Eastern Capital

From: Vsg <vsg-bounces@mailman11.u.washington.edu> On Behalf Of Mike High

Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 10:04 PM

To: Hieu Phung <minhhieu@msn.com>

Cc: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Eastern capital, western capital

Also, some may find it interesting that Đông Kinh has the same meaning as Tokyo (both written 東京). Tokyo (formerly Edo) became the “Eastern Capital” in 1869. It is very clearly to the east of the former capital, Kyoto (280 miles).

:: Mike High

On Jan 5, 2021, at 12:51 AM, Mike High <mikebiking@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Bill and all,

I have pondered this question at some length, but without any resolution. Here are the name changes, based on a quick scan of the Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư:

• After Hồ Quý Ly built the Tây Đô citadel in Thanh Hóa in 1397, Thăng Long became Đông Đô.

• As noted, the Ming used “Đông Quan” after the conquest of 1407.

• The name Đông Kinh (東京) first appears in 1427, after the Lê Lợi evicted the Ming. (And Tây Đô became Tây Kinh 西京.)

I can think of no geomantic reason that would have kept Hồ Quý Ly from naming the old and new capitals Bắc Kinh and Nam Kinh. In fact, the Ming would use this nomenclature just a little later, when the Yongle emperor moved his royal establishment to the old Yuan capital, which then became Beijing (北京), while the former capital became Nanjing (南京).

So, I would agree with Hieu Phung’s suggestion that the choice of an East/West axis had some cultural resonance that was more important than the geographical relationship.

Our late colleague, John K. Whitmore, offered this explanation in 2008:

Though more northwest/southeast in relation to each other, it seems likely that Quy Ly picked up the Chinese classical scholarship then growing strongly in Dai Viet and made explicit reference to the Book of History ….

In the antiquity of the Duke of Zhou, an iconic figure in Dai Viet at that time, there were a Tay-do and a Dong-do. and it is quite possible that Quy exploited this connection. Its classical justification would have overlain the strategic necessity.

--"Secondary Capitals of Dai Viet: Shifting Elite Power Bases,” in Secondary Cities and Urban Networking in the Indian Ocean Realm, c. 1400-1800, edited by Kenneth R. Hall.

The other very interesting thing to me is the survival of the name Đông Kinh during the span of the Mạc dynasty. The Mạc regime represented a resurgence of the Red River elites who had been taken down a peg by the newly emergent leaders from Thanh Hóa (the Hồ and Lê). They would have viewed the name "Đông Kinh” with taste, since it put Thăng Long on a par with the citadel in Thanh Hóa (and, indeed, subordinate to it in the brief reign of the Hồ). The Mạc had no reason to regard Tây Kinh as any kind of capital, and thus there was no need for the distinction “Eastern Capital." So it is interesting that the old name “Thăng Long” was not revived. Instead, Đông Kinh became Tonquin or Tonkin on early western maps, designating the whole region of the Red River watershed, and later became the French term for their “protectorate” of North Vietnam.

:: Mike High

Great Falls, Virginia

USA

On Jan 4, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Hieu Phung <minhhieu@msn.com> wrote:

Dear Bill,

This is a great question. I don’t have an answer but just some thoughts open for discussion.

1. Did Ho Quy Ly call it “Dong Do”? “Dong Do” was also the name of a prefecture-like unit after the capital was moved to Thanh Hoa. An ensuing question would be why the Ming also called this place “Dong Quan.”

2. What it meant by “West/East/North/South” and what point of view the contemporary observe used are open for further research. We are asked to face a question such as, if a person stood at the Ho’s Western Capital in the 14th/15th century, did they relate that place (spot) more to the west (western mountainous sphere) or more to the southern region/zone - an area that wouldn’t become clear in the “Vietnamese” mental map since the second half of the 15th century. I remember I was surprised to learn that Che Bong Nga marched on land routes (instead of sailing along the coast) in the 1380s.

3. Additionally, the East v. West might be a cultural issue. For instance, Tay Kinh has been the nickname of the Western Han dynasty’s capital, Chang’an (Trường An), for a long time. Ho Quy Ly is a special character, as we all know. For instance, he would have believed that he came from the Emperor Thuấn/Shun’s lineage, and therefore claimed his kingdom “Đại Ngu.” But why Dong Do/ Dong Quan?

All the best,

Hieu Phung

====================

Dear VSG,

Happy nam moi to everyone! Another odd question from me…

Ho Quy Ly named his capital ’Tay Do’ (western capital) and Thang Long/Hanoi became known as ‘Dong Kinh’ - eastern capital. However, a quick look at a modern map would suggest that Tay Do is hardly any further west than Dong Kinh. In the context of Dai Viet at the time, the names ‘northern’ and ‘southern’ capital would be more accurate. So why did the names ‘east’ and ‘west’ get chosen?

All the best

Bill Hayton

Independent writer