Introduction
According to Vietnamese official accounts, Pāṇḍuraṅga, the last remaining principality of the once-prominent kingdom of Campā,Footnote 1 was absorbed in 1832; its territory was organised as the prefectures of Ninh Thuận and Hàm Thuận and incorporated into the Vietnamese province of Bình Thuận. Although the annexation marked the extinction of one of Southeast Asia's most prestigious kingdoms, Vietnamese official records describe it simply as the administrative reorganisation of a province. On the contrary, Cam sources offer a radically different view of the event, depicting it as a watershed in the lives of the peoples of Campā. They feature the changes that happened in Pāṇḍuraṅga and the numerous reforms carried out by the Huế court to turn this principality into a Vietnamese province.
This article studies the Cam version of these events, recorded in metrical compositions known as ariya, a term which refers to both the poetic form itself and to the texts composed using that form. Cam texts show that the incorporation of Pāṇḍuraṅga, although inevitable by that time, was an ordeal for the local population, entailing as it did the imposition of a foreign order and various economic, religious and cultural restrictions. As Cam sources recorded these events, the Vietnamese ‘treated [the Cam] like buffaloes’, and had them ‘eating [their] tears’.Footnote 2 By emphasising the Cam perspective of the events and their feelings, Cam sources illustrate the clash of two cultures. On a wider scale, the Cam sources provide a precious contribution to our knowledge of Vietnamese nineteenth-century state-building.
Although nineteenth-century Cam historical sources, and ariya in particular, offer valuable insights into Campā's political and socio-economic evolution, the first scholars in Cam studies, including their most prominent pioneer Étienne Aymonier, rejected these texts along with the Cam royal chronicles (C. sakaray) arguing that these documents were ‘fable and confusion’.Footnote 3 In the following decades, Cam texts were considered to be historically unreliable. Po Dharma was the first scholar to consider ariya as historical material, publishing two of them in a 1987 study of Campā–Vietnam relations between 1802–35.Footnote 4
The present study is based on 22 Cam texts kept in one American and two French libraries (Cornell University, Société Asiatique, and École Française d'Extrême-Orient). I have also used the texts Ariya Po Ceng and Ariya Po Phaok translated in French and published by Po Dharma and relied on his translation and interpretations.Footnote 5 I have chosen to take into account the three other texts Ariya gleng anak [Looking forward], Ariya thei mang déh [The one who comes from afar] and Ariya hatai paran [Aspirations of the people], even though they are less detailed regarding the historical events and political developments.Footnote 6 My aim in this article is not to publish another version of Po Dharma's important study of Pāṇḍuraṅga from 1802 to 1835, to which I am greatly indebted. Rather, I wish to add to his work by examining other texts and thus contribute to our knowledge of Campā, particularly Pāṇḍuraṅga, during the last years of its existence. I have chosen to focus less on the political relations between the Huế court and the last governors of Pāṇḍuraṅga and to emphasise instead the depiction of the point of view and feelings of the masses witnessing the assimilation of their country. I believe that Cam sources offer a perspective which must be taken into account for our understanding of not only the evolution of the social history of Campā but also the history of modern Vietnam.
One may question the reliability of Cam sources, which like every other record must be taken with a pinch of salt, but it would be unfair to dismiss them solely on the ground that they differ considerably from the official Vietnamese version of history. Furthermore, although written in verse, the Cam sources used in this study should not be classified as mere literary laments for the loss of Campā but should be considered as ‘snapshots’ of the situation of Pāṇḍuraṅga during the first half of the nineteenth century. If Cam sources must be used together with Vietnamese sources, the latter should also be interrogated on many levels as well. First, they represent the official point of view, as opposed the view from ‘the grassroots’. Second, they represent the view of the ‘conquerors’ and do not take into account the perception of the ‘conquered’. Third, they legitimate the Vietnamese imperial court's actions. Fourth, they represent the point of view of a people not only ethnically but also culturally different from the Cam and which used to consider itself culturally superior to the others. Although the Cam view of the events is the main focus of this study, I have added confirmation and other relevant information from the Vietnamese official records. I have also chosen to incorporate segments of the original Cam texts through translation, as I believe that they are useful for anyone interested in the history of Campā, Vietnam and mainland Southeast Asia in general.
A brief introduction to the Cam ariya
Since most of the texts regarding the assimilation of Pāṇḍuraṅga are written in the form of poems, or ariya, I will first introduce this genre. Ariya, which in many respects can be considered as narrative poems, are composed and written in Modern Cam.Footnote 7 In spite of its Sanskrit name, the Cam ariya has nothing in common with Sanskrit metrics and is clearly indigenous.Footnote 8 A typical ariya stanza (kanaing ariya) is ideally composed of two lines of verse connected to one another. The second line is composed of two segments separated by a comma. The last word of the first line usually echoes the last word of the first segment of the second line; the last word of the second segment rhymes with the last word of the first line of the subsequent verse and echoes the last word of the first segment of the subsequent verse's second line. The following example is an illustration:
ni panah tuer di dalam ariy a,
ka nagar cam it a, ndaom kunal baik pu s ah,
tuen phaow nyu lac nyu marai mang mak ah,
li-ndap dahlau luec al ah, ama bicam pa-mblaong kalin. Footnote 9
The structure of the ariya allows for flexibility, and composers can take considerable liberties with grammatical rules and orthography.Footnote 10 Although the ariya were produced by well-educated and literate people, their composition was not exclusively limited to members of the elite. It was a tradition in Campā for the wealthy to order copies of a particularly famous work from a scribe. Historical ariya seem to have been very popular among the common people, as many copies or variants of the same text can be found. If the copying of the texts preserved Cam memory, it invariably led to modifications of the original and occasional errors, misspellings and inconsistencies. Misreading may have led the copyists to confuse letters that are similar in shape.Footnote 11 Like many other metrical works of Southeast Asian poetic traditions, the ariya were meant to be chanted before an audience.Footnote 12 The written text, its transmission and rendering through chanting were closely intertwined, and it is not unusual to find in the different versions of a written ariya traces of the oral narrative tradition.Footnote 13 Transmission through chanting undoubtedly preserved Cam memory.
