Siamese–Vietnamese War (1833–1834)

The Siamese–Vietnamese War of 1833–1834 (Thai: อานามสยามยุทธ (พ.ศ. 2376 – พ.ศ. 2377), Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt–Xiêm (1833–1834)), also known as the Siamese-Cambodian War of 1831–1834, was sparked by a Siamese invasion force under General Bodindecha that was attempting to conquer Cambodia and southern Vietnam. After initial success and the defeat of the Khmer Army at the Battle of Kompong Cham in 1832, the Siamese advance was repelled in southern Vietnam in 1833 by the military forces of the Nguyễn dynasty. Upon the outbreak of a general uprising in Cambodia and Laos, the Siamese withdrew, and Vietnam was left in control of Cambodia.

Background

Internal and Interstate conflicts in Cambodia, Siam and Vietnam

Main articles: Siamese–Vietnamese wars, Siamese–Vietnamese War (1771–1773), and Battle of Rạch Gầm-Xoài Mút

Siamese invasion of Cambodia and Hà Tiên in 1771 and Vietnamese counter-offensives in 1772.

Since the eventual end of Khmer empire in the fifteenth century, post-Angkorian Cambodia had been more or less under aggression by neighboring Siamese Ayutthaya kingdom. In the seventeenth century, Vietnam, led by the Nguyen Lords of Đàng Trong, expanded to the south into Mekong delta of Cochinchina, which had been Cambodian territories, in the process known as Nam tiến. Nguyen Lords exerted influence over Cambodia, bringing them into conflicts with Siam who also sought to control Cambodia. Dynastic factional conflicts in Cambodia aggravated the issue as rival princely candidates usually sought supports from either Siam or Vietnam in their claims to Cambodian throne. In 1771, Siamese King Taksin of Thonburi sent troops to invade Cambodia in efforts to overthrow pro-Vietnamese King Ang Ton of Cambodia and to install his pro-Siamese candidate Ang Non. Siamese invasion did not achieve goal as the Nguyen Lord Nguyễn Phúc Thuần sent Vietnamese forces to repel the Siamese from Cambodia in 1772. Tây Sơn uprising toppled the rule of the Nguyen Lord in Vietnam. With Vietnamese assistance dwindling, Ang Ton decided to reconcile with his rival Ang Non. Ang Ton abdicated in 1775 in favor of Ang Non, who became the new pro-Siamese king of Cambodia. Ang Ton soon died in 1777. Another turn of event occurred in 1778 when Chauvea Tolaha Mou, the Cambodian Prime Minister, rebelled against Ang Non with support from the Nguyen Lord Nguyễn Phúc Ánh, who was fighting the Tây Sơn at the same time. Nguyễn Phúc Ánh sent Vietnamese forces to defeat and kill Ang Non in 1779. Tolaha Mou installed Ang Eng the seven-year-old son of Ang Ton as his puppet king. Taksin was enraged as his pro-Siamese candidate was murdered by the pro-Vietnamese faction. In late 1781, Taksin sent Siamese forces under Chaophraya Chakri into Cambodia. However, a rebellion happened at home in Thonburi, prompting Chakri to broker a peace with Nguyễn Phúc Ánh in order to return to pacify political upheaval in Thonburi in 1782. Chaophraya Chakri assumed power and ascended the throne as King Rama I of Rattanakosin Kingdom, founding the Chakri dynasty of Siam.

Nguyễn Phúc Ánh was ousted from his base at Saigon by the Tây Sơn in 1783. Defeated, Nguyễn Phúc Ánh took refuge in Bangkok where he was well-received by the Siamese court, partly due to the preceding peace negotiations in Cambodia in 1782. Also in 1783, Oknha Yumreach Baen, a pro-Siamese Cambodian nobleman, managed to seize power from Tolaha Mou but the ensuing chaos and upheaval in Cambodia obliged Yumreach Bean to take the young king Ang Eng to Bangkok to be under Siamese custody. King Rama I of Siam sent Siamese riparian fleet down the Mekong in 1784 in efforts to restore Nguyễn Phúc Ánh but was utterly defeated by Tây Sơn navy under Nguyễn Huệ in the Battle of Rạch Gầm-Xoài Mút. The Siamese king appointed Yumreach Baen as Chaophraya Aphaiphubet to be prospective head pro-Siamese minister in Cambodia, though Cambodia continued to be technically under Vietnamese domination. In 1787, Nguyễn Phúc Ánh left Bangkok to successfully reconquer Saigon in 1788 and to reclaim his polity from the Tây Sơn with French assistance. According to Thai chronicles, Nguyễn Phúc Ánh sent tributes to Bangkok during his stay in Saigon. In 1789, Aphaiphubet finally defeated the rival pro-Vietnamese faction and took control of Cambodia. In 1794, King Rama I allowed Ang Eng to return to Cambodia to assume personal rule but also carved northwestern Cambodia, including the srok of Battambang and Siemreap, for Aphaiphubet to govern separately under Siamese direct rule. King Ang Eng of Cambodia died prematurely in 1796 with all of his four sons: Ang Chan, Ang Snguon, Ang Em and Ang Duong, were considered by Siamese court to be too young to rule. Nguyễn Phúc Ánh eventually reclaimed and unified Vietnam, proclaiming himself Emperor Gia Long of the Nguyen dynasty in 1802.

Siamese–Vietnamese conflicts over Cambodia in 1811–1813

Main article: Cambodian rebellion (1811–1812)

In 1806, Ang Chan the eldest son of Ang Eng, who had been held custody in Bangkok being a young Cambodian prince, was finally crowned as the new king of Cambodia by King Rama I and was allowed to return to Cambodia to rule. However, Ang Chan grew resented of Siamese influence over Cambodia and eventually became pro-Vietnamese. On his coronation, Ang Chan also received recognition state seal from Gia Long and reciprocated with friendly gesture. When Chaophraya Aphiphubet Baen, the Siam-appointed governor of Battambang, died in 1809, another pro-Siamese governor was appointed, upsetting Ang Chan who expected Northwestern Cambodia to be returned to him. Siam-appointed governors of Battambang would be thorn in the side for Ang Chan. Ang Chan did not attend the funeral of Siamese King Rama I in 1809 and sent his younger brothers Prince Ang Snguon and Prince Ang Em to Bangkok in his stead. The new Siamese king Rama II then made Prince Ang Snguon the Uprayorach (viceroy) and Prince Ang Em the Ouparach (deputy viceroy), without consulting Chan, thus making these two princes to form a new pro-Siamese faction in Cambodia. Also in 1809, the Burmese invaded Phuket and King Rama II asked for Ang Chan to contribute forces as vassal kingdoms were expected to provide military assistance. However, Ang Chan ignored this request. Two pro-Siamese Cambodian ministers, Chakrey Pen and Kralahom Muong, acted on their own to gather Cambodian forces to be sent to Siam without Ang Chan's consent. Ang Chan considered this action to be a sedition and executed these two officials. The Cambodian court became again polarized into Siamese and Vietnamese factions.

