The French conquest of Vietnam and Indochina (1858 - 1907)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2020
- The French colonization of Vietnam began in 1858 with the siege of Da Nang, and the occupation of Saigon a year later. In 1862 was established the colony of Cochinchina, and in 1867 Siam recognised the 1863 French protectorate on Cambodia. After a French ultimatum in 1883, the Court of Huế accepted a French protectorate for Annam and Tonkin. After a short conflict with Siam, France annexed Laos in 1893. The French expansion in Indochina continued until 1907. It took dozens of years for the French to conquer all the territories of the future so-called Indochinese Union, which the French created in 1887 to include the colony of Cochinchina and the four protectorates of Annam, Tonkin, Cambodia, and Laos.
------------------------------------------
Voice & editing: Nicolae Bondar (myself)
Music: Don't Look Inside, by Biz Baz Studio, downloaded from RUclips Audio Library
Information Sources:
www.britannica.com/place/Viet...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguy%E1...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E1%BB...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochinc...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France%...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_o...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...
We can stay in touch on Facebook:
/ historyclasspage
You can support our channel here:
/ historyclass1
For every video I try to use copyright free images. However if I have used any of your artwork or map, then please don't hesitate to contact me, and I’ll be more than happy to give the appropriate credit.
It was said that my great great grandfather was an Vietnamese imperial commander who took part in the 1885 failed attack on the French garrison in the imperial capital Hue and had to carry emperor Ham Nghi out of there.
Later, as a resistance fighter, he participated in an attempt to poison the French garrison at Hanoi in 1908, which was also unsuccessful. That attempt led to a crack down by the French on Vietnamese rebels & intellectuals which eventually led to the emigration of Ho Chi Minh, who was persecuted because he was the son of a rebellious imperial official, out of Saigon in 1911. And then the rest is history.
Thank you for making this video about a little-known part of Vietnamese history.
Tôn thất thuyết or Nguyễn Văn Tường?
Consider how much the Nguyen dynasty had looted from impoverished Vietnamese peasants and indigenous Cham and Khmer peoples to enrich themselves in gold jeweled palaces, Vietnamese have no sympathetic to the Nguyen defeat.
Ho Chi Minh immigrated to the Russia and China where he studied Marx communism. During WW2, He joined a guerrilla group that sabotaged and engaged the Imperial Japanese Army stationed in N Vietnam. After Japan’s surrender to USA, Ho and Giap turned their attention to the French colonialists who invited themselves back to Indo-China and with Uncle Sam’s blessing. Using weapons supplied by USA the French Army subjugated the Vietnamese once again. Ho and Giap defeated the French Army at the Battle of Diem Bien Phu in 1950. The Americans tried their luck when the French left. Ho and Giáp’s guerrilla army defeated the mighty U.S. military in 1972. As Martin Luther King shouted so famously : Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, Free at Last!
@@ubermenschen3636 Something wrong but thannk you!
Thank you for that information but don’t for a minute think that the mighty US Army lost Vietnam ..America was cutting edge in nuclear weapons at that time uranium, etc. etc. it could’ve wiped Vietnam off the face of the Earth. Thankfully they did not do that. It was an unjust war America should’ve never went there in the first place. The military did not lose that war, the politicians and the president in the idiots that were surrounding the American president like Robert McNamara . That same mindset that the Commies are coming, filtered down to every president after him to include the idiot Ronald Reagan.
It's not well known that the French were doing similar things in Korea. And like in Vietnam the Korean government was suppressing Korean converts and French clerics. After a vicious persecution in 1866 a French admiral sent a force from Vietnam to Korea, which led to a brief war.
But unlike in Vietnam, France did not colonize Korea, it was Japan who created a protectorate in 1905.
But unlike Vietnam, the Koreans won that war, and beated back the French.
@@crusaderforchrist8430 Even less well known is that the US did something similar in Korea in 1871, fought a brief undeclared war in the same area around Ganghwa-do as did the French several years earlier.
@@gmansard641 It was another pointless incursion, the Korean gov't wouldn't be forced to sign any agreement with the West until 1880s. Korea unlike neighboring countries like China and Japan didn't give in to Western demands until very late 19th century.
@@crusaderforchrist8430 Yes, I think the first American treaty with Korea was in 1882. Japan had one from 1876. Through the early 20th century the greatest foreign influences in Korea came from Japan and the US. We pulled out after the Russo-Japanese and a little- known agreement between US and Japan, the Taft-Katsura Accord of 1905.
@@gmansard641 I wouldn't say US was greatest foreign influence during that time. Japan was and slowly interfered in Korean affairs from 1890s to 1905 by gradually eliminating any political force in Korean court that opposed Japanese influence (Empress Min and her fraction), and eliminating outside foreign interference (China and Russia). The protectorate treaty was signed by 4 members of Korean Empire cabinet (pro-Japanese infitrators), de jure, without the permission of Korean emperor Gojong signature. The Taft-Katsura accord acknowleges US to allow Japanese protectorate over Korea after Russo-Japanese war.
Excellent. Well researched. Thank You
man you worked so hard on this to get so little likes. We Need To Get You More Likes Because You Taught Me My Family History.
Thank you, I'm glad my video was useful :)
@@HistoryClass no problem.
The producers of history video put their hearts into the projects, the views will gradually follow because the content remains just as relevant five years from now
Lol Siam was making deals after deals. They dealt their way out if troubles haha
Vietnamese seen
@@hoainamthan8188 what do make a deal?
@@damiann4734 what
Yes they are cowards. Unlike viet and burma who fought bravely.
And Thais lost a lot of territory while countries such as Vietnam were just colonies but not annexed territories, unlike Algeria.
Best concise whirlwind tour of Vietnamese history I have ever seen. Thanks for posting
Thank you for making video, very interesting info
Thank you for this.
I enjoyed that; thanks for posting.
