332 replies to this topic

[Tungus]

"When Dae Mooye (大武藝) said that Barhae (渤海) “recovered the former lands of Koguryo”, it means that those people under the new Barhae (渤海) regime were in fact the former subjects of Koguryo (高麗), now being under a new country name and ruler and thus that they must have used the same Koguryo language (高麗語) as they used to use during Koguryo (高句麗) period. Secondly, when Dae Mooye (大武藝) said that Barhae State (渤海) “has the remaining customs of Buyo (復高麗之舊居。有扶餘之遺俗)”, it means that the languages Barhae (渤海) people used was the same language as that of Buyo (扶餘) as well as the customs because the “customs (俗)” often comprehend languages (語言), though not necessarily.

With regard to this text, 復高麗之舊居, 有扶餘之遺俗. Where does it say that those people under the new Barhae (渤海) regime were in fact the former subjects of Koguryo? Where does it say that the languages Barhae (渤海) people used was the same language as that of Buyo? Don’t you think you are stretch things a bit too far? I seriously question your ability to read classic hanja literacy. Or are you doing it on purpose?

Further, there is no doubt that all the proto-Korean peoples such as Buyo (夫 餘), Koguryo (高 句 驪: Maek), Ye (濊), Okjeo (沃 沮) and the Three Han (三韓) people used the same language or a dialect thereof and they were part of the same ethnic group since the time of Old Chosun (古朝鮮) era.

"Buyo (夫 餘 國)....neighbored Koguryo (高 句 驪) and Yilou (挹 婁)....it is originally Ye (濊) area...the title of officers are...Ka (加)..."
夫 餘 國 ， 在 玄 菟 北 千 里 。 南 與 高 句 驪 ， 東 與 挹 婁， 西 與 鮮 卑 接 ， 北 有 弱 水 。 地 方 二 千 里 ， 本 濊 地 也 。 ...以 六 畜 名 官 ， 有 馬 加、 牛 加 、 狗 加 ， 其 邑 落 皆 主 屬 諸 加 。 後 漢 書 卷 八 十 五, 東 夷 列 傳 第 七 十 五

"Koguryo (高 句 驪)...neighbors Chosun (朝 鮮), Yemaek(濊 貊), Okjeo (沃 沮), Buyo (夫 餘)...These Eastern Barbarians (東 夷) say they are another branch of Buyo (夫 餘) and their language is the same in many respects... title are...Ka (加)....
高 句 驪 ， 在 遼 東 之 東 千 里 ， 南 與 朝 鮮 、 濊 貊 ， 東與 沃 沮 ， 北 與 夫 餘 接 。 ....東 夷 相 傳 以 為 夫 餘 別 種 ， 故 言 語 法 則 多 同...。 其 置 官 ， 有 相 加 、 對 盧 、 沛者 、 古 鄒 大 加 、 〔 二 〕 主 簿 、 優 台 、 使 者 、 帛 衣 先 人 。武 帝 滅 朝 鮮 ， 以 高 句 驪 為 縣 ...句 驪 一 名 貊 （ 耳 ） 。 有 別 種 ， 依 小 水 為 居 ， 因 名曰 小 水 貊 。 出 好 弓 ， 所 謂 「 貊 弓 」 是 也 。〔 一 〕 　 魏 氏 春 秋 曰 ： 「 遼 東 郡 西 安平 縣 北 ， 有 小 水 南 流 入 海 ， 句 驪 別 種 因 名 之 小 水 貊 。 」 後 漢 書 卷 八 十 五, 東 夷 列 傳 第 七 十 五

The languages of Baekje (百 濟) and Silla (新 羅) were also mutually understandable dialects.

"Baekje (百 濟)'s ancestors are the Eastern Barbarians (東 夷) and has three Han States (三 韓 國)...Their languages (言 語) and clothings (服 章) are almost the same with those of Koguryo (高 驪)...