The pro-Siamese prince Ang Snguon eventually rebelled against his pro-Vietnamese brother Ang Chan in 1811. Ang Snguon left the Cambodian royal city of Oudong to gather his pro-Siamese supporters at Pursat. Ang Chan requested military aid from the Vietnamese. Nguyễn Văn Thoại was sent to bring Vietnamese fleet to take defensive position at Longvek against Siamese attacks. Siamese court, in turn, sent Chaophraya Yommaraj Noi to lead an army of 5,000 men into Cambodia in 1812 to support Ang Snguon. Panicked, King Ang Chan, escorted by Nguyễn Văn Thoại, fled from Oudong to take refuge at Saigon where he was accommodated by the Vietnamese. Princes Ang Em and Ang Duong, Chan's younger brothers, chose to join the Siamese side instead and went to join their brother Ang Snguon. Yommaraj Noi, the Siamese commander, took control but found himself unprepared for long-term occupation of Cambodia. Yommaraj Noi then destroyed and burnt down Cambodian cities of Oudong, Phnom Penh and returned to Bangkok with Cambodian princes Ang Snguon, Ang Em and Ang Duong. The Siamese also deported thousands of Cambodians to the Siam-occupied Northwestern Cambodia.

Both Siam and Vietnam avoided direct confrontations during the crisis of 1811–1813. Simultaneously as Siamese army was invading Cambodia, the Siamese court sent a mission to Gia Long at Huế in 1812, explaining that Siamese expedition into Cambodia was of good intention to restore peace while blaming Ang Chan for the troubles at the same time. Gia Long assumed friendly pretension but put the blame on Ang Snguon instead. Through his reign, Gia Long maintained amicable relations towards Siam but geopolitical dilemma would soon cause Siamese–Vietnamese relations to sour. Cambodia moved closer towards Vietnamese domination. Siam was hesitant to actively compete with Vietnam over Cambodia due to prospective Burmese threat was still looming. In 1813, Gia Long assigned Lê Văn Duyệt, who had just been appointed as the governor of Saigon in 1812, to lead the Vietnamese army of 13,000 men to escort Ang Chan back to Cambodia with Siamese representatives as witnesses. Upon seeing the wrecked ruins of his royal city burnt to the grounds by the Siamese, Ang Chan reportedly cried in tears. Lê Văn Duyệt oversaw military defenses in Cambodia, constructing a new royal citadel for Ang Chan at Phnom Penh called Banteay Keav and another citadel at Lvea Aem. Ang Chan chose to reside at Phnom Penh rather than Oudong owing to its riverside position being accessible to Vietnamese protection navy. Nguyễn Văn Thoại was appointed as bảo hộ or Protector of Cambodia – technically Vietnamese representative minister in Cambodia.

Cambodia under Vietnamese domination: 1813–1833

Lê Văn Duyệt (called Ong Ta Kun in Thai and Cambodian chronicles) was appointed as Gia Định Thành or governor of Saigon citadel in 1812, which acted as the viceroy of Cochinchina or Southern Vietnam and also had authorities over Cambodia. With appointment of Nguyễn Văn Thoại as bảo hộ Chân Lạp or Protector of Cambodia in 1813, Cambodia became Vietnamese protectorate. Lê Văn Duyệt also built a Vietnamese shrine for Emperor Gia Long at Chroy Changvar, the land opposite of Phnom Penh on the river. Twice a month, Cambodian king Ang Chan, along with his Cambodian officials, would dress in Vietnamese costumes and worship Nguyễn Hữu Cảnh (a Vietnamese commander who conquered Cambodia in 1700) at the shrine. In 1815, at suggestion of Nguyễn Văn Thoại, Ang Chan sent Cambodian forces led by Samdech Chauponhea Tey to attack Battambang and reclaim Northwestern Cambodia from Siam. Samdech Tey, however, was repelled by Ros, the pro-Siamese governor of Battambang who was a son of Aphaiphubet Baen. This incident led to another round of Siamese–Vietnamese diplomatic crisis as Bangkok accused Nguyễn Văn Thoại of instigating this attack. Samdech Tey became the scapegoat as Vietnam put the blame on his belligerent actions and put Samdech Tey under pretensive investigation to please Siam.

Main article: Cambodian rebellion (1820)

In 1819, Gia Long came up with the construction project of Vĩnh Tế canal that would connect Châu Đốc with Hà Tiên. Nguyễn Văn Thoại was put in charge of the project with dedicative participation from King Ang Chan of Cambodia as Cambodian people were conscripted to labor works on the canal supervised by the Vietnamese. Vietnamese overseers treated Cambodian workers, who were subjected to poor working conditions, harshly. In 1820, Cambodian workers arose against Vietnam led by Snang Ke. The rebellion of Snang Ke was soon crushed by Vietnam. Gia Long died in early 1820, to be succeeded by his son Minh Mạng. Minh Mạng initially maintained neutral attitude towards Siam and also took cautious approach on his powerful mandarin Lê Văn Duyệt, who was appointed as the governor of Saigon for the second time, in the same year. Also in 1820, a Cambodian Buddhist monk also named Ke declared himself Neak Sel or holy man and rebelled against Vietnam. Neak Sel Ke was eventually defeated by Lê Văn Duyệt. Siam took construction of the Vĩnh Tế canal with great alarm as Siam suspected the canal would facilitate movement of Vietnamese fleets into the Gulf of Siam, directly threatening Bangkok. In response, King Rama II then ordered his son Prince Chetsadabodin to supervise the construction of the Phisuea Samut or Samut Prakarn Fort in 1822 in defense against possible Vietnamese seaborne incursion.