Propaganda, but NOT History, has led us to believe that the Empire of Japan began its territorial expansion in the 1930’s, invading China, creating the puppet State of Manchukuo and “Provoking” the war with the Western Powers. But, Was this really, how events happened? Did Japan invade China and South East Asia? It seems so. However, the Propaganda does NOT say that for centuries, all Asia was invaded by Western Powers. England occupied India, Burma (Myanmar); Singapore, Malaysia and China (Hong Kong, Nanking, Shanghai, etc). France dominated all Indochina. The Netherlands intervened by the Force of its Arms, to all of Indonesia. And Belgium, Germany, Portugal, Spain, and of course, also the United States were in South East Asia cuz, for example this country, the US, occupied the Philippines since 1898. (Spanish-American War). Thus the panorama in the 30's, the Empire of Japan, when defeating to the Tsarist Russian Empire, it also decided to "Grow" by invading its neighbors. In those years, all European nations had colonies in Africa, India, the Middle East, Asia and America. (England came to occupy almost ¼ part of the planet). For its part, the US, in 113 years of existence as a nation in those years, had "Grown" 711 the size of its territory from its original 13 colonies. Now is the picture clear? Japan for its part, had fought on the side of the winners in World War I (1914-1918), and they, the Japanese, not awarded any "Gain". The western victors of WWI divided the world. Japan was excluded. Thus, Japan's motives for attacking and expanding as the Europeans and the US did seem clearer, right? Then they, the Japanese, attacked China in 30’s, which was occupied by 6 Western Powers for almost a century. None of the Western Powers occupying China at this time, OPPOSED or fought Japan for Invading China. NONE! Then, 11 years later after having occupied the territory of China and coexisted without any problem with the Western Powers within China, they, the Japanese, attacked Hawaii, which in turn, this Island had been occupied and annexed by the US in 1898. (In 1900-01, Hawaii became US territory and Hawaii ceased to be an independent nation after more than 630 years of sovereignty. By the time Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the United States had just completed the 40th anniversary of the military occupation and annexation of Hawaii). They, the Japanese, attacked Singapore, which was then a Colony of England. They, the Japanese, attacked the Philippines, which were occupied by the US and whose Gov’r, Douglas MacArthur reined as Emperor. Yup… Truly like an Absolute Autocrat. Therefore, the Japanese did NOT attack (In the 40’s), Singapore, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Borneo, Timor, the Philippines, etc. In reality, the Japanese attacked England, France, Belgium, Holland, the US, etc. That is, the Japanese attacked the Western Powers invading all of Asia. That is the verifiable truth. But, Propaganda has made us believe that the good guys were us, the US. And of course… Nanking was a horrendous Genocide committed by Japan, but, it was no more horrendous than the 12 Genocides committed by the United States in his History and all over the world. Nor was it less horrendous than the Genocide committed by King Leopold II of Belgium, in Central Africa. Nor was Nanking more or less horrendous than the Genocides that the British Empire committed in America, Africa, Australia, Middle East, India and also in China too. And now, the Japanese are our friends and allies... Yup… But, to fight against China, AGAIN!!! Well… No More. No More British Malaya nor British Borneo nor British wherever. No More French Indochina. No more Dutch Indies. No More Portugese Domains. No More US Domain here. Asia is for Asians and “The China Sea” belongs to CHINA. Westerns powers have nothing to do in Asia.
OMG THANK YOU SO MUCH! THIS REALLY HELPED WITH MY FRENCH HOMEWORK
Great! Thanks for posting.
Very interesting! Thank you for your good work...
Thank you. I found this interesting.
You did a wonderful job with this. I have been looking for art work on this topic, specifically the rubber plantations. What are your sources?
hihi can i ask you what art work, can i see it on Behance??
A SOLDIER OF THE LEGION, An Englishman's Adventures under the French Flag in Algeria and Cochin, 1907 George Manington. Follows his tour of duty in late 1890s in the Foreign Legion. Trained in Algeria, his unit was deployed to Vietnam where he was engaged in combat until his enlistment was over and he returned to Europe.
Good job. Amazing history.
Thai king Chulalongkorn was correct in suspecting France intention to colonize his country called Siam at the time, after France finished conquering Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos). King Chulalongkorn got tacit agreement from England to stop the French from colonizing his country. if you look at the 1800's map, we see England controlled India and Burma. So France intention was to fill the gap by controlling Thailand (Siam) located between the British Empire and Indochina.
This is why Rama V (Chulalongkorn) is held in such esteem by Thais to this day. His portrait is often hung next to that of Rama IX in people's homes. Without his pragmatism and political acumen, it's very likely France would have annexed Siam which undoubtedly could have led to war with Britain. Avoiding colonization has become a deeply-rooted pillar of Thai identity and a source of pride that endures to this day. Fascinating video, very well presented.
Thailand was not colonized by french thanks to english empire, while it was not colonized by english thanks to france. Thailand managed a succesful diplomacy with both empires, taking the rol of a buffer kingdom. Thailand had the luck of bordering two european powerful colonies that were enemies between them. So france and england needed siam stays independent in order to avoid a conflict between both empires, letting siam take military advantaje of that rivalry.
Funny enough, acceptance of trans people in Thailand remains to this day where former European colonies have some level of LGBT discrimination
If you have Time , follow on this History and cherch Mr Gustave Rolin Jacquemin ...
Belgique ...
Prime ministère of Thaïlande for Rama 5 about 10 years !
And save thé souveraing of Thaïlande
Siam was a buffer state thats why they remained independent. If british wasnt there to remind french to stop harassing siam, the whole country would have been annexed.
Thanks! 😀
11:49 just pointing out here that the painting is actually an image of Siamese line infantry [Regular] and elephant gun battery marching to Shan state (Northeastern province of Burma)
When Siam goes to wars with the French. King Chulalongkorn dispatched the King's Guard Infantry [Elite] (uniform of the unit is the one that you see is the British colonial troops uniforms that seen used in zulu wars)
You should have had used the gunboat diplomacy incident ones, because it took most parts of the wars and play key role here that resulted in Siam losing land to French Indochina
11:49 the shan state incident with british ?