百 濟 者 ， 其 先 東 夷 有 三 韓 國 ， 一 曰 馬 韓 ， 二 曰 辰韓 ， 三 曰 弁 韓 。....其 人形 長 ， 衣 服 淨 潔 。 其 國 近 倭 ， 頗 有 文 身 者 。 今 言 語 服 章略 與 高 驪 同 ， 行 不 張 拱 ， 拜 不 申 足 則 異 。梁 書 卷 五 十 四, 　 　 列 傳 第 四 十 八, 諸 夷, 海 南 　 東 夷 　 西 北 諸 戎

Silla (新 羅)'s ancestors are originally Jin Han people (辰 韓 種)....Their language (語言) can be understood through the help (待) of Baekje (百 濟) people....
新 羅 者 ， 其 先 本 辰 韓 種 也 。...無 文 字 ， 刻 木 為 信 。 語 言待 百 濟 而 後 通 焉 。 。梁 書 卷 五 十 四, 　 　 列 傳 第 四 十 八, 諸 夷, 海 南 　 東 夷 　 西 北 諸 戎

百 濟 者 ， 其 先 東 夷 有 三 韓 國 ， 一 曰 馬 韓 ， 二 曰 辰韓 ， 三 曰 弁 韓 。....其 人形 長 ， 衣 服 淨 潔 。 其 國 近 倭 ， 頗 有 文 身 者 。 今 言 語 服 章略 與 高 驪 同 ， 行 不 張 拱 ， 拜 不 申 足 則 異 。梁 書 卷 五 十 四, 　 　 列 傳 第 四 十 八, 諸 夷, 海 南 　 東 夷 　 西 北 諸 戎

The key is here. 略~同, it means Baekje language is A LITTLE BIT SIMILAR TO Koguryo language. Many modern academia agree this too.

Then......

新 羅 者 ， 其 先 本 辰 韓 種 也 。...無 文 字 ， 刻 木 為 信 。 語 言待 百 濟 而 後 通 焉。

You are misquoting here yet AGAIN! It supposed to be無 文 字 ， 刻 木 為 信， 語 言待 百 濟 而 後 通 焉。This is the original complete sentence. And it means originally Silla did not have writing and they learned the writing (presumably hanja, or what else?) from Paekji. Next time don’t misquote ancient text, read things with context, and most importantly learn more about classic hanja literacy please.

So we come back to the starting point in a full circle that Koguryo language was somehow similar to Paekji. And we still do not know if Paekji language is communicable to Silla from all the text you cited.

Thus, assuming that the record (Barhae “recovered the former lands of Koguryo and has the remaining customs of Buyo (復高麗之舊居。有扶餘之遺俗).” ) means that the languages Barhae (渤海) people used was the same as that of Buyo (扶餘), then Barhae language (渤海語) is the same as Buyo (扶餘) and Koguryo (高 句 麗) language. This is a natural result of recovering the former lands of Koguryo (高 句 麗) as well because the people living in those areas would also be reintegrated into the new political entity. Thus, based on this fact and the other fact that the leading class of Barhae (渤海) was Koguryo (高 句 麗)-group minority, Korean language would have been the official spoken language in Barhae (渤海) whereas Malkal (靺鞨)-Tungus was also used among the Mankal (靺鞨)-Barhae (渤海) members."

It’s fuzzy logic in play here. These are all your speculations build on top of false assumptions and speculation. So how can I not question your premises?

Still any doubt on this issue, Tungus?

Doubts? You are providing more questions than answers. And it’s quite evident in the way you misquoting ancient text and mistakenly (or falsely) interpreting the original text.

[Yun]

Malkals (Mohe) once attacked Buyo, but it was restored by the inetrvention of a regime in China (I forgot the state).

It was actually the Murong Xianbei who attacked and destroyed Buyo in 285. Buyo was restored with the help of the Western Jin dynasty in 286.

開元中，其酋來朝，拜為勃利州刺史，遂置黑水府，以部長為都督、刺史，朝廷為置長史監之。賜府都督姓李氏，訖唐世朝獻不絕。五代時始稱女真。後唐明宗時，嘗寇登州渤海，擊走之。

I have in one of my books a 2003 article by Ma Yihong on the relations between Bohai and the Heishui Malgals (the ancestors of the Jurchen). The question he was dealing with was when the Heishui Malgal were (as mentioned in the Xin Tangshu and Tang Huiyao) "subjects of" Bohai. His conclusion was that after the 770s, the Heishui Malgals became a vassal tribe of Bohai, but unlike other Malgal tribes in the 9th century, they did not get absorbed into Bohai as subjects on the census registers. The evidence is that Bohai did not establish provinces or prefectures on the lands of the Heishui Malgals, but the Heishui Malgals also stopped sending tribute missions to the Tang court after 815, while tribute missions from the 770s onwards were made jointly with Bohai. In 924 and 925, just before Bohai was conquered by the Khitan in 926, the Heishui Malgals finally sent two tribute missions to the Later Tang court. Ma Yihong infers from this that the Heishui Malgals had broken free from Bohai control during the decline of Bohai, and were again independent.

