Mountain People in the Muang:
Creation and Governance of a Tai Polity
in Northern Laos
Nathan Badenoch* and Tomita Shinsuke**This paper traces the history of Luang Namtha, an intermontane valley basin in
northern Laos, based on the narratives of non-Tai ethnic groups that collectively
constitute a majority in the region. The narratives demonstrate the possibility ofalternative histories of muangg polities, which are a core part of our understandingof Tai social and political organization. These narratives describe a central role formountain people in the muang, including the formation, population, and development of what appears to be a Tai polity. This analysis suggests the need to open up
our understanding of “traditional” Tai political spaces to accommodate an expanded
historical agency for upland groups conventionally circumscribed within their own
upland setting. This paper argues that the first step towards a more nuanced understanding of muangg is recognizing them as cosmopolitan areas in which many sourcesof power, innovation, and transformation intersect.
Keywords: Laos, muang, ethnic minorities, local history, Lanten

I Layers of Locality: Digging for Historical Narratives
The Lanten, Sida, and Bit people living in the foothills surrounding the town of Luang
Namtha in northern Laos tell of how the valley was empty when their forefathers migrated
to the area at the end of the nineteenth century. Some even assert that they were theones who established the current valley settlement and have played a central role in its
governance. These claims go against our assumptions about the expected historicaldevelopment of a small urban center in northern Laos. Indeed, as the plane clears themountains and descends into the valley, one sees a town surrounded by wet rice fields
that cover an area of 100 square kilometers and two Buddhist stupas on the hills overlooking the city. The village next to the airport has an old Buddhist temple, and the* Hakubi Center for Advanced Research, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University
Corresponding author’s e-mail: baideanach@gmail.com** 富田晋介, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University
Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, April 2013, pp. 29–67© Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University

29

30

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

irrigation system extends across the valley bottom. In town, the people speak Lao andseveral other related Tai languages. Any student of mainland Southeast Asia would
assume that they are entering the world of a typical Tai1) muang—theghierarchicallyorganized but decentralized socio-political structures that are believed to be the backboneof cultural continuity 2) running throughout the concept of Laos in history (Stuart-Fox 2002).
Towards “Indigenous Histories” in Northwestern Laos
There is no official written history of Luang Namtha. However, “official narratives” foundin statements of local government offices and officers, emphasize the muangg characteristics of Luang Namtha. Muangg is an ambiguous term referring to the political and socialorganization of the Tai, but has a wide range of meaning in terms of geographic, social,
and political scope (Liew-Herres et al. 2012). The conventional understanding of thehistory of the Luang Namtha basin encapsulates many of the assumptions that exist
regarding the muang—thatg
it was founded in the sixteenth century by a group of Taispeaking Buddhists who set up a small polity attached to a more powerful Tai muang,
supporting themselves economically by wet rice cultivation and providing a socio-politicalcenter for other latecomer ethnic groups that live on the fringe of the Tai world. Government offices often reiterate such a view on the regional social history. For example, theLao National Tourism Authority has the following history of the Namtha valley on its
website: 3)
In 1890, the Tai-Yuan returned to the Nam Tha Valley under the aegis of Chao Luangsitthisan tore-establish Muang Houa Tha. Vat Luang Korn, one of Luang Namtha’s largest, was constructedshortly thereafter in 1892. However, the newly resettled Muang Houa Tha was to enjoy its independence for only two years. In 1894, following a meeting between the French, British and Siamesecolonists, it was agreed that Muang Houa Tha would be administered by the French and the
Mekong from the northern reaches of Muang Sing to Chiang Saen would serve as the border
between French Indochina and British-ruled Burma. Not long after this divide took place the firstgroup of Tai-Dam arrived from Sip Song Chou Tai in north western Viet Nam and established Tong
Jai Village on the east bank of the Nam Tha River. At about the same time the Tai-Dam arrived,
migrations of Tai-Neua, Tai-Kao, Akha, Lanten, Yao and Lahu originating in Sipsong Panna, Burmaand northwest Viet Nam began to migrate to the area’s fertile valleys and the forested mountains
surrounding them.
1) We use the term “Tai” in referring to a large group of peoples speaking related Tai-Kadai languages
and sharing certain cultural heritage such as a muangg model of political organization. In the Laocase, this refers to Lao, Lue, Phuan, Tai Dam, and other related groups. In the Luang Namtha story,
the key Tai groups are Nyuan, Lue, and Tai Dam. The point of using this term is to characterizethem as lowlanders, in contrast to the other people we refer to as uplanders.
2) Writers such as Archaimbault (1964) and Aijmer (1979) have contributed to the idea that the hierarchical relations represented by the muangg are a factor of proto-Tai culture.
3) http://www.tourismlaos.org/web/show_content.php?contID=42, accessed March 2, 2012.

Mountain People in the Muang

31

The arrival of non-Tai people is peripheral to the establishment of the Muang. It is this
disconnect between the conventional discourse and the oral traditions of the non-Tai
people that suggests the need to unravel the history of the muangg and question some of
the basic assumptions that underpin it.
Grabowsky’s (2003) articulation of an “indigenous” history of northwestern Laos
has helped move us away from the simplicity of dominant historical discourses of nationstate formation. Grabowsky has worked to peel away the Western colonial narrative tofree up a different level of historical storytelling. In his analysis of the Chiang Khaeng
Chronicle, the local records of a Tai Lue principality on the northern reaches of the
Mekong, not far from Luang Namtha, Grabowsky brings the dilemmas and decisions of
the Tai Lue rulers of the muangg to the forefront, giving agency to the local political players in the theatre of struggle between the French and British in the late nineteenth
century. In doing so, he demonstrates that these local figures “were by no means exclusively ignorant victims” of the negotiations dominated by the colonial powers, but rather
they “tried hard to manipulate the contradictions between the two main European colonial powers to secure the very survival of that state” (ibid., 62). His exploration of the
Tai Lue leaders’ strategies is an attempt to understand what the process of bringing an
area under the colonial blanket meant for the life of the local population, giving voice toan important alternative narrative of the colonial experience.
Working with the same Chiang Khaeng Chronicles, Grabowsky and Renoo (2008)
uncover a wealth of information about the Tai Lue, their socio-economic situation andtheir political strategies. There is valuable detail about the relations between the Tai
Lue and the other groups living on the outskirts of the muang. The power structure of
the Chiang Khaeng polity was determined by symbiotic relations between the politicallydominant Tai Lue, who settled in the valley of the Mekong and its tributaries, and the
autochthonous hill tribes that provided valuable forest products, precious metals, andagricultural labor. Importantly the Chronicle mentions that the Tai Lue were often aminority in the region they ruled. For example, the composition of the Tai Lue leader
Chao Fa Dek Noi’s young followers—five Tai and seven Kha (non-Tai autochthonous
people, usually referring to speakers of Mon-Khmer languages)—illustrates demographicbalance of the Chiang Khaeng polity (Grabowsky 2003).
The Chiang Khaeng Chronicles are written by the Tai Lue, the local Tai elite of themuang, and Grabowsky correctly recognizes this fact without hesitation. While he undertakes to highlight the impacts of policy on people in the marginal areas of the would-becolony, there is still a large sector of society that remains voiceless. Our knowledge ofthese other ethnic groups comes primarily though the observations and interpretationsof outsiders, Tai and Western, who bring their own frameworks, biases, and objectives

32

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

to the writing of history. The Tai Lue understandably write history to make it their own,
and that places non-Tai peoples in a certain position within the Tai political and social
imagination. While this analysis is of high value, it still leaves us wondering what themarginal majority of non-Tai groups in the muangg experienced in this process and how
they acted on other contemporary social forces.
Further Layers of Autochthonous Historical Narrative
It is well established in the historical records of the Tai Lue and other Tai groups in thearea that relations between Luang Prabang, Chiang Mai, Kengtung, and Chiang Hung
during the period of the sixteenth–twentieth centuries were dynamic, dramatic, and often
tumultuous. Trade routes crisscrossed the area of northern Laos while armies struggled
to secure political power over local people. The Namtha river provided access from the
Sipsong Panna territories to the Mekong and down to Luang Prabang, but river travelwas difficult on account of rapids and seasonal fluctuation in water levels. Another moreconvenient overland trading route from Chiang Khong to Chiang Hung passed throughMuang Luang Phukha, as Luang Namtha was previously known, and Viang Phukha, overthe mountains and down to the Mekong. Lue and Shan (Tai) muangg established on thenorthern reaches of the Mekong were key intermediary actors in the local politics andtrade between the larger Tai muangg of the region. Not far to the north-east of Muang
Luang Phukha is a chain of salt fields which provided an important economic commodity
traded widely across the region until the 1980s. Discussing these historical dynamics indetail, Walker has made a major contribution by dispelling the myth of isolation in thisarea of the upper Mekong (1999).
Évrard (2006) has described the historical and social background of northwestern Laosfrom the perspective of the Khmu. The Khmu of the right bank of the Namtha were integrated into the trade routes that passed through their territory, while the Khmu of theleft bank were more isolated from this traffic. The river was also a border among the
Khmu, with the right bank Khmu associated with the kingdom of Nan, and the left bankwith Luang Prabang. One group of Khmu, known as Khmu Yuan, were concentrated
around the muangg of Vieng Phukha, and as the ethnonym suggests, have a close historical relationship with the Yuan (Nyuan) (ibid.). This area prospered in the seventeenth
century and was an area of Tai political influence, as attested by the Buddhist structuresthat date from this period. The Khmu-Nyuan relationship in this period may have beenof the classic muangg model, with the Tai wielding power from the narrow valley area, but
incorporating the Khmu in their upland landscapes through ceremonial and economic
relationships (Grabowsky 2003). The local Khmu-Nyuan relationship was further reinforced by the Muang Vieng Phukha’s relationship with the principality of Nan, a larger

Mountain People in the Muang

33

center of Nyuan political power.
The Tai records also note that the majority of the population in the area was MonKhmer. People speaking Khmuic and Palaungic languages inhabited the mountainous
regions, but they came into increasingly intense contact with Tai cultures as the Tai
muangg expanded. Linguistic evidence from Khmu suggests that Mon-Khmer groups
began borrowing from Tai languages at an early time, a phenomenon that indicates highlevels of bilingualism among mountain people (Downer 1989–90) across the mountainous
areas. The implications of this cultural contact are evident in the Khmu, Rmeet, Samtao,
and Bit languages still spoken in the area, which contain a high level of Tai lexical material. It is difficult to put a date on the start of this interaction, but it is likely that the
linguistic contact became significant with the founding of small Tai muangg in what are
now the northern areas of Laos, Vietnam, and Thailand. A somewhat more recent development is the evolution of tones in Samtao and several varieties of Khmu, which wereoriginally not tonal but developed tones partially as a result of contact with local Tai
languages that have tones. This deep cultural influence requires the presence of social
networks that were much denser than those implied by simply symbolic roles in ritualor occasional trading relations.
Évrard states that the ritual formalization of the relations between Tai and MonKhmer groups determines the “structure interethnique” that provides the basic framework for considering the muangg and its relations with the margins (Évrard 2006, 77).
Indeed, it is this ceremonial relationship—the precarious balance of appropriation andintegration, denial and recognition—that has captured the analytic attention of manyscholars of the region. However, Évrard shows in his own study that the micro-dynamics,
such as the practical details of livelihoods, soldiering and river trade, of the Tai Lue-Khmurelationship require a rethinking of the assumptions about dependence and dominancethat are implied in models based on structure. Furthermore, insights on the culturalprocesses associated with the appearance of villages that are mixed Tai-Khmu—or even
Tai villages that became Khmu call for a finer resolution of analysis. Particularly interesting is his assertion that when looking at this level of interaction, the ethnic group often
loses its usefulness as an analytical tool, because here the subgroupings4) within society
play a more important part in determining the outcome of power struggles and development dilemmas.

