158 Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 43(1), pp 158–180 February 2012. © The National University of Singapore, 2012 doi:10.1017/S0022463411000701 The destruction and assimilation of Campā (1832–35) as seen from Cam sources Nicolas Weber This article proposes to study nineteenth-century Cam sources as valuable materials for the history of the disappearance of the kingdom of Campā — or more precisely its last independent principality of Pāṇḍuraṅga — and its integration into the Vietnamese realm during the first half of the nineteenth century. The end of Campā is recorded mainly in metrical works known as ‘ariya’. These sources offer unique and detailed accounts of the incorporation of Campā as a Vietnamese province and the new administrative, economic, religious and cultural policies implemented by the Vietnamese. They also highlight the sufferings of the Campā population witnessing the imposition of a new and foreign order. Introduction According to Vietnamese official accounts, Pāṇḍuraṅga, the last remaining principality of the once-prominent kingdom of Campā,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, Nicolas Weber is a Visiting Lecturer at University of Malaya, Department of Southeast Asian Studies, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Correspondence in connection with this paper should be addressed to: nicolasweb@yahoo.com. The author would like to thank Professor Bruce Lockhart for his observations and suggestions. 1 ‘Cam’ and ‘Campā’ are commonly written ‘Cham’ and ‘Champa’ although this spelling does not correspond to an accurate transcription of the Cam script. The transcription system adopted here was elaborated by the Campā Research Group — gathering the French scholars Pierre-B. Lafont, Po Dharma, Gérard Moussay and Pierre Labrousse — in 1997. See Akayet Inra Patra (Hikayat Inra Patra = Epopée Inra Patra), ed. Po Dharma, Gérard Moussay and Abdul Karim (Kuala Lumpur: Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia & École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1997), p. 39. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 159 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’.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’.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 1802–35.4 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.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.6 My aim in this 2 Manuscript Cam Microfilm (hereafter CM) 37(38), p. 242. The Cam manuscripts kept in French libraries were inventoried in 1977 and 1981. Manuscripts bearing the class-mark ‘CAM’, ‘Cam Microfilm’ and CHCPI CAM are kept in the library of the École Française d‘Extrême-Orient, Paris. Manuscripts bearing the class-mark ‘CM’ are kept in the library of the Société Asiatique, Paris. It should be noted that a manuscript rarely contains only one single text: it is very common to find in the same manuscript multiple texts dealing with different subjects: ariya, religious hymns, magic treaties, genealogies, stories, etc. In order to differentiate the various texts contained in a particular manuscript, a number has been assigned to each text; see Pierre-B. Lafont, Po Dharma and Nara Vija, Catalogue des manuscrits cam des bibliothèques françaises (Paris: Publications de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1977) and Po Dharma, Complément au catalogue des manuscrits cam des bibliothèques françaises (Paris: Publications de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1981). 3 Quoted by Pierre-B. Lafont in his ‘Pour une réhabilitation des chroniques rédigées en caṃ moderne’, Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient [hereafter BEFEO], 62 (1980): 107. Lafont’s article provides a description of the chronicles and emphasises the need for their ‘rehabilitation’ for the knowledge and understanding of Campā’s modern historiography. For the study of two Campā royal chronicles, see Po Dharma, ‘Chroniques du Pāṇḍuraṅga’ (Thèse, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris, 1978). Aymonier (1844–1929) was a naval officer in Cochinchina, where in 1874 he was appointed to teach Cambodian at the Administrative Training College. As French Résident in Phnom Penh, he led the exploration of Angkor, as well as subsequent archaeological missions to Cambodia and Vietnam. 4 Po Dharma, Le Pāṇḍuraṅga (Campā) 1802–1835. Ses rapports avec le Vietnam (Paris: Publications de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1987). Such debate over the reliability of historical texts is widely found in other parts of Southeast Asia; see, for instance, Helen Creese, ‘Balinese babad as historical sources: A reinterpretation of the fall of Gèlgèl’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 147 (1991): 236–9; and Carool Kersten, ‘Cambodia’s Muslim king: Khmer and Dutch sources on the conversion of Reameathipadei I, 1642–1658’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 37, 1 (2006): 2–6. 5 Po Dharma, Pāṇḍuraṅga; these texts are Cam Microfilm 17(1) and CM29(1), respectively. 