@@daenghasriofficial
Siam tries to take over Kengtung and Cheng hung as nominal ally of the British in the wars but failed due to bad logistic planning and had to march all the way back with no victory whatsoever
@@SobaYatai those 2 states were formally a vassal of Burma.
I think your video could have been much better but the facts and scene changes are too fast. Keep in mind, the viewer is also reading the subtitles. Quick changes from scene to scene doesn't give one time to take in what transpired when dates and encounters are fed one after another along with the graphics. I think you would be better off to give the viewer a chance to look at the illustrations, especially when maps and subtitles are included. I found myself mainly just reading the subtitles and missing all of your illustrations and graphics. This is only a critique not a criticism of the good work that was put into your effort.
Thanks for your review. I tried to add useful information as much as possible, thinking that viewers can put the video on pause for reading every graphic information. Maybe I should add less graphics in the future. It also would be easier for me. But I only added subtitles to the videos 2 months ago. 🙂
@@HistoryClass The subtitles are a excellent addition. My only critique on the graphics is that they switch off too quickly. The graphics are actually good and are a big help to viewers. Perhaps you were concerned about time and wanted to make the video to not take up too much time. However, the story and history of the French Conquest of that region is so important that it shouldn't be rushed.
I myself would not have minded if it had taken longer to watch, because it's an interesting story. I know in this day and age many people want things that are quick. The only problem with that is very little sticks, or stays inside their head as knowledge. It's my feeling that if the graphics stayed on the screen a little bit longer, the scenes of maps, facts and dates, would give people a chance to have it more memorable.
I also believe that the people who are truly interested in History and knowing the facts, are the type of people who are willing to take the time to learn it, especially when it's put into a video with graphics as interesting as yours.
There's an old saying about writing that might apply to what I am saying it goes something like...
" Don't Write for Anyone, Write for Someone " I think it would apply to videos also since in actuality it is writing with words, graphics and voice-over.
Then again, I am no editor or film maker, so it's not like I have any professional feedback. This is only my opinion. Maybe others would consider my opinion invalid. So, I am only offering it as to the way I think you could improve the viewing of it. Thanks for all of your hard work in making this video.
@@normangrochowski6972
You can pause the video at any point as long as you want and also rewind it. This is RUclips, not television!
👍🏻👍🏻 ur underrated
It's so sad that in the 1800s China, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia and Laos are so weak and unable to protect themselves against foreign invasion. Asian countries must keep strong military to protect from foreign imperialism.
Vietnam is the ONLY Asian nation that beat that many European powers (France, Spain, Holland, German soldiers serving under France). Even china lost to Europe.
No imperialism now,..its only intervention from Nato and America😂…
And we ASEAN would never let then conquer us ever again!
It didn't help that other Asian countries... Filipino mercenaries aided them. Then Thailand, Filipino, Koreans mercenaries aided 🇺🇸 during the Vietnam War 😢
@@mostlymessingabout yes... North African and Senegalese volunteers were also numerous in the French army.
Yes, that's VERY TRUE. MANY MUSLIMS fought in the French military to kill Viets. SHAME ON ISLAM AND MUSLIMS! But Vietnam BEAT THEM ALL!
Vietnam is the ONLY nation in the world to BEAT ALL ENEMIES! PRAISE LORD JESUS! Amen.
Informative
Muy buen documental...enhorabuena
It's more interesting when you imagined it as Gru's voice
My grand grand grand father participate to the conquest of Cochinchine. He brought back in France lot of Vietnamese decoration stuff, furniture, vase, etc.
There is a real hype for oriental culture in France in the second part of the XIX century. So my gran gran gran father open an decoration and furniture Asian shop. By his contact he could supply his shop him and his little daughter. The shop end in 90's.
Vietnamese stuff, and then after independance of Vietnam, Chinese stuff.
Si just imagine this big Asian furniture shop in a town of south part of France who exist during more than one century.
You should realise than colonisation open mind of European people to other cultures. They like this cultures and same have a kind of pride to "have" this cultures inside of their empire. As British with India or Egypt I guess.
This interest for other cultures change the way the European see their own culture. For exemple "expressionism" been influence in part by Asian (japanese) painting conceptions.
But no, European do not considerate this cultures as "inferior" or "barbaric". So it is a strange relation who melt domination and a real interest who caracterise European feelings for other cultures.
That's a lot of barely coherent words trying to pretend that british french etc. genocides against the developing world never happened 😂 maybe just stop talking 😂
@@radiofreeacab a genocide ? 2.3 millions of Algerian people in 1856.
In 1962 (end of colonisation by France in Algeria) 11.8 millions Algerian.
What a strange genocide...
@@radiofreeacabAre you american ?
@@mehmetii8527 I'm an amerikan, yes, and as such I'm an expert in recognizing colonial genocides 🤣 the French don't have the body count of amerika or the UK but they're equally culpable for capitalist empire
@@radiofreeacab Ironic recognizing genocides or war crimes, imperialism from an American ... 🙃
Emperor Tu Duc massacred Christian population in Vietnam including Jesuit missionaries, and one priest was brutally executed. He was an old friend of the empress Eugenie de Montijo, thus, she convinced her spouse, emperor Napoleon III to launch a campaign against Vietnam to revenge, protect Christianity, and conquer Vietnam. The French legions successfully captured the poorly defended South Vietnam which was later named “Cochinchine”, but they lost a great price to ultimately conquer the North and South Vietnam.
Tu Duc definitely drew lots of attention unfortunately.
On the side note, it is more correct to say southern Vietnam than “South Vietnam” because South Vietnam usually denotes the regime that existed after 1954. Before that, there was no such thing as “South Vietnam”.
