38 replies to this topic

[shunyadragon]

I am skeptical and not too trusting on the genetic studies on Manchus. They were mixing and assimilating Han Chinese and Koreans into their race even before they crossed the Great Wall. I think they did a DNA study on Giocangga, the father of Nurhachi (first emperor of Qing Dynasty) and found that he had the Haplogroup C3 (the most common one among Altaic peoples). Some of the modern Qing descendants refuse to participate in the genetic study, because it is said that the Manchus living in Beijing and Liaoning already shown to have fewer instance of Hap. C3. Only the Xibe and Manchus of Jilin/Heilongjiang/Inner Mongolia seem to be more pure.

You selectively misquote and cite genetic research and than say 'I am skeptical and not too trusting on the genetic studies on Manchus.' This is a problem that makes your position undefendable.

[shunyadragon]

Wilhelm Solheim's views that the transfer of Yayoi culture to Japan was a gradual process that took several thousands of years.

http://www.google.co...e...mp;aq=f&oq=

The three sacred imperial regalia ( 3 sacred treasures 三種の神器 ) -- the mirror, sword and curved jade jewel ( magatama 勾玉 ) -- all date back to the Yayoi or Jomon periods ( magatama also found in Korea peninsula ). Authentic magatama jewels have been found at Jomon sites.The sword has been linked to Jomon phallic stones and the earliest bronze swords in Japan are probably of Korean origin and date back to the end of the early Yayoi period. However, ritual swords of Japanese origin appear also in the Yayoi era. Mirrors of Chinese origin date from the Middle Yayoi and probably were soon manufactured locally.

Yayoi culture dates at least to about 500-400 BCE, although some of the latest AMS datings suggest it could go back as far as 900 BCE.

I also disagree with Solheim's conclusions. Korean migration and assimilation into the Japanese archepeligo took place over a much shorter period, probably from ~900 BCE to ~200-300 CE.

[peepee]

I also disagree with Solheim's conclusions. Korean migration and assimilation into the Japanese archepeligo took place over a much shorter period, probably from ~900 BCE to ~200-300 CE.

At least Solheim not as flaky as Jared Diamond ( a NE Asia history m**** discredited 40% Jomon & a good percentage of Chinese genes in Japanese ),from whom you drawn the conclusion that Japanese are basically Koreans.Totally hogwash.

As usual,hyper-inflate past ' Korean ' component & downplay the significance of Chinese to Japanese

If they were of same tribes,then how come they spoke ( still is today ) unintellegible languages ?! There were documented accounts of Korea migration between 4th-7th centuries,included nearly 50% of Han-Chinese ancestry.

The migrations in ' early ' Yayoi period happened way before there was any nation-state in Korea peninsula.

Using your logic,we can also say Chinese migration and assimilation into the Korea peninsula for being from present day CHINA !! In this case,both Japanese & Koreans are actually ' Chinese people ". How about that

I mean nations are made up of various peoples, tribes, clans who have united under a common language, culture, bond, historical ties etc Aren't Japanese Japanese because they speak Japanese, are from Japan, have a common culture, bond and history ?

How far do the results match different parts of Japan ? if you're from a region that received some migrants a few centuries ago how does it represent them ? Wouldn't it be more scientifically accurate to state, in Japan from the results conducted the findings were alot of so and so genetic markers were found. Instead of, Japanese aren't actually Japanese they are really just Chinese and Koreans with a bit of Japanese in them racially.

Edited by peepee, 27 October 2008 - 11:42 PM.

[MockTurtle]

If they were of same tribes,then how come they spoke ( still is today ) unintellegible languages ?! There were documented accounts of Korea migration between 4th-7th centuries,included nearly 50% of Han-Chinese ancestry.

I don't think they were from the same tribes. Before nation states began to solidify in Korea, there must have been hundreds of tribes living on the peninsula. It's impossible to know if they were all the same people or not but it's certainly incorrect to say that the tribes who stayed behind in Korea were the same as the tribes who migrated to Japan. These tribes may have been totally different from each other for all we know. If you look at pre-colonial North America, there were hundreds of tribes there, who may have LOOKED similar to the stray explorer, but they all had their distinct languages and customs, even if they lived in the same area. Still, you can't discount the fact that a good deal of the immigrants WERE in fact, from the Korean peninsula. Where did you find that info about Chinese immigrants? Does it matter? I think every East Asian (Mongols included) must be part Han Chinese.

