Wa-pedia Home > Japan Forum & Europe Forum
Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 330

Thread: What's the origin of the Japanese people ?

  1. #176
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Don't forget the view that northeast Asians (Ainu) mixed with South East Asians (Malayo-Polynesian speaking peoples) to form the Jomon People. The Jomon People then inhabited the Japanese archipelago until the great migrations of southern Chinese and Koreans mixed the melting pot a bit more to form the Yayoi People.

    I've recommended it before and I will recommend it again: J. Edward Kidder, Jr.'s "Himiko and Japan's Elusive Chiefdom of Yamatai" provides a *fantastic* view of Jomon, Yayoi, and Kofun period Japan.

  2. #177
    diceke
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post
    North Korean are malnutritioned and it's a sad thing and a low blow to see Chinese trolls on the board taking advantage of this. Still, the North Koreans do have the same body structure as that I recognize among South Koreans such as stocky, broad shoulder, relatively large boned horizontally build etc, that if given the proper nutrition they would reach South Korean height. But it is still a fact that (South) Koreans ARE tallest among the asian groups borne out by scientific study after study. I can provide examples of these population height studies upon request.
    Huh?
    Where are the Chinese trolls?
    An ad hominem attack is a nice way to reply to the factual evidence.

  3. #178
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by diceke View Post

    Huh?
    Where are the Chinese trolls?
    I guess this S Korean troll doesn't know you're an ethnic Japanese ( expat ) living in Taiwan

  4. #179
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 4, 2007
    Posts
    12
    Those are flimsy ridiculous theories, and as usual you quote scholars on the periphery not mainstream scholarship. That does not explain that plethora of Paekhe artifacts that are all over Japan. It should be noted, there is zero archeological or historical evidence in Korea to indicate ever that it was conquered by Wa. However, there are tons of early Koreanic art and architecture in Japan which indicate the exact opposite. I refer you to the book by the Covells.

    Not only that it is logistically impossible because at the time Wa was technology primitive whereas Korea very advanced technogologically in terms of use of metal weaponry and horses to conduct relatively modern warfare. In fact, Korean introduced experimentation with regard to metals and horses to Japan. How does a country with lack of sophisticated weaponry conquer a country like Korea which already very sophisticated metal workers as indicated by the examples of Silla, Gaya, Paekje artifact I've linked above? In fact, to acquire this modern weaponry, Wa had to import technology from Korea. It even is recorded in Nihongi that early Japan was dependent on trade with Korea for import of modern techonogy. Half of the Nihongi is dedicated to entries on Korea. Hence, it is logically and logistically impossible and it is a dream that is conjured by Japanese nationalists to reconcile to the fact that there are TONS of early Koreans artifacts from Silla, Gaya, Paekje littered all over the Japonic islands.

    Also, with regard to Southern Chinese contributing to Yayoi. I doubt that. Both Koreans and Japanese do not share DNA with Southern Chinese. In fact, Japanese and Southern Chinese DNA differ extremely. Hence, there is no genetic evidence and the exact opposite can be inferred: Southern Chinese had little contribution to the peopling of Japan, if any. I will link the genetic study on this upon request.

  5. #180
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Just to let you guys know, J. Edward Kidder, Jr. has done a new translation of the Wei Zhi section on the Wa in his recent "Himiko and Japan's Elusive Chiefdom of Yamatai" (2007). It's *very* well done.

    His case for Yamatai being located in the Kinai is also very convincing and well-argued.

