臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

The Nam Viet kingdom (204 BC- 111 BC) of Trieu Da was located in the Sino-Vietnamese border region. It was recorded in both Chinese and Vietnamese historiographies in pre-modern time. Until the emergence of national consciousness, and the end of Confucian histories in the 20th century, while Chinese historians firmly defined Trieu Da as Chinese man, Vietnamese historians started treating him as Chinese invader. The current Marxist historiography, which is an official narrative of Trieu Da and his Nam Viet kingdom in Viet Nam, interprets Trieu Da as the First Chinese Invader and the historical record of Trieu Da was completely removed out of national history.
This thesis focuses on historical record of Trieu Da in four Confucian official histories from the 13th century- 19th century. It aims to criticize the transformations of Trieu Da’s image within the framework of official history - state identity relation. It claims that state identity, in its three terms of origin, geography, and legitimacy, contributes as a determining element of changing historians’ interpretations in official writing. With different perceptions of state origin and geography, Trieu Da was narrated as either insider or outsider. His position was respectively changed from the Founder of Vietnamese dynastic enterprise into as a Han invader. In addition, in order to legitimate Dai Viet emperorship, different supportable concepts of Neo-Confucianism were applied to argue against the traditional Chinese inclusiveness idea over the land of Dai Viet. Trieu Da, in turn was interpreted differently, as a Virtuous Emperor, a Sage Emperor, a Talent Emperor, or a Teacher- Emperor.
Through an examination of the transformations of interpretation of Trieu Da’s position in Vietnamese Confucian official, by contextualizing approach, the thesis argues that the contesting of histories of Trieu Da in Vietnamese public sphere originate from the burden of nation-building in current Marxist historiography. Instead of endeavouring to define Trieu Da’s nationality (Chinese or Vietnamese) to be applicable all time, it should acknowledge the casual relationship between the changing of social context and the way Trieu Da being interpreted, in which Trieu Da’s image can be changed over time.

The Nam Viet kingdom (204 BC- 111 BC) of Trieu Da was located in the Sino-Vietnamese border region. It was recorded in both Chinese and Vietnamese historiographies in pre-modern time. Until the emergence of national consciousness, and the end of Confucian histories in the 20th century, while Chinese historians firmly defined Trieu Da as Chinese man, Vietnamese historians started treating him as Chinese invader. The current Marxist historiography, which is an official narrative of Trieu Da and his Nam Viet kingdom in Viet Nam, interprets Trieu Da as the First Chinese Invader and the historical record of Trieu Da was completely removed out of national history.
This thesis focuses on historical record of Trieu Da in four Confucian official histories from the 13th century- 19th century. It aims to criticize the transformations of Trieu Da’s image within the framework of official history - state identity relation. It claims that state identity, in its three terms of origin, geography, and legitimacy, contributes as a determining element of changing historians’ interpretations in official writing. With different perceptions of state origin and geography, Trieu Da was narrated as either insider or outsider. His position was respectively changed from the Founder of Vietnamese dynastic enterprise into as a Han invader. In addition, in order to legitimate Dai Viet emperorship, different supportable concepts of Neo-Confucianism were applied to argue against the traditional Chinese inclusiveness idea over the land of Dai Viet. Trieu Da, in turn was interpreted differently, as a Virtuous Emperor, a Sage Emperor, a Talent Emperor, or a Teacher- Emperor.
Through an examination of the transformations of interpretation of Trieu Da’s position in Vietnamese Confucian official, by contextualizing approach, the thesis argues that the contesting of histories of Trieu Da in Vietnamese public sphere originate from the burden of nation-building in current Marxist historiography. Instead of endeavouring to define Trieu Da’s nationality (Chinese or Vietnamese) to be applicable all time, it should acknowledge the casual relationship between the changing of social context and the way Trieu Da being interpreted, in which Trieu Da’s image can be changed over time.

Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT ii
NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION AND THE USEAGE OF TERMS iii
ABBREVIATIONS iv
CHAPTER I: Introduction 1
1.1. Contesting histories of Trieu Da in Vietnam 1
1.2. The research 3
1.3. Theoretical framework 4
1.3.1. What is history: the question of the truth in historical writings 4
1.3.2. State identity and Official history 7
1.4. Thesis structure 9
CHAPTER II: Trieu Da in Chinese and Vietnamese national history 11
2.1. Trieu Da in Chinese national history 11
2.1.1. Trieu Da in the Han official history 11
2.1.2. The studies on Trieu Da during 1949 – 1970s 13
2.1.3. The studies on Trieu Da during 1980s – 1990s 14
2.2. Trieu Da in Vietnamese national history 16
2.2.1. An Duong Vuong and Trieu Da’s invasion 16
2.2.2. Trieu Da in Vietnamese national history in the 20th century 18
2.2.3. The contemporary Vietnamese scholarship on Trieu Da 21
2.2.4. English scholarship on Trieu Da and Vietnamese identity 23
2.3. Conclusion 25
CHAPER III: The Founder of the Viet dynastic enterprise– Trieu Da in Le Van Huu’s Su Ky (1272) 29
3.1. The interpertation of Trieu Da in the book Su Ky 29
3.1.1. Compiling context 29
3.1.2. Note on Le Van Huu’s historiography 30
3.1.3. Trieu Da in the book Sy Ky 31
3.2. The Founder of the Viet dynastic enterprise: Trieu Da and common ancestor of Dai Viet 32
3.2.1. Geographical identity: Dai Viet – Nam Viet historical mental connection 33
3.2.2. Cultural – Ethnical identity: Trieu Da and Dai Viet common ancestor 36
3.3. A Virtuous emperor: Trieu Da and Dai Viet position in Hua-Yi order 37
CHAPTER IV: A Sage- Emperor: Trieu Da in Ngo Si Lien’s Toan Thu (1479) 43
4.1. The interperation of Trieu Da in the book Toan Thu 43
4.1.1. Compiling context 43
4.1.2. Note on Ngo Si Lien‘s historiography 44
4.1.3. Trieu Da in Ngo Si Lien’s Toan Thu 46
4.2. A Confucian Emperor: Trieu Da and the Southern kingdom 48
4.2.1. From oligarchy to Bureaucratic state: new imaged geography and origin 48
4.2.2. Trieu Da and a newly theorizing of state origin and geography 50
4.3. A Sage-Emperor: Trieu Da and Neo-Confucian Sagehood 52
CHAPER V: Becoming alien emperor: Trieu Da and Ngo Thoi Si critical historiography (1775-1800) 57
5.1. The inteperation of Trieu Da in the book Tien Bien 57
5.1.1. Compiling context 57
5.1.2. Note on Ngo Thoi Si’s historiography 58
5.1.3. Trieu Da in the book Tien Bien 60
5.2. A Chinese Invader: A new perception of state origin and geography 64
5.2.1. Annam and new self-identification of Dai Viet state 64
5.2.2. Excluding Trieu Da: From Bach Viet to An Nam 67
5.3. A Talent Emperor: The Le- Trinh bicephalic state and the legitimacy of literati over the bureaucracy 69
CHAPTER VI: A Non-Orthodox Emperor: Trieu Da in the book Cuong Muc 75
6.1. The interpretation of Trieu Da in the book Cuong Muc 75
6.1.1. Compiling context 75
6.1.2. Note on historiography of the book 75
6.1.3. Trieu Da in the book Cuong Muc 76
6.2. Trieu Da old land and an ambiguous territory of Dai Nam kingdom 78
6.3. A Non-Orthodox Emperor: Trieu Da and Dai Nam Empire 80
6.3.1. Criticizing dynastic orthodoxy and Emperor/King division 81
6.3.2. Teacher- emperor and Confucianism in Tu Duc reign 83
CHAPTER VII: Conclusion 87
References 93

Sources cited for pre-modern primary Sources
Sources cited in Chinese:
Shiji 史記：　http://ctext.org/shiji
Hanshu 漢書：　http://ctext.org/han-shu
Tongdian 通典：　http://ctext.org/tongdian
Shiji Sanjiazhu 史記三家注：　http://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=en&;res=384378

Sources cited in Vietnamese:
Ngô Sĩ Liên. Đại Việt Sử Ký Toàn Thư. (TT). Translated and annotated by Ngô Đúc Thọ. Revised by Hà Văn Tấn. Hà Nội: Nhà Xuất Bản Khoa Học Xã Họi, 1998.
Primary sources: A. 3/1-4 – 國子監藏版， Vien Nghien cuu Han Nom
English translation: Online sources
https://sites.google.com/a/hawaii.edu/viet-texts/dhvsktt-nk

Ngô Thì Sĩ. Đại Việt Sử Ký Tiền Biên. (ĐVSKTB). Edited and translated by Viện Nghiên cưú Hán Nôm. Hà Nội: Nhà Xuất Bản Khoa Học Xã Họi, 1997.
Primary sources: 大越史記前編，東武劉燕庭氏校鈔

Quốc sử quán Triều Nguyễn. Khâm Định Việt Sử Thông Giám Cương Mục. (CM).