Tu Duc was a kind man, but the catholics had pushed his luck. Minh mang was actually the most brutal one towards christians. This is because the christians/catholics planned to overthrow the country, who teamed up with Le Van Khoi (Le Van Khoi's Rebellion) to form a catholic centric nation to support missionaries and catholicism in the region and people, which the Nguyen rulers were not of.
Massacred or not. They will find another excuse to invading Vietnam soon or later.
@@chanlamkha5766 like they justify war against china
Sounds pretty "Christian" to launch a "revenge" campaign doesn't it? Lol 😆 🤣 What happened to "turn the other cheek?" OH wait... Vietnam 🇻🇳 isn't even thier country.
you triggered Laos and Khmer so hard by using Vietnamese emperor as thumbnail for indochina
The most part of the video is about Vietnam, that's why I used an image of a Vietnamese emperor. They will understand after watching the video :)
It's cause they were irrelevant.
The arrogance of the French to claim ownership of Vietnam is astonishing, as well as their delusional thinking that they could maintain control of the country as late as the 1950s after oppressing the Vietnamese people for some 70 years. 🙄
It's interesting how the Vietnamese don't hold a grudge against the French or the Americans today. Having been living in Saigon since 2014, I can say the people here are very friendly and don't think about the past. Xin chào các bạn! ❤
Maybe because the French have bring many thing if you Ask the vietnamese
The vietnamese don't hold grudges because victim status is not passed down from generation to generation.
@@h4rck04 we vietnamese aren't hold victim mentality, we only thrive forward😃
@@Natb168 And that's great. Thanks not to be like the arabic countries. Love Vietnam from France.
@HEY HEY HEY Yeah, continue to justify your hate. Victimisation culture. I could do the same with Italy: "Snif snif the Roman Empire colonized us", now let's kill people from Roma to avenge glorious Gallia!
First emperor of Nguyen dynasty - Gia Long were heavy dependent on the support of a French missionary who also a spy working for French government to gaining weapons,battleships,mercenaries troops,… Cost of those support is a lot of contracts that he will pay back with territory, fortunately those contracts are disrupted by government changes in France. After successfully takes the throne, he immediately ask to become a vassal of Qing dynasty and adopted their foreign policies that hostile towards all foreign
Collaborators with foreign invaders have always been vilified in the history of Vietnam
Can someone please explain 3:11 - 3:29? No fence but his English makes it quite hard to understand.
After they conquered the citadel, the French lacked the manpower to defend it, and preferred to demolish it.
@@HistoryClass Thank you for your answer! I'm sorry to ask, but what's the name of the citadel, and where did the 100 Spanish men come from, that were placed under the siege of 10 000 vietnamise? They were never mentioned to my understanding until 3:21
@@HistoryClass 3:35 - 3:37Do you mean "divert from china?" It doesn't make sense for me any other way. But if it does, do you mind explaining why is makes sense in this context 3:29 - 3:37?
@@lill_m8 , the Citadel Saigon, also known as Citadel of Gia Định is the name. The Spanish entered this war because one of their bishops was killed in Vietnam. They received only money from Vietnamese in 1862, not territories like the French, and then retreated.
@@lill_m8 The French were at war with China and had troops in the region, when the war with Annam began.
France had a colony in Southeast Asia. Great Britain had multiple colonies throughout the world. Italy had a colony in Northeast Africa. It's interesting to see how the World once looked. It was very different.
Very interesting, have no idea Vietnam was the big brother to surrounding 3 countries: Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia. Always stood their ground against imperialism from oversea and from up north. FYI: Moral was extremely low after they fought Americans due to extreme high casualties. Yet they still have the balls to clean up the mess over in Cambodia and even beaten up the Chinese for crossing the border in 1979.
Vietnam was a larger country before being colonized by the French. They had conquered parts of Laos and Cambodia as well as vassalizing the rest of Cambodia at that time.
Don't brag, Vietnam was ruled by China for almost 1000 years and was a vassal state of the mainland for the last 1000 years
@@jeong-eunking5981Koreans were also a vassal state of China too, no?
Vietnamese were the only mainland Asian peoples not to be conquered by the Mongols. Speaks volumes.
❤
Too much detail about the battles....should focus on brevity and the big picture in the early going, delivering the large scope understanding that most viewers want...then delve into the detail for those who really want it. This is boring and hard to assess for separating the essentials from the blow-by-blow.
Hospitals, roads, train traffic, bridges, acqueducs, electricity, munuments, universités, médecines....
Who cares..?? Those were built for the benefit of the French and not the locals. Trying to claim otherwise would be akin to saying that your mother did not bring you into this world.
Do French still think this way
@@leaveme3559 No, just a small minority.
@@lykatheaaflame8254 Liar! Many of pro-colonialism still exist in this section!
I live in France since decades, even among right-wing people I have never seen someone being nostalgic about Indochina. I don't care about the unhinged people on RUclips, that type of subject tends to attract that sort of people.@@user-NoomieGaion
The French spread so much suffering jeez.
that's for human rights
Also the British
Oui
@Evangelos Amata We French know that. We conquered only Vietnam instead
@Evangelos Amata the cambodians begged the french to come rule them lolol
5:37 this is not the picture of king Norodom, this is the picture of king Sisovat (king norodom's son)
The picture is from the Wikipedia page about king Norodom. I don't think they have mistaken.
@@HistoryClass sorry my bad, i was confuse, you're right.
@@vibotx , no problem, anybody can make mistakes
Only Vietnam fought and die for their identity while Cambodia and Thailand didnt even try to fight for their independence
The video will be perfect if change the voice
Nice video. Sorry about the wumao and campodian raging in the comments.
A new video at last
A part is quang chau loan(china)
EPIC ❤💙🤍
You are wrong my friend, Vietnam was taken by a coalition between Spain & France, and till 1922 Spain has territories in Vietnam.
