Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture(Southern Vietnam)
Exploration, Research, and Achievements
Nguyen Hoang Bach Linh

ABSTRACTThe term ‘Oc Eo culture’ originates from the archaeological site of Oc Eo, situated in the Oc Eo - Ba
The complex, located in An Giang Province, Vietnam. In early 1944, Oc Eo became the initial excavationsite for Louis Malleret, a French scholar. This site unveils the remnants of an ancient civilization that once
existed in the Mekong Delta region during the early Common Era, also referred to as Funan in ancient
Chinese texts.
Over the course of more than 140 years, commencing with the initial explorations by foreign scholars
in the late 19th century, followed by the unceasing research endeavors of Vietnamese scientists, the Oc Eo
culture has been acknowledged for its prominent values. The issues concerning cultural spatial alongside
the fundamental characteristics of sites and artifacts, the process of formation and development of thisancient culture as the archaeological culture of the Funan State, and its role within the ancient East-Westtrade network, have also been elucidated.
KEYWORDS
Oc Eo, Vietnam, Funan, Mekong Delta

THE EXPLORATION AND
RESEARCH PROCESS

Gia Dinh Citadel [Gia Định Thành Thông Chí 嘉定城通志] compiled by Trinh Hoai Duc [Trịnh
Hoài Đức], a famous historian during the Nguyen

Initial Records of the Oc Eo Culture in
Southern Vietnam
The earliest information about the archaeologi-

Dynasty (1802-1945). The book provides specificdescriptions of the discoveries at An Tong Pagoda[chùa Ân Tông], now known as Cay Mai Pagoda[chùa Cây Mai], in Ho Chi Minh City:

cal sites and artifacts related to protohistoric period“In the 15th year of Gia Long’s reign, in thein southern Vietnam is in the book The Annals ofyear Binh Ty [Bính Tý, 1816], a Buddhist monk

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Available online October 2023

Nguyen H. B. L.

renovated the pagoda and unearthed many old

Oc Eo - Ba The archaeological complex.

bricks and tiles, as well as two square gold

In the last two decades of the 19th century, many

leaves, each measuring more than 3 cm intraces of an ancient civilization, including sculp-

size, weighing 3 taels [钱] [approximately 10tures, religious artifacts, and architectural ruins,grams]. On the surface, there were carvings ofwere collected and recorded in the provinces ofan ancient Buddha riding an elephant, which

An Giang (Nui Sam [Núi Sam] and Bay Nui [Bảy

could possibly be the object used by the monk

Núi] regions), Tra Vinh [Trà Vinh], and Bien Hoa

Hu [Hồ] to guard the temple?” (Trinh 2004: 41)[Biên Hòa] (Aymonier 1891: 7, 84-85; Chronique
De L’année 1940: 477-484; Dupont 1934: 64). Sub-

Exploration and Research by French
Scholars (Late 19th Century to 1975)

sequently, Lunet De Lajonquière conducted several
surveys (from 1899 to 1909) to map the architectural monuments in southern Vietnam and Cambodia.

From the late 19th century, the history of an-

He identified several sites such as Chot Mat temple

cient civilizations in Southeast Asia attracted the[tháp Chót Mạt] (Tay Ninh [Tây Ninh] Province),

attention of many Western scholars. Among them,

Ba The (An Giang Province), and Tra Long temple

southern Vietnam, with its vast lowland area in the[tháp Trà Long] (Bac Lieu [Bạc Liêu] Province).

Mekong Delta, became one of the focal points of

He also documented several Hindu and Buddhist

this exploration.

statues, including the Uma Goddess, Vishnu God,

The first significant discovery occurred around
1878-1879 when a number of ancient inscriptions

Buddha statues, and a Maitreya statue (Chronique
1909b: 819-820; Malleret 1963: 39-40).

in ancient Sanskrit were found at the Prasat Pream

The first important bookdocumenting an ancient

Loven site, now called the Go Thap [Gò Tháp] ar-kingdom that once existed in the southern region of

chaeological complex in Dong Thap [Đồng Tháp]

Vietnam is Le Fou-nan by Sinologist Paul Pelliot,

Province. Among them, the best-preserved inscrip-

published in 1903. Pelliot meticulously collectedtion, labeled K5, was dated to the 5th century CE

almost all the ancient documents mentioning theand is the earliest known inscription in the Mekong

history of the Funan kingdom recorded in the an-

Delta region. It mentioned a prince of Funan named

cient Chinese annals and chronicles1). Through his

Gunavarman, who governed the “conquered lands

work, Pelliot made important conclusions about (1)in the mud.” This discovery, later published andthe location and existence of Funan, (2) the interac-

evaluated by George Coedès, suggested that thetions between Funan, China, and India, and (3) thesite might have been an important religious center

Funanese kings from the beginning of the Common(Coedès 1931: 1-23). During the same period, theEra until its annexation by the Chenla kingdom infirst artifacts were discovered in the Oc Eo - Ba The

the mid-7th century CE (Pelliot 1903).

region [Óc Eo - Ba Thê], An Giang Province by

Notably, in the early 20th century, Henri Par-

Armand Corre and reported in the journal Excur-

mentier conducted investigations and surveys, doc-

sions et Reconnaisances (Corre 1879). It mentioned

umenting numerous traces of ancient architectural

two inscriptions in ancient Sanskrit carved on stone

structures in provinces such as Tay Ninh (Go Chuaslabs found in association with the remains of an

Co Lam [Gò Chùa Cổ Lâm], Ben Dinh [Bến Đình],ancient structure at the Prasat Brah Dhat site, now

and other sites in the Cau An Ha [Cầu An Hạ] area),

the Linh Sơn Pagoda [chùa Linh Sơn], part of the

Bac Lieu (Tra Long Temple), Tien Giang [Tiền40Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Giang] (remains at Thien Pagoda [chùa Thiền] andtributions from J. Bouchot, J. Y. Claeys, R. Dalet,

Linh Phong Pagoda [chùa Linh Phong]), Long An

and others (Chronique 1909a: 618-620; Chronique(Bau Thap [Bàu Tháp], Bau Dai [Bàu Dài], Bu Loi

1922: 376; Chronique 1924: 643; Chronique De[Bù Lời], and the group of ancient architectural

L’annèe 1939: 335; Cœdès 1931: 1-12; Dalet 1936:

structures in Binh Ta [Bình Tả]). In addition, the38; Finot 1914: 1-8; Malleret 1937: 120; Malleretefforts to discover and study the relics of ancient

1969: 232-235; Parmentier 1909: 739-756).

cultures in the southern region also included con-

From 1936, Louis Malleret conducted extensive

Fig. 1. The geographical divisions in southern Vietnam(based on the map from snazzymaps.com and Bui et al. 2018: 848).

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

41

Nguyen H. B. L.

surveys and research on ancient architectural mon-noises (BSEI), Bulletin de l’École Française d’Ex-uments and related artifacts scattered throughouttrême-Orient (BEFEO), and Cahiers de l’École

the entire Southern region, including both the East-

Française d’Extrême-Orient (Bui et al. 2018: 26-

ern and Western regions (Fig. 1) (Malleret 1969:

27).

2)

20-145). A significant milestone in the study of thisAfter Malleret’s research, there were almost no

ancient culture occurred from February to Aprilarchaeological surveys conducted in the Southern

1944 when Malleret and his colleagues conduct-

region related to the Oc Eo culture until 1975, due

ed excavations at 12 archaeological sites in the Oc

to the military situation in Vietnam.

Eo plain (Malleret 1951: 75-88). He proposed the3)name “Oc Eo” to refer to the material civilization
closely associated with the kingdom of Funan, as
mentioned in historical records and inscriptions.
The results of Malleret’s surveys, excavations, andInheritance and Continuation of Research
by Vietnamese Archaeologists(from 1975 to the Present)

research were published in the four-volume series

After the reunification of the country, along

L’archéologie du Delta du Mékong [Khảo cổ họcwith the post-war restoration process, archaeo-Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long], published between

logical work in southern Vietnam was reinitiated1959 and 1963.

with the pioneering of archaeologists from the Ar-

Many other sites with traces of ancient archi-chaeological Department of the Institute of Social

tectural structures were surveyed in the 1940s andSciences in Ho Chi Minh City4). The objective wassubsequently published by L. Malleret, such as theto appraise and systematize the previously discov-

Vatt Pan Dham and Knun Tuol sites in Kien Giang

ered and researched sites by the French, while also[Kiên Giang] Province; the Thma Tamrwt, Dwl Ce-

providing direction for future research endeavors.

tiy Dwl, Vatt Jhi Ka En, and Brah Cety sites in An
Giang Province; and the Ba Tuc Pagoda in Tra Vinh

The Period of Assessment and Re-study on[Trà Vinh] Province, which contained artifacts re-

the Oc Eo Cultural Sites (1975-1995)

lated to religion and daily life, such as Buddha

The research during this period was closely asso-

statues, eight-armed and five-headed Hindu deity

ciated with the most significant discoveries in threestatues in the Angkor style, yoni, and stone sugar-

key areas: Kien Giang, An Giang, and Dong Thap.

cane crushers. Additionally, he documented over 30

In Kien Giang Province, the Nen Chua [Nềnother archaeological sites in the southwestern partChùa] site was surveyed and excavated from 1981of the Mekong Delta (Malleret 1969: 19-261).

to 1983. This was an important archaeological site

Therefore, in the first half of the 20th century,with large stone and brick structures, along with 19

approximately 300 archaeological sites, includ-“cremation graves” [ngôi mộ hỏa táng] (Vo 1984a:

ing over 50 architectural monuments and a large

199-206). The Canh Den [Cạnh Đền] site was also

number of artifacts related to the archaeologicala notable archaeological site, surveyed from 1981

culture of Oc Eo, were discovered by French re-

and further researched in 1986. The study revealed

searchers in the Southern region of Vietnam. These

that Canh Den site included residential areas, re-findings were published injournals such as Bulletin

ligious architecture, and tombs, with diverse ma-de la Commission archéologique de L’Indochineterials such as brick, stone, wood, and sculptures.

(BCAI), Bulletin de la Société des Études Indochi-

Additionally, grinding tools, mortars, as well as

42

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

human and animal remains were found (Vo 1986,

southern region of Vietnam (Dao 1985).

1990). By 1990, the Ke Mot [Kè Một] site was dis-

Dong Thap Province is an area that contains

covered and excavated, consisting of a brick “archi-

many important archaeological sites, among which

tecture-cremation grave” [kiến trúc - mộ hỏa táng]

the Go Thap archaeological complex, formerly

containing 40 artifacts, including religious objects

known as Prasat Pram Loven, is a typical exam-(Dao 1990: 247-250).

ple. In 1983, this site was investigated and evalu-

In An Giang, the second excavation on the Oc Eoated, and one year later, the first excavation took

plain, after nearly 40 years since Malleret’s exca-

place. The research findings unveiled that Go Thapvation, took place in 1983 at 10 sites including Go

is a significant archaeological site comprising three

Cay Trom [Gò Cây Trôm], Go Cay Coc [Gò Cây

categories of monuments: architectural monuments

Cóc], Go Ong Con [Gò Ông Côn], Go Cu Lao Voi

showcasing the hallmark features of Hindu temple[Gò Cù Lao Vôi], Go Da [Gò Đá] no. 1, Go Da no.

architecture, burial sites, and ancient settlements.