Ariya dealing with historic and political events such as anti-Vietnamese uprisings or the situation of Pāṇḍuraṅga after the Vietnamese annexation are particularly numerous. The first work dealing with historical events appears to be the Ariya Tuen Phaow, recalling the anti-Vietnamese revolt led by Tuen Phaow in 1796–97.Footnote 14 During the first half of the nineteenth century, several ariya recorded military and political events such as the uprisings of Po Baruw and Ja Thak Wa.Footnote 15 The tradition of recording historical events in the form of ariya was carried out throughout the nineteenth century, even after the establishment of French rule in Indochina, as illustrated by the text Ariya Kalin Biang Thang [The war of the scholars], recording a Vietnamese anti-French insurrection.Footnote 16
The integration of Campā into the Vietnamese realm: Historical background
Campā is an ancient multiethnic kingdom whose existence is recorded from the second century. At the time of its apogee, its territory stretched over the coastal plains and highlands of present-day Vietnam and was composed of five principalities: from north to south, Indrapura (from present-day Quảng Bình to Thừa Thiên), Amarāvatī (Quảng Nam to Quảng Ngãi), Vijaya (Bình Ðịnh), Kauṭhāra (Phú Yên to Khánh Hòa) and Pāṇḍuraṅga (Bình Thuận and Ninh Thuận).
The incorporation of Campā into the Vietnamese realm was the result of a steady and gradual process of subjugation of territory, implantation of Vietnamese colonies and extension of Vietnamese influence over Campā's politics. However, while the capture of Campā territory began as early as the tenth century, it seems that until the seventeenth century, Vietnamese rulers were not intent on a total annexation of the kingdom. Wars between Campā and the Vietnamese kingdom resulted in seizures of territory, but there was no will to conquer Campā in order to monopolise its territories and resources or control its population. Things changed dramatically under the rule of the Nguyễn lords who established an autonomous domain in the southernmost part of the Vietnamese kingdom in the late 1500s. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, Campā's territory was reduced to the principalities of Kauṭhara and Pāṇḍuraṅga. An active Vietnamese migration, sponsored by the Nguyễn rulers, took place and patches of Vietnamese settlements gradually developed on Campā's territory. Kauṭhara fell into Vietnamese hands in 1653 and was turned into the provinces (Viet. trấn) of Diên Khánh and Thái Khang.
In 1692, after the suppression of an attack by the king of Pāṇḍuraṅga, Po Saot (V. Bà Tranh, r. 1655, 1660–92), Lord Nguyễn Phúc Chu (r. 1691–1725) annexed Pāṇḍuraṅga and converted it into the province of Thuận Thành.Footnote 17 Shortly afterward, the province was turned into the prefecture of Bình Thuận and its administration was entrusted to a brother of Po Saot, Po Saktiraydaputih (V. Kế Bà Tử, r. 1695 and 1696–1727), and other members of his family. This was the first time that the Vietnamese tried to annex Pāṇḍuraṅga. A massive anti-Vietnamese revolt, led by A Ban among others, broke out, and Nguyễn Phúc Chu reversed the transformation of Thuận Thành into the prefecture of Bình Thuận and re-established Cam royalty.Footnote 18 In 1697, the prefecture (V. phủ) of Bình Thuận and the two districts (V. huyện) of Hòa Ða and An Phước were established in Pāṇḍuraṅga.Footnote 19 By 1702, the Vietnamese living in the prefecture and the two districts were administered directly by the Bình Thuận prefecture officials, not by Pāṇḍuraṅga's rulers. Vietnamese enclaves and settlements rapidly increased all over Pāṇḍuraṅga. It should be noted, however, that the prefecture of Bình Thuận was composed of Vietnamese villages located relatively far from one another and definitely distant from the Cam villages, as confirmed by Cam sources. Nevertheless, as Po Dharma put it, Pāṇḍuraṅga's territory gradually came to resemble a ‘leopard skin’.Footnote 20 Furthermore, the ongoing conquest of the Mekong Delta by the Nguyễn Lords placed Pāṇḍuraṅga in a new situation: its territory cut the Nguyễn Lords' domain in two, which challenged its likely survival as an independent country.
Pāṇḍuraṅga almost disappeared during the conflict between the Nguyễn Lords and the Tây Sơn (1771–1801) and the subsequent civil war that tore apart the country.Footnote 21 More importantly, the Cam ruling class was compelled to take sides in the conflict.Footnote 22 Cam rulers were appointed by both the Tây Sơn and Nguyễn Ánh and were given Vietnamese military titles (chưởng cơ, or chief of regiment), as confirmed by both Vietnamese and Cam sources.Footnote 23 After the final victory of Nguyễn Ánh over the Tây Sơn, as Emperor Gia Long (r. 1802–20) he re-established Campā as a semi-independent state on the territory of the former Pāṇḍuraṅga principality and Po Saong Nyung Ceng (V. Nguyễn Văn Chấn, r. 1799–1822) was put at its head.Footnote 24 Although Po Saong Nyung Ceng and the two last rulers after him (Po Klan Thu and Po Phaok The) were still seen as legitimate kings (C. patao) by the Cam and called as such in their sources, they were not fully fledged rulers from the Huế court's point of view.Footnote 25 They were considered as members of the Vietnamese administration and held the title of provincial governor (V. trấn thủ), together with the military titles regimental captain (V. cai cơ), regimental leader and squad leader (V. quản cơ). On the other hand, although the men placed at the head of the Cam were no longer considered as sovereigns by the Huế court, Gia Long did not intend to totally suppress the Cam administration and traditional nobility. Quite the contrary, he was careful to respect Cam traditional customs, as Cam sources confirm.Footnote 26
The situation of Pāṇḍuraṅga changed drastically during Minh Mạng's reign (r. 1820–41), however. Obsessed with the unification of the country under his sole command, he soon felt the need to fully assimilate Pāṇḍuraṅga into a Vietnamese province. In 1832, he decided to convert Pāṇḍuraṅga into the prefectures of Ninh Thuận and Hàm Thuận, both of which were in turn incorporated into the province of Bình Thuận.Footnote 27 A political crisis which involved Pāṇḍuraṅga's last governor Po Phaok The (V. Nguyễn Văn Thừa; r. 1828–35) and his second-in-command Dhar Kaok (V. Nguyễn Văn Nguyên) gave Minh Mạng the opportunity to get rid of the governor and put Cam nobles and dignitaries opposed to his policies behind bars. During the seventh month of 1832, Minh Mạng put Po Phaok The and Dhar Kaok under arrest, deported them to Huế and then put them to death in 1834. Vietnamese official sources alleged that they had participated in the Lê Văn Khôi rebellion, although Cam documents do not corroborate such an accusation.Footnote 28
Between 1833 and 1835, a number of massive anti-Vietnamese revolts broke out — the last Cam attempts to prevent the country's assimilation.Footnote 29 The first revolt occurred in 1833 and was led by Katip Sumat, a Cam from Cambodia. He was supported by members of Pāṇḍuraṅga's ruling elite such as the governor Po Phaok The, Po Nyi Liang, Po Ling and Po Caing.Footnote 30 Katip Sumat aimed at both driving the Vietnamese out of Pāṇḍuraṅga and spreading Islam. The revolt was crushed in 1834 by imperial troops. Katip Sumat's revolt was followed by Ja Thak Wa's movement. Ja Thak Wa, a Cam from the village of Ram (V. Văn Lâm), rose in rebellion in 1834; as with a number of other anti-Vietnamese uprisings of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, both Cam living in the coastal plains and Austronesian-speaking highland groups such as the Cru (Churu) and Raglai participated in it. Ja Thak Wa reinstated a king (C. po patrai) and a crown prince (C. cei) in western Pāṇḍuraṅga.Footnote 31 The revolt was crushed in 1835.