6 ‘Ariya hatai paran’, in Po Dharma, Abd. Karim, Nicolas Weber and Majid Yunos, Reproduction des manuscrits cam n°1. Contes, Epopées, Textes versifiés (Kuala Lumpur: Department of Museums and 160 NICOLAS WEBER 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 Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga, 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.7 In spite of its Sanskrit name, the Cam ariya has nothing in common with Sanskrit metrics and is clearly indigenous.8 A typical ariya stanza (kanaing Antiquities and École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 2003). The first two texts are CHCPI CAM1 and CM37(28), respectively. 7 Scholars usually identify three successive stages for Cam script: Ancient, Middle, and Modern. ‘Ancient Cam’ refers to the language and script used in the stone inscriptions. It was used from the 4th to the 15th century (Po Dharma, ‘The problem of Cham language and its script after 1975’, International Symposium, ‘Written Cultures in Mainland Southeast Asia’, Osaka, Japan, 3 and 4 Feb. 2006). It makes frequent use of subscript consonants, which have almost totally disappeared in Modern Cam (akhar thrah, literally ‘straight script’); the latter is considered to have appeared during the 16th century and is used in manuscripts. ‘Middle Cam’ was the script used between ‘Ancient’ and ‘Modern Cam’. A few other scripts (akhar yok, akhar atuel, and akhar rik) are still in use nowadays in Cam communities in Bình Thuận and Ninh Thuận provinces, but are reserved for religious or magical purposes. For samples of the different scripts, see Étienne Aymonier and Antoine Cabaton, Dictionnaire čam–français (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale/Ernest Leroux, 1906), pp. xii–xiii. 8 Anthony Warder defines the Sanskrit āryā verse as ‘a musical “bar” metre’; Anthony K. Warder, Indian Kāvya literature I (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1972), p. 184. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 161 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 ariya, ka nagar cam ita, ndaom kunal baik pu sah, tuen phaow nyu lac nyu marai mang makah, li-ndap dahlau luec alah, ama bicam pa-mblaong kalin.9 The structure of the ariya allows for flexibility, and composers can take considerable liberties with grammatical rules and orthography.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.11 Like many other metrical works of Southeast Asian poetic traditions, the ariya were meant to be chanted before an audience.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.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 1796–97.14 9 Manuscript CAM 58(3), p. E11. This passage is translated as follow: ‘Here is [the story of Tuen Phaow] composed in ariya [form]/for our Cam country to think and remember well the Prince/Tuen Phaow [used to] say he was coming from Makah/Before his [final] defeat, he entered Bicam to wage war [against the Vietnamese]’. 10 For a detailed description of Cam poetry and ariya, see Paul Mus, ‘Études indiennes et indochinoises. Vol. IV, Deux légendes chames’, BEFEO, 31 (1931): 39–102 and Gérard Moussay, ‘Akayet devamano’ (Thèse, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris, 1975). 11 This problem is also commonly found in Old Javanese texts, especially kakawin; P.J. Zoetmulder, Kalangwan: A survey of Old Javanese literature (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974), p. 62. 12 For Balinese and Javanese traditions, see, for instance, P.J. Worsley, Babad Buleleŋ: A dynastic genealogy (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1972), p. 116, and John Anthony Day, ‘Meanings of change in the poetry of nineteenth-century Java’ (Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1981), pp. 40–6. 13 For a similar phenomenon, see Roger Tol, ‘Fish food on a tree branch: Hidden meanings in Bugis poetry’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 148, 82–102 (1992): 83. 14 For a translation and analysis of this ariya, see Nicolas Weber, ‘Ariya Tuen Phaow: Le soulèvement anti-vietnamien d’un seigneur malais au Pāṇḍuraṅga (Campā) à la fin du XVIIIe siècle’, in Péninsule indochinoise et monde malais (Relations historiques et culturelles), ed. Po Dharma and Mak Phœun (Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Culture, Arts and Tourism and École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 2003), pp. 127–66. 162 NICOLAS WEBER 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.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.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 Ði ̣nh), 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.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 15 Manuscripts CAM58(2) and CM32(6), respectively. 16 Manuscript CM37(29). ‘Byang thang’ is the Cam transcription of the Sino-Vietnamese văn thân (scholars, literati). The insurrection that the text refers to is not clearly identifiable. It may have been the movement called by modern historians Khởi nghĩa Văn thân, ‘Uprising of the Literati’, which broke out in central Vietnam in 1874–75 under the leadership of Trâǹ Tấn and Ðặng Như Mai. ̀ Vương (Aid to the King) movement of 1884–89 which spread Alternatively, it may refer to the Cân from the central region to the rest of the country. For the history of these two movements, see David G. Marr, Vietnamese anticolonialism, 1885–1925 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971). 