@JNeace-uk8ue But for different reason, our only reason was to avoid Islam in Vietnam, and we win this. Franch has another reasons. And by the way, the Pacific, from Philipenes till Mexico was Spain till 1.898
@JNeace-uk8ue Seems to me you don't understand what means colonized and part of Spanish Empire, colonized mean that a colony is a place where a nation extrat richnes for the metr'opoli, that is the case of Vietnam - French relation. Be part of Spanish Empire mean that you keep your land, your richness, your habits and you are part of the most big Empire, only one condition, no Muslim.
Wow Vietnam losing? That’s something you don’t hear
They had really cool swaggeer you think that's how it was
Could France have retained control of Vietnam and Indochina after World War II?
If France had not been occupied by the Germans, and Indochina by the Japanese, it could have taken 2-3 decades more for Vietnam and Indochina to become independent.
@@HistoryClass Thank you for answering my question!
Yes
Of course NOT. Just study the glorious history of Vietnam to see how Vietnam beats ALL enemies.
@@HistoryClass Judging by all the likes you been giving, you content makers are clearly white & pro-colonialism. When are you going to do one on Russia's annexation of Crimea? Im sure you'll attract many likes.
So all this trouble because some stupid priest was killed??
No. Because European take the resources from the Land. A pretext for war is the green light to conquer.
it would have happened regardless, just in a different way. the deaths of -stupid- martyred priests were just casus belli.
The Vietnamese emperor butchered and skinned them alive, 10,000 people died in Catholic massacres and 7,000 people died in the Van Than movement (anti-Catholic movement after the surrender of the Nguyen Dynasty). The massacres of the Van Than movement were so terrible that Ham Nghi (the Vietnamese king with anti-French ideology) had to declare him innocent.
@@vinhvu5986 3 sticks idiotic mindset
RESPECT TO THE EMPEROR , PROTECT NATIONAL IDENTITY ALL COST 😊😊😊
French taught lesson to a lunatic butcher
ก่อนไทยเสียดินแดนเนี่ย เราสู้กับเวียดนามแต่ฝรั่งเศสเข้าไปยึดกัมพูชาจากเราไป
Love France From Thailand 🇹🇭❤🇫🇷
Do you like it
No, before French came, Cambodia was vassal of both Thailand and Vietnam, Thais drew Vietnamese in the war.
@@user-id3br6xx5e Oh
Vietnam was a Kinh settler colony. The first indigenous peoples were the Montagnards and Cham tribes but now they're gone because of White-Vietnamese colonialism
Yeh, the vietnamese were white
the Kinh people are native to northern Vietnam and southern China. That's the reason for the name "kinh," they lived in the flatlands of northern vietnam in larger cities and so called themselves kinh in comparison to other ethnic groups that lived in the hills or mountains in smaller villages.
@@SuperHiddenaccount kinh are southern Chinese migrated to vietnam during china colonial rule . They are not native to Vietnam. The real native Vietnamese are black Montagnards like the Champas and khemerit
Stupid babbling
@@JNeace-uk8ue european colonizing european. You mean the holocaust, nazi, ww2, extermination of jews and slavs in europe for german settlers
Imagine this being taught in Japan in a history class in 1931. Why should they respect the European conquest of the Asia, or the losses and shame of those bequeathed? Or be so ashamed of their own persecution of Christians in the early 1600s? So easy to rationalize. And yet they would soon be the evil ones themselves.
There actually was such a movement in early 20th century Japan, it inevitably led to Imperial Japan, which contested the authority of the United States in Asia! It was an elaborate cultural educational period in which the government began rejecting Western influences and to learn to appreciate Japanese culture and values!
Japan took it too far for sure. If they would have chilled out a bit, they are probably the world superpower today.
Japan was loved by Asian anti-imperialists since they defeated Russia in 1905 and Germany in 1914, until they realized that Japan was worse than European imperialists. Japan had the opportunity to become the liberator of the Asian nations, but they destroyed it by acting as another conqueror and brutalize their fellow Asians.
@@Razzle_Dazzle- yeah..I guess so..in a round-about-way, vaguely. But I don't think the heinous cruelty was a planned thing. Thee Japanese really respected China and Chinese culture for thousands of years, right up to the 1880s. When they say the Europeans humiliate China, they thought, let's get some of that. And I suppose they thought, lets get some empire, as did England, Germany, Spain, etc. etc..not just to be 'big' but simply to survive. They got hooked on oil and that was it. Of course, any culture has its gullible morons and programmable robots. And the fable of history as they saw it...there was no brake. Witness the atrocities Cambodians performed on one another..programmed. gettable. With a grudge.
@@Razzle_Dazzle- Yup. Japan also had ambition to take over all of China then India since the 1600s. Crazy huh? They were the only Asian country that realize they were far behind in science and technology. Very impressive that they caught up in 20-30 years.
It's "invasion", not "conquest"
Heureusement, les pubs sont en français.
1:13 ...refuses to modernize the country.. Those priest that came to Vietnam had no idea about its culture nevertheless they came to tell them that the Vietnamese culture was inferior to theirs. I guess they also had nice stories about the Inquisition, stakes and witch’s persecution; a very popular form of modernization in Europe. Vietnamese (but also other Asian countries) judged these activities as very disturbing and, in the long run, very dangerous and responded quite preventively. After all, they were not the first foreigners who came to occupy Vietnam. Normally foreigners come to trade. But missionaries only came to tell them that they were pagans but if they converted their empire would come with even a three-piece king.
Yes, Vietnamese were not waiting for a new ruler and his followers. For them they were just new invaders and so they treated them.
Especially under someone who keen on projecting himself as a Catholic Protector. A child chasing his uncle shadow. Thinking that with this he will make Frech Empire great like his uncle.