So the ancestors of the Jurchens and Manchus were only vassals of Bohai for about 100 years.

[tongyan]

That's a great new theory! Every body knows that 百姓 at that time means "Common people" in China, Korea and Japan who commonly used Chinese characters. In particular, since the data is recorded in Japan at that time, let's take a look at the word 百姓, as reflected in Continuum of Japanese Chronicles (続日本紀) in which a lot of Barhae-related records are found!

The meaning of 百姓 depends on context. It can mean 'common people' or 'elite/ruling class.' The meanings were more or less contemporaneous. (Of course, nowadays 百姓 only means 'common people')

You need to look at the entire phrase and see which meaning fits.

No!!! Until the Meiji restoration, Japanese common people (people other than kuge and samurai) had no surnames!!!

As for the quoted text, you don't have to argue with me. It's not a theory either. It's a very common mistake committed by casual classic hanjia literacy readers. Lets just assum 百姓 is translated into common people like you said. But you still can not explain why this part, 其下百姓皆曰首領(every "common people" is called chief.), does not make sense at all.
============================================================

And the orginial text you quoted is here. Look carefully with how the original text constructed.

　渤海國者,高麗之故地也.天命開別天皇七年,高麗王-高氏,為唐所滅也.後以天之真宗豐祖父天皇二年,大祚榮始建渤海國.和銅六年,受唐冊立其國.延袤二千里,無州縣館驛.處處有村里,皆靺鞨部落.其百姓者,靺鞨多,土人少.皆以土人為村長.大村曰- 都督,次曰- 刺史.其下百姓,皆曰-首領. 土地極寒,不宜水田.俗頗知書.自高氏以來,朝貢不絕.

http://applepig.idv....uki/kouki04.htm

Although I don't necessarily agree with the above explanation, this seems to be a good way to approach an analysis of what 百姓 means in this particular context.

[Juchechosunmanse]

Further, those areas descriveded above is now resided by Nanais (Goldi), Oroks, Hejens (Hezhe) and Udhighe, the legitimate descendants of the Malkal-Jurchens or the true Wild Jurchens (生女真)! These people are Russians as a matter of citizenship!, not Chinese nor Manchus.

They are Russian citizens? Hezhe for one are Chinese (as a matter of citizenship). Wild Jurchens or cooked Jurchens, they were all Jurchens. Manchus, being Jurchen's offsprings can claim Jurchens's history.

It should be also remembered that the Golden State and the Jurchens used a Tungus dialect that is close to the Udhighe and Nanais than the Manchu language as to Malkal-Jurchen language.

Proof?

Further, the modern Manchus are not the direct offspring of Malkals of Barhae: See

女真即古肅慎國也，東漢謂之挹婁，元魏謂之勿吉，隋唐謂之靺鞨。開皇中，遣使貢獻，文帝因宴勞之。使者及其徒起舞於前，曲折皆為戰鬭之狀。上謂侍臣曰：「天地間乃有此物，常作用兵意。」其屬分六部，有黑水部，即今之女真。其水掬之則色微黑，契丹目為混同江。其江甚深，狹處可六七十步，闊處百餘步。
唐太宗征高麗，靺鞨佐之，戰甚力。駐蹕之敗，高延壽、高惠真以眾及靺鞨兵十餘萬來降，太宗悉縱之，獨坑靺鞨三千人。開元中，其酋來朝，拜為勃利州刺史，遂置黑水府，以部長為都督、刺史，朝廷為置長史監之。賜府都督姓李氏，訖唐世朝獻不絕。五代時始稱女真。後唐明宗時，嘗寇登州渤海，擊走之。其後避契丹諱，更為女直，俗訛為女質。居混同江之南者謂之熟女真，以其服屬契丹也，江之北為生女真，亦臣於契丹。後有酋豪受其宣命為首領者，號「太師」。(松漠紀聞, Hong Hao (1088-1155 AD) of Song Dynasty)

Here, the Jurchens (女真) were attacking Barhae (渤海) all the time!

