View Full Version : The Vietnamese


Knight-Dragon
Feb 26, 2002, 02:41 AM
Posted by me
>>The Turks were an older power than the Vietnamese, Spanish, Thai definitely. There were already Turks contolling the Islamic Caliphate in Baghdad (behind the scenes as slave soldiers) before the Mongols came and also the Khorezm Sultanate in Central Asia later (when the Mongols invaded).

The Thai only formed present Thailand after they were driven out of Nanzhao in Yunnan by the Mongols in the 12-13th century AD. The Vietnamese only formed as a nation during one of their dynasties in the 10-11th century AD (forgot name). The Spanish were slightly later, when they began driving the Moors out of Iberia. The Turks already formed their first empire on the steppes of Mongolia in the 6-7th century AD, around the time of the Tang in China.>>

Posted by milty
The Vietnamese date back to pre-warring states era, in the 7th century BC, atleast in context with Chinese history. I'm sure they have been there since a long time ago, without written history. Back then, all of southern China was known as the Yue, or Viet, and the people were known as the Bai-Yue or hundred Yue. They were conquered and brought into the Han dynasty by Ma Yuen, and had a history of resisting Chinese rule ever since.No argument with that. :) But the Vietnamese, as a people with a sense of national identity, didn't really get going until the 10-11th centuries AD, during one of their native dynasties (as I had mentioned). During the Han, Vietnam (N Vietnam, the south was the Hindu Malay kingdom of Champa) was actually a Chinese province and remained so till the 5-6th century AD IIRC. And more importantly, the people felt themselves to be Chinese and as Chinese as e.g. Guangxi or Guangdong at that time.

They are atleast as old as the ancient Turks, whom as I re-emphasize have very little in common with the modern Turks. The Viet people, or as they use to call themselves the Lac, were of roughly the same race and culture since the 7th century BC.The Turks are hardly ancient. But in the 7th century BC, Vietnam, as a nation with their own national and cultural consciousness, didn't exist yet or not recognizably Vietnamese. But feel free to argue otherwise. ;)

milty
Feb 26, 2002, 01:05 PM
>>No argument with that. But the Vietnamese, as a people with a sense of national identity, didn't really get going until the 10-11th centuries AD, during one of their native dynasties (as I had mentioned). During the Han, Vietnam (N Vietnam, the south was the Hindu Malay kingdom of Champa) was actually a Chinese province and remained so till the 5-6th century AD IIRC. And more importantly, the people felt themselves to be Chinese and as Chinese as e.g. Guangxi or Guangdong at that time. >>

Well, the Viets definately had atleast an ethnic identity, if not a national identity. Not many cultures had a definate "national" identity in which they recognize and establish their boundaries, maintain relations with other "nations", and have the idea of citizenry. The Vietnamese ethnic identity is very strong, and if they thought of themselves as Chinese, then why do they resist Chinese rule so vehemently. Northern Vietnam, also known as Jiao Zi (named after one of the central provinces on the Hung river valley), was designated a Han province by Ma Yuen, but his rule there was hated, and I believe Han rule quickly deteriorated after Ma left. This may lead to Vietnam being technically a Han province but not in actuality. This of course leaves out Champa, who survives until the 11th-13th century I think.

As to ethnic identity, one of the strongest cultural legends were the Phung sisters that resisted Han rule, so they had atleast an identity of rebelliousness and yearning for freedom ever since the Han. As to the name Viet, they didn't use that name until later, because they thought it was a derogatory term given by the Chinese. They thought of themselves as the Lac, named after Lac Long-quan the dragon lord. The earliest period known in history about Vietnam was in the Lac Lords period where there were individual tribes.

Knight-Dragon
Feb 26, 2002, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by milty
Well, the Viets definately had atleast an ethnic identity, if not a national identity. Not many cultures had a definate "national" identity in which they recognize and establish their boundaries, maintain relations with other "nations", and have the idea of citizenry.Ethnic identity shldn't be confused with cultural and national identity. ;) Ethnically I am closer to the Vietnamese (as with most of the South Chinese), rather than the North Chinese (more like the Mongols, Manchus, Koreans etc), and yet I considered myself to be as Chinese as any other Chinese. Even if my first language is English. ;)

Take Americans for example. There're Americans of every race, ethnic group and etc under the sun, yet they considered themselves to be Americans and culturally so. ;)

The Vietnamese ethnic identity is very strong, and if they thought of themselves as Chinese, then why do they resist Chinese rule so vehemently. Northern Vietnam, also known as Jiao Zi (named after one of the central provinces on the Hung river valley), was designated a Han province by Ma Yuen, but his rule there was hated, and I believe Han rule quickly deteriorated after Ma left. This may lead to Vietnam being technically a Han province but not in actuality. This of course leaves out Champa, who survives until the 11th-13th century I think.This was cos the Vietnamese had developed their national consciousness during the 10-11th centuries AD. The Ming under Yung Lo then conquered and ruled them for 2 decades (and retried a few times) before being thrown out. Hence Vietnamese vehemence for Chinese rule and invasion.

In the 5-6th century AD, the Vietnamese, led by a Chinese failed scholar, broke off and formed their own state. At this time, the area was still Chinese. Then as the centuries rolled by, the Vietnamese got used to having their own state and so didn't return to the Chinese political sphere. ;)

The Vietnamese got on very well with the Qing though (cos they didn't invade). The Qing even sent troops to help the Vietnamese in 1885 when the French encroached into Indo-China. ;)

The Chinese didn't expand into Champa cos of its jungles and climate. They believed any army sent there would be decimated by disease and the climate.

As to ethnic identity, one of the strongest cultural legends were the Phung sisters that resisted Han rule, so they had atleast an identity of rebelliousness and yearning for freedom ever since the Han. As to the name Viet, they didn't use that name until later, because they thought it was a derogatory term given by the Chinese. They thought of themselves as the Lac, named after Lac Long-quan the dragon lord. The earliest period known in history about Vietnam was in the Lac Lords period where there were individual tribes.Myths make for poor history though....

You'll have to remember - the Han armies conquered all of South China and turned the entire population Chinese. Vietnam was the one that got away a few centuries later. ;) Even so, they were culturally very close to the Chinese. Esp the South Chinese. Vietnamese sounds much like any of the S Chinese dialects, even today.

joespaniel
Feb 27, 2002, 07:02 AM
Did China invade VietNam in 1976 or so, after the US was gone?

I ask because, oddly enough, the topic came up at work the other day.

Knight-Dragon
Feb 27, 2002, 07:11 AM
Yep! And the Chinese got crushed although they took some hill posts and proclaimed themselves the victors. :lol: Lost 26000 troops. The PLA was still pretty much a Korean War-style army; up against the well-equipped and hardened NVA. It was a joke. :rolleyes:

That was the event that began the Chinese drive to modernise their armed forces; which had been reinforced by the American victory in the Gulf War.

I think it was cos the Vietnamese were rolling into Cambodia, which was controlled by the Khmer Rouge, which was in turn aligned with the Chinese (rather than the Russians and Vietnamese).