56 replies to this topic

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

The second invasion is probably not that large, More around 70,000. There are two records of it.

There are a few reason that Nan Zhao sumitted to Tang again, one of which Tubo was demanding great tax and Nan Zhao is always sent as a vanguard against the Tang, after a Tubo Nan Zhao alliance thwarted in 779, Tubo became displeased and degreaded Nan Chao to the status of Dong Ri Wang, which from the relation of brotherhood to a mere vassal, of course Nan Zhao was displeased. Meanwhile Tang also have to thank its ggreat diplomat of Si Chuan, he purposely stirred trouble between Tubo and Nan zhao but sending letters which he let the Tubo capture and rose suspision. Tubo in turn bsent 20,000 troops to the border of Nan Zhao to block their path, The king was undoubly angered and refused to ally with Tubo, While the viceroy of Xi Chuan to prove Tang is a worthy aly, started a number of battles against Tubo in the north of Nan Zhao and scored a series of victory to overpower the Tubo defense, yet to prove Tang would not threat Nan Zhao, he sent a memorial to it declaring mutual assistance for survival, obviously there are no benefit whatso ever now for Nan Zhao to support Tubo, while everything to gain to sumbmit to tang since there wouldn't be any tax or ordering of troops to be sent. since Tang at this moment is not strong enough to demand it. Teh breaking point was when Tubo asked Nan Zhao to provide troops against the Uighurs. When Nan Zhao submitted to Tang its opening move was to attack the Tibetan fortresses on northwest Yunnan, , in a surprise ruse, they "drowned 10,000 person, captured 100,000, and 16 cities." Wiping out the Tubo threat to Nan Chao's west border indefinitely, from then on Nan zhao would conduct a serie of attack on Tubo, this submission has a gerat effect on the whole politics of East Asia in fact, it severely weakened the Tubo eastern Defense, Tubo which was always aggresivve before now became on the defensive. It was repeatedly attacked by Nan Zhao and its counterthrust wore weak(since most of its attack before had Nan Zhao vanguard in support) and was usually repulsed by Tang and Nan Zhao. This also weakened Tubo's defense on the north and west since more troops are now consentrated on the east.

[Yun]

An informative recent article by a researcher at my university, on Yunnan's relations with China from Qin to Ming - including Nanzhao and Dali:

http://www.ari.nus.e...s/wps04_030.pdf

(members interested in Zhuge Liang's campaigns against the so-called 'Nanman' of Yunnan, for example Meng Huo, are also recommended to read this)

[Karakhan]

Cool... thanks for the info. This is off topic, but do you know when and if there's any specific reason for the migration of the Thai people south out of Guangxi into South East Asia?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

sorry for late reply, i tend to forget where I post thigns

I do not think Thai speaking groups in Guangxi really migrated south, most of the migration was from Yunnan due to the Mongol invasion. It also seemed that ancient Thai speaking groups in Yunnan primarily inhabit the southern fringe of modern Yunnan while the other more dominant Yunnan minorities, like the Bai and Yi had control of the center and eastern areas.

[Yun]

Most scholars now believe that the Tai were not pushed into Southeast Asia by the Mongol invasion of Yunnan. The Tai had been gradually migrating peacefully from the uplands down to the floodplains of the Chao Phraya and the valley of the middle Mekong, and by the 11th century had established themselves on the peripheries of the Khmer empire and the Pagan kingdom. In the Mongol invasions of Southeast Asia from the 1250s to 1280s, which greatly weakened Angkor and destroyed Pagan, many Tai chieftains allied themselves with the Mongols and eventually took advantage of the situation to found kingdoms of their own. These kingdoms included Lan Na, Sukhotai, Ayyuthaya and Lan Xang. The Tai were not victims of the Mongols, but rather beneficiaries.

[foldup_gryphon]

Another theory I've come across had it that Nanchao is the main reason for the Tai migration. Conquered ethinic groups were relocated for economic production, which lead/force them to settle in new lands when Nanchao expanded.

What about the end of Nanchao, I've read the Tuan family taking over the Meng, founding Dali, but are there any details to it?

After reading the article recommended by Yun from his University of Singapore in the site address http://www.ari.nus.e...s/wps04_030.pdf, I have come to a conclusion that the present academic consensus understanding of the Austro-Asiatic Mon people originating from western China as incorrect.

In the old tradition the Pyu occupied lower Myanmar and then later the Mon migrated from Western China to Myanmar and over run the Pyu Kingdoms. Both people Pyu and Mon were identified as Austro-Asiatic.