4) This is an analysis of the tmooy subgroupings in Khmu society. See also Évrard (2011) for a compelling analysis of these social dynamics in the contemporary context.

34

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

Re-examining the Formation and Transformation of a Muang
Condominas (1990) made the important observation that the structure of the muangg has
typically been the overwhelming concern for scholars interested in the history of Tai
people and their neighbors. Reflecting on his own fieldwork on the interethnic andinterclass relationships between the Tai Dam, Laha, and Khang in a muangg of northwestern Vietnam, he expresses frustration with the standard approaches.
Though this picture conveys, it seems to us, the structure of a muong [muang] in the modern
period, it cannot convey the internal dynamics that move this society. In this region, as elsewhere,
ethnographic descriptions give an impression of a static society which, paradoxically, reinforce thesame picture given by accounts of conquests that historians provide. The interpretations of these
two types of data, although throwing light on each other, allow only a vague suggestion of theinternal dynamics of a present-day muong. (ibid., 69)

Okada (2012) has further challenged the scholarship on muangg in northern Vietnam,
drawing on texts written in Han Nom and old Tai scripts dating from before the colonial
period. He uncovers detail about muangg in Thai Bac, described as having two centers of
power—one Tai Dam (Black Tai) and one Tai Khao (White Tai)—that interacted witheach other. The governance of the muangg was based on several sources of authority.
Rather than a center-periphery model for the muang, he proposes a more dynamic andnetworked system of relations among many different peoples. Furthermore, the area ishigh in “cultural hybridity,” given the multiple ethnic groups living in close proximity.
He concludes that ecological conditions, influxes of immigrants, and linkages to theregional economy were critical in creating the structures that were subsequently identified by scholars such as Condominas in the colonial and post-colonial periods. In otherwords, the muangg political structure was embedded in the local geography and ecology
and situated within a particular historical context, and was not the product of any one
ethnic group. Moreover, the “Tai Dam” model was shown to be a mix of Tai Dam andTai Khao, while the basic decentralized structure contradicts the notion of concentrated
power. However, the reliance on written records means that the non-Tai people fadeout of sight quickly, and we are left wondering again how relations with and amongautochthonous peoples were created and recreated over time, and what their role may
have been in matters of the muang.
The heritage of ethnolinguistic diversity characterizing Luang Namtha, in which theTai speakers have always been a decisive minority, begs the question of how a Tai-stylemuangg was formed amid such situations of extreme diversity. What we know from theTai and other records suggests that this ethnic complexity was probably the norm in theregion. The data presented here illustrate how uplanders created niches within theMountain People in the Muang

35

development and governance of the Luang Namtha muang, shaping the political, economic, and cultural landscapes that overlay the area today. The need for recognition of
uplanders’ agency in history has been mentioned with increasing frequency (for example,
Journal of Global History 2010), but local narratives demonstrating the historical dynamism of this agency are still critical for unloading the baggage of state-written history.
The oral traditions discussed here tie together the founding and expansion of the muangwith the recent socio-economic development of Luang Namtha. Remembering themselves as founders of the muang, the non-Tai people see continuity in their political andeconomic engagement with the local center of governance within a local society that is
dominated by Tai narratives.
Luang Namtha Demographics: Dynamic Complexity
Now a growing urban center of some 45,000 people, the expansion of Luang Namtha’s
economy is driven by ever increasing levels of trade and investment. The city, which isthe provincial capital of Luang Namtha province within the Lao Peoples’ Democratic
Republic, lies less than an hour’s drive from the Chinese border, along the national roadR3, which was upgraded in 2004 as part of the Asian Development Bank’s Greater
Mekong Sub-region Program to increase transport links among the countries in theregion. Across the border is Sipsong Panna, China’s rubber production area. Rapid growthin demand for latex in China has drawn Luang Namtha and Lao national agricultural
policy solidly into transboundary product chains, transforming the landscapes and livelihood strategies of the local people. Despite the widespread conversion of forest fallow
to rubber trees, visitors to Luang Namtha, numbering almost 250,000 in 2009 (Lao PDR,
Government of Laos 2009), enjoy trekking in the Nam Ha National Protected Area andvisiting villages of the many local ethnic minority groups.
The town of Luang Namtha shows great ethnolinguistic diversity, and the populationof the town itself reflects the influx of diverse people since the early 1900s. Of the total
provincial population of approximately 145,000 people (2005), nearly 45,000 live in Luang
Namtha town. Luang Namtha provincial census data from 2005 is broken down by ethnicity in Table 1.
At the provincial level, the population breaks down into roughly 30 percent each for
Tibeto-Burman, Mon-Khmer, and Tai-Kadai. Hmong-Mien and other small groups constitute the last 10 percent, while ethnic Lao account for only 3 percent of the population.
These figures roughly reflect the ethnolinguistic situation documented by Izikowitz([1951] 2001) in the 1930s, and by Halpern in the 1950s (quoted in Pholsena 2010).
The data and analysis presented here draw on narratives given by non-Tai people
around the town of Luang Namtha. The data comes from extended interviews with and36

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.
Table 1 Population of Luang Namtha Province by Ethnicity
Ethnic Group

Linguistic Family% of Total

Akha
Khmu
Tai Lue
Tai Dam
Hmong
Lahu
Lamet
Lao
Nyuan
Iu-MienSingsili
SamtaoTai Nua

Tibeto-Burman
Mon-Khmer
Tai-Kadai
Tai-Kadai
Hmong-Mien
Tibeto-Burman
Mon-Khmer
Tai-Kadai
Tai-Kadai
Hmong-Mien
Tibeto-Burman
Mon-Khmer
Tai-Kadai

25
25
12
10
5
4
3
3
3
3
2
1
1

Source: Lao PDR, Government of Laos (2005)

Table 2 Ethnic Groups Appearing in the Paper
Tai
Nyuan
Tai Lue
Tai Dam
Lao
Lue

Non-Tai
Mon-Khmer

Hmong-Mieng

Tibeto-Burman

Sinitic

Bit
Khmu

Lanten
Mien
Hmong

Sida
Pana
PhunoyHonarratives given by local people in the Lao, Mun, Sida, Bit, Khmu, Hmong, Pana, andChinese languages. Table 2 summarizes the main ethnic groups involved in the paper.
The events discussed in the following section are summarized in Table 3. First, we
discuss the settling and opening of the muang, focusing on the role of a local leader ofthe Lanten ethnic group. Next we explore description of the governance of the muang
after its founding, with an eye to uncovering some sense of the economic and politicalinteractions between the muangg peoples. This is followed by a look at the role of themuangg and its people in the establishment of the current political order, including borderdemarcation and the Communist revolution. Finally, the analysis is brought into thecurrent socio-economic development context. The presentation of this data is concluded
with discussion of how identities are being redefined based on this alternative historicalnarrative, even as it is colored by the current Lao national political discourse. We makereference to analysis of local written Tai historical texts and other Western documents
for the purpose of triangulation and contextualization.

Mountain People in the Muang

37

Table 3 Historical Events in Luang Namtha
Year

Event

1587
1600s
1733
1880s

Nyuan depart Doi Tung in Chiang Rai
Nyuan enter Luang Namtha area
Nyuan relocate to Nan
Lanten (Dang Yon Hak group) enter Luang Namtha area from China
Sida enter Luang Namtha from Phongsaly
Lanten (Li clan) enter Namtha from Muang Ay area (Oudomxay)
Bit enter Luang Namtha from Muang Ay area
Dang Yon Hak rules as “hua na khet”
Nyuan return to Luang Namtha
Lao territories become French colony
Boten border incident
Chao Luang Sitthisane ruling Luang Namtha as chao muang
Tai Dam migrants arrive from Dien Bien Phu
Qing forces defeated, KMT disruption starts
Revolt of Muang Sing
Lanten and others take to the forest to escape fighting between Communist and Royalist forces
Luang Namtha town liberated by Communist forces
Villagers return from the forest
Tai Dam, Nyuan, Bit, and other groups siding with Royalists flee to Bokeo province
Tai Dam and other ex-Royalist forces return to Luang Namtha
Lao People’s Democratic Republic proclaimed
Nyuan return to Luang Namtha

1891
1893
1894
1895
1911
1914
1960
1962
1968
1974
1975
1976

II Settling the Muang: Dang Yon Hak and the Arrival of the Lanten
When our ancestors arrived here, there was no one living in the valley basin.
Common narrative of Lanten, Sida, and Bit elders of Luang Namtha

We often conceive of “minority” groups in mainland Southeast Asia as a substratum(autochthonous) or an overlay (late immigrants). The Lanten, Sida, and Bit communities
living in Luang Namtha5) claim that they arrived in the area in the late 1800s. There areno specific dates, but genealogies given by village elders confirm this general timeframe.
What is clear from all of them is that their ancestors migrated from different directions
in search of safe and productive land. Fig. 1 shows key villages in the Namtha valley.
Namdii, founded in the 1960s by the Lanten but originally the location of a Bit settlement,
is a village in which Lanten and Sida currently live together. This village is where themajority of this paper’s narrators live. Ban Sida has a larger Sida population, and is the5) The information presented here was gathered from Lanten, Sida, and Bit elders living in villagesaround the town of Luang Namtha.

38

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

Fig. 1 Northern Laoslast of many moves the Sida have made since arriving in the area in the late 1800s. Elders
in this village have provided supplementary information as well. Thong Om is the siteof the original Lanten settlement discussed here.
Since at least the early 1800s,6) a group of Lanten7) had been living in the Sipsong
Panna area of the Sino-Lao border, farming and hunting. The Lanten currently live in
Laos, Vietnam, and China, and speak a Hmong-Mien language called Mun, which is
closely related to the better-known Mien (Yao) language. Also, like the Mien, the Lanten
have been practicing Daoism since perhaps the eleventh century (Pourret 2002). Theirrituals are performed with the assistance of books written in Chinese characters. Chinese
literacy remains an important, but increasingly threatened, aspect of Lanten culture,linked not only to rituals but to traditional singing and other forms of cultural knowledge
6) It is generally believed that the uplanders inhabiting the region are relatively recent arrivals. Dates
are often put at around 1890 or thereafter, but conservative estimates based on oral genealogies
date the arrival of the Sida and Lanten in the region to the 1860s.
7) We have chosen to use the ethnonym “Lanten” over other options because that is how they are
known in the literature. We refer to their language as Mun, which is what they themselves calltheir language.

