From: Tan Pham <nxb315kio@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 12:49 AM

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

Subject: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

Hello esteemed members of the VSG,

I am looking for an English translation of the edict issued by Lý Thái Tổ in 1010 when he decided to move the capital of Đại Cồ Việt from Hoa Lư, around 100 km south, in Ninh Bình province, to present-day Hanoi. Today, you can see his giant statue on the eastern side of Hoàn Kiếm lake in Hanoi. King Lý Thái Tổ occupies a special place in Vietnamese history. While Hanoi, as a centre of power, was established in the 6th/7th century, this king made it a permanent capital for the next 1000 years, barring a few short years of interruption.

I have asked a few Vietnamese historians in Hanoi, but apparently, there is no English version. I could translate, but I thought I would ask if there is an "official" translation or an English version by someone.

The original Vietnamese version, taken from Đại Việt Sử Ký Toàn Thư, Complete Book of the Historical Records of Great Viet, is below.

"Ngày xưa, nhà Thương đến đời Bàn canh năm lần dời đô, nhà Chu đến Thành Vương ba lần dời đô, há phải các vua thời Tam đại ấy theo ý riêng tự dời đô xằng bậy đâu. Làm như thế cốt để mưu nghiệp lớn, chọn ở chỗ giữa, làm kế cho con cháu muôn vạn đời, trên kính mệnh trời, dưới theo ý dân, nếu có chỗ tiện thì dời đổi, cho nên vận nước lâu dài, phong tục giàu thịnh. Thế mà hai nhà Đinh, Lê lại theo ý riêng, coi thường mệnh trời, không noi theo việc cũ Thương Chu, cứ chịu yên đóng đô nơi đây, đến nỗi thế đại không dài, vận số ngắn ngủi, trăm họ tổn hao, muôn vật không hợp. Trẫm rất đau đớn, không thể không dời. Huống chi thành Đại La, đô cũ của Cao Vương [Chú giải], ở giữa khu vực trời đất, được thế rồng cuộn hổ ngồi, chính giữa nam bắc đông tây, tiện nghi núi sông sau trước. Vùng này mặt đất rộng mà bằng phẳng, thế đất cao mà sáng sủa, dân cư không khổ thấp trũng tối tăm, muôn vật hết sức tươi tốt phồn thịnh. Xem khắp nước Việt đó là nơi thắng địa, thực là chỗ tụ hội quan yếu của bốn phương, đúng là nơi thượng đô kinh sư mãi muôn đời. Trẫm muốn nhân địa lợi ấy mà định nơi ở, các khanh nghĩ thế nào?"

To give you some context, this is what I have written so far on this subject for my third book.

Edit to transfer From Hoa Lư to Thăng Long (present-day Hanoi) – Move to a new capital (1010)

Đinh Bộ Lĩnh, followed by Lê Hoàn, built their capital in Hoa Lư, about 100 kilometres south of Hanoi, mainly because they were from that area. Hanoi — called Đại La or La Thành at the time — was a power centre from the sixth to the tenth centuries, when northern Vietnam was under the rule of the northern dynasties.

Hanoi was most likely first founded by another Lý — unrelated to Lý Công Uẩn, as far as I know — in the mid-sixth century. When the Sui (581-618) and the Tang (618-906) dynasties came, they built a citadel there.

When Lý Công Uẩn became king a year later in 1010, he thought that Hoa Lư was damp and too small for a capital and decided to return to Đại La. His edict, written by himself, is an interesting read and I translate it as follows:

Lý Công Uẩn was right. Hoa Lư was surrounded by hills, mountains, and man-made walls; it was almost like a valley, so it was likely to be damp. It was ideal for a defensive stronghold but not for a capital city that needed a larger land area to house the king’s family members and various administrative departments.

Contrary to the dictatorial style of the Reclining Emperor, Lý Công Uẩn sought advice from court officials to transfer the capital; when he did not have to. This consultative approach to government continued into later dynasties, and it is possible to trace Vietnam's consensus style of government back to this edict.

One detail he did not mention is that his new capital, Đại La, was less than 20 kilometres, as the crow flies, from his village where his support base was. Leaving out other considerations, Lý Công Uẩn was wise to move out of Hoa Lư, where he was likely to face hostility from the relatives and descendants of the Lê and the Đinh.