Translated by Viện Sử Học. Hà Nội: Nhà Xuất Bản Giáo Dục, 1998.
Primary sources: text NLVNPF-0174-01 R.591- National Library of Vietnam/ Thư viện Quốc gia Việt Nam
Online source: http://lib.nomfoundation.org/collection/1/volume/251/
English translation: https://sites.google.com/a/hawaii.edu/viet-texts/kdhvstgcm


Other References
Anderson, J. (2007). The Rebel Den of Nung Tri Cao. Seattle: University of Washington.
Anh, Đ. D. (2005). Lịch sử cổ đại Việt Nam. Hà Nội: NXB Văn hóa – Thông tin.
Anh, N. T. (2009). Efforts to update Confucian principles of government under the reign of Tự Ðức. In V. n. Nôm, Nghiên cứuu tư tưởng Nho gia Việt Nam từ hướng tiếp cận liên ngành (Confucian thoughts in Viet Nam: Studies from an interdisciplinary perspective) (pp. 39-57). Hanoi: Nhà xuất bản Thê Giới .
Astrid, E. (2011). Erll, A. (2011). Memory in culture. . Palgrave Macmillan.
Bol, P. K. (2008). Neo-Confucianism in History. Harvard University Press .
Breisach, E. (2007). Historiography: Ancient, medieval, and modern. University of Chicago Press.
Brindley, E. (2003 ). Barbarians or Not? Ethnicity and Changing Conceptions of the Ancient Yue (Viet) Peoples, ca. 400-50 BC. Asia Major , 1-32.
Chen, C. (2006-2009, June 09). lifeofguangzhou . Retrieved 10 28, 2014, from "King of Nanyue Kingdom": A Drama Made by Cantonese: http://www.lifeofguangzhou.com/node_10/node_22/node_25/2006/06/09/11498334823802.shtml
Cooke, N. L. (2011). The Tongking Gulf Through History. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Du, T. T. (6/2007). Triệu Đà và nước Nam Việt trong dòng chảy lịch sử Việt Nam. In Cổ sử Việt Nam - Một cách tiếp cận vấn đề. Nhà xuất bản lao động.
Finney, P. (2005). Beyond the Postmodern Moment?” Journal of Contemporary History. Journal of Contemporary History(40), 149-65.
Friedman, E. (1994). Reconstructing China's national identity: a southern alternative to Mao-era anti-imperialist nationalism. The Journal of Asian Studies, 67-91.
Hồng, H. (No. 1 (357), 2006.). Các luận điểm về sử học của E. Carr trong cuốn Lịch sử là gì. Tạp chí Nghiên cứu Lịch sử .
Hồng, H. (No.4-2002.). Vài nét về trào lưu “Sử học mới” trong sử học phương Tây hiện đại. Tạp chí Khoa học, Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội .
Insun, Y. (2006). Le Van Huu and Ngo Si Lien: A comparison of their perceptions of Vietnamese histor. In N. T. Reid, Viet Nam: Borderless Histories (pp. 45-71). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Jenkins, K. (1991). Rethinking history . London : Routledge.
Jenkins, K. (1995 ). On'What is history?': from Carr and Elton to Rorty and White. Psychology Press.
Jenkins, K. (1995). On'What is history?': from Carr and Elton to Rorty and White. Psychology Press.
Jenkins, K. (2005). Why history? Routledge.
Joyce, P. (1998). The return of history: postmodernism and the politics of academic history in Britain. Past and Present, 207-235.
Kelley, L. (2006/1(1-2)). "Confucianism" in Vietnam: A State of the Field Essay. Journal of Vietnamese Studies,, 314-370.
Kelley, L. C. (2012 (vol.7/no.2)). The Biography of the Hong Bang Clan as a Medieval Vietnamese Invented Tradition. Journal of Vietnamese Studies, 87-130.
Klein, K. L. (2000). On the emergence of memory in historical discourse. Representations, 127-150.
Klein, K. L. (2011). From History to Theory. CA: University of California Press.
Lary, D. (1996). The tomb of the king of Nanyue-the contemporary agenda of history: Scholarship and identity. Modern China, 3-27.
Latham, K. (2000). Nothing but the truth: News media, power and hegemony in south China. The China Quarterly, 163, 633-654.
Lâu, H. V. (2001 - Số 2 (47)). Đại Việt sử ký tiệp lục tổng tự, một bài tổng luận lịch sử đáng chú ý của Quốc sử quán thời Tây Sơn. Tạp chí Hán Nôm, 24 - 29.