Now the latest academic consensus placed the Mon Kingdoms in lower Myanmar with the Pyu Kingdoms occupying upper Myanmar. Now it is the Mon Kingdoms that have established first in lower Myanmar before the Pyu Kingdoms. This is an incongruence and contradiction. Further now the Pyu Kingdoms are identified as Burmese Tibetans and the Mon Austro-Asiatic. Wisely the document in the website above completely left out the Mon and only documented the Pyu.

I would provisionally maintain the old tradition that both the Pyu and Mon are Austro-Asiatic. Also the Pyu Kingdoms occupy Myanmar first and later Mon came and over run the Pyu Kingdoms in lower Myanmar. However I would posit that the Mon originated from South China instead of Western China. They originated from the Yangtze Delta, Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, North Vietnam and Laos. The Mon went in a Southwest direction with the lead emigrants settling in lower Myanmar over running the original Pyu Kingdoms there.

Edited by foldup_gryphon, 20 September 2005 - 01:13 PM.

[foldup_gryphon]

Nan Zhao was concluded NOT to be of Thai origin. It was commonly assume then since Nan Zhao could have a meaning (something prince) in the Thai family of language..but it was a mere coicidence.

Nan Zhao had a mixture of races for sure, but the two primary races that compose the population is the ancestors of today's Bai and Yi minority. The same is applied to Da Li.

Although Da Li was definitely led by the Bai ethnicity.. people was unsure about how the racial heirchy was in Nan Zhao.. some claimed it was ruled by Bai elite with a Yi majority, or vice versa.

At this time, the Thai speaking peoples (Tai, Zhuang, Lao, etc) was either in modern Guangxi to the east, or farther south (but still within boundaries of current day China).

The library here had an excellent book on it, but unfortunately is closed at the moment

As of now I do not know which theory is the right one the Tai formed the Nanchao Kingdom or whether the Bai (Pai)/Yi formed it. Tai people belong to the Tai-Kadai language family. Bai(Pai)/Yi people both are originally Austro-Asiatic but now have evolved to Tibeto-Burman under the influence of continuous sincization. If the Bai(Pai)/Yi people both formed the Nanchao Kingdom then there are every likelihood that it was they as Austro-Asiatic Mon who migrated Southwest to Lower Myanmar over running the Pyu Kingdoms and establishing the Mon Kingdom there.

[foldup_gryphon]

Most scholars now believe that the Tai were not pushed into Southeast Asia by the Mongol invasion of Yunnan. The Tai had been gradually migrating peacefully from the uplands down to the floodplains of the Chao Phraya and the valley of the middle Mekong, and by the 11th century had established themselves on the peripheries of the Khmer empire and the Pagan kingdom. In the Mongol invasions of Southeast Asia from the 1250s to 1280s, which greatly weakened Angkor and destroyed Pagan, many Tai chieftains allied themselves with the Mongols and eventually took advantage of the situation to found kingdoms of their own. These kingdoms included Lan Na, Sukhotai, Ayyuthaya and Lan Xang. The Tai were not victims of the Mongols, but rather beneficiaries.

Pyu people could have under gone the same process as the Bai (Pai)/Yi people. They were all Austro-Asiatic speakers but because of influences from their neighbors have subsequently become Tibeto-Burman.

[wuTao]

Is "Becoming Tai: The Historical Basis of the Thai Nation" a book? I'd sure like to own it... but it doesn't seem to be sold in the U.S.

[foldup_gryphon]

Thank you for your post Sawa. I am not a professional historian too more of a historical addicted enthusiast. Could you please clarify on some points?

I apologize to Dr. Dhida for copy/pasting this..

Taken from:

Dhida Saraya, Ph.D. "Becoming Tai: The Historical Basis of the Thai Nation" Asian Studies Institute, Chulalongkorn University, 2003. ISBN 974-90577-4-0

Pages 15 - 20

Do you have website address for this document as a direct access would mean the following clarification will not be required?

…Cross border contact among ethnic groups as a result of economic exchange and trade was not a new phenomenon in the history of the southwest of China. Such activities took place constantly during the Hand dynasty. For example, traders from Szechuan sold a kind of chili pst or poweder, an indigenous product of its land, which was very popular, especially among the Yeh-lang. The latter served as middlemen, selling this product further to the Yeuh, by traveling across the Sanko river in North Vietnam. Such cross border trading fostered the relationship between the Yeuh in the south and those in the southwest. The king of the Yeuh believed that he could control the whole Yeh-land clan through this king of economic exchange. (20)

I guess Hand dynasty is Han Dynasty and Yeuh is Nan Yue.