A Cam source indicates that after the end of the revolt, the ‘big and small lords’ (C. ganuér [> ganuer] praong anaih) disappeared forever, which means that the king and the crown prince established by Ja Thak Wa and his followers were removed and most probably executed.Footnote 32 It also suggests that after the uprising, the members of the former ruling elite were also demoted, if not jailed and executed. Vietnamese official documents briefly mention the outbreak of popular revolts in Pāṇḍuraṅga: Ta La Văn (C. Ja Lidong) and Sô Cố or Ðiên Sư (C. Ja Thak Wa) in 1835, and the two sisters Thị Tiết and Thị Cân Oa in 1836.Footnote 33 These sources confirm that members of the nobility, such as Nguyễn Văn Giảng, Mai Văn Văn, Trúc Văn Lân, Long Văn Thiêm (also spelt Long Văn Thêm) and Lâm Văn Bình joined the uprisings.Footnote 34 Sources also corroborate that the Cam living in the lowlands and peoples living in the highlands, the ‘barbarians of the mountains’ as the Vietnamese documents call them, led these uprisings.Footnote 35
The pacification of the 1834 and 1835 Cam uprisings led to severe consequences for the population of Pāṇḍuraṅga. In order to make sure that the Cam would never again challenge the Huế imperial authorities, the court ordered the systematic split of Cam villages and their incorporation into Việt-populated villages. Huế made it clear to its provincial officials: ‘It is necessary to scatter [the Cam] and settle them in all localities. It is crucial not to let them gather in one place, but mix them with the Kinh [ethnic Việt] in order to maintain our control on them and avoid further troubles in the future.’Footnote 36 After setting up the prefecture of Ninh Thuận, the province was to be reorganised in such a way that Vietnamese and Cam settlements would always be intermingled.Footnote 37
Cam sources as journals of the assimilation: The Cam recollection of the events
Numerous nineteenth-century ariya focus on the Cam view of the destruction of Pāṇḍuraṅga as a polity and its incorporation into a Vietnamese province. Texts describe the administrative, socio-economic, cultural and religious reforms that were implemented throughout the reign of Emperor Minh Mạng and especially during the governorship of Po Phaok The in Pāṇḍuraṅga, from 1828 to 1835.
Administrative and economic changes
The absorption of Pāṇḍuraṅga brought about the destruction of the indigenous administration. According to Cam sources, in 1832 former Cam administrative units were reorganised following the Vietnamese model and consequently prefectures, cantons and villages were set up. The Cam came under direct Vietnamese administration; all traditional administrative titles were suppressed and replaced by Vietnamese ones. At the canton and village levels, some Cam were chosen to be kai taong (V. cai tổng, canton chief), lik klan or lik kleng (V. lý trưởng, village chief), klam (V. trùm, village notable) and mbien (V. biện, secretary).Footnote 38 Vietnamese sources confirm the administrative reorganisation that took place in Pāṇḍuraṅga following the establishment of the prefecture of Ninh Thuận. The court declared that the Cam territory had to be assimilated following the example of the new prefectures of Tương Dương in Nghệ An and Cam Lộ in Quảng Trị — both established among non-Việt peoples in the highlands — where ‘the indigenous officials’, i.e. the traditional chiefs (V. thổ ty), were replaced by officials (V. lưu quan) sent from Huế. This administrative reform was known as cải thổ quy lưu.Footnote 39 The Cam were not of course excluded from the administrative system, but they were assigned only minor positions and had to refer to Vietnamese superiors.
The introduction of a new administration had many direct consequences for Cam society as it destroyed the traditional hierarchy, and it seems that members of the traditional elite were no longer eligible to rule their own people. There is no evidence that the individuals chosen to administrate the Cam were from the nobility or the former ruling class, which would have at least given them some legitimacy, and in fact it is most likely that the Vietnamese authorities appointed commoners. The author of the Ariya gleng anak points out the issues caused by the introduction of the new administrative regulations and appointment of commoners:
They forced the ants to ride the elephants and look for teaching.
They forced the dogs to ride the tigers and look for hunting.
