Đầm Dơi district
old district of Ca Mau province, Vietnam
Đầm Dơi [ɗəm˨˩:jəːj˧˧] is a former rural district of Cà Mau province in the Mekong Delta region of Vietnam.
History
Middle Ages
Before the 19th century, most of Cà Mau province was still a mangrove forest with low population and there was also very little information which were recorded by officials.
In the 17th year of Minh Mệnh (1836), "Đầm Dơi area" (xứ Đầm Dơi, "land of bat swamps") was first mentioned in Đại Nam nhất thống chí. However, this was not yet an official name but just a way to call a area of many fields for convenient demographic statistics. Just know that Đầm Dơi area was next to "Đầm Quạ area" (xứ Đầm Quạ, "land of crow swamps"), and both of them belong to Long Xuyên rural district of Hà Tiên province.
It was not until Cochinchina became a whole colony of the French Republic in 1867, an official administrative unit called Đầm Dơi rural district (huyện Đầm Dơi) that appeared. The rural district was based on the merger of two areas Đầm Dơi and Đầm Quạ. However, from the mid-19th century to the Second World War, this land has been divided with the rest of Cochinchina by its system of rivers, canals and forests with many crocodiles and snakes.
XX century
Under the State of Vietnam regime, Đầm Dơi district (quận Đầm Dơi) was part of Bạc Liêu province.
In 1956, the National Assembly of the First Republic of Vietnam issued a decree to establish An Xuyên province in the area of Cà Mâu peninsula.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Đầm Dơi district” as old district of Ca Mau province, Vietnam. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the places & architecture register because the source frames it as old district of Ca Mau province, Vietnam. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 15, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3593897. Authority coordinates are 8.958, 105.242. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1836, 1867 and 1956.
A single description cannot reconcile every naming convention, rebuilding phase or administrative transfer associated with a place. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Đầm Dơi district”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Đầm Dơi district primary sources, Đầm Dơi district archive and district research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Đầm Dơi district”?
- Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Đầm Dơi district” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.