女真即古肅慎國也，東漢謂之挹婁，元魏謂之勿吉，隋唐謂之靺鞨。

唐太宗征高麗，靺鞨佐之，戰甚力。駐蹕之敗，高延壽、高惠真以眾及靺鞨兵十餘萬來降，太宗悉縱之，獨坑靺鞨三千人。開元中，其酋來朝，拜為勃利州刺史，遂置黑水府，以部長為都督、刺史，朝廷為置長史監之。賜府都督姓李氏，訖唐世朝獻不絕。五代時始稱女真。

Which part of this do you not understand? 女真=肅慎/挹婁/勿吉/靺鞨

[Juchechosunmanse]

"Barhae contry... from place to place there are Malkal villages, Among their common people (i.e. As for the subjects / As for the population) there are a lot of Malkals, but the Natives are less (than those Malkals). They designate the Natives as the Heads of villages. The (Heads of) bigger villages are called Dodok (Dudu), the next bigger are called Jasa. The smaller ones are called Sooryong by the commoners..... commoners under them.

Its not that "the 百姓 below those levels are called 首領.", as Tungus implies it. Tungus is implying that 其百姓者,靺鞨多 should be interpreted as:其"村長=都督=刺史" (百姓)者,靺鞨多,土人少...

This interpretation directly contradicts "皆以土人為村長.大村曰- 都督,次曰- 刺史."
That does not make sense from the whole context.
Otherwise, the record would not have said:皆以土人為村長.大村曰- 都督,次曰- 刺史. (They designate the Natives as the Heads of villages. The (Heads of) bigger villages are called Dodok (Dudu), the next bigger are called Jasa.)!
Thus, the conclusion is that the former Koguryo people were less in number than Malkal in that specific area, but they were the governing class people!

So your interpretation of (其百姓者,靺鞨多,土人少.皆以土人為村長.大村曰- 都督,次曰- 刺史.)其下百姓,皆曰-首領 is "the smaller ones are called Sooryong by the commoners"? Where does it say "the smaller ones are called Sooryong" by the commoners? Sooryong(Shou Ling) = commoners? Commoners are called commoners by commoners? This doesn't make any sense.

And why was Zhu Yuanzhang a Jurchen?

[Tungus]

CONTRAST OF KOGURYO-BUYO-SILLA LANGUAGES AND SUKSIN-EUMNU (SHUSHEN-YERU) LANGAUGES

SINCE you insist upon the difference of languages between Buyo and Koguryo, Baekje..Silla, I will repost part of my post elsewhere for you:

Look, all the above sources prove that Koguryo, Ye, Okje, Han, Buyo, Han..Silla etc... are using the same languages or dialect thereof, which are the same with modern Korean (朝 鮮語,韓 國語).

However, check the following:

"Yilou (挹 婁) is the ancient Sushen (古 肅 慎 之 國)....Neighbors the Big sea...and Northern Okjeo (北 沃 沮) in the south... They look similar to Buyo people (夫 餘), but their languages are different from each other (言 語 各 異).

挹 婁 ， 古 肅 慎 之 國 也 。 在 夫 餘 東 北 千 餘 里 ， 東 濱大 海 ， 南 與 北 沃 沮 接 ， 不 知 其 北 所 極 。 土 地 多 山 險 。 人形 似 夫 餘 ， 而 言 語 各 異 。 後 漢 書 卷 八 十 五, 東 夷 列 傳 第 七 十 五

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YILOU (挹 婁)-TUNGUS AND CHOSUN (朝 鮮)-KOREAN GROUP

"Yilou (挹 婁).....'s people look similar to Buyo people (夫 餘), but their languages (言 語) are different from those of Buyo ( 夫 餘) and Koguryo (句 麗)....It is Susehn of the ancient times (古 之 肅 慎 氏 之 國)... Buyo (夫 餘) pacified them several times. Though the size of its people is small, because they liven in steep mountains....they could not conquer them... The Eastern Barbarians (東 夷) all use food vessels (俎 豆). But only Yilou (挹 婁) people dont' use them....

挹 婁 在 夫 餘 東 北 千 餘 里 ， 濱 大 海 ， 南 與 北 沃 沮 接， 未 知 其 北 所 極 。 其 土 地 多 山 險 。 其 人 形 似 夫 餘 ， 言 語不 與 夫 餘 、 句 麗 同 。 ....古 之 肅 慎 氏 之 國 也 。...夫 餘 數 伐 之 ， 其 人 眾 雖 少， 所 在 山 險 ， 鄰 國 人 畏 其 弓 矢 ， 卒 不 能 服 也 。 其 國 便 乘船 寇 盜 ， 鄰 國 患 之 。 東 夷 飲 食 類 皆 用 俎 豆 ， 唯 挹 婁 不 ，法 俗 最 無 綱 紀 也 。 三 國 志 卷 三 十 　 魏 書 三 十, 烏 丸 鮮 卑 東 夷 傳 第 三 十

Look, again, all the above sources prove that Koguryo, Ye, Okje, Han, Buyo, Han..Silla etc... are using the same languages or dialect thereof, which are the same with modern Korean (朝 鮮語,韓 國語). Thus, there is no need to say they are the ancestors of modern Koreans.

