If you Chinese want some "historical evidence" argument, let's rock and roll.
1838 maps using Western latest technique and Vietnamese older technique
Western map, 1774
Western map, 1754
Western map 1735
Western map 1760
1776 book that described about our "Paracel Teams". Their misson was settling the sovereignty over Paracel, patrolling and exploiting in Paracel. They had been doing that continuously for hundreds years, until the French came. Then the French and Vietnamese pro-France officials replace them and live there continuously until the time when French were kicked out of Vietnam
---
Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique de Précis ... - Conrad Malte-Brun - Google Books
The French book "Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique du Précis de la géographie universelle en huit volumes" (volume 2) was published in Paris, 1831. Page 221 said that: "equal-spaced between Hainan and Cochinchina, Paracels archipelago was depended on Annam Empire". "A une egale distance de la cote de Cochinchine et de l'ile d'Hai-nan, l'archipel de Paracels est une dependance de l'empire d'Annam"
---
---
http://hoangsa.org/forum/downloads/37974-Modern_geography.pdf
“Modern geography: A description of the empires, kingdoms, states, and colonies with the oceans, seas, and isles” is pulished in Philadenphia, 1804. The author is John Pinkerton. In the Volume 2, at page 178, Paracels was described as a feature of the Cochin-China kingdom.
---
---
http://hoangsa.org/forum/downloads/45585-Algemeen_aardrijkskundig_woordenboek_tweede_deel.pdf
This is a historial book printed in Amsterdam and Leiden, 1772. In chapter XV at pages 647 to 674, the book treats of Cochin-China and islands of this country such as Pullo Sicca, Pullo Secca de Mare, Pullo Cambir, Pullo Canto. Especially, Paracels has been considered as initial part of Pullo Secca de Mare island chain. In the ancient maps, Paracels was used to draw like tail of scorpion extanding as far as Poulo Cerci de Mer forming Pullo Secca de Mare.
---
---
Nuovo dizionario geografico universale statistico-storico-commerciale ... - Google Books
The Italian geographic dictionary "Nuovo dizionario geografico universale statistico-storico-commerciale" was published in Venezia, 1831, based on documents of famous geographers: Balbi, Cannabich, Malte-Brun, Pinkerton ... In the volume 4, part 1, at the page 680, they describes that the Paracels was equal-spaced between Hainan and Cochinchina, and the sovereignty over it belongs to Annam kingdom.
---
---
Neues Konversations-Lexikon: ein Wörterbuch des allgemeinen Wissens ... - Herrmann Julius Meyer - Google Books
The German book "Neues Konversations-Lexikon: ein Wörterbuch des allgemeinen Wissens" was written by Herrmann Julius Meyer, published in Germany, 1866. At the page 575, they said that Paracels belongs to Cochinchina, Annam.
---
---
http://hoangsa.org/forum/downloads/65509-Principios_generales_de_geograf__a_matem.pdf
Spanish books printed in Barcelona in 1832 for Compania Mayoly Juaquin, including: "Principios generales de geografía matematíca ó Cosmografía", "Nociones de geografía Fisíca y de geografía Política", "La geografia moderna", "Espana en la mano, en la que se la trata", "La geografia antígua comparada con la moderna". The Paracels belong to Cochin China was confirmed in page 57 of the book "La geografia moderna"
---
---
Remember that Vietnam already pitched the flag in 1816
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...qMGZ0TkpCTHZ6TVE&hl=en&authkey=COyTzIwK#gid=0
The Italian book "Del vario grado d'importanza degli stati odierni" was published in Milano, 1841. Page 421 mentions about the event Gia Long emperor pitch the flag to own Paracels in 1816, but Paracels belongs to Cocochina many years ago, according to Western documents.
---
I have more than 100 old Western books which affirm Vietnamese sovereign over Paracels, pm me if you need some more evidences. It means that when the Westerners came, they saw that Vietnamese govs and people are administrating Paracels archipelago, not Chinese. Then they wrote what they saw.
In "historical" side, I have more historical maps and text, it means I have more evidence, and I choose to use international laws. If you are confident in your historical evidences, why don't we go to international court, instead of your effort in trying to avoid the court all the time?