Pro-Siamese princes Ang Snguon, Ang Em and Ang Duong, half-brothers of Ang Chan, resided in Wang Chao Khamen or Cambodian quarters in Bangkok established since the times of Ang Eng. Ang Snguon died in 1822, leaving Ang Em and Ang Duong as living pro-Siamese candidates. Neak Neang Tep, daughter of Chaophraya Aphaiphubet Baen the Siam-appointed governor of Battambang who died in 1809, was one of the consorts of King Ang Chan and bore him a daughter named Princess Ang Pen. Neak Neang Tep and her brother Preah Angkeo Ma represented the remaining pro-Siamese faction in Cambodian court. In 1829, Ang Chan sent Preah Angkeo Ma to deliver tributes to Siam – a purely symbolic gesture just to keep Siamese aggression at bay. Angkeo Ma, however, secretly handed a letter to King Rama III or King Nangklao of Siam, urging the Siamese king to attack Cambodia to topple Vietnamese influence. Siam was still unresponsive but Angkeo Ma's confidential maneuver was exposed to the Vietnamese. The Vietnamese ordered the arrest of Angkeo Ma but he fled to Siam. Also in 1832, Oknha Surkealok Kas the chauvay srok or governor of Pursat, who was pro-Siamese, rebelled against Ang Chan and fled to Siam with majority of Cambodian population in Pursat.

Anouvong's Lao rebellion

Main article: Lao rebellion (1826–1828)

In the eighteenth century, the Lao Kingdom of Lanxang fragmented into three separate kingdoms of Luang Prabang, Vientiane and Champasak, with Muang Phuan, another polity, under periodic Vietnamese control. In 1778–1779, Siamese invading armies conquered all three Lao kingdoms to become tributary states under Siamese domination. Royal family of Vientiane, including the young prince Anouvong, were taken to Bangkok as hostages. Anouvong grew up in Siamese court and was allowed to return to Vientiane as a prince in 1795, becoming the King of Vientiane himself in 1805. Prince Anouvong took Muang Phuan by force in 1799, forcing the ruler of Muang Phuan to accept the authority of Vientiane but, through arrangements by Gia Long in 1802, Muang Phuan was given to Luang Prabang. However, Anouvong again sought to dethrone Chao Noy the ruler of Muang Phuan, who was married to a female relative of Anouvong. Chao Noy eventually accepted Anouvong's authority but, at the same, pleaded for Vietnamese aid and held grudges against Anouvong.

In 1824, King Rama II of Siam died and Anouvong traveled to Bangkok to attend the royal funeral but faced derogatory treatment. Also in 1824, the Siamese court ordered the Sak Lek or conscription tattooing in Laos, an unprecedented policy that oppressed Lao people and disregarded Anouvong's authorities. Given the wrong impression that the British would attack Bangkok, Anouvong took this false opportunity to march his Lao armies in 1826–1827 to stop the Sak Lek and to threaten Bangkok, seizing Nakhon Ratchasima and Saraburi. Anouvong, however, was repelled by Siamese counter-offensive forces. With defeat imminent, Anouvong fled from Vientiane to Vietnamese Nghệ An Province, seeking protection under Vietnam. Lê Văn Duyệt suggested belligerent retaliation against Siam but Minh Mạng preferred peaceful means. Minh Mạng sent Phan Văn Thúy to escort Anouvong back to Vientiane in 1828 to negotiate with Siamese officials there. According to Thai chronicles, the Vietnamese envoy spoke: "Siam is like the father. Vietnam is like the mother. When the father is angry over the child. The mother should bring the child to apologize." Anouvong, however, unexpectedly arose and killed the unprepared Siamese officials in Vientiane. With situation spiraled out of hand, Minh Mạng sent another Vietnamese mission to Nakhon Phanom to propose peace terms. Chaophraya Ratchasuphawadi (later Chaophraya Bodindecha) the Siamese commander, however, was convinced that Vietnam was behind this deadly ambush on the Siamese at Vientiane. Ratchasuphawadi ordered the massacre of Vietnamese envoys at Nakhon Phanom. Shocked, Minh Mạng sent a mission to Bangkok in 1829 to demand justice for the incident but Bangkok was not cooperative.

Vietnamese annexation of Muang Phuan

When the Siamese armies invaded Laos in search for Anouvong, Chao Noy the ruler of Muang Phuan asked for Vietnamese protection. Minh Mạng was poised to annex Muang Phuan into Vietnamese rule by transforming Muang Phuan into Trấn Ninh (鎮寧) Province. When Anouvong was defeated again in 1828 and fled to Xiangkhouang, Chao Noy the ruler of Muang Phuan, a former vassal to Anouvong that later became a vassal of Vietnam, revealed the whereabouts of Anouvong to Bodindecha, which led to the capture of Anouvong. Anouvong was eventually captured and encaged, transported as a prisoner to Bangkok in 1828. At Bangkok, Anouvong and his family were subjected to tortures and public humiliation. Anouvong died in early 1829. The kingdom of Vientiane was dissolved as the royal city of Vientiane itself was mostly destroyed and burnt to the grounds. Minh Mạng sent Tạ Quang Cự to occupy Muang Phuan and to assist Chao Noy but soon realized that Chao Noy had switched loyalty to Siam. When Minh Mạng learnt that Chao Noy had cooperated with the Siamese in the downfall of Anouvong, the Vietnamese emperor summoned Chao Noy to Huế for explanation but Chao Noy had become defiant to Vietnam, refusing to go. Tạ Quang Cự then arrested Chao Noy and brought him to Huế, where Chao Noy was executed by slow slicing in 1829 by the orders of Minh Mạng. Muang Phuan–Xiangkhouang then came under direct Vietnamese control as the Trấn Ninh Province. Tạ Quang Cự was appointed as the governor of Nghệ An and Hà Tĩnh – Vietnam's frontline area against Laos-Siam. Minh Mạng also appointed Chao San, a distant relative of Chao Noy, as the puppet ruler of Muang Phuan.