17 Until 1692, the name ‘Chiêm Thành’ was used for Campā, even when its territory was limited to Pāṇḍuraṅga. After this date, and until its final disappearance in 1832, it was called only ‘Thuận Thành’. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 163 Thành into the prefecture of Bình Thuận and re-established Cam royalty.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.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’.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.21 More importantly, the Cam ruling class was compelled to take sides in the conflict.22 Cam rulers were appointed by both the Tây Sơn and Nguyễn Ánh and were given Vietnamese military titles (chươn̉ g cơ, or chief of regiment), as confirmed by both Vietnamese and Cam sources.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.24 Although Po Saong Nyung Ceng and the two last rulers after him (Po Klan 18 Ðại Nam thực lục [Veritable Records of Ðại Nam] (hereafter ÐNTL) (Hanoi: Giáo Dục, 2007), I, pp. 107–9. As noted in the official sources, Kế Bà Tử (Po Saktiraydaputih) was declared ‘tributary king’ (V. phiên vương) and was granted the authorisation to gather troops on his own. He had to send an annual tribute to the Vietnamese court in Phú Xuân (Huế): elephants, ivory, fish skin, white cloth, honey, wood, etc. (p. 109). 19 Ibid., p. 111. 20 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga I, p. 70; on the distribution of villages, see, for instance, ‘Ariya hatai paran’, p. 23. 21 Scholars call ‘Tây Sơn’ the three brothers Nguyễn Nhạc, Nguyễn Huệ and Nguyễn Lữ who rose in rebellion against the Tri ̣nh Lords (in northern Vietnam or Tonkin) and the Nguyễn Lords (southern Vietnam or Cochinchina), drawing a large number of followers among the masses. Tây Sơn is the name of the hamlet (An Khê in the Central Highlands) from which the three brothers originated. The Tri ̣nh Lords were defeated in 1786 and subsequently the Tây Sơn extended their rule over the northern kingdom. They then defeated the Nguyễn Lords, killing almost their whole family and forcing Prince Nguyễn Ánh (or Nguyễn Phúc Ánh, the future Emperor Gia Long) to flee to the southernmost part of his territories. For a history of the movement and the war, see Hoàng Lê nhất thống chí [The unification record of the imperial Lê] (Hanoi: Khoa học Xã hội, 1970); ÐNTL, vol. I; Charles B. Maybon, Histoire moderne du pays d’Annam (1592–1820). Étude sur les premiers rapports des Européens et des Annamites et sur l’établissement de la dynastie annamite des Nguyễn (Paris: Librairie Plon, 1919); Tạ Chí Đại Trường, Lịch sử nội chiến ở Việt Nam từ 1771 đến 1802 [History of the civil war in Vietnam from 1771 to 1802] (Saigon: Văn Sử Học, 1973); George Dutton, The Tây Sơn uprising: Society and rebellion in eighteenth-century Vietnam (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2006); and Maurice Durand, Histoire des Tây Sơn (Paris: Les Indes Savantes, 2006). 22 See Weber, ‘Ariya Tuen Phaow’. 23 See Ðại Nam nhất thống chí: Tı ̉nh Bình Thuận [Gazetteer of Ðại Nam: Bình Thuận province] (hereafter ÐNNTC) (Saigon: Nha Văn hóa Bộ Văn hóa Giáo dục, 1965), p. 41; Po, ‘Chroniques du Pāṇḍuraṅga’, p. 63. 24 Po Saong Nyung Ceng was one of Gia Long’s faithful allies while he was fighting against the Tây Sơn. According to the Vietnamese official sources, he was appointed governor of Thuận Thành in 1795 164 NICOLAS WEBER 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.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.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.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.28 Between 1833 and 1835, a number of massive anti-Vietnamese revolts broke out — the last Cam attempts to prevent the country’s assimilation.29 The first revolt occurred (ÐNTL, I, p. 327). It seems that the tradition of giving the Vietnamese surname ‘Nguyễn’ to Pāṇḍuraṅga rulers dates back to this period. Thus Po Cei Brei (r. 1783–86), who was once allied to Nguyễn Ánh, was renamed Nguyễn Văn Chiêu and Po Ladhuandapaghuh (r. 1793–99), who was put in his place, Nguyễn Văn Hào. Official sources specify, however, that the original names of these two men were Môn Lai Phù Tử and Thôn Ba Hú, respectively (p. 264). This tradition was carried out until the end of Pāṇḍuraṅga as an entity. 25 In fact, according to the ÐNNTC (p. 41), Nguyễn Ánh ordered the men placed in charge of Pāṇḍuraṅga’s to give up their royal titles as early as 1794. Further research needs to be done in the Pāṇḍuraṅga royal archives, however, and especially the correspondence between Cam rulers and the Nguyễn administration, to clarify which exact titles and terms of address were used. 26 The Ariya Po Ceng acknowledges that ‘the kingdom was not threatened to disappear as Po Cang [i.e. Po Saong Nyung Ceng] maintained with perseverance the Cam traditional customs’; Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 41. 