Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages and Dong Son Culture

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015

Bui Xuan Dinh *

Abstract: The archaeological data have convincingly proved that the Dong Son (Đông Sơn) culture resulted from the indigenous development of the previous pre-Đông Sơn cultural systems in the basins of the Hồng, Mã and Cả rivers, closely associating people and ancient Vietnamese culture. The ethnological and linguistic data demonstrate the close relationship of language and culture between the Việt and Mường peoples, and other ethnic groups of Viet – Muong (Việt – Mường) language. There are a lot of convincing data to confirm that the Việt and Mường peoples once shared an origin and they themselves were the owners of the pre-Đông Sơn and Đông Sơn cultures, closely connected with the ancient Vietnamese civilization. Key words: Ethnic, Việt – Mường languages, Đông Sơn culture.

1. Nativeness and continuity of the - The owners of Phùng Nguyên Culture cultures during the period from Phùng were direct ancestors of Mường people in Nguyên to Đông Sơn culture Vietnam. They inherently were Mon, Man It has been 90 years, since Đông Sơn and Mân Việt people, whose ancient ancestors culture was discovered. Many aspects of were the very ancient Đản people – one of this culture have been decoded, providing the Mongoloid groups that spoke South important materials to elucidate significant Asian languages; they were the very owner issues in the history of Vietnam at the time of the Neolithic culture in Tanshishan, Fujian of national foundation. There are, however, due northeast of Guangdong (China). They still controversies surrounding some issues, came to Vietnam and Thailand by the sea. including the owner of Đông Sơn culture. At first, they earned a living by doing As there were not many archaeological harvesting and hunting in coastal and evidences available in Vietnam, in the surrounding areas of estuaries. And then, 1960s some scholars tried to find out the they started to grow rice and do gardening, origin of Đông Sơn culture on the basis of setting up step-by-step cultures such as overseas materials, such as those from the Phùng Nguyên, Đồng Đậu, Gò Mun in the Eurasian steppe (Janse, 1947), the Huai Red River Delta. They had an originally close River culture (Kargren, 1942), and Black and direct relationship with the Neolithic Sea Costal culture (Geldern, 1951). cultures, of which the date is earlier than Recently, in the book titled “The origin that of the cultures in Fujian, Guangdong, of Việt and Mường people” published in Taiwan, and Sichuan (4,000 BP).(*) 2013, Tạ Đức – the author – developed the ideas that Đào Duy Anh and Bình Nguyên Lộc used to raise in the past, as below: (*) Assoc. Prof., Ph.D., Institute of Anthropology.

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages...

- The true owners of Đông Sơn culture advocated by archaeological as well as were La Va people, or Lạc Việt people, who other materials. In the Late Neolithic and came from Zhejiang to Vietnam after Mường the Early Iron Era, Hạ Long culture was people (more or less 3,000 years ago). Basically, already formed in the Northeast coastal area the foundation and development of Đông of Vietnam. This culture originated from Sơn culture are closely attached with migration Cái Bèo culture (in the Mid-Neolithic Era, of Baiyue people from the North. as demonstrated by artifacts found in the According to this explanation, there was layers of this vestige). In Cái Bèo vestige, not a common Việt – Mường ethnic group, ones found small quadrangular handaxes, which would be then split into Việt people Phùng Nguyên-like ceramic tripods, and and Mường people as seen at present. some ceramic pieces pressed smoothly and Moreover, the both groups of people were caved with decorative designs that are similar not native people in Northern Vietnam, but to those of Phùng Nguyên Culture (Nguyễn they were just “a general combination of Khắc Sử: 127-136). groups that migrated from the North” (Tạ During the following period, Nguyễn Đức, 2013: 104). Việt outlined some connections between For the past over fifty years, however, historical events in the time of Thục Phán – hundreds of archaeological vestiges dating King An Dương Vương (including Cổ Loa back to the Iron Age have been discovered Citadel, the Kingdom of Âu Lạc, and the in North Vietnam. They are genealogized as failure of Thục Phán) and relics of Kele below: Phùng Nguyên - Đồng Đậu - Gò Culture in Guizhou, China (Nguyễn Việt, Mun - Đông Sơn in the Red River Delta. It 2010). Tạ Đức argues that Thục Phán-An is viewed as the main process of foundation Dương Vương was a prince of the Chinese and development of Đông Sơn culture - the state of Shu; he was a member of the Qishi ancient Viet civilization. The native origin Royal family of La/Lạc Việt descents; “Vac of Đông Sơn culture has been, therefore, Village was the very destination of migration gradually elucidated. Most of all researchers of the noble family Dian” (Tạ Đức, 2013). have come to a common conclusion that According to the above-mentioned arguments, owners of the genealogy of Phùng Nguyên Thục Phán - An Dương Vương, who ruled – Đồng Đậu – Gò Mun – Đông Sơn were Lạc over the Kingdom of Âu Lạc at the most Việt people; i.e. ancient Việt people – the prosperous time of Đông Sơn culture, had ancestor of modern-day Việt and Mường people Chinese origin. However, Trình Năng Chung (Institute of Archaeology, 1994). Phùng Nguyên showed fundamental differences between Culture originated from North Vietnam and Đông Sơn and Kele cultures, which were it is viewed as “the beginning” of the pre- clearly demonstrated by artifacts, burial customs, Đông Sơn cultures, which then developed and economic mode. Although those cultures continuously through periods to become had a certain connection, basically they Đông Sơn culture in the Red River Delta. were different from each other. It is very The arguments of Tạ Đức were not difficult to find out any traces of Đông Sơn