However, Yilou (挹 婁) people, who are Tungus-Manchus used different languages from those of Buyo (夫 餘) and Koguryo (句 麗) ...etc. who used ancient Korean language...

Thus, Old Chosun (朝 鮮), Buyo (夫 餘), Koguryo (高 句 驪)... etc. have nothing to do with "Chinese minorities" or "Chinese". (Unless you say all Koreans are the very Chinese Minorities themselves!!!)

THE above data proves that Buyo-Koguryo....-Silla used the sam language but different dialects. This dialects still exist even now, though they are all mutually clearly understandable.
KOREAN-MANCHU LANGUAGE RELATIONSHIP

In contrast, the Manchu language is unintelligible to Koreans and Korean to Manchus, except for some specific words and despite extreme garmatical similarities or identities!

Of course, if there are very simple sentences, containing common words, some people may understand each other:

E.g. 1. Korean: Gaksi hana jaba! (Take a bride!=Marry yourself with a girl!)

Manchu: Gaksi emu jafa! (Take a bride!=Marry yourself with a girl!)

E.g.2. Korean: Bang-e eoso duso! (Please enter the room!)

Manchu: Boo-de huudun dosiki! (Please enter the room!)

E.g.3. Korean: Mal-eul duleo (Listen to the words (stories))
Manchu: Gisun-be donji (Same)

There may be hundreds of them. However, basically they are different.

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN KOREAN DIALECTS: 略~同 ISSUE

But, as between Korean dialects, there are some differences which make the other party immediately see that's a different dialect, there is no problem in communication. The only exception is true Jejoo island dialect which can be understood by less than 50% by other dialect-users.

Probably, there could have been more differences in the ancient times due to lack of long distance travel and frequent communications, which may have caused ancient recorders to use the term 略~同!

P.S. I know you don't understand Manchu language, which is your own even though you are making an issue about it here.

So, my brotherly advice is that you may attempt to learn a little bit of your own language, using this opportunity as a start. But, I don't blame you for that incapacity because almost 99,999999 % of Manchu's lost their language and adopted Chinese. Once an ethnic group lose their language, they also lose history quite soon and then, identy and then, disappearance......then only fossilized records.... and then the WHOLE HISTORY will be SOMEBODY ELSE'S, depending on who claims so. So, its not so important to make some arguably weak claims on history, but need to think about this overall historical process!

LOL....Dude make up your mind. At very beginning, you said Manchus and Koreans were cousins. Now you are trying to distant Koreans from Manchus in every way you can because you find me, a Manchu, does not take your delusionary side. So much for Manchus and Korean brotherhood? I have said from the very beginning Manchus and Koreans are very different from the begining of the time.

There is no need to bring in so many bits and piece of info here and there to confuse people. I know you have tried very hard to say the least. But it's very obivious that Silla language(modern korean language's direct ancester) was not the same with its neighbor. Even your own cited quotes could not sufficiently prove or disprove otherwise. Who is the everyone else neighboring Silla? They were mainly peoples of Huimo system 秽貊系. I have never denied the realtionship among subgroups of Huimo system 秽貊系 such as Fuyu, Koguryo, Gaoyi, Laiyi ....... They were not the same people. But there is little doubt that they were distant or closely related. BUT were Silla people themselves part of Huimo system? That's the question you should ask.


Historically, the Chinese Dobei region has been mainly occupied by peoples of Huimo system 秽貊系, Sushen system 肃慎系, Donghu system 东胡系. Thier languages, customs, culture, and lifestyle were quite distinct from each other since very early on. This is very elementary ethnological knowledge with regard to Manchuria, part of North Korea, and part of Russian Far East . For your references:

Donghu system trandtionally resided at Northeast Inner Mongolia, West Manchuria, and Northwest Manchuria which evloved into xianbei, xi, shiwei(mongol distant relatives). They were mostly mobile normadic.

Huimo system traditionally lived at part of east Jiling province and east liaoling province and part of north korea. They were mostly semi-agriculture people. And they had many subgroups of peoples like fuyu, wozhu, and koguryo......