27 ÐNTL, vol. III, p. 392. 28 Ibid., vol. IV, p. 164. Lê Văn Khôi was the adopted son of the powerful mandarin Lê Văn Duyệt. After the latter’s death, Emperor Minh Mạng inflicted a symbolic punishment on Duyệt for having challenged his authority and had his tomb publicly whipped. Outraged, Lê Văn Khôi rose in rebellion in 1833, gathering around him many followers in southern Vietnam. Imperial forces quelled his revolt in 1835. For the official biography of Lê Văn Khôi, see Ðại Nam liệt truyện [Biographies of Ðại Nam] (Huế: Thuận Hóa, 1997), vol. IV, p. 475; for details of the Lê Văn Khôi movement, see, for instance, Quốc triêù chánh biên [Primary compilation of the national dynasties] (hereafter QTCB) (Saigon: Nhóm Nghiên cứu Sử đi ̣a Việt Nam, 1972), pp. 158–70 and J. Sylvestre, ‘L’insurrection de Gia Đi ̣nh. La révolte de Lê Văn Khôi (1832–1834)’, in La Revue Indochinoise, 24 (1915): 1–37. 29 Pāṇḍuraṅga was not the only place where the population rose in rebellion against the administration of Emperor Minh Mạng. In the North, for instance, Nông Văn Vân led an insurrection from 1833 to ̀ and 1834. The revolt started in Tuyên Quang but spread to the provinces of Thái Nguyên, Cao Băng CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 165 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.30 Katip Sumat aimed at both driving the Vietnamese out of Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga 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.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.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 Thi ̣ Tiết and Thi ̣ Cân Oa in 1836.33 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.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.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 Lạng Sơn (ÐNTL, vol. III, pp. 643–5, 649–700, 704, 714–16, 729, 738–9, 746–8, 755, 761, 763, 775, 804, 881–2). 30 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga I, p. 142. 31 Ibid., p. 154; according to Cam sources, the name of the king was Po War Palei (p. 162). Vietnamese documents refer to him as La Bôn (ÐNTL, vol. IV, p. 551). Cam sources mention that both Katip Sumat and Ja Thak Wa had Cru and Raglai followers from Praoh (Xóm Trò), Korang (Vĩnh Hạnh) and Cape (Xóm Ðậu); see manuscripts CM24(5), p. 165 and 169; Cam Microfilm 66(2), p. 23. 32 Manuscript Cornell Reel 4, MS38, p. 38. 33 Minh Mệnh chính yếu [Abstract of the policies of Minh Mạng] (hereafter MMCY) (Saigon: Tủ Sách Cổ văn-Uỷ ban Di ̣ch thuật, 1974), vol. VI, pp. 160–1; on Ta La Văn see the same source, vol. V, pp. 114– 15. Sô Cố is mentioned in ÐNTL, vol. IV, p. 551 and pp. 602–3. According to Vietnamese sources (ÐNTL, vol. IV, p. 557), Thi ̣ Tiết and Thi ̣ Cân Oa were sisters of Nguyễn Văn Nguyên (C. Dhar Kaok) and thus of royal descent. 34 ÐNTL, vol. IV, pp. 519, 528. Although the participation of Cam nobility in the uprisings is attested by both Cam and Vietnamese sources, it is hard to establish the correspondence between the names found in Cam documents (Po Ling, Po Caing, Po Nyi Liang and so on) and those given by the Vietnamese sources. 35 Ibid., p. 527. 166 NICOLAS WEBER troubles in the future.’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.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 tông, canton chief), lik klan or lik kleng (V. lý trươn̉ g, village chief), klam (V. trùm, village notable) and mbien (V. biện, secretary).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 Tri ̣ — both established among non-Việt peoples in the highlands — where ‘the indigenous officials’, i.e. the traditional chiefs (V. thô ̉ ty), were replaced by officials (V. lưu quan) sent from Huế. This administrative reform was known as cải thô ̉ quy lưu.39 The Cam were not of course excluded from the 36 ÐNNTC, p. 22; the quotation is from MMCY, vol. VI, p. 161. 37 ÐNTL, vol. III, p. 392. ̉ was in charge of the administration and the justice in his canton (V. tông); ̉ 38 The cai tông he was ̉ were well-to-do and were very influential; see elected by the communes. Traditionally the cai tông Alfred Schreiner, Les institutions annamites en Basse-Cochinchine avant la conquête française (Saigon: Claude & Cie, 1900–01), vol. I, pp. 332–3. Each canton was divided into villages (V. thôn) and at the head of each different thôn were three notables: hương thân, hương hào and thôn trươn̉ g (vol. II, p. 22 and 26–7). The lý trươn̉ g was second to the thôn trươn̉ g and helped him for the communal and public affairs (vol. II, p. 30). The trùm (trùm di ̣ch or trùm việc) were responsible for transmitting the thôn trươn̉ g’s orders to the village’s notables and inhabitants (vol. II, p. 31). The biện (or biện lại) were in charge of the accounts of the commune and were entitled to deliver receipts (vol. II, p. 33). 