7, Go Da no. 8 and Go Da no. 10 (Le 1983). During

Notable sites include Ba Chua Xu [Bà Chúa Xứ],this time, a survey was also conducted to re-eval-

Go Minh Su [Gò Minh Sư], and Go Thap Muoi [Gòuate the conditions at Malleret’s “Oc Eo ancientTháp Mười] (Dao 1984: 238-240; Nguyen 1984:

city”. The site had undergone changes compared260-262; Vo 1984b: 280-283). It is worth noting

to the description by Malleret, influenced by naturethat during the excavation at Go Thap Muoi site inand human activities, revealing numerous traces of

1998, archaeologists discovered two Vishnu stat-ancient cultural remains on the surface of the fields.

ues and several other sacred artifacts (Vo and Dao

In 1984, the eastern slope of Ba The Mountain

1998: 732-734).

was surveyed and investigated. Along with record-

In addition, during the two decades of the 1980s

ing traces of architectural ruins on a large scale atand 1990s, a series of archaeological sites relat-

the Linh Sơn Pagoda area, which had been dug fored to the Oc Eo culture were discovered acrossbricks used in paving roads and numerous piec-

the vast Mekong Delta region. These include res-es of processed and decorated granite and basalt

idential sites such as Nhon Thanh [Nhơn Thành]stones, the establishment of topographic maps of(1990-1991, Can Tho [Cần Thơ] City) (Nguyen

the Linh Sơn Pagoda site (scale 1:500) and the Oc

and Nguyen 1990: 250-253); religious architectural

Eo plain (scale 1:1,000) was carried out by the Ge-

ruins in Vinh Hung [Vĩnh Hưng] (1990, Bac Lieu

odesy Department of Ho Chi Minh City Universityof Technology (Bui et al. 2018: 30). Also in 1984,
the Da Noi [Đá Nổi] site was discovered and excavated a year later (Fig. 2). The results revealed
seven “architecture-worship grave” [kiến trúc - mộthờ] structures with a central square cylinder shapebuilt with bricks. The collection included 331 goldleaves artifacts with religious themes, as well as
metal jewelry and gemstones. The Da Noi artifact
collection was considered to be largest and mostsignificant collection in terms of quantity, types,
and cultural content within the Oc Eo culture in theAncient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Fig. 2. Da Noi site, excavated in 1985 (© Center for
Archaeology, Southern Institute of Social Sciences).

43

Nguyen H. B. L.

Province); the sites of Luu Cu [Lưu Cừ], Luu Cu

culture have been excavated (Bui et al. 2018: 36-

II, and Luu Cu IIa (1985-1987, Tra Vinh Province)

37). The religious and funerary architectural mon-(Dao 1986); Go Thanh [Gò Thành] site (1987-1989,

uments have received focused research attention,

Tien Giang Province) (Dao 1989); Go Roc Chanhwhich has helped to clarify the characteristics, for-[Gò Rộc Chanh], Go De [Gò Đế], Go Dung [Gòmation process, and development, as well as theDung], and Go Hang [Gò Hàng] sites (1986, Long

indigenous and exogenous cultural elements of thisAn Province); Binh Ta archaeological complex

rich and diverse culture. Additionally, other impor-(including Go Xoai [Gò Xoài], Go Don [Gò Đồn],tant religious and settlement centers of the Oc Eo

Go Nam Tuoc [Gò Năm Tước] sites) and Go Sao

culture have been identified, including the Oc Eo -[Gò Sao], Bau Dai [Bàu Dài], Go Tram Quy [GòBa The (An Giang Province), Go Thap (Dong Thap

Trâm Quỳ] sites (1987, Long An Province); Cay

Province), the Go Don - Binh Ta (Long An Prov-

Gao [Cây Gáo], Dong Bo [Đồng Bơ] site (1985-ince), and the Nhon Thanh (Can Tho City)5).

1987, Dong Nai [Đồng Nai] Province) (Nguyen, V.
L. 1997: 52); Go Chieu Lieu [Gò Chiêu Liêu], Go

Implementation of Research and Collabora-

Ong Tung [Gò Ông Tùng], Bau Sen [Bàu Sen], andtive Research with Domestic and International

Da Lak [Đạ Lăk] sites (1995, Dong Nai Province)

Scientific Organizations (1997-2012)(Nguyen and Luu 1994, 1995, 1996).

Research on the Oc Eo culture and Funan king-During the two decades after the Vietnam War,dom in Vietnam took a significant step forward

the process of surveying and documenting the pre-through collaborative research between archaeolo-

viously recognized sites in the southern region ofgists from the Southern Institute of Social Scienc-

Vietnam was carried out, alongside the discovery,es (SISS, Vietnam) and École Française d’Ex-

research, and excavation of numerous new ar-trême-Orient (EFEO) from 1998 to 2002, underchaeological sites. These efforts have significantly

the project named “Archaeology of the Mekong

contributed to the understanding of the prehistor-

Delta”. The program aimed to synthesize existingic period in the southern region as a whole. Overresearch materials and relevant maps on the Oc Eo

90 sites belonging to the Oc Eo culture have been

culture and Funan kingdom in Vietnam and France.

surveyed, and 20 architectural sites of this ancient

It involved a comprehensive inventory of approxi-

Fig. 3. Linh Son Nam site, excavated in 1999

Fig. 4. Go Oc Eo site, excavated in 200244(© Center for Archaeology,(© Center for Archaeology,

Southern Institute of Social Sciences).

Southern Institute of Social Sciences).

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

mately 300 archaeological sites associated with thislished in two volumes: Prehistoric Archaeology ofancient culture in the Mekong Delta region, with

Southern Vietnam (Bui et al. 2017) and Protohis-

geographical references. Additionally, several sites

toric Archaeology of Southern Vietnam (Bui et al.

identified as important at the foot of Ba The moun-2018).

tainous area and the plain of Oc Eo were excavat-

The research project “Pre-Oc Eo Sites in theed using advanced scientific archaeological meth-Southwestern Region” by Dang Van Thang [Đặngods to effectively control and gather information

Văn Thắng] (2008-2009) aimed to investigate and(Figs. 3 and 4). The goal was to establish a reliable

construct a system of materials on pre-Oc Eo sites

chronological framework for the “Oc Eo culture”

in the Southwestern Vietnam, in order to clarify

and the “Funan kingdom” in general, and provide

the development process from prehistoric period

the basis for dating a large number of discovered

to the Oc Eo culture. It particularly examined pre-artifacts.

Oc Eo sites such as Go O Chua [Gò Ô Chùa], GoThe period from 2002 to 2005 marked the participation of Japanese archaeologists in collaborative

Cay Tung [Gò Cây Tung], and Go Tu Tram [Gò TưTrăm].

research with the Center for Archaeology, Southern

The research topic “Archaeological Sites of theInstitute of Social Sciences, Vietnam. The focus

Oc Eo and Post-Oc Eo Periods in An Giang” by

was on studying and exploring the characteristics

Pham Duc Manh [Phạm Đức Mạnh] (2008-2009)of the community’s daily life and the scientific val-

focused on studying the Oc Eo culture in An Giang

ue of representative settlement sites within the Oc

Province. By gathering and systematizing materi-

Eo culture at Oc Eo - Ba The, Go Thap, and Nhon

als, especially from representative sites such as Go

Thanh site.

Cay Tung and Go Tu Tram, the research contribut-

The research topic “Buddhist and Hindu Art in

ed to shedding light on fundamental aspects of thethe Mekong Delta before the 10th Century”, con-Oc Eo culture in An Giang and the Southwestern

ducted by Le Thi Lien [Lê Thị Liên] in 2002, fo-

region of Vietnam.

cused on analyzing the artistic features and sculp-

The research project “Southern Vietnam from Its

tural styles of the worship figurines, ritual objects,

Origins to the 7th Century”, conducted by Vu Minhand religious architectures within the Oc Eo cul-

Giang [Vũ Minh Giang], was part of the State-levelture of the Mekong Delta. By combining various

social sciences project “The Formation and Devel-sources of material, the study aimed to gain a better

opment Process of the South Vietnam” led by theunderstanding of the Oc Eo cultural period and theMinistry of Sciences and Technology (2008-2011).

multidimensional cultural relationships within the

The objective was not only to study the historicalregion and internationally.

process of the Southern region from prehistor-

The research project “Systematization of Archae-

ic period to the 7th century but also to clarify theological Materials in Southern Vietnam from 1975

characteristics of the Oc Eo culture and the Funan

to 2005”, led by Bui Chi Hoang [Bùi Chí Hoàng]

kingdom within the flow of Vietnamese history andand the Center for Archaeology (2005-2010), syn-culture. The research adopted an approach that con-thesized and organized archaeological materials

sidered both indigenous and exogenous factors, asfrom the Prehistoric and Protohistoric periods inwell as changes in the region’s political and social

the Southern region from the reunification of thespace.

country until 2010. The research results were pubAncient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

The research topic “Cultural Value of Oc Eo in45

Nguyen H. B. L.

the Southwestern Region (Based on Existing Doc-chaeological sites located in provinces such as Anuments)”, conducted by Dao Linh Con [Đào Linh

Giang, Dong Thap, Tien Giang, Long An, and Kien

Côn] (2009-2010), focused on studying important

Giang. It assessed the interdisciplinary and inter-archaeological sites such as Oc Eo - Ba The, Nenregional research collaboration on Oc Eo culture

Chua, Go Thap, Da Noi, and Nhon Thanh. The

during the preceding years and provided directions

objective was to identify the cultural and histori-

for future research activities. Furthermore, the con-cal value of Oc Eo within the context of the South

ference evaluated the management efforts, current

Vietnam’s history and the early Common Era inconservation status, and value enhancement of Oc

Southeast Asia.

Eo heritage. It aimed to propose solutions for effec-

The research project “Conservation and Devel-

tive management, planning, conservation, and val-

opment Planning Guidelines for Oc Eo - Ba The

ue enhancement of exemplary Oc Eo sites, while

Archaeological Site (Oc Eo Town, Thoai Son Dis-

integrating them with local tourism development

trict, An Giang Province)”, was chaired by Bui Chi

and interregional relationships.

Hoang (2011-2012), aimed to determine the value,
scale, and nature of the archaeological sites within

Large-scale Research on the Oc Eo - Ba The

the Oc Eo - Ba The area. This involved synthesiz-

and Nen Chua Archaeological Complexes

ing and systematizing existing materials and con-(2017-2020)

ducting new surveys and excavations to establish

A large-scale research project on Oc Eo culture

the fundamental characteristics of the core (central)

was initiated in 2012 by archaeologists from theand buffer (peripheral) zones of the archaeologicalSouthern Institute of Social Sciences. In 2015, thesite. The objective was to provide guidance for thePrime Minister assigned the Vietnam Academy

conservation and promotion of the site’s value. The

of Social Sciences to lead the State-level scientif-

most important goal was to complete a comprehen-

ic project titled “Research on the Archaeologicalsive scientific dossier that would contribute to theComplex of Oc Eo - Ba The and Nen Chua (Oc Eoclassification of the Oc Eo complex as a Special

Culture in the Southern of Vietnam)”. Two years

National Heritage.

later, the project was officially deployed in the field.

During this period, several scientific conferences

This project represented the largest archaeologicalwere organized on the topic of Oc Eo culture, withendeavor to date on Oc Eo culture6). The main ob-

the most important being the specialized conference

jective of the project was to excavate and study two

on “Oc Eo Culture and the Kingdom of Funan”

significant archaeological complexes, namely Oc

held in 2004 to commemorate 60 years of research

Eo - Ba The and Nen Chua, in order to gain a deep-(1944-2004). This conference marked the initial

er understanding of the formation and development

summary of the achievements in the study of Oc Eoof the ancient urban center of Oc Eo and its role in- Funan civilization by the entire scientific commu-

the region and the world during the early Common

nity in Vietnam up to that point. Another significant

Era. The project also aimed to provide a scientificconference was the “Oc Eo Culture: Awareness andfoundation for planning, conserving, and enhanc-

Solutions for Conservation and Value Enhancement

ing the cultural heritage value of the Oc Eo - Ba

of Heritage” held in 2009. The conference focused

The archaeological complex, with the ultimate goalon evaluating the research accomplishments in Oc

of proposing its recognition as a UNESCO WorldEo culture to date, particularly in representative ar-

Cultural Heritage.

46

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Fig. 5. Wet sieving method to collectFig. 6. Flotation method to collect the micro-materials.

the micro-materials.

Fig. 7. Animal bones, fish bones, and plant seeds

Fig. 8. Square brick well at Go Giong Cat site,

obtained from wet sieving samples.

excavated 2019.

The project not only employed specialized archaeological methods but also marked the firsttime interdisciplinary and scientific-technical approaches were applied in the study of Oc Eo culture (Figs. 5-7). As a result, numerous important
relics were discovered, including temple architectures wells, and water reservoirs, along with residential sites, and craft production sites (Figs. 8
and 9). Notably, a significant number of valuable
artifacts were unearthed, helping to answer questions regarding the living environment, the ancient
city of Oc Eo, cultural exchange, and the life of the
Oc Eo community during that period. These new
findings once again affirmed that Oc Eo - Ba The
Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Fig. 9. Circular brick well at Go Giong Cat site,
excavated 2019-2020.