Lê Văn Khôi Rebellion

Main article: Lê Văn Khôi revolt

Warlord Lê Văn Duyệt held the position of Gia Định Thành or governor of Saigon from 1820 to his death in 1832 and, during his tenure, had been the most powerful minister of Southern Vietnam, also holding influence over Cambodia. Under his rule, Lê Văn Duyệt allowed Chinese immigrants to flourish in their trades and Christian Southern Vietnamese to enjoy their religious freedom. He was popular and was the personification of Southern Vietnam itself. This, however, conflicted with Minh Mạng's staunch Confucianist policies. Minh Mạng considered Southern Vietnam to be an unruly autonomous region where illegal opium imports by Chinese immigrants and Christianity were allowed and tolerated. Minh Mạng then sought to dismantle this autonomous regional apparatus. In 1831, Minh Mạng appointed his own officials Nguyễn Văn Quế as governor of Gia Định (Saigon) province as a part of his administrative reforms to reorganize Vietnam into tỉnh or provinces and also appointed Bạch Xuân Nguyên as the attorney of Saigon. Lê Văn Duyệt finally died in 1832 and this gave pretext for Minh Mạng to further undo Lê Văn Duyệt's legacies. The autonomous position of Gia Định Thành was abolished in favor of centrally-appointed provincial governors. Minh Mạng prohibited Christianity in January 1833 and Western Catholic priests, missionaries and Vietnamese Christians were arrested and persecuted. French priests, including Father Régéreau and Jean-Louis Taberd, fled to Siam. Bạch Xuân Nguyên reported to Minh Mạng at Huế that the recently-deceased Lê Văn Duyệt had been corrupted and abusive of his powers. Minh Mạng then instituted posthumous punishments for Lê Văn Duyệt by digging his dead body out of his grave to be canned. Three generations of Lê Văn Duyệt's family were executed and his followers were arrested and punished in large-scale political purge of Southern Vietnam.

Lê Văn Khôi, adopted son of Lê Văn Duyệt, arose in rebellion against Minh Mạng in April 1833. The rebels murdered Minh Mạng's officials including Nguyễn Văn Quế and Bạch Xuân Nguyên the governors of Saigon. Lê Văn Khôi rebels seized control of Saigon and gained a large number of followers in Southern Vietnam, especially the Christians. In 1833, Lê Đại Cương (known in Thai chronicles and Ong Chan Bia) had been holding the position of tổng đốc or governor of An Giang and Hà Tiên provinces and was also bảo hộ or Protector of Cambodia, Vietnamese head minister in Cambodia. Lê Đại Cương and other commanders attempted to retake Saigon but were utterly defeated by the rebels as Lê Đại Cương himself had to take refuge in Cambodia. Lê Văn Khôi quickly took control of all six Southern Vietnamese provinces including Biên Hòa, Gia Định (Saigon), Định Tường (Mỹ Tho), Vĩnh Long (Long Hồ), An Giang (Châu Đốc) and Hà Tiên. With initial setbacks, Minh Mạng assigned a whole new troupe of commanders led by Tống Phước Lương, including other commanders such as Nguyễn Xuân and Trương Minh Giảng, to put down Lê Văn Khôi's rebellion. Thái Công Triều at Châu Đốc, second-in-command under Lê Văn Khôi, decided to defect upon seeing the might of Nguyen armies, enabling the Nguyen to prevail. Due to the defection of Thái Công Triều, Lê Văn Khôi was obliged to retreat to Saigon. Tống Phước Lương was successful against the rebels, reconquering all of Southern Vietnam for Minh Mạng by late 1833 except for the Saigon citadel itself where Lê Văn Khôi stood.

Nearly defeated, Lê Văn Khôi attempted to enlist Siamese help by sending deputations to Siam but they were unsuccessful as they were intercepted, revealing a letter written by Lê Văn Khôi to Siamese king Rama III to ask for military aid. Perhaps informed by the fleeing French priests, Siam became known about the upheavals in Southern Vietnam. King Rama III was to capitalize this opportunity to dismantle Vietnamese influence in Cambodia and to possibly take control of Southern Vietnam. Siam, by the 1830s, considered Vietnam to be a geopolitical rival rather than an established ally. In the words of Thai chronicles; "When Ong Chan rebelled, Vietnam supported him. When Anou rebelled, Vietnam also supported him and escorted him back to restore. They also do this in Cambodia, restricting Thai territories and boosting themselves as Duc Hoang De." The Siamese king did not like that Vietnamese rulers styled themselves as Hoàng đế or emperors. Rama III initiated the Siamese campaign to bring Prince Ang Em to the Cambodian throne and to take Saigon.

Preparations

Siamese preparations

King Rama III arranged the Siamese forces into the following routes:

Chao Phraya Bodindecha would lead a land army of 40,000 men to bring Prince Ang Em and Ang Duong to Cambodia and to proceed to take Saigon.
Chao Phraya Phraklang would lead a galley fleet of 10,000 men to attack Hà Tiên and to converge with the land army at Saigon.
Phra Mahathep Pom and Phra Ratchawarin Kham would attack Xiangkhouang and Nghệ An Province through Khorat Plateau and Laos.

Military campaigns

Siamese invasion of Cambodia

King Nangklao or King Rama III sent Siamese forces to invade Cambodia by land and sea in order to topple Vietnamese influence in Cambodia, installing the pro-Siamese candidates Ang Em and Ang Duong on the Cambodian throne, bringing Cambodia into Siamese domination. If succeeded, the Siamese forces were to continue to invade Southern Vietnam to support the Lê Văn Khôi rebels in the Mekong delta. If failed, the Siamese commanders were to depopulate Cambodia by "turning Cambodia into a forest", enforcing the deportation of Cambodian people into Siam, to prevent Vietnam from utilizing Cambodia as a geopolitical threat to Siam.

All three Siamese divisions left Bangkok on the same day on November 23, 1833. Pro-Siamese Cambodian figures, including Preah Angkeo Ma and Oknha Kas the former governor of Pursat, who had been taking refuge in Siam, also joined the main Siamese land division under Chaophraya Bodindecha. King Ang Chan of Cambodia, upon hearing news of Siamese invasion, assigned Oknha Chakrey Long to organize Cambodian forces to resist the Siamese. However, Chakrey Long was able to muster a troop of only 300 men in short period of time. The main column of Chao Phraya Bodindecha, led by shock troops with a great number of war elephants, marched from Battambang to seize Pursat and Kampong Chhnang. Oknha Chakrey Long led the Cambodian army against Siamese vanguard forces of 5,000 men in the Battle of Kampong Cham in December 1833. Chakrey Long was defeated and fled to Ba Phnum. A great number of Cambodian people, frightened on the sight of Siamese invading armies, simply fled and took refuge in the jungles.

After the defeat of Chakrey Long, King Ang Chan and his court fled from Phnom Penh under Siamese treat on December 31 to Cochinchina. Ang Chan presumably intended for Saigon as he had previously been in 1811 but Saigon was then occupied by the Lê Văn Khôi rebels so Ang Chan instead ended up in Long Hồ, in Vĩnh Long Province. Bodindecha then marched his armies through Cambodia without further resistances. Chaophraya Bodindecha left Princes Ang Em and Ang Duong to take control in Phnom Penh with himself proceeding to Ba Phnum.