  6. #181
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by caster51 View Post

    korean does not have a DNA YAP+ at all that 50% of japanese men have.
    That's right caster51,Korean males share more DNA markers with Chinamen


    Study of Korean Male Origins (abstract)[5]

    Sunghee Hong, Seong-Gene Lee, Yongsook Yoon, Kyuyoung Song
    University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 388-1 Poongnap-dong, Songpa-ku, Seoul, Korea

    Population studies of genetic markers such as HLA variation and mitochondrial DNA have been used to understand human origins, demographic and migration history. Recently, diversity on the nonrecombining portion of the Y chromosome (NRY) has been applied to the study of human history. Since NRY is passed from father to son without recombination, polymorphisms in this region are valuable for investigating male-mediated gene flow and for complementing maternally based studies of mtDNA. Haplotypes constructed from Y-chromosome markers were used to trace the paternal origins of Korean. By using 38 Y chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism markers, we analyzed the genetic structure of 195 Korean males. The Korean males were characterized by a diverse set of 4 haplogroups (Groups IV, V, VII, X) and 14 haplotypes that were also present in Chinese. The most frequent haplogroup in Korean was Group VII (82.6%). It was also the most frequent haplogroup in Chinese (95%) as well as in Japanese (45%). The frequencies of the haplogroups V, IV, and X were 15.4%, 1%, and 1%, respectively. The second most frequent haplogroup V in Korean was not present in Chinese, but its frequency was similar in Japanese. We have tried to correlate the Y variation with surname to determine how well the clan membership corresponds to Y variation. There were 37 surnames in our sample but genetic variation structure did not correlate with surnames. "

  7. #182
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Post

    I found this English-subtitled video about the root of japanese people.

    Delves into genetic research which has totally changed notions of who the Japanese are. Overturns Koreans' claim that the Japanese are descendants of Koreans. Rather, the Japanese are a very diverse people made up of Ainu, Okinawan, Chinese, Korean, and various other genetic sequences.

    The Modern Japanese were thought to be a mixture of ancient Jomon and Yayoi Peoples. Recent Genetic Research has proven that the Jomon and Yayoi People themselves were a mixed ethnicity even when they first reached the Japanese Islands.

    Complete report .... http://oniazuma.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/idenshi/

  8. #183
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Thumbs up

    Here are detailed percentages ....
    Last edited by tokapi; Mar 15, 2008 at 18:49.

  9. #184
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    Koreans did not originate from China.
    FYI .... ancient Korea's Koryo Dynasty founder 王建 Wang Geon was of Han-Chinese descent

    "Korean: there is one Chinese character for the surname Wang. Some sources indicate that there are fifteen Wang clans, but only two can be identified: the Kaesong 開城 Wang clan and the Chenam Wang clan. The Kaesong Wang clan, which originated in China, ruled the Korean peninsula for almost five hundred years as the ruling dynasty of the Koryo period (918–1392). There are some indications that the Kaesong Wang clan was present in the ancient Choson Kingdom (?194 bc). When the Chonju Yi clan seized power in 1392 and established the Choson kingdom, many of the members of the Kaesong Wang clan changed their names and went into hiding to avoid being persecuted by the new ruling dynasty. The Chenam Wang clan is also of Chinese origin. The Chenam Wang clan is much smaller than the Kaesong Wang clan."

    As for the Wangs changing their lastname,one theory was that they changed 王 to 全.

    * KOREAN WANG CLAN

    Korean Wang clan existed even before " LeLang Commandary " during China's Han Dynasty controlled northern part of Korea peninsula.One of the Ministers of Old Chosun (Wang Hyob:王俠) had Wang family name at the time of the destruction of Old Chosun (Han Shu and/or Post Han Shu). Wang In (王仁) of Baekje who transmitted Chinese characters 千字文 to Japan most probably came from this clan.

    Japanese sources attribute to this scholar of Paekche in the Kojiki & Nihon Shoki,the name of Wani (王仁) is linked to that of Achiki 阿直岐.

    http://www.indopedia.org/Lelang_commandery.html

    http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=004...3E2.0.CO%3B2-8

    Source: http://genealogy.familyeducation.com...me-origin/wang

  10. #185
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    As to Japanese having Ainu roots, maybe like 5%;
    Ainu is @ over 25% same as Chinese, http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CguNE9vcd-8

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dmon_period

  11. #186
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by caster51 View Post

    at that time , half of korean peninsula was ruled by "WA"
    It's over-stretched but you're absolutely accurate caster51

    ' Wa 倭 ' was existed in the southern part of Korea


    <韓>在<帶方>之南, 東西以海爲限, *南與<倭>接, 方可四千里. 有三種, 一曰<馬韓>, 二曰<辰韓>, 三曰<弁韓>. <辰韓>者, 古之<辰國>也. <馬韓>在西.