The capital of Thăng Long (Rising Dragon)

In the autumn of the seventh lunar month of 1010, the king and his entourage moved to Đại La (Hanoi). They most likely travelled by boats along the Đáy river, came out to the Red river, sailed upstream, and took a left turn towards the Tô Lịch river, when it was still connected to the Red river, before reaching Đại La. As the king’s boat anchored at the foot of the wall of Đại La, a yellow dragon appeared. Seeing that as a sign from heaven, the king named his new capital Thăng Long (meaning Rising Dragon).

Lý Công Uẩn did not come to bare ground to build his capital. This was the location of a citadel with high, solid walls and gates called Đại La. The citadel was strengthened and rebuilt by Gao Pian in 866 after Nanzhao-An Nam War (854-866) with walls almost 7.8 metres high, a base width of a similar size, and an overall perimeter of about 4,500 metres. Gao Pian was a Tang general who defeated the Nanzhao army during the war and became the jiedushi (governor) of An Nam (present-day north Vietnam) from 866 to 868. In the edict, Lý Công Uẩn refers to Cao Vương, who is the same as Gao Pian.

When the Tang dynasty collapsed in 906, the governorship of An Nam was taken by a local person who was also stationed in Đại La. However, when Ngô Quyền defeated the Southern Han forces at the Battle of the Bạch Đằng river in 938, he did not move to Đại La but established his capital at Cổ Loa, as mentioned earlier.

Thus, for 72 years, from 938 to 1010, Đại La was abandoned as the capital. One will never know how much of the old citadel built in 866 survived, but one would assume that some of the walls and gates should still be standing, but the buildings may have fallen into disrepair or been destroyed during this time. For more details on Đại La, Gao Pian, and the Nanzhao-An Nam War during this period, refer to Volume Two of this book series.

The new construction

Lý Công Uẩn wasted no time in building his new capital. He ordered 20,000 quan to be released from the treasury and hired the workers for the construction of:

· pagodas at eight locations in his province of Cổ Pháp (now Bắc Ninh),

· one pagoda plus a tall tower inside the citadel, one pagoda outside the citadel,

· eight palaces inside the citadel, two mansions. A large one for the king to hold court, two behind it for him and his family, and two mansions behind them again for his concubines.

He also ordered the strengthening of the citadel walls and the digging of moats. He opened four gates in the citadel walls (east, west, north, and south) and three more gates to enable a better flow of traffic. Within five months, one of the mansions for his concubines was completed (presumably it was the final building in the construction schedule) and the inauguration of Thăng Long began on the 12^th lunar month of 1010.

On the occasion of his inauguration, Lý Công Uẩn forgave all people’s taxes for three years, and the taxes owned by orphans, widows, or the elderly were also forgiven.

The 13th-century historian, Lê Văn Hưu, was not impressed with these expenditures; he wrote:

”Lý Thái Tổ [Lý Công Uẩn] has only been on the throne for two years, the Ancestral Temple [Tông Miếu] has not been built, the Earth and Harvest Altar [Đàn Xã Tắc] has not been established. However, before that, eight pagodas were built in Thiên Đức [Cổ Pháp] province, the pagodas in the districts were restored and raised [employed] more than a thousand people in Kinh Sư [Thăng Long]. The waste of wealth and energy on earth and wood [land and trees] is incalculable. Wealth does not rain; strength does not come from God who does the work, is it not a dredger for the fruitfulness of people? Can stripping people's blood and fat be called a good deed?”

Perhaps Lê Văn Hưu, in the strong tradition of Confucianism, resented that money was being spent on pagodas rather than on ancestral temples and altars for the gods. However, he may have a point. One can imagine that spending 20,000 quan plus not collecting tax for three years and forgiving the tax owed would quickly empty the coffers.

So how much is 20,000 quan?

My rough estimate is that 20,000 quan would be over US$50,000 in money in 2023 and enough to feed about 350,000 people for one day in 1015.

The king also issued gold and silver to pay for casting bronze bells at the pagodas, which would give some ideas of the relative value between rice, gold, and silver at the time. Unfortunately, the information recorded by SKTT is somewhat inconsistent, but it seems to me 20,000 quan was not sufficient to build all of the above-described pagodas, palaces, and mansions. Perhaps Lê Văn Hưu was a bit harsh when he condemned Lý Công Uẩn.

