|
COMMENTARY
1
This text, which dates back to the beginning
of the 11th century, and is classed among the most ancient written
documents of Việt Nam, was
written in Chinese ideograms (Han), the Chinese script being then used in the
Far East for official, educational and literary writings as was Latin in Europe in the Middle Ages. That script was the only one
used in Việt Nam for more than twenty centuries, not only under Chinese rule
but also in the period of independent national dynasties (10th to
19h centuries). Only in the 20th century was it replaced by French
(colonial period: 1884-1945) and the Vietnamese Romanized script (officially
starting with the 1945 Revolution).
2
Let us put that document into the historical
context. The Việt national and cultural identity was formed in the first
millennium B.C. with the bronze culture. The first Vietnamese
State established its capital at
Bạch Hạc, the apex of the deltaic triangle of the Red
River on the demarcation line between the hilly uplands and the
swampy, barely cultivated lowlands. The second State moved its capital to the
plain, already grown with rice, to Cổ Loa (18 kilometers from present-day Hà
Nội). Then came a 1000-year period of Chinese rule; imperial proconsuls first
established their administrative seat north of present-day Hà Nội in Luy Lâu
and Long Biên before building the citadel of Đại La in the 9th
century on the site of the present capital. Meanwhile, the heads of
victorious insurrections against the Chinese were able to stay in power only
for brief periods; they preferred to install their headquarters in their
native regions with the exception of Lý Nam Đế (6th century)
who took Hà Nội (then Long Biên) as the capital of his short-lived kingdom.
The Chinese yoke was broken in the 10th
century. The capital was established at Cổ Loa by the liberating Ngô Dynasty
which ended in anarchy. Order was restored by King Đinh Tiên Hoàng who for
the sake of better defense installed the capital at Hoa Lư in a hilly region.
The following dynasty stayed there.
It was Lý Thái Tổ who was credited with having
asserted the location of Hà Nội to be the country’s capital. His voice was no
doubt dictated by the geopolitical conjuncture. For several decades Việt Nam
had had time to remake the apprenticeship of independence. The central power
having been consolidated, economic and cultural conditions made it possible
to build a prosperous and powerful kingdom which, indeed, was to enjoy great
prestige in Southeast Asia over four
centuries. The capital had to be moved to a site favorable to these
prospects.
Hà Nội obviously seemed to fit that role. A
glance at the map shows that all the waterways (and the mountain ranges)
converge on Hà Nội and continue to the sea like the fingers of the hand. Both
river and land routes are the most favorable. Protected on its northern flank
against possible invasions by mountain ranges, the city easily communicates
with the sea and overseas cultures; plains and mountains meet there.
3
Of course, in the time of Lý Thái Tổ, geopolitical
reasons vindicating the choice of Hà Nội as capital were left rather than
analyzed. The king was obeying two imperative cultural commands: the
Confucian nation of “heavenly mandate” (Thiên
Mệnh) and the principles of geomancy.
“Lý Thái Tổ reproached the Đinh and Lê
dynasties, his predecessors, with having disobeyed the law of heaven by
persisting in staying in Hoa Lư, a place not easily accessible. An unjust
reproach, for they were compelled to act as they did by reason of security.
As for him, he could allow himself to move the capital away in order to
“follow the will of Heaven” and the “aspirations of the people”.
Once the decision was taken, has had to
conform to the rules of geomancy. The capital would be located “in the head
land of the country. Its position evokes that of a coiled-up dragon, a
squatting tiger. It is situated at an equal distance of the four points of
the compass and corresponds to favorable orientation of mountains and rivers,
which would ensure a royal dynasty lasting ten thousand generations”.
4
This text indicates the ambiguous character of
the old relations between Việt Nam
and China,
which were governed by the dialectical play of repulsion and attraction. On
the one hand, the Vietnamese repulsed all that emanated from the hereditary
invader; on the other hand, they were attracted by a richer culture which
often served as a model. Thus, Lý Thái Tổ cited the examples set by Chinese
dynasties (Shang, Zhou, the Three Dynasties) and honored the memory of the
proconsul Kao Pen.
5
The king called his capital Thăng Long the
“Soaring Dragon”, showing that he remained deeply Việt, for the Việt were
believed to descend from the union of a Dragon and a Fairy. The mythical
animal was thought to bring rain to the rice fields. It represented royalty
and nobility.
6
Thăng Long or Long Thành (the Dragon City) has been called since 1831, in
the reign of the Nguyễn Dynasty which fixed its capital in Huế, Hà Nội again
has resumed the status of capital since the Revolution of 1945.
|