    Source: 《三國志》魏書 東夷傳 ( Legend of 3 Kingdoms ) Book of Wei Dong-Yi/Eastern Barbarian Chronicles

    If 'Wa' simply existed in Japanese islands,this description is not possible. *It says Samhan's southern territory borders Wa

  12. #187
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    But the relationship is obvious first from the similarity of the language---
    There certainly isn't any evidence that Korean and Japanese are Altaic languages.It's just something some Finnish Scientist made up and everyone else just assumed to be true.

    Korean is similar, if not related, to Japanese.They are grammatically pretty identical whereas vocabulary wise they are no.

    Racial characteristics do not always correlate with the langage spoken by particular people.

    Since when did language groups denote race ?

  13. #188
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    According to Chinese history records, Huimo ( Yemak 穢貊 ) was formed by two peoples ( Korean nationalists staunchly claimed these were their ancient ancestors ).One being Hui (穢) and the other being Mo (貊). Hui people used to populated around China's Shangdong peninsula. Mo people used to populated around the northern edge of China's Hebei and Shangxi provinces. Some branches of Hui (穢) people and Mo (貊) people migrated to Manchuria. After their arrival to the southern Mancuria and North Korea, some clans of Hui and Mo merged and evloved into a new tribal alliance of Huimo ( Yemak 穢貊 ) at the eastern side of North Korea.Some of Hui and Mo populated a large territory of southern and south-central Macnhuria. They did not merged into a single people initially and live independently in Southern Manchuria. Maybe I should change the wording of Huimo system into Hui-Mo system just to make a distinguishing from that single Huimo tribal alliace in the eastern North Korea.Later,they became the Puyo 夫餘 clans ( predecessor of Baekje or Paekche in southern Korea peninsula ).

    Oh ... ultra-nationalist Koreans romanticized that Yamato Royal House was founded by the Puyo people.

  14. #189
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 3, 2007
    Location
    Hot Springs, Arkansas
    Age
    33
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by tokapi View Post
    There certainly isn't any evidence that Korean and Japanese are Altaic languages.It's just something some Finnish Scientist made up and everyone else just assumed to be true.
    Finnish scientist? What Finnish scientist? And how do you know that there isn't any truth to what this so called Finnish scientist said?

  15. #190
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    There is solid DNA evidence that Chinese have origins in SE asia. Also, many Chinese I've seen do look amazingly like Vietnamese. I can't tell them apart most of the time. In fact, Chinese and Vietnamese and Thai languages sound extremely similar, all being tonal languages. Thai language supposedly originated in China.
    Genetic relationship of populations in China on the PNAS website,it is quite long and I scanned through but still can't find anything that substantiate your claim.

    Source: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...gi?artid=21714

    Quote: " genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo Sapiens in China ".The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia." from the abstract, and "Now that we have established that populations in East Asia were subjected to genetic contributions from multiple sources: Southeast Asia, Altaic from northeast Asia, and mid-Asia or Europe. It would be interesting to estimate relative contributions from each source.Unfortunately,the current study involved only mostly minority populations.A study involving populations across the country is necessary to reveal such a picture"

    At the conclusion,what I see is that the study is more of Chinese minority groups than the larger Han Chinese majority.It seems to suggest and enforce Li Hui theory of at least one of the 3 streams of transmigratory routes taken by Chinese peoples,the stream of genetic marker M119 ( where the Viets belong ) whose path was through northern SE asia into China and they contain Bai Yue and other minorities like Dai but not Han Chinese.So it sort of confirm " the current study involved only mostly minority populations " in the article on PNAS and they " entered from Southeast Asia " ( not the Han Chinese, mind you).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_...nic_minorities

    Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets does not share the M122 genetic marker with the Hans. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.

    I read the other article on PNAS, and quote

    "Usually, most Chinese immigrants to the U.S. (and to other countries, like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc.) come from southern China, and this is certainly true of the cell lines from California residents from China born in the mainland, collected by Louise Chen and Alice Lin at Stanford and used in our surveys (2, 7, 8). Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the North, but they did so at very different times, and thus had different times for gene flow from the earlier settlers,that is the minorities"

    The statement sort of confirm Han Chinese from south China " mostly came originally from the north ", which substantiate Li Hui theory of one of his 3 streams where in one stream the peoples passed through tibetan plateau to arrive in North China were ancestors of the Han-Chinese and Tibetans, carrying the genetic marker M117.PNAS site states that "Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the north, but they did so at very different times".

    Virtually all Han Chinese share the same paternal and maternal lineage except for few southern groups that had Austronesian maternal ancestors.The many migrations ( referenced Tang & Song history chronicles ) into southern China have diluted the bloodlines.

    The fact is that the Han Chinese majority and ethnic Vietnamese didn't share a common root.Any culture similarity,language similarity and genetic similarity in the south are due to chinese expansion to the south,and cultural diffusion, and mixing with the local people but not by common root. its simple as that.It is a fact that Vietnamese culture shares similarities with Chinese culture is due to Chinese influence like how Chinese influenced Korean and Japanese,not by common root.Another fact that the northern Han-Chinese migrated southward in large numbers and some have mixed with the locals and thats the reason they are genetic related ( same scenario with both Japanese & Koreans because their ancestors originally from Asia continent which is today's China excluding Russian Far East Territory & outer Mongolia ).

    Series of civil warfare, rebellions, famines and barbarian invasions in Northern China led to mass migrations of Chinese people from devastated Northern China to the fertile and peaceful Southern China. An estimated 20 million people migrated from Northern China to Southern China from 800AD – 1250AD, to flee from prosecution and escape from the destitute and war-ridden Northern China.Through these waves of migrations to the south,Middle Chinese language was brought into Southern China.Eventually evolved into several dialects,a major one of these dialects is Cantonese.

    Vietnamese is an Austro-asiatic language,not Austronesian.Thus the language is related to that of the Khmers and Mons.The negrito people of Malaya (Asli people) also speak this language.In this latter case,it is likely they were a mixed race adopting the language of the dominant group). We should also note that the original speakers of Austro-asiatic (and for that matter, Austronesian) are also Mongoloids.The differences in features only indicate the amount of negrito blood in them due to intermarriage. Paleolithic Negrito people (who look like the Australian Aborigines) lived in most of Southeast Asia and South China prior to the big migration of Mongoloids southwards, which displaced these peoples. Other contribution of course also include climate and diet.

    It is a fact that Vietnamese language has at least 60&#37; of Chinese loanwords due to Chinese cultural influence and dominance,50% of Chinese loanwords in Korean and Japanese languages,again not by common roots.

    ************************************************** ********

    Below are credible and interesting sources that any interested reader can find out more about the former ancient kingdom of Champa in southern part of Vietnam and her people.

    Concerning my personal "impression" of the former Champa kingdom, here is just but one conclusion from Authors Peter and Sanda Simms who wrote, "Champa had been proved to be an extremely powerful and civilized nation."

    There is a Vietnamese scholar named Dr. Thanh Liem Vo of Australia who wrote about the Cham people as follows:

    "…the vast majority of the population in Central Vietnam are from Cham descendants but assimilated into Viet culture wholely." Listen to their accent!!

    Mr Pham Van Dong ( a Cham descendant ) was Prime Minister of North Vietnam for 45 years.Former S Vietnam president Mr Nguyen Van Thieu ( also a Cham descendant).They both did nothing for Chams...No one in South and Central Vietnam can say for sure they have no Cham or Cambodian blood.

  16. #191
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    Koreans probably confuse Mongolia with Siberia since that they are in the same region.
    Some of your Korean compatriots have clear identity ( ethnic origin ) tho

    Vietnamese refugee L&#253; Dương C&#244;n (李陽焜) was progenitor of 花山李氏 (The Hwasan Lee clan).Former South Korean president Syngman Rhee reportedly told the local Korean press that he was a descendant of Vietnamese Ly.