They forced the rats to ride the pheasants and look for the boats.Footnote 40
The poet emphasises here that people chosen from the lower classes of the Cam society — symbolised here by the ants, dogs and rats — were placed in administrative positions and given authority over members of the traditional elite, symbolised here by the elephants, tigers and pheasants. The author also points out that these new officials were made to force the former elite to do tasks that they were not supposed to do (specifically, learning Vietnamese and hard labour). As confirmed by Vietnamese sources, the appointment of people coming from different backgrounds and not belonging to the traditional ruling class was a regulation introduced by the Huế court as early as 1829 and applied throughout the empire to all the territories inhabited by non-Việt peoples. In the northern provinces of Tuyên Quang, Cao Bằng, Lạng Sơn and Hưng Hóa, for instance, the Emperor declared that the district chiefs (V. tri huyện and tri châu) and their secretaries (V. thừa phái and lại mục) were to be chosen according to their ‘capacities’, which implies that they could either belong to the former ruling class and traditional elite or else be chosen from among commoners.Footnote 41
The introduction of a new administrative system brought about another issue for the Cam society: the development of corruption. Our sources narrate the development of corruption and the mischief of Cam newly appointed by the Vietnamese to village administrative functions. In troubled times, some unscrupulous individuals always try to take advantage of the situation to acquire wealth and get promotions, and some Cam in charge of village communities had a hand in the misfortunes of the population. According to one ariya, the Huế court sent between 1832 and 1835 a touring inspector (C. tun an, V. tuần án) to the former Pāṇḍuraṅga territory. The inspector found out that wastage of resources was rampant in Pāṇḍuraṅga among the people in charge of the Cam population at the village and canton levels. The lik kleng and kai taong were behaving as if they were members of the nobility and had been spending money ‘without [listening] to the complaints [of the population stuck in] misery’. The text adds that the money was lavishly spent to buy silk clothes (C. aw pataih), rings (C. karah), amber and gold necklaces (C. anyuk) and Vietnamese-style utensils such as carafes (C. ho, V. hồ).Footnote 42 These manners were contrary to Cam customs, as according to tradition only royalty and members of the nobility were allowed to own jewellery and luxury items while commoners had to remain modest.
Corruption was rampant. Village notables (C. taok) bribed (C. thaoh) village chiefs, and village chiefs bribed village notables.Footnote 43 Bribery was, for instance, used to make false statements regarding the accomplishment of the corvée: by paying the men in charge of the register (C. tho, V. sổ), village notables and chiefs could escape their obligation. We can understand from the Cam texts that corruption and misuse of wealth speeded up the deterioration of village and community ties. The issue of corruption must have been particularly serious, as it is confirmed by Vietnamese sources. Several people were arrested in 1835, after a report made by a man called Phan Phu, for building their wealth and fame at the expense of the people and for stealing from them.Footnote 44
Numerous other reforms were carried out. The justice system, for instance, was also changed. According to Cam texts, Emperor Minh Mạng abolished the decree of 1712 establishing that the disputes between Cam and Vietnamese living in Pāṇḍuraṅga had to be settled by mixed court composed of the king of Pāṇḍuraṅga, a Vietnamese registrar (V. cai bạ) and a secretary (V. kỳ lục).Footnote 45 Disputes between Cam and Cam were settled exclusively by the king, without any intervention from the Vietnamese.Footnote 46 After the systemic changes, all disputes were settled by purely Vietnamese courts.
While replacing traditional Cam administration and setting up a Vietnamese-style one, the Vietnamese carried out land reform. To some extent, this land reform was a revolution in Pāṇḍuraṅga. For the Cam, nobody was allowed to dispose freely of the land, especially foreigners. As a text explains it: ‘The lands and the fields of [our] ancestors cannot be sold […] yet they shared all of them.’Footnote 47 Cam traditional laws of property were abolished. Lands (C. tanah) and fields (C. hamu) belonging to families, clans and temples were seized. In addition to the obvious economic loss, land seizures created great distress among the Cam population, who believed that each piece of land is inhabited by a spirit (C. yang) that has to be propitiated adequately. If the required specific rituals and sacrifices are not performed properly, the spirit may turn against the population and punish it by sending all sorts of calamities and epidemics. Therefore, the land reform performed by the Vietnamese had a serious impact on Cam morals and religious values. The Vietnamese divided the lands according to their registers and allocated each piece of land to different individuals. It seems that in many cases, the land reform took the form of spoliation, as lands and fields were taken from the Cam without their consent and without any kind of compensation.Footnote 48 Communal lands (C. hamu bhum) were also ‘equally divided’ (C. pa-ndéw)Footnote 49 and distributed. The Vietnamese also ordered the usage of muw for land measurement; land was cut into plots and taxes (C. jia) were imposed on each and every plot.Footnote 50
As planned by the imperial authorities, the Cam were then subjected to the Vietnamese taxation system.Footnote 51 A census of the population was carried out in order to determine the head tax that each individual had to pay, but due to a lack of co-operation on the part of the Cam, the population figures were underestimated.Footnote 52 The Cam were not used to paying head taxes and the application of this new regulation was strongly resented by the Cam population, which considered it as a vexation. Other taxes were applied on buffaloes, carts and rice.Footnote 53
The introduction of a new land register, redistribution of lands, and the imposition of taxes led to various kinds of abuses. It seems that unscrupulous individuals took the opportunity to steal from the Cam their fields, wealth and all means of subsistence.Footnote 54 The Ariya gleng anak records that:
They left the roots, cut the buds and abandoned the trees. The roots that were kept were cut and they destroyed the crops of the people.
They left Ulik [i.e., the Vietnamese] to watch the longan tree.
In every corner they made [the people] pick up and gather the crops [and hand them] to them.Footnote 55
The first stanza indicates that, in addition to spoliation, there was also considerable wastage of wealth and supplies. The next stanza is slightly challenging to interpret due to the obscure symbolism of the longan tree (C. phun darang, Nephelium longana). In my opinion, there is no longan tree, but rather a spelling mistake: ‘phun darang’ should be read as the two separate words ‘phan’ (portion, plot) and barang ([all the] things). The meaning of the verse would be then quite explicit: ‘They left the Ulik to guard [the Cam’s] plots and things' which means that the Vietnamese officers gave their own people each and every Cam piece of land and wealth, and made sure that the Cam would never have access to them again. The following connecting verse of the stanza then makes sense: plots and crops were confiscated as well.
Spoliation, the monopolisation of wealth, and agricultural production left the whole population of Pāṇḍuraṅga in extremely difficult circumstances:
There is nothing left in front or behind [of us]. All the things that we used to produce with hard work [have been taken]. Nothing is left for our subsistence.