Sushen system traditionally resided at Russian Far East, Northeast and East Manchuria all the way down to north of Changbai mt. Another patch of Sushen system lived around Sumo river(Songhua river). Sushen system has not been branching out to too many subsystems like Donghu and Huimo systems. With exception of isolated tribes that advanced to kindomhood like Bohai(sumo mohe), Jin(Jurchen), and Houjin(manchu), Sushen system was mostly consist of finshing hunting tribal societies.

As for learning Manju Gisun, yes, I am learning it. There are quite a few places you can learn Manju Gisun right now in China like I have mentioned. Even in the states, there are several colleges offering Manju Gisun classes such as Harvard and Swarthmore colleges...So don't worry. We manchus won't disappear and history of Machuria belongs to us Manchus and the world. Baniha!

Edited by Tungus, 03 September 2006 - 04:55 AM.

[Tungus]

Regarding your poin underlined above, I don't need so many books written by the Chinese whose solo purpose is to separate out Barhae history from Korean history.

Their efforts are focused on Dae Joyong's ethnic back ground and based on the Old Records of Tang (舊 唐 書 ) which implies that HE was a Malkal: See

Regarding the ethnic background of Dae Joyong (大 祚 榮), the Old Records of Tang State (舊 唐 書) states:

“Barhae Malkal (渤 海 靺 鞨) Dae Joyong (大 祚 榮) was originally an alternative branch (tribe) of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種). When Koguryo (高 麗) was destroyed, Joyong (祚 榮) led his family members (家 屬) and settled in Ying Region (營 州)….”

渤 海 靺 鞨 大 祚 榮 者 ， 本 高 麗 別 種 也 。 高 麗 既 滅 ，祚 榮 率 家 屬 徙 居 營 州 。 萬 歲 通 天 年 ， 契 丹 李 盡 忠 反 叛 ，祚 榮 與 靺 鞨 乞 四 比 羽 各 領 亡 命 東 奔 ， 保 阻 以 自 固 。 盡 忠既 死 ， 則 天 命 右 玉 鈐 衛 大 將 軍 李 楷 固 率 兵 討 其 餘 黨 ， 先破 斬 乞 四 比 羽 ， 又 度 天 門 嶺 以 迫 祚 榮 。 祚 榮 合 高 麗 、 靺鞨 之 眾 以 拒 楷 固 ， 王 師 大 敗 ， 楷 固 脫 身 而 還 。 屬 契 丹 及奚 盡 降 突 厥 ， 道 路 阻 絕 ， 則 天 不 能 討 ， 祚 榮 遂 率 其 眾 東保 桂 婁 之 故 地 〔 二 二 〕 ， 據 東 牟 山 ， 築 城 以 居 之 。 祚 榮 驍 勇 善 用 兵 ， 靺 鞨 之 眾 及 高 麗 餘 燼 ， 稍 稍 歸之 。 聖 曆 中 ， 自 立 為 振 國 王 ， 遣 使 通 于 突 厥 。 舊 唐 書 卷 一 百 九 十 九 下, 列 傳 第 一 百 四 十 九 下, 北 狄, 鐵 勒 　 契 丹 　 奚 　 室 韋 　 靺 鞨 　 渤 海 靺 鞨 　 霫　 烏 羅 渾

There are 5 more later Chinese sources including a Mongol source (Jin Shi: History of Golden State). However, all these others are either summary or a variation of the above. Thus, the key is the interpreation of 高 麗 別 種!

Yet, most Chinese historians and even Korean historians could not make a conclusion because the meaning of 別 種 as in 高 麗 別 種 is difficult to determine because 別 種 as in 高 麗 別 種 would mean both
1) another, alternative species of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種), which would be Malkal (靺 鞨) (CHINESE POSITION)or
2) another, alternative tribe of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種), such as a Non-Royal Family group or clan (大姓) of Koguryo people (高句麗王室﹕高姓). (MY POSITION)

Nonetheless, it is also clear that
1) another, alternative species of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種) or
2) another, alternative tribe of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種) does not necessarily mean Malkal (靺 鞨). This fact becomes clear when we review the usage of 別 種 in another example.
"高 句 驪 ...neighbors Chosun (朝 鮮), Yemaek(濊 貊), Okjeo (沃 沮), Buyo (夫 餘)...These Eastern Barbarians (東 夷) say they are another branch of Buyo (夫 餘) and their language is the same in many respects... title are...Ka (加)....Koguryo's another name is Maek. There is another branch (有 別 種 ) and live along the Small River (小 水) and thus, they are called the Small River Maek people (小 水 貊 ). They produce good bows and what is called Maek Bow is this...Wei Shi Annlas say (魏 氏 春 秋 )...There is Small River (小 水 ) flowing into the sea in the south. The other branch of Koguryo (句 驪 別 種) is called thus Small River Maek (小 水 貊 ).