47

Nguyen H. B. L.

and Nen Chua constitutes a complex ancient urban

contributions through documentation and surveys

center and a major economic and cultural hub withof related archaeological sites and artifacts. No-a coastal orientation, serving as a gateway for ex-tably, Malleret played a prominent role not only

ternal cultural interactions. They played a crucial

as the first person to excavate Oc Eo archaeolog-

role in the formation and development of Funan,

ical site and identify this ancient culture but alsoa nation built upon indigenous traditions and withthrough important studies that contributed to theextensive trade relationships along international

fundamental understanding of Oc Eo culture andmaritime routes .

the kingdom of Funan. These studies were pre-7)sented in the four-volume series L’archéologie

ACHIEVEMENTS IN OC EO
CULTURAL RESEARCH

du Delta du Mékong published between 1959 and
1963. Malleret was also the first to apply scientificand laboratory techniques to the research of historical archaeology in Southeast Asia (Manguin 2009:

Basic Overview of Oc Eo Culture andthe “Ancient Port-city” of Oc Eo

106).
Through a combination of surveys and aerial
photography, Malleret discovered a rectangu-

French scholars and officers were among the pi-

lar-shaped fortified structure encompassing an area

oneers in the research on the ancient Oc Eo culture.

of approximately 450 hectares, measuring 3,000

Since the late 19th century, they made significant

meters in length and 1,500 meters in width. Inside

Fig. 10. Oc Eo ancient port-city (after Malleret 1959: Pl. XV).

48

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

the structure, there were traces of roads, waterways,

hundreds of Oc Eo-Funan artifacts, including jew-

and geometrically arranged residential buildings

elry made of gold, silver, and gemstones, stone(Fig. 10). Passing through the ancient city was aand bronze statues of deities and Buddhas, compo-

canal known as Lung Lon [Lung Lớn], which

nents of architectural structures made of bricks andwas over 100 kilometers long, flowing in a north-tiles, as well as various pottery, stone, and wood-

east-southwest direction and connecting the Ang-en household objects (Manguin and Vallerin 1997:

kor Borei archaeological site to the north and the Ta408) . These discoveries provided essential insights

Keo (Nen Chua) site to the south, close to the an-into the Funan, an entity vaguely mentioned in an-

cient coastal area (Fig. 11). Malleret also identified

cient manuscripts and inscriptions8). Malleret be-

Oc Eo as a central hub with close connections tolieved that Oc Eo was a material manifestation ofneighboring regions such as the Long Xuyen Quad-the maritime sector of the Indianized Funan polity,

rangle [Tứ giác Long Xuyên] Depression and the Ufunctioning as a significant port-city with the Ta

Minh Thuong [U Minh Thượng] region (MalleretKeo (Nen Chua) archaeological site as its gateway

1959: 273-297).

port. It was a diverse industrial center, a cultural-In addition, Malleret systematically document-ly rich city following the tradition of Sanskrit, anded around 300 archaeological sites throughout

possibly the capital known as Naravanagara [or Na-

southern Vietnam. Along with this, he collected,

fu-na] of the Funan kingdom (Malleret 1962: 307,categorized, described, and sometimes analyzed

408-425, 452-454).

Identification of the Characteristics of
Oc Eo Monuments and Artifacts
Monuments
Foreign scholars, mainly of French, discovered
the Oc Eo culture and, in this context, identified theprimary distribution area of this cultural phenomenon in the Long Xuyen Quadrangle and U Minh
Thuong (Transbassac area9)). From 1975 to thepresent, Vietnamese archaeologists have continued
to study and identify over 100 monuments, expanding the spatial distribution of the Oc Eo culture toinclude almost all provinces in the Mekong Delta
region. These sites are located in diverse naturallandscapes and ecological environments, ranging
from the lowland area of Long Xuyen Quadrangle
and Dong Thap Muoi, coastal sand mounds anddunes, transitional zones between ancient alluviumin southeast Vietnam and recent alluvium in southFig. 11. Ancient canal systems of Oc Eo culture in theTransbassac area (after Malleret 1959: Pl. XII).

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

west Vietnam along the flow of the Vam Co river[sông Vàm Cỏ] (Figs. 1 and 12). Some opinions

49

Nguyen H. B. L.

Fig. 12. The distribution of Oc Eo cultural monuments in southern Vietnam(based on the map from snazzymaps.com).

50

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

even suggest that the influence of the Oc Eo culture

their houses. The people also live in tall houses”

is present in the Cat Tien Holy Land [Thánh địa Cát(Pelliot 1903: 261). One of the most distinct piec-

Tiên] in southern central Highlands. However, thees of evidence was found in a cultural layer of a

Oc Eo culture exhibits a unified appearance with-150 cm-thick residential site at the Go Thanh ar-in its diversity, demonstrating a highly developed

chaeological site in Tien Giang Province, where a

economic and cultural level with a well-organizedlayer of 30 cm-thick water coconut leaves was dis-society.

covered at a depth of 170 cm, beneath which were

The development of the Oc Eo culture has been

several processed wooden beams. This trace could

identified through archaeological discoveries, in-indicate a collapsed thatched house, with the results

cluding stages such as pre-Oc Eo, early Oc Eo, typ-of 14C dating identifying it as from the 4th century

ical Oc Eo, and post-Oc Eo. Important settlement

CE (Le et al. 1995: 160). Additionally, an authen-centers were established during the early period,

tic depiction of a wooden house with a lightweightaround the 1st-3rd centuries CE, followed by theroofing material was found on a golden leaf at theappearance of religious architectural monuments,

Go Thap archaeological complex, providing specif-

dated from the 4th to 7th centuries CE and even lat-

ic evidence of the architectural style and dwellinger, influenced by Indian civilization, including Hin-patterns of the inhabitants in the southern region in

du and Buddhist architecture. Additionally, archae-the first half of the 1st century CE.

ology has documented the presence of burial sites,

In 2018, the excavation results at the Go Giongworkshops for jewelry production, wood-carved

Cat [Gò Giồng Cát] archaeological site uncov-

Buddha statues, and pottery kiln sites. Moreover,ered the embankments of brownish-yellow clay

ancient Chinese manuscripts have mentioned thatsoil (Hue 2.5Y 5/6), characterized by a firm andFunan had “walled cities, castles, and houses” (Pel-homogeneous structure with a relatively flat sur-liot 1903: 254).

face. Based on the comparison of pottery types andIn his research, Malleret (1959a: 279) stated

AMS dating analysis, these embankments could

that “stilt houses are a common form of residence

have been constructed as early as the 2nd century

in the Oc Eo culture”. The residential architecture

CE, and continued to be inhabited until the 4th-5thof the Oc Eo inhabitants, represented by stilt house

century CE. The study indicated that these earth

structures, not only reflects their creativity and ad-

layers were selectively applied to individual liv-

aptability but also embodies elements of indigenous

ing spaces with uneven thickness, averaging from

cultural traditions dating back to prehistoric times.

30-50 cm, gradually thinning towards the edges.

Throughout the low-lying areas of the Mekong Del-

They also served as foundation or reinforcementta, clear evidence of stilt columns, elaborately dec-

for the above structures, leaving numerous traces

orated wooden structures with high aesthetic value,of postholes. Notably, a system consisting of fiveand a delicate combination of imported cultures canrows of wooden columns/postholes aligned in an

be found, creating unique and distinctive architec-

east-west direction was discovered, measuring

tural features. “They [the Funanese] cut down trees

7.26 m x 6.3 m, with consistent spacing between

to build houses. The king resides in a multi-story

columns. The remaining wooden columns exhibit abuilding. They have wooden walls as fortifications.

relatively large diameter, ranging from 18 to 25 cm,

Along the coastal areas, there is a type of large

with surface tool marks, and the majority of them

bamboo with long leaves, which they use to thatch

were crafted with mortise and tenon joints to in-

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

51

Nguyen H. B. L.

terlock with wooden beams at the base, providing

Archaeology has also discovered traces of pro-reinforcement and structural support for the archi-

duction activities, metal casting, and jewelry crafts-

tectural framework (Fig. 13). This was identified

manship at various Oc Eo cultural sites. While Go

as the remaining part of a wooden structure built

Oc Eo, Go Hang, and Go Dung reveal a vast amounton the deposited earth, potentially serving as theof glass bead types along with production evidence,residence of affluent inhabitants during the 4th-5th

sites such as Oc Eo - Ba The, Nen Chua, Canh Den,century CE (Nguyen, H. B. L. 2020).

and Go Thap have yielded traces of metalworking

In contrast, the architectural structures associ-and jewelry crafting using various materials. Par-

ated with religious practices in the Oc Eo culture

ticularly, the Nhon Thanh site, one of the most im-

were robustly constructed using materials such as

portant settlements of Oc Eo, with the largest andbricks, stones, and a combination of bricks andmost diverse collection of molds, is considered one

stones (Fig. 14). They are often dated to a continu-

of the specialized centers for crafting lead-tin jew-

ation and later date than the habitation sites. Theseelry with a high level of specialization, catering not

structures encompassed the philosophies and reli-

only to local demands but also allowing for com-gious models of India from early to late periods,

mercial exchange.

wherein the technique of reinforcing the foundation
with a system of wooden piles combined with earth

Artifacts

fill on top was a notable feature in the architectur-

Building upon the research foundation laid by

al art of the Oc Eo inhabitants. They also utilized

Malleret, and nearly 50 years of continued investi-

lightweight and local materials such as wood andgation, the distinctive artifacts of the Óc Eo culture

leaves for the superstructures. This construction

have been identified and classified, with pottery be-method demonstrated their high adaptability anding the most significant category. Pottery serves ascontrol over the topography of the low-lying re-reliable evidence of material and provides a basisgion. This particular technique had developedfor better identification and evaluation of the re-through the long-term accumulation of the indig-

mains and artifacts of this ancient culture, especial-enous resident’s history of conquering their deltaic

ly within ancient settlements. It helps to reflect thehomeland (Bui 2013: 160-162).

social structure and life of the ancient community,

Fig. 13. The traces of settlement on wooden

52architecture and clay embankment at

Fig. 14. Go Sau Thuan architectural site,

Go Giong Cat site, excavated in 2018-2020.

excavated in 2017-2019.

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

an important aspect that has not been fully emphasized.

tinctive characteristics of the Oc Eo culture.
The various types of handicrafts are also nota-

The pottery collection of the Oc Eo culture ex-ble collections within the Oc Eo culture. Ancient

hibits unique characteristics in terms of type, mate-

Chinese documents described the life of the people

rial, and manufacturing techniques. It demonstratesof Funan: “Further, they like to decorate ornaments

a combination of various indigenous and imported

and to carve. Many of their eating utensils are silver.

cultural elements, while clearly reflecting the de-Tax is paid in gold, silver, pearls, perfumes. Theyvelopment from early to late stages in the history of

have books and archives and other things. TheirOc Eo culture. High-quality pottery is from careful-

written characters are like those of the Hu [Hồ]”ly processed materials and often used for special-(Pelliot 1903: 254), “The people of Funan cast rings

ized and primarily religious items, such as jars, cup,and bracelets in gold and dishes in silver” (Pelliot

kendi (spouted jars), kundika (ritual sprinklers),

1903: 261), “It is a market where East meets West.

bell-shaped lids. These products are typically deco-Thousands of people gather there every day. Rare

rated with simple colored patterns. On the contrary,

items and precious goods are abundant” (Pelliot

ordinary pottery is primarily made from coarse clay

1903: 263). At the Oc Eo site, archaeologists havemixed with sand or plant residues, including every-

discovered a vast quantity and diversity of glass

day household items such as pots, vessels, jars, ca-

bead strings, along with evidence of production andrang (stoves). This group of products is the focal

crafting activities. This indicates that the area waspoint of decorative art, combining various technicalone of the important centers for manufacturing andmethods to create pottery products that bear the dis-

supplying glass beads in the region. In addition, theFig. 15. Some typical artifacts in the Oc Eo culture in southern Vietnam(© Center for Archaeology, Southern Institute of Social Sciences, and the author).

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

53

Nguyen H. B. L.

collection of jewelry is highly diverse, including

community but also likely became one of the maingold rings adorned with bull motifs or engraved

trade commodities in the region’s commercial ac-

with Sanskrit characters, earrings made of lead-tin

tivities.

alloy, gold-plated or gold-wrapped, bracelets, amulets, and insignias. Furthermore, a rich collection ofmolds and tools used to craft these types of jewelryhas been found at various sites of Oc Eo culture.