39 ÐNTL, vol. III, pp. 391–2; manuscript Ðại Nam nhất thống chí quyên̉ thập nhi ̣: Bình Thuận đạo [Gazetteer of Ðại Nam, volume 12: đạo of Bình Thuận], p. 22. The cải thô ̉ quy lưu [改土歸流] system is of Chinese origin. It was first applied in Yunnan in the Ming dynasty and then implemented during the Qing dynasty for ethnic minorities such as the Miao of Guizhou province. There are numerous valuable academic works discussing the use of this policy in southern China; see, for instance, Herold J. Wiens, Han Chinese expansion in South China (Hamden, CT: Shoe String Press, 1967 reprint), pp. 214–40, and Geoff Wade, ‘Ming China and Southeast Asia in the 15th century: A reappraisal’ (Singapore: Asia Research Institute Working Paper Series no. 28, 2004. PDF version), p. 24; C. Patterson Giersch, The transformation of Qing China’s Yunnan frontier (Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 2006). For the Vietnamese context, see Alexander B. Woodside, Vietnam and the Chinese CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 167 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.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 inhab̀ Lạng ited by non-Việt peoples. In the northern provinces of Tuyên Quang, Cao Băng, 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.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 ̀ án) to the former Pāṇḍuraṅga territory. The inspector inspector (C. tun an, V. tuân 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 model: A comparative study of the Nguyễn and Ch’ing civil government in the first half of the nineteenth century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 247. 40 Manuscript CHCPI CAM1, p. 3. 41 MMCY, vol. VI, p. 131. 168 NICOLAS WEBER (C. karah), amber and gold necklaces (C. anyuk) and Vietnamese-style utensils such ̀ 42 These manners were contrary to Cam customs, as accordas carafes (C. ho, V. hô). ing 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.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. sô),̉ 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.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 Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga had to be settled by mixed court composed of the king of Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga, a Vietnamese registrar (V. cai bạ) and a secretary (V. kỳ lục).45 Disputes between Cam and Cam were settled exclusively by the king, without any intervention from the Vietnamese.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 Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga. 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.’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.48 Communal lands (C. hamu bhum) were also ‘equally divided’ (C. pa-ndéw)49 and distributed. The Vietnamese also ordered 42 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 30–1 (quotation from p. 30). 43 Ibid., pp. 31–2. 44 ÐNTL, vol. IV, p. 521. 45 The decree was issued after an agreement reached between Lord Nguyễn Phúc Chu and Pāṇḍuraṅga’s king, Kế Bà Tử (C., Po Saktiraydapatih) (ÐNTL, vol. I, p. 128). 46 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 62. 47 Manuscript Cam Microfilm 65(4), p. 31. 48 Manuscripts CM35(2), pp. 23–4 and Cam Microfilm 66(3), p. 46. 49 One should notice that the author of this ariya created the new verb ‘pa-ndéw’, which is the combination of ̀ ‘equal’. the Cam prefix ‘pa-’, depicting an action, and ‘ndéw’, the Cam transcription of the Vietnamese đêu, CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 169 the usage of muw for land measurement; land was cut into plots and taxes (C. jia) were imposed on each and every plot.50 As planned by the imperial authorities, the Cam were then subjected to the Vietnamese taxation system.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.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.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.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.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. 50 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 23–4. ‘Muw’ is the Cam transcription of ‘mẫu’, the Vietnamese acre; one mẫu is approximately equivalent to 4.910 m2. It should be noted that the introduction of land measurement in the former Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga was one of the steps towards the homogenisation of land measurement and taxation throughout southern Vietnam. The mẫu was previously unknown in that region as until 1833 the southern ̀ and sở (Choi, Southern Vietnam, p. 175). Jia (also spelt jiâ) originally meant provinces were using the thăng ‘tribute’; it seems that for the Cam, there was little difference between tribute and tax. 51 Manuscript Cam Microfilm 65(5). 52 Manuscript CM35(2), p. 26; Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 78. 53 Ibid., I, p. 127; Manuscript CM35(2), p. 24. 54 Ibid., p. 23. 55 Manuscript CHCPI CAM1, p. 1; the origins of the term ulik, which is also found in the text Ariya Hatai Paran, are obscure. 170 NICOLAS WEBER On all the roads of Panrang, Kraong, Parik, Pajai, we chew iron to nourish ourselves and we spit blood.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’.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.