The migrations in ' early ' Yayoi period happened way before there was any nation-state in Korea peninsula.

Using your logic,we can also say Chinese migration and assimilation into the Korea peninsula for being from present day CHINA !! In this case,both Japanese & Koreans are actually ' Chinese people ". How about that

Still doesn't get rid of the fact the migrating tribes were from the Korean peninsula (and China). People call them "Korean tribes" because they lived in Korea, and if they lived in Korea, there is a good chance that they were the ancestors of the modern day Korean people. So while it may be incorrect to say that Japanese = Korean, it is true that Koreans and Japanese are very close genetically. The present day PRC does not, in my opinion, represent only Han Chinese. People call it "China," but it fact it is quite different from the earlier Chinese dynasties, where the only true citizens were the Han (Manchus and Mongols don't count because they only functioned as the upper classes). "Chinese people" in the modern sense can mean almost anything. If your parents were from Belgium but you were born and raised in China, spoke Chinese, and acted Chinese, then you are Chinese. Korean-Chinese who live in Yanbian today are counted as Chinese nationals, but they are still not Han Chinese, who represent the true historical Chinese people. English settled in America, but that does not mean the Americans today are English. In fact, both parties would probably be highly offended at such a claim.

I mean nations are made up of various peoples, tribes, clans who have united under a common language, culture, bond, historical ties etc Aren't Japanese Japanese because they speak Japanease, are from Japan, have a common culture, bond and history ?

How far do the results match different parts of Japan ? if you're from a region that received some migrants a few centuries ago how does it represent them ? Wouldn't it be more scientifically accurate to state, in Japan from the results conducted the findings were alot of so and so genetic markers were found. Instead of, Japanese aren't actually Japanease they are really just Chinese and Koreans with a bit of Japanese in them racially.

I don't think anyone will try to claim that a Japanese is not a Japanese. "Japanese" is a valid ethnic group, just like "Mestizo" or "Filippino" are valid as ethnic terms. A lot of people say Japan is perfectly homogenous and that's all there is to it. That's as fallacious a statement as "there is such a thing as a pure Chinese." What are Koreans? Siberians, Han Chinese, steppe people and the stray Okinawan all mixed together. I don't think there is any pure "Japanese" gene unless you're looking at the Ainu, and attempting to tie the Ainu to every single Yamato to prove that Japanese are, in fact, unique would be a highly laughable endeavor.

[peepee]

I don't think they were from the same tribes. Before nation states began to solidify in Korea, there must have been hundreds of tribes living on the peninsula. It's impossible to know if they were all the same people or not but it's certainly incorrect to say that the tribes who stayed behind in Korea were the same as the tribes who migrated to Japan.These tribes may have been totally different from each other for all we know.

Still, you can't discount the fact that a good deal of the immigrants WERE in fact, from the Korean peninsula. Where did you find that info about Chinese immigrants ? Does it matter ? I think every East Asian ( Mongols included ) must be part Han Chinese.

Still doesn't get rid of the fact the migrating tribes were from the Korean peninsula (and China). People call them "Korean tribes" because they lived in Korea, and if they lived in Korea, there is a good chance that they were the ancestors of the modern day Korean people.So while it may be incorrect to say that Japanese = Korean, it is true that Koreans and Japanese are very close genetically. The present day PRC does not, in my opinion, represent only Han Chinese. People call it "China," but it fact it is quite different from the earlier Chinese dynasties, where the only true citizens were the Han (Manchus and Mongols don't count because they only functioned as the upper classes). "Chinese people" in the modern sense can mean almost anything.

Exactly ...


No one ever denied migrations from Korea peninsula,but only disputed hyper-inflated suggestion of Japanese are basically Koreans or predominate Korean ancestry because it's hogwash.

It's recorded in Japan's Shoban 諸蕃 ( or 蕃 別 banbetsu ),a family registry designated Japanese clans known to be of continental descent.