Siamese invasion of Southern Vietnam: An Giang and Hà Tiên

The Siamese navy division of Phraklang reached Hà Tiên in January 1834. The Vietnamese, who had been preoccupied with Lê Văn Khôi's rebellion, were caught unprepared, and the Siamese quickly took Hà Tiên. Phraklang then sailed his fleet upstream the Vĩnh Tế Canal and also quickly took Châu Đốc in the An Giang Province. Bodindecha, who had reached Ba Phnum, sent his brother-in-law Chao Phraya Nakhon Ratchasima to bring 7,000 men eastwards through Ba Phnum district directly to Saigon Bodindecha himself joined Phrakhlang at Châu Đốc.

Vietnam had to divert its forces from the Saigon rebel front to engage with the invading Siamese. Emperor Minh Mạng then Nguyễn Xuân (known as Ong Tham Tai, for his position as Tham tán Đại thần) and Trương Minh Giảng to counter the Siamese offensives in An Giang.

Battle of Vàm Nao

To reach Saigon from Châu Đốc, the Siamese fleet had to cross from the Bassac River to the Mekong via the Vàm Nao Canal. Chao Phraya Bodindecha merged his army into Phraklang's fleet and the massive Siamese fleet proceeded along the Bassac River and reached the Vàm Nao Canal or Thuận Cảng Canal on January 21, 1834, where they met the Vietnamese fleet under the command of Nguyễn Xuân. The Battle of Vàm Nao ensued and continued for ten days. The Siamese initially prevailed. The Vietnamese retreated towards the Mekong and the Siamese pressed on the attack. Bodindecha ordered his fleet to disembark and attack the Vietnamese on land but was repelled by Vietnamese officer Phạm Hữu Tâm. The admirals of Phraklang's fleet, however, refused to engage with the Vietnamese fleet. Phraklang himself had to board a small boat to encourage his admirals to attack but to no avail. Vietnamese reinforcements, including more than 100 battle junks, led by Tống Phước Lương the Tả tướng quân (Ong Tian Kun) or grand commander of the campaign, arrived and the overwhelming number of the Vietnamese engaged Bodindecha's armies. The Siamese were unable to withstand the Vietnamese, and both Bodindecha and Phraklang decided to retreat on January 31, 1834 or in February 1834.

Siamese retreat and Vietnamese offensives

After the Battle of Vàm Nao, the Siamese retreated to Châu Đốc on February 2, 1834. Vietnamese commanders; Nguyễn Xuân (Ong Tham Tai), Lê Đại Cương (Ong Chan Bia) and Trương Minh Giảng, capitalized on the victory by sending a fleet to follow the Siamese and attack Châu Đốc. Chao Phraya Bodindecha ordered the Siamese to fire upon the disembarking Vietnamese, which resulted in bodies piling on the river bank. Phraklang then retreated further to Hà Tiên through the Vĩnh Tế Canal and carried off the local population of Banteai Meas, Kampot, and Kampong Som to be resettled in Chanthaburi. The water of the Vĩnh Tế Canal was too shallow for the galleys to proceed.

Phraklang then ordered some of the galleys to be pulled by elephants to Kampot. However, the Cambodians revolted and murdered the mahouts, taking all of the elephants. As the Vietnamese kept attacking Châu Đốc, Phrakhlang decided to abandon Châu Đốc, retreat from Cambodia to Chantaburi, and take along as much of the local population as he could find on the way back.

Oknha Chakrey Long the Cambodian commander, who had fled to Ba Phnum, met with Oknha Yumreach Hu, another Cambodian commander who had been organizing local resistance against Siamese incursion near Prey Veng. Two Cambodian commanders, Chakrey Long and Yumreach Hu, then hold their position at Prey Veng against the Siamese. Chao Phraya Nakhon Ratchasima and Phraya Ratchanikul, who had led the Siamese troops from Ba Phnum to Saigon, were ambushed by the Cambodian resistance force under Oknhas Chakrey Long and Yumreach Ho at Smaong (Phumi Smaong, Svay Antor, Prey Veng province). The two Siamese commanders then realized that the main Siamese forces had already retreated. Siamese commanders Nakhon Ratchasima and Ratchanikul returned to the Mekong but found that all boats to cross the river had vanished and so built a pontoon bridge to cross. Internal dissent caused some contingent commanders to leave the army group and marched northwards along the Mekong, where they were massacred. Chao Phraya Nakhon Ratchasima and Phraya Ratchanikul eventually crossed the Mekong and engaged the Cambodian insurgents.

The Vietnamese reconquered Châu Đốc and Hà Tiên. Bodindecha instructed Princes Ang Em and Ang Duong at Phnom Penh to destroy the citadel, burn the city, and march all inhabitants to Battambang. However, revolts against the Siamese invaders broke out in Phnom Penh and the rest of Cambodia under the co-ordinated leadership of two Khmer magistrates, Chakrey Long and Yumreach. All further hostile acts of Siam met massive resistance. The Siamese burnt down the Cambodian royal palace in Phnom Penh, demolished the city ramparts and looted everything they could. Bodindecha and the two Cambodian princes then retreated towards Siam. Failing in their campaign, the Siamese were to turn Cambodia into forest, deporting over a thousand Cambodian people to Siam. Vietnamese and Cambodian forces under Nguyễn Xuân, Lê Đại Cương, Trương Minh Giảng and Chakrey Long pursued the retreating Siamese deep into Cambodia. Bodindecha reached Pursat on February 15 and then retreated further to the Siamese-held Battambang. Chao Phraya Bodindecha ordered Chao Phraya Nakhon Ratchasima and Phraya Ratchanikul to retreat to Nakhon Ratchasima.

In 1834, Viceroy Trương Minh Giảng and his vassal king, Ang Chan, returned to Phnom Penh. Vietnamese rule in Cambodia had been established. King Ang Chan awarded Oknha Chakrey Long with the position of Chauvea Tolaha or Prime Minister and Oknha Yumreach Hu with the position of Samdach Chauponhea.

Northern Fronts

Phra Mahathep Pom and Phra Ratchawarin Kham reached their respective destinations in January 1834. Phra Mahathep Pom stationed at Nakhon Phanom and Phra Ratchawarin Kham at Nongkhai. Phra Mahathep Pom led a Siamese army to attack the Lao city of Mahaxay, which had been under Vietnamese rule. He then proceeded to attack Phu Thai communities of modern Savannakhet Province including Muang Pong, Muang Phalan and Muang Champhone. The Siamese relocated the Phu Thai people to settle in what is now Nakhon Phanom Province and the surrounding areas.