On a separate note, one will never know whether Lý Công Uẩn simply ordered his treasury to melt more copper to produce more coins or the Reclining Emperor left behind enough money. Alternatively, Lý Công Uẩn had some wealthy donors, or the work required did not cost much!!

I should mention that Đinh Bộ Lĩnh minted the first coin for Đại (Cồ) Việt in 970. Before that, the people used Chinese-minted coins under the Tang and Song dynasties.

A Magic Square

Đại La citadel was built and strengthened several times by different jiedushi (governors) during the Sui-Tang dynasties. One of the main characteristics of the layout of this period is the concept of the square. The square is based on the Magic Square as a mandala of Buddhism. Like a Sudoku, it is a 9x9 grid and was widely applied as a layout for royal cities.

The Chinese culture and the practices of Buddhism strongly influenced Lý Công Uẩn. He made references to the ancient Chinese dynasties in his edict and the builder of Đại La, Gao Pian. He changed place names from local to Chinese and constructed new pagodas. One can assume that he continued with the Magic Square layout adopted by the Tang builders when he set out Thăng Long.

Based on the Magic Square — which I have discussed in detail in Volume Two — the works of other historians and archaeological finds, I have drawn up a plan of Thăng Long with different buildings and gates, as shown in Figure xx. In the current setting, the central palace’s position (No. 1 in Figure xx) has not changed over the centuries. It became the Kính Thiên palace (coordinates 21°02'12.5"N 105°50'25.3"E); unfortunately, the French colonial government demolished it to make way for an artillery command.

Today, only the remains of stone dragon steps built in the 15th century can be seen. The position of the north gate (A in Figure xx) is probably the same as today’s Cửa Bắc. Kính Thiên palace is within the complex of the Imperial Citadel of Thăng Long, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, about two kilometres east of Hoàn Kiếm lake.

In 2002, during the preparation for the construction of the new National Assembly Hall at 18 Hoàng Diệu St., Hanoi, many archaeological remains were discovered in the excavation of the site. Among those found at the lowest layer of 4 metres below the ground level were tube-shaped roof tiles with a lotus motif, human faces at the end, and bricks with swimming crocodiles. Archaeologists also found bricks with Chinese characters reading "Jiangxi army", foundations, wood pillars, seven wells, and 15 drainage canals. The artefacts were dated back to the Sui-Tang period (seventh to ninth century). Figure xx shows a terracotta dragon head dated to the Lý dynasty found at the site.

Jiangxi is a Chinese province north of Guangdong and the Jiangxi army is likely the same unit that fought against the Man tribes during the Nanzhao-An Nam war in the ninth century.

Mountain behind and river front

In his edict, Lý Công Uẩn mentioned Gao Pian and explained why Đại La should be chosen as the nation’s new capital. I was intrigued by the geomancy (Fengshui) principles that Gao Pian may have used. To my excitement, I came across “The Magic Square: Cities in Ancient China”, a book by an architect and urban planner named Alfred Schinz. In his book, Schinz drew a diagram to illustrate an idealized presentation of a favourable site for a town according to geomantic considerations based on 12 principles. These were popular under the Sui-Tang dynasties. The key principles are the north-south axis lining up with high mountains with a river in the south and having pagodas in the north-east and south-west as protections. Hanoi meets 10 of these principles, as illustrated in Figure xx.

Kind regards,

Tan Pham

Author of a book series on Vietnamese history: A Traveller’s Story of Vietnam’s Past.

Volume One: The Bronze Drums and The Earrings.

Volume Two: One Thousand Years - The Stories of Giao Châu, the Kingdoms of Linyi, Funan and Zhenla.

From: Eric Henry <henryhme@bellsouth.net>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 1:47 PM

To: Tan Pham <nxb315kio@gmail.com>

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

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

Dear Mr. Tan Pham,

I made a partial translation of Lý Thái Tổ’s 1010 edict a few years ago in the course of writing a paper on the history of Confucianism in Vietnam. The original language of the edict was (I believe) Chinese. I’ll paste in that text below and follow it by my English version—what there is of it.

