Van Lang and Hung kings don't exist I don't care how many times you quote the Dai Viet su ky Toan Thu or Linh Nam Chich Quai there is archaeological evidence that supports this and it is not recognized by international scholars.
Again read my explanation above you conveniently repeat the same...
Van Lang didn't exist provide the archaeological proof or you are just fabricating history once again.
Van Xuan means Eternal Spring.
No, in the 5th century Vietnamese spoke an extinct branch of Middle Southwestern Chinese later Proto Vietic/Muong language was adopted leading to a mixture of...
Nanyue was a vassal state of Han dynasty furthermore Vietnamese had a separate kingdom Au Lac until Zhao Tuo annexed them.
What I don't understand is why Vietnamese claim Nanyue as Vietnamese not only were the bulk of the population made up of Tai Kadai and Qin Chinese,Zhao Tuo did not even pay...
There's a reason why historical books not legends are taken seriously.
From Shiji
Shiji : 列傳 : 南越列傳 - Chinese Text Project
南越王尉佗者,真定人也,姓趙氏。
The King of Nanyue. previously military leader Tuo,hailed from Zhending,bore the surname Zhao.
It is also clearly stated that his ancestral tombs were...
Funny how Vietnamese trolls are at it again,the ethnicity of the emperor doesn't matter as long as the people are content there will be less strife.
If this is the case we can bring up the Chinese ancestry of the Anterior Ly,Ho,Tran dynasties.
The Manchus had significant Han Chinese admixture...
While I don't necessarily agree with all his claims,Wholegrain sources his claims unlike you or many other members who love to engage in ad hominems.
You on the other hand spout various claims and have absolutely nothing to back it up.
Relying on ad hominems as usual,you are truly incapable of addressing your own points.
Assuming Wholegrain is a he I'm afraid I have no desire to participate in sexual intercourse with him,I don't swing that way.
It would be moronic to assume modern day Taiwanese Hokkien are cannibals.
Much...
No,Hui have multiethnic origins.
East Turkestan is hardly occupied territory,it switched hands over the centuries and the Uighurs or today are not the Uighurs of the Tang era.
Look at your renowned ETR.
You are not Pro-China ,instead you attempt to flamebait and stir up tension.
How is degenerating Northern Han as bastard nomadic ethnicties patriotic?
How is distorting Southern Han Chinese as Sincized natives and Fujianese as Malays patriotic?
How is thanking Pak-one's deragatory posts...
Why are Anatolian Turks always harping on how they are related to Xiongnu and Xianbei?
They are related to Siberian and Mongolian populations.
Also prove that modern day Uighurs are descended from Xiongnu and Tocharians.
As usual EastSea has no sources to back up his false conjectures.
@Hu Songshan EastSea has provided nothing of value to this thread,instead he attempts to troll Chinese members by distorting their lineage and history.
This is not relevant at all,the Hakka were stigmatized because they were later migrants.
Examples of inter ethnic conflict would be the Punti-Hakka wars,and the Quanzhou/Zhangzhou/Hakka wars in Taiwan.
You have to realize the She the Hakka mixed with are in reality a mix of minorities and Han...
What's very sad is your intellectual dishonesty,as usual you attempt to shift the subject to avoid any questions.
Repeating the same lie over and over again doesn't make it true.
You are nothing more than a fraud with an ax to grind,trying to desperately distort the origins of Southern Han...