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.59 According to the Cam sources, the Vietnamese took control of the maritime coast and restricted the Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga 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].’60 Consequently, the Cam could no longer benefit from the coastal trade as the Vietnamese made sure that they 56 Ibid., p. 1. Panrang, Kraong, Parik and Pajai, the four regions composing Pāṇḍuraṅga. Panrang region stretched from Cam Ranh (south of Nha Trang) to Cà Ná on Cape Prandaran. Its centre was present-day Phan Rang city. Kraong (V. Long Hương) region stretched from Cà Ná to the village of ̀ ̀ to the north of present-day Phan Thiết and had its centre Duông. Parik region ranged from Duông in Phan Rí city. The Pajai region stretched from Phan Thiết to the former province of Bà Ri ̣a. Its centre was Phố Hài village. See Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 44. 57 ÐNTL, vol. III, p. 392. 58 Ibid., vol. IV, p. 521. 59 See, for instance, manuscripts CM29(1), pp. 9–10, 23, 39; CM35(2), p. 23. 60 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 198; Panrang and Parik refer not just to the modern cities of Phan Rang and Phan Rí but to the two Cam regions and administrative circumscriptions. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 171 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.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.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).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).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 Đi ̣nh (the area around Saigon) and then redistributed to the soldiers in service in the provinces of Long (i.e. Vĩnh Long), Tường (i.e. Đi ̣nh Tường), An (i.e. An Giang), Hà (i.e. Hà Tiên), as well as the Cambodian provinces under Vietnamese domination.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 61 ‘Ariya hatai paran’, p. 33. 62 Nicolas Weber, ‘The Vietnamese annexation of Panduranga (Champa) and the end of a maritime kingdom’, in Memory and knowledge of the sea in Southeast Asia, ed. Danny Wong Tze-Ken (Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Institute of Ocean and Earth Sciences Monograph No. 3, 2008), pp. 69–70. 63 Manuscript CM29(1), pp. 79–81; Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 203. 64 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 28–9. 65 ÐNTL, vol. IV, pp. 245–6 and 398. 172 NICOLAS WEBER to capture and bring before them any Cam who tried to buy iron.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.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.68 Po Dharma is of the opinion that the Vietnamese needed it for the construction of war boats, as well as for ̀ 69 According building rice granaries (C. galang) and military posts (C. ndong, V. đôn). 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.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 Parik71 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.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.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 66 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, pp. 199–200. 67 ÐNTL, vol. III, p. 447. 68 Manuscript CM30(14), pp. 101–2. 69 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, pp. 181–2, 38. 70 Manuscript Cam Microfilm 66(3), p. 46. 71 This expression is truncated; it should be ‘Kraong, Panrang, Parik and Pajai’ — a common expression comprising the four regions designating the whole territory of Pāṇḍuraṅga. 72 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 27–8. 73 On the revolt of Kê, see, for instance, David P. Chandler, ‘Cambodia before the French: Politics in a tributary kingdom, 1794–1848’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973), pp. 104–6. For the official Vietnamese accounts of the uprising, see QTCB, pp. 111 and 114, and MMCY, vol. VI, p. 211. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 173 stresses the sufferings of the population.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.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).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.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).78 Unfortunately, Vietnamese official sources are extremely sketchy regarding the high demand for rare products such as ivory (V. tươn ̣ g 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.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”’.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 74 Khin Sok, L’annexion par les Viêtnamiens au XIX° siècle d’après les deux poèmes du Vénérable Bâtum Baramey Pich (Paris: Editions YOU-FENG, 2002), pp. 228–9. 75 Manuscript Ðại Nam nhất thống chí quyên̉ thập nhi ̣: Ninh Thuận đạo [Gazetteer of Ðại Nam, vol. 12 đạo of Ninh Thuận], p. 13. 76 ÐNTL, vol. III, pp. 963–4. 77 Manuscript CAM29(2), p. 37; see also manuscript CM35(2), pp. 33–4. 78 Manuscript Cam Microfilm 66(3), p. 51; I believe that these turtles were a very rare species of yellow sea turtle, commonly called in Vietnamese ‘rùa vàng’ or ‘golden turtle’, which only inhabits the coast of present-day Ninh Thuận province. 79 Manuscript ÐNNTC Ninh Thuận đạo, p. 13. 80 Woodside, Vietnam and the Chinese model, p. 252. 