Bình Ngô đại cáo

BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o (, literally: Great proclamation upon the pacification of the Wu) was an announcement written by NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i in 1428, at LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i's behest and on LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i's behalf, to proclaim the Lam SÃÂ¡n's victory over the Ming imperialists and affirm the independence of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât to its people. The document was written in Classical Chinese.

Naming

BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o literally means Great Proclamation upon the Pacification of the Wu. Zhu Yuanzhang, the founder of the Ming dynasty, was a native of Hao Prefecture -which is now in Fengyang, Anhui, China and lies in the territory of the former state of (Eastern) Wu ([Ã¦ÂÂ±]Ã¥ÂÂ³; Sino-Vietnamese: [ÃÂÃÂ´ng] NgÃÂ´) - and, in 1356, he himself took the title Duke of Wu (Ã¥ÂÂ³Ã¥ÂÂÃ¥ÂÂ¬; SV: NgÃÂ´ QuÃ¡Â»Âc CÃÂ´ng) and later King of Wu (Ã¥ÂÂ³Ã§ÂÂ; SV: NgÃÂ´ VÃÂ°ÃÂ¡ng). Therefore, one could reason that NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i named his work Pacification of the Wu instead of Pacification of the Ming in order to subtly emphasize the victory of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât and the failure of the Ming dynasty which was called, in the proclamation, merely by the name Wu after its founder's ancestral land. The second part of the name, ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o (Ã¥Â¤Â§Ã¨ÂªÂ¥) is commonly understood as the denotement of its literary genre, a great edict (cÃÂ¡o), or the announcement's great scale (ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o). The former was the name of a chapter in the book Classic of History in which great edict was a special form of an edict. But during the time of the early Ming dynasty, great edict was used by Hongwu Emperor for his official documents of imperial laws and thus became a symbol of power and authority of the Ming emperor. For this reason, there was an opinion that NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i named his announcement ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o for the purpose of reversing the meaning of great edict from the symbol of Ming emperor to the representation of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât victory over his very own army.

Background

In 1427, LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i led the Lam SÃÂ¡n uprising to the ultimate victory over the Ming imperialists and ended the Fourth Chinese domination in Vietnam. As a result, in 1428 LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i ordered NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i to write an announcement for people in the country about the total pacification of the Ming imperialists and the affirmation of the independence of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât. From that demand, NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i wrote BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o which not only proclaimed the independence of the country but also claimed the equality of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât with China during the long history and expressed many own ideas of NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i about the fairness, the role of people in history of the country and the way to win a war of independence. Besides, NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i used BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o to prove the just cause of the Lam SÃÂ¡n uprising and why LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i's army could drive out the Ming imperialists with its policies of relying on people to fight against the invaders. After it was announced, the proclamation was considered a success, while NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i became one of the most crucial figures of the royal court after the coronation of LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i, now LÃÂª ThÃÂ¡i TÃ¡Â»Â. However, NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i was finally executed in 1442 during the political struggle in the royal court and royal family of the early LÃÂª dynasty. The earliest version of BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o that remains today was found in the 1697 edition of the ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât sÃ¡Â»Â kÃÂ½ toÃÂ n thÃÂ° which was compiled by NgÃÂ´ SÃÂ© LiÃÂªn.

Content

BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o is an edict-like () announcement written in the literary form of parallel constructions (vÃÂn biÃ¡Â»Ân ngÃ¡ÂºÂ«u). The proclamation was divided in four parts:

The first part demonstrated the history of ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât with its identity and tradition of fighting against Chinese dynasties for the purpose of independence and equal position as China.
The second part denounced the heinous crimes of the Ming imperialists during their domination in ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i ViÃ¡Â»Ât when they enslaved the people and deprived resources of the country.
The third part narrated the Lam SÃÂ¡n uprising from the difficult beginning to the final victories.
The fourth part summarized the lesson from history and reaffirmed that righteousness would win.

Originally, BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o was written in chÃ¡Â»Â¯ HÃÂ¡n, it was translated into Vietnamese by several scholars such as NgÃÂ´ TÃ¡ÂºÂ¥t TÃ¡Â»Â, BÃÂ¹i KÃ¡Â»Â· or TrÃ¡ÂºÂ§n TrÃ¡Â»Âng Kim, the translated version by TrÃ¡ÂºÂ§n TrÃ¡Â»Âng Kim in his ViÃ¡Â»Ât Nam sÃ¡Â»Â lÃÂ°Ã¡Â»Â£c and the revised version by BÃÂ¹i KÃ¡Â»Â· are considered the more popular and included in the schoolbook in Vietnam.

Significance

BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o is considered the second declaration of independence of Vietnam after the poem Nam quÃ¡Â»Âc sÃÂ¡n hÃÂ which was attributed to LÃÂ½ ThÃÂ°Ã¡Â»Âng KiÃ¡Â»Ât in the early LÃÂ½ dynasty. The proclamation is highly appreciated not only for its value of propaganda and history but also for its fine literary quality which is praised as the "Incomparably powerful writing document" (ThiÃÂªn cÃ¡Â»Â hÃÂ¹ng vÃÂn) in the History of Vietnam. With BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o, NguyÃ¡Â»Ân TrÃÂ£i asserted the obvious independence and equal status of Vietnam with China and more importantly, reckoned that independence could be achieved only when the rulers had concern for their people and made decision for the interest of the masses. Today, BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o is taught in both secondary (grades 6Ã¢ÂÂ9) and high school (grades 10Ã¢ÂÂ12) in Vietnam.

Different perspectives

The historian Professor Liam Kelley of the University of HawaiÃÂ»i at MÃÂnoa on his Le Minh Khai's SEAsian History Blog suggested that the "north" referred to the Ming collaborationist Hanoi scholars while the south referred to Thanh HÃÂ³a, the base of LÃÂª LÃ¡Â»Â£i since the text referred to "Dai Viet" and did not introduce China before mentioning north. cited John Whitmore and challenged the claim that "NgÃÂ´" referred to Ming dynasty China but instead referred to the Chinese settled Red River Delta area of Vietnam. It was English and French foreign languages translations which bowdlerised "south" into "Vietnam" and "north" into China even though people today have no true idea of what south and north referred to in the original text. He believes that it was the Ming collaborationist scholars of Hanoi who were referred to as the "NgÃÂ´" and that it was not a term used for Chinese as is currently thought in Vietnam, and that the BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o was not directed at China. In the 20th century for propaganda purposes against French colonialism, the development of the new genre of "resistance literature" spurred a change in how the "BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o" was looked at. Kelley suggested that the "BÃÂ¬nh NgÃÂ´ ÃÂÃ¡ÂºÂ¡i cÃÂ¡o" drew on a previous Ming text. In June 2014 historian LÃÂª ViÃ¡Â»Ât Anh criticised these views of Liam Kelley in an article published by NhÃÂ¢n DÃÂ¢n, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Vietnam; LÃÂª stated that Kelley's findings were a "bizarre explanation" with no basis in the text, and referred to Kelley as a "Temple burner".

Notes

References

Bibliography

External links

"A question about Binh Ngo Dai Cao" (discussion) (2010). Vietnam Studies Group. archived from original