False narrative. France actually did a lot improving Vietnam. They lifted Vietnam from being ruled by dark-age isolationist neo-confucianists. The Nguyen emperors actively suppressed Buddhism (Mahayana and Theravada), persecuted Christians and Muslims, suppressed ethnic minorities, jailed all dissents and bashed intellectuals who perceived European liberal ideas and technology. 462 rebellions throughout Vietnam ad Cambodia against Nguyen rule from 1802 to 1858. Million Vietnamese were starving and dying of cholera while the autocratic emperor enjoyed pleasure and shut down the bad news.
@@hermannboyen5392 Yes, the French did great things, just read Vu Trong Phung's book Luc Xi: about the Prostitution and Venereal Disease in Colonial Hanoi thanks to the French.
By making the alphabetic writing mandatory they cut of and destroyed the whole history of the Vietnamese language. And maybe you should visit the jails where the French throws the Vietnamese in to beat them to death.....and by the way....Vietnam is not from the French, it is from the Vietnamese.
The French never never came to Vietnam to 'improve the live of the Vietnamese, that is an incredible lie! The only reason they came to Vietnam was that other countries were already occupied and looted empty by the English, Dutch, Portuguese and so on. The French just want their share in steeling and looting South Asia (and other places).
When they build a road or whatever, it was never because it was a profit for the Vietnamese, it was only to steal more and faster.
The fact that a few French did something good in Vietnam. They in no way outweighs the crimes and robberies they engaged in. To the French, the Vietnamese were something completely inferior. While the Vietnamese had a much older and richer culture than the French.
It is the biggest nonsense that European countries brought "democracy" to Asia. When the first French arrived in Vietnam, the Inquisition was rampant in Europe. So don't take that Vietnamese princes were so unfriendly to other believers. Learn the history first of Europe and the massacres that took place there .
@@ybor20While it true our stupid Emperor is the one to blame for our holdings back our reform and mordenization not taking to the account of the Western Imperialism power and believe should be focus model itself like the Qing. Despite the facts the French did improve us a little but still the same ideal of their like all other European power. Their presence here is not to help our country improve. But to colonization, monopoly on trade of the resource here and project their influence of great Western Empire. They really have to do it becasue well if they don't they would lose to the British. And they really don't want to loose to British do they?
Even Napoleon III trying to take Mexico and have the Austrian prince on throne while the American is busy with the their civil war said a lot.
@@ybor20 Also My friends the Catholic church at that time always have a bad reputation especially due to their past event. I rather have Protestants Dutch or at least the British Christianity came here, at least they mostly don't care much for religion just want to focus on the trade more for their Empire.
Like the time when Japan kick the Portuguese out because of the their Catholicism and favor with the Dutch protestant more.
My dad is from bien hoa
what's Ian McCullough doing in Vietnam
Filipino troops used by the French, around the time the Americans were at war with Spain & Philippines Hmmm interesting. Something to do with the execution of Spanish Catholic missionaries by the Vietnamese ?
Lol french bullied siam until british stopped french interest.
As I have long said, the Viet Cong, has been around a very long time, under many names. They have sought to keep Vietnam free from outside colonization and, at the risk of being called "Bandits", have sought to keep the Vietnamese Farmers and Villagers free from even the Royal Government dominance. Amazing people! Their actual politics are, doubtless harsh, but it is their choice as the "Black Flag" was a populist movement, just like the Viet Minh. The people of the countryside are very culturally different from the people of the cities, as in most places in the world, so Black Flag and Viet Cong were rural Heroes. Beaten back and even crushed, they always come back, seeking only to be left alone. Strange, nobody has ever learned this lesson, even though many thousands of foreign and Government troops left their bones in the rice paddies and green fields.
It's like their fighting spirit, an ancient spell born from when China's predecessor states started marching into Vietnam's soil to conquer. Times and times again it was awaken to fight and keep Vietnam sovereign, no matter the cost. It's greatest achievements are that Vietnam is on the world map as a nation instead of a part of China, and as one unlike the Korea situation.
the Black Flags were a Chinese bandit/mercenary group that migrated south from Guangxi into the Red River valley in Tonkin. They were actually a offshoot splinter group of the Taiping rebellion. The Vietnamese used them to fight off local indigenous tribes and also another Chinese marauder group the Yellow flags that settled in northern Vietnam. Maybe they might have recruited locally but my impression was that they were mostly Guangxi Chinese, particularly the Zhuang and Hakka. I don’t see them as a populist movement, if anything they’re more likely to raid and plunder the locals than to protect them. The Vietnamese also paid them off to counter the French in the Tonkin region which led to Garnier’s death. They’re more mercenaries than freedom fighters
when was vietnam an empire ?
Since it had emperor, considered itself another China, and had a system of vassals.
@4:14, After the British and French defeated the Chinese in the Opium War, the French dispatched its army to Vietnam where earlier it had little success waging a concurrent war against China and IndoChina. The second French military mission succeeded. The Vietnamese could not evict the ‘foreign devils’ from their land until 1950 in the Battle of Diem Bien Phu where Ho Chi Minh routed the French Army, and again later in 1972 had to defeat the mighty U.S. military. Today, the Western Powers once again are mobilizing their military against China. If history repeats, the French will recolonize Vietnam; the Spaniard and American recolonize the Philippines; and the British recolonize Thailand and Burma.
Actually, you are also giving the wrong information: the Dien Bien Phu battle happened in 1954, the French legion was defeated to Vietminh forces commanded by Gen. Giap WITH an army of Chinese Communist advisors. The American departed Vietnam in 1972 after the second bombing campaign of Hanoi and wanted a way out of the war after immerse domestic pressure. The end of the war in 1975, when South Vietnam gov collapsed in April campaign.
@2:00 the Catholics… Mussolini in ww2
The history Americans like myself need to know more about but don’t to understand why vitineim war was the way it was.
French IS already the big issue france never expanded frenchness IS Not a live seeding concept
Vietnam's century of humiliation.
well played Siam for manoeuvring between Chinese Empire, European Empires and local kingdoms to retain sovereignty.