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015 cultural quintessence in the relics of Kele rule of voiceless pronunciation, the rule of culture; and vice versa, the influence of monosyllabic words, and the rule of nasal Kele culture on Đông Sơn is also very little pronunciation (studied by Nguyễn Tài Cẩn, (Trình Năng Chung, 2014). M. Ferlus, and Trần Tri Dõi), linguistic All the research findings obtained in scholars have affirmed that Việt language is archaeology, anthropology, and linguistics one of the languages in the Việt-Mường demonstrate that Việt people and Mường category (some scholars have further classified people have a very close relationship and it as a language in the sub-category of Việt- they share a common origin. Of all the Chứt languages). In the South-asiatic language disciplines, the linguistics plays a very family and the entire Continental Southeast important role in this matter. It is not only Asia as well, Indochina is viewed as the one of the first signs as well as one important major center for formation of the South- criterion to identify ethnic groups, but it is asiatic languages (Nguyễn Hữu Hoành also a basis to determine the origin and the (chief author), 2013: 92). Languages in the relationship among ethnic groups. The history sub-category of Việt-Chứt still maintain of languages is the very history of ethnic some common features of the South-asiatic groups and their relationships. Language is language family and some common features relatively “conservative”, compared with of the Môn-Khmer branch. There are different other cultural factors. According to the opinions about the initial location of Việt- Swadesh method (glottochronology) that Chứt language though, all scholars have identifies two languages that were split from agreed that those, who spoke this language, the same original language, the proportion migrated to many places, of which one of original vocabularies that remain after significant group moved to plain areas in 1,000 years and 2,000 years is 74% and the lower valley of North Vietnam, where 54% relatively (Nguyễn Tài Cẩn, 1995). they did wet rice cultivation and the cradle Based on comparisons of historical languages, of Viet people was formed afterwards. Vietnamese as well as international linguistic Recently, the Institute of Linguistics has scholars have found a lot of similarities in identified Việt language and Mường pronunciation, tone, and fundamental language as two among 11 languages of the vocabularies between Việt, Mường, Thổ, Vietic sub-branch in the Môn-Khmer branch, and Chứt languages. Especially, the similarity South Asiatic language family (Nguyễn between Việt language and Mường language Hữu Hoành (chief author), 2013: 51). is so great that many linguistic scholars The above-mentioned similarities between hesitantly consider them as two languages Việt language and Mường language make it or two dialects of the same language. By favorable for communication between people showing phonetic rules that illustrate Viet of the two ethnic groups. After moving and Mường languages were split from a from home (a place in the plain) to an area common language, including: the rule of of Mường people and staying there for a tone (established by Haudricort A.G), the couple of weeks, a Việt person can understand