昔商家至盤庚五遷。周室迨成王三徙。豈三代之數君徇于己私。妄自遷徙。以其圖大宅中。爲億万世子孫之計。上謹天命。下因民志。苟有便輒改。故國祚延長。風俗富阜。而丁黎二家。乃徇己私。忽天命。罔蹈商周之迹。常安厥邑于茲。致世代弗長。算數短促。百姓耗損。万物失宜。朕甚痛之。不得不徙。

况高王故都大羅城。宅天地區域之中。得龍蟠虎踞之勢。正南北東西之位。便江山向背之宜。其地廣而坦平。厥土高而爽塏。民居蔑昏墊之困。万物極繁阜之丰。遍覽越邦。斯爲勝地。誠四方輻輳之要会。爲万世帝王之上都

朕欲因此地利以定厥居。卿等如何。

In former times, the house of Shāng had changed location five times when Pān Gēng [became king], and the house of Zhōu had changed location three times when King Chéng [ruled]. How could it be that the rulers of the Three Dynasties changed locations recklessly out of mere personal whim, or out of a desire to make their dwellings grand? It was rather because they were making plans for their myriad descendants. Above, they respectfully observed the mandate of heaven, while below, they acted in accord with the people’s will. Whenever they met a snag, they changed location, and so the altars of their states lasted long, and the customs of their realms flourished. The houses of Đinh and Lê, on the other hand, followed their personal desires and ignored the mandate of heaven, not following the example of the Shāng and the Zhōu. If we continue long in this location, our generations will not endure long, but will pass away in a few years only. The people are wearing themselves to exhaustion, and the natural surroundings [here] are not suitable to our needs. I am greatly grieved at this. There is no choice but to change location. [The next paragraph enumerates the historic, geomantic, strategic, and climatic advantages of Đại La, the proposed new location, and the line below that asks the assembled officers to express their views on the matter.]

Best wishes,

Eric Henry

Senior Lecturer (retired)

Asian Studies Dept., UNC-CH

Home address: 106 Jones Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27513

From: Tan Pham <nxb315kio@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 2:49 PM

To: Eric Henry <henryhme@bellsouth.net>

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

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

Thank you so much, Eric,

This is wonderful. I do not read Chinese (or Nôm), except via Google Translate, so the translation from the original script is great.

One thing that I have not been able to locate is King Cheng of the house of Zhou. There is Wangcheng, the capital of Eastern Zhou. The current Vietnamese version is the house of Zhou up to the time of King Cheng as in your translation, but in another text, it only says the Zhou, up to Wangcheng.

I appreciate you are busy so unless the answer is obvious, please do not devote any more time to the subject.

Best wishes for 2023.

Below is the version in http://www.nomfoundation.org/nom-project/history-of-greater-vietnam/Fulltext/29-Thai-To-Hoang-De?uiLang=vn,

"Tích Thương gia chí Bàn Canh ngũ thiên, Chu thất đãi Thành Vương tam tỉ, khởi tam đại chi sổ quân, tuân vu kỷ tư, vọng tự thiên tỉ.

以 其 圖 大 宅 中 為 憶 萬 世 子 孫 之 計 上 謹 天 命 下 因 民 志 苟 有 便 輙 改 故 國 祚 延 長 風 俗 富 阜 . [2a*6*14]

Dĩ kì đồ đại trạch trung, vi ức vạn thế tử tôn chi kế, thượng cẩn thiên mệnh, hạ nhân dân chí, câu hữu tiện triếp cải, cố quốc tộ diên trường, phong tục phú phụ.

而 丁 黎 二 家 乃 徇 己 私 忽 天 命 罔 𨂻 商 周 之 跡 常 安 厥 邑 於 兹 𦤶 世 代 . [2a*8*12]

Nhi Đinh Lê nhị gia, nãi tuân kỷ tư, hốt thiên mệnh, võng thao Thương Chu chi tích, thường an quyết ấp ư tư, trí thế đại..

弗 長 筭 數 短 促 百 姓 耗 損 萬 物 失 宜 朕 甚 痛 之 不 得 不 徙 . [2b*1*1]

phất trường, toán số đoản xúc, bách tính hao tổn, vạn vật thất nghi, trẫm thậm thống chi, bất đắc bất tỉ.

