>>No argument with that. But the Vietnamese, as a people with a sense of national identity, didn't really get going until the 10-11th centuries AD, during one of their native dynasties (as I had mentioned). During the Han, Vietnam (N Vietnam, the south was the Hindu Malay kingdom of Champa) was actually a Chinese province and remained so till the 5-6th century AD IIRC. And more importantly, the people felt themselves to be Chinese and as Chinese as e.g. Guangxi or Guangdong at that time. >>
Well, the Viets definately had atleast an ethnic identity, if not a national identity. Not many cultures had a definate "national" identity in which they recognize and establish their boundaries, maintain relations with other "nations", and have the idea of citizenry. The Vietnamese ethnic identity is very strong, and if they thought of themselves as Chinese, then why do they resist Chinese rule so vehemently. Northern Vietnam, also known as Jiao Zi (named after one of the central provinces on the Hung river valley), was designated a Han province by Ma Yuen, but his rule there was hated, and I believe Han rule quickly deteriorated after Ma left. This may lead to Vietnam being technically a Han province but not in actuality. This of course leaves out Champa, who survives until the 11th-13th century I think.
As to ethnic identity, one of the strongest cultural legends were the Phung sisters that resisted Han rule, so they had atleast an identity of rebelliousness and yearning for freedom ever since the Han. As to the name Viet, they didn't use that name until later, because they thought it was a derogatory term given by the Chinese. They thought of themselves as the Lac, named after Lac Long-quan the dragon lord. The earliest period known in history about Vietnam was in the Lac Lords period where there were individual tribes.