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages... and even speak Mường language. The similarity describes similarities between patterns on in pronunciation and basic vocabularies is the upper hem of Mường women’s skirts the most typical for language similarities and designs on the bronze Đông Sơn between the two ethnic groups. It is completely kettledrums – the symbolic product of the different from language similarities between ancient Việt civilization. Consequently, he other ethnic groups. For some local groups concludes that the owner of the bronze of ethnic minorities in our country, differences Đông Sơn kettledrums was the very owner in language between them are even great. of the patterns on the upper hem of Mường For instance, Dao people are divided into 7 women’s skirts; and, most of the bronze sub-groups with two language branches. Đông Sơn kettledrums have the native One branch consists of 4 sub-groups, origin here (Trần Từ, 1978). In a paper including: Dao Tiền, Dao Đỏ, Lô Gang or written over 40 years ago that has been Thanh Phán, and Quần Chẹt); the other one recently found in his posthumous manuscripts consists of the rest 3 groups, including: and introduced in the Review of Museums Thanh Y, Quần Trắng, Áo Dài or Dao Tuyển. and Anthropology (vol.1, 2014), he again In communication, people in the same pointed out the outstanding similarity between language branch can understand each other; designs on the bronze Đông Sơn kettledrums whereas, people in different branches can and patterns on the upper hems of Mường understand only 10% of what other say; skirts as below: the lay-out consists of they have to use an intermediary language closed strips with squares, cylinders, slanting to understand each other(1). patterns;(1)especially, there is a sun-star on The linkages of Việt - Mường ethnic both the kettledrum and the upper hem. The groups with Đông Sơn culture have been traces of Đông Sơn culture still remain in shown by Nguyễn Từ Chi (Trần Từ) – an decorations on dragon-heads at the time of anthropologist. To find out the origin of Lý – Trần Dynasties and Later Lê Dynasty Việt people in the context that most of the early period, stone steles, the base of cultural factors of Việt people were covered Buddha statues, fish shapes on wood at the densely by the Chinese cultures for a time of Mạc Dynasty, the edging and top of thousand years of domination by Northern stone steles, and dragon-heads at the time invaders, Từ Chi tried to seek for “original” of Nguyễn Dynasty. The tradition of Đông factors of Việt cultures in a close neighboring Sơn can be seen in many activities at ethnic group – Mường people. For over 10 present, such as: The festival “Dô ông đám” years, he travelled to areas of Mường people, (The parade of the elderly) in Đồng Kỵ collecting relevant materials and data. One Village (Từ Sơn Town, Bắc Ninh Province); of his ideas, which was considered as “a the ceremonials of hole-pricking, seed- breakthrough”, is to study the upper hem of sowing, and harvesting among Mãng Ư Mường women’s skirts. Based on scrupulous measurements, comparisons and analyses, (1) The comment presented by Lý Hành Sơn, Institute in the book titled “Patterns of Mường”, he of Anthropology, at the meeting on 31 March 2014.