Mountain People in the Muang

39

as well. The spoken Mun language has also been heavily influenced by generations ofcontact with Chinese. Nevertheless, the Lanten are known in contemporary Luang
Namtha as one of the most culturally conservative groups, preserving their homespun
cotton and indigo-dyed clothing, patrilineal clan-based society, and written language. The
exonym “Lanten” comes from the Chinese word for indigo (landian 蓝靛), and thisproduct has been so important to them that it has been suggested that they are called
Lanten not only because they wear the indigo-dyed clothes, but also because they had amonopoly on the indigo market long ago in China (Takemura 1981).
One day this group of Lanten followed their game over the mountains into the area
between Muang Sing and Muang Luang Phukha. Pleased with the environmental setting
and encouraged by the low population density in the region, they moved into the Namtha
valley, which they found to be empty. The Lanten took up residence as a large village
along the eastern bank of the Namtha river and began to clear the vegetation for swidden
farming and livestock. The thick forest was home to many animals and hunting continued
to be an important element of their livelihoods. The Lanten leader, Dang Yon Hak 鄧玄
斈, oversaw the establishment of several Lanten villages in the lowland area, but themain settlement was at a village called Thong Om, located just south of the present-day
airport. At around the same time, a small group of Sida8) people arrived and started asettlement across the river, farming swidden fields and raising livestock. The Sida andthe Lanten “built a road between their villages” and traded rice and cloth. It is interesting to note that the motivation for the migration is rather different between the Lanten
and Sida. The Lanten insist that they were not persecuted in Chinese lands and were
not fleeing from war; rather, they made conscious decisions based on consideration of
their economic needs and potential for self-governance in daily matters. The Sida, on theother hand, tell that they were suffering an unbearable tax burden, which they paid in
non-timber forest products such as lac, edible insects, and other special herbs and spices.9)
At around the same time, another group of Lanten was leaving the confluence of the
Mekong and Khan rivers just outside Luang Prabang. This group also tells a story ofentering into Lao territory, in this case from Lai Chau in Vietnam, during one of theirhunting trips. Fleeing from turmoil and disease in the Sipsong Chu Tai, they made their
way down into the Mekong basin by way of southwestern flowing tributaries. But life
near the Lao royal capital was not agreeable, largely because of the shortage of land forswidden cultivation. The group then moved northwards to Muang Ay, in the current-day8) The Sida speak a Tibeto-Burman language belonging to the Southern-Loloish branch of LoloBurmese.
9) We are preparing a separate analysis of Sida oral history that traces their departure from China andsubsequent journey through Phongsaly to Luang Namtha.

40

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.

Namo district of Oudomxay province. The Li clan was the dominant force in this Lanten
community and oversaw the establishment of a more permanent settlement in their new
home. The Lanten settlement fell within the political influence of a small Tai muang
centered around Muang Ay, but which also included a large Khmu population, several
villages of Bit and Mien, and a small population of Tibeto-Burman groups. Lanten textile
production, important in trade among local groups, had made them an important factor
in the local economy.
The leader of the Li clan asserted himself as a figure of power among these uplandgroups, providing an interface between the non-Tai upland people and the Tai rulers in
the muang. With the death of the Li leader, his two sons—Li Yon Siu 李玄照 and Li Yon
Sang 李玄璋—traveled to Luang Prabang with an entourage to consult with the Lao kingand the French authorities on how to handle the succession of the hua na khett (Lao:
subdistrict chief) position. It was decided that Yon Siu, the elder brother, would assume
the position of upland leader. In recognition of his local economic and political influence,
he received the title of saen luangg (Lao: leader of 100,000) and returned to Muang Ay as“the administrator of the mountain people.”10)
The Namo Lanten also built relations with the Bit, who had arrived recently as
refugees from the Cheuang Wars of the 1880s.11) The Bit were spinners of high-quality
thread from the Lanten cotton but apparently did not grow their own cotton. The Lanten
recall how as many as 10 Bit households could be “attached” to a Lanten family, providing dedicated spinning services. Most Bit families had members who spoke Mun(Lanten), and many of the influential Lanten were conversant in Bit. The Luang Namtha
Bit also recall their relationship with the Lanten, and confirm the importance of cottonin the exchange between the two groups. They also confirm widespread bilingualism.
Bit oral narrative remembers their weak position in relationships with other larger, more
powerful groups. For the Mon-Khmer groups of northern Laos, this would usually be
assumed to refer to their position of subjugation to the local Tai rulers, but in this casethere is some more recent evidence for some form of indentureship with the Lanten. In
any case, it seems clear that the Lanten had established a position in the administrationof the Ban Ay-Ban Khouang muangg and carved out a niche for themselves in the local
economy.
10) In Sino-Mun, 得種官名管山人．
11) Proschan (1998) provides useful information about the Cheuang Wars but does not mention the Bit
specifically. The Bit themselves tell of fleeing the Phongsaly-Vietnam border area during this time,
and their narrative puts them in Namo directly after that. It is likely that a group of Bit continued
on from Namo to Namtha, as a British traveler has them well established in the upper area of theNamtha river watershed in 1891 (Anonymous 1982).

Mountain People in the Muang

41

Fig. 2 Excerpt from Short History of the Lanten in Luang Namtha, written in Sino-Mun (泰聀遙人 Thek Tjek
Iu Mun)When Yon Siu died, the order maintained by the Lanten in the Muang Ay mountains
was significantly weakened. By this time, Dang Yon Hak, the Lanten leader in Luang
Namtha, had also established relations with the French in Luang Prabang and received
the title saen luang. He made frequent trips to pay tribute and collect budgetary resources
for administering the Luang Namtha area, passing through Muang Ay. Seeing that the
Muang Ay Lanten had fallen into some disarray, he invited the Li clan to lead the Lanten
to Luang Namtha and join them in the valley region. With the low population density andlack of manpower, Dang Yon Hak needed the Muang Ay Li clan to help him develop thebasin. The prospect of having an influential leader in the form of Dang Yon Hak, in addition to the abundance of land, led the Li clan to accept the invitation and migrate to theLuang Namtha basin. Now there were several Lanten villages along the river, and thecultivation of upland rice, cotton, and other upland crops, along with raising cattle andbuffalo, became the mainstay of the basin economy.
The Lanten oral history discussed here has also been written down in a traditional
song format. Fig. 2 is one page from a song composed in 2011 by a Lanten elder, describing the arrival of his people in Luang Namtha. The Mun title of the song is Thek Tjek Iu
Mun 泰聀遙人, but the author also gave it a Lao title meaning “Short History of the Lanten
in Luang Namtha.” As a member of the Li clan, the writer focuses on the position of Yon
Siu and Yon Sang, and the Li clan’s decision to join Yon Hak in Namtha. His emphasis is

42

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.

Yon Hak’s role in bringing the Lanten together to assert themselves in Luang Namtha,
an event of importance remembered by elders from both the local Li and Dang clans.

III Opening the Muang: Return of the Tai Refugees
The most powerful event in the Lanten accounts of their history in Luang Namtha concerns the role of Dang Yon Hak in transforming the Namtha basin from pa to muang. As
introduced above, the Namtha basin was covered in dense forest when the Lanten andother groups arrived. Although traces of previous settlement were readily observable,
establishing the new settlements required a portfolio of upland livelihood technologies
including rice production in swidden fields, diversified cropping of food and fiber crops,
hunting and gathering, and large livestock husbandry. Using these time-tested methods,
the Lanten and Sida transposed their mountain livelihood systems onto the lowland ecology. Fig. 3 shows the current Luang Namtha basin, showing the location of the main
research villages, and the original Lanten settlement of Thong Om.

Fig. 3 Luang Namtha Valley
Source: MekongGIS

Mountain People in the Muang

43

The uplanders who viewed this valley were long-time shifting cultivators, anddescribe the Namtha valley in terms that in Tai cultural frameworks signify pa or wild
forest areas, as opposed to civilized, muangg valley areas. The lowland areas on both sidesof the Namtha river were covered in forest. Large trees known in Lao as kok hai (a typeof Ficus) were numerous in the landscape, making it an inhospitable setting. The physical labor needed to clear large areas of land was not available, given the size of the
migrant groups, and it was widely believed that kok hai are inhabited by wild spirits. The
presence of kok hai trees holds special importance for the spiritual aspect of the humannature relationships that were formed there. In the Sida telling of their arrival, the kok
hai plays a central role (Sida elder, male, age 62):
In the times of our ancestors, there was no heaven and no earth. There was one kok hai tree thatgrew up to the heavens, so high that it blocked out the sun. In the shadow of this tree, crops could
not be grown and people could not make their lives. So they tried to cut the tree down. We hired
30 and 300 Akha12) to come chop the tree. We chopped and chopped, but each morning we woke
to find the tree had grown back. On the tree was a large vine. We decided to cut the vine. When
we had chopped through the vine, the tree fell over, killing the Akha and forming a depression.
The two leaders Ca Lo and Ca Sa made the pond into a fishing area, and we had plenty to eat. We
stayed at the pond and it became our home.

In this story, there is clearly an intertwining of an older creation myth common acrossthe region, and a more recent founding of the muang. It is interesting that there is no
mention of agriculture but rather fishing. The identity of Ca Lo and Ca Sa is not clear.
At first, we were told that these brothers were the original Sida descendants from theirfirst ancestor, the mythical mother Go Gue. In subsequent tellings, it became clear thatthey were probably Tai but are still considered to be the ancestors of the local Sida.
Interestingly, the Rmeet, a Mon-Khmer group living further to the south, have a similar
but more detailed myth.13) In the Rmeet telling, the falling tree kills the two brothers but
lands in Thailand, which explains how the original wealth of the Rmeet was lost to theThai (Sprenger 2006). The Sida telling is more focused on the first step of transforming
the inhospitable Luang Namtha area to a settlement with direct forward links to theircurrent lives. It also indirectly recognizes the same assertion as the Lanten story: thatthe mountain people were the first people to open the valley.
12) It is possible that the narrator has confused Akha with “Kha,” as might be suggested by the Rmeet
story referred to below. However, in other stories told in conjunction with this, the Sida recognize
the large population of Akha in the area. There is also a tendency to sanitize ethnonyms in present
day storytelling, so as to avoid offending the national discourse of “harmony among all ethnic
groups.”13) There are many examples of cross-ethnic transfer in oral traditions in Luang Namtha.

44

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

Faced with the practical obstacles of developing the Namtha valley plain, Dang Yon
Hak took advantage of his political connections. Yon Hak paid tribute to both Luang
Prabang and Nan, a logical strategy for a leader aspiring to establish his own power locally.
The trip to Luang Prabang to pay taxes and collect an administration budget was relatively
easy and likely facilitated by the Li clan, who had closer relations and more local experience given their previous residence near the Lao royal capital. Yon Hak also made trips
to the principality of Nan, which was under the suzerainty of Bangkok. One year, returningfrom a large tribute mission to the Siamese king in Bangkok with a sizable administrationbudget, Yon Hak stopped in Nan.14) Here he encountered a community of Nyuan who
claimed to have come from Muang Luang Phukha and were willing to return to the Namtha
valley with him. Arriving finally in Namtha with 10 Nyuan households, they were allowed
to live near their old wet-rice fields and told to rebuild their paddy fields.
The Mun phrase used for this event bu mun in dou dai taai an wa gjang, “we Lanten
brought the Tai here and put them in the village” is centered around the idea of inserting
outsiders into the muang. This is reminiscent of the well-known Tai phrase referring to
the practice of moving people to strengthen a polity—kep—
phak sai sa, kep kha sai muang,“collect vegetables and put them in the basket, collect Kha and put them in the muang”15)—
but with a complete reversal of roles. Moreover, the Lanten elders often use the Laophrase phattana baan muangg (“develop the polity”), a live expression in the socio-political
discourse of the modern Lao state, to describe Yon Hak’s intent to use the Nyuan to open
the valley up to more intensive cultivation. This is in contrast with the Lanten description of their own role, saang baan saang muangg (Lao: build-village-build-muang, “establish the polity”).
The resettlement of the Nyuan was followed in 1895 by a wave of Tai Dam refugees
fleeing social upheaval in Dien Bien Phu. With the valley plain gradually returning toagriculture, the abundance of land and other resources made the Namtha basin attractive
to these new arrivals. Soon the Lanten found themselves competing for resources with
the Tai. In particular, Lanten livestock and Tai wet rice cultivation proved to be a difficult
mix, with cattle damaging crops and expanding fields encroaching on forests where cattle
were grazed. Furthermore, Lanten dry agriculture was carried out in areas that were
14) The Nan chronicle (Wyatt 1994) mentions a tributary mission from Nan to Bangkok in 1856, which
included a “local chief” from Muang Luang Phukha. This date does not match the documented
timing of the Nyuan return. It is also significantly earlier than the supposed arrival of the Lanten.
The mission included local chiefs from a number of areas, and perhaps Yon Hak or a similar figure
was part of it. If it was indeed Yon Hak, this reference greatly reinforces the Lanten clans to a significant role in the governance of Muang Luang Phukha.
15) This phrase is used particularly in reference to King Kawila’s attempts to reestablish Chiang Mai’s
political control over northern Thailand after Burmese rule in the eighteenth century.