【漢帰化族】 naturalized Han-Chinese

周人の末裔【大里氏】【長野氏】【広野氏】【三宅氏】【山田氏】【伊部氏】【白鳥氏】【白原氏】【調氏】【 長岑氏】【首氏】【水海氏】
　
秦の始皇帝の末裔【秦氏】【太秦氏】【惟宗氏】【朝原氏】【大蔵氏】【河勝氏】【桜田氏】【宗氏】【高尾氏】【時原氏】【寺氏】【 秦原氏】【広幡氏】【物集氏】【三林氏】【井手氏】【川辺氏】【中家氏】【原氏】【小宅氏】【井手氏】【長 田氏】【巨知氏】【長岡氏】【奈良氏】【大滝氏】【山村氏】
　　　　　　　　
漢の高祖の末裔【厚見氏】【馬氏】【浄野氏】【栗栖氏】【古志氏】【高志氏】【桜野氏】【武生氏】【高道氏 】【玉作氏】【豊岡氏】【春沢氏】【桧前氏】【文氏】【尾津氏】【村主氏】
　　　　　　　　
後漢霊帝の末裔【坂上氏】【大蔵氏】【丹波氏】【調氏】【木津氏】【桧原氏】【内蔵氏】【山口氏】【平田氏 】【佐太氏】【谷氏】【桜井氏】【路氏】【文氏】【桧前氏】【蔵人氏】【志賀氏】【広原氏】【池辺氏】【栗 栖氏】
　
その他漢帝の末裔【桑原氏】【下氏】【桧前氏】【若江氏】【田辺氏】【谷氏】【豊岡氏】【八戸氏】【高安氏 】【高道氏】【春井氏】【河内氏】
　
漢の国人の末裔【大原氏】【吉水氏】【真神氏】【台氏】【交野氏】
　
魏人の末裔【高向氏】【上氏】【高根氏】【筑紫氏】【平松氏】【雲梯氏】【郡氏】【河内氏】【河原氏】【鋤 田氏】【野上氏】【広橋氏】【穴太氏】
　
呉人の末裔【蜂田氏】【深根氏】【松野氏】【和楽氏】【工氏】【祝部氏】【額田氏】【勝氏】【上氏】【刑部 氏】【茨田氏】【高向氏】【小豆氏】
　
漢人の末裔【伊吉氏（壱岐氏）】【交野氏】【広海氏】【吉水氏】
　
燕人の末裔【赤染氏】【赤染部氏】【常世氏】【筆氏】
　
唐人の末裔【江田氏】【清宗氏】【清海氏】【清川氏】【浄山氏】【栄山氏】【千代氏】【新長氏 】
　
その他の漢土帰化族【大山氏】【大石氏（生石氏）】【高丘氏】【朝妻氏】【清村氏】【春村氏】


http://www.myj7000.j.../clan/03/03.htm


There are books published on non-Yamato indigenous Hayato & Kumaso were actually related to Chinese ' Wu-Yue ' peoples of China's coastal Jiangsu & Zhejiang provinces.

http://www.amazon.co...6/dp/4797471239


Although there is no doubt on genetic closeness of Japanese and Korean,but its relatedness is ' relative '.I am sure Japanese of ' definite ' Korean ancestry should be closest to modern Koreans,but most other Japanese aren't.in the case of multi-ethnic PRC,specific provinces & region ( combined area larger than Japan or Korea peninsula ) have populations genetically close to Japanese & Koreans.On the other hand,Koreans have no genetic relation to Jomon ancestry which is near 50% of Japanese gene pool.

Japanese typically consider themselves 50% 縄文人 ( Jomon ) & 50% 弥生人 ( Yayoi ) not Siberian Korean Chinese Mongol.

Jomon contribution to modern Japanese @ 40.3%, with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%). On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly there is no evidence of Yayoi lineages in the Ainu.More recently,Yayoi Y chromosomes that originated in Southeast Asia expanded to Korea and Japan with the spread of wet rice agriculture.

Koreans do not have Y chromosome D2.The D2 system is Ainu 88%, the Okinawa people 56%, mainland Japan 50～56% and Korea 0%.


1 academic research on ' dual origins ' of the Japanese.

A set of 81 Y chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) was used to trace the origins of Paleolithic and Neolithic components of the Japanese paternal gene pool, and to determine the relative contribution of Jomon and Yayoi Y chromosome lineages to modern Japanese. Our global sample consisted of >2,500 males from 39 Asian populations, including six populations sampled from across the Japanese archipelago. Japanese populations were characterized by the presence of two major (D and O) and two minor (C and N) clades of Y chromosomes, each with several sub-lineages. Haplogroup D chromosomes were present at 34.7% and were distributed in a U-shaped pattern with the highest frequency in the northern Ainu and southern Ryukyuans. In contrast, haplogroup O lineages (51.8%) were distributed in an inverted U-shaped pattern with a maximum frequency on Kyushu. Coalescent analyses of Y chromosome short tandem repeat diversity indicated that haplogroups D and C began their expansions in Japan ~20,000 and ~12,000 years ago, respectively, while haplogroup O-47z began its expansion only ~4,000 years ago. We infer that these patterns result from separate and distinct genetic contributions from both the Jomon and the Yayoi cultures to modern Japanese, with varying levels of admixture between these two populations across the archipelago.The results also support the hypothesis of a Central Asian origin of Jomonese ancestors, and a Southeast Asian origin of the ancestors of the Yayoi,contra previous models based on morphological and genetic evidence.

http://www.springerl...1g0300430k6215/


it's fallacy to regard Japanese and Korean nationalities are closer genetically than all other NE Asian groups.

It's like saying British ( English Scots Welsh Irish ) are more closer related to some specific continental European nationalities ( they too are mixed with other European tribes and people of non-European race ) than with multi-racial & multi-ethnic America ( by discounting 50 million+ British ancestry ) because the population has non Anglo-Saxon ( or Nordic ) genetic component of 45 million Italians,a few million Greeks,many million White-Hispanics,some racially intermixed Whites,Asian-Americans,' Asiatic ' native Americans,Black-American,etc ..... therefore ' pull ' North America away from Europe.

Frankly,it's a pathetic argument.

Let's me repeat,it's a bias has aspects that reflect cultural/social/historical currents of the moment ( This debate wouldn’t be worth mentioning if it's true or Koreans and non-NE Asian surrogates wouldn't harp on it in cyberspace ).It's a fad of late will fade in due time.

Edited by peepee, 27 October 2008 - 05:15 PM.

[MockTurtle]

it's fallacy to regard Japanese and Korean nationalities are closer genetically than all other NE Asian groups.

It's like saying British ( English Scots Welsh Irish ) are more closer related to some specific continental European nationalities ( they too are mixed with other European tribes and people of non-European race ) than with multi-racial & multi-ethnic America ( by discounting 50 million+ British ancestry ) because the population has non Anglo-Saxon ( or Nordic ) genetic component of 45 million Italians,a few million Greeks,many million White-Hispanics,some racially intermixed Whites,Asian-Americans,' Asiatic ' native Americans,Black-American,etc ..... therefore ' pull ' North America away from Europe.

Frankly,it's a pathetic argument.

Let's me repeat,it's a bias has aspects that reflect cultural/social/historical currents of the moment ( This debate wouldn’t be worth mentioning if it's true or Koreans and non-NE Asian surrogates wouldn't harp on it in cyberspace ).It's a fad of late will fade in due time.

What group would you say the Japanese are closest to, if not the Koreans? Disregarding the Jomon gene (which no one has except Japanese, anyway), wouldn't Koreans be closest? Of course, Chinese peoples also figure into this, but as I said before, most East Asian peoples are mixed with them.

Perhaps the Japanese are truly unique. But a large number of people refuse to buy into that, so the debate must go on. I don't think it's a fad, though. I've seen just as much Japanese hogwash as Chinese or Korean hogwash on the matter, which leads me to believe that the Japanese themselves aren't so comfortable with their own genes as they claim to be. This argument isn't recent, and it'll probably continue until the irrefutable truth is discovered (which may never happen).

[peepee]

What group would you say the Japanese are closest to, if not the Koreans ? Disregarding the Jomon gene (which no one has except Japanese, anyway), wouldn't Koreans be closest?

Perhaps the Japanese are truly unique. But a large number of people refuse to buy into that, so the debate must go on. I don't think it's a fad, though. I've seen just as much Japanese hogwash as Chinese or Korean hogwash on the matter, which leads me to believe that the Japanese themselves aren't so comfortable with their own genes as they claim to be. This argument isn't recent, and it'll probably continue until the irrefutable truth is discovered (which may never happen).

As I've previously stated that Japanese & Korean relatedness is ' relative ' and the subject is trivial except when it's used as ' political tool ' like 日鮮同祖論 by Japanese imperialists in the past to justified annexation of Korea peninsula.So,the debate isn't recent as you pointed out and a fad as I've proved it to be.It's some S Koreans pursue Japanese & Koreans brotherhood relationship now recycle this half-truth c**p in recent years in cyberspace.Long before I got involved into Japanse ancient history and genetics,never thought they have been that related to Koreans or Chinese.As I went back and forth debating ( extensive reading of ) those issues and more assessible credible materials available online,I found out Japanese are more of ' indigenous stock ' than many of us have believed.In my opinion,Japanese and Siberian peoples ( include some of N America west coastal native tribes ) are genetically closer with highest percentage shared DNA.Of-course,you can say Koreans are closest kins of a percentage Japanese ethnicity on mutual ancestry but not overall average Japanese population though.

Only Japanese and Sinophobic non-East Asian Japanophiles romanticize ' Nihonjiron ' concept,a theory promotes uniqueness & superiorty of Japanese ethnicity.

Regarding the Japanese have been uncomfortable discussing their ' Asian ' roots.There is ' twofold ' to this matter .

( 1 ) Japanese is one Asian ethnicity consciously ' submerge ' their own family origins in the name of ' Yamatoizaton '.
( 2 ) Fukuzawa Yukichi ( 福澤 諭吉 ) instrumentally led Japan & Japanese ' out of Asia ' mentally and pschologically.

Edited by peepee, 27 October 2008 - 11:35 PM.

[MockTurtle]

I found out Japanese are more of ' indigenous stock ' than many of us have believed.In my opinion,Japanese and Siberian peoples ( include some of N America west coastal native tribes ) are genetically closer with highest percentage shared DNA.Of-course,you can say Koreans are closest kins of a percentage Japanese ethnicity on mutual ancestry but not overall average Japanese population though.

Which Siberian peoples and which North American tribes?

[pangrui]

quote:DNA ANALYSIS OF THE JAPANESE Y CHROMOSOME USING 7 BINARY MARKERS
Ncapillary electrophoresis has been developed. To increase success rates for obtaining typing
results from degraded DNA samples, PCR primers were designed to make PCR targets as short
as ~100 bp. By simultaneously analyses of 7 Y chromosome binary markers (M130, M131, M57,
M125, M175, M122 and M134), 1346 Japanese male individuals were divided into 7 Yhaplogroups
i.e., C-M130_6.17%, C-M131_5.65%, D-M57_14.41%, D-M125_18.2%, O-M175_34.18%, O-M122_11% and O-M134_8.47%, and a "no mutation detected" group.
Frequencies of C-M130, C-M131, D-M57, D-M125, O-M175, O-M122,
O-M134, and the "no mutation detected" group were 0.0617, 0.0565, 0.1441, 0.182, 0.3418, 0.11,
0.0847 and 0.0193, respectively. No non-specific PCR amplification was observed from 155
Japanese female DNA samples. Y-haplogroup typing was successful in analyzing DNA mixture
samples containing 1ng male DNA and 500ng female DNA. Y-haplogroup typing was also
successful in analyzing bloodstain samples stored at ambient temperature for 23 years, indicating
the ability of our system to analyze degraded DNA samples.
Samples from which no mutation was detected by simultaneous analyses of the 7 binary markers
were further analyzed for M174, M214 and P36 by direct sequencing. These were found to
belong to the D-haplogroup (M174 mutation positive), NO-haplogroup (M214 mutation positive)
and Q-haplogroup (P36 mutation positive). Their frequencies in the 1346 Japanese male subjects
were 0.0015, 0.0141 and 0.0037, respectively.
---------------------------------------------
so the M134 propotion in Japanese is only 8.47%,but the total M122 propotion is 8.47%+11%,and the M134 is not the dominant in the Japanese who take the M122