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015 people; the custom of using the bronze Of those three areas, the area of Mã and kettledrum among Mường people and Lô Chu Rivers carries typical characteristics of Lô people etc.(Nguyễn Từ Chi, 2014: 6-13). Đông Sơn culture, since bronze products in By showing the above-mentioned traces and the vestiges within this area are used as relics, Tứ Chi believed: “Owing to various criteria for recognition of bronze products findings of archaeological excavations in in the areas of the Red River and Cả River. By coming time, Đông Sơn may be viewed as a now, several hundreds of bronze kettledrums – factor of common denominators for the the symbolic artifact for Đông Sơn culture early-historic Southeast Asia – a Southeast – have been found in all the three areas, Asia that hadn’t yet contacted other big mainly along big rivers in the Northern civilizations from outside” (Nguyễn Từ Chi, plain and the North-Central plain. 2014: 13). This is an original discovery that Remarkably, the three above-mentioned has been then demonstrated by archaeological areas were the very residence location of achievements. The nativeness of Đông Sơn ethnic groups in Việt - Mường language family, culture does not eliminate exchange with as described below: other cultures, as concluded recently in a - The Red River area. This area was the Ministerial-level research project: “There main area of habitation for Việt (Kinh) were really mutual influences and impacts people, of which the neighboring area was between Đông Sơn culture and other the habitation area of Mường people. cultures in the North, specifically those in Anthropological research works, however, South China” (Bùi Văn Liêm, 2010: 132). show that traces of Mường culture still 2. Appropriateness between the remain obviously in the habitation areas of distribution of Đông Sơn culture and the Việt people, which can be seen in language, areas of habitation of Việt – Mường production customs, rituals and beliefs. language ethnic groups When Tứ Chi was alive, he told his classmates All archaeological findings have supported that the midland running from Phú Thọ a common agreement that Đông Sơn culture through Sơn Tây, Ninh Bình and Thanh covered three areas, including: Hóa was a transitional area between the - The Red River Area, of which the habitation area of Việt and the habitation center was Cả Village (in Việt Trì City, Phú area of Mường people. In other words, Thọ Province at present); when moving from the valley in the foot of - The Mã and Chu River Area, of which a mountain towards the Red River Delta, the center was Đông Sơn Village (in the ancient Việt people stopped in this midland former Đông Sơn District that belongs to to settle down; consequently, the division Hàm Rồng Ward, Thanh Hóa City at present). between the habitation areas of Việt and - The Cả (or Lam) River Area, of which Mường people started. the center was Vạc Village (in the former - The Mã River and Chu River area. Nghĩa Đàn District that belongs to Thái Apart from a large number of Việt people Hòa Town, Nghệ An Province at present). living in the plain areas, a relatively part of

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages...

Việt people lived together with Mường in by other ways. We agree with the opinion mountainous districts, such as Cẩm Thủy raised by Lê Mai Oanh that those groups of (where Mường people make up 52% of the people are migrant descendants of ancient total population), Quan Hóa, Bá Thước, Việt people, who lived in the West of Nghệ Thường Xuân, Ngọc Lặc, and Như Xuân An Province a long time ago. Perhaps, the etc. According to anthropological research migration took place from the Bronze Age findings, the boundary between Mường and to the time of Đông Sơn culture (Lê Mai Việt peoples in mountainous districts of Oanh, 2011: 22). Thanh Hóa Province is not very obviously In addition to the three ethnic groups, identified. In some areas, a number of including Việt, Mường and Thổ, the ethnic people, who used to be Mường, have groups of Việt – Mường languages also become Việt now, and vice versa. This is includes Chứt people with many local recognized via language, customs, beliefs branches such as Mày, Rục, Sách, Arem, etc. Apart from Việt and Mường, there are and Mã Liềng. They live in mountainous also Thổ people living in the area of Mã areas of Quảng Bình and Hà Tĩnh Provinces. and Chu River. At present, there are two opinions about the - The Cả River area: Apart from Việt origin of this ethnic group. One opinion people, there are also a lot of Thổ people assumes that they are direct migrant descendants living in this area. Those from 5 branches of people in the Pre-Việt – Mường community. of Thổ people, including: Mọn, Lâm La, They already split from the community, Kẻo, Cuối, and Họ, mainly live in some before Mường people split from Việt people. districts such as Nghĩa Đàn (including also As they lived separately with scattered small modern-day Thái Hòa Town), Tân Kỳ, Qùy groups in an unfavorable environment, they Hợp. In the meanwhile, those from Đan Lai gradually became “backward” and they still – Ly Hà branch mainly live in Con Cuông keep almost all factors of language and District; and, those from Tày Poọng branch culture of the Pre-Việt – Mường Community mainly live in Tương Dương District. Of all (Hà Văn Tấn and Phạm Đức Dương, 1978; branches of Thổ people, the two branches Hà Văn Tấn, 1976; Nguyễn Văn Tài, 1976; (Kẻo and Cuối) that mainly live in Nghĩa Nguyễn Văn Mạnh, 1983 - 1996; Võ Xuân Đàn District are considered to have Việt Trang, 1998: 5; Nguyễn Hữu Thông and origin by anthropological researchers; they colleagues, 2007: 29 - 31). The other opinion moved from plain districts of Nghệ An assumes that those people migrated from Province to this mountainous area during Thanh Hóa and Nghệ Tĩnh during the late the 17th and 18th centuries, due to poverty, 17th century (Institute of Anthropology, 1978). famine, unpleasant customs in the villages The linkages between habitations of of origin as well as war troubles. In reality, ethnic groups of Việt – Mường language however, those groups of migrants moved family and distribution of Đông Sơn culture to the area of Cả River just recently. It is, can be summarized in the following table therefore, necessary to find out their origin (Table 1).