Siamese conquest of Muang Phuan

After the execution of Chao Noy of Muang Phuan at Huế in 1829, Minh Mạng appointed Chao San, a prince of Phuan royal dynasty, as the new puppet ruler of Muang Phuan under Vietnamese control. Muang Phuan had been under direct Vietnamese governance as the Trấn Ninh province. Phra Ratchawarin Kham and Phra Patumthewa the governor of Nongkhai sent secret messages to Chao San, urging him to defect to the Siamese side. Chao San, disillusioned with Vietnamese rule, decided to join Siamese side. Phra Ratchawarin Kham led the Siamese army to capture Muang Phuan, defeating and massacring the Vietnamese occupying forces there. Vietnamese forces in Muang Phuan was left unsupported as Tạ Quang Cự the governor of the adjacent Nghệ An and Hà Tĩnh provinces was sent away to suppress the rebellion of Nông Văn Vân in the same year.

Muang Phuan, as a tributary state to Siam, was too far from Siamese influence and was difficult to defend. Siam proposed that Muang Phuan and its people should be evacuated in order to avoid Vietnamese retaliation. Chao San the ruler of Muang Phuan agreed to evacuate 4,000 families of his people across the Mekong to the west side. However, they soon learned that Siam had intended to deport them further into Central Siam. Siam dissolved the Kingdom of Muang Phuan altogether. Nearly all of the Phuan people of Muang Phuan were forcibly relocated to Nan, Sukhothai, Uttaradit, and Phitsanulok Provinces, and Muang Phuan was left largely deserted. A recent study in 2015 found that some of the displaced Phuan people eventually reached as far as Banteay Meanchey and Battambang provinces of Cambodia, where they are misidentified as Liao (Lao) instead of Phuan.

Aftermath and Prelude to 1841–1845 war

Vietnamese annexation of Cambodia

Main article: Tây Thành province

Siamese forces had withdrawn from Cambodia by February 1834, holding position at Battambang. Minh Mạng assigned Ong Chan Bia Lê Đại Cương to bring the Cambodian king Ang Chan to Phnom Penh in April 1834. Ang Chan promoted his meritorious subjects Oknha Chakrey Long, who played crucial role in expelling the Siamese, to the position of Chauvea Tolaha or Prime Minister and Oknha Yumreach Hu to Samdech Chauponhea. After successfully expelling the Siamese, Vietnam occupied Cambodia. Vietnamese troops of 5,000 men were stationed in Phnom Penh and trained. Minh Mạng promoted Nguyễn Xuân to the position of Tả tướng quân and Trương Minh Giảng to governorship of An Giang and Hà Tiên provinces, also in charge of Cambodia, replacing Lê Đại Cương.

In mid-1834, Trương Minh Giảng petitioned Minh Mạng to annex Cambodia into direct Vietnamese rule. King Ang Chan of Cambodia died in January 1835. Ang Chan left no male heirs but four daughters Ang Pen (Ang Pen's mother was Neak Neang Tep, daughter of Chaophraya Aphaiphubet the pro-Siamese governor of Battambang who had died in 1809.), Ang Mey, Ang Peou and Ang Snguon, all born from different mothers. Ang Chan's pro-Siamese brothers, Princes Ang Em and Ang Duong, were under Siamese custody and guardianship in Battambang. Minh Mạng then established the Trấn Tây Province (鎮西) or Western Commandery over Cambodia in 1835 to bring Cambodia under direct rule. In May 1835, Minh Mạng conferred upon Princess Ang Mey the title of Quận chúa (郡主) as Queen regnant of Cambodia, the first and only historical female ruler in Cambodian history, as a puppet ruler without actual powers. Minh Mạng passed over Princess Ang Pen the eldest daughter due to her apparent Siamese connection. Meanwhile, Minh Mạng invested Trương Minh Giảng with the title Trấn Tây tướng quân (chữ Hán: 鎮西將軍) as supreme commander in Cambodia with Lê Đại Cương as Tham tán đại thần or counselor. The Cambodia royal city of Phnom Penh was renamed as Nam Vang. Vietnamese governors and officials were installed in Cambodia and native Cambodian mandarins were left with minimal power.

After repelling Siamese invaders and consolidating rule in Cambodia, the Nguyen court was then able to finalize its subjugation of Lê Văn Khôi rebels. Lê Văn Khôi died from illness at Saigon in December 1834, leaving leadership to Nguyễn Văn Trắm. In September 1835, Nguyễn Xuân led the Nguyen forces to successfully recapture Saigon. Thousands of rebels and sympathizers were killed and buried in mass grave. The rebel leaders, including the French priest Joseph Marchand who was caught among the rebels, were arrested and brought to Huế to be brutally executed. The tomb of Lê Văn Duyệt was destroyed and flattened. Nguyễn Xuân, the leading Vietnamese general who defeated both the Siamese and the rebels, died in late 1835, leaving Trương Minh Giảng as the main meritorious powerful official in Southern Vietnam.

Siamese recuperation

After retreating, Chaophraya Bodindecha and his Siamese forces stayed at Siam-occupied Battambang. King Rama III or King Nangklao made Prince Ang Em the governor of Battambang and Ang Duong the governor of Mongkolborey, giving the Cambodian princes the impression that they ruled at least some parts of Cambodia. ฺBodindecha and Siamese forces left Battambang to return to Bangkok in May 1834. The Siamese were so impressed by the Vietnamese large fort-warships that King Nangklao ordered the construction of eighty Vietnamese-style warships in December 1834.

Siam expected full retaliation offensive attacks from Vietnam. Siam fortified its defense against Vietnam, reinforced and prepared itself for future campaigns. In December 1834, King Rama of Siam sent Chaophraya Phrakhlang to fortify Chanthaburi. Phrakhlang moved the city of Chanthaburi five kilometers to the upland position for better defensive site and constructed the Noenwong Fort (Thai: ป้อมเนินวง) there. King Rama also ordered the renovation of Chachoengsao city walls and construction of a new fort called Khong Kraphan Fort (Thai: ป้อมคงกระพัน) at Phra Samut Chedi, Samut Prakarn. With the demise of Cambodian king Ang Chan in early 1835 and the advent of Vietnamese rule, a group of Cambodian Oknha nobles sent a secret letter to Bangkok, urging the return of Cambodian princes Ang Em and Ang Duong. Siam had not yet recovered from its losses so the Siamese king sent Phraya Ratchasuphawadi Ng To to establish supply line at Prachinburi and Krabinburi on the way to Cambodia. In 1835, a group Siamese spies were caught near Hà Tiên by Vietnam, prompting a Vietnamese official in Hà Tiên to send a letter to Phrakhlang at Chanthaburi, declaring reconciliatory intentions but was suspiciously viewed as pretension by the Phrakhlang.