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_people_in_Korea

  17. #192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    Japanese and Chinese researchers themselves have a personal bias and hidden agenda.
    How about Koreans re-examine own idiocy of extremism & fanaticism


    Hyung Il Pai, Constructing "Korean" Origins.A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories. Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard East Asian Monographs, 2000. 543 pages. ISBN: 0-674-00244-X.

    Source: http://koreaweb.ws/ks/ksr/ksr01-10.htm

    Nationalism has been a major force in the creation of the Korean state in the 20th Century. It was fueled during the colonial period when it underpinned the struggle for independence. Korean intellectuals promoted patriotism, and with it a sense of nationhood, yet the question of identity suddenly became an important issue when Japanese archaeologists began digging into Korea's past. Their activities and those of anthropologists, paid for largely by the Japanese government, focused on the history and culture of Korean civilization. The Japanese military government planned to assimilate the Korean people and the outcome of the studies, so it hoped, would serve to facilitate the assimilation process. It also made efforts to prevent expressions of a distinct Korean identity. For that purpose it imposed strong censorship and ruled that, among other things, the Korean Confucian institution was to be broken down, Korean history books rewritten, and Japanese taught as the primary language at schools.

    After the liberation, the ensuing strong anti-Japanese sentiments helped the state to further boost nationalism, this time in order to increase competitiveness and productivity, improve national unity, and preempt criticism of the government. The success of South Korean president Park Chung Hee's policy of cultural indoctrination, in particular, was such that today most South Koreans share the same ideas about their unique cultural heritage and 5,000-year history. Park's nationalism focused on the threat from foreign powers and the uniqueness of Korea's national identity. It involved advocating old Confucian values that underscored the responsibility shared by all strata of society in achieving the state's economic and political objectives. Perhaps under the influence thereof, many Koreans, both scholars and laymen, began dealing with their colonial past their own way. They did so either by blaming the Japanese for stripping the country of its cultural treasures and economic resources, and leaving the country in ruins, or by rewriting the history of Korea, which they considered to have been greatly contrived by the Japanese during the colonial period. The starting point was to "prove" the historical truth of the myth of Tan'gun, who allegedly founded the first Korean state as early as 2333 B.C. Popular support for adopting the Tan'gun theory was significant, and was further gained under Park's rule. Due to this widespread support, and the fact that many of these historians gained prestigious positions in the academic world, the misconceptions stand largely uncorrected and continue to thwart objective Korean historiography.

    In Constructing Korean Origins, Hyung Il Pai tackles most of the post-colonial historiographical constructions. With great dexterity she examines how and whether Korean historians have used the available data in formulating their many preconceived theories on the existence of Tan'gun's very early and purely Korean civilization, which, so they argue, was one of formidable cultural development and influence. Based on her findings, she shows that, instead, the first Korean state was not an isolated culture and cannot have been formed until much later.

    In terms of the number of pages, the book is divided in two sections. The first part is made up of seven chapters, and the second of a relatively long section (127 pp.) of appendices, followed by the notes, bibliography, glossary and index. In the introduction, "The Formation of Korean Identity" (pp. 1-22), Pai summarizes the factors that led to the current trends in historiography. She outlines the nationalist cultural policy of South Korea's post-war governments and the nationalist activities of scholars, and explains how they have managed to shape the Korean identity. Urged on by the fast industrialization and urbanization, the government has become the arbiter in terms of which archaeological sites are salvaged from destruction by building projects. According to Pai, it is now "the supreme authority over the 'authentic domain of identity'" (p. 13).


    * Author ( ethnic Korean ) Hyung Il Pai was born and raised in Seoul, South Korea

    http://www.eastasian.ucsb.edu/content/people_pai.html

  18. #193
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Here is a Japanese language website on Dr Hyung Il Pai

    http://www.nichibun.ac.jp/research/f...taff3/pai.html

  19. #194
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    Koreans are NOT related to Chinese.

