Funan was a loose network of ancient Indianized states (mandalas) located in Mainland Southeast Asia, covering parts of present-day Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam, that existed from the 1st to the 7th century CE. It was located southwest of Linyi, the Chinese designation for the historical region of Champa in present-day central and southern Vietnam. Funan is generally considered the first known kingdom in Southeast Asia.
Funan is known in the ancient languages of the region as Suvarnabhumi, from Sanskrit, meaning "land of gold", and in Chinese as 扶南 (). However, the name Funan does not appear in any locally produced texts from the period, and it remains unknown what name the people of Funan used for their polity. It appears in Chinese historical texts describing the kingdom, and the most extensive accounts are largely based on reports by two Chinese diplomats, Kang Tai and Zhu Ying, who represented the Eastern Wu dynasty and sojourned in Funan during the mid-3rd century CE.Higham, C., 2001, The Civilization of Angkor, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson,
Based on Chinese historical accounts, Funan is believed to have been established in the 1st century CE in the Mekong Delta. According to the epigraphic and Chinese texts, it was founded by legendary monarchs Soma and Kaundinya who are held to be the first kings of Cambodia. However, archaeological research indicates that extensive human settlement in the region may date back as far as the 4th century BCE. Although Chinese authors described Funan as a single unified polity, some modern scholars argue that it may instead have been a collection of city-states that were at times in conflict and at other times politically united.Hà Văn Tấn, "Oc Eo: Endogenous and Exogenous Elements", Viet Nam Social Sciences, 1–2 (7–8), 1986, pp.91–101.
Like the kingdom's name, the ethno-linguistic identity of its people remains a subject of considerable scholarly debate. The leading hypotheses suggest that the Funanese were primarily Mon–Khmer, primarily Austronesian, or part of a multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic society. The available evidence remains inconclusive.
Archaeological evidence, including Roman, Chinese, and Indian goods excavated at the ancient mercantile center of Óc Eo in southern Vietnam, indicates that Funan was a powerful trading state.Lương Ninh, "Funan Kingdom: A Historical Turning Point", Vietnam Archaeology, 147 3/2007: 74–89. Excavations at Angkor Borei in southern Cambodia have likewise revealed evidence of an important settlement. Because Óc Eo was connected both to a coastal port and to Angkor Borei through a system of canals, it is possible that these locations together formed the heartland of Funan.
Etymology The origin and meaning of the word Funan is disputed. It has been suggested that the name Funan (Middle Chinese pronunciation of 扶南: /bju nậm/, Later Han pronunciation: /buɑ nəm/) represents a transcription from a local language into Chinese. George Cœdès specifically suggested that ancient Chinese scholars were transcribing a term related to the Khmer word bnaṃ or vnaṃ (modern: phnoṃ), meaning "mountain".Georges Cœdès, "La Stele de Ta-Prohm", Bulletin de l'Ecole française d'Extreme-Orient (BEFEO), Hanoi, VI, 1906, pp.44–81; George Cœdès, Histoire ancienne des États hindouisés d'Extrême-Orient, Hanoi, 1944, pp.44–45; Georges Cœdès, Les états hindouisés d'Indochine et d'Indonésie, Paris, E. de Boccard, 1948, p.128.
It has also been noted that, in Chinese, the character 南 (; ) is frequently used in geographical terms to mean "South". Chinese scholars used it in this sense when naming other locations and regions in Southeast Asia, such as Annam.Claude Jacques, "‘Funan’, ‘Zhenla’: The Reality Concealed by these Chinese Views of Indochina", in R. B. Smith and W. Watson (eds.), Early South East Asia : Essays in Archaeology, History and Historical Geography, New York, Oxford University Press, 1979, pp.371–9, p.378. Some scholars argue that ancient Chinese scholars derived their understanding from records in the Yuán Shǐ, the historical records of the Yuan dynasty: "Siem Kok and Lo Hu Kok, formerly the Kingdom of Funan, were located to the west of Linyi Kok (the Champa Kingdom in central Vietnam). The maritime distance from the capital of Linyi Kok to the capital of Funan Kok was about 3,000 li."
Some scholars propose that Funan may itself have been an endonym used by its inhabitants and perhaps a Chinese rendering of the Proto-Khmeric term bnaṃ ("mountain"). However, the epigraphist Claude Jacques argued that this explanation was based on a mistranslation of the Sanskrit word parvatabùpála in ancient inscriptions as equivalent to the Khmer word bnaṃ, as well as a misidentification of King Bhavavarman I as the conqueror of Funan.Claude Jacques, "'Funan', 'Zhenla'. The reality concealed by these Chinese views of Indochina", in R. B. Smith and W. Watson (eds.), Early South East Asia: Essays in Archaeology, History, and Historical Geography, New York, Oxford University Press, 1979, pp.371–9, pp.373, 375; Ha Van Tan, "Óc Eo: Endogenous and Exogenous Elements", Viet Nam Social Sciences, 1–2 (7–8), 1986, pp. 91–101, pp.91–92.