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015

Table 1: Habitation Areas of Ethnic Groups of Việt – Mường languages Area Ethnic groups Habitation location Red River Việt Midland, Plain Transitional areas: Phú Thọ – Sơn Tây Midland, Ninh Bình Mường Valleys in the foots of mountains in Phú Thọ, Hòa Bình and Thanh Hóa Provinces Mã River and Chu Việt Plain districts River Mường Mountainous districts Thổ Mountainous and midland districts Cả River Việt Plain and midland Thổ Midland and mountains ? Chứt Mountainous areas in Hà Tĩnh and Quảng Bình Provinces

Summarizing all the above-mentioned Thanh Hóa Province, created an area of data, we can realize that at the Bronze Age, Đông Sơn culture in the valley of Mã River. the area of habitation of ancient Việt people The rest moved from Vạc Village to the was very large, including both plain and coastal area. Due to changes in the living mountainous areas running from Yên Bái, environment and influence by Chinese Hòa Bình, Phú Thọ, and Sơn Tây provinces cultures, these ancient people gradually to Thanh Hóa, Nghệ An, and Hà Tĩnh became contemporary Việt (Kinh) people. provinces. Linguistic materials demonstrate - Another is the group of those, who kept that the current pronunciation and vocabularies staying in mountainous areas, mainly in of Việt people in Quỳnh Lưu, Diễn Châu, valleys by the foots of mountains in Hòa Nghĩa Đàn, and Quỳ Hợp districts etc still Bình Province and a part of Thanh Hóa have a lot of similarities to those of Việt Province. They were not influenced by Chinese people in former Sơn Tây Province (especially cultures. They are the very contemporary in Quốc Oai and Thạch Thất districts). Mường people. At the Bronze Age, which was more or - The rest is the group of those, who less 4 thousands years ago, ancient Việt inhabited mountainous areas in Nghệ An people started large flows of migration, Province and a part of Thanh Hóa Province. forming 3 groups as below: Because of isolation in habitation, they formed - One is the group of those who moved their own cultural factors and became Tho to the Red River Delta after the sea people with different branches such as withdrawal, creating an area of Đông Sơn Mọn, Cuối, and Kẹo etc. afterwards. Some culture, of which the center was Cả Village. researchers think the branch of Cuối people Those, who inhabited the plain area in is “an oasis” of ancient Việt people left

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages... after the split of Việt – Mường ethnic Việt and Mường people did not take place groups (Nguyễn Đình Lộc, 2000: 48), since at the same time with the split in culture the language of Cuối people is viewed by and custom. Anthropological researchers all many linguistic researchers as an independent agree that separation between Việt and language from those of Mường, Việt and Mường groups took place at the late period Chứt people; it cannot be a dialect of Mường of domination by Northern invaders (Institute language (Nguyễn Văn Tài, 1976: 70). of Anthropology, 1978; Trần Quốc Vượng Regarding to the moment, when ancient and Nguyễn Dương Bình, 1965). Việt people were split into different ethnic 3. Việt and Mường peoples with Đông groups such as Việt, Mường, Thổ and Chứt, Sơn culture Nguyễn Văn Tài argues that Mường As described above, the locations of language and Việt language are the closest Đông Sơn culture were mainly attached and most developed among 9 languages of with the areas of habitation of Việt, Mường, the same language family in the West Thổ and Chứt ethnic groups. By now, Annamite Range (including Tha Vung and however, traces of this culture can be seen Patatan) and the East Annamite Range most clearly in the areas of two ones, (including Aren, Mã Liền, Sách, Poọng, including Việt and Mường. In the following Cuối, Mường, and Việt). The two groups of part, therefore, we are presenting some language, including Việt and Mường comments about the linkages of Việt and peoples, separated from the Việt – Mường Mường peoples with Đông Sơn culture. community in the 7th and 8th centuries A.D. 3.1. The existence of Đông Sơn culture (Nguyễn Văn Tài, 1978). was closely associated with the national From the historical linguistic perspective, foundation of Hùng Kings. This is recorded Hà Văn Tấn and Phạm Đức Dương presented in legends of both Việt and Mường peoples. a diagram of the split of Việt and Mường In the community of Việt people, there is a languages from the Việt – Mường language story about Âu Cơ – Lạc Long Quân. In the group and the division of the Pre-Việt – meanwhile, Mường people also have a Mường language family into Việt – Mường legend about a couple of mythological birds language group and the Chứt – Poọng named “Ây and Ứa”. The birds lived in a language group, which took place from the spathe named “land and water production”. middle of the first millennium BC to the They then laid a lot of eggs, which hatched second century AD (Hà Văn Tấn and Phạm out afterwards and became all beings, Đức Dương, 1978). including Mói (Mường) people and Đào Based on research works on graves of (Việt) people. There is also a story about a Mường and Việt people, however, Phạm woman named Ngu Co. She was inherently Quốc Quân argues that burial graves a deer and got married with Long Vương between the two groups started to differ (Dragon King), who was inherently a fish. from each other by the 7th and 8th centuries They gave birth to 50 girls and 50 boys. and they became completely different in the And then, the father took 50 children to the 9th century (Phạm Quốc Quân, 1995). This coastal area to establish a branch of the shows the separation in language between Yellow-Shirt King (or Dịt Dàng King).