LEE, E. (n.d.). The consolidation of the Song dynasty, 960 – 979 . In a. P. Denis Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China. Volume 5, Part 1, The Sung Dynasty and Its Precursors, 907–1279. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lieberman, V. (2003). Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context, c.800-1830. Volume I: Integration on the Mainland. Cambridge University Press.
M.Pelley, P. (2002). Postcolonial Viet Nam: New histories of the National Past. Durham: Duke University Press.
Miles, S. B. (2002). Rewriting the Southern Han (917-971): The production of local culture in nineteenth-century Guangzhou. Harvard journal of Asiatic studies , 39-75.
Miles, S. B. (2002). Rewriting the Southern Han (917-971): The production of local culture in nineteenth-century Guangzhou. Harvard journal of Asiatic studies , 39-75., 39-75.
Munslow, A. (2001, October ). What history is. Retrieved from History in focus : http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/Whatishistory/munslow6.html
Ng, O. C., &; Wang, Q. E. (2005). Mirroring the past: The writing and use of history in Imperial China. University of Hawaii Press.
Nôm, V. n. (2006 ). Ngô Gia thế phả. In V. n. Nôm, Ngô Thì Nhậm toàn tập, tập V (pp. 543 - 743 ). Hà Nội: NXB Khoa học Xã hội.
Nora, P. (1989). Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire. In Representations, No.26, Special Issue: Memory and Counter – Memory (pp. 7-24). University of California Press .
Ong Eng Ann, A. (2010). Contextualizing the Book- Burning Episode during the Ming Invasion and Occupation of Vietnam. In G. a. Wade, Southeast Asia in the Fifteenth Century: The China Factor (pp. 154-165). Singapore : NUS Press.
Peters, H. (1990). Tattooed faces and stilt houses: Who were the ancient Yue? Department of Oriental Studies, University of Pennsylavania.
Peters, H. (April 1990). Tattooed Faces and Stilt Houses: Who Were the Ancient Yue? Sino-Platonic Papers 17 .
Phan Huy Lê, D. T. (số 1-1985). Vài nét về bộ sử của vương triều Tây Sơn. Tạp chí Hán Nôm, 17-24.
Pulleyblank, E. (1961). Chinese Historical Criticism: Liu Chih-chi and Ssu-ma Kuang. In W. G. Pulleyblank, Historians of China and Japan (pp. 135-66). London : Oxford Univesity Press .
Roberts, G. (1997). Postmodernism versus the Standpoint of Action. History and Theory, 249-260.
Sarah Foot and Chase F. Robinson. (2012). Oxford History of Historical Writing, Vol 2: 400-1400. Oxford University Press .
Scott, J. W. (1989). History in crisis: The others' side of the story. The American Historical Review, 680-692.
Smith, P. J. (2003). Introduction: Problematizing the Song-Yuan-Ming Transition. In e. Paul Jakov Smith and Richard von Glahn, The Song-Yuan-Ming Transition in Chinese History (pp. 1-34). Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.
So, B. K. (2003). Power and identity in the Chinese world order: Festschrift in honour of Professor Wang Gungwu (Vol. 1). Hong Kong University Press.
Sơn, N. K. (1995). Tư liệu thư tịch cuối thế kỉ XVII – thế kỉ XVIII và khuynh hướng khảo chứng học. . Tạp chí Nghiên cứu Lịch sử, số 4, 73-79.
Sơn, N. K. (1996). Về những nhân tố làm khởi phát khuynh hướng khảo chứng học thế kỉ XVIII nửa đầu thế kỉ XIX. Hà Nội: Thông báo Hán Nôm học năm 1996.
Sơn, Q. S. (2012). Đại Việt sử kí tiền biên. Hà Nội: NXB Hồng Bàng, Trung tâm văn hóa ngôn ngữ Đông Tây.
Tana, L. (2006). A view from the sea: Perspectives on the northern and central vietnamese coast. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 37(01), 83-102.
Tana, L. (2009). Considering Book Trade - the Material Foudation of Confucian Learning in the 17th Century Vietnam . In V. n. Nôm, Nghiên cứuu tư tưởng Nho gia Việt Nam từ hướng tiếp cận liên ngành (Confucian thoughts in Viet Nam: Studies from an interdisciplinary perspective) (pp. 556-575). Hà Nội: Nhà xuất bản Thế giới .
Taylor, K. (2013). A history of the Vietnamese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, K. W. (1976). The birth of Vietnam. Univ of California Press.
Taylor, K. W. (1980, 23(1), ). An Evaluation of the Chinese Period in Vietnamese History. 아세아연구, , 139-164.