174 NICOLAS WEBER 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’.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’.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’.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.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].85 81 82 83 84 85 ÐNTL, vol. III, pp. 391–2. Manuscript CM35(2), p. 22; see also manuscripts CM23(3), p. 20 and CAM60(3), p. R5. Manuscript Cornell Reel 4, MS38, pp. 215–16. ÐNTL, vol. V, p. 284. Manuscript Cornell Reel 4, MS38, p. 215. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 175 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.86 It should be noted here that such attempts to impose Vietnamese dress were not entirely new for Pāṇḍuraṅga. In 1693, after transforming Pāṇdu ̣ raṅga 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 Tủ,̛ and his relatives) who had just been incorporated into the Vietnamese administration of the prefecture.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).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.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.90 They were forbidden to shave their heads and perform 86 Manuscript CM35(2), p. 20; manuscript CAM29(2), pp. 37–8. On traditional Cam dress, see Cdt. Baudesson, Au pays des superstitions et des rites: Chez les Mois et les Chams (Paris: Librairie Plon, 1932), p. 177. 87 ÐNTL, I, p. 107. 88 Ahier and Bani communities still exist nowadays in Ninh Thuận and Bình Thuận provinces. See Rie Nakamura, ‘Awar-Ahier: Two keys to understanding the cosmology and ethnicity of the Cham people (Ninh Thuận Province, Vietnam)’, in Champa and the archaeology of Mỹ Sơn (Vietnam), ed. Andrew Hardy, Mauro Cucarzi and Patrizia Zolese (Singapore: NUS Press, 2009), pp. 78–106. 89 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 21–5 (quotation from pp. 24–5). The kut are stelae, whether ornate or rough, and are considered to represent the matrilineal ancestors; they are placed in the centre of each family’s sacred rice field. As Paul Mus pointed out: ‘the stela is the deceased, just as a sacred stone is a spirit’; Paul Mus, India seen from the East: Indian and indigenous cults in Champa, trans. Ian Mabbett and David Chandler (Melbourne: Monash Papers on Southeast Asia No. 3, 1975), p. 39. For ̀ ‘Kut (Cemeteries) of the Cham in Ninh Thuận province’, in The a study of the kut, see Thành Phân, Cham of Vietnam: History, society and art, ed. Trâǹ Kỳ Phương and Bruce M. Lockhart (Singapore: NUS Press, 2011), pp. 337–47. 90 The term ‘acar’ is of Sanskrit origin but now refers exclusively to Bani priests who are masters or professors in their communities; R. P. Durand, ‘Les Chams Bani’, BEFEO, III (1903): 54–62. Unlike their Ahier counterparts, the Bani priests used to shave their hair. 176 NICOLAS WEBER the prostrations for the fasting month.91 In the year of the Buffalo, in the seventh month,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].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.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].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.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.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 katé98 ceremonies, purification rites (C. balih) at the 91 ‘Bulan aek’, literally ‘the month for fasting’, refers to the Muslim season of Ramadan, also known as ‘Ramâwan’ in the Bani community. 92 It is possible that the author means that the fasting should have taken place in the seventh month of the year of the Buffalo; due to the Vietnamese restrictions, the ceremonies could not be performed for the following years. 93 The priests could only wear clothes sewn by their own wives. 94 The adhia is an Ahier dignitary, chief of the basaih (also spelled baséh), a generic term for the Ahier priests. They were divided into three castes: royal (which disappeared along with Cam royalty), popular and semi-secular. The baséh start their religious training from the age of 10 years and are ordained when they reach the age of 25 or 30 years (Aymonier and Cabaton, Dictionnaire čam–français, p. 332). They cannot eat beef and must be married. See E.-M. Durand, ‘Notes sur les Chams VI. Les Basêh’, BEFEO, VII (1907): 313–21. The baganrac is a sacred object that can be touched only by the basaih; it is a small plate held by a small cage made of thirty-two sticks and woven leaves. See Etienne Aymonier, Les Tchames et leurs religions (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1891), p. 51. 95 Manuscript CM35(2), p. 21. 96 The Cam consider that the origin of this ceremony is ‘Jawa’, i.e. the Malay Peninsula and the Indonesian Archipelago (Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 54). 97 Ibid., pp. 67–8. The Cam texts refer to the plays as ‘hat mbuai’, the transcription of the Vietnamese ̀ hát bội (also known as hát bộ or hát tuông), a form of theatre said to have been introduced to Vietnam from China during the 13th century. It makes extensive use of elaborated painted faces and costumes, with stylised acting movements adapted from the Chinese tradition. Despite its codified and refined language (Sino-Vietnamese), it has long been enjoyed among popular audiences, especially in central ̀ and other forms of Vietnamese traditional and southern Vietnam. For an introduction to hát tuông and modern theatre, see Colin Mackerras, ‘Theatre in Vietnam’, Asian Theatre Journal, 4, 1 (1987): 1–28. 