    S Korean surname website source verified & confirmed ethnic Koreans of Chinese origin.


    * 孔氏 ( Gong/Korean or Kong/Chinese )

    http://www.surname.info/gong/gong1.html

    ( ancestor's hometown China's Qufu 曲阜 )

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qufu

    Former S Korea Foreign Minister Gong Ro Myung ( of late 1990's ) admitted in newspaper interviews that his family originally from China's Shandong peninsula.


    * China's Ming General 陳璘 during Korea's Injim War against Japanese invasion.His grandson settled in Korea peninsula,and one S Korean male offspring made a personal visit to Chinese ancestor's tomb in China's Canton province 3 years ago.

    http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/...nt_3893337.htm

    * 陳氏 ( Chen ) ( ancestor originally from Canton China )

    http://www.surname.info/jin/gwang_dong.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chen_Lin_&#37;28Ming%29

  20. #195
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post


    it is a dream that is conjured by Japanese nationalists to reconcile to the fact that there are TONS of early Koreans artifacts from Silla, Gaya, Paekje littered all over the Japonic islands.

    Technological culture was of Han-Chinese origin

    Blind nationalism is most prevailing in Korean academia


    This is REAL history without any political agenda.

    References:

    Pai, Hyung Il. "Lelang and the 'Interaction Sphere': An Alternative Approach to Korean State Formation." Archaeological Review from Cambridge 8:1 (1989): 64-75.

    Pai, Hyung Il. "Culture Contact and Culture Change: The Korean Peninsula and its Relations with the Han Dynasty Commandery of Lelang." World Archaeology 23:3 (February 1992): 306-319.

    One of the most controversial topics in Korean archaeology and history concerns the Han Lelang commanderies that were established in the Korean peninsula during the Han dynasty in 108 BC and lasted for 400 years.

    In the traditional view, the importance of the Lelang in Korean history was seen in its role as the common enemy, at the time when Korea first experienced colonial rule.Such sentiment is so strong that there are actually some Korean ultranationalists who even deny the very existence of the Lelang commandery.

    This view has been further complicated by the fact that some of the earliest archaeological work on Lelang was initiated by the Japanese around the time of the First World War. Back then, the ulterior motives of territorial claims by the Japanese Government General's Office of Korea over the Korean peninsula and Manchuria made some Japanese Lelang scholars claim that Han Lelang culture in Korea was a purely Han Chinese phenomenon, with no native Korean variants and forms.

    But what really were the relations between the Korean Peninsula and the Han Dynasty Commandery of Lelang? Hyung Il Pai (1992) presented a more balanced theoretical view that may help reconcile the nationalistic view of contemporary Korean scholars with pre-war Japanese colonial interpretations of Han Lelang's position in Korean prehistory. Basically,she argued that social and regional differentiation in the Korean peninsula were not possible without initial Han contact. Before the Lelang period, regional differences find expression ony in terms of minor variation in pottery styles. In contrast, third-century texts of the Weizhi (300 years after initial Han contact) reveal the existence of various guo 国 (or tribal kingdoms) such as Puyo, Koguryo, Okcho, Eastern Ye and Samhan. They are recorded as having distinctively different social organizations, subsistence systems, customs, and rituals.

    The most important "traits of civilization" such as iron technology, writing, gold craftsmanship, and intesive rice agriculture, were derived from Han Lelang culture. Such widespread distribution of ideas and technology would not have been possible without the elite distribution network of seals, bronze mirrors, and luxury Han goods which stimlulated the initial exchange network.

    According to Pai (1992), once this network was established in the core areas of Lelang, it quickly spread to all other parts of Korea and into southern-western Japan, forming the "Lelang Interaction Sphere" in Korean prehistory (that included Koguryo, Wa of Japan, and Samhan - Chinhan, Pyonhan, and Mahan)".Without this initial phase, the second stage of the interaction sphere that comprised Koguryo, Paekche, Silla, and Kofun Japan, would not have been possible. Extensive trade and diplomatic activities were heightened and reinforced by competition and warfare with Yamato Japan and the three kingdoms. These states shared common features in palatial architecture, in the spread of Buddhism and associated sculpture, as well as in gold artwork and jewellery.

    http://www.eastasian.ucsb.edu/content/people_pai.html

  21. #196
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    Koreans and Chinese do not even look similar.