On all the roads of Panrang, Kraong, Parik, Pajai, we chew iron to nourish ourselves and we spit blood.Footnote 56
The land reform and the introduction of the Vietnamese taxation system in Pāṇḍuraṅga are confirmed by Vietnamese official documents. Although not giving details about the Cam response, the records corroborate that, as planned by the Huế court, lands and paddy fields would be subjected to taxes and the Cam would have no choice but to ‘conform to the [Vietnamese] tax regulations’.Footnote 57 The abuses and spoliation that took place during this period are also recorded; the problem must have been serious for the Vietnamese official sources to record it. For example, the sources describe a trick played by Vietnamese settlers to take lands from the Cam: some unscrupulous settlers used to put snakes in the paddy fields, causing great panic and fear among the Cam, thus compelling them to abandon their fields. It seems, though, that the officials in the imperial court frowned upon this method.Footnote 58
Through a series of measures, reforms and restrictions, the Vietnamese managed to impose tight control over Pāṇḍuraṅga's economy and natural resources. As the region was now part of the Vietnamese empire, the authorities made sure that they could make the best use of all its resources. The administrative changes gave the Vietnamese full access to these resources, and it is clear from the Cam sources that the Vietnamese rapidly supplanted the Cam in the local economy. The intensive use of natural resources by the Vietnamese threatened Cam livelihoods. The various measures implemented by the Vietnamese were for the Cam nothing less than direct exploitation of their resources, territory and population. Abuses must have taken place, as the vocabulary used in the texts is unambiguous: sources mention that the Vietnamese ‘seized’ (C. mak) lands and properties, which means that they took everything they wanted without consulting the Cam or giving them any kind of compensation.Footnote 59
According to the Cam sources, the Vietnamese took control of the maritime coast and restricted the Pāṇḍuraṅga population's access to the sea. A number of villages along the coast were razed to the ground: Tang Plam, Hamu Kulaok, Ca-ndah, Tal Yau, Baoh Masuh, Jawum, Nadah Tang, Baoh Manah, Cahok, Bal Mak, Ula Panrang and Aia Cak. As the Ariya Po Ceng states: ‘[If you] go along the coast from Panrang to Parik, you will notice, Prince and Lord, that there is no Cam house [left].’Footnote 60 Consequently, the Cam could no longer benefit from the coastal trade as the Vietnamese made sure that they were the only ones dealing with trading ships, whether local or foreign. The Ariya hatai paran recalls:
In Prangdarang [Pāṇḍuraṅga] and for a long time, the trading boats sank [into the sea]: their way [to the coast] was blocked off.
They ordered [the Cam] to gather their boats and made them wait there. The ports were blocked off and in doing so [they hoped] that the Cam country would disappear forever.Footnote 61
These two stanzas make clear that the Cam were no longer permitted to sail and use their boats. The poet also accurately states that the Cam were perfectly aware that, with no more access to the sea, they would be no longer be able to sustain their economy. Vietnamese records do not mention the restriction, but demonstrate clearly that from 1822 onwards, the Vietnamese, via a series of measures and trade regulations, managed to wrest control of the entire Pāṇḍuraṅga coastal area. Pāṇḍuraṅga was definitively opened to trade and the outside world as Chinese and even British boats used to stop along its coasts. The Vietnamese effectively obtained a monopoly over the international trade on the Pāṇḍuraṅga coast.Footnote 62
Between 1832–35, the Vietnamese seized Cam salt-making facilities (C. hamu sara) and redistributed them to the Vietnamese population. According to Po Dharma, the most famous salt-making facilities were located in Nại and Ca Ná (C. Kanak).Footnote 63 There are no records of the Cam being explicitly forbidden to have access to these facilities, but Cam manuscripts acknowledge that Vietnamese control led to a shortage of salt. Unable to use salt for the production of fish preserved in brine (C. mathin), the basis of their diet, the Cam population faced starvation (C. aek lapa).Footnote 64 Vietnamese sources do not record seizure of salt facilities, but it is understandable that the exploitation of salt in the region became more intense due to the actions of the Vietnamese. Sources record that in 1834, salt and salt-derived products (fish preserved in brine and nước mắm) were purchased in Bình Thuận province (as well as Khánh Hòa) to be sent to Gia Định (the area around Saigon) and then redistributed to the soldiers in service in the provinces of Long (i.e. Vĩnh Long), Tường (i.e. Định Tường), An (i.e. An Giang), Hà (i.e. Hà Tiên), as well as the Cambodian provinces under Vietnamese domination.Footnote 65
The use of iron was put under control as well. The text Ariya Po Phaok mentions in a few words that the Vietnamese forbade the Cam to buy iron (C. basei) from the highlands (C. cek), where they traditionally acquired it. Po Dharma is of the opinion that the Vietnamese feared that the Cam would use iron to forge weapons and join the revolts that spread in Pāṇḍuraṅga and other parts of southern Vietnam. The Ariya Po Phaok acknowledges that the Vietnamese authorities summoned the Cru and Raglai to capture and bring before them any Cam who tried to buy iron.Footnote 66 In my opinion, the prohibition was a way not only for the authorities to have control over the region's natural resources but also to put the contacts between the Highlanders and the Cam living in the lowlands under surveillance. Regarding iron, Vietnamese sources simply point out that supplies were located in the mountainous area of Ninh Thuận and that Vietnamese became major actors in its production and trade.Footnote 67
Cam texts acknowledge that between 1832–35 the Cam were asked to cut down large numbers of trees (C. kayau) in the forest. Several sources mention that the Bình Thuận authorities were aware of the good quality of the wood.Footnote 68 Po Dharma is of the opinion that the Vietnamese needed it for the construction of war boats, as well as for building rice granaries (C. galang) and military posts (C. ndong, V. đồn).Footnote 69 According to one text, each family had to send five men to the forest to cut wood. This number may not be exact, but we can understand from this that the Vietnamese authorities ordered every able-bodied man to go to the forest. The women were left at home; and as nobody was there to cultivate the fields, they had to incur debts (C. mesraiy) with the Vietnamese villagers who were not subjected to such forced labour.Footnote 70 The following is an extract illustrating the plight of the population:
Then the officials in the prefecture issued letters ordering the Cam to cut [the wood into] planks until they died.
The poor and deprived population chopped [the tree trunks] until the blades [of their axes] broke and the trees fell on their heads.
The population of Kraong, Panrang and ParikFootnote 71 was weeping. Their feet could not support them anymore while they were chopping the trunks.