I never heard , about this .
well it was the base of indochina war
The French at that period of time have made Indochina a place with so many innovations for the quality of life in various cities and the delivery of beautiful architectures, having also helped the population to live globally much better ( hospitals, schools, agriculture, railways and so on ..). By example Phnom Penh was called the Pearl of Orient ..
they were oppressors, don't defend colonization
@@Kooobf colonization has undeniable positive sides unless you are a follower of the denial of reality, but it is your psychic problem not ours
They nade it better for themselves
@@leaveme3559 ignorance has no limits
@@christophe36000 do you think Russians invading Ukraine is wrong?
Siam paid money to all their enemies to leave them alone. That's why no colonizing siam
Respect Vietnam.
Respect France 🇨🇵🗿🏅🔥🗿
@@sanssucreajoute6554yeh for losing wars lolll. Hitler walk through paris without a shot fired 😂
Fine campaigning from the French, there.
And now France is in decay, impoverished.
It is a sad history
@@christophe36000 French contributions were for themselves, not for Vietnamese, Laos and Khmer. That's why the French earned their defeat at Dien Bien Phu 1954.
Our country 🇹🇭 has suffered and is so angry about losing territories ( or Vassal ) to France. Siam's military at that era is no match for France's Imperialism, have to pay a lot of war reparations. So we seek friendship with another European power. Thai History lesson nowadays in school has Teachs this event to all children. In order to boost the Patriots. But the pass is the pass. Let us hope that France and Thai can be more prosperous by collaborating. No more European power-hungry again.
Thailand didnt even try to protect their territories while Vietnam fought and die for their independence
@@tooshy8099 good to know
@@tooshy8099 Actually, that's NOT true. During WWII, Thailand did attack France.
@@YonIon996 Yes, but that's not the main reason why Thailand attacked France. They did so because they wanted to take back lost lands that France stole from them 80 years before.
@@tooshy8099 wrong….they defend what should defend,thise teritory they loss
Are all vassal state that didnt abey much to Siam.
Only keep what good,cut the bad out.😂
But its indeed make a grudge against England and French at that time.
Thats why we join Axis power in WW2.
But French lost big at the battle of Dian Bian Fu (which at the border between Laos and Vietnam) and led America enter Indochina with the request of French of course 😊
Huh ?
Thank you Germany !!
Haha
Kaiserreich fan?
Thank you France 🇨🇵❤
Theyre worse
@@kurochigo Without German Vietnam is still named indo-Qin.
Those poor people went through hell all them years being taken advantage of and we had no business over there either y'all they wanted was Independence
the persecution of Christians was a pretext for war but France would've invaded regardless as Vietnam was weak and there was a big race among Europeans to colonize the world. France helped Emperor Gia Long establish the Nguyen dynasty and was actively trying to have more and more control over Vietnam.
French Indo - China. Vietnam, Laos & Cambodia.
@Evangelos Amata south vietnam during the vietnam war was still a part of vietnam. Looks like the khmoi rouge did a lot of damage to intelligence level. Your arguments have already been debunked but you still go on rants because you never read those arguments.
@@shadowblitzo123 War had to happen because it wasn’t unified. The French was the previous power to unify these lands. Hell Vietnam was created through Europeans intervention. Look at the history of Southeast Asia and you would realize these various Kingdoms never go to War in a manner of total submission or domination. The change is when Europeans came and instigated and lure these kingdoms with their fancy weapons. Divide and Conquer strategy applied. Also building up a Kingdom to fight their neighbors to weaken each other. After that it’s easy for the Europeans. Y’all have your fun killing each other with my guns 😂 this tactic is used all over the word. Europeans fabricated history to make these idiots feel as if they were some big shot empire lol. They weren’t no actual conquering going on in the ancient past. People were intermingling more than fighting. This is why they write history as if these folks were already killing each other. Same story they was telling about the Native Americans…Africans…so on. HISTORY IS A FAT LIE.
@@shadowblitzo123 shxt the f up South Vietnam at those time was still khmer's under the control of the Vietnamese ruler , with your point then the Vietnamese essentially are han Chinese .
of course the french historian may regard the black flag army as bandit .
Why the French allowed a defeated country to retain its monarchy and institution, but discriminated the indigenous Champas that used to be original black indigenous peoples in Vietnam. Because the French regarded the Champas as less civilized and barbaric, they thoroughly looted champa heritage and brought to museums of "extinct races"
French Indochina was impressive. Just look at the city of Da Lat built from scratch in a typical French style. Like most traditional French town planning it’s beautiful.
Shame there’s a lot of people on here focusing entirely upon the negative aspects of French rule.
Colonization is negative…
@@icecactus11 Not necessarily. Colonialism has created many successful nations, and modernised many others. If you read outside of the anti-colonial/Marxist recommend reading lists there is definitely a case for colonialism.
@@malpreece5008 are you guys bots? You have the same generated responses. I’m a libertarian I don’t read Marx. Colonialism has lead to countless atrocities and discrimination that effects the world until this day. Stop trying to justify this bullshit.
@@icecactus11 I can’t answer for other people, but I’m just sick of mid-wit Marxists/post-modernists pushing the same vapid talking points about colonialism. Characterising colonialism merely by reference to the negative is facile. Colonialism brought about advances in government, medicine, healthcare, improvements in sanitation, education, transportation, development of architecture etc. Does none of that deserve any praise?
Tbh, I studied colonial history for four years at uni, and the constant anti-colonial bullshit just got on my nerves. European colonialism is singled out as if it is uniquely evil, even though every human group have expanded in power and territory over time, occupying lands, governing populations, and using resources. The difference is European empires were better than all of the alternatives.
You’re a libertarian? So, you adhere to principles that were outlined by John Stuart Mill, an advocate of the British Empire?