Mountain People in the Muang

45

most easily returned to wet rice cultivation, and they made way for the Tai so that thevalley could be developed. No doubt other social and political pressures figured into theirdecision as well.

IV Governing the Muang: Cultural Resources and Economic
Interdependence
Scholarly concern with the governance of Tai muang, particularly with regards to therelationships between Tai and non-Tai peoples, tends to focus on structures involved indefining the hierarchy of unbalanced power relations. Insights into the modalities ofinteraction are harder to come by, but illustrate a multitude of relationships.
Literacy, Bilingualism, and the Creation of a Political Niche
Li Lao Da’s song stresses the fraternal relations established between the two Lantenclans. Without the joining of the Dang and Li groups, it would have been impossible toassert any sort of authority in the Namtha area. But Dang Yon Hak continued to play therole of founder, tax collector, and payer of tribute. The Lanten use a number of different
terms to describe the position of Yon Hak, focusing on the broad geographic scope of his
authority and his high position within the political hierarchy. The two commonly used
Lao terms emphasize that he was a regional leader, ostensibly exerting some kind of
authority over a large and diverse number of people:• hua na khett (Lao), “subdistrict chief”• chao khwaengg (Lao), “provincial governor”
Not surprisingly, both Lao terms have direct semantic links to the modern Lao administrative system. The hua na khett position was also part of the French administrative
structure, although it is used more informally in local oral histories. It should be notedthat these Lao terms are frequently used even when the narrative is in Mun.
There is another set of Sino-Mun terms that related to Chinese administrative
concepts:• gwen tjou 県主 (Mun), “chief of district”• ai tjou ai gwan 做主做官 (Mun), “to be lord, to be the administrator”• ai lu ai gwan 做大做官 (Mun), “to be boss, to be the administrator”

46

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

These terms highlight the Chinese influence on Lanten ideas of authority and administration, most directly from their own experience as a peripheral group to the areas of Han
power. The spiritual world of Daoist deities is a highly structured, complex system ofhierarchical political relations. In their rituals, the Lanten are continuously dealing withthe bureaucracy and power politics of the other world.
Another common phrase incorporates Tai and Chinese terminology into a Mun
construction:• ai taao ai tjou (Mun), “to be the tao,16) to be the master/owner”
These demonstrate the Lanten capacity to integrate different conceptions of power into
their own discourse of political organization. The use of Lao terms shows the Lanten
effort to describe their participation in a Tai administrative context. Thus Lanten oral
history describes the rare situation of a non-Tai ruler, himself a migrant from the mountains, manipulating his political allegiances to increase his own local power by moving
people into his muang. With a hostile natural environment, shaky demographics, and thewrong agricultural technology, Yon Hak had no other choice but to control his land bycontrolling the movement of people.
But Yon Hak was not in control of the stronger demographic force, the migration of
the Tai Dam. The large Lanten villages had to move to the foothills on the fringe of theplains. After Yon Hak’s death, it is said that his son Dang Wan Nyan took over the position of leadership, but this was not passed on to the next generation. The Dang clan’shold on local matters started to waver, as traditional Chinese education weakened andthe Li clan began to assert itself. From this point the Lanten describe themselves asassuming a second layer of administration within a political structure headed by a Tai
leader. Despite the loss of executive authority, the Lanten retained administrative power
within the local governance system.
Governing the muangg required communication with a diverse local population, thevast majority of which was illiterate. The orders and notifications of the chao muang
could easily be written down by the Lanten in Chinese and carried to upland villages,
where they could be read directly in Chinese to the Tibeto-Burman and other HmongMien groups (all of whom used Chinese as a common language), or translated on the spot
into Lue or Khmu for the Mon-Khmer speakers. In Namtha, the Lanten leaders had acohort of assistants, comprised of thin theng 先生 and thung thou nyan 送書人. The
former would write out messages, the latter would deliver, read, or translate the mes16) Tao is a Tai term referring to an elite class of leaders in a muang.

Mountain People in the Muang

47

sages. Details of these individuals survive in the collective memory and household
records; we were told of Li Kyam Nyui, one of Yon Hak’s well-known thin theng, separated by five generations and recorded in the family genealogy book of the Li clan elder
who composed the song presented above.
Having maintained close relations with the Nyuan, however, the Li clan descendants
continued to play the role of public relations officer for the Nyuan chao muang, providing
an interface between the ruler and the ruled. In a typical muangg situation, a lowland
broker (Lao: laam) would have provided the economic and administrative (tax collecting)linkage between the uplands and lowlands (Walker 1999). The laam role was usually
played by a Lao, often an individual of economic and political power, and oriented towards
to transactions with Khmu communities (Yokoyama 2010). Other uplanders, such as
Hmong, were oriented to trading with the Haw caravans, and were thus often outside ofthe laam system (Halpern 1964). The Lanten do not use the word laam to describe theirrole in the muang; they focus on their role in facilitating communication and representing
the chao muangg though literacy. Lanten control of written communications indicates thatthey occupied a position of some power in the local political structure; their position was
founded on a combination of their own linguistic and administrative skills, and their ability to maintain relations in both the upland and the lowland worlds.
But in daily life, relationships in the uplands largely depended upon oral communication. Contemporary narratives give some sense of the patterns of multilingualism that
may have existed at around the turn of the nineteenth century. The Lanten, Sida, and
Bit all give prominence to proficiency in many languages as a characteristic of a successful and influential leader. They themselves have typically been multilingual communities
through past generations. Generally speaking, Haw (Yunnanese Chinese) and Lue werethe lingua franca. Uplanders tended to use Haw with each other, while they would use
Lue with lowlanders. The cultural and linguistic influence of Haw on both Hmong-Mien
and Tibeto-Burman languages is evident in the current lexicons and ritual practices of
those groups. But multilingualism among upland groups was also common.17)
For example, the Lanten have typically been proficient in Mien, and the Lamet and17) It should perhaps not be assumed that Haw influence is an upland-lowland phenomenon. In termsof worldviews and belief systems, this may be the case, but the Haw themselves have been referred
to as upland Chinese and it is likely that a significant portion of these interactions may have happened in the mountains. As Daniels (2009) shows, generations of a Haw family surnamed Fu in
Phongsaly province were issued with titles from the monarchy in Luang Prabang during the nineteenth century, and from the French colonial regime thereafter, which gave them authority toadministrate and collect taxes from various Tibeto-Burman speaking upland peoples. The Fu family, and indeed other upland Haw too, were traders who maintained close relationships (includingintermarriage) with, and exerted cultural and linguistic influence on, other highland ethnic groups.

48

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

Bit have spoken Khmu. As mentioned above, relations between the Lanten and Bit wereconducted not only in Lue, which would be the standard lingua franca, but in their own
languages as well. Artifacts of these patterns are still visible in Namtha today, although
the patterns are undergoing change.
The telling of the Dang and Li clans establishing power over the newly settled areas
in northern Laos harkens back to the ancient days of their relations with the Chineseemperor in the thirteenth century. The Lanten were provided with documents by theemperor giving them permission to migrate through the mountains as they pleased,
conducting their upland agriculture. The mythic origins of this special privilege originate
with the Lanten descent from Pang Hu 盤古, the first ancestor, a dog, who asked themto establish and maintain stability in the mountain areas.18) During those times, theChinese emperor was eager to settle farmers in the mountains to quell the social unrestand banditry that was prevalent, and provided official documentation authorizing the
Iu-Ngin (referring to the historical ancestors of the Mien, Lanten, and other relatedgroups) to carry on their economic activities.
The documents that were held by the Iu-Ngin were called Shan Guan Bo 山關薄
and authorized them to conduct shifting cultivation.19) These papers also freed them fromtax and corvee requirements. These documents are known to exist among the Mien,and one copy of the Lu Cheng Tu Shan Guan Zhuan 路程圖山關伝 (A Record of Mountain Passes on the Route Map) was recently found at the house of a Lanten ritual performer in neighboring Namo district (Tomita and Badenoch 2011). Pourret (2002)
describes how the Iu-Ngin’s relationship with the emperor condemned them to a life ofmobility, but at the same time recognizes the utility of the documents in helping the IuNgin retain their freedom and preserve their identity. Importantly, since these were
official documents issued by the Chinese court, other administrations were likely torecognize their authority. Lemoine (1982, 12) has stated that by maintaining this mythic
history, “the Yao [Mien] (and related groups) gave themselves, as it were, a bargaining
counter in negotiations with the Chinese Empire.” In fact, Lemoine suggests that the“history” that is written down in these documents may be the result of a negotiatedsolution to a spate of Iu-Ngin rebellions.
If there is some foundation in the assertion that written language was one of themechanisms of control used by lowland polities on upland people (Scott 2009), the Iu-Nginare seen to have appropriated this technology of control in order to legitimize their18) The earliest date for the King Ping Charter, in which this descent is codified, is 1261. This is believed
to be the original version that was copied and distributed widely in Thailand, Laos, and Yunnan.
19) In contemporary Lao society, documentation in support of uplanders’ livelihoods consists of land
allocation papers, which are designed to limit cultivation in the name of eradicating shifting cultivation.

Mountain People in the Muang

49

residence in mountain areas, their shifting cultivation-based livelihoods, and their migrations. Furthermore, the possession of written language helped them to assert politicalpower over other upland groups and make alliances with literate lowland groups. Whilethe historical veracity of these stories is debatable, the salient point here is that the
Lanten see themselves as playing a historical role mandated by the highest imperial
authority. In case of Luang Namtha, there is no suggestion that Dang Yon Hak was rulingon behalf of a Chinese political force. However, the concept of ruling the mountains isclearly extended from the old mythical texts into the present, and they are very clear
about the literacy.
The Lanten speak of very close relations with the Mien and Haw in this period, andChinese literacy was a special aspect of this relationship. While many upland groups had
people who could speak Chinese, proficiency in the written language was limited mostly
to the Mien and Lanten. Economically, the Mien are reported to be the richest, as they
were large producers of opium. Mien leaders have also been known to assert control
over a wide area composed of many ethnic groups (Kandre 1967). The Haw controlled
the trade networks, securing access to markets and important goods. Having establishedthemselves as pioneers in the region, the Lanten maintained their position as a bridge
into the muangg administration, positioning themselves between the Tai, Kha, and Chineseworlds. Thus the commercial and cultural bonds between the Lanten, Mien, and Haw
could have been a powerful force challenging the authority of the Nyuan.
Livelihoods, the Regional Economy, and Power Relations
The Nyuan quickly found themselves to be just one of three Tai groups vying for powerin Luang Namtha. As late as 1936, Izikowitz ([1951] 2001) describes Luang Namtha asconsisting of three villages, one each of Nyuan, Tai Dam, and Tai Lue. The Sida tell of
the Nyuan migrants’ struggle to assert themselves. The narrator, a 62-year-old Sida
elder from Ban Namdii, uses the pejorative ethnonym “Kalom” to refer to the Nyuan,
and the term “Venyu,” which is how the Sida refer to themselves in their own language.
After we built the road to the Lanten, we met the Kalom [Nyuan]. The Kalom had just arrived in
Luang Namtha and they had no food. When we saw the Kalom, they said “You, Venyu [Sida]! Do
you have any rice?” We responded, “Yes, we have rice, we have more rice than we can eat.” And
the Venyu said to the Kalom, “Do you have any cloth?” The Kalom responded, “We have plentyof cloth, we have more cloth than we can use for our clothes.” We said, “In that case, bring cloth
and we will trade with you for our rice.” After that, we built a road between the Venyu and theKalom. After that, a Kalom couple brought a bolt of cloth to the Venyu village and they traded forour rice. They tried to carry the rice back, but they got so much that they couldn’t carry it all. And
we got the cloth we needed. The couple went back and told the Kalom villagers about it, and afterthat the Kalom population began to expand.