    Majority modern day northern Han-Chinese ( local populations of Shandong peninsula & provinces north of Yangtze River ) and Koreans look exactly alike,it's hard to tell them apart because they share same ( original ancient northern Hans & Mongols ) ancestral roots.

  22. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    Interestingly,in Saga prefecture of Japan, there is an unknown grave on a hill that is supposedly dedicated to Xu Fu ( 徐福 ), though one might say that it could be a tourist gimmick.Meanwhile, Fukuoka ,the largest city in Kyushu Island and where Xu Fu ( 徐福 )was rumoured to have landed, was named after two places, Fuku(福) and Oka 岡.One could perhaps guess that the place Fuku was name after Xu Fu, whose name in Japanese was jou fuku.There are other places in the island of Kyushu which may point to Xu Fu's arrival in Japan.

    But it seems to be only a legend.There were probably Chinese immigrants moving to Japan via Korea and the Ryukyus, but I think it would be pretty untrue to say that the Japanese are solely the descendants of these Chinese immigrants.

    Early Chinese legend never said that the Japanese were descendants of Xu Fu ( 徐福,the Daoist alchemist) and the large number of boys and girls he brought with him. Instead, in the Sanguo Zhi ( 三國志 ) and Hou Hanshu ( 後漢書 ), the first two dynastic history chronicles to describe Japan, Xu Fu's new home is identified as a different island called Chanzhou 澶洲 or Danzhou 亶洲. Sun Quan is said to have sent a fleet to find this island, but they were unsucessful and only reached Taiwan or Okinawa (known as Yizhou 夷洲). There is no suggestion that it was Japan.

    It was only in recent Chinese history that people started to claim that Xu Fu ( 徐福 ) was the ancestor of the Japanese.This is motivated by silly Chinese nationalistic pride.

  23. #198
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    In fact, Japanese and Southern Chinese DNA differ extremely.
    Hearsay or your baseless biased opinion ?!

    Japanese are about the same height as many Southeast Asian groups but shorter than most North East Asians ( northern Han-Chinese & Koreans,they're blood siblings )...maybe as tall as Hong Kong Chinese people and a lot of Taiwan Chinese ( southern Han-Chinese stock ).

    Abstract Using the data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction polymorphism, the gene pools of Koreans (N = 164) and Mongolians (N = 48) were characterized. It was demonstrated that the gene pools were represented by the common set of mtDNA haplogroups of East Asian origin (M*, M7, M8a, M10, C, D4, G*, G2, A, B*, B5, F1, and N*). In addition to this set, mtDNA haplogroups D5 and Y were identified in Koreans while Mongolians possessed haplogroup Z. Only in Mongolians, a European component with the frequency of 10.4&#37; and represented by the mtDNA types belonging to haplogroups K, U4, and N1, was identified. Phylogenetic and statistical analyses of the data on mtDNA variation in the populations of South Siberia, Central, and East Asia suggested the existence of interpopulation differentiation within these regions, the main role in which was played by the geographical and linguistic factors. Analysis of the pairwise F ST distances demonstrated close genetic similarity of Koreans to Northern Chinese, which in turn, were clearly different from Southern Chinese populations. Mongolians occupied an intermediate position between the ethnic groups of South Siberia and Central/East Asia.

  24. #199
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by allq View Post

    1) The first horses that appeared on Japanese islands came from Korea 2000 years ago.

    3) Kyushu which is closest to the Southern tip of Korea is hypothesized as the place as where Japanese cultural bloom began because it is the area in which you will find the oldest and culturally significant early Japanese artifacts.