Siamese annexation of the Lao kingdom of Vientiane allowed its access to vast manpower resource in the Isan-Laos region. In 1836, King Rama III ordered Chaophraya Bodindecha, Phraya Maha-amat (formerly Phra Mahathep Pom) and Phra Phirenthorathep (formerly Phra Ratchawarin Kham) to conduct a manpower census survey in Siam-controlled parts of Cambodia and the Lao region of Khorat Plateau in order to evaluate the available manpower for future military conflicts with Vietnam. Siam sought to strengthen Battambang as its own political base. King Nangklao ordered Bodindecha to fortify Battambang. Chaophraya Bodindecha went to Battambang in February 1837 and moved the Battambang city from Baset to the present-day site on the Sangkae River, constructing a new city-fort there. In February 1839, Phraya Ratchasuphawadi was sent to renovate and fortify the Siemreap town. Battambang and Siemreap were within the Siamese-controlled part of Northwestern Cambodia.

War of 1840–1841

Main article: Siamese–Vietnamese War (1841–1845)

Prince Ang Em, the governor of Battambang, decided to defect to the Vietnamese side in November 1838. He arrested Siamese officials in Battambang and, along with its inhabitants, deported them to join Trương Minh Giảng at Phnom Penh in hope that Vietnam would make him King of Cambodia. However, Trương Minh Giảng arrested Prince Ang Em and sent him to Huế. This incident initiated new conflicts. Chao Phraya Bodindecha hurriedly brought army to Battambang to placate the situation. In 1840, Princess Ang Baen was found collaborating with the Siamese. Minh Mạng completely lost his trust in the Cambodian princesses. Queen Ang Mey and her sisters were demoted in status. Ang Baen was sentenced to death by drowning at Long Hồ. Ang Mey and her remaining sisters were carried off to Poulo Condore for imprisonment.

In 1840, Cambodian native mandarins arose against their Vietnamese overlords and massacred many Vietnamese officials in Cambodian rebellion (1840). The Cambodian governor of Pursat approached Chao Phraya Bodindecha at Battambang asking for Siamese support against Vietnam. This led to the new round of conflicts; the Siamese–Vietnamese War of 1841–1845.

References

^ Joachim Schliesinger (2 January 2017). The Chong People: A Pearic-Speaking Group of Southeastern Thailand and Their Kin in the Region. Booksmango. pp. 106–. ISBN 978-1-63323-988-3.
^ Ben Kiernan (17 February 2017). Viet Nam: A History from Earliest Times to the Present. Oxford University Press. pp. 283–. ISBN 978-0-19-062729-4.
Spencer C. Tucker (23 December 2009). A Global Chronology of Conflict: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East [6 volumes]: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East. ABC-CLIO. pp. 1157–. ISBN 978-1-85109-672-5.
George Childs Kohn (31 October 2013). Dictionary of Wars. Routledge. pp. 445–. ISBN 978-1-135-95494-9.
Gerstl, Alfred; Strašáková, Mária (2016). Unresolved Border, Land and Maritime Disputes in Southeast Asia: Bi- and Multilateral Conflict Resolution Approaches and ASEAN's Centrality. Brill.
^ Woodside, Alexander (1988). Vietnam and the Chinese Model: A Comparative Study of Vietnamese and Chinese Government in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century. Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University.
^ Breazeale, Kennon (1999). From Japan to Arabia; Ayutthaya's Maritime Relations with Asia. Bangkok: Foundation for the promotion of Social Sciences and Humanities Textbook Project.
^ Taylor, K.W. (2013). A History of the Vietnamese. Cambridge University Press.
^ Chandler, David P. (May 26, 1971). "Cambodia's Relation with Siam in the Early Bangkok Period: The Politics of a Tributary State". Journal of the Siam Society.
Baker, Chris (2017). A History of Ayutthaya. Cambridge University Press.
^ Wyatt, David K. (2003). Thailand: A Short History (2nd ed.). Yale University Press.
Reynolds, Craig J. (1987). Thai Radical Discourse: The Real Face of Thai Feudalism Today. Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University.
^ Bun Srun Theam. "CAMBODIA IN THE MID-NINETEENTH CENTURY:A QUEST FOR SURVIVAL, 1840-1863" (PDF). Open Research. Retrieved July 2, 2020.
^ Choi Byung Wook (2004). Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response. SEAP Publications.
Vũ Đức Liêm (September 2016). "Vietnam at the Khmer Frontier: Boundary Politics, 1802–1847" (PDF). Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review.
Van Roy, Edward (2018). Siamese Melting Pot. ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute.
^ Ngaosyvathn, Mayoury; Ngaosyvathn, Pheuiphanh (2018). Paths to Conflagration: Fifty Years of Diplomacy and Warfare in Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam. Cornell University Press.
^ Chao Phraya Thipakorawong (1938). พระราชพงศาวดาร กรุงรัตนโกสินทร์ รัชชกาลที่ ๓. (posthumous publication)
Stuart-Fox, Martin (6 February 2008). Historical Dictionary of Laos. Scarecrow Press. p. 236.
^ Simms, Sanda (2013). The Kingdoms of Laos. Taylor & Francis.
^ "Tạ Quang Cự: Con đường trở thành ngôi sao quân sự của vương triều mới". Minister of Public Security.
^ Vo, Nghia M. (2011). Saigon: A History. McFarland, Incorporated, Publishers.
^ Dutton, George; Werner, Jayne; Whitmore, John K. (2012). Sources of Vietnamese Tradition. Columbia University Press.
^ Ramsay, Jacob (2008). Mandarins and Martyrs: The Church and the Nguyen Dynasty in Early Nineteenth-Century Vietnam. Stanford University Press.
Marie Alexandrine Martin (1994). Cambodia: A Shattered Society. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-07052-3.
^ Vũ Đức Liêm. "Vietnam at the Khmer Frontier: Boundary Politics, 1802–1847" (PDF). Hanoi National University of Education. Retrieved July 2, 2020.
Terwiel, B.J. (2005). Thailand's Political History: From the Fall of Ayutthaya in 1767 to Recent Times. River Books.
Molle, François (2003). Thailand's Rice Bowl: Perspectives on Agricultural and Social Change in the Chao Phraya Delta. White Lotus Press.
Bradford, James C. (2004). International Encyclopedia of Military History. Routledge.
"Far East Kingdoms - South East Asia". Kessler Associates. Retrieved July 2, 2020.
Đại Nam thực lục chính biên.
Osborne, Milton (2008). Phnom Penh: A Cultural History. Oxford University Press.
"ชุมชนลาวในภาคกลางของสยาม (๑๔)".
Trongdee, Thananan (2015). "Phuan in Banteay Meancheay Province, Cambodia: Resettlement under the Reign of King Rama III of Siam" (PDF). The Journal of Lao Studies (Special Issue 2): 2159–2152.
^ Jacobsen, Trudy (2008). Lost Goddesses: The Denial of Female Power in Cambodian History. NIAS Press.
Corfield, Justin (2009). The History of Cambodia. ABC-CLIO.
Cheunboran, Chanborey (2021). Cambodia’s China Strategy: Security Dilemmas of Embracing the Dragon. Taylor & Francis.
"The Ancient Site Of Noen Wong Fortress". Tourism Thailand.
^ Cooke, Nola; Li, Tana (2004). Water Frontier: Commerce and the Chinese in the Lower Mekong Region, 1750-1880. Singapore University Press.
Braginskiĭ, V. I. (2002). Classical Civilisations of South East Asia: An Anthology of Articles Published in the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. RoutledgeCurzon.