50

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.

This narrative stresses the poverty, vulnerability, and lack of good judgement the
Sida saw in the Nyuan. The Nyuan shortage of rice is not surprising, given the description of the overgrown valley that they found when they arrived. The Sida and Lanten
were skilled swidden farmers and had no problems with food security. To this day, theSida are known for their high rice yields. In the Sida telling of this exchange, the Nyuan
population was dependent on the Sida to meet their food needs, at least in the early period
after their arrival. The exchange of rice and cloth creates a mutually beneficial relationship, even as the Sida story asserts some sort of authority through their superior survival
skills. But his story continues in a different direction.
Then one day, a Venyu man was boiling maize to make feed for his pigs. A Kalom man came tothe village to trade and saw the maize being boiled for pig feed. The Kalom man, he grabbed themaize and started eating it. “Don’t eat that stuff, it will make you sick!” the Venyu man said. “Son,
I will cook some proper food with rice for you,” he said. The Kalom man responded, “Never mind,
I’m happy to eat this maize, it won’t kill me!” And he kept eating. But the Venyu man boiled rice
anyway and made the Kalom man eat this good food. After finishing, the Kalom man returned to
his village, but got sick and died. After that, the Kalom did not trust us Venyu anymore. They will
not let us sleep in their houses any more.

Despite the Sidas’ assistance with surplus rice, the Nyuan still lacked rice and cameto the Sida for help. But the Nyuan would not listen to the Sida, and a tragedy opens arift between the two. The story is again told in the terms of economic well-being, but
the fate of the maize-eating Nyuan man hints at the larger difficulties the Nyuan were
facing, with the Sida being blamed for the Nyuan’s mistake.
The Muang in Local Geopolitics
These oral histories clash sharply with the Nyuans’ own representation of their returnto Luang Namtha in the late eighteenth century.20) According to records written in the tham
script kept at Nyuan temples, the Nyuan had fled Doi Tung in the current Thai provinceof Chiang Rai in 1587 to escape pressure from the Burmese. At the time, the Burmese
king placed onerous tax and corvee requirements on the Lanna muangg (Sarassawadee2005). The Nyuan probably reached the Namtha valley in the early 1600s, and set up amodest muangg under the direction of Panya Luang Kaansulin. The Nyuan would haveestablished close relations with the local Khmu population who were the main demographic force in the region.
However, in 1733 they fled to the principality of Nan, caught again in the geopoliti20) This information was gathered in interviews with Nyuan elders in Ban Luang, Luang Namtha
province.

Mountain People in the Muang

51

cal turmoil of the region. After an absence of 158 years, they claim to have returned toNamtha in 1891, a group of 500 led by Chao Luang Kommachang Sitthisane. In theirparty were also two samanen, Chua Channha and Chua Nanta. They repaired the thatoverlooking the valley, which had been originally completed in 1628, and the watt at Ban
Khone. In 1893 Laos was formally incorporated into French Indochina. The FrancoBritish project to maintain a buffer zone in the unpopulated areas of Muang Luang had
failed (Grabowsky 2003). The Nyuan claim that they took over the rulership of Luang
Namtha, which they kept only until 1918, at which time a Lao administrator was dispatched from Luang Prabang to rule on behalf of the French. When Lefèvre-Pontalis
traveled through the region in 1894, the town of Muang Luang Phukha was reportedly
under the control of Chao Sitthisane. He describes how Chao Sitthisane had establishedgood relations with the Tai Lue of Muang Sing, in order to strengthen his position against
the Lue of Sipsong Panna, who had tried to gain territory by moving the border marker
southwards in 1893.
Reading other accounts of the region at this time, it seems that Sitthisane had
difficulty with the mountain people to the north and south. The Khmu leaders in Vieng
Phukha, to the south of Muang Luang Phukha, had taken advantage of the long absenceof Tai rulers to strengthen their position, and resisted yielding control of land to the
Nyuan (Lefèvre-Pontalis [1902] 2000). In the foothills north of Muang Luang Phukha,
the Lanten and Mien were also successful in remaining outside of the direct control of
the Nyuan. Lefèvre-Pontalis mentions meeting with three of their leaders, welcoming
them and other migrants from their group to settle in the area, but requiring that theysubmit to French rule. Chao Sitthisane had complained that the Mien and Lanten maintained relations with the Tai Lue of Sipsong Panna, which made them suspicious, especially given the Tai Lue border marker power play in 1893.
The French were at this time in search of a local elite, a critical layer of local societythat had to be won over in order to establish legitimacy for the colonial project. In particular, there was a perceived need to unify the diverse people of the muang. LefèvrePontalis was sympathetic to Chao Sitthisane’s desire to request the ruler of Nan torelease more Nyuan refugees and allow them to come to Muang Luang Phukha. But thisdid not come to pass, even as Tai Dam continued to arrive from the Lao-Vietnam borderarea. Although there were several candidates for a local leader they could support, theFrench were faced with the reality that there was no solid political structure that could
be easily appropriated (Walker 2008). One such candidate for a local elite ally mentioned
in an 1898 Report on Vieng Phukha (referenced in Walker 2008) was an “intelligent andactive chief” who had been appointed by the Siamese some time before the treaty of 1893.
Based on the documentation, one would assume that this refers to Sitthisane. As pres-

52

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

ented above, the Lanten narrative raises the possibility that this chief was Dang Yon Hak.
These interweaving, yet contradictory, narratives pose interesting questions. Whatsort of muangg was evolving in the early twentieth century and who were the main individuals driving it? Lanten and Sida claim to have been the first settlers, catalyzing theresettlement of Nyuan. Perhaps, embracing dreams of restoring the glory of a pastmuang, the Nyuan struggled to assert themselves. In the meantime, they were displaced
demographically by Tai Dam refugees, and their hopes of building a power base were
eclipsed by the political reality of becoming a French colony.

V Protecting the Muang: Border Demarcation and Securing the Salt
The Lanten direct political influence declined with the death of Dang Yon Hak, although
they adjusted and kept a role in the governance of the muang. However protecting Namtha
from the Chinese is an important theme in the Lanten telling of their role in the muang.
The most enthusiastically told story of Lanten efforts to secure Lao territory from thedesigns of the Chinese concerns a border demarcation. From the colonial historical
record, we know that in 1893 the Tai Lue of Sipsong Panna moved a border marker into
the territory of Muang Luang Phukha in order to gain control of the salt fields at Boten(Walker 2008). The Chinese were generally believed to be behind this bold move on thepart of the Lue, but in the Lanten telling, it was the Chinese (Qing dynasty officials) who
were directly responsible for the affront on Lao (French colonial) territory (Lanten elder,male, age 58, Ban Namdii).
In those days, the Chinese moved the border down, just above the old Sida village. The people
were not happy with this. So the Chinese came to negotiate again, and there was a large feast. But
the French and Chinese could not agree on the border. The Chinese would not move the borderback. The salt fields of Boten were on the Chinese side of the border. So Dang Yon Hak negotiatedand agreed with the Chinese like this. The Chinese would return to their territory, and the next
day both sides would send a delegation. Each would lead a pig and wherever the two delegations
met, that would be the site of the border. The pigs would be prepared, and it would be decided.
The next morning, the Lao side woke up late and were worried that they would arrive late and theChinese would get control of the salt. So the Lao side carried their pig on their backs, and ran up
the hill. Once they passed the Boten salt fields, they sat down and waited for the Chinese to arrive.
That is how we kept the border on the other side of the salt.

This story relates how the Lanten outsmarted Chinese officials, but touches on the amusing possibility that the Lao side almost missed the opportunity to secure their salt becauseof a late start. The story also tells of the importance of the Boten salt fields for the Lao.

Mountain People in the Muang

53

We first heard this story from the Sida, who claimed that they were the ones who carried
the pig up the hill. The Lanten storytellers assert that they were the ones in the lead,because Dang Yon Hak was the figure of authority and the Sida were a small group without any influential leaders in the muang.
In a later episode, the Lanten save Lao territory from the Chinese yet again. Afterthe defeat of the Qing forces by the Republicans in 1911, defeated Qing soldiers flooded
into Lao territory and the security situation deteriorated quickly. There was much theftof food and livestock, as the French had withdrawn to Namo district in Oudomxay province, leaving a political vacuum. Again, in the 1940s, the Lanten helped repel marauding
Guomintang soldiers, as described by a Lanten ex-soldier (male, 66 years old):
The Haw of Chiang Kai-shek’s army were numerous. The people were suffering but there wasnothing to be done. Finally we decided to go get help from the French garrison in Namo district.
Three hundred French soldiers came back with us, but when they got to Dong Ving, the French
did not see any Chinese soldiers and got very upset with us. They said that if they didn’t see theChinese soldiers the next day, they would eat Lanten liver for dinner. They continued down into
the Namtha valley and arrived at Ban Pasak on the Namtha river. The Chinese soldiers were
camped on the other side of the river. The French crossed the river and chased the Chinese backto Muang Sing and over the border back into China. Because of this, the French stayed in Namtha,
and there were no more security problems.

These episodes portray a central role for the Lanten in key defenses of Lao territory.
In the first story, the Lanten were able to renegotiate another chance for a beneficial
outcome to the border demarcation with Chinese officials because of their intimate knowledge of Chinese culture and skills in the Chinese language. In the second story, becauseof their previous position within the French administration, the Lanten were able toconvince the French to return to Namtha and restore stability to the region. Thesestories also highlight some ambiguity in the Lanten relationship with the Chinese. They
are proud of their association with the Chinese culture of literacy, but at the same timethey make reference to an ever-present threat not only to their own existence, but also
to the well-being of their area of residence. It is worth noting that in both, the Chineseare made out to be the enemy, when in fact both the Tai Lue and Chinese contributed tothe social disturbances. This is likely a manifestation of the present national discourseof borders and nations working retrospectively on the historical memory of the Lanten.
Repelling a Chinese enemy allows them to retain the protection of Lao territory as thetheme, while at the same time increasing the import of the actual defense by enlarging
the size of the enemy.

54

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

VI Liberating the Muang: Minorities and the Communist Victory“Together with the Khmu, the Lanten brought the revolution to Luang Namtha.”
Lanten ex-soldier describing the mountain peoples’ contribution to the Liberation effort.

The town of Luang Namtha was “liberated” in 1962, an important victory in the Communist struggle against the Royalists. Fighting over the rural and mountainous areas
continued until 1986.
Lanten elders tell of their satisfaction when the French returned after World War
II, as the familiar regime reestablished stability to their lives. However, they were wellaware that the French had returned on different terms. The Lanten were sympathetic
to the pro-independence Lao Issara message that the French would not be able to maintain their presence for much longer, and that it was better in the long run for the Lanten
to participate in the establishment of a new Lao regime. A sizable number of Lantenjoined the Communist Ay Nong 21) forces. Many of the Lanten soldiers were young men
who just had a sense that something was changing and felt that they should be a part ofit. In 1964, a Lanten unit was set up in Namtha, composed of approximately 80 people,
but was broken up and integrated into other units in 1968. For those who remained in
the village, it was a period of hardship, as described by a Lanten ex-soldier (male, age 61,
Ban Namdii).
In 1960, the Lanten of the Namdii area fled to the forest because the fighting was getting bad.
Villages and rice barns were burnt, mostly by Yao [Mien] soldiers who fought for the French. We
dug tubers in the forest to eat. Their leaders were Chao La and Chao Mai, and they were verystrong. The Yao were stronger than the Lanten because their leaders had good relations with theKMT [Kuomintang]. They collected opium from all households and then made big sales to the
KMT. We Lanten only produced opium for our own use, and we never knew how to sell it. Before,
we traded our cloth for Yao paper. My father, Tan Lao San, went over to Namo to get weapons tofight the Yao. In 1962, we came out of the forest because Namtha was liberated. But there werestill attacks by Yao who hadn’t fled. The Yao burned our houses. My grandfather’s official regalia
were all burned. The shoes were beautiful and shiny, but they were burned. After two or three
big battles, the Vietnamese soldiers finally swept out the remaining Yao.

The Lanten relationship with the Mien was for most intents and purposes destroyed by
the war period. However, when the Lanten ex-soldiers speak of their time in the war,
they frequently mention their close relationship with the Khmu. The main Ay Nongg base21) In the post-1975 historical discourse, the Communist forces are known as Ay Nongg (the brothers)
and the Royalists as Satu (the enemy). This narrative is by the Lanten who were on the Ay Nongside.

Mountain People in the Muang

55

in Namtha was in Vieng Phukha district, an area to the south of Luang Namtha town thatis mainly Khmu. Li Lao Da recalled how Lanten soldiers, many of whom had grown up
near Khmu villages and understood basic Khmu, quickly becoming proficient in the language. They tell of long periods of time in which they were alone with the Khmu, receiving little support and having very little contact with Lao soldiers.
The last of the Lanten thin thengg were important in the new regime’s post-liberation
political work of establishing control over the rural areas. Three of these individuals
traveled around the northern part of the Namtha valley conducting public relations for
the Ay Nong. The immediate objective of these efforts was to “raise awareness,” andtheir tasks consisted of taking messages from the Ay Nong, written in Chinese, and reading them in mountain villages, in the same manner as they had done previously for the
Nyuan chao muang. In the village, the thin thengg would assess who could speak and read
Lao well enough to understand the message and establish a point of contact for on-goingpropaganda activities. The Lanten seem to have been particularly well equipped for thisrole, again because of their fluency and literacy in Chinese. Moreover, each spoke Lueand could read basic Lao. All could communicate in Mien and Khmu, as well. But the
Lanten did not have a monopoly on the mountain propaganda work. One man of Sida-Panaparentage was another active propagandist, speaking Haw, Sida, Pana, Lue, and Khmu.
Without these multilingual message-bearers, the Ay Nongg were limited in their accessto mountain communities. Such a combination of linguistic capacity and ethnic minority
identity seem to have been key factors in convincing upland people to support the Ay
Nongg forces.
The role of ethnic minorities in the Communist struggle has been debated. Thereis some sentiment that the minority groups were crucial to the liberation of the country
at the local levels (Pholsena 2006). In this interpretation, the Lao avoided much of theactual fighting and took orders from an elite that was either Vietnamese or heavily influenced by the Vietnamese. Evans (2003) has argued that the role of the minorities has
been overestimated, and that the Lao were much more engaged on the ground than iscommonly believed. It is interesting that the Lanten account of the liberation of Luang
Namtha places the Lanten in close quarters with the Khmu, who formed the vast majority of field revolutionaries. The Lanten are proud of their role in the liberation of Namtha,
and by stressing their close collaboration with the Khmu revolutionaries, are able todistance themselves from those who did not side with the Ay Nong, particularly the Mien.

56

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.

VII Developing the Muang: Rice, Rubber, and the Road to China
After the Tai Dam villages that had sided with the Satu (“enemy,” Royalist forces) fled
to Bokeo in 1968, a number of Lanten and Sida farmers moved into the plains to cultivate
wet rice in the abandoned fields. The new government was keen to increase rice production as quickly as possible, and they encouraged the Lanten and Sida. Technical assistance was provided by the few remaining Tai Dam households. Over the next five years,
more farmers from the hill villages joined. In this way, the Lanten took up the task offeeding the newly liberated muang, producing irrigated rice and participating in caravans
to deliver food and supplies to the soldiers still fighting to the south of Namtha until the
Tai Dam began to return in 1974. Despite their revolutionary contributions, the Lanten
had no choice but to retreat to the foothills again, where they applied the newly learned
technology to open paddy fields along the streams running through the village.
Luang Namtha now leads northern Laos in rubber planting (Lao PDR, Governmentof Laos 2011). A rubber boom has swept much of the country, and rubber is now a national
economic development priority for the government. A Hmong village on the edge of
Namtha town has established itself as a leader in rubber planting (Chantavong et al. 2009).
The Lanten, Bit, and many Sida have also decided to make the shift to rubber production
as their main livelihood activity. Namdii village was the first to make the investment
among the Lanten. Their first requests for assistance from the local government weredenied, but they soon established a relationship with Lanten in China and gained accessto the information, technology, and planting materials they needed. What is interesting
about the start-up of the Lanten rubber operations is that it was catalyzed by the participation of several village leaders in a joint Mien-Lanten cultural festival in China, notinfluence for their Hmong neighbors. The Namdii elders traveled to China to take partin a traditional singing event and became acquainted with Lanten of the same clan. The
Chinese Lanten were workers on rubber estates and were invited by the Namdii village
headman to travel to Laos to help them start planting. Not only did the Lanten obtain
critical information and technology from China, but their kin in Yunnan came to invest in
their operations as well.
The Bit have also begun planting rubber in their fallow fields along the road to theChinese border. The roadside areas were first planted by provincial officials who had
their own contacts with buyers in China, but the Bit were able to make contacts with
Chinese technicians who were stationed next to their village during the building of arubber processing factory. Four individuals from the Bit village were trained at thefactory, and one enterprising man struck up a friendship with a Chinese foreman who
had a range of small business operations in Luang Namtha. After doing small jobs for theMountain People in the Muang

57

Chinese man, he formed his own informal contracting operation and began to supply
technical support to rubber planting operations in Muang Sing. From there he expanded
to providing technical support to the establishment of other cash crops such as bananas
and sugar cane, both of which are extremely popular in the northern areas of Luang
Namtha province. All of these activities are geared towards the Chinese market, and heeven takes his crews to do jobs in China.
These are just two cases of local development initiatives by upland people who liveon the edge of Namtha town. Although the scale of their operations is small, they areshouldering much of the risk of investing in the cross-border market linkages that drive
the Namtha economic boom, dealing with an uncertain market, difficult price negotiations,and unfamiliar techniques. It is still too early to say what the outcomes will be, but firstindications are that rubber is generating income for local people, thus contributing to themost important development objective of the country. There are no statistics summarizing rubber by ethnicity, but our surveys along the main transport artery R3 show thatrubber has become the dominant element of livelihoods in many ethnic minority villages.
Cross-border economic activity at this small scale has been a major factor in the local
economies of northern Laos, and is often driven by ethnicity, clan, and other kin relations.

VIII Redefining Muang
g Identities: Ethnonyms, Solidarity, and Social
Hierarchies
All ethnic groups are officially placed on an equal footing in the 1991 Constitution thatdefines Laos as a multi-ethnic nation. In this scheme, the Lao themselves are included
as an ethnic group, and reference to the ethnic diversity of the country is made throughthe term bandaa phao (all ethnic groups). The central ideology of this thinking is solidarity among all groups, and there is no concept of “minority” or “indigenous” groups in the
country. A three-way system of ethnic classification—Lao—
Lum (lowland Lao), Lao
Theungg (hill Lao), and Lao Sungg (highland Lao)—which had existed since French colonial
times was abandoned and replaced with a more nuanced classification based on ethnolinguistic characteristics in 1985. Lao Sungg and Lao Theungg are now considered to bepolitically inappropriate, with the official policy being to call ethnic groups by specificnames, prefixed with the term phao. This is, however, not an easy solution because
groups are known by many different names. It is interesting to note that in everyday
conversation in Luang Namtha, Lao Sungg has come to mean Hmong, while Lao Theung
refers to Khmu. One can consider this as coming full circle to something resembling theold, now unacceptable terms Kha (Khmu) and Meo (Hmong), only with less social stigma

58

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

attached. In Luang Namtha, the revision of ethnonyms has been an interesting undertaking reflecting the positions of different groups in the historical social landscape.
The Lanten, previously Lao Sung, are now known by the names Lanten and Lao
Huay. The former is from a Chinese word meaning “indigo,” a reference to their traditional dyeing. In everyday conversation, Lao Huay is commonly heard. This name wasgiven to the Lanten after the Communist victory in Luang Namtha, as recognition of theirpreference for living along the streams at the edge of the town. When using their own
language, the Lanten call themselves Mun (person) in the spoken language, or Iu-Nginin the literary language. All of these names are heard in the village, but the use of Lanten
at the 2012 Lunar New Year’s celebration, an official event at which provincial officials
were present, suggests a preference for this name when dealing with others.
The Bit were originally known in Laos as Khabitt or Khabet, which contains the unacceptable Kha element. After the liberation of Luang Namtha, the Bit were also given a
new name, Lao Bit, which tried to bring them more comfortably into the Lao polity.
Currently, Lao Bit is the common official self-reference, although Khabet is heard regularly in the village. In their own language, the Bit call themselves Psiing, Psiing Bit, oreven Psiing Khabet. Psiingg means “person” in the Bit language. In interactions withother ethnic groups, the Bit prefer to be known as Lao Bit, as it emphasizes their identity
as separate from Khmu. This is because the Bit were officially grouped with the Khmuas Lao Theungg until 1985.
But the most interesting ethnonym dynamics in Namtha are demonstrated by the
Nyuan. Despite being a Tai-speaking group that “should” be at the top of the muang
social hierarchy, they are in the process of asserting a new name for themselves. The
Nyuan have typically referred to themselves as Nyuan, Tai Nyuan, or Khon Muang(people of the muang). In official policy, they have always been known as Nyuan or Yuan
(Lao PDR, Institute of Ethnicity and Religion 2009). In their own historical documents
one finds Yuan, and this is also the name used by Europeans visiting the region at theturn of the nineteenth century. However, the Nyuan are known as Kalom among the
non-Tai groups, as well as among the Tai Lue, Tai Dam, and Tai Daeng. To the Nyuan
this name is disparaging, although the etymology of the word is not clear, and they now
prefer Lao Nyuan. The addition of “Lao” in front of a local ethnonym legitimizes a specificethnic identity within the larger social landscape of the Lao nation. It is somewhat
remarkable that the Tai group that is supposed to have founded the settlement would
need to make a specific assertion of their Lao-ness, much in the same way that non-Taigroups have done in recent years.
The renaming project is part of a larger effort of the Nyuan aimed at overcoming thestigma of having sided with the Royalists during the struggle years. In 1968, after theMountain People in the Muang