    1) J. Edward Kidder, Jr. (who released a 400+ page book on the history, archaeology, and mythology surrounding Himiko and the location of Yamatai this Spring) covers the history of horses in Japan in his article "The Archaeology of the Early Horse-Riders in Japan". You can read it in "The Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan". He also provided some great evidence that discredits a few pillars of Egami's horseriders theory.Of course,every theory has aspects that reflect cultural/social/historical currents.

    I recommend you guys checking out his article. I'll only lay out a few points he made in this post.

    -The Kiso horse is indigenous to Japan, yet it's presently endangered. The horse that spread throughout the archipelago was imported from Korea.

    -Horses began to be ridden widely in the 5th century.

    -It was expected that aristocrats know how to ride horses.

    -The native horses were from the Late Jomon period (1000 B.C.-300 B.C.)

    -He gives 114.5 cm as an average height for the indigenous horses (measured up to the "withers")

    -Yayoi horses are, on average, 132 cm (again, "withers")

    -Jomon and Yayoi (300 B.C.-250 A.D.) sites don't imply the eating or sacrifice of horses. I believe Farris mentioned they were beasts of burden, however they apparently weren't ridden, yet.

    -After the Yayoi period, horses began to be used in religious rituals. They were sacrificed. The Taika Reforms of the 7th century prohibited the sacrificing of horses (among other mourning practices after one's lord/leader had died).

    -Horse sacrifice is actually a bit debated, as Kidder wonders why the Japanese would sacrifice the few horses that lived on the islands during the first years of the Kofun period.

    -The use of horse haniwa around kofun seems to imply that the Japanese believed that horses were mediums or intouch with the spiritual world. 8th century rituals involving horse figures attest to this.

    There's a lot more information in the short article. If you can get your hands on it, it'd go nicely with Walter Edwards rebuttal of Egami's theory. Both are from an archaeological standpoint.

    A reputable Japanese archaeologist 樋口隆康 noted 2 Chinese migration routes

    * China's lower Yangtze River ( today China's coastal provinces of Jiangsu & Zhejiang ) > northern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan

    * southern China via Taiwan and Ryukyus ( Okinawa ) > southern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan

    日本考古学研究家 " 樋口隆康 "

    http://www.google.com/search?q=&#37;E6%A...3&start=0&sa=N

    『日本人はどこから来たか』(樋口隆康著、講談社現代新書)は、考古学者の日本人起源論である。樋口は日本 人を「日本列島に住み、同じ体質を持ち、日本的な文化を持つ一群の人類群」と定義した上で、「日本人の起源 とは日本文化の起源である」という立場から、起源を、日本文化の形成過程に求めている。他分野の知見も参考 にし、石器や土器、稲作の伝来や農具など発掘から得たデータをもとに考察する樋口は、文化は樺太、朝鮮半島、(中国)東シナ海、台湾・南西諸島、小笠原諸島の5ルートから日本に移入されていて、その合成により日本文化は形成されたが、中でも中国江南地域から東シナ海を通って伝えられた文化が最も重要な役割を果たしており、形成時期は弥生時代であ る、という仮説をたてる

    Source: http://shinshomap.info/theme/roots_of_japanese_g.html

    Japanese-English translation website: http://www.excite.co.jp/world/english/

  25. #200
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location
    ŠO‰F’ˆ
    Posts
    103
    We must not mistake the true definition of " Yayoi 弥生 ",it dedicates to a history era ( 弥生時代 ) of Japan between 300 BCE-250 CE and culture & people designated to this period.By no means,it implies " monolithic " race or origin of Yayoi population.I am open to & entertain the idea of " migration waves " or " various origins " of Yayoi population.Japanese recent Genetic Research has proven that the Jomon and Yayoi People themselves were mixed ethnicities.I think people of SE Asian & Pacific lslanders blended in and interbred with the rest of the population since they weren't the majority.

    related thread ... http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9496
    Last edited by tokapi; Jan 11, 2008 at 07:04.

Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Genetic origin of Chinese people
    By Grimmo in forum Chinese Culture & History
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: Mar 18, 2010, 19:27

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •