Vietnamese nationalist fabrications

SamDNguyen · Nov 4, 2014

Names of the 15 province of Văn Lang

Phú Thọ Province, Châu Diên, Phúc Lộc, Tân Hưng, Vũ Định, Vũ Ninh, Lục Hải, Ninh Hải, Dương Tuyên,
Giao Chỉ, Cửu Chân, Việt Thường,
Cửu Đức, Bình Văn, and Hoài Hoan.

Grand Historian · Nov 4, 2014

SamDNguyen said:
Confucian Classic Thư Kinh (Shujing), one of few classic remaining books that wasn't destroyed by Qin Shi Huang, told of an event in 2353 BC of an envoy from Việt Thường (Yue Shang) one of the 15 province of Văn Lang Nation, who came to King Yao and presented him with a gift. The gift was a 1000 year old sacred tortoise baring strange inscriptions that related the history from the beginning of the world craved onto its back. King Yao ordered it be transcribed, which later became known as the "Tortoise Calendar". The inscriptions were described to resemble tadpoles.

View attachment 144978

Give the exact quote in the Shangshu that the Yuechang presented Emperor Yao with a tortoise,I'm only aware of the Shangshu Dazhuan which claims the Yuechang bestowed white pheasants to the Duke of Zhou.

Regardless the passage in the Shangshu Dazhuan doesn't indicate a location,while Zhou era oracle bones have shown that a Yue polity existed in Henan.

SamDNguyen · Nov 4, 2014

Grand Historian said:
In the end you are unable or unwilling to show textual or archaeological evidence that Vietnamese myths are grounded in reality,the source(欽定越史通鑑綱目) I posted dates from Nguyen dynasty where they even argue against the territory of Van Lang exceeding present day Vietnam.

Except Sima Qian and Han era Chinese didn't speak Baiyue,recent research has shown Baiyue was a catch all for Miao-Yao,Austro Asiatic,Tai-Kadai and Austronesian languages there was never a single Yue identity that united them neither did all claim to be descended from Goujian.

Sima Qian also claimed the Xiongnu were descended from the Xia,there's a reason why myths and legends stay myths and legends.

I already explained this before Vietnamese who claimed ancestry from the modern day provinces of Fujian,Zhejiang or Jiangsu claimed ancestry from either Han or Sinicized people show me records where they claimed to be a Minyue or Wu or Yue nobles.

Neither are Luoyue or Ouyue Vietnamese,we have no records of their language and no DNA samples to compare with present day populations.

Repeating a lie ten thousand times doesn't make it true,the truth is that Yue applied to a wide category of people ranging from northern China to southern Vietnam simply hijacking the term doesn't make every single Yue entity in history "Vietnamese".

Khâm Định Việt Sử Thông Giám Cương Mục (Completely Reflecting the History of Viet; 欽定越史通鑑綱目)

Tiền Biên

Quyển thứ I

Hùng Vương. Dựng nước gọi là Văn Lang, đóng đô ở Phong Châu

Hồng Bàng thị. Đầu là Kinh Dương Vương, tương truyền là vua trước tiên của nước Việt ta. Kinh Dương Vương sinh Lạc Long Quân. Hùng Vương là con Lạc Long Quân.

Nguyên xưa, Đế Minh, cháu ba đời Viêm đế Thần Nông thị1, đi tuần sang Nam, đến Ngũ Lĩnh2, lấy Vụ tiên nữ, sinh con là Lộc Tục có đức tính hoàn toàn. Đế Minh yêu Lộc Tục lắm, muốn truyền ngôi cho, nhưng Lộc Tục cố nhường cho anh là Nghi. Bấy giờ mới lập Đế Nghi làm vua nối ngôi, thống trị phương Bắc (Trung Quốc), phong Lộc Tục làm Kinh Dương Vương, thống trị phương Nam.

Kinh Dương Vương sinh con là Sùng Lãm, gọi là Lạc Long Quân. Lạc Long Quân lấy Âu Cơ, sinh trăm con trai. Ấy là tổ tiên của Bách Việt3, suy tôn người trưởng lên làm Hùng Vương, nối ngôi vua, dựng nước gọi là nước Văn Lang, đóng đô ở Phong Châu; truyền nối mười tám đời đều gọi là Hùng Vương.

Thời bấy giờ, cư dân khi xuống nước, hay bị loài giao long làm hại, Hùng Vương dạy dân lấy mực vẽ hình loài thủy quái xăm vào mình. Từ đó mới tránh khỏi nạn. Nước ta cái tục xăm mình có lẽ bắt đầu từ đấy.

Grand Historian · Nov 4, 2014

SamDNguyen said:
Names of the 15 province of Văn Lang

Phú Thọ Province, Châu Diên, Phúc Lộc, Tân Hưng, Vũ Định, Vũ Ninh, Lục Hải, Ninh Hải, Dương Tuyên,
Giao Chỉ, Cửu Chân, Việt Thường,
Cửu Đức, Bình Văn, and Hoài Hoan.

Which the 欽定越史通鑑綱目 is quite adamant that they are located in the territory of Nguyen era Vietnam.

SamDNguyen said:
Khâm Định Việt Sử Thông Giám Cương Mục (Completely Reflecting the History of Viet; 欽定越史通鑑綱目) 1856-1884 - The encyclopedia include 53 volumes.

Below are first few pages.

Tiền Biên

Quyển thứ I

Hùng Vương. Dựng nước gọi là Văn Lang, đóng đô ở Phong Châu

Hồng Bàng thị. Đầu là Kinh Dương Vương, tương truyền là vua trước tiên của nước Việt ta. Kinh Dương Vương sinh Lạc Long Quân. Hùng Vương là con Lạc Long Quân.

Nguyên xưa, Đế Minh, cháu ba đời Viêm đế Thần Nông thị1, đi tuần sang Nam, đến Ngũ Lĩnh2, lấy Vụ tiên nữ, sinh con là Lộc Tục có đức tính hoàn toàn. Đế Minh yêu Lộc Tục lắm, muốn truyền ngôi cho, nhưng Lộc Tục cố nhường cho anh là Nghi. Bấy giờ mới lập Đế Nghi làm vua nối ngôi, thống trị phương Bắc (Trung Quốc), phong Lộc Tục làm Kinh Dương Vương, thống trị phương Nam.

Kinh Dương Vương sinh con là Sùng Lãm, gọi là Lạc Long Quân. Lạc Long Quân lấy Âu Cơ, sinh trăm con trai. Ấy là tổ tiên của Bách Việt3, suy tôn người trưởng lên làm Hùng Vương, nối ngôi vua, dựng nước gọi là nước Văn Lang, đóng đô ở Phong Châu; truyền nối mười tám đời đều gọi là Hùng Vương.

Thời bấy giờ, cư dân khi xuống nước, hay bị loài giao long làm hại, Hùng Vương dạy dân lấy mực vẽ hình loài thủy quái xăm vào mình. Từ đó mới tránh khỏi nạn. Nước ta cái tục xăm mình có lẽ bắt đầu từ đấy.

Are you blind?

I've posted the passages in the 欽定越史通鑑綱目 which criticizes the size of Van Lang,would you like me to post passages where the author criticizes the veracity of Vietnamese myths?

Why are you using Nguyen era texts to prove something that supposedly happened 4,000 years ago?

jkroo · Nov 4, 2014

Can any Vietnamese read and translate first page?

學術未明豈非舊史未備之故

SamDNguyen · Nov 4, 2014

Bro, you ask me to on your post to give you the history book written during the Nguyen that talks about Hung Kings. Are you that forgetful?

jkroo · Nov 4, 2014

Grand Historian said:
The text I posted is from the 欽定大南會典事例 which was compiled during the Nguyen dynasty.

These non-Han emperors claimed to be Chinese and held sacrifices to honor the previous dynasties,I don't need to go over this again the Yuan,Qing etc all claimed to be rulers of Zhongguo.

Look at Qing era treaties,the Great Qing is synonymous with China.

The 大越史記全書 has many flaws that cannot be glossed over.

Regardless I'll go over the claims over and over again until Vietnamese nationalists stop pestering me.(My Japanese published copy of 大越史記全書 dates to 1868 so expect some minor discrepancies.)

1.There's no archaeological evidence of the existence of Hung Kings or Van Lang,there's no point in me asking for them as no one ever presents them.

2.都峯州。The capital was situated in Fengzhou.
View attachment 141493
The usage of the word zhou(州) in this context is a Sui-Tang naming convention,therefore Fengzhou is an anachronism.
The Problems with “châu” and Phong Châu | Le Minh Khai's SEAsian History Blog

3.其國東夾南海。西抵巴蜀。北至洞庭湖。南接狐猻國。卽占城國。今廣南是也
To the east it bordered the southern sea,the west Ba Shu, to the north Dongting Lake and to the south Hu Sun(Champa),which is present day Guangnan province(Le dynasty).
View attachment 141494

according to 欽定越史通鑑綱目:洞庭地夾兩湖實在百粵之北巴蜀猶隔雋滇(今屬雲南) 不相接壤舊史侈大其辭殆與後蜀王之事皆屬傳虛而未之。
Lake Dongting is situated between the two Hu's ie Hunan and Hubei. Lake Dongting is North of the Baiyue. Ba and Shu were separated from Van Lang by Xi and Dian(both located in modern day Yunnan),thus Van Lang did not share a border. The old texts are obviously exaggerated. Furthermore this and King Shu Pan are not credible and have never been substantiated.

考也況所分十五部皆交阯朱鳶以內全無一部在北可證其誣也
The demarcation of the 15 regions are within the lands of Jiaozhi and Zhuyuan,not a single piece of land is north of these areas.
View attachment 141495

This phrase is used in the Huayang Guozhi showing that it is just a mimicry.
The Huayang guozhi and Early Vietnamese History | Le Minh Khai's SEAsian History Blog

4..分國為十五部。曰交趾。曰朱鳶。曰武寧。曰福祿。曰越裳。日寧海。曰陽泉。曰陸海。曰武定。曰懷驩。曰九真。曰平文。曰新興。曰九德。
Van Lang was divided into 15 commanderies:Jiaozhi,Zhuchuan,Wuning,Fulu,Yuechang,Ninghai,Yangquan,Luhai,Wuding,Huaihuan,Jiuzhen,Pingwen,Xinxing,Jiude.
View attachment 141496

欽定越史通鑑綱目 even has passages that claims those commanderies were all located in Northern Vietnam not Southern China.

山南 (今河內南定興安地是) 古交阯部
Jiaozhi commandery was located in Shannan(Nguyen era Henei,Nanding and Xingan).
View attachment 141497

山西古朱鳶福祿部
Zhuchuan and Fulu commanderies were located in Shanxi.
View attachment 141498

5.嶺南摭怪 is the basis of the the Hung King myth,yet the region Lingnan is a far larger area then Northern Vietnam,the Han and ethnic minorities of that region don't recognize this myth.

6.Texts dating to the warring states and Han dynasty fail to mention Van Lang.

You claimed the information about the Hung Kings was taught in previous dynasties when 大越史記 doesn't even contain this information.

There's no mention of Hung Kings in the Shiji,neither did Sima Qian claim that Chinese can only be descended from Huangdi.

Plenty of surnames trace their ancestry to Yandi/Shennong including the Jiang(姜),Lu(呂),Xie(謝) etc tell me are Jiang Ziya,Lu Bu and Xie An all Vietnamese?

Acctually, your evidence is overwhelming. But they just can't read it. Maybe this is their excuses to fabricate their history.

Grand Historian · Nov 4, 2014

SamDNguyen said:
Bro, you ask me to on your post to give you the history book written during the Nguyen that talks about Hung Kings. Are you that forgetful?

I never asked for a Nguyen era source,the proof I use is already quoted from 欽定越史通鑑綱目 so why are you posting it again?

jkroo said:
Acctually, your evidence is overwhelming. But they just can't read it. Maybe this is their excuses to fabricate their history.

Considering how the constantly claim that a certain Chinese text said this or a certain Chinese text says that,while the text itself doesn't even say this shows that they can't read Chinese ie SamDNguyen claims the Shujing records Emperor Yao receiving a tortoise from the Yuechang clan while in reality it was the Tongzhi a Song era work that has this information.

jkroo · Nov 4, 2014

Grand Historian said:
I never asked for a Nguyen era source,the proof I use is already quoted from 欽定越史通鑑綱目 so why are you posting it again?

Considering how the constantly claim that a certain Chinese text said this or a certain Chinese text says that,while the text itself doesn't even say this shows that they can't read Chinese ie SamDNguyen claims the Shujing records Emperor Yao receiving a tortoise from the Yuechang clan while in reality it was the Tongzhi a Song era work that has this information.

Yes, I found that. It's very rediculous that they follow the pattern of borrow, copy, fabricate and self-brainwash that seems they are very ancient and civilised.

It turns to be delusion.

Grand Historian · Nov 4, 2014

jkroo said:
Yes, I found that. It's very rediculous that they follow the pattern of borrow, copy, fabricate and self-brainwash that seems they are very ancient and civilised. It turn to be delusion.

The difference between modern day Chinese historians and modern day Vietnamese historians is that they believe in myths and legends as a substitute for history ie texts like Shanhaijing for them would be taken at face value,am I to believe that the world consists of demons,gods and bestial humans?

jkroo · Nov 4, 2014

SamDNguyen said:
Read your post again. I don't think you are here for the freindly discussion I have hoped for, but rather for an aguement.

Who the heck do you think you are? A*s hole.

Reported.
@Hu Songshan @Chak Bamu

kyle Chiang · Nov 4, 2014

Grand Historian said:
The difference between modern day Chinese historians and modern day Vietnamese historians is that they believe in myths and legends as a substitute for history ie texts like Shanhaijing for them would be taken at face value,am I to believe that the world consists of demons,gods and bestial humans?

You can not weak up a man who is pretending to sleep,just like you can not teach real history to a Viets man who do hate China.

They will never accept what you said.They feel glory to fabricate history and boost military force.

Just let them go.Don't care about them too much.

PICTURE:Văn Miếu ( Hanoi Temple of Literature,built in 1070 AD)

SamDNguyen said:
Read your post again. I don't think you are here for the freindly discussion I have hoped for, but rather for an aguement.

Who the heck do you think you are? A*s hole.

Viets are really savage.Don't your mum teach you using polite language?

Oh,I understand.That's why we call you Viets monkey,because you are never civilized though tamed by Chinese culture for 1000 years.Viets never have the ability to learn the world's elite culture such as Korean and Japanese .So your nation is always under the edge of the world for a long long time and never has own bright civilization.

SamDNguyen · Nov 4, 2014

Chinese Ape Man

Rechoice · Nov 4, 2014

kyle Chiang said:
You can not weak up a man who is pretending to sleep,just like you can not teach real history to a Viets man who do hate China.

They will never accept what you said.They feel glory to fabricate history and boost military force.

Just let them go.Don't care about them too much.

PICTURE:Văn Miếu ( Hanoi Temple of Literature,built in 1070 AD)

View attachment 144998

Viets are really savage.Don't your mum teach you using polite language?

Oh,I understand.That's why we call you Viets monkey,because you are never civilized though tamed by Chinese culture for 1000 years.Viets never have the ability to learn the world's elite culture such as Korean and Japanese .So your nation is always under the edge of the world for a long long time and never has own bright civilization.

look at yourselves, How long Mongolian, Manchurian, Japanese ...ruled you and civilized you ? event untill 1997 for Hongkong and 1999 for Macau !

SamDNguyen · Nov 4, 2014

Grand Historian said:
I never asked for a Nguyen era source,the proof I use is already quoted from 欽定越史通鑑綱目 so why are you posting it again?

Considering how the constantly claim that a certain Chinese text said this or a certain Chinese text says that,while the text itself doesn't even say this shows that they can't read Chinese ie SamDNguyen claims the Shujing records Emperor Yao receiving a tortoise from the Yuechang clan while in reality it was the Tongzhi a Song era work that has this information.

Lol. Are you sure about that Bro. Go read your history classics again. Song recorded another visit from Việt Thường clan in Thông Chí, Tống - Trịnh Tiều 通志 -[宋] 紹興 - 鄭樵
Tong Zhi (general treaties) of Song by Zheng Qiao.
You should change your screen name.

Search

Vietnamese nationalist fabrications

SamDNguyen

FULL MEMBER

Grand Historian

FULL MEMBER

SamDNguyen

FULL MEMBER

Grand Historian

FULL MEMBER

jkroo

FULL MEMBER

SamDNguyen

FULL MEMBER

jkroo

FULL MEMBER

Grand Historian

FULL MEMBER

jkroo

FULL MEMBER

Grand Historian

FULL MEMBER

jkroo

FULL MEMBER

kyle Chiang

FULL MEMBER

SamDNguyen

FULL MEMBER

Rechoice

BANNED

SamDNguyen

FULL MEMBER

Similar threads

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts