I agree and disagree at the same time.
Ancient origin myths and oral histories and folklores, although do not have concrete evidences to back up the claims, help set the course and is the backbone of history for the particular culture and civilization. Sometime it's content may sound too mystical to be true in today's understanding. But, it does open up a partial view of the past and a glimpse through the consciousness of that particular race on how they perceive life.
There are, however, artifacts discovered showing a culture once thrived in this area dating back to the Hong Bang Dynasty. How this culture relates to Hong Bang Dynasty is debatable. The "burning of books and burying of scholars", in 213 - 210 BC edict given by Qin Shihuang, the first Emperor of China, resulted in some lost of History in Central Asia and human knowledge in general.
Furthermore, ancient history of one race may sometime contradict the ancient history, understanding and development of another race, this is because they are in parallel of each other. Cultural advancement and achievements in technologies varies from group to group. Forcing two parallel civilization's history together and expecting them to fit perfectly like a jigsaw puzzle would be ludicrous. Therefore, civilization that lived in parallel of each other can not share the same time line until the two collide and knowledges are exchanged.
....As a senior member of this forum, this is the part where you would reply to welcome me as a new member. Cheers!!
Where are my manners,while this forum has its fair share of vitriolic nationalists/irredentists there's still some reasonable members,but welcome to this forum.
Uncorroborated sources/mythology don't fly in the academic community,therefore they shouldn't be used as a legitimate substitute for primary/secondary sources.
While it is possible that individuals rooted in mythology might represent a set of ideals or a tribe or that some sort of conflict emerged between several parties however they are heavily embellished and contain anachronistic terminology.
That's the issue you can't attach prehistoric cultures to a later day fabrication,Chinese historians use the Erlitou culture as "proof" for the Xia dynasty however there's no evidence of writing therefore its not recognized by Western historians.
The same reason why the Shang dynasty was put under heavy scrutiny until oracle bones were found to record Shang era events and Shang imperial lineage.
Qin Shihuang's book burning have nothing to do with Van Lang/Hong Bang they were too distant to know of each other,neither did the Spring Autumn/Warring States maintain close contacts with Central Asians.
Hong Bang dynasty is a complete sham made by Vietnamese to prove that they are an older civilization and origin of Chinese culture.
1.Material culture is not indicative of suzerainty ie Dong Son bronze drums spread throughout parts of southern China as well as southeast Asia however there existed an independent tradition in Shizaishan. Many foreign cultures adopted Chinese culture and imported Chinese swords,mirrors as well as bells however this doesn't make them Chinese.
2.Chinese terminology as well as mimicry ie the terminology of Phong Chau is erroneous as it couldn't possibly have existed until the Sui-Tang era where 州 was redefined,as well as this famous passage:
東夾南海，西抵巴蜀，北至洞庭湖，南至狐猻精國（今占城是也）。
To the East it bordered the Southern sea,the west BaShu to the North Dong Ting Lake and to the South Hu Sun(Champa).
Is just ripping off the Huayang Guozhi.
3.The lack of Chinese sources indicating a powerful kingdom to the south or archaeological evidence of a bureaucracy that ruled southern China from Vietnam,writing etc.
4.Linguistics:Southern China had Austronesians,Tai Kadai,Austro Asiatics,Tibeto Burmans as well as Miao Yao speakers how can they all be Vietnamese?
5.No other ethnicity has myths of Hung Kings,a powerful country would surely leave behind descendants all over Southern China.
This is just the tip of the iceberg there are plenty of other evidence that contradicts the medieval Vietnamese narrative.
The issue is that Dong Son culture faded away after Chinese culture supplanted it and that it barely influenced other cultures,the bronze drums which the Vietnamese hold great pride over today were viewed as relics of barbarians by medieval Vietnamese.
Chinese legacy is widespread despite how Vietnamese want to deny it today ie historically Vietnamese surnames,architecture,bureaucracy,philosophy,linguistics,clothing,script were all heavily influenced by Chinese cultures.
Vietnamese claiming that they had a civilization that matched the Chinese in influence and territory is ridiculous,it would be like saying the Germanic tribes the Romans faced were the origins of the of the Romans.
most of aggressive Chinese members here on DPF belong to southern Chinese or oversea Chinese, they tried portray themselves truer Han Chinese than Han Chinese in Zhong Yuan.
There's no such as true Han Chinese,tell me are Northern,Central or Southern Vietnamese more Kinh?
Considering how you and your countrymen spew so many lies its only natural that Chinese would feel offended.