Origin and Development of Oc Eo Culture— Funan Kingdom

All of this demonstrate a high level of integration

Based on excavation findings, stratigraphic

between traditional metalworking and the importa-

analysis, typological comparison of archaeologi-tion of diverse and continuously innovative design

cal artifacts, and the application of scientific dating

patterns, resulting in a distinctive style of artisanal

methods, primarily radiocarbon dating, Vietnamese

craftsmanship within the Oc Eo ancient culture.

scholars have essentially delineated the general

Religious artifacts in the Oc Eo culture include

process of development of Oc Eo culture in south-

sculptures and reliefs depicting Buddhism and Hin-ern Vietnam, which can be divided into four phases

duism on various materials such as stone, wood,(Bui et al. 2018: 611-613):

fired clay, and gold (Fig. 15). They bear the unique—­ Pre-Oc Eo phase (3rd century BCE - 1st cen-artistic characteristics of “Funan Art”, as referredtury CE): characterized by sites such as Go

to by Vietnamese archaeologists (Bui et al. 2018;

Cay Tung (phase 2), Go Me - Go Sanh [GòBui et al. 2022; Le 2006) influenced by various

Me - Gò Sành], K9, Giong Cu [Giồng Cu],

art styles from India through direct or indirect

Xoa Ao [Xoa Ảo], Giong Xoai, Go Tu Tram

cultural exchange during the cultural diffusion to(phase 1).

neighboring regions. These artworks closely adhere—­ Early Oc Eo phase (1st-3rd century CE):to religious patterns and distinct cultural features

represented by sites like Mop Van [Mốpimported from different regions. At the same time,Văn], Nop Le [Nóp Lê], Go Cay Thi [Gòthe process of “localization” has led to the develop-

Cây Thị] (phase 1), Go Oc Eo [Gò Óc Eo]ment of superb sculptural artworks found through-(phase 1), Go Cay Da [Gò Cây Da], Go Tu

out the Mekong Delta region. For example, in Go

Tram (phase 2).

Thap, Giong Xoai [Giồng Xoài], and Phong My—­ Developed Oc Eo phase (Typical Oc Eo, 4th-

[Phong Mỹ], in 4th-6th century CE, unique wood-

7th century CE): characterized by sites suchen Buddha sculptures bear deep influences from theas Da Noi (Kien Giang), Da Noi (An Giang),

Amaravati and Dvaravati art styles. Additionally,

Nen Chua, Oc Eo - Ba The, Nhon Thanh, Go

stone sculpture reached its peak with the Phnom

Thap, Kenh Ruot Ngua [Kênh Ruột Ngựa],Da style around the 6th-7th century CE, exempli-

and others.

fied by the gigantic Vishnu statue in Ba The (Bui—­ Post-Oc Eo phase (8th-10th century CE):

2013: 162-163). Furthermore, it is worth mention-

primarily concentrated in the ancient estua-

ing intricately engraved gold leaves with religious

rine regions, coastal sand mounds and dunes

symbols. These artworks not only demonstrate theareas, and highland regions of southern Vi-

development and product diversity of the sculptural

etnam, such as, Go Thap An Loi [Gò Tháp

art but also attest to the high level of craftsmanship.

An Lợi], Go Cay Tung, Go Minh Su (phase

These products were not only used within the local

II), Ba Chua Xu, Luu Cu II, Chua Lo Gach

54

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)[Chùa Lò Gạch], Go Thanh, Vinh Hung, Ben

Vietnam, as well as Sa Huynh [Sa Huỳnh] culture

Dinh, Binh Thanh, Chop Mat, Go Buong,in central Vietnam, and extending further into the

Cay Gao, and others.

Southeast Asian region.

Among these, the origin and formation of Oc

Based on the foundational cultural elements of

Eo Culture in the Mekong Delta have been a sub-Oc Eo culture identified in the late Bronze Age -ject of significant interest for Vietnamese research-early Iron Age archaeological sites in the south, Haers, particularly during the phase of re-examining

Van Tan (1996: 9) argued that this cultural founda-

this ancient culture.

tion resulted from the development of multi-lineage

During the conference on “Oc Eo Culture andcultures, possibly formed from various pre-Oc Eo

Ancient Cultures in the Mekong Delta” held in

cultures that developed independently yet intermin-

1983, Ha Van Tan [Hà Văn Tấn] (1984: 225) ana-

gled with each other. These lineages may include

lyzed the indigenous and exogenous factors and ar-

the Giong Ca Vo - Giong Phet - Giong Lon [Giồng

gued that Oc Eo culture represents the continuation

Cá Vồ - Giồng Phệt - Giồng Lớn], the Go Cao Su -of the internal cultural development that had exist-

Go O Chua [Gò Cao Su - Gò Ô Chùa], and the Go

ed in this area since early times, possibly stemming

Cay Tung. The hypothesis of this multi-lineage de-from the Metal Age. Sharing a similar perspective,

velopment is supported and supplemented by some

Le Xuan Diem [Lê Xuân Diệm] (1984: 55) asserted

archaeologists’ opinions. For example, Nguyen Thi

that Oc Eo culture was established in the region of

Hau [Nguyễn Thị Hậu] (1997: 132) suggested that

the Mekong Delta, and in reality, it owes a signif-

the Giong Ca Vo - Giong Phet line advanced to-

icant part of its formation to the creative efforts ofwards Oc Eo culture and the Funan kingdom. Tong

the Dong Nai cultural inhabitants. Pham Duc Manh

Trung Tin [Tống Trung Tín] (2008: 211-228) syn-and Bui Chi Hoang (1984: 127-135), following

thesized four developmental paths from pre-Oc Eo

important discoveries at Iron Age archaeologicalto Oc Eo culture, including: (1) Pre-Oc Eo throughsites in the Dong Nai river basin, concluded that

the Go Cay Tung site, (2) Pre-Oc Eo through thethese findings indicate transitional phases, marking

Go Cao Su site, (3) Pre-Oc Eo through the Giongthe end of the prehistoric society and the beginning

Ca Vo - Giong Phet - Giong Am sites, and (4) Pre-of protohistoric life, characterized by the develop-

Oc Eo through the Giong Noi [Giồng Nổi] site.

ment of multifaceted cultural relationships and ex-

Dang Van Thang (2009: 309-314) illustrated threechanges expanding in various directions, including

developmental paths: (1) Pre-Oc Eo through theCentral and Northern Vietnam, the Mekong Delta,

An Son - Go Cao Su - Go O Chua and Giong Noi

and other regions of Southeast Asia. Additionally,sites, (2) Pre-Oc Eo through the Go Cay Tung site,

Vo Si Khai [Võ Sĩ Khải] (1985: 28-29, 31), in sum-and (3) Pre-Oc Eo through the Bao Dong - Giongmarizing the achievements of the first 10 years of

Ca Vo - Giong Phet [Bao Đồng - Giồng Cá Vồ -Oc Eo cultural research (1975-1985), identified theGiồng Phệt] and Giong Lon sites. Meanwhile, Vu

presence of an indigenous cultural foundation and

Quoc Hien [Vũ Quốc Hiền] and Truong Dac Chien

imported elements within Oc Eo culture based on[Trương Đắc Chiến] (2010: 57) asserted that fromnew discoveries at Oc Eo, Nen Chua, and Go Thap.

Can Gio [Cần Giờ] to Long Son [Long Sơn], from

Furthermore, these findings were placed in relation

Giong Ca Vo - Giong Phet to Giong Lon, there ex-

to archaeological sites in Can Gio [Cần Giờ], Vamists a distinct form, a developmental path from theCo [Vàm Cỏ], and Dong Nai regions in southernearly Iron Age to Oc Eo culture.

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

55

Nguyen H. B. L.

Another approach proposed by archaeologists isin connecting communities and contributing to theto consider Oc Eo culture within the broader con-establishment of Oc Eo culture from the beginningtext of cultural strata and reflect on the relationshipof the Common Era. Pham Duc Manh (2008: 106)

between the prehistoric and protohistoric culturaldefines the concept of pre-Oc Eo as encompassing

traditions in the south Vietnam. During the latethe entire cultural complex that developed from

Bronze Age and early Iron Age periods, the devel-prehistoric to protohistoric times, with processes of

opment of metallurgical techniques influenced theemergence, development, interaction, and conver-

economic and cultural structure, contributing to thegence of cultures, serving as the foundation for the

emergence of Oc Eo culture. Simultaneously, theformation of a new social structure and represent-

rapid formation and expansion of the natural land-

ing the root of Oc Eo culture that emerged in thescape in the Mekong Delta region since the late 1stearly Common Era.

century BCE also had a significant impact on thebirth of Oc Eo (Nguyen 2019: 21-22).

Currently, the majority of Vietnamese scholars
agree on two continuous developmental stages of

Dao Linh Con [Đào Linh Côn] (2002: 109-

Oc Eo culture, including: (1) the early Oc Eo stage,110) conducted analyses and synthesis of residen-

approximately 1st-3rd century CE, and (2) the typ-tial sites within the Oc Eo - Ba The archaeological

ical Oc Eo stage, around the 4th-7th century CE.

complex, identifying a continuous process of for-

These periods witnessed the civilization of Oc Eo

mation and development spanning multiple stages

taking shape and experiencing significant devel-of this area, from pre-Oc Eo to Oc Eo. In this pro-opment, laying the groundwork for the emergencecess, the indigenous traditional elements, known as

and flourishing of the Funan kingdom as one of thethe Dong Nai culture, served as the foundation for

most prosperous cultural and civilized centers in

the formation of Oc Eo culture, which was further

Southeast Asia. From the 8th century to approxi-

influenced by cultural elements imported during

mately the 10th century CE and beyond, Oc Eo

the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age phases inculture entered a period of decline in the lowland

southern Vietnam. Bui Phat Diem [Bùi Phát Diệm]plains (Fig. 16). During this stage, cultural dis-

(2002: 119, 145) analyzed the close relationshiptribution shifted to higher regions such as coastaland shared cultural traditions between the sites ofmounds and dunes in the southwest, the ancient al-

pre-Oc Eo and early Oc Eo stages in the spatial

luvial plain surrounding the Long Xuyen Quadran-context between the southeastern and southwest-

gle, the Vam Co and Dong Nai river basins (Bui etern regions, distributed from the Vam Co river ba-

al. 2018: 43-44).

sin to the Dong Thap Muoi region. According to

The two developmental stages of the archaeo-

Vo Si Khai (2008: 360-362), the pre-Oc Eo period

logical culture of Oc Eo exhibit similarities in thein the southern region corresponded to the Metaltransition of the Funan. Phan Huy Le [Phan Huy Lê]Age, serving as a dynamic and driving force for thesuggests that Funan also had two stages: the Funan

development and accumulation of culture from the

kingdom and the Funan empire (Vu and Nguyen

Bronze Age to the early Iron Age and playing a sig-

2017: 17). In fact, the geological evolution as wellnificant role in the formation of Oc Eo culture. The

as the archaeological evidence also indicate these

agricultural economy based on wet rice cultivation,differences. Pierre-Yves Maguin (2009: 103-118)

the development of maritime trade, and inter-re-

divided Funan archaeology into two stages: the in-gional commercial exchange played crucial roles

itial stage of “Control of flood plains and urban de-56

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Fig. 16. The development phases of Oc Eo - Ba The archaeological complex (after Manguin 2002: Table 3).

velopment” and the later stage of “Indianization”.

nan, encompassing the territory of the Champa

The period of constructing irrigation systems andcivilization. Additionally, Funan had relations withlimited transportation, along with the emergence ofa third region, expanding from Funan into the cul-

port cities and early trade relations with the pre-3rd

tural sphere of Java Sea, inhabited by Malay ethnic

century CE world in the Long Xuyen Quadrilateralgroups (Hall 1985: 66). The Funan empire domi-

region, can be understood as the era of the Funan

nated the entire Gulf of Thailand region and can be

kingdom. The Indianization process from the 4th toconsidered as controlling the vital trade route from

5th century CE marks the beginning of the Funan

Indochina to India via the Kra Isthmus.

empire .
10)

After a period of flourishing development, theThe robust development of the port-city con-

Funan Empire began to decline in the late 6th cen-

tributed to Funan’s increasing prominence. Thistury CE (Vu and Nguyen 2017: 274). The Xin Tang

kingdom became an important hub of culture andShu [新唐書] provides more specific information,commerce, connecting three nascent Southeast

stating that during the reign of Zhen Guan of the

Asian kingdoms. The first region extended from

Tang Dynasty (627-649), “The king of Funan re-

Lower Myanmar (Chin-lin) through Funan, wheresided in the city of T’o-mou [Đặc Mục], but that

the Mon-Khmer and Pyu civilizations were in theircity was unexpectedly conquered by the kingdom

developmental stage. The second region stretchedof Chenla, forcing the king of Funan to flee south

northwards along the Vietnamese coast from Fu-

to the city of Na-fu-na” (Pelliot 1903: 299). The de-Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

57

Nguyen H. B. L.

cline of Funan was not solely attributed to political

populations. Le Trung Kha [Lê Trung Khá] (1984:

factors, the rise of powerful neighboring nations,

247; 1986: 232) analyzed the skulls discovered atand the loss of its role in international trade net-

Canh Den and Go Thap sites and classified themworks, but also linked to the influence of natural

as part of the Indonesian sub-group, which in-conditions and the ecological environment. The

cludes present-day people such as the Thượng inslow rise in sea levels led to the intrusion of salt-

the southern Truong Son mountain range, the Kha

water and had a negative impact on the economy

people in the Boloven Plateau (Laos), the Po Nongof the marshy region, creating favorable conditions

and Pêa people in Cambodia, and the Dayak people

for the development of higher, drier areas (Hallin Kalimantan. When analyzing the human remains

1985: 78-83; Vu and Nguyen 2017: 277-278). In

found at the Rach Rung [Rạch Rừng] and An Son

this context, Chenla, originally a vassal state, tri-

[An Sơn] prehistoric sites, Nguyen Quang Quyenumphed over Funan. This explains why, for nearly[Nguyễn Quang Quyền] (1990: 118) concluded that

10 centuries afterward, the land of southern Viet-the bone samples from Moc Hoa [Mộc Hóa] belong

nam became a desolate region, undeveloped andto the same type of ancient population, referred toneglected by the Angkor authorities, although nom-as “Prehistoric people” [người thượng cổ], similar

inally, Angkor had claimed control over this land

to Melanesians. He also suggested that the skulls

since the 7th century CE (Vu and Nguyen 2017:from An Son are likely of the same type, indicat-

278).

ing that the inhabitants of these areas over 2,000
years ago in the southern region and even the Dong

The Oc Eo Cultural Inhabitants

Thap Muoi area were predominantly of the ‘Prehistoric people’ type. However, through the analy-

A key research issue of interest in the study ofsis of ancient skulls from Loc Giang [Lộc Giang],

Oc Eo culture is who left the culture. The initial

Go O Chua, Go Me [Gò Me], Giong Ca Vo, andunderstanding of the ethnic characteristics andNhon Thanh sites, Nguyen Lan Cuong [Nguyễn

ancient inhabitants of Oc Eo is mentioned in an-

Lân Cường] (2008: 184-187) argued that theycient Chinese texts, such as, “the men of Funan arehave closer affinities with Mongoloid or Dong Son

ugly and dark, with curly hair” (Pelliot 1903: 254),[Đông Sơn] (Southeast Asian group) populations“the people of the Whitehead country, located west

and are distinct from Australian, Melanesian, orof Funan [which is a vassal state of Funan]. The

Khmer skulls.

Whitehead people have white faces and smooth,

Nguyen Quoc Manh [Nguyễn Quốc Mạnh]shiny skin like wax” (Pelliot 1903: 275), and “the(2019: 141-143), through the analysis and com-people of Funan are very tall” (Pelliot 1903: 280).

parison of material evidence, revealed the similar-

Discoveries of human skeletons within the cul-ities and traditional relationships between the Oc

tural layers of archaeological sites related to Oc Eo

Eo culture and neighboring prehistoric culturesare scarce in general. Malleret (1962b: 194-197),

such as those in the southeastern region, central

while analyzing cranial indices found at Lo Mo, Oc

Highlands, coastal areas of central Vietnam, andEo, and Canh Den, concluded that the indigenous

Southeast Asian archipelagos. Additionally, there ispeople of Oc Eo may be ethnically related to pres-evidence of cultural connections and the develop-

ent-day ethnic groups in the Central Highlands, asment of communities among these cultures throughthey were deeply inland and not mixed with othermaritime trade activities, especially during the late58

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Bronze Age and early Iron Age. Situated at the in-foreport, played the role of an ancient port-city

tersection of the east and the west, the Mekong Del-

complex of Funan kingdom situated on the East-ta region, with its favorable natural conditions, hasWest trade route, which also clearly demonstrates

created a diverse cultural environment character-extensive trading relations through the presence ofized by cultural diversity and connections between

imported elements, as evidenced by archaeologicalmainland and the island Southeast Asia regions.

discoveries. These include Roman gold coins minted during the reign of Emperor Antonius Pius (138-

Oc Eo in Its Cultural Relations with
the Region and the World

161 CE, Fig. 17: 1) and Marcus Aurelius (161-180
CE, Fig. 17: 2), Roman-style bronze keys (2nd-3rd
century CE, Fig. 17: 3), mosaic eye glass beads in

Economic trade during the Oc Eo cultural peri-

Roman style (Fig. 17: 4), Persian bronze lamps,

od developed strongly and participated in the East-

beaded glass necklaces originating from West Asia.

West trading network from the early centuries of

In addition, archeology also recorded the presence

Common Era. This is evidenced by the discoveryof leaf-shaped paddle oars in the style of India andof Oc Eo cultural coins at numerous archaeolog-

the maritime residents of Southeast Asia (Fig. 17:

ical sites in present-day Thailand, Myanmar, and5, 3rd-4th century CE), bronze mirrors (Fig. 17:

the Malay Peninsula. Additionally, through contact

6) and Wuzhu coins (Fig. 17: 7) from the Easternwith Indian, Arab, and Roman traders, Oc Eo es-

Han Dynasty (1st-3rd century CE), as well as vari-tablished trade activities with India and the Medi-

ous artifacts with inscriptions in Chinese, Brahmi/

terranean (Vo 2008). The maritime trade route was

Sankrit, and a wide variety of imported pottery, in-established from the river ports along the Ganges,

cluding Roman pottery (2nd century CE), Chinesecontinued along the coast of the Bay of Bengal,

pottery (2nd-8th century CE, Fig. 17: 8-10), Indianpassed through Malaysia, crossed the Kra Isthmus,

pottery (1st-6th century CE, Fig. 17: 11), and Is-

looped through the Gulf of Thailand, and ultimately

lamic pottery (8th century CE, Fig. 17: 12) (Bui etreached Funan in the Mekong Delta (Hall 1985: 67,

al. 2022: 288-289, 301-305).

69; Bui et al. 2018: 626).
The city of Oc Eo, along with the Nen Chua

The civilization of India can be said to have themost important and powerful influence not only

Fig. 17. Some imported artifacts were found at the Oc Eo - Ba The, and Nen Chua archaeological sites(after Bui et al. 2018: 910 [1, 2]; Bui et al. 2022: 125, 161, 237, 291 [4, 6, 9, 10, 13]).

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

59

Nguyen H. B. L.

on the Oc Eo culture but also on the contemporarychaeological site, Wuzhu coins and Chinese mir-cultures of the Southeast Asian region in general,rors from the Eastern Han Dynasty, and Han-stylethrough processes of trade and cultural dissemina-

glazed pottery with floral patterns, as well as spout-tion. This influence is evident in the social organ-

ed teapots in the shape of a rooster’s head from theization, religious architecture, objects, and tech-Six Dynasties period (4th-6th century CE), have

nologies. The Hindu and Buddhist architectural

been found. The presence of ancient Chinese cul-elements in Oc Eo adhere to common construction

ture is also noted in the later period of Oc Eo cul-standards derived from Indian architectural models,ture, with the identification of certain ceramic types

while still displaying distinct local characteristics.

that, according to Bui Minh Tri’s analysis (2020:

Additionally, high-quality pottery types imported

43-62), are characteristic products of the Ding kiln,

from India, including fine clay material, and pol-Heng kiln (Hebei), and Dehua kiln (Fujian) duringished black pottery, have been found dating back to

the Northern Song Dynasty (10th-12th century CE).

the earliest phase of Oc Eo culture (the earliest cul-

At several archaeological sites in Thailand,tural layer of Lung Lon, 1st-3rd century CE). An-

such as Khao Sam Kaeo, Phu Kao Thong, andother type of pottery, adorned with black patterns

Khuan Luk Pat, the presence of various types ofon a red surface, was discovered in residential sites

jewelry made from gemstones such as carnelian

dating to around the post-3rd century CE (Bui et al.

and agate, glass, and gold has been documented.

2022: 295).

These artifacts exhibit a high degree of similarity

The cultural exchange between the residents ofto those found in the Oc Eo culture, which did not

Oc Eo and ancient China, as evidenced by recent

have access to the raw materials required for theirarchaeological discoveries, is believed to have ex-

production. Researchers suggest that these jewelry

isted from an early period, possibly in the 2nd-3rd

items were likely popular imported goods among

century CE. In the Oc Eo plain and Nen Chua ar-

the residents of Oc Eo during the early Common

Fig. 18. Provenance and trade routes of glass beads, including Oc Eo (after Oga and Tamura 2013: 36).

60

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Era. Additionally, Go Oc Eo is known as a centerin ancient literature to archaeological discoveries

for the production of Indo-Pacific glass beads, withfrom the late 19th century to the present, has been

the estimated quantity unearthed exceeding the lo-

studied and approached by generations of scholars

cal demand. Analysis using XRF (X-ray Fluores-

both domestically and internationally, from various

cence) has revealed similarities in the composition

aspects. These include dating, the process of forma-of raw materials used in the production of Indo-Pa-

tion, development and decline, spatial distribution,cific glass beads between Oc Eo, archaeologicalfundamental characteristics of artifacts and sites,

sites in Southeast Asia, and even further into thethe influence and cultural relations with contempo-

South Asian region (Fig. 18). Hence, it is possi-

rary ancient civilizations in the region and beyond,ble that these locations shared a common source

as well as the connection between the Oc Eo cul-of glass material (Nguyen et al. 2020; Oga andture and the ancient kingdom of Funan. The results

Tamura 2013).

of these researches have significantly contributed

The relationship between the residents of Oc Eo

to recognizing the historical, cultural, and social

and the island-dwelling communities of Southeast

value, as well as the role of this ancient culture in

Asia in the past research remains somewhat faint.

the development process of the history of southern

However, during excavations at the Oc Eo - Ba The

Vietnam, particularly in Southeast Asia during thearchaeological site between 2017 and 2020, archae-first millennium CE.

ologists discovered three objects of leaf-shaped oar

However, there are still many scientific issues

blades in the Lung Lon cultural layer. Through re-related to the Oc Eo culture that require further

search and comparison, it was observed that theseresearch. Determining the indigenous or origins

oar blades bear similarities to those used by ancient

factors, and pathways of the formation of this cul-people in India and island-dwelling communities inture has not yet reached a consensus among the ac-

Papua New Guinea, a country that belongs to theademic community. Additionally, the methods andCommonwealth, and surrounding areas. Addition-

pathways through which exogenous influences, es-ally, through the application of starch analysis (Tor-pecially from Indian civilization, were introduced,

rence and Barton 2006) on pesani, pestles, grinding

adopted, and assimilated by the local population,stones, and mortars, researchers identified the pres-and their impact on the formation and development

ence of common spices such as ginger, turmeric,of Oc Eo, are still largely based on hypotheses

and taro. Notably, starch from benzoin was also

derived from the study of imported artifacts anddetected (Nguyen 2020). Benzoin has been known

scant information mentioned in ancient literaturesince ancient times as an important and valuable

and records. The issue of the cultural agents of Oc

commodity, widely used in the production of per-Eo still requires more evidence through analytical

fumes, flavorings, pharmaceuticals, and in religious

and comparative approaches in anthropology andceremonies. Benzoin primarily originates from theancient languages, which can be explored throughislands of Sumatra and Java in Indonesia.

future archaeological excavations.
In addition, the geographical location and roleof Oc Eo also need further examination to deter-

CONCLUSION

mine whether it was an urban settlement, a portcity, an international trading center with commer-

The Oc Eo culture, from scattered references
Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

cial activities between local residents and foreign

61

Nguyen H. B. L.

merchants, or the capital Na-fu-na mentioned in

pa civilization in Central Vietnam, where manycertain periods of the Funan kingdom in some an-well-preserved religious structures exist, most ofcient texts and recent studies (Dang et al. 2020),

the known religious architectures of the Oc Eo cul-particularly in relation to the Angkor Borei archae-ture is in the form of ruins or partially preserved

ological site (Cambodia). Furthermore, elements

foundations. There are very few or virtually absent

related to the urban properties of Oc Eo, such as its

inscriptions providing information about the dat-scale, urban structure, population, settlement pat-ing or the kings and nobles who constructed andterns, food supply sources, adaptability to annual

worshiped a particular deity. Instead, the evidence

flooding phenomena, and its relationship with themainly consists of religious artifacts found in-situ

religious center of the Ba The mountain region, andor artifacts that have been displaced due to frequent

other cultural centers of Oc Eo in the Mekong Del-

excavation activities conducted in the past. Theta, and the contemporary cultural complexes in theidentification of specific religious functions or theregion, also require further research to clarify the

specific ruling deity of an architectural structure,role and significance of this particularly important

therefore, needs to be approached with caution.

archaeological site.

It should not be solely based on a statue found orPreviously, Vietnamese archaeologists tended

some religious artifacts associated with a Hindu or

to focus only on the study of religious architectural

Buddhist deity that commonly encountered in con-monuments and related artifacts in Oc Eo culture.

secration deposit within the central architecture.

In the early 21st century, the study of ancient set-Comparative studies and archaeological evidence

tlements has begun to receive research interest andhave revealed that architectural structures in ancient

has made certain achievements, notably the suc-cultures often existed not only for a short period but

cessful establishment of a basic Oc Eo pottery chro-

could undergo continuous renovation, expansion in

nology according to the developmental progression

scale, structural changes, and even modifications infrom early to late stages. However, other aspects

religious functions. Another issue recently raised

have not received sufficient attention and researchby some Vietnamese archaeologists is the subjec-

due to various objective reasons, such as the pres-tive naming of major settlement points of Oc Eoervation conditions of ancient environments, thecultural residents, such as religious centers, culturalprocess of occupation and habitation, material andcenters, capitals, and even the “micro-state” of thespiritual life of the community residents, the social

Funan kingdom, without defining the correspond-

structure of Oc Eo, dietary patterns and nutrition,

ing criteria and constituent elements in relation toand the adaptation of Oc Eo residents to different

contemporary ancient cultures within the region

natural conditions, such as the lowland region ofand beyond.

southwestern Vietnam or the highland region ofsoutheastern Vietnam.

The number of archaeological monuments andartifacts unearthed and collected from Oc Eo cul-

One issue that has sparked considerable debate

ture over the past decades is extremely diverse andin cultural research on Oc Eo and the Funan inabundant. Although archaeologists have made sig-

southern Vietnam over the past decade is the iden-nificant efforts in studying and analyzing them, thetification of religious architectural structures or theoverall research primarily remains at a descriptive

determination of the ruling deity associated withand statistical level. This is due to a lack of experts

these discovered temple ruins. Unlike the Cham-in iconography, comparative research, and the ap-

62

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

plication of advanced methods to analyze materi-

the Eastern Han Dynasty (25-220). There are also

als and techniques within a broader context. Initial

other ancient texts such as Funan Zhuan [扶南传],results have been achieved, but there is still ample

Wu Shu [吴书], Jin Shu [晋书], Qi Shu [齐书], Liang

fertile ground and potential for researchers to con-Shu [梁书], Tang Shu [唐书], and Song Shi [宋史],tribute significantly in deciphering their content,

but the information about Funan is often scattered

meaning, cultural relationships, and elucidating

and only briefly mentioned.

the cultural-artistic interactions with traders from

2) In terms of natural geography, southern Vietnam is

the region and abroad at the ancient Oc Eo cultur-commonly divided into two regions. The southwest-

al sites. Through this, a clearer and comprehensive

ern region [miền Tây Nam Bộ] (also known as theunderstanding of Oc Eo culture will be established.

Mekong Delta), characterized by low-lying newly
formed alluvial plains. It features flat terrain, intricate

Acknowledgements

networks of branches from the Mekong river, and adense system of canals, alongside coastal mounds

I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation toand dunes. The southeastern region [miền Đông Nam

Dr. ADACHI Takuro (Professor at Kanazawa Universi-

Bộ] is located in higher areas with more diverse to-ty), and Dr. YAMAGATA Mariko (Professor at Rikkyo

pography, combining mountains, ancient alluvial

University), for their invaluable feedback in finalizing

plains, and coastal wetlands.

the content of this article. I am also deeply grateful to3) “Oc Eo” is a term used in Vietnamese, phonetical-

Dr. ICHIKAWA Akira (Associate Professor at Kanaz-

ly derived from the Khmer language “Ur Kev”, pro-awa University), and Dr. John ERTL (Professor at Keionounced as “O Kéo” in a common phonetic way

University), for their excellent advice, which greatly

among residents of the Mekong Delta. However, it iscontributed to the completion of this work. Addition-

not an original Khmer word but a Thai word mean-

ally, I would like to extend my gratitude to the peer re-ing “Jade River” [O = depression/river; Kéo = jade]viewers for their valuable contributions in enhancing(Malleret 1962: 427).

the quality of this publication. This study was funded

4) Now the Center for Archaeology, Southern Insti-

in part by the Resona Foundation for Asia and Oceania,

tute of Social Sciences, Vietnam Academy of Social

Japan in 2023.

Sciences.
5) The achievements of the archaeological research on

NGUYEN Hoang Bach Linh

Center for Archaeology,
Southern Institute of Social Sciences (Vietnam)/Ph.D. Student, Kanazawa University

the Oc Eo culture over 20 years after the reunificationof the country were summarized in the publication
Oc Eo Culture: New Discoveries in 1995 by Le Xuan
Diem, Dao Linh Con, and Vo Si Khai.
6) The project has the participation of leading Vietnamese archaeologists from the Southern Instituteof Social Sciences, the Institute of Archaeology, andNOTES

the Institute of Imperial Citadel Studies, as well as1) The oldest book in China that records information

and Australia. The research outcomes of the project

about the southern region and the kingdom of Funan

were published in the work titled Oc Eo Culture: New

is the Diwu Zhi [地物志] written by Yang Fu during

Archaeological Discoveries at the Oc Eo - Ba The andAncient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

the collaborative involvement of experts from Japan

63

Nguyen H. B. L.

Nen Chua 2017-2020, released in 2022, authored by
Bui Minh Tri, Nguyen Gia Doi, and Nguyen Khanh
Trung Kien.

REFERENCES
Aymonier, É. 1891. Première Étude sur les Inscriptions

7) Significant results from the project have contributed

Tchames. Journal Asiatique 8e Série 17: 5-86.

to the completion of the nomination dossier for theBui, C. H. 2013. Conservation and Development Plan-

Oc Eo - Ba The archaeological complex as a proposedning Guidelines for Oc Eo - Ba The Archaeological

UNESCO World Cultural Heritage (Phase 1). Cur-

Site (Oc Eo Town, Thoai Son District, An Giang

rently, the project is in the process of preparing theProvince). Comprehensive Report of Ministry-lev-dossier for the second phase, aiming to propose theel Scientific Project. Hanoi, Vietnam Academy ofrecognition of the Oc Eo - Ba The complex as a World

Social Sciences [Bùi Chí Hoàng 2013. Định hướng

Cultural Heritage by UNESCO.

quy hoạch, bảo tồn và phát huy khu di tích Óc Eo

8) However, it is necessary to distinguish between two- Ba Thê (thị trấn Óc Eo, huyện Thoại Sơn, tỉnh An

concepts: the Oc Eo culture (archaeological) and theGiang). Báo cáo tổng hợp đề tài cấp Bộ. Hà Nội,Funan kingdom (national). In terms of time, basedViện Hàn lâm Khoa học xã hội Việt Nam].

on material evidence, the Oc Eo culture has an earlier

Bui, C. H., K. T. K. Nguyen and N. K. Dang 2017. Pre-and longer dating than Funan. Currently, archaeol-

historic Archaeology of Southern Vietnam. Hanoi,

ogists unanimously determine the dating of the Oc

Social Sciences Publishing House [Bùi Chí Hoàng,

Eo culture from the 1st to the 9th, 10th century CE.

Nguyễn Khánh Trung Kiên, Đặng Ngọc Kính 2017.

On the other hand, based on historical records andKhảo cổ học Nam Bộ thời Tiền sử. Hà Nội, Nxb.

archaeology, history recognizes the existence of the

Khoa học Xã hội].

Funan Kingdom and Empire from the 2nd to the ear-Bui, C. H., Q. M. Nguyen and H. P. Le 2018. Protohis-

ly 7th century CE. In terms of geography, the bound-toric Archaeology of Southern Vietnam. Hanoi, So-aries of Funan do not always coincide with the dis-cial Sciences Publishing House [Bùi Chí Hoàng,tribution of the Oc Eo culture (Phan 2011: 179, 213).

Nguyễn Quốc Mạnh, Lê Hoàng Phong 2018. Khảo9) “Transbassac” is a French term used by the French tocổ học Nam Bộ thời Sơ sử. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học

refer to the southwestern region of Vietnam, whereXã hội].

the Mekong River flows through. This term originat-

Bui, M. T. 2020. Foreign Pottery in Oc Eo Culture anded from the combination of “trans”, meaning “across”

New Perspectives on Oc Eo Culture from Compar-or “beyond”, and “Bassac”, another name for the Hậu

ative Research. Journal of Archaeology 2: 43-62 [BùiRiver, one of the main branches of the Mekong River

Minh Trí 2020. ‘Đồ gốm nước ngoài trong văn hóa

in this area.

Óc Eo và một vài nhận thức mới về văn hóa Óc Eo,10) The concept of “imperial” used here is relative, derived from records of Pham Man (Fan Shi Man) usingtiếp cận từ nghiên cứu so sánh’. Tạp chí Khảo cổ họcsố 2: 43-62].

large ships to establish vassal relationships with some

Bui, M. T., G. D. Nguyen and K. T. K. Nguyen 2022.

remote port states. However, there is insufficient evi-

Oc Eo Culture: New Archaeological Discoveries at thedence to compare it with contemporary empires such

Oc Eo - Ba The and Nen Chua 2017-2020. Hanoi,

as the Roman or Chinese empires (Vu and Nguyen

Social Sciences Publishing House [Bùi Minh Trí,2017: 179).

Nguyễn Gia Đối, Nguyễn Khánh Trung Kiên 2022.
Văn hóa Óc Eo: Những phát hiện mới khảo cổ học tạidi tích Óc Eo - Ba Thê và Nền Chùa 2017-2020. Hà64

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

na: The First and Last Capital of Funan Kingdom.

Bui, P. D. 2002. Archaeology of Long An in the Ear-

Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam National University Ho Chi

ly Centuries CE. Ph.D. Dissertation in Historical

Minh City Publishing House [Đặng Văn Thắng,Sciences. Ho Chi Minh, Institute of Social SciencesNguyễn Hữu Giềng, Hà Thị Sương 2020. Na Phậtin Ho Chi Minh City [Bùi Phát Diệm 2002. Khảo cổ

Na: Kinh đô đầu tiên và cuối cùng của vương quốchọc Long An những thế kỷ đầu Công nguyên. LuậnPhù Nam. Hồ Chí Minh, Nxb. Đại học Quốc gia

án Tiến sĩ Khoa học Lịch sử. Hồ Chí Minh, ViệnThành phố Hồ Chí Minh].

Khoa học xã hội tại Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh].
Chronique 1909a. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 9(3): 613-630.
Chronique 1909b. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 9(4): 817-860.
Chronique 1922. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 22: 329-388.
Chronique 1924. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 24(3/4): 615-648.
Chronique De L’annèe 1939. Bulletin de l’École
Française d’Extrême-Orient 39(2): 273-366.
Chronique De L’année 1940. Bulletin de l’École
Française d’Extrême-Orient 40(2): 465-505.
Coedès, G. 1931. Études Cambodgiennes. Bulletin deDao, L. C. 1984. Discovery of Oc Eo Burial Site (DongThap). In Vietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.),New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1984, pp. 238240. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing House [ĐàoLinh Côn 1984. Phát hiện mộ táng Óc Eo (Đồng
Tháp). Trong Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học
năm 1984, tr. 238-240. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xãhội].
Dao, L. C. 1985. Excavation Report of the Da Noi Archaeological Site (An Giang). Ho Chi Minh, Documentation from the Center for Archaeology, Southern Institute of Social Sciences [Đào Linh Côn
1985. Báo cáo khai quật di tích khảo cổ học Đá Nổi(An Giang). Hồ Chí Minh, Tư liệu Trung tâm Khảol’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 31(1-2): 1-23.

cổ học, Viện Khoa học Xã hội vùng Nam Bộ].

Corre, A. 1879. Rapport sur les Objets de l’Âge de laDao, L. C. 1986. Excavation of the Luu Cu Architec-

Pierre Polie et du Bronze Recueillis Its Som-Ron-tural Site, Tra Cu District (Cuu Long). In Vietnam

Sen (Cambodge), et Note Annexe sur des Instru-

Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Discoveries inments en Pierre Polie et en Bronze Trouvés aux

Archaeology of 1986, pp. 114-117. Hanoi, Social

Environs de Saigon. Saigon, Excursions et Recon-

Sciences Publishing House [Đào Linh Côn 1986.

naissances 1: 71-91.

Khai quật di tích kiến trúc Lưu Cừ, huyện Trà Cú

Dalet, R. 1936. Recherches Archéologiques au Cam-(Cửu Long). Trong Những phát hiện mới về Khảobodge. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Ori-cổ học năm 1986, tr. 114-117. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa

ent 36(1): 23-64.

học Xã hội].

Dang, V. T. 2009. Pre-Oc Eo Archaeological Sites in

Dao, L. C. 1989. Excavation of the Go Thanh Site. In

the Mekong Delta. Final Report of the ScientificVietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Dis-and Technological Project. Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam

coveries in Archaeology of 1989, pp. 95-98. Hanoi,

National University Ho Chi Minh City [Đặng Văn

Social Sciences Publishing House [Đào Linh CônThắng 2009. Những di tích khảo cổ học thời tiền Óc

1989. Khai quật di tích Gò Thành. Trong Những

Eo ở Tây Nam Bộ. Báo cáo tổng kết Đề tài Khoa học

phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1989, tr. 95-98.

Công nghệ. Hồ Chí Minh, Đại học Quốc gia Thành

Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

phố Hồ Chí Minh].
Dang, V. T., H. G. Nguyen and T. S. Ha 2020. Na-fu-

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Dao, L. C. 1990. Survey of the Ke Mot ArchaeologicalSite, Vinh Thuan (Kien Giang). In Vietnam Institute65

Nguyen H. B. L.

of Archaeology (ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeolo-

ment in Early Southeast Asia. Honolulu, University

gy of 1990, pp. 247-250. Hanoi, Social Sciences Pub-of Hawaii Press.

lishing House [Đào Linh Côn 1990. Thám sát di chỉ

Le, T. K. 1984. Regarding the Newly Discovered An-khảo cổ Kè Một, Vĩnh Thuận (Kiên Giang). Trong

cient Skulls in An Giang and Dong Thap. In Viet-Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1990, tr.

nam Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Discoveries

247-250. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

in Archaeology of 1984, pp. 247-250. Hanoi, Social

Dao, L. C. 2002. Oc Eo Culture Settlement Sites at the

Sciences Publishing House [Lê Trung Khá 1984. Về

Oc Eo - Ba The Archaeological Complex (An Giang).

những sọ cổ mới phát hiện ở An Giang và ĐồngResearch Project Sponsored by the Toyota Foun-

Tháp. Trong Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học

dation. Ho Chi Minh, Documentation from thenăm 1984, tr. 247-250. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã

Center for Archaeology, Southern Institute of Socialhội].

Sciences [Đào Linh Côn 2002. Di chỉ cư trú văn hóa

Le, T. K. 1986. Regarding the Newly Discovered An-Óc Eo ở khu di tích Óc Eo - Ba Thê (An Giang). Đề

cient Human Remains in Canh Den (Vinh Phongtài do Quỹ Toyota Foundation tài trợ. Hồ Chí Minh,

Commune, Vinh Thuan District, Kien Giang Prov-

Tư liệu Trung tâm Khảo cổ học, Viện Khoa học Xãince). In Vietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.),hội vùng Nam Bộ].

New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1986, pp. 229-

Dupont, P. 1934. Catalogue des Collections Indochi-

233. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing House [Lênoises du Musée Guimet, Précédé d’Études par P.

Trung Khá 1986. Về những di cốt người cổ mới

Stern, J. Auboyer, G. de Coral-Rémusat, P. Dupont.

phát hiện ở Cạnh Đền (xã Vĩnh Phong, huyện VĩnhBulletin de la Commission Archéologique de l’Indo-Thuận, tỉnh Kiên Giang. Trong Những phát hiệnchine, Années 1931-1934: 7-194.

mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1986, tr. 229-233. Hà Nội,Finot, L. 1914. L’archéologie en Indochine (1911-1912).
Bulletin de la Commission Archéologique de l’Indochine, Année: 1-8.

Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].
Le, T. L. 2006. Buddhist and Hindu Art in the Mekong
Delta Before the 10th Century. Hanoi, The Gioi Pub-

Ha, V. T. 1984. Oc Eo: Indigenous and Exogenous Fac-lishing House [Lê Thị Liên 2006. Nghệ thuật Phậttors. In Institute of Social Sciences in Ho Chi Minhgiáo và Hindu giáo ở Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long

City (ed.), Oc Eo Culture and Ancient Cultures intrước thế kỷ X. Hà Nội, Nxb. Thế Giới].

the Mekong Delta, pp. 222-231. Long Xuyen, De-

Le, X. D. 1983. Excavation of the Ba The - Oc Eo Sitepartment of Culture and Information Publishing(An Giang). In Vietnam Institute of Archaeology[Hà Văn Tấn 1984. Óc Eo: những yếu tố nội sinh và(ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1983, pp.

ngoại sinh. Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và các Nền văn hóa

192-194. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing Housecổ ở Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long, tr. 222-231. Long[Lê Xuân Diệm. 1983. Khai quật di tích Ba Thê - ÓcXuyên, Sở Văn hóa và Thông tin xuất bản].

Eo (An Giang). Trong Những phát hiện mới về KhảoHa, V. T. 1996. Evaluation of Results from Archaeological Programs in Truong Sa, Tay Nguyen, and Tay

học Xã hội].

Nam Bo. Journal of Archaeology 4: 5-10 [Hà Văn

Le, X. D. 1984. Regarding the Ancient Cultures in theTấn 1996. Nhận xét kết quả các chương trình khảoMekong Delta. In Institute of Social Sciences in Hocổ học Trường Sa, Tây Nguyên và Tây Nam Bộ. Tạp

Chi Minh City (ed.), Oc Eo Culture and Ancient Cul-chí Khảo cổ học số 4: 5-10].

tures in the Mekong Delta, pp. 43-59. Long Xuyen,Hall, K. R. 1985. Maritime Trade and State Develop-66cổ học năm 1983, tr. 192-194. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa

Department of Culture and Information Publishing

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)[Lê Xuân Diệm 1984. Về các Văn hóa cổ ở Đồngchéologie du Delta du Mékong ». Bulletin de l’Écolebằng sông Cửu Long. Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và các

Française d’Extrême-Orient 84: 408-414.

Nền văn hóa cổ ở Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long, tr. 43-

Manguin, P.-Y. 2002. Mission Archéologie du Delta du

59. Long Xuyên, Sở Văn hóa và Thông tin xuất bản].

Mékong: Rapport Préliminaire Campagne 2002. Par-

Le, X. D., L. C. Dao and S. K. Vo 1995. Oc Eo Culture:is, École Française d’Extrême-Orient.

New Discoveries. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing

Manguin, P.-Y. 2009. The Archaeology of Fu Nan in

House [Lê Xuân Diệm, Đào Linh Côn, Võ Sĩ Khảithe Mekong River Delta: The Oc Eo Culture of Viet

1995. Văn hóa Óc Eo: Những khám phá mới. Hà Nội,Nam. In Tingley N. (ed.), Arts of Ancient Viet Nam -Nxb. Khoa học xã hội].

From River Plain to Open Sea, pp. 103-118. London,

Malleret, L. 1937. Catalogue General des Collections,Tome I: Arts de la Famille Indienne. Hanoi, Ecole
Francaise d’Extreme-Orient.

Yale University Press.
Nguyen, D. H. 1984. Go Thap Muoi Monument (DongThap). In Institute of Social Sciences in Ho Chi

Malleret, L. 1951. Les Fouilles d’Oc-Èo (1944): Rap-

Minh City (ed.), Oc Eo Culture and Ancient Cul-

port Préliminaire. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Ex-

tures in the Mekong Delta, pp. 260-262. Long Xuyen,trême-Orient 45(1): 75-88.

Department of Culture and Information Publishing

Malleret, L. 1959. L’archéologie du Delta du Mékong

[Nguyễn Đắc Hiền 1984. Di tích Gò Tháp Mười- Tome Premier: L’exploration Archéologique et(Đồng Tháp). Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và các Nền văn

Les Fouilles d’Oc-Èo. Paris, École Française d’Ex-

hóa cổ ở Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long, tr. 260-262.

trême-Orient.

Long Xuyên, Sở Văn hóa và Thông tin xuất bản].

Malleret, L. 1962. L’archéologie du Delta du Mékong -Nguyen, D. T. and P. A. Nguyen 1990. Results of Ar-

Tome Troisième: La Culture du Fou-nan. Paris, École

chaeological Exploration in Hau Giang in 1990. In

Française d’Extrême-Orient.

Vietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Dis-

Malleret, L. 1969[1959]. Archaeology of the Mekong

coveries in Archaeology of 1990, pp. 250-253. Hanoi,

Delta, Volume 1: Exploration of Archaeology andSocial Sciences Publishing House [Nguyễn Duy Tỳ,

Excavation of Oc Eo Sites. Translated by the Insti-Nguyễn Phụng Anh 1990. Kết quả thăm dò Khảo cổtute of Vietnamese History Museum. Hanoi. [Louishọc năm 1990 ở Hậu Giang. Trong Những phát hiệnMalleret 1969[1959]. Khảo cổ học Đồng bằng sôngmới về Khảo cổ học năm 1990, tr. 250-253. Hà Nội,Cửu Long, tập 1: Thăm dò Khảo cổ học và Khai quậtNxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

di tích Óc Eo. Bản dịch Viện Bảo tàng Lịch sử ViệtNam. Hà Nội].

Nguyen, H. B. L. 2020. Preliminary Report on the Excavation Results of the Go Giong Cat ArchaeologicalMalleret, L. 1970[1962]. Archaeology of the Mekong

Site (Zone A). Ho Chi Minh, Southern Institute of

Delta, Volume 3: Culture of Funan. Translated by theSocial Sciences [Nguyễn Hoàng Bách Linh 2020.

Vietnamese History Museum. Hanoi [Louis Mall-Báo cáo sơ bộ kết quả khai quật di tích Gò Giồng Cát

eret 1970[1962]. Khảo cổ học Đồng bằng sông Cửu(khu A). Hồ Chí Minh, Viện Khoa học Xã hội vùngLong, tập 3: Văn minh Phù Nam. Bản dịch Bảo tàngNam Bộ].

Lịch sử Việt Nam. Hà Nội].

Nguyen, K. D., K. T. K. Nguyen and H. P. Le 2020.

Malleret, L. 1963. L’archéologie du Delta du Mékong

Insights on International Trade in Oc Eo Culture- Tome Quatrième: Le Cisbassac. Paris, École

from Newly Discovered Jewelry Artifacts. Journal ofFrançaise d’Extrême-Orient.

Archaeology 2: 79-100 [Nguyễn Kim Dung, Nguyễn

Manguin, P.-Y. and M. Vallerin 1997. La Missión « Ar-

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Khánh Trung Kiên, Lê Hoàng Phong 2020. Từ hiện67

Nguyen H. B. L.

vật trang sức mới phát hiện góp thêm những nhậnmộ chum miền Đông Nam Bộ: Những phát hiện mới

xét về hải thương quốc tế trong văn hóa Óc Eo. Tạptại Cần Giờ, Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Luận án Phó

chí Khảo cổ học số 2: 79-100].

Tiến sĩ Khoa học Lịch sử. Hồ Chí Minh, Viện Khoa

Nguyen, K. T. K. 2020. New Research Results at the Oc

học Xã hội tại Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh].

Eo - Ba The Archaeological Complex (An Giang).

Nguyen, V. L. and V. D. Luu 1994. Report on the Exca-

Journal of Archaeology 1: 25-38 [Nguyễn Khánhvation of the Bau Sen Archaeological Site (Vinh Cuu -Trung Kiên 2020. Kết quả nghiên cứu mới tại khu

Dong Nai). Ho Chi Minh, Documentation from thedi tích Óc Eo - Ba Thê (An Giang). Tạp chí Khảo cổ

Center for Archaeology, Southern Institute of Social

học số 1: 25-38].