况 髙 王 故 都 大 羅 城 宅 天 地 區 域 之 中 得 龍 蟠 虎 踞 之 勢 正 南 北 東 西 之 位 便 江 山 向 背 之 宜 . [2b*2*4]

Huống Cao Vương cố đô Đại La thành, trạch thiên địa khu vực chi trung, đắc long bàn hổ cứ chi thế, chính Nam Bắc Đông Tây chi vị, tiện giang sơn hướng bối chi nghi.

其 地 廣 而 坦 平 厥 土 髙 而 𡙁 塏 音 愷 燥 也 髙 民 居 蔑 昏 墊 之 困 萬 物 極 蕃 阜 之 豐 . [2b*4*2]

Kì địa quảng nhi thản bình, quyết thổ cao nhi sảng khải [âm khải táo dã], cao dân cư miệt hôn điếm chi khốn, vạn vật cực phiên phụ chi phong.

遍 覽 越 󰘊 斯 為 勝 地 . [2b*5*12]

Biến lãm Việt bang, tư vi thắng địa.

誠 四 方 輻 輳 之 要 會 為 萬 世 京 師 之 上 都 . [2b*6*1]

Thành tứ phương phúc tấu chi yếu hội, vi vạn thế kinh sư chi thượng đô.

朕 欲 因 此 地 利 以 定 厥 居 卿 等 如 何 . [2b*6*17]

Trẫm dục nhân thử địa lợi dĩ định quyết cư, khanh đẳng như hà?".

羣 臣 皆 曰 陛 下 為 天 下 建 長 久 之 計 上 以 隆 帝 業 之 丕 洪 下 以 措 斯 民 扵 當 𱝅 所 利 如 此 誰 敢 不 從 . [2b*7*12]

Quần thần giai viết: "Bệ hạ vi thiên hạ kiến trường cửu chi kế, thượng dĩ long đế nghiệp chi phi hồng, hạ dĩ thố tư dân ư đương thứ, sở lợi như thử, thuỳ cảm bất tòng.

帝 大 悅 . [2b*9*12]

" Đế đại duyệt.

From: Eric Henry <henryhme@bellsouth.net>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 3:34 PM

To: Tan Pham <nxb315kio@gmail.com>

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

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

Dear Mr. Pham.

King Cheng 成 was the third Zhou king, the son of King Wu 武 and the grandson of King Wen 文. His reign dates are 1045 to 1004 BC. (This is a modern revision of the traditional reign dates: 1115 – 1079). One small problem is that I am not aware that King Cheng ever changed the location of the (Western) Zhou capital. Early in his reign, the Duke of Zhou acted as a sort of regent to the (still young) king and perhaps conducted his activities from a different stronghold.

Best wishes,

Eric Henry

Senior Lecture emeritus, UNC-CH

From: Tan Pham <nxb315kio@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 4:38 PM

To: Eric Henry <henryhme@bellsouth.net>

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

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

Thank you Mr. Henry,

During the reign of King Cheng, the capital of (Western) Zhou was Feng (Fenghao), present-day X'ian. You are correct, I am unable to find any reference to the capital being moved three times at that time. It was not until King You (781–771 BC) that the capital was moved to Wangcheng (present-day Luoyang) which became the capital of Eastern Zhou.

What do you think? Which version reflects Lý Thái Tổ's intention better? King Cheng or Wangcheng as a capital?

Kind regards,

Tan Pham

Author of a book series on Vietnamese history: A Traveller’s Story of Vietnam’s Past.

Volume One: The Bronze Drums and The Earrings.

Volume Two: One Thousand Years - The Stories of Giao Châu, the Kingdoms of Linyi, Funan and Zhenla.

From: Dutton, George <dutton@humnet.ucla.edu>

Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 6:03 PM

To: Eric Henry <henryhme@bellsouth.net>

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

Subject: Re: [Vsg] Edict to transfer the capital (Chiếu Dời Đô)

For what it’s worth, there is also a (lightly annotated) translation of this text found in the anthology Vietnamese Literature, compiled by Nguyen Khan Vien and Huu Ngoc. The first edition of which I’m aware came out in 1972 (Hanoi: Red River). The translation is found on pp. 199-200.

George Dutton

Professor, UCLA