The Vietnamese pressured [them] and beat them to make them work faster. The Vietnamese terrorized them. Their [axes] fell from their hands.Footnote 72
Woodcutting was also a punishment associated with hard labour. As the Cam population had risen into rebellion in 1834–35, the Huế court had every reason to punish it by condemning it to hard labour, as had happened in Cambodia in 1820, during the reign of Ang Chan (1797–1835), when the population had joined the revolt of the holy man named Kê.Footnote 73 A text in verse written by a Buddhist holy man, Bâtum Baramey Pich, during this period testifies that the population of all the provinces under Vietnamese domination (Phnom Penh and eastern Cambodia) was compelled to cut wood in the forest and send it to the Vietnamese authorities stationed in Han Chey (present-day Kompong Cham province). As in our Cam sources, the author stresses the sufferings of the population.Footnote 74 Vietnamese sources do not link the production of wood logs (V. mục bản) with punishment or hard labour, affirming only that it was indeed a major exploitation, particularly in the mountains.Footnote 75 We can gather from the sources that wood was used for various purposes, among others the construction of boats and the making of lances (V. trường thương).Footnote 76
In addition to woodcutting, the Cam were also forced to collect ivory (C. bala basan) for the Vietnamese authorities. An ariya mentions that Emperor Minh Mạng and his officials were pressuring the population to get ivory. Once the ivory reached Huế, officials proceeded to carry out strict measurements and calculations to make sure nothing was missing.Footnote 77 We can understand from Cam sources that the population associated ivory collection with hard labour. By sending the Cam to the forest to hunt wild elephants, the Vietnamese authorities made sure that there would not be any resistance while they were applying the new regulations in Pāṇḍuraṅga. The high demand for ivory was therefore another way to put the Cam under constant pressure and tight control. Cam were also compelled to hunt the Rusa deer (C. rusa or rasa) for its skin (C. kalik) and to search for a type of turtle called the ‘golden turtle’ (C. kara mah) for its shell (C. ka-nduh).Footnote 78 Unfortunately, Vietnamese official sources are extremely sketchy regarding the high demand for rare products such as ivory (V. tượng ngà) and shells. We only know that ivory was one of the local products that had to be sent yearly to the Huế court, but nothing is said regarding the participation of the Cam.Footnote 79
Cultural and religious reforms
In addition to the administrative and economic changes, several cultural reforms were carried out to assimilate the Cam. Texts show that these cultural and religious reforms were seen as assaults on Cam practices. Cam identity had to be modelled on the Huế court's ideals or it had to disappear. As Alexander Woodside has pointed out, the Emperor, the court and the bureaucracy believed that they were ‘cultural cynosures of society surrounded by subversive “barbarians”’.Footnote 80 ‘Barbarians’, which included not only the Cam, but every other non-Việt people except for the Chinese, needed to be civilised and assimilated. To be considered ‘civilised’, ‘barbarians’ needed to master Sino-Vietnamese culture, and especially the appropriate language, dress and etiquette. From the Vietnamese sources, we understand that assimilation of the Cam and cultural homogenisation of the Empire was one of Minh Mạng's main concerns. He wanted to promote a unique culture, which meant promoting Vietnamese culture as defined by Huế court standards. Nothing should differentiate the population of Pāṇḍuraṅga from the Vietnamese subjects of the Empire. In 1832, Minh Mạng noticed that the ‘customs were still like before’ and was ‘afraid that they could not be compatible with the concept of a common culture for all’. He planned then to ‘send officials from the capital to tour the region and make possible their assimilation with the Kinh’.Footnote 81
From the Cam point of view, Vietnamese assimilation always promoted the development of values that totally contradicted Cam tradition. With their dramatic descriptions of the substitution of traditional Cam customs and traditions by Vietnamese ones, the ariya exemplify the clash of two civilisations. The various cultural, educational, and religious changes introduced by the Vietnamese were meaningless to the Cam population, who in many cases were forced to accept the new measures.
According to Cam texts, the Cam were compelled to learn the ‘Vietnamese letters’ (C. akhar yuen), i.e. the Vietnamese language and script. A text mentions that ‘the Cam were [forced] to be pupils and beaten to learn and acquire [perfect] knowledge of the [Vietnamese] letters’.Footnote 82 It is interesting to point out that in this stanza the poet uses the term ‘haok klaow’ for ‘pupils’, which is borrowed from the Vietnamese ‘học trò’. By choosing to use a Vietnamese word, the poet here emphasises the fact that the educational system introduced by the Vietnamese, which is based on the learning of Sino-Vietnamese characters and Chinese classics, was something totally new and unfamiliar to the Cam. It seems that Vietnamese language was not the only thing they had to learn, as they also had to acquire knowledge of Vietnamese traditions in order to assimilate.
