By Naw Liang
Mai soong kha.
It has been slow slogging with my research and writing for the All about Shan Studies blog recently. Maybe it's summer, which is supposed to be slow and perfect for study, but has proved to be even more busy than ever. However, I continue to have my eyes open for Shan information and news, while recent topics of interest - these include waving the flag for Shan nationalism and editing my last (way back in 2007 now) journey to Shan, Wa and Kokang States - continue to move forward, though slowly. More to come, I promise.
The following is a short summary of a recent academic publication focused on the Tai Lü - one of the many Tai groups - and the Chiang Khaeng kingdom that existed until the mid- to late-19th century on the eastern banks of the Upper Mekong River; this area is now the modern-day northern Lao PDR region of Luang Namtha. Author and academic Volker Grabowsky creates a distant link (see original posting here) between the Tai Lü kingdom of Chiang Khaeng and the Shan by stating that the "...ruler Cao Fa Sili Nò transfered the capital first from (Ban) Chiang Khaeng to Müang Yu (situated west of the Mekong in what is now [Shan State] Burma). From there the ruler's seat was finally moved to Müang Sing. Around 1887 more than 1,000 people were resettled from Müang Yu and other areas into the new capital of Müang Sing [which is located further east from the Mekong (see map here)]." Although tenuous, finding any link to Shan and the Shan State - historical or otherwise - is worthy of our interest. So, with a plausible link between these Tai groups, we take a deeper look at this new book.
Summary
Volker Grabowsky's and Renoo Wichasin's monograph 'Chronicle of Chiang Khaeng: A Tai Lü Principality of the Upper Mekong', published by the Center of Southeast Asian Studies, University of Hawai‘ii, is an important text for Upper Mekong studies. Described in a deeply and adeptly researched manner that goes beyond merely chronicling and translating four Lü chronicles, Grabowsky and Wichasin should be proud. Multilingual Grabowsky and Wichasin's text highlights an entrancing history, peppered with their recipe of meticulous footnoted annotations and in-depth research. The end result is a history that goes beyond this one principality in northwestern Laos and strives to discuss the interpolitics of power between the varying chiang and chao throughout the Upper Mekong, including modern Shan State. They touch on the Buddhist ethics of resident cultural centres, detailing varying concepts of hierarchy - tributes, regalia and pomp - as well as the results of elite decision-making, which include the brutal relocation of local populations caused by constant battles for human resources. This is gold for Shan-focused social/cultural anthropologists. Grabowsky and Wichasin also discuss myth and history, including juicy passages on sibling and spousal rivalries, Tai networking through intermarriage and how the elite use and abuse political alliances. Furthermore, the authors include key effects and events of the arrival of the British and French as well as growing engagement with China and Siam - first via earlier autonomous city states and eventually through the kingdom as a whole. Grabowsky and Wichasin also manage, masterfully, to paint Chiang Khaeng as a poster child South East Asian river state with multiple rulers and complex (and intertwined) histories. Comparisons and discussions of similarities to other kingdoms, such as those in neighbouring moder-day Shan State, are a distinct possibility.
The University of Hawai'i Press called 'Chronicles...a model of translation skill and historical acumen at its finest.' I cannot wait to get my hands on one to investigate the possible (and existing) links to and like comparisons with Shan kingdoms of the past. That, and to check to see if my 'summary' holds up to scrutiny.
Until next time,
Naw Liang