External links

Rattanakosin Period (1782–1932)

Monarchs

Individuals

Key events

Chakri dynasty
Kings

Phutthayotfa Chulalok (Rama I)
Phutthaloetla Naphalai (Rama II)
Nangklao (Rama III)
Mongkut (Rama IV)
Chulalongkorn (Rama V)
Vajiravudh (Rama VI)
Prajadhipok (Rama VII)

Viceroys

Deputy Viceroy

Anurak Devesh

Crown Prince

Hereditary Prince

Royalty

Siamese

Foreigners

Key events

← Thonburi Kingdom (1767–1782) • History of Thailand (1932–1973) →

Nguyễn dynasty topics

Overview

Sovereign state (1802–1883)
French protectorates of Annam and Tonkin (1883–1945)
Empire of Vietnam (1945)

History

Sovereign Việt Nam / Đại Nam (Nhà Nguyễn thời độc lập, 茹阮𥱯獨立)	Nguyễn lords Đàng Trong Nam tiến Six Provinces of Southern Vietnam Citadel of Saigon Nguyễn dynasty's persecution of Catholics in the 19th century Tự Đức's Catholic persecution Văn Thân movement
French protectorate(s) (Pháp thuộc, 法屬)	French conquest of Vietnam Cần Vương Great Hanoi Rat Massacre Hanoi Exhibition Đông Du Duy Tân Hội Hanoi Poison Plot History of Vietnam during World War I Việt Nam Quang Phục Hội Vietnamese Revolutionary Youth League Việt Nam Quốc Dân Đảng Le Travail movement Communist Party of Vietnam Phú Riềng Đỏ Việt Minh French Indochina in World War II
Japanese period	Japanese coup d'état in French Indochina Vietnamese famine of 1945 Abdication of Bảo Đại Declaration of independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam

Government

Emperors	Gia Long (1802–1820) Minh Mạng (1820–1841) Thiệu Trị (1841–1847) Tự Đức (1847–1883) Dục Đức (1883) Hiệp Hòa (1883) Kiến Phúc (1883–1884) Hàm Nghi (1884–1885) Đồng Khánh (1885–1889) Thành Thái (1889–1907) Duy Tân (1907–1916) Khải Định (1916–1925) Bảo Đại (1925–1945)
Ministries & agencies	Censorate Court of Judicial Review Court of Imperial Entertainments Court of the Imperial Stud Court of Imperial Sacrifices Office of the National Altars Hàn lâm viện House of People's Representatives of Annam Imperial Clan Court Imperial Household Department Quốc Tử Giám Lục bộ Ministry of Education Nội các Viện cơ mật
Symbols	Coat of arms Đăng đàn cung Flags Provincial flags Names of the Nguyễn dynasty state (Việt Nam / Đại Nam) Seals of the Nguyễn dynasty Vietnamese dragon
Provincial administration	Đề Đốc Tuần phủ Tổng Trấn
French administration	Khâm sứ Trung Kỳ Thống sứ Bắc Kỳ
Prominent mandarins	Bạch Xuân Nguyên Cao Xuân Dục Jean-Baptiste Chaigneau Jean Marie Despiau Hoàng Cao Khải Hoàng Diệu Hoàng Kế Viêm Michael Hồ Đình Hy Lê Chất Ngô Đình Diệm Ngô Đình Khả Ngô Đình Khôi Nguyễn Trường Tộ Nguyễn Huỳnh Đức Nguyễn Văn Tâm Nguyễn Văn Tồn Nguyễn Văn Nhơn Phan Văn Thúy Phạm Quỳnh Phạm Thận Duật Phan Đình Phùng Phan Thanh Giản Phan Thanh Liêm Nguyễn Tri Phương Thân Văn Nhiếp Nguyễn Ngọc Thơ Thoại Ngọc Hầu Tôn Thất Đính Tôn Thất Thuyết Trần Trọng Kim Trần Cao Vân Đặng Huy Trứ Trương Định Trương Minh Giảng Trương Tấn Bửu Nguyễn Văn Tường Philippe Vannier

Military

Battles and wars

Prominent military personnel

Special administrative regions

Palaces & mausoleums

Palaces	Imperial City of Huế Meridian Gate
Tombs	Thien Tho Mausoleum Khiêm Mausoleum An Mausoleum Ứng Mausoleum

Society & culture

Education

Currency

Cash coins	Tự Đức Thông Bảo Tự Đức Bảo Sao Khải Định Thông Bảo Bảo Đại Thông Bảo
Currency units	Văn Mạch Quán Tiền
Colonial currencies	French Indochinese piastre

Laws

Hương ước

Treaties

Saigon (1862)
Huế (1863)
Saigon (1874)
Huế (1883)
Huế (1884)

Orders, decorations, and medals

Misplaced Pages