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015

They were the very ancestors of modern- beliefs were also formed, including the day Việt people. In the meanwhile, the custom of blackening teeth, chewing betel, mother took the rest 50 children to the tattooing body, making bánh chưng – bánh mountains to establish a branch of the dầy (square glutinous rice cake and Black-Shirt King. They were the ancestors dumpling) on the occasion of Tet holidays of modern-day Mường people. Obviously, (as expressed in the legends), winding a Ngu Cơ and Long Vương in the legend of turban round the head, putting hair in a Mường people are completely the same as chignon, cutting hair, staying in a house on Âu Cơ and Lạc Long Quân in the legend of stilts, organizing a boat race (as carved on Việt people. the bronze kettledrums), chicken-based 3.2. In the period of Đông Sơn culture – fortune-telling, and braying stone motars, the time of Hùng Kings, social institutions when a person died etc. Some of those were formed. Lower social organizations customs and beliefs still remain at present include tribes administered by “hereditary in the community of Mường and Việt mandarins”. Many stories in some books people as well. In terms of beliefs, Mường such as Việt điện u linhCollection ( of people also worship the Saint Đản (or Tản, Stories on the Shady and Spiritual World of i.e. Tản Viên) and Bua Khu (glass), which the Việt Realm), Lĩnh Nam chích quái reflect the history of struggles against (Extraordinary stories of Lĩnh Nam) and natural calamity. legends such as The family name of Hồng The bronze kettledrum, a typical product Bàng, The Palm Story, The Story of Bánh of Đông Sơn culture, was respected much chưng… as well as The Records of Historians, by ancient Việt people. After the Việt – Hou Han Shu (Book of the Later Han) and Mường split, descendants of ancient Việt Jiaozhou Reports mention the hereditary people still maintained and used the mandarins, who came from the aristocratic kettledrums with a great love. In the time of class of ancient Việt people; there were still Lý Dynasty, Bronze Kettledrum Temples such mandarins in society of Mường people were built by the government (such as the sixty years ago. The title of a hereditary Ancient Bronze Temples in Thăng Long mandarin was also noted in some historical and Thanh Hóa, where kings and mandarins annals such as The Completed Annals and came to make a worship every year). The The Compendium etc., when mentioning ceremonial of beating the bronze kettledrum events that took place in the period from the was still performed in the mid-15th century, 11th to the 13th centuries in Đường Lâm when King Lê Nhân Tông visited Lam (Sơn Tây Province) and Nho Quan (Ninh Kinh to pray and proclaim at the royal tomb Bình Province) – they are “transitional areas” (Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư - Completed between Việt people and Mường people Annals of Đại Việt, 2004: 228). For Mường more than ten centuries ago. The local community, hereditary mandarins kept the inhabitants were surely ancient Việt people bronze kettledrums to show the power (both at that time. royal and divine power). Moreover, the 3.3. In the period of Đông Sơn culture – bronze kettledrum played an important role the time of Hùng Kings, customs and in religious rituals and funerals. It was