59

Table 4 Contested Ethnonyms
Traditional
Self-Reference

HistoricalExonyms

Early Official
Reference

Ay Nong
Reference

Current Public
Self-Reference

Nyuan, Khon Muang
Mun, Iu-NginPsiing, Psiing Khabit
Venyu, Go Gu a Yae

Kalom
LantenKhabit, Khabet
Ko, Ko Sida, Kha Sida

Lao Lum
Lao Sung
Lao Theung
Lao Sungn/a
Lao Huay
Lao BitSida

Lao Nyuan
LantenLao BitSida

final “sweeping” of resistance forces from the Namtha area, there were only five Nyuan
households remaining. The rest had fled to the Thai border at Bokeo. In 1976, a proportion of the Nyuan were sent back to Namtha town, returning as part of the defeatedenemy. While the official policy was to reintegrate them back into local society, thepost-liberation years were filled with a significant amount of distrust for all of those who
had escaped to Bokeo. In 2007, the Nyuan submitted a codification of their social institutions to the province for approval. The document is called “Establishment of the Traditions of the Lao Nyuan.” In the Lao title, the ethnonym is phao Lao Nyuan. It includes
the word phao, which is used before ethnonyms in official references. The document
spells out Nyuan practices on marriage and management of other social relations in thecommunity including specifications on sanctions for individuals who do not conform.
These traditional aspects of Nyuan culture are, of course, written to be in line with Laolaw, demonstrating the legitimacy of their traditions and their contribution to the cultural
fabric of the nation state. There is a 10-person Committee for the Management andPromotion of Lao Nyuan Culture, responsible for implementing the document in the
Nyuan community. Thus the Nyuan have re-named themselves, placing themselves
within the official system and distancing themselves from an old exonym associated withunacceptable local history.22)
The statements of ethnic and political affiliation seen in the shifting landscape of
ethnonyms highlights the complexity of intergroup relations in Luang Namtha. Table 4summarizes the contestation of ethnonyms in Luang Namtha.
Pholsena has argued against the “the apparent immutability of these two oppositional figures, the Majority and the ethnic minorities” (Pholsena 2006, 219). The fourgroups discussed in this paper employ differing identification strategies. The Nyuan and
the Bit have taken up the “Lao” identifier to emphasize their commitment to being good
Lao citizens, perhaps in an effort to discard the political baggage of having been on thewrong side of the revolutionary struggle. The Sida and the Lanten, both of whom remember themselves as founders of Luang Namtha, have not taken a Lao prefix before their
22) The Tai Dam have produced a similar document and organizational structure.

60

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

ethnonym. Although the contestation of ethnonyms is clearly done in the immediate
context of post-1975 nationalism, the longer history of interethnic relations in the earlydays of the muangg have clear bearing on the directions of these efforts of expression.

IX Discussion: Re-exploring the Wide World beyond Structure
These local narratives leave us with questions about how to interpret the Lanten assertion of power and its place within the historical development of the muangg of Luang
Namtha. Did Dang Yon Hak’s efforts to assert Lanten authority result in a muangg thatwas fundamentally different from others? It is the modern-day muangg and its link to themuangg of the past that concerns us here. Stuart-Fox (2002, 11) has stated: “the discontinuity of central political structures was overcome by the continuity of political culture
based firmly at the village level, anchored in the socio-religious Lao worldview.” He goeson to remind us that the major polity building (and rebuilding) efforts of the Lao kings
was to align the muangg with the Lao mandala. Our look at the formation and transformation of Luang Namtha highlights some difficulties in generalizing a muangg model, bothin terms of the centrality of the Lao cultural element and the continuity that is needed
to support it. Table 5 below considers some of the differences between the “classic”
muang, the early (first) muang, and the later (second) muang. This summary table showsthat there are significant differences between the first and second muang.
Discussion of the classic muangg places central importance on a political contract
between the Tai and the Kha, where myth and ritual create and confirm a kin relation
between the exploiter and the exploited (Aijmer 1979). In the muangg created in the latenineteenth century, there is little available evidence of rituals or ceremonies to provide
the basic frame of reference that would normally legitimize the Tai group’s rule andsubjugate the peripheral groups in an unbalanced power structure. The lack of data on
ceremonial and ritual displays of the “traditional” power relations—for Aijmer, “the ideal
model”—has allowed us to look at some of the more mundane areas of muangg formation.
The display of cohesion has always been critical in the maintenance of muangg even as
conflict played out (Condominas 1990). Likewise, the cultural continuity of Lao muang
is taken to be a sign of the possibility of “Lao” history (Stuart-Fox 2002). In reality, thestrategies of different groups, none of which had an overwhelming demographic majority,compelling moral mandate, or coercive political authority, played out against the backdropof the French colonial project. The striking continuity one observes here is not of aLao (Tai) cultural core encoded in the muang, but rather of a cosmopolitan space of
cultural contention.

Mountain People in the Muang

61

Table 5 Comparison of Muangg Dynamics
Classical Muang

18th-century Namtha

20th-century Namtha

Settlement

Pioneer Tai appropriate
land from Kha

Nyuan settlers fromDoi Tung-Chiang Saen
settle on edges of
Khmu territory

Lanten and Sida arrive inabandoned, overgrownplains and continue uplandlivelihood technology;
Nyuan arrive after

Power

Political dominance of
Tai over Kha

Exert political andcultural influence overKhmu, “creation” of
Khmu Nyuan

Lanten assert control first,
but Nyuan gain control
with assistance of French

Interethnic relations

Hierarchical relations
maintained with Kha,
including trading

Khmu and other MonKhmer groups in themountains are trading
partners

No clear hierarchy
emerges, Lanten maintainposition of intermediary

Legitimization

Symbolic rituals
involving Kha?

None in local memory

Cosmology

Buddhist cosmology toreinforce Tai power

Remains of religious
structures suggest
Buddhism flourishing

Low profile of Buddhist
influence, majority ofmuangg remains nonBuddhist, including otherTai groups

Hierarchy

Submit to authority oflarger muang

Superiority of Nan andSiamese

Local rulers rely on
French for support,
incorporation into colonialadministration

Population

Increase agricultural
production throughacquisition of
population

Wet rice fields foundby non-Tai groups
suggesting large-scale
production

Lanten claim to havecontrolled population for
agricultural development,
Nyuan unable to control
population, inflow of Tai
Dam

Interface

Tai laam as broker inupland-lowland
relations?

Lanten thin thengmessengers delivery,
Haw economic brokers

One of the most important outcomes of these re-examinations is the understandingof ethnic relations over history. The muangg framework is vulnerable because it isdependent on a certain type of relationships within a social space. For example, it has
been claimed that “the traditional Lao muangg also integrated the non-Tai populace without significantly affecting their own traditional community-structure,” and that the Laochao “paid much attention to peaceful ‘ethnic management’” (Raendchen 2004, 417). At
the same time, it is widely believed that the establishment of muangg required violent
appropriation of land and eviction of autochthonous people (Archaimbault 1964). Clearly,
these need to be reconciled based on a broader base of ethnography that examines thedetails of interethnic relations (see Kojima and Badenoch, this issue).
The stories that make up the Lanten and Sida narratives share the common themeof niche creation. Both groups, understanding their own history of migration and adapta-

62

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

tion, recognize the necessity of defining and redefining their role in broader society,rather than falling into a predetermined hierarchy. For the Lanten, they are privilegedby their literacy, which they use not only to assert themselves over other uplanders but
more importantly, as an interface between the many groups of the muang—angadvantagethat the Nyuan do not possess. For the Lanten, literacy has brought not only access to
the world of Chinese culture, it also means bureaucratic capacity within the muangg andthe potential to turn that into influence and maybe even authority. As for the Sida, theydescribe their high rice yields as a way to position themselves in the local economy, andtherefore make themselves indispensable to the more powerful groups around them.
The fact that one of their main clients is the lowland, wet-rice producing Nyuan strengthens their feeling of integration during those times. These niches, however, are not solely
defined in terms of subjugation by the Tai; in fact, in many of them, the relationship with
the Tai is only peripheral to larger cultural, economic, and political streams.
We have also observed that the significance of the multilingual nature of these social
landscapes is common to all upland groups in this area. Scott (2009) has suggested that
Zomians find literacy to be a liability, and while there is no doubt that written language
can be used as a method of control by the state, it does not have a monopoly on the strategic use of written language. The orality factor, especially the seemingly cacophonous
diversity of languages, may seem to be a convenient Zomian escape route. While the useof many languages may give uplanders an upper hand in keeping the lowlanders confused,the descriptions of multilingualism in the history of the region point to strategies forenhancing uplanders’ position to engage with the state. It would be more useful to consider the complex network of linguistic relations in the uplands as a form of social capitalused in engaging strategically with states and markets. More specifically, our story has
shown how this social capital is actively managed and used to influence the local politicalsituation.
Thus, the objective of this presentation of local narratives about peoples’ positionin the muangg is not so much an effort to recreate the history of Luang Namtha. Whether
or not Dang Yon Hak actually brought the Nyuan back from Nan after a trip to Bangkok
is perhaps not the main concern, as interesting as that possibility may be. Rather, following narratives that commemorate highland leaders throughout the history of fringe
areas may help to highlight the complex nature of power relations (Jonsson 2010). As
Jonsson has shown in the case of the Mien, these upland leaders may have received
formal titles, but they do not appear in chronicles or other historical records. Giving
voice to these leaders’ lives uncovers alternative perspectives on “chiefly control andlowland connections” (2002, 74). Most interesting is the accounts of how local leadersand normal people related to each other within the muang.

Mountain People in the Muang

63

The muangg history elaborated here also shows how upland people influenced thelarger political directions that are assumed to be the domain of Tai, Lao, or Chinese. Once
we shift our analysis to the marginalized storytellers, it becomes clear that there is indeed
no convincing hegemony of the majority; neither can the minority be represented solely
as “the other” (Pholsena 2006). While modern, nationalist motifs figure prominently in
local narratives, the alternative versions show that the “imagined community” may not
be as stable or clear as it is often made out to be. In presenting such an alternative local
history, we do not suggest that Luang Namtha is an upland polity constructed in a lowland
area. Neither do we conclude that the Lanten created a Tai look-alike polity. Rather, weunderscore the complex interactions and exchanges between different groups, multiple
centers of power and political influence, and the possibility that the muangg should beunderstood as more of a regional phenomenon than a purely Tai social construct.

