continental south asia and the islands 31In the 11th month (Nov./Dec.) of 1272, the Southern Sung presented
horse trappings to Ch’en Jih-ching, who had abdicated in 1258,^79 and
his son and sucessor Ch’en Wei-huang (Sung shih 46:21b; 488:18b).
In the 6th month (June/July) of 1273, the Annam State presented
regional objects, for which it received 500 ounces of gold and 500
bolts of silk (Sung shih 46:26a).
All rulers of Chiao-chih/Annam had Chinese or Chinese-style
names. The Chinese sources refer to their own rulers from T’ang
through Sung by their temple names,^80 while they condescendingly call
the rulers of Chiao-chih/Annam and other foreign countries by their
given names. Such names would in China have been tabooed, so that
their use by the historians was an offensive, sino-centric conceit. The
contemporary Chinese diplomatic correspondence was more tactful.^81
The rulers of Chiao-chih/Annam actually conferred on their prede-
cessors temple names according to the Chinese model. For instance,
the founder of the Li dynasty, Li Kung-yün, received after his death
the temple name of T’ai-tsu (Grand Founder), but these honorifics
are never mentioned in the Chinese sources.
Neither were the Chinese generous in granting posthumous titles to
the rulers of Chiao-chih/Annam. Li Huan was made a Prefect of the
Palace Writers, Li Kung-yün, Li Te-cheng, Li Ch’ien-te, and Li Lung-
kan Palace Attendants, and Li Yang-huan a Commander Unequalled
in Honour. Only the last of these titles had any prestige.
The Sung is recorded to have recognized seven of the fifteen con-
temporary rulers of Chiao-chih/Annam, to have congratulated at the
enthronement of at least one, to have condoled at the death of five,
to have presented testamentary gifts once, and to have received them
once. The texts may be deficient. There can be no doubt, however,
that the Sung never had official mourning for the rulers of Chiao-
chih/Annam.
Relations between Chiao-chih/Annam and China were generally
peaceful. The raids of Chinese coastal territories by a fleet of over 100
warships in the spring of 995 and the subsequent one in the summer of
the same year were obviously instigated by the king (Li Huan) himself.
The responsibility for the border incident of 1028 and the lootings
(^79) Ibid.
(^80) Excepting those, of course, who did not receive any.
(^81) For instance, Emperor Hsüan-tsung of T’ang in a letter of 713 to the king of
Lin-yi addressed him as “Your Excellency” (Ts’e-fu yüan-kuei p.5027).