Educational and cultural measures were applied to all levels of the Cam population. One version of the Ariya Po Ceng states that the canton chiefs were ‘forced to learn the Vietnamese customs, traditions and language’.Footnote 83 Furthermore, the people chosen to be in charge of the newly created Cam cantons were expected to acquire a good knowledge of the Vietnamese language and traditions in order to assimilate and teach them to the Cam population. It should be noted that these educational and cultural measures did not only target the Cam but were implemented throughout the Empire. For instance, in 1838, the Khmers of Vĩnh Long province in the Mekong Delta were explicitly forbidden to follow their traditional temple education and were compelled to learn the Vietnamese language and customs.Footnote 84
The Cam had to give up their traditional attire to adopt the Vietnamese one, which caused great resentment among the population. A text of the Ariya Po Ceng states:
[We, the Cam] had to endure all sorts of sorrows and we were exhausted. We had to pay for everything. We witnessed [some more changes]:
[Our] attire had to follow the Vietnamese [fashion]. [We had to] wear the tunic and the trousers and could not tie the pouch [to our waist].Footnote 85
The tunic (C. au) is the Vietnamese long tunic with buttons down the front (V. áo, i.e. the áo ngũ thân or ‘five-panelled shirt’, the ancestor of the modern áo dài), which used to be worn by men and women at the time. Until the reign of Emperor Minh Mạng, trousers (C. tarapha) were unknown to the Cam. Cam men used to wear a tunic and a loincloth; women used to wear a tight-fitting long tunic, often dark green in colour, worn over a piece of cloth folded around the waist. The new dress regulation was applied harshly: soldiers (C. baol) were sent to force the population from the nobility (C. ganâp) down to the commoners to wear the trousers, and officials were sent by the court to ‘teach’ (C. pasram) the ruling class how to wear it as well.Footnote 86 It should be noted here that such attempts to impose Vietnamese dress were not entirely new for Pāṇḍuraṅga. In 1693, after transforming Pāṇḍuraṅga into the prefecture of Bình Thuận and abolishing the ruling house, Nguyễn Phúc Chu tried to impose Vietnamese (Kinh) dress, at least for the members of Cam royalty (Po Saktiraydaputih, or Kế Bà Tử, and his relatives) who had just been incorporated into the Vietnamese administration of the prefecture.Footnote 87
The Vietnamese imperial authorities also targeted Cam religions and traditions. Regarding religious beliefs and practices, the population of Pāṇḍuraṅga was at that time divided into two religious communities: the Ahier and the Bani (called also Awal or Awar).Footnote 88 The Ahier religion is a unique blend of local cults, ancestor worship and remnants of Hinduism. Scholars have sometimes called the Ahier religion ‘Brahmanism’ or ‘Hinduism’, although present-day Cam beliefs have evolved considerably from their Indian roots. The Bani religion blends local beliefs, ancestor worship and Islamic elements. After the annexation of Pāṇḍuraṅga, Cam traditions (C. adat) and religious beliefs were outlawed; as one manuscript stated, ‘the traditions of the elders disappeared’. Religious buildings such as mosques (C. sang magik) were razed to the ground. Cam Ahier cemeteries, the kut, were profaned and destroyed by the Vietnamese administrators.Footnote 89 An ariya gives us a glimpse of those traditions which had been carried out by the Bani priests but were then outlawed:
The po imam [priest conducting the prayers in the mosque] and the po acar jama-ah [were forced] to grow their hair.Footnote 90 They were forbidden to shave their heads and perform the prostrations for the fasting month.Footnote 91
In the year of the Buffalo, in the seventh month,Footnote 92 the po acar would do the prostrations, shave his head and wear the kalah [head garment].
The po imam, the po acar jama-ah would buy a goat [to be sacrificed] and hit the drum to [announce] the fasting.
This is the tradition of [our] great kingdom: the rituals of fasting have to be performed [by high-ranking priests] for one whole month.
The wives of the po imam and the po acar would rub their heads and think of the new clothes [that had to be made].Footnote 93 The po acar would recite aloud the prayers and would conduct the adat [traditions, rites] for the elders.
The Cam [traditions] have disappeared [now]. The adhia would perform the rites for the elders and use the baganrac.Footnote 94
He would perform sacrifices, cut [the sticks] and read the letters in the baganrac as it was done since Po Rasur [the Cam pronunciation of Rasul'llah, the Prophet].Footnote 95
Ahier religious ceremonies were also prohibited. For instance, the rija, which is performed in honour of the ancestors and occasionally carried out to cure illness, was banned.Footnote 96 The hut (C. kajang) reserved for the performance of the ceremony was used by the Vietnamese to perform traditional theatre plays, and the Cam were forced to tolerate this.Footnote 97 The text Ariya hatai paran recalls other ceremonies that fell under prohibition with the new cultural policies: ceremonies for worshipping spirits, ceremonies and offerings for the month of Puis [the eleventh month of the Cam calendar], ca-mbur and katé Footnote 98 ceremonies, purification rites (C. balih) at the river mouths (C. pabah lam-mengâ) in order to bring happiness (C. haniim) to the country, and ceremonies in the temples (C. bamong kalan) for the yuer yang.Footnote 99
The prestige and social status of the Ahier and Bani priests were also intentionally diminished. Cam in Pāṇḍuraṅga held their priests in high respect. Yet the Vietnamese did not care for their positions and openly threatened (C. gham) them, which was regarded by the Cam as highly offensive.Footnote 100 Cam manuscripts state also that both Bani priests were forced to consume pork (C. pabueiy) and lizard (C. ajah) meat while Ahier priests were compelled to eat cow (C. limaow) meat, food absolutely forbidden by their religious traditions.Footnote 101 The Vietnamese also made the priests perform tasks that they were not supposed to do and subjected them to hard labour: both Ahier and Bani priests (baséh and acar) were forced to cut trees in the forest, hunt for Rusa deer, and skin them.Footnote 102 Making the priests perform such activities was regarded by the Cam as a cruel offence to their religious beliefs and a blasphemy.
There were also attempts to impose on the Cam the Vietnamese religious traditions and ritual practices: according to the texts, they were forced to celebrate Vietnamese festivals such as the Mid-Autumn (V. Tết Trung Thu) or Summer Solstice festivals (V. Tết Đoan Ngọ), and to place idols (C. rup) in their houses and worship them.Footnote 103 Regarding the idols, Po Dharma indicates that they could have been either statues of gods and deities or the tablet placed on the ancestral altar.Footnote 104 It seems that, at least in some households, statues of deities were put on altars. The Ariya gleng anak confirms: ‘They forced [us] to put idols on altars, to sit [in front of them], honor [them] and put the hands together in obeisance.’ In this stanza, the Cam word used for ‘idols’ is bata, an altered form of débata. This word, derived from the Sanskrit devatā, strictly speaking means ‘divinities, gods’, but in the context of this ariya it refers to idols or representations of Vietnamese deities. As for the word ‘altar’ (C. saban), it designates the table used for sacrifices and offerings for deities and/or ancestor worship.Footnote 105 This verse exemplifies the religious reforms carried out by the Vietnamese. The Cam had to set up an altar with statues of deities following the Vietnamese tradition and were also forced to imitate the Vietnamese way of praying: bowing before the altar, putting the hands together in obeisance, etc.
All the changes in religious practices introduced by the Vietnamese were indeed contrary to Cam customs, and it seems that the Cam did not understand them at all. It is rather unclear what gods or deities were worshipped in private homes at that time. The deities may have been those worshipped by all the Vietnamese families: Táo Quân, god of the hearth; Quan Thánh, god of war; Thổ Công, god of the Earth; Mụ Bà, spirit of women, and so on.Footnote 106 One should note here again that similar attempts at imposing Vietnamese cult practices and traditions had already begun as early as 1822 in other parts of the Empire, such as the mountainous areas of the Thanh Hóa province where non-Việt peoples were living. Official sources record Minh Mạng's orders to officials to disseminate the Sino-Vietnamese traditions: the ritual for boys on entering the adult age (V. quan); the wedding rites (V. hôn); the funeral rites (V. tang); rituals for offerings (V. tế).Footnote 107
According to Cam texts, the Vietnamese authorities required the active participation of the traditional elite to disseminate Vietnamese culture and religious practice among the Cam population. A text explains:
The Cam Lords were [forced] to abandon [the celebration of the] rija for the ancestors.