As a result, Funan may have been an originally Chinese term rather than a transcription of a local name. Jacques therefore proposed abandoning the use of the name Funan in favor of names such as Bhavapura, Aninditapura, Shresthapura, and Vyadhapura, which are attested in inscriptions as contemporary names for cities in the region. By contrast, the names Funan and Chenla are not known from Old Khmer sources.
Sources
The first modern scholar to reconstruct the history of the ancient polity of Funan was Paul Pelliot, who in his ground-breaking article "Le Fou-nan" of 1903 drew exclusively on Chinese historical records to set forth the sequence of documented events connecting the foundation of Funan in approximately the 1st century CE with its demise by conquest in the 6th to 7th century. Scholars critical of Pelliot's Chinese sources have expressed scepticism regarding his conclusions.See Vickery, "Funan Deconstructed"
First record dated 84 CE in late Han period 后汉书. Chinese records dating from the 3rd century CE, beginning with the Records of the Three Kingdoms completed in 289 CE by Chén Shòu (233–297), record the arrival of two Funanese embassies at the court of Lü Dai, a governor in the southern Chinese state of Eastern Wu: the first embassy arrived between 225 and 230 CE, the second in the year 243. Later sources such as the Book of Liang of Yáo Chá (; 533–606) and (d. 637), completed in 636, discuss the mission of the 3rd-century Chinese envoys Kang Tai and () from the state of Wu to Funan. The writings of these envoys, though no longer extant in their original condition, were excerpted and as such preserved in the later dynastic histories, and form the basis for much of what we know about Funan.
Since the publication of Pelliot's article, archaeological excavation in Vietnam and Cambodia, especially excavation of sites related to the Óc Eo culture, have supported and supplemented his conclusion.
History
Origins of Funan Chinese sources relate a local legend to document Funan's origin, that a foreigner named "Huntian" (混填, pinyin: Hùntián) established the Kingdom of Funan around the 1st century CE in the Mekong Delta of southern Vietnam. Archeological evidence shows that extensive human settlement in the region may go as far back as the 4th century BCE. Though treated by Chinese historians as a single unified empire, according to some modern scholars Funan may have been a collection of city-states that sometimes warred with one another and at other times constituted a political unity.
The ethnic and linguistic origins of the Funanese people have consequently been subject to scholarly debate, and no firm conclusions can be drawn based on the evidence available. Michael Vickery argued that, although identifying the language of Funan with certainty is impossible, the evidence strongly suggests that the population was Khmer.Michael Vickery, "Funan reviewed: Deconstructing the Ancients", Bulletin de l'École Française d'Extrême Orient XC-XCI (2003–2004), pp. 101–143 However, several studies indicate that the inhabitants of Funan may have spoken Austroasiatic languages, while Malayo-Polynesian languages were spoken in neighboring Champa. The Funanese may have been either Cham, Khmer or from another Austronesian or Austroasiatic group. It is possible that they are the ancestors of those indigenous people dwelling in the southern part of Vietnam today who refer themselves as Khmer or Khmer Krom. The Khmer term "krom" means "below" or "lower part of" and is used to refer to territory that was later colonized by Vietnamese immigrants and taken up into the modern state of Vietnam.Asia: A Concise History by Milton W. Meyer p.62 Archaeological findings at Óc Eo have demonstrated "no true discontinuity between Óc Eo and pre-Angkorian levels", suggesting Khmer linguistic dominance in areas under Funan's control.Pierre-Yves Manguin, "From Funan to Sriwijaya: Cultural continuities and discontinuities in the Early Historical maritime states of Southeast Asia", in 25 tahun kerjasama Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi dan Ecole française d'Extrême-Orient, Jakarta, Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi / EFEO, 2002, p. 59-82. Recent archaeological research lends weight to the conclusion that Funan was a Mon-Khmer polity. In his Funan review, Michael Vickery expresses himself a strong supporter of Funan's Khmer predominance theory.
Whether Funan's ethnolinguistic components were Austronesian or Austroasiatic remains inconclusive. The majority of Vietnamese academics believes them to be Austronesians. For example, Mac Duong, stipulates that "Funan's core population certainly were the Austronesians, not Khmer;" the fall of Funan and the rise of Zhenla from the north in the 6th century indicate "the arrival of the Khmer to the Mekong Delta." That thesis received support from D. G. E. Hall.
It is also possible that Funan was a multicultural society, including various ethnic and linguistic groups. In the late 4th and 5th centuries, Indianization advanced more rapidly, in part through renewed impulses from the south Indian Pallava dynasty and the north Indian Gupta Empire. The only extant local writings from the period of Funan are paleographic Pallava Grantha inscriptions in Sanskrit of the Pallava dynasty, a scholarly language used by learned and ruling elites throughout South and Southeast Asia. These inscriptions give no information about the ethnicity or vernacular tongue of the Funanese.