X Conclusion
In painting an alternative view on a local history, we have tried to peel back layers of
mainstream discourse to transform the “anonymity” that hides marginal actors (Forsythand Michaud 2011) in history, picking up on the claim of an upland group in northern Laosthat they laid the foundations for the establishment of a Tai muang. In exploring thedifferent memories of how the muangg was established and developed, we challenge thecommon assumptions about political organization in the Tai hinterlands and add nuanceto the complex and poorly understood relations between ethnic groups in these areas.
In our examination of the Luang Namtha case, we are faced with a narrative in which the“marginal” people played a central role in establishing a local polity. At the same time,
the original Tai founders are consistently portrayed in a passive and vulnerable role. The
political ambiguity of the muangg social space is presented in ways that give new voice toactors whose agency is frequently denied, ignored, played down, or appropriated by conventional historical perspectives. Moreover, we find efforts to cast history in a different
light, one that is strongly influenced by the political ideology of the modern Lao nation
state, but one that, in its own way, seeks to reclaim the right to authorship of history, inorder to redefine the multiethnic social landscape of a rapidly developing economic center. We believe that this type of study demonstrates the importance of following local
articulations of history, in an attempt to challenge our assumptions about historical relations. Key to this is moving beyond social structures to focus on the interactions between
ethnic groups, looking to social phenomena such as multilingualism as a window on local
strategies. In doing this we follow efforts to “carve out spaces from which to speak that

64

N. BADENOCH and TOMITA
A S.

keep sliding away from centers of elite power” (Sears 1993, 18)
We propose that the value-added content of this study is in the rethinking of ahistory, rather than its rewriting (Reynolds 2006). Having explored the possibility of amuangg founded by uplanders, the control of Tai by uplanders, the absence of Buddhist
cosmology and rituals to define and confirm power relations, and the efficiency of local
economic initiative over state policy, we create for ourselves a space to consider how ahistory might be rewritten. For example, writing about the Tai people of Nan Province
in Thailand, Davis tempers the common understanding of the assimilation of Mon-Khmer
people into the Tai muangs, remarking that “acculturation has not been a one-way process” (1984, 35). But such a “seditious history,” to use Reynold’s term, is one that not
only challenges the assumptions encoded in the “documentation of specificity,” as is thetask of historians, but one that gives thought to “where this body of knowledge has comefrom, what holds it together, and how it might be liberated for wider use” (ibid., 29).
This paper has taken up Stuart-Fox’s call for alternative historiographies drawing
on traditions of minority groups (2002), which he suggested should be written and integrated into a more diverse and nuanced Lao historiography. With pressures mounting
on minority languages, oral traditions, ritual songs, and other potential sources of “alternative” history, this must be given the highest priority. Only then will a history emergethat is commensurate with the rich human diversity that defines Laos, and further
enhance our understanding of the region and its immense complexity.
Accepted: November 6, 2012

References
Aijmer, Goran. 1979. Reconciling Power with Authority: An Aspect of Statecraft in Traditional Laos.
Man New Series 14(4): 734–749.
Anonymous. 1982. An Englishman’s Siamese Journals 1890–1893. Bangkok: Siam Media International
Books.
Archaimbault, Charles. 1964. Religious Structures in Laos. The Journal of the Siam Society 52: 57–74.
Chantavong, Nitkham; Xayleuxong, K.; Chitpanya, S.; Badenoch, N.; and Keonakhone, T. 2009. Rubber
Institutions in Ban Hat Nyao: Managing Trees, Markets and Producers. Upland Research andCapacity Development Programme, Socio-economic Working Paper 0903. Vientiane: National
Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute.
Condominas, Georges. 1990. From Lawa to Mon, from Saa’ to Thai. Canberra: Australian National
University.
Daniels, Christian. クリスチャン・ダニエルス. 2009. Unnanjin (Ho) no Ponsari Shi: Sanchimin o Tochishita Fu Ichizoku no Jirei o toshite 雲南人（ホー）のポンサーリー史―山地民を統治した傅一族の事例を通して [A Yunnanese (Haw) history of Phongsaly: The case of the Fu family whichadministered the hill peoples]. In Tai Bunkaken no naka no Raosu: Busshitsu Bunka, Gengo,

Mountain People in the Muang

65

Minzoku タイ文化圏の中のラオス―物質文化・言語・民族 [The Tay cultural area of Laos:
Material culture, language, and ethnic groups], edited by Tadahiko Shintani, Christian Daniels, andMitsuru Sonoe 新谷忠彦，クリスチャン・ダニエルス，園江満，pp. 71–124. Tokyo: Keiyusha.
Davis, Richard. 1984. Muang Metaphysics: A Study of Northern Thai Myth and Ritual. Bangkok: Pandora.
Downer, Gordon. 1989–90. The Tai Element in Khmu. Mon-Khmer Studies 18–19: 44–51.
Evans, Grant. 2003. A Short History of Laos: The Land in Between. Crow’s Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin.
―. 1998. The Politics of Ritual and Remembrance: Laos since 1975. Honolulu: University of
Hawai‘i Press.
Évrard, Olivier. 2011. Oral Histories of Livelihoods and Migration under Socialism and Post-Socialism
among the Khmu of Northern Laos. In Moving Mountains: Ethnicity and Livelihoods in Highland
China, Vietnam, and Laos, edited by Jean Michaud and Tim Forsyth, pp. 76–99. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
―. 2006. Chroniques des cendres: Anthropologie des sociétés khmou et dynamiques interethniques
du Nord-Laos [Chronicles of the Ashes: Anthropology of Khmu societies and interethnic dynamics
of Northern Laos]. Paris: IRD.
Forsyth, Tim; and Michaud, Jean. 2011. Rethinking the Relationships between Livelihoods and Ethnicity in Highland China, Vietnam, and Laos. In Moving Mountains: Ethnicity and Livelihoods in
Highland China, Vietnam, and Laos, edited by Jean Michaud and Tim Forsyth, pp. 1–27. Vancouver:
University of British Columbia Press.
Grabowsky, Volker. 2008. The Early Stage of French Rule in Müang Sing. In New Research on Laos,
edited by Yves Goudineau and Michel Lorrillard. Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient.
―. 2003. Chiang Khaeng 1893–1896: A Lue Principality in the Upper Mekong Valley at theCenter of Franco-British Rivalry. In Contesting Visions of the Lao Pas, edited by Christopher E.
Goscha and Soren Ivarsson, pp. 35–70. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.
Grabowsky, Volker; and Renoo Wichasin. 2008. Chronicles of Chiang Khaeng: A Tai Lü Principality of
the Upper Mekong. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.
Halpern, Joel. 1964. Economy and Society of Laos: A Brief Survey. New Haven: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies.
Horstmann, Alexander; and Wadley, Reed L. 2009. Introduction: Centering the Margin in Southeast
Asia. In Centering the Margin: Agency and Narrative in Southeast Asian Borderlands, edited byAlexander Horstmann and Reed L.Wadley, pp. 1–26. New York: Berghahn Books.
Izikowitz, Karl Gustav. [1951] 2001. Lamet: Hill Peasants in French Indochina. Bangkok: White Lotus
Press.
Jonsson, Hjorleifur. 2010. Above and Beyond: Zomia and the Ethnographic Challenge of/for Regional
History. History and Anthropology 21(2): 191–212.
―. 2002. Mien Relations: Mountain People and State Control in Thailand. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
Journal of Global History. 2010. Special volume “Zomia and Beyond”, Vol. 5, Part 2, July 2010.
Kandre, Peter. 1967. Autonomy and Integration of Social Systems: The Iu Mien (“Yao” or “Man”)
Mountain Population and Their Neighbors. In Southeast Asian Tribes, Minorities, and Nations,Vol. 2, edited by Peter Kunstadter. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lao PDR, Government of Laos. 2011. Bot vichai yaang phaalaa ບົດວິໄຈຢາງພາລາ [Analysis of rubber].
Vientiane: Policy Research Center, National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute.
―. 2009. 2009 Statistical Report on Tourism in Laos. Vientiane: Lao National Tourism Administration.
―. 2005. National Census Data.
Lao PDR, Institute of Ethnicity and Religion. 2009. Xawk Huu Xon Phao nai Lao ຊອກຮູຊ້ ນົ ເຜົາ່ ໄນລາວ

66

N. BADENOCH and TOMITAA S.

[Studying ethnic groups in Laos]. Vientiane: National Institute for Social Sciences.
Lefèvre-Pontalis, Pierre. [1902] 2000. Travels in Upper Laos and on the Borders of Yunnan and Burma.
Bangkok: White Lotus.
Lemoine, Jacques. 1982. Yao Ceremonial Paintings. Bangkok: White Lotus.
Liew-Herres, Foon Ming; Grabowsky, Volker; and Renoo Wichasin. 2012. Chronicle of Sipsòng Panna:
History and Society of a Tai Lü Kingdom, Twelfth to Twentieth Century. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.
Okada Masashi 岡田雅志. 2012. Taizoku Muon Kozo Saiko: 18–19 Seiki Zenhan no Betonamu, MuonRo Bonchi Shakai no Shiten kara タイ族ムオン構造再考―18–19世紀前半のベトナム、ムオ
ン・ロー盆地社会の視点から[Rethinking the Tai Muong structure model: A view from a valley
society of Muong Lo, Vietnam in the 18th and the early 19th century]. Tonan Ajia Kenkyu 東南ア
ジア研究 [Japanese journal of Southeast Asian Studies] 50(1): 3–38.
Pholsena, Vattana. 2010. Nation/Representation: Ethnic Classification and Mapping Nationhood inContemporary Laos. Asian Ethnicity 3(2): 175–197.
―. 2006. Postwar Laos: The Politics of Culture, History and Identity. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
Pourret, Jess G. 2002. The Yao: The Mien and Mun Yao in China, Vietnam, Laos and Thailand. Bangkok:
River Book.
Proschan, Frank. 1998. Cheuang in Kmhmu Folklore, History and Memory. In Tamnan keokap thao hungthao chuang: miti thang prawattisat lae watthanatham ตํานานเกีย่ วกับท้าวฮุง่ ท้าวเจือง: มิตทิ างประวัตศิ าสตร์
และวัฒนธรรม [Narratives about Thao Hung Thao Cuang: Historical and cultural perspectives], editedby Sumitr Pitiphat สุมติ ร ปิตพิ ฒั น์, pp. 174–209. Bangkok: Thai Khadi Research Institute.
Raendchen, Jana. 2004. The Socio-Political and Administrative Organization of Muang in the Light of
Lao Historical Manuscripts. In The Literary Heritage of Laos: Preservation, Dissemination andResearch Perspectives. Vientiane: The National Library of Laos.
Reynolds, Craig J. 2006. Seditious Histories: Contesting Thai and Southeast Asian Pasts. London: Universityof Washington Press.
Sarassawadee Ongsakul. 2005. History of Lanna. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.
Scott, James. 2009. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Sears, Laurie. 1993. Contingency of Autonomous Histories. In Autonomous Histories, Particular Truths,edited by Laurie Sears, pp. 3–19. Madison: University of Wisconsin.
Sprenger, Guido. 2006. Political Periphery, Cosmological Center: The Reproduction of Rmeet Sociocosmic Order and the Laos-Thailand Border. In Centering the Margin: Agency and Narrative inSoutheast Asian Borderlands, edited by Alexander Horstmann and Reed L. Wadley, pp. 67–86. New
York: Berghahn Books.
Stuart-Fox, Martin. 2002. On the Writing of Lao History: Continuities and Discontinuities. In Breaking New Ground in Lao History: Essays on the Seventh to Twentieth Centuries, edited by Mayoury
Ngaosrivathana and Kennon Breazeale, pp. 1–24. Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Takemura Takuji 竹村卓二. 1981. Yaozoku no Rekishi to Bunka: Kanan, Tonan-Ajia Sanchi Minzoku
no Shakai Jinruigakuteki Kenkyu ヤオ族の歴史と文化―華南・東南アジア山地民族の社会人
類学的研究 [History and culture of the Yao: Social anthropological research on the upland ethnic
groups of Southern China and Southeast Asia]. Tokyo: Kobundo.
Taylor, Philip. 2011. Minorities at Large: New Approaches to Minority Ethnicity in Vietnam. In
Minorities at Large: New Approaches to Minority Ethnicity in Vietnam, edited by Philip Taylor. Singapore: ISEAS Publishing.
Tomita, Shinsuke; and Badenoch, Nathan. 2011. The Tjei Sei Ritual Books, The Preservation, Compilation
and Reading of Lanten Yao Traditional Texts in Northern Laos. Vientiane: National Library of Lao PDR.

Mountain People in the Muang

67

Walker, Andrew. 2008. Borders in Motion on the Upper Mekong: Siam and France in the 1890s. In
New Research on Laos, edited by Yves Goudineau and Michel Lorrillard. Paris: École française
d’Extrême-Orient.
―. 1999. The Legend of the Boat: Regulation, Trade and Traders in the Borderlands of Laos, Thailand,
China and Burma. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Wyatt, David. 1994. The Nan Chronicle. Ithaca: Cornell University.
Yokoyama, Satoshi. 2010. The Trading of Agro-forest Products and Commodities in the Northern
Mountainous Region of Laos. Southeast Asian Studies 47(4): 374–402.