@@malpreece5008 Many Europeans who make these apologetics arguments for colonialism fail to realize the nations they “improved” especially African ones. Already had the things they “brought” it’s just suppressed in history or was stolen knowledge. Colonialism no matter how you slice it is negative. You are aggressing upon a group of people creating a colony which extracts its resources hiding behind “improving” their conditions. Jordan Peterson post modernist talking points are irrelevant I’m not a dumb Marxist. The reason you are annoyed by anti-colonialism is because of the guilt you’d feel if you actually had to digest the atrocities and resource extraction that happens until this day. European colonialism is unmatched in its atrocities and resource extraction that’s why it’s focused on. No amount of feeling like you’re a victim because people call this out will make Europeans victims, no amount of “well they did it too” will make what Europeans did less okay or not exclusively European styled colonialism. No other nations on other continents especially Asia with the Japanese; who were only expansionist at a large scale after forced cooperation with the USA, came close to European nations world wide. On nearly every continent Europeans have a colony that has horrible atrocities, genocides, debt slaves and the people are not better off.
These civilizations already had their forms of all the services you listed but judging them based off of European versions of these things, when they had their own solutions to problems is a common fallacy. Any argument used against the people of the world “who needed to be colonized” can easily be turned around against Europeans who had worse if not the same issues. Which is why they had to go colonizing in the first place. I can’t even name other continents that Asians, Native Americans or Africans have set up a colony that committed the same atrocities, resource extraction, genocides and exploits the natives like Europeans have done. We can’t go so anti-SJW to the point where we start justifying the unjustified just because a Marxist calls it out. Aggression upon a group of people who weren’t doing the same to you is bad no matter how you slice it. Defending colonialism to protect from the slander of your ethnic group or others ethnic group is not an excuse to excuse colonialism. Committing genocide, atrocities, exploiting the native population, slavery and resource extraction is not okay because “we gave them healthcare” or “they had slavery too”.
Vietnam before 1858 was also a hermit kingdom
and vietnam after 1975 is a bullshit
@@bourbon369 better than some country who can not unite
@@bourbon369 and can you imagine how worse than bullshit to the oppressive regime and its sheep’s that dropped the weapons, stripped all their military uniforms and ran for their lives.
@@bourbon369 South Vietnam was a bullshit regime, only 29% of population living in urban area but always boast about the only beautiful city of Saigon
@@vinhlong7347 STFU
Vietnam French colonized centuries TU DUC AND HAM NGHi GIA LONG KING OF VIETNAM FRANC COLONIAL BEFORE IN VIETNAM COUNTRY
4,000 yrs 🏴 khong giao" sharply blames on pedestrians *no friendly* none membership*nor applicants
The French might’ve been ‘EVIL’ But Dang they make Awesome cuisine!!!!! LOL!!!!!;);)🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷
Yanks are worse
Yanks are worse
Siam was weakness.
The Viets have resisted any attempts of subjugation going back well beyond the Mongols. They don’t appreciate that kind of mess!
Exterminated Indigenous Champas people wanna be friend with you
Siam was survived.
Siam was afraid to fight unlike Vietnam
❌ Down with French Imperialism 🇫🇷
✅ Up with Vietnamese Socialism 🇻🇳
If France did not conquest Vietnam, the kingdom would fully submerge into neo-confucian dark age, whom Alexander Woodside recalled "The Nguyen tried hard as possible to integrate Chinese style politics and traditions onto the Vietnamese masses, who saw these models as non-indigenous. And they didn't fit well."
Tens of thousands of Vietnamese sided with the French rather with the court.
@@hermannboyen5392 kek wtf are these passages? Pulled out of chinese fairytales
Vive la France 🇨🇵
@@hermannboyen5392 Siempre el imperialismo llega falsamente para "salvar y civilizar a los salvajes". Lo que les interesa es llevarse sus riquezas, dejarlo en ruinas y desorganizarlo. Nadie les llamó a los militares franceses para ir a colonizar Cochinchina e Indochina. La excusa fue por la muerte de unos pocos curas, que fueron a cambiarles su ideología. Sin embargo en aquella época, ni Francia ni España tolerarían que entren otras religiones en sus países. Colonialistas abusivos.
😕 in repeat
No one is paying attention to the way this video manipulates your emotions. The audio: the narrator reads historical events as if they were merely a list of objects to be expelled from his mouth. There is no baseline humanity in his pitch. The background music: is needlessly circular and eerie. Recount facts with neutrality and verbal accuracy. These things matter. Finally, there is no critical analysis or insight provided by this account. We do not learn the emotional context of the key historical relationships and thus we learn NOTHING. Questions: how did the southern Vietnamese become Catholic? What were they before? What was the role of religion in all of this mess? And, how do nations use or do not use religion as a tool of psychological conquest and domination? How do people come to have the religions they have? Is it because the religions are right? An idea: a religion can contain precepts and claims that, if properly inspected by its adherent, are in fact untrue and invalidate a religion altogether.
Damn western greed :(
Whatever happened to the French ideals of" liberte egalite fraternite? What a bunch of hypocrites.
As you are very smart, you must have seen that the emperor Napoleon III is mentioned, meaning that the Republic was taken down by an authoritarian guy.
Story of many republics since Athens and the Roman Republic.
Conquest 🦆 ( 🐠 ko scor Ken Dong 🎺 *language zero 99% animals nameless
kuril kuril kuril 🐾 Crimea Kheson KheSanh Bakhmut bamethuoc Donbass Dong bang 🐾 Donetsk 🐾 Ukraine's Kiev 🏝️
Vietnamese "empire" lmao.
It was. Don't underestimate this country.
The French never “conquered” Vietnam. They invaded and occupied until they were forced out. The French lost their war. So did the U.S.
I think they did but I would contest that it was until 1950 since the Japanese took over Vietnam overnight during WWII.
By that logic none of the country that exist today has ever been conquered because they eventually forced their conquerors out