Taylor, K. W. (1986). Authority and Legitimacy in 11th century Vietnam. In D. M. Milner, Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries (pp. 141-176). Singapore: Institute SE Asian Studies.
Thùy, H. V. (2006). Triệu Đà Ngài là ai (Triệu Đà Who is he?). Tạp chí Xưa và Nay (Journal of Past and Present).
Thùy, H. V. (2007). Hành trình tìm lại cội nguồn (Nghiên cứu và Đối thoại). Hanoi: Nhà xuất bản Văn Học .
Ungar, E. S. ( 1986). From Myth to History: Imagined Polities in Fourteenth Century Vietnam. In D. M. Milner, Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries (pp. 177 – 186 ). Singapore: Institute Southeast Asian Studies.
Wang, A. (2006). Cosmology and political culture in early China. Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Q. E. (1999 ). Wang, Q. E. (1999). History, space, and ethnicity: the Chinese worldview. Journal of World History, 285-305.
Wertsch, J. (2002). Voices of Collective Remembering, . Cambridge University Press.
Whitmore, J. K. (2006). The Rise of the Coast: Trade, State and Culture in Early Dai Viet. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 37(01), 103-122.
Windschuttle, K. (1997). The killing of history: How literary critics and social theorists are murdering our past. Free Press New York.
Wolters, O. W. (2008). Historians and Emperors in Vietnam and China: Comments Arising Out of Le Van Huu's History, Presented to the Tran Court in 1272. In O. W. Wolters, Early Southeast Asia: Selected Essays (p. 206). SEAP Publications.
Zhaojie, Li, and Li James. (2002). Traditional Chinese World Order. Chinese Journal of International Law 1.1 , 20-58.
戈振. (1995). 试论越南《 钦定越史通鉴纲目》 的编撰及其若干问题. 史学月刊.
王川. (1995). 南越国史研究概述. 中国史研究动态 1.
王明珂. (2006). 《英雄祖先與弟兄民族：根基歷史的文本與情境》. 台北: 允晨文化.
王明珂. (2006). 《英雄祖先與弟兄民族: 根基歷史的文本與情境》. 臺北: 允晨文化實業股份有限公司.
王明珂. (1997). 《華夏邊緣：歷史記憶與族群認同》. 允晨文化實業股份有限公司.
王英. (2000). 元朝与安南之关系. 暨南大学硕士论文.
刘信君. (2006 ). 华夷一统”思想的演变及对治理东北边疆的影响 . 《北华大学学报》.
张荣芳. (1988). 《古南越國史》. 廣西人民出版社.
张继合. (2008). 第一个在越南称帝的中国人. 半月选读, 16.
武尚清. (1998). 钦定越史通鉴纲目评介. 史学史研究.
陈国强. (1988). 《百越民族史》. 中国社会科学出版社.
闻华. (2009). 论 “正名”——《 资治通鉴》 开篇的意义. 华夏文化 , 62-64.
唐传喜. (2012). 南下战略与南下干部的历史贡献. 理论学刊. .
孫紅梅. ( 2009). 朝的“天下一家”思想及其政治文化一統,黑龍江民族叢刊編輯部郵箱.
徐素. (1959). 《南越武王赵佗》. 香港中华书局.
徐連達. (2012). 帝國宮廷的深處——中國古代皇帝制度解讀. 香港中和出版有限公司.
栾凡. (2009 年10 月, 第3 卷 第4 期). 元代的中朝朝贡关系. 古代文明.
栾凡. (2010年, 11日 01月). 元朝廷对高丽国管理：元公主权力大于高丽国王. Retrieved from 凤凰网历史综合:
http://news.ifeng.com/history/zhongguogudaishi/201001/0111_7181_1505831.shtml
彭丰文. (2010). 试论十六国时期胡人正统观的嬗变. 《民族研究》, 67-74.
彭适凡. (1990). 《百越民族研究》. 江西教育出版社.
焦芹春. (2004). 《趙佗：南下“幹部”第一人》. 鄉音 , 編輯部郵箱 .
程爱勤. (1995). 《后汉书•南蛮列传》所载“南越徼外蛮夷献白雉、白菟”质疑. 《佳木斯大学社会科学学报》 .
黃飛. (2010). 論元忽必烈朝對安南的征伐. 齊齊哈爾師範高等專科學校學報, .
葛兆光. (1992). 从《 通鉴》 到《 纲目》——宋代通鉴学之一脉. 扬州师院学报社科版 .
福客. ( 2014). 第一个在越南称皇帝的中国人. 人生与伴侣: 月末版, 5-5.