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages... considered to link the alive with the death. References It was also viewed as a magic tool and it 1. Bùi Văn Liêm (2010), Quá trình chiếm was sometimes buried with the dead. lĩnh và làm chủ đồng bằng châu thổ sông Hồng During a funeral procession, the powwow của cư dân văn hóa Đông Sơn (The Process of disguised himself as a bird (like a bird-man Controlling and Possessing the Red River Delta carved on bronze products of Đông Sơn by Residents of Đông Sơn Culture), Report of culture). He told the story “Ây and Ứa”, the ministry-level research project kept at the describing how Mường and Viet peoples Department of Archive, Vietnam Academy of were produced. Mường people still keep a Social Sciences. powwow oration of the bronze kettledrum, 2. Cuisinier J. (1948), Les Mường-Géographie in which Dịt Dàng – a mythological king of humaine et Socicologie. Paris. both Mường (Mọi) and Việt (Đáo) – 3. Janse, O. (1947), Archaeological Research directed people to cast thousands bronze in Indochina, Vol.I, Vol.III (1958). kettledrums for exchange or to be given to 4. Hà Văn Tấn (1972), Văn hóa Phùng hereditary mandarins (Trần Quốc Vượng Nguyên và thời kỳ tiền Hùng Vương. Hùng and Nguyễn Dương Bình, 1965). Vương dựng nước (Phùng Nguyên and the Pre- 4. Conclusion Hùng King Time: National Foundation by Hùng 4.1. Đông Sơn culture originated in the Kings), Social Sciences Publishing House, Vol.2, Pre-Đông Sơn genealogies and then developed Hà Nội. continuously through different periods, 5. Hà Văn Tấn (1975), “Văn hóa Phùng Nguyên including Phùng Nguyên, Đồng Đậu, Gò và nguồn gốc dân tộc Việt” Nam (Phùng Nguyên Mun and Đông Sơn, in the Red River Delta Culture and the Origin of Vietnamese Nation), and the valleys of Mã and Cả rivers. Đông Review of Anthropology, Vol.1. Sơn culture in the Northern midland and 6. Hà Văn Tấn and Phạm Đức Dương plain areas was the most striking. It was a (1978), “Về ngôn ngữ Tiền Việt - Mường” (On basic ground for the ancient Việt civilizations, the Pre-Việt - Mường Languages), Review of resulting in unification of diversified factors Anthropology, Vol.1. of the Vietnamese civilizations at the period 7. Hà Văn Tấn (1993), “Văn hóa và ngôn of national foundation. ngữ ở Việt Nam thời tiền sử” (Culture and 4.2. Ancient Việt people were the very Languages in Vietnam at the Prehistoric Time), owners of Đông Sơn culture. They were Review of Archaeology, Vol.1. then split into different ethnic groups, including: 8. Hán Văn Khẩn (2005), Văn hóa Phùng Việt, Mường, Thổ and Chứt in the Việt – Nguyên (Phùng Nguyên Culture), Hà Nội Mường language family. Of all those ethnic National University Publishing House, Hà Nội. groups, Việt people and Mường people are 9. Lê Mai Oanh (2010), Văn hóa vật chất the two closest groups. They played the người Thổ (Material Culture of Thổ People), decisive role in the national foundation at Ethnic Cultural Publishing House, Hà Nội. the time of Hùng Kings. This hypothesis 10. Nguyễn Đình Lộc (2013), Các dân tộc has been convincingly proved by folk thiểu số ở Nghệ An (Ethnic Minorities in Nghệ legends as well as linguistic, archaeological An), Nghệ An Publishing House, Vinh. and anthropological data and materials. 11. Nguyễn Hữu Hoành (chief author) (2013),

Vietnam Social Sciences, No. 4(168) - 2015

Ngôn ngữ, chữ viết các dân tộc thiểu số ở Việt Based on the Date of Mường Graves). Review Nam: những vấn đề chung (Language and Scripts of Archaeology, Vol.1. of Ethnic Minorities in Vietnam: General Issues), 21. Tạ Đức (2013), Nguồn gốc người Việt - Encyclopedia Publishing House, Hà Nội. người Mường (Origin of Việt and Mường Peoples), 12. Nguyễn Hữu Thông and colleagues (2007), Intellectual Publishing House, Hà Nội. Hoa trên đá núi (Flower on the Mountainous 22. Trần Quốc Vượng (1974), “Vài suy nghĩ Stone), Statistical Publishing House, Hà Nội. tản mạn về trống” đồng (Some Comments on 13. Nguyễn Khắc Sử (2014), Di chỉ tiền sử the Bronze Kettledrum), Review of Archaeology, Cái Bèo, đảo Cát Bà (Prehistoric Vestige in Cái Vol.14: 71-81. Bèo, Cát Bà Island), Social Sciences Publishing 23. Trần Quốc Vượng and Hà Văn Tấn (1960), House, Hà Nội. Lịch sử chế độ cộng sản nguyên thủy ở Việt 14. Nguyễn Khắc Sử (2014), “Nguồn gốc của Nam (History of the Primitive Communism in Văn hóa Phùng Nguyên qua tư liệu khảo cổ học” Vietnam), Educational Publishing House, Hà Nội. (Origin of Phùng Nguyên Culture in Archaeological 24. Trần Quốc Vượng and Nguyễn Dương Materials), Review of Archaeology, Vol.3. Bình (1965), Một vài nhận xét về mối quan hệ 15. Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1995), Giáo trình lịch Mường - Việt và quá trình phân hóa giữa tộc sử ngữ âm tiếng Việt (sơ thảo) (Textbook on the Mường và tộc Việt (Some Remarks on the Việt – Phonetic History of Vietnamese Language (Draft)), Mường Relationship and the Division between Educational Publishing House, Hà Nội. Mường and Việt Peoples), The Bulletin of 16. Nguyễn Từ Chi (2014), “Sức sống Đông History, Vol.5, Hà Nội University. Sơn” (Vitality of Đông Sơn), Review of Museum 25. Trần Tri Dõi (2011), Giáo trình lịch sử and Anthropology, Vol.1. tiếng Việt (Vietnamese Language History Textbook), 17. Nguyễn Văn Mạnh (1996), Người Chứt Educational Publishing House, Hà Nội. ở Việt Nam (Chứt People in Vietnam), Thuận 26. Trần Từ (1975), Hoa văn Mường (Mường Hóa Publishing House, Huế. Designs), Ethnic Cultural Publishing House, Hà Nội. 18. Nguyễn Văn Tài (1978), “Góp thêm tài 27. Trình Năng Chung (2014), “Văn hóa liệu cho việc đoán định thời điểm chia tách của Đông Sơn và Văn hóa Khả Lạc ở Nam Trung hai ngôn ngữ Việt và Mường” (Contribution of Quốc” (Đông Sơn Culture and Kele Culture in Further Materials into Determination of the South China), Review of Archaeology, Vol.2. Splitting Time between Việt and Mường 28. Institute of Anthropology (1978), Các Languages), Review of Anthropology, Vol.3. dân tộc ít người ở Việt Nam (các tỉnh phía Bắc), 19. Nguyễn Văn Tài (1976), “Thử bàn về vị (Ethnic Minorities in Vietnam (In Northern trí tiếng Chứt, tiếng Cuối trong nhóm Việt - Provinces)), Social Sciences Publishing House, Mường” (Let’s Talk over the Position of Chứt and Hà Nội. Cuối Languages in the Việt – Mường Language 29. Institute of Archaeology (1994), Văn hóa Family), Review of Anthropology, Vol.2. Đông Sơn ở Việt Nam (Đông Sơn culture in 20. Phạm Quốc Quân (1995), “Từ iên n đại Vietnam), Social Sciences Publishing House, mộ Mường thử tìm hiểu niên điểm tách ra của Hà Nội. người Mường khỏi khối Việt - Mường chung” 30. Võ Xuân Trang (1998), Người Rục ở (To Determine the Time of the Split of Mường Việt Nam (Rục People in Vietnam), Ethnic People from the Việt – Mường Community, Cultural Publishing House.

Ethnic Groups of Viet – Muong Languages...