Interactions of ethnic groups led toward the establishment of a more complex level of social organization than that of tribe. During the 8th to the 12th centuries, historical records show that some ethnic groups were unified and two important inland states were formed. After the unification of the Pyu, a state referred to in Chinese documents as the Sri Ksetra Kingdom emerged; and the unification of the Man in Yunnan eventually led to the formation of the Nanchao Kingdom.

Man could mean Mon or does she really mean Man 蠻.

Unification of ethnic groups in Yunnan had taken place long before that. Around 900 BC there was a community known as the Kunming Kingdom. This state had developed a certain degree of civilization. They were engaged in activities such as rice farming, animal husbandry, fishery, and copper smelting. Its inhabitants comprised several ethnic groups, such as the Pei-man, U-man, and the Man. Kunming was formed by the amalgamation of nomads who settled down permanently and adopted technology from China through trade contact. Some of the important things they learned from the Chinese included agriculture, irrigation, and metal smelting, as well as language and other cultural influences. By the 7th century, this kingdom had incorporated six other states and was called Liu Chao or Kok Chao. Finally the Chief of the Meng Soe tribe conquered the other five groups and established the Nanchao kingdom in 794 AD. Although consisting of several ethnic groups, the ruling class of Nanchao were mainly the U-mand and the Pei-man who had close ties with members of the Tang Dynasty. The chiefs of Nanchao during its initial period were from the Meng family. Among the key figures were Pi Lo-koh, I Meo-Sin, and Koh Lo-Feng. This family remained in power during the first two hundred years of nanchao. Then from the 11th century onwards, the rulers of Nanchao belonged to the Tuan family, who established Tali or Talifu. They were conquered by the Yuan Dynasty in the 13th Century. (21)

Pei-man and U-man could mean Bai (Pai) Mon and Yi Mon but I not sure about Man. U-mand could be printing error or copying error.

At first glance she seemed to be agreeing with the theory that it was the Bai (Pai) Mon and the Yi Mon who formed the Nanchao Kingdom.

Edited by foldup_gryphon, 21 September 2005 - 04:11 AM.

[foldup_gryphon]

Man as in 'southern barbarian/tribes.'

U-mand is the same as U-man, another typo.

My understanding is that in the context of this paper, the point was 'U-man' and 'Pei-man' dominated Nanchao and the 'Mons' were another minority groups relocated.

But whether the U-man and Pei-man are Mons or not, I do not know. Good luck on your research

Thank you for the clarification. Now I can comment on the document. The document has a different theoretical reference frame than from what I have postulated. The document follows the idea that the Chu State and the Man 蠻 are Austro-Asiatic. This is in the same way that the Bai (Pai) and Yi are Austro-Asiatic which would explain why the document would assigned Bai (Pai) as Man 蠻 and the Yi as Man 蠻 in Pei-man and U-man. The document has one similar idea to that of the document recommended by Yun where an expedition from the Chu State had set up a kingdom in Yunnan. This therefore could account for the Man 蠻 presence in Yunnan. The author of the Thai document is trying to link Man 蠻 with Mon base on the idea both groups are Austro-Asiatic and therefore both Man and Mon could be the same people as in Southern China Barbarians. These various points of view are also base on the hypothesis that the Austro-Asiatic Mon has a western China origin around Gansu. These core assumptions have a general academic consensus of acceptance.

These core assumptions which have general academic consensus of acceptance are different from my own postulated reference base. My own postulation is the Chu State and the Man 蠻 are Sinitic and they are not Austro-Asiatic. Another difference is my theory posits the Austro-Asiatic Mon has a Southeast China origination from the Yangtze Delta, Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, North Vietnam and Laos. The Austro-Asiatic Mon from these areas migrated in a Southwest direction.

The West China Austro-Asiatic Mon Origin Theory would arrived at the conclusion that the Austro-Asiatic Mon Bai (Pai) and Yi founded the Nanchao Kingdom. However, my own South China Austro-Asiatic Mon Origin Theory would have a bias toward the Tai-Kadai founding the Nanchao Kingdom. According to my theory the Austro-Asiatic Mon has a lesser chance of founding the Nanchao Kingdom.

Edited by foldup_gryphon, 21 September 2005 - 09:48 AM.