The Lords were made to say that the [Cam] traditions were bad and had to be abandoned and [to say] that the Vietnamese traditions were appropriate and had to be followed.Footnote 108
Like the commoners, the members of the former ruling elite (the po or ‘lords’) were forbidden to practise traditional ceremonies for ancestor worship. They were made to announce to their former subjects that the Cam traditions such as veneration of the ancestors were wrong and that the people had to conform to more ‘correct’ (C. makrâ) traditions. In doing so, the Huế court meant not only to make the members of the elite publicly repudiate Cam customs, but also to make the people understand that there was no hope of keeping Campā's traditions alive. Vietnamese sources confirm the involvement of the local elite, here religious, in the diffusion of Vietnamese culture. In 1836, officials of Bình Thuận province were ordered to select one or two individuals from the Ahier (V. đạo Chiêm) and Bani (V. đạo Bà Ni) religious communities who had a fair knowledge of Vietnamese and reward them with money and rice. In addition, six children of intellectuals would be chosen and taken care of to encourage them to learn the Vietnamese language and ‘loyalty’ (V. nghĩa) to the Huế court. The people selected were expected to help the Vietnamese authorities to establish lists of the members of their communities and help with translations.Footnote 109 As representatives of the two main religious groups, they were expected to disseminate the Vietnamese language and customs to their own people.
The reforms and their repercussions on Cam society
The establishment of a new order and the reforms implemented by the Vietnamese among the Cam jeopardised the latter's cultural and social values, which led to the disintegration of social and community ties. The authors of the ariya emphasise that the internal upheavals which undermined Cam society speeded up the process of assimilation. The disappearance of Pāṇḍuraṅga and its traditions was caused not only by the Vietnamese annexation but also by an internal social crisis. Texts show the Cam awareness of their own share of responsibility for the final collapse of the kingdom. A text makes rather clearly that the great ‘sins’ (C. duis-sa) of the kingdom and its population led to the disaster. Cam ariya emphasise the degradation of the social, communal and family ties. The verse ‘the youngsters do not recognise the elders; the aunts do not recognise their nephews’, commonly used in nineteenth-century ariya, has become the very symbol of the disappearance of social cohesion in Pāṇḍuraṅga.Footnote 110
Unable to use their familial, village, religious or social networks, some Cam chose to leave the country and in doing so quickened the process of the destruction of the social fabric, which the author of the text Ariya Thei Mai Mang Déh expresses in the following stanza: ‘Then the elephant left the reeds. The lizard left its hole, the elders forgot the youngsters.’Footnote 111 The Ariya gleng anak pictures the collective sadness due to the loss of the traditions and the disintegration of the Cam society. The poet metaphorically compares living in Pāṇḍuraṅga in previous times with entering a dark tunnel (C. kanjrung) and stepping on a slippery (C. danar) ground full of holes (C. ra-ong): each step is dangerous and makes one stagger and forget where one came from.Footnote 112 The poet expresses the idea that the people have been left with no boundaries and no values. For the poet, the Cam people are in a dark age and surrounded by dangers and chaos. He suggests that the disappearance of social values, particularly respect for elders and the social hierarchy, is due to the policies implemented by the Vietnamese in Pāṇḍuraṅga.
The Ariya hatai paran is even more pessimistic and adds: ‘Since the country of the Cam lords disappeared, all [we] witness on his earth is misstep and sin everywhere.’Footnote 113 Furthermore, the author of the Ariya hatai paran implies that the disappearance of the cultural and religious heritage is clearly linked to the rapid Vietnamese immigration and the subsequent Cam acculturation: with Vietnamese villages all over the territory of former Pāṇḍuraṅga and their intermixing with Cam villages, one does not know ‘which side belongs to whom’, i.e. which part is Vietnamese and which part is Cam. Furthermore, the Cam were led to imitate them, which put their traditional values at stake.Footnote 114
Conclusion
Nineteenth-century history-based Cam ariya offer a valuable contribution to the history of the disappearance of Campā as witnessed by its own population. The texts shed light on the various measures taken by the Vietnamese to impose their hegemony on Pāṇḍuraṅga's territory and population. Land reform, the imposition of a tax system and the introduction of Vietnamese administration hastened the end of Campā as an independent kingdom, and cultural and religious reforms greatly undermined Cam traditional social structures. From the Cam point of view, Vietnamese reforms and actions were perceived as acts of foreign aggression. All the reforms implemented, and especially those pertaining to religion and cultural traditions, were lived as traumatic experiences. Cam sources show a little-known form of indigenous colonialism. One should note that the themes and expressions used in nineteenth-century Cam texts, ariya in particular, are strikingly similar to anti-French texts written by Vietnamese intellectuals, such as Phan Bội Châu (1867–1940), in the early twentieth century.Footnote 115 These themes and modes of expression are almost universal and illustrate the sufferings of people witnessing the imposition of a foreign order.
In spite of the aggressive assimilation policies carried out throughout Minh Mạng's reign, Cam traditions did not disappear. It seems that the policies, particularly the cultural policies, implemented by this ruler were not enforced by his successors. I have not found any texts describing the state of Cam traditions and cultural practices after the reign of Minh Mạng, but it is possible that, in spite of a former interdiction, the Cam went back to some of their old practices, especially religious practices. At the end of the nineteenth century, Étienne Aymonier noted that Cam traditions were still alive, making this population ‘exceptionally interesting from the ethnographic and religious point of view’.Footnote 116 On the other hand, the French were stunned by the backwardness and the economic misery of the Cam living in the Bình Thuận and Ninh Thuận provinces.
The study of Cam sources enriches our knowledge not only of the history of Campā, and particularly the last decades of its existence, but also of the history of the construction of modern Vietnam as a politically and culturally unified country and the integration of non-Việt peoples.