Sciences [Nguyễn Văn Long, Lưu Văn Du 1994. Báo

Nguyen, L. C. 2008. Ancient Human Remains in

cáo khai quật di tích khảo cổ Bàu Sen (Vĩnh Cửu -Southern Vietnam. In Vietnam Historical SciencesĐồng Nai). Hồ Chí Minh, Tư liệu Trung tâm KhảoAssociation (ed.), Oc Eo Culture and the Kingdomcổ học, Viện Khoa học Xã hội vùng Nam Bộ].

of Funan, pp. 177-199. Hanoi, The Gioi PublishingNguyen, V. L. and V. D. Luu 1995. Urgent Excavation

House [Nguyễn Lân Cường 2008. Di cốt người cổ ởof the Bau Sen Archaeological Site, Vinh Tan Com-

Nam Bộ. Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và Vương quốc Phù

mune, Vinh Cuu District, Dong Nai Province. In

Nam, tr. 177-199. Hà Nội, Nxb. Thế Giới].

Vietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Dis-

Nguyen, Q. M. 2019. Pre-Oc Eo Monuments in the Long

coveries in Archaeology of 1995, pp. 225. Hanoi, So-

Xuyen Quadrangle During the Formation of Oc Eocial Sciences Publishing House [Nguyễn Văn Long,

Culture in the Southwestern Region. Ph.D. Disserta-Lưu Văn Du 1995. Khai quật chữa cháy di tích khảotion in Archaeology. Hanoi, Graduate Academy ofcổ Bàu Sen, xã Vĩnh Tân, huyện Vĩnh Cửu, tỉnhSocial Sciences [Nguyễn Quốc Mạnh 2019. Các diĐồng Nai. Trong Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ

tích tiền Óc Eo ở vùng Tứ giác Long Xuyên trong quá

học năm 1995, tr. 225. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xãtrình hình thành Văn hóa Óc Eo ở miền Tây Nam

hội].

Bộ. Luận án Tiến sỹ Khảo cổ học. Hà Nội, Học việnKhoa học xã hội].

Nguyen, V. L. and V. D. Luu 1996. Excavation of the
Da Lak Archaeological Site (Tan Phu District, Dong

Nguyen, Q. Q. 1990. Report on the Research Results

Nai Province). In Vietnam Institute of Archaeolo-of Ancient Human Remains in Long An (Moc Hoa

gy (ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1996,

and An Son). In Vietnam Institute of Archaeology

pp. 663. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing House(ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1990, pp.

[Nguyễn Văn Long, Lưu Văn Du 1996. Khai quật di116-120. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing Housetích Đạ Lăk (huyện Tân Phú, tỉnh Đồng Nai. Trong[Nguyễn Quang Quyền 1990. Báo cáo kết quả ng-Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1996, tr.

hiên cứu các di cốt người cổ ở Long An (Mộc Hóa

663. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội).

và An Sơn). Trong Những phát hiện mới về Khảo cổ

Nguyen, V. L. 1997. Oc Eo Cultural Monuments in thehọc năm 1990, tr. 116-120. Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa họcSoutheastern Region: New Discoveries in Dong Nai.

Xã hội].

Ph.D. Dissertation in Historical Sciences. Ho Chi

Nguyen, T. H. 1997. Burial Jar Monuments in theMinh, Institute of Social Sciences in Ho Chi Minh

Southeastern Region: New Discoveries in Can Gio,

City [Nguyễn Văn Long 1997. Di tích Văn hóa Óc Eo

Ho Chi Minh City. Ph.D. Dissertation in Historicalmiền Đông Nam Bộ: Những phát hiện mới ở ĐồngSciences. Ho Chi Minh, Institute of Social SciencesNai. Luận án Phó Tiến sĩ Khoa học Lịch sử. Hồ Chíin Ho Chi Minh City [Nguyễn Thị Hậu 1997. Di tíchMinh, Viện Khoa học Xã hội tại Tp. Hồ Chí Minh].

68

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Archaeology of the Oc Eo Culture (Southern Vietnam)

Oga, K. and T. Tamura 2013. Ancient Japan and theical Sciences Association (ed.), Oc Eo Culture andIndian Ocean Interaction Sphere: Chemical Com-

the Kingdom of Funan, pp. 200-228. Hanoi, The Gioi

positions, Chronologies, Provenances and Trade

Publishing House [Tống Trung Tín 2008. Đóng góp

Routes of Imported Glass Beads in Yayoi-Kofun Pe-

vào việc nghiên cứu văn hóa Nam Bộ. Trong Văn

riod (3rd Century BCE - 7th Century CE). Journal

hóa Óc Eo và Vương quốc Phù Nam, tr. 200-228. Hàof Indian Ocean Archaeology 9: 35-65.

Nội, Nxb. Thế Giới].

Parmentier, H. 1909. Relevé Archéologique de la Province de Tay-Ninh (Cochinchine). Bulletin de l’École
Française d’Extrême-Orient 9(4): 739-860.
Pelliot, P. 1903. Le Fou-nan. Bulletin de l’Ecole Francaise d’Extrême-Orient 3(2): 248-303.

Torrence, R. and H. Barton 2006. Ancient Starch Research. Walnut Creek, Left Coast Press.
Trinh, H. D. 2004[1820]. The Annals of Gia Dinh Citadel. Translated with annotation by Do, M. K., N. T.
Nguyen, T. Nguyen and V. D. Ly. Bien Hoa, Dong

Pham, D. M. 2008. Cultural Heritage of the ‘Pre-Oc Eo’

Nai General Publishing House [Trịnh Hoài Đức

Objects in the South: Phenomenon and Historical

2004[1820]. Gia Định thành thông chí. Đỗ MộngNature. In Vietnam Historical Sciences AssociationKhương, Nguyễn Ngọc Tỉnh, Tu Trai Nguyễn Tạo,(ed.), Oc Eo Culture and the Kingdom of Funan, pp.

Lý Việt Dũng (dịch và chú giải). Biên Hòa, Nxb.

68-127. Hanoi, The Gioi Publishing House [PhạmTổng hợp Đồng Nai].

Đức Mạnh 2008. Di sản văn hóa vật thể “tiền Óc

Vo, S. K. 1984a. Excavation of Ancient ArchitecturalEo” ở Nam Bộ: Hiện tượng và bản chất lịch sử.

Monument in Nen Chua (Tan Hoi - Kien Giang).

Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và Vương quốc Phù Nam, tr.

In Institute of Social Sciences in Ho Chi Minh City

68-127. Hà Nội, Nxb. Thế giới].

(ed.), Oc Eo Culture and Ancient Cultures in the Me-

Pham, D. M. and C. H. Bui 1984. Cluster of Burial Jarskong Delta, pp. 199-206. Long Xuyen, Departmentin the Southeastern Region. In Institute of Socialof Culture and Information Publishing [Võ Sĩ KhảiSciences in Ho Chi Minh City (ed.), Oc Eo Culture

1984. Khai quật di tích kiến trúc cổ ở Nền Chùaand Ancient Cultures in the Mekong Delta, pp. 122-

(Tân Hội - Kiên Giang). Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và

135. Long Xuyen, Department of Culture and In-

các Nền văn hóa cổ ở Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long, tr.

formation Publishing [Phạm Đức Mạnh, Bùi Chí

199-206. Long Xuyên, Sở Văn hóa và Thông tin xuấtHoàng 1984. Cụm di tích mộ vò ở miền Đông Nam

bản].

Bộ. Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo và các Nền văn hóa cổ ở

Vo, S. K. 1984b. Go Thap Archaeological ComplexĐồng bằng sông Cửu Long, tr. 122-135. Long Xuyên,(Dong Thap). In Vietnam Institute of ArchaeologySở Văn hóa và Thông tin xuất bản].

(ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology of 1984, pp.

Phan, H. L. 2011. The Formation and Development280-283. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publishing Houseof the Southern Region. Overview Report of the[Võ Sĩ Khải 1984. Khu di tích khảo cổ học Gò Tháp

State-level Social Sciences Research Project. Hanoi,(Đồng Tháp). Trong Những phát hiện mới về KhảoVietnam Historical Sciences Association [Phan Huycổ học năm 1984, tr. 280-283. Hà Nội, Nxb. KhoaLê 2011. Quá trình hình thành và phát triển vùnghọc Xã hội].

đất Nam Bộ. Báo cáo tổng quan kết quả nghiên cứu

Vo, S. K. 1985. Research on the Archaeological Cul-Đề án Khoa học xã hội cấp Nhà nước. Hà Nội, Hộiture of Oc Eo: Ten Years in Retrospect. Journal of

Khoa học Lịch sử Việt Nam].

Archaeology 4: 13-32 [Võ Sĩ Khải 1985. Nghiên cứuTong, T. T. 2008. Contributions to the Research on the
Culture of Southern Vietnam. In Vietnam Histor-

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University

Văn hóa khảo cổ học Óc Eo: Mười năm nhìn lại.
Tạp chí Khảo cổ học số 4: 13-32].

69

Nguyen H. B. L.

Vo, S. K. 1986. Survey of Canh Den Archaeological

In Vietnam Institute of Archaeology (ed.), New Dis-

Complex (Kien Giang). In Vietnam Institute of Ar-

coveries in Archaeology of 1998, pp. 732-734. Hanoi,

chaeology (ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology ofSocial Sciences Publishing House [Võ Sĩ Khải, Đào1986, pp. 225-227. Hanoi, Social Sciences Publish-

Linh Côn 1998. Về hai pho tượng Visnu mới pháting House [Võ Sĩ Khải 1986. Khảo sát khu di tíchhiện tại Gò Tháp Mười (Đồng Tháp). Trong Những

Cạnh Đền (Kiên Giang). Trong Những phát hiệnphát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1998, tr. 732-734.

mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1986, tr. 225-227. Hà Nội,Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

Vu, M. G. and V. Nguyen 2017. The Southern Vietnam

Vo, S. K. 1990. Re-survey of the Archaeological Site

(Volume 2): From the Origins to the 7th Century. Ha-

Canh Den (Kien Giang). In Vietnam Institute ofnoi, National Political Publishing House [Vũ Minh

Archaeology (ed.), New Discoveries in Archaeology

Giang, Nguyễn Việt 2017. Vùng đất Nam Bộ (tập 2):

of 1990, pp. 212-216. Hanoi, Social Sciences Pub-Từ cội nguồn đến thế kỷ VII. Hà Nội, Nxb. Chính trị

lishing House [Võ Sĩ Khải 1990. Khảo sát lại di chỉquốc gia Sự thật].

khảo cổ học Cạnh Đền (Kiên Giang). Trong Những

Vu, Q. H. and D. C. Truong 2010. Contributions to thephát hiện mới về Khảo cổ học năm 1990, tr. 212-216.

Formation Process of Oc Eo Culture in the Coast-

Hà Nội, Nxb. Khoa học Xã hội].

al Areas of Southeastern Vietnam. In Department

Vo, S. K. 2008. Oc Eo Culture: Sixty Years in Retro-of Cultural Heritage and Department of Culture,

spect. In Vietnam Historical Sciences Association

Sports and Tourism of An Giang Province (eds.),(ed.), Oc Eo Culture and the Kingdom of Funan, pp.

Oc Eo Culture: Awareness and Preservation Solutions

34-68. Hanoi, The Gioi Publishing House [Võ Sĩ

for Heritage, pp. 54-58. An Giang [Vũ Quốc Hiền,Khải 2008. Văn hóa Óc Eo: Sáu mươi năm nhìn lại.

Trương Đắc Chiến 2010.Góp bàn về quá trình hìnhTrong Văn hóa Óc Eo và Vương quốc Phù Nam, tr.

thành văn hóa Óc Eo ở vùng ven biển Đông Nam

34-68. Hà Nội, Nxb. Thế Giới].

Bộ. Trong Văn hóa Óc Eo: Nhận thức và giải pháp

Vo, S. K. and L. C. Dao 1998. On Two Newly Discov-bảo tồn, phát huy giá trị di tích, tr. 54-58. An Giang].

ered Vishnu Statues at Go Thap Muoi (Dong Thap).

70

Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, vol. 1 (2023), pp. 39-70© Institute for the Study of Ancient Civilizations and Cultural Resources, Kanazawa University