98 Katé is one of the most spectacular ceremonies of the Ahier community. Celebrated during the seventh month of the Cam calendar (Sept.–Oct.), it is performed in honour of the ancestors. It is CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 177 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.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.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.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.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.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.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 nowadays called by the Vietnamese ‘Cam New Year’ and has become a tourist attraction. The Ca-mbur is celebrated in the ninth month of the Cam calendar. 99 ‘Ariya hatai paran’, p. 27. Yuer Yang, another important ceremony of the Ahier community, is celebrated during the fourth month of the Cam calendar (June–July). This ceremony is also performed in the honour of the ancestors. Strictly speaking, a bamong (also spelt bimong) is a house built of brick, wood or a combination of the two, which shelters a linga or the statue of a deity. A kalan is a brick temple built during ancient times, when Hinduism was the main religion in Campā. 100 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, pp. 65–6. To show the profound respect of the Cam population towards their religious men, the titles of the priests (acar, basaih, etc.) are always preceded by the words ‘po’ (Lord) or ganuer (lord, master). 101 Ibid., p. 78. 102 Manuscript CM35(2), p. 25. 103 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, pp. 66–8. Tết Trung Thu is celebrated on the fifteenth day of the eighth lunar month; families traditionally bake ‘mooncakes’ during this festival. The Tết Đoan Ngọ is celebrated on the fifth day of the fifth month. This festival was originally performed to ward off evil influences and epidemics; votive offerings and mannequins are burnt and amulets are prepared. See Pierre Huard and Maurice Durand, Connaissance du Việt-Nam (Paris: Réimpressions École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 2002), p. 79. ̀ chủ) in traditional Vietnam could represent either 104 Po, Pāṇḍuraṅga, vol. II, p. 68. The tablet (V. thân deities or clan ancestors. As Edouard Chavannes put it, ‘this tablet is taken to be the material abode where the divinity takes up residence’ (quoted in Mus, ‘India seen from the East’, p. 17). For tablet and ancestor worship in traditional Vietnam, see Huard and Durand, Connaissance du Việt-Nam, p. 98. 178 NICOLAS WEBER and/or ancestor worship.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.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).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.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 105 Manuscript CHCPI CAM1, p. 3. The word translated as ‘put the hands together in obeisance’ is ‘ba-ndang’; terms for this gesture are widely found in Southeast Asian languages. For the meaning of ‘débata’, see Aymonier and Cabaton, Dictionnaire čam–français, p. 227. 106 Huard and Durand, Connaissance du Việt-Nam, p. 214. 107 MMCY VI, p. 111. The translators of this text into Vietnamese indicate that the ritual for boys on entering the adult age (quan or gia quan 加冠) was actually a Chinese tradition not practised in Vietnam; ‘quan’ refers to a kind of hat bestowed on adult men. It was rather an idiom, part of the expression quan hôn tang tế [冠婚喪祭] used to describe the ceremonies and rites performed for marriage, funeral and worship. 108 Manuscript CAM29(2), p. 35. CAMPĀ (1832–35) AS SEEN FROM CAM SOURCES 179 people selected were expected to help the Vietnamese authorities to establish lists of the members of their communities and help with translations.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.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.’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.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.’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 ̀ ̉ sự lệ [The 109 Tạ Quang Phát and Bửu Câm, Nhu viễn trong Khâm đi ̣nh Ðại Nam hội điên ‘Harmonious management of distant peoples’ in the Official Compendium of institutions and usages of Ðại-Nam] (Saigon: Tổng bộ Văn hóa Xã hội, 1966), vol. I, p. 121. 110 Manuscript CM35(2), pp. 19–20 (verse quoted from p. 20). 111 Manuscript CM37(28), p. 243. 112 Manuscript CHCPI CAM1, pp. 2–3. 113 ‘Ariya hatai paran’, p. 34. 180 NICOLAS WEBER 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.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.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’.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. 114 Ibid., pp. 27–8. 115 See Marr, Vietnamese anticolonialism, p. 108. 116 Aymonier, Tchames et leurs religions, p. 111.