高 句 驪 ， 在 遼 東 之 東 千 里 ， 南 與 朝 鮮 、 濊 貊 ， 東與 沃 沮 ， 北 與 夫 餘 接 。 ....東 夷 相 傳 以 為 夫 餘 別 種 ， 故 言 語 法 則 多 同...。 其 置 官 ， 有 相 加 、 對 盧 、 沛者 、 古 鄒 大 加 、 〔 二 〕 主 簿 、 優 台 、 使 者 、 帛 衣 先 人 。武 帝 滅 朝 鮮 ， 以 高 句 驪 為 縣 ...句 驪 一 名 貊 （ 耳 ） 。 有 別 種 ， 依 小 水 為 居 ， 因 名曰 小 水 貊 。 出 好 弓 ， 所 謂 「 貊 弓 」 是 也 。〔 一 〕 　 魏 氏 春 秋 曰 ： 「 遼 東 郡 西 安平 縣 北 ， 有 小 水 南 流 入 海 ， 句 驪 別 種 因 名 之 小 水 貊 。 」 後 漢 書 卷 八 十 五, 東 夷 列 傳 第 七 十 五

There are no usage of 別 種 found in other contexts regarding other etnic groups, not to mention of Koguryo case. Further, both Chinese scholars and Korean, Russian...failed to see this usage of 別 種. Thus, they argued against each other.

However, as I pointed out above by looking at the usage of 別 種 in other Koguryo context,
the above two examples clearly shows that as an ethnic group, 句 驪 (一 名 貊) 別 種 “小 水 貊” is no different than 句 驪 (一 名 貊) except that their ethnic name 小 水 貊 is based on the same Maek people, but simply different regions where they lived. In other words, “小 水 貊” simply means “the Maek people in 小 水 area”. It does not mean the two groups are different ethnies.

THIS is no different than "Shan Dong" Chinese and "Bei Jing" Chinese (assuming Chinese actually means the same people / ethny) or "my relatives in Xaan Xi" and "my relatives in Hu Bei".

Thus, when we interprete the description that “Barhae Malkal (渤 海 靺 鞨) Dae Joyong (大 祚 榮) was simply the Head of Barhae [/u] "AND" Malkal (渤 海 靺 鞨) and it does not mean that 靺 鞨 or 渤 海 靺 鞨 was originally an alternative branch (tribe) of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種)”

and this means that Dae Joyong (大 祚 榮) was a "Koguryo (高 麗) person living in Malkal (靺 鞨) area (高 麗 別 種)" or that he was a Koguryo person, but not belonging to Koguryo royal family.

This fact is supported by the fact that

渤 海 ， 本 號 靺 鞨 ， 高 麗 之 別 種 也 。 唐 高 宗 滅 高 麗， 徙 其 人 散 處 中 國 ， 置 安 東 都 護 府 於 平 壤 以 統 治 之 。 武后 時 ， 契 丹 攻 北 邊 ， 高 麗 別 種 大 乞 乞 仲 象 與 靺 鞨 酋 長 乞四 比 羽 走 遼 東 ， 分 王 高 麗 故 地 ， (新 五 代 史 卷 七 十 四, 四 夷 附 錄 第 三)

Whereas merely “靺 鞨” was used for "靺 鞨 酋 長" 乞四 比 羽, in case of 大 乞 乞 仲 象, the predicate words “高 麗 別 種” are used.

This means that though both of them were those people living in Malkal area (靺 鞨), they were distinguished in some way in terms of affiliation with Koguryo (高 麗) state or ethny.

This part of the record clearly indicates that 高 麗 別 種 大 乞 乞 仲 象 and 靺 鞨 酋 長 乞四 比 羽 had some different ethnic or political back grounds.

Whereas merely “靺 鞨” was used for靺 鞨 酋 長 乞四 比 羽, in case of 大 乞 乞 仲 象, the predicate words “高 麗 別 種” are used. This means that though both of them were those people living in Malkal area (靺 鞨), they were distinguished in some way in terms of affiliation with Koguryo (高 麗) state or ethny.

Thus, 高 麗 別 種 means
1) the alternative tribe of Koguryo (高 麗 別 種), such as a Non-Royal Family group or clan (大姓) of Koguryo people (高句麗王室﹕高姓).
2) or Koguryo people who settled in Sogmal Malkal area living together with them

Thus, 靺 鞨 酋 長 乞四 比 羽 was a 靺 鞨 and thus was a Chieftain, but 高 麗 別 種 大 乞 乞 仲 象 and Dae Joyong were Koguryo ethnic people who served as Generals in Malkal area, not as Chieftain!

Other KOREAN data and Japanese sources, as we discussed above, all support this conclusion.
So, we don't need so many books as you say, Tungus, and no more Manchu or Chinese claim using Manchu claim as a bridge!

You spent a lot time to explain the phrase, alternative tribe of Koguryo (高麗別種). Yet you still can hardly prove that 大乞乞仲象 and 大祚榮 were alternative tribe of Koguryo, let alone being Koguryo.

And I can easily cite sources that indicates that Bohai kingdom’s lineage was indeed Sumo Mohe：

<新唐书-列传第一百四十四- 北狄>
渤海，本粟末靺鞨附高丽者，姓大氏。高丽灭，率众保挹娄之东牟山，地直营州东二千里，南比新罗，以泥河为境，东穷海，西契丹。筑城郭以居，高丽逋残稍归之。

<XinTangShu>
Bohai, originally Sumo Mohe which affiliated with Koguryo, surname Da (大).


<新唐书•渤海传>
　云:“睿宗先天中, 遣使拜祚荣为左骁卫大将军、渤海郡王, 以所统为忽汗州, 领忽汗州都督, 自是去靺鞨号、专称渤海”。

<XingTangShu>
sent a mission to visit Dazuorong(大祚荣), entitled him (...3 tiltles…), since then eliminated the name of Mohe, for a name Bohai.


And here are Korean sources:

《三国史记 卷三十七•杂志六》
高丽(高句丽)盛时，士三十万抗唐为敌。则可谓地胜而强兵，至于季末君臣昏虐失道，大唐再出师，新罗援助讨平之。其地多入渤海靺鞨, 新罗亦得其南境。”
<Samguksagi>
During the prosperous era of Koguryo, Koguyo had 300 thousand soldiers against Tang. It was indeed a place with prosperity and strong military. At the end of Koguryo, Koguryo king and bureaucratic officials were corrupted with ruthless rules. Tang again marched military and pacified Koguryo with the assistance of Silla. Koguryo land mostly was taken by Bohai Mohe. Silla also got the south portion of Koguryo.

And Silla scholar’s ,崔致远, description with regard to the origin of Bohai kingdom.

《谢不许北国居上表》（《东文选》卷三十三“表笺”)
臣谨按渤海之源流也，句骊未灭之时，本为疣赘部落，靺羯之属，寔繁有徒，是名粟末小蕃，尝逐句骊内徙。其首领乞四羽及大祚荣等，至武后临朝之际，自营州作孽而逃，辄据荒丘，始称振国。

Bohai’s lineage, before Koguryo’s demise, was originally a clan of warts, belonging to the clan of Mohe, with many people, the name of these little barbarian is Sumo(Sumo Mohe), tried to move into or invade (presumably Zhongyuan) with Koguryo. His chiefs were chishiyu(乞四羽) and dazhuorong(大祚荣), ……

Edited by Tungus, 03 September 2006 - 05:13 AM.

[WangKon936]

And Silla scholar’s ,崔致远, description with regard to the origin of Bohai kingdom.

《谢不许北国居上表》（《东文选》卷三十三“表笺”)
臣谨按渤海之源流也，句骊未灭之时，本为疣赘部落，靺羯之属，寔繁有徒，是名粟末小蕃，尝逐句骊内徙。其首领乞四羽及大祚荣等，至武后临朝之际，自营州作孽而逃，辄据荒丘，始称振国。

Bohai’s lineage, before Koguryo’s demise, was originally a clan of warts, belonging to the clan of Mohe, with many people, the name of these little barbarian is Sumo(Sumo Mohe), tried to move into or invade (presumably Zhongyuan) with Koguryo. His chiefs were chishiyu(乞四羽) and dazhuorong(大祚荣), ……

Silla diplomatic documents called Barhae/Bohai the "Barbarian Country in the North" an indication that they didn't believe them to be the same ethnicity. However, Silla says very very little about their neighbor in the North.