Did malaria save Vietnam from repeats of Chinese conquest and domination?

[Roma_Victrix]

When the People's Republic of China under Deng Xiaoping battled against Vietnam with mixed results in the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979 (with border skirmishes continuing until 1990), some Chinese who are more knowledgeable than others on the topic of history must have felt a tinge of deja vu.

Lucky for them and their Vietnamese enemies, however, they were now both more likely to die in battle than in some makeshift hospital while suffering from the effects of that most dreaded tropical disease: malaria. That's because a decade before this Chinese invasion of Vietnam, North Vietnam's leader Ho Chih Minh actually requested of the Chinese premier Zhou Enlai that research should be funded for a cure to this deadly disease that was ravaging his army (in 1967, at the height of the Vietnam War). Luckily for them and the Chinese who were dying of malaria in southern provinces like Guangdong and Yunnan, a Chinese female pharmaceutical chemist named Tu Youyou (who at age 85 just recently won the Nobel Prize in Medicine, 2015) discovered artemisinin, a drug which has arguably saved the lives of millions these past few decades.

For Chinese and Vietnamese people of centuries past, however, the luxury of avoiding this awful disease was one they simply couldn't afford (aside from those privy enough to have Ge Hong's 4th-century medicinal book handy, an ancient Chinese text that Tu Youyou used in order to discover the correct level of heat that should be applied to sweet wormwood, or artemisia annua). The Chinese were successful in controlling the northern half of Vietnam for over a thousand years until the 10th century, with largely unsuccessful invasions coming afterward. From what I understand, it is well documented in Chinese historical sources how Chinese troops contracted malaria and died in droves, sabotaging more than one invasion of Vietnam. That includes the Chinese Sui Dynasty's invasion of Champa (i.e. southern Vietnam) from 602-605 AD (Ebrey, Walthall, & Palais, 2009) and the Chinese Song Dynasty's invasion of Dai Viet under the Ly Dynasty from 1075-1077 AD (Anderson, 2008).

However, I'm not so sure about the impact of malaria and its consequences for other Sino-Vietnamese conflicts, and whether or not this gave the Vietnamese the edge they needed in order to drive Chinese forces out of the country. That includes the:

1) initial conquest of northern Vietnam (i.e. Nam Viet, Nanyue) under the Triệu dynasty by the Chinese Han Dynasty under Emperor Wu in 111 BC (Han Chinese victory)
2) the Trung sisters' rebellion from 40-43 AD (Han Chinese victory)
3) the Sui-Former Ly War of 602 AD (Sui Chinese victory)
4) the Battle of Bach Dang, 938 AD (Southern Han Chinese defeat, independence of the Vietnamese Ngô Dynasty)
5) the Mongol invasions of Vietnam, 1258, 1285, 1287-1288 AD (Yuan Mongol-Chinese defeat, yet with tributary status imposed on Dai Viet and Champa)
6) the Yongle Emperor's invasion of northern Vietnam in the Ming–Hồ War of 1406-1407 AD, and occupation until 1427 (eventual Ming Chinese defeat)

I've read a bit about each of these conflicts, but I haven't found any solid references to malaria being a contributing factor to any Chinese defeat beyond the first two conflicts mentioned above (i.e. Sui invasion of Champa and Song invasion of Dai Viet). Does anyone know more or have access to sources which reveal the role malaria played if any in these other conflicts?

On a side note, the Sino-Soviet War of 1979 began after Vietnam invaded and occupied Cambodia. The Vietnamese sided with Russia in the Sino-Soviet Split by toppling the regime of the Khmer Rouge that was backed by China. Funnily enough, a thousand years before this the Chinese Song Dynasty called on the Khmer Empire based in Angkor Wat, plus the Champa Kingdom of southern Vietnam, to aid them in their fight against the common enemy of the Ly Dynasty in Dai Viet (i.e. northern Vietnam). The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Roma_Victrix]

I thought this topic was pretty cool. I guess it's not? Or something? Is this just a slow week for TWC? Or has it been going downhill since the whole January-December rollback.

[pannonian]

If it helps, in a book I have somewhere about Marco Polo, it was mentioned that Guangdong province, which includes what is now Hong Kong, was seen as a dead end province with high mortality rates due to the climate and environment.

[Roma_Victrix]

Do you remember the author's name? Do you think you'd be able to find that book?

[IrishBlood]

It's an interesting topic, but I lack the knowledge to contribute much to the discussion I'm afraid

It does however make me wonder, how badly were the French effected when they invaded in the 1800's and if there had not been sufficient medical breakthroughs, would their invasion(s) have subsequently failed as a result?

[Roma_Victrix]

It's an interesting topic, but I lack the knowledge to contribute much to the discussion I'm afraid

It does however make me wonder, how badly were the French effected when they invaded in the 1800's and if there had not been sufficient medical breakthroughs, would their invasion(s) have subsequently failed as a result?

Strangely enough, I can only find information on how native Vietnamese under French rule suffered from malaria on corporate plantations. I can't seem to find info on how many French soldiers and civilian colonists would have died regularly from contracting malaria during the periods of Cochinchina and French Indochina.

[IrishBlood]

Interesting! I would have thought being Europeans with only limited exposure to the disease, that they would have been devastated by it!

[Roma_Victrix]

Perhaps the majority of French colonists spent most of their time indoors and away from mosquito-infested areas, while poor natives forced to labor outdoors were more prone to falling victim to the spread of malaria. That sounds way too simplistic, though.

[IrishBlood]

Perhaps the majority of French colonists spent most of their time indoors and away from mosquito-infested areas, while poor natives forced to labor outdoors were more prone to falling victim to the spread of malaria. That sounds way too simplistic, though.

Nor does it address the fact that many, many French soldiers would have had to tramp their way through said mosquito infested areas throughout the course of the invasion/occupation!

[Mangalore]

The French annexed Indochina in the late 1880s and only started involvement in the 1850s when also Africa was being chopped up so arguably the medical support of the troops was sufficient to allow operations in tropical territories when the centuries before the Europeans had staid in coastal outposts where malaria would be less of an issue. Overall I would think this also aided in controlling Vietnam with most important areas being coastal thus not much jungle warfare needed back then.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Yes I'm sure malaria along with other diseases and logistical problems played a huge part.
Check the Qing dynasty's invasions of Burma for example where huge amounts of Chinese, Manchu and Mongolian soldiers died from heat and disease.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-B...%E2%80%9369%29

Though I wouldn't say so much that it kept them from invading or conquering the area just that it kept them from dominating that area in the long term and some dynasties and states managed to keep control for quite a long time. I had actually heard about that Nobel Prize thing.

On a side not "One does not simply besiege Ningyuan", seriously though Nurhaci died there and Hong Taiji spent years trying to bypass the Great Wall.

[nhinhonhinho]

I understand, it is well documented in Chinese historical sources how Chinese troops contracted malaria and died in droves, sabotaging more than one invasion of Vietnam. That includes the Chinese Sui Dynasty's invasion of

Well I suggest you to make a look at the documents from the other combatant (namely Vietnamese historical sources) then.

Anyway when talking about Vietnamese's military history, there're 2 theories

- The first and common theory stated that the combination of malaria, diseases, treacherous terrains (mountainous, jungle...), hash climate (hot) and guerrilla were the main reason for the unsuccessful invasions.

- The other newer theory stated that while those hazardous terrain and climate as well as guerrilla warfare did have their role, yet those are not the decisive factors. I personally lean more toward this theory.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

I've personally never taken these other sources, non-Chinese sources I mean, very seriously cause all the ones I've seen are like "50 trillion Chinese invaded our lands and we defeated them in an epic battle"

[Roma_Victrix]

The French annexed Indochina in the late 1880s and only started involvement in the 1850s when also Africa was being chopped up so arguably the medical support of the troops was sufficient to allow operations in tropical territories when the centuries before the Europeans had staid in coastal outposts where malaria would be less of an issue. Overall I would think this also aided in controlling Vietnam with most important areas being coastal thus not much jungle warfare needed back then.

That makes sense, but do we have sources which actually confirm that the French never strayed too far outside of the coastal settlements in order to avoid malarial disease? It seems odd to me that they wouldn't secure the countryside, especially since the plantations were out in the country, not in the middle of cities.

Well I suggest you to make a look at the documents from the other combatant (namely Vietnamese historical sources) then.

Well, I've never read sources like the Lĩnh Nam chích quái, so you've got me there.

Anyway when talking about Vietnamese's military history, there're 2 theories

- The first and common theory stated that the combination of malaria, diseases, treacherous terrains (mountainous, jungle...), hash climate (hot) and guerrilla were the main reason for the unsuccessful invasions.

- The other newer theory stated that while those hazardous terrain and climate as well as guerrilla warfare did have their role, yet those are not the decisive factors. I personally lean more toward this theory.

Wait...what? What was the decisive factor then, if not terrain, climate, or guerilla warfare? By omitting it, are you basically saying that malaria was THE decisive factor? Or was it the superiority of native troops who understood the land better than invaders...you know...like the Vietnam War of 1955-1975.

I've personally never taken these other sources, non-Chinese sources I mean, very seriously cause all the ones I've seen are like "50 trillion Chinese invaded our lands and we defeated them in an epic battle"

Lol. That is an outrageous figure, Oda! Logistically speaking, the Chinese wouldn't have sent any more than 500 million infantry accompanied by 250 million cavalry during each invasion. Anything higher than that is just simpry impossibru!

[nhinhonhinho]

I've personally never taken these other sources, non-Chinese sources I mean, very seriously cause all the ones I've seen are like "50 trillion Chinese invaded our lands and we defeated them in an epic battle"

Well we all known that sources which stated something like that are no correct. Anyway there're several reasons for the really big number of Chinese troops around: the first factor would be propaganda (both sides) the other factor may be the logistic train, I suppose the logistic train and camp follower would be rather big.

In case of Vietnam - China conflict the troops numbers, battles, outcomes and how the Viet stopped them varied each times. However there're several notable factors (in my opinion):
- Terrain: mountainous, jungle and rivers terrain in Vietnam lessen the effect of Northern cavalry and worsen logistical situation while strengthen the defenders. Anyway note that the density of South China river is larger than North Vietnam
- Climate: I tend to rule out this factor since North Vietnam climate is not different with the climate in South China, Dali and Hainan. Historically Kublai Khan did threaten Daiviet Emperor that the climate are not going to save them because he will use troops from these areas (and he did used those troops)
- Naval power: in many cases powerful naval force possessed by Vietnamese played almost decisive factor
- Good leaders: we can see when the Viet got good leaders, when they didn't then they fail . i.e the second Ming invasion of Daiviet which wiped out Ho dynasty and brought the third Northern domination.
- Unity: same as above
- Number: hardly believable but it's seem Vietnamese did outnumbered the invading forces
- Gunpowder: in some cases the Viet possess better gunpowder stuffs but only in later eras

[nhinhonhinho]

Well, I've never read sources like the Lĩnh Nam chích quái, so you've got me there.

Vietnamese historical sources are mostly in Vietnamese and quite hard to access anyway. BTW a little note for you:

For Vietnamese historical sources the most priced once would be Đại Việt sử kí toàn thư (Complete Annals of Đại Việt) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%90...3%A0n_th%C6%B0 wrote in the second Le dynasty

Lĩnh Nam chích quái (Selection of Strange Tales in Lĩnh Nam/Lingnan) you mentioned above is not a historical book, it's a book which contained strange tales (legends/folklores actually) happened in Dai Viet

Wait...what? What was the decisive factor then, if not terrain, climate, or guerilla warfare? By omitting it, are you basically saying that malaria was THE decisive factor?

Malaria is not a decisive factor here (read my above post). Yet most invasions would be defeated through large battles

Or was it the superiority of native troops who understood the land better than invaders...you know...like the Vietnam War of 1955-1975.

Certainly not the superiority of Vietnamese troops. In fact invaders always superior compare to the Viet (excluding the Cham and Cambodian and we all known what happened next).

Nah nobody said VC/NVA were superior compared to the Murica (including Vietnamese themselves)

Lol. That is an outrageous figure, Oda! Logistically speaking, the Chinese wouldn't have sent any more than 500 million infantry accompanied by 250 million cavalry during each invasion. Anything higher than that is just simpry impossibru!

hm...it's possible to field a few 万 (10.000) troops including logistics and camp followers isn't it?

PS: anyone want me to make a little summary for Vietnamese - Chinese conflicts (ancient ages specifically) using Vietnamese viewpoint ?

[Mangalore]

That makes sense, but do we have sources which actually confirm that the French never strayed too far outside of the coastal settlements in order to avoid malarial disease? It seems odd to me that they wouldn't secure the countryside, especially since the plantations were out in the country, not in the middle of cities.

...

Well, colonization starts via controlling the trade hubs and Vietnam is not shaped in a way that would remove much of their main political centers from access by sea as well so the French could get 100% political and economic control over the country without controlling the hinterland which I would say only came later and even then it was less than 50 000 French settlers. It seems the French designated Vietnam officially as an economic colony aka exploitation, not settlement (like Algeria). If they could keep the local government in line there was little to get involved in themselves, at least on a daily basis.

[yevon]

For Chinese and Vietnamese people of centuries past, however, the luxury of avoiding this awful disease was one they simply couldn't afford (aside from those privy enough to have Ge Hong's 4th-century medicinal book handy, an ancient Chinese text that Tu Youyou used in order to discover the correct level of heat that should be applied to sweet wormwood, or artemisia annua). The Chinese were successful in controlling the northern half of Vietnam for over a thousand years until the 10th century, with largely unsuccessful invasions coming afterward. From what I understand, it is well documented in Chinese historical sources how Chinese troops contracted malaria and died in droves, sabotaging more than one invasion of Vietnam. That includes the Chinese Sui Dynasty's invasion of Champa (i.e. southern Vietnam) from 602-605 AD (Ebrey, Walthall, & Palais, 2009) and the Chinese Song Dynasty's invasion of Dai Viet under the Ly Dynasty from 1075-1077 AD (Anderson, 2008).

However, I'm not so sure about the impact of malaria and its consequences for other Sino-Vietnamese conflicts, and whether or not this gave the Vietnamese the edge they needed in order to drive Chinese forces out of the country. That includes the:

1) initial conquest of northern Vietnam (i.e. Nam Viet, Nanyue) under the Triệu dynasty by the Chinese Han Dynasty under Emperor Wu in 111 BC (Han Chinese victory)
2) the Trung sisters' rebellion from 40-43 AD (Han Chinese victory)
3) the Sui-Former Ly War of 602 AD (Sui Chinese victory)
4) the Battle of Bach Dang, 938 AD (Southern Han Chinese defeat, independence of the Vietnamese Ngô Dynasty)
5) the Mongol invasions of Vietnam, 1258, 1285, 1287-1288 AD (Yuan Mongol-Chinese defeat, yet with tributary status imposed on Dai Viet and Champa)
6) the Yongle Emperor's invasion of northern Vietnam in the Ming–Hồ War of 1406-1407 AD, and occupation until 1427 (eventual Ming Chinese defeat)

I've read a bit about each of these conflicts, but I haven't found any solid references to malaria being a contributing factor to any Chinese defeat beyond the first two conflicts mentioned above (i.e. Sui invasion of Champa and Song invasion of Dai Viet). Does anyone know more or have access to sources which reveal the role malaria played if any in these other conflicts?

In the history, Chinese defeated and colonized Vietnamese more than 1000 years ( ? - 905 and 1407-1427). During these years, very many Vietnamese' rebellion rised and be defeated by Chinese. And of course, we can't find any Chinese document said that malaria or something like " every years, very many of our soldiers in Jiaozhi died by sickness ". If Vietnam territory's malaria so dangerous like that, how can they Chinese lived in there land more than 1000 years????

However, when talk about Vietnamese's victory war:
- 938: battle of Bach Dang
- 981: the first Song Empire's invasion
- 1079: the second Song Empire's invasion
- 1258: The first Mongol's invasion
- 1285: the second Mongol's invasion
- 1288: the third Mongol's invasion

Both Vietnam and Chinese usually explain " lam chướng" ( 嵐瘴) is one among main reasons lead to Chinese's failure.

However, all of these war is very short war. All of them just occured in several of months ( the war of 1258: just one month, if i remember correctly). If Vietnam's 嵐瘴 can kill enough Chinese/ Mongol soldiers to cause the huge damage to their army ( usually among 100 000 of soldiers - at least, that is the number which people usually imagine about them) just in several of months , that 嵐瘴 is too dangerous ( may be more dangerous than even Black Death) . And, how can that sickness can kill so many of Chinese while don't have any infeted on Vietnamese in the same territory??? And, Why that 嵐瘴 just cause damage to Chinese just in these six of battles while they Chinese live on that territory safe and peaceful in more than 1000 years????

I think this sickness just some legend be created by Chinese dynasty to explain their failure. That is all.


---------------------------------------------------------------

"Guerrilla tactic - the key to win every war" is another legend which very popular among Vietnamese. They usually imagine that their ancestor as same as VC in the modern age. However, Vietnam War in the very long war ( 1955-1975; with American: 1965-1972) while all of the Vietnam's wars against Chinese usually very short and finished in only several of months.

No way Guerrilla tactic have enough time to show its effection just in one-three months like that.

By the way, Viet army in the feudal age very similar to any other army in the world: they have elite force; regular force; levy;... and defeat the enemy in the battlefield. You can say that Vietnam War in one among very few times which Vietnamese use " guerrilla tactic".

[nhinhonhinho]

Note: " lam chướng" ( 嵐瘴) => it's a words commonly use to describe the hazardous environment (in this case the combine of hash climate and terrain)

[Condottiere 40K]

Was there anything economically worth exploiting in Vietnam, outside of rice production?