52 replies to this topic

[Andy Lau]

Tattoo culture is common in many cultures in the pacific including the Maori of New Zealand and the oldest domesticated rice grains (about 15,000 years old) in the world were found in Korea. Although the wet paddy rice cultivaltion techniques were first introduced to Korea around 2,500~3,000 years ago, this still predates the Qin Dynasty by centuries.

I don't know how you came to a conclusion that Chinese went to Japan via Korea during the Qin dynasty and planted the seeds of civilization. Archaeological evidence strongly indicates that transmission of civilization to Japan was as a direct result of mass migration from Korea to the Japanese islands.

Well i read from some article saying that when archaeologists dug up a skull in some place in southern japan, and compared it to one in Zhejiang - where the tattoo and rice cultivation was found - they found similarities of the bone structure and DNA.

[DearCoolZ]

I found this video about the root of japanese people. with english subtitle.








http://oniazuma.word.../10/09/idenshi/

Delves into genetic research which has totally changed notions of who the Japanese are. Overturns Korean claims 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.

Edited by DearCoolZ, 20 November 2007 - 06:53 PM.

[MC420]

I read somewhere that Buyeo nobles went to Kyushu island as they fled southward.

meateatinghorse, Andy Lau, both of you guys don't have a clue ?

you quote them as "got no clue"
so ... what about you
where is your clue
your clueless becomes blue ... or ... ?

koreans are koreans, japanese and japanese, and chinese are chinese. people from all over asia became part of modern day koreans but the dominant genes are from siberia. for japan, people from all over asia became part of modern japanese but the dominant genes are from pacific islanders. for china, not every people who ever lived in china proper and surrounding area became modern chinese, many migrated to west, north, and few who came to korea and japan are no longer represented in the modern chinese. koreans in china are koreans, and chinese in korea are chinese, and same for japan. regradless of how people migrated in ancient times do not matter since some of the people are no longer part of where they migrated from. chinese didn't become koreans and koreans didn't become japanese, there were some immegrants and exhange of political asylums. chinese are continental people, koreans and peninsula people, japanese are islander people. development of culture and economy were environmentally influenced and are differ for korea, china, japan. buddhism spread from central asia to n.wei dynasty to koguryo, and to beakje, silla, japan when china was in dark ages. early tang china was culturally influenced by silla, and later tang influenced neighbors but tang was influenced by persian culture and central asia first.

Your interpretation of modern nationalism and national boundary to link with people who lived several thousand years ago ... and you are still not able to make your point clear to readers yet.

First of all, if you indicate of the so-called "dominat genes from Siberia" to substantiate your assertion then .... show us your reference pls.

Exchanges of culture of course do flourish all the time and is more prevalent during our contemporary period than ever; however, should you make reference to the Tang's period then you're venture into a period whereas the flourish of Chinese culture at that time <== China was one of the most developed and advanced empires on earth (after the demise of the Roman empire). Give due credit to where it's due ... pls do not let your personal and subjective opinion to muddle real history. Again, should one is not focus merely on those superficial expresional culture then the East Asian people are historically bounded and shared their common value culture which is still based on the foundation of Confucianism, Taois, and Buddhism.

[DearCoolZ]

I read somewhere that Buyeo nobles went to Kyushu island as they fled southward.


meateatinghorse, Andy Lau, both of you guys don't have a clue ?


koreans are koreans, japanese and japanese, and chinese are chinese. people from all over asia became part of modern day koreans but the dominant genes are from siberia. for japan, people from all over asia became part of modern japanese but the dominant genes are from pacific islanders. for china, not every people who ever lived in china proper and surrounding area became modern chinese, many migrated to west, north, and few who came to korea and japan are no longer represented in the modern chinese. koreans in china are koreans, and chinese in korea are chinese, and same for japan. regradless of how people migrated in ancient times do not matter since some of the people are no longer part of where they migrated from. chinese didn't become koreans and koreans didn't become japanese, there were some immegrants and exhange of political asylums. chinese are continental people, koreans and peninsula people, japanese are islander people. development of culture and economy were environmentally influenced and are differ for korea, china, japan. buddhism spread from central asia to n.wei dynasty to koguryo, and to beakje, silla, japan when china was in dark ages. early tang china was culturally influenced by silla, and later tang influenced neighbors but tang was influenced by persian culture and central asia first.

show me evidences.

[Chanpuru]

for japan, people from all over asia became part of modern japanese but the dominant genes are from pacific islanders.

Hi, just to clarify, the three major ethnicities found on the Japanese islands (Ainu, the Japanese, and the Ryukyuans) are not Pacific Islanders.
all three are to varying degrees, descended from the Jomons and Yayoi.
Jomons: Proven to be mongoloid but also developed separately from other mongoloid groups living in mainland Asia. Because they're isolated, they tend to have some unique features such as larger eyes, stockier and hairier bodies, deeper brow bridges, etc. The light skinned controversy "which some people have mistakingly assumed they are Caucasians" is due to the climate in where they live which tends to be cloudy and has less sunny days. The Ryukyuans (who can vary between island to islands) also have Jomon descent and similar features, but are mistakingly assumed to have Pacific islander roots because they are dark. They are darker skinned simply because the region is very sunny. Like wise, Mongols are northern mongoloids but have a tendency to be darker skinned simply because the mongolian plains tend to be very sunny (but cold).

Yayoi: came to Japan much more recently than the Jomons. cultural and genetic evidence makes them much more closely related to Proto-Koreans and Proto-Tungusic peoples. Ainu tend to have stronger links with the Jomon than regular Japanese, with Ryukyuans being somewhere in betwee.

[Chanpuru]

Outdated theory .... overturned by most recent findings

近年、DNAの研究が進み、渡来系弥生人の多くは中国大陸の長江流域
近幾年.DNA的研究前進,很多Yayoi渡来系人的是中國大陸的長江流域
Recent years,DNA research indicated MAJORITY of Yayoi ethnicity originated in China's Yangtze River region

山東省付近から来たと言われている。
一般認為山東省附近來了。

また、稲のDNAもほぼ同様の結果を呈している。
同時，稻的DNA也大體上呈同樣的結果。

Japanese Source : http://wpedia.search...%...edia&LINK=1

your "recent" finding is nothing more than a theory as well. The level of evidence found by his research does not conclusively pin point the origins of the Yayoi being in Jiangsu and that area, all it is, is the "latest" evidence that supports one theory, which is in competition with already existing evidence that support another theory.

the theory that the Yayoi came from China's coast has generally went with out strong evidence, however Yamaguchi's research have found some evidence that might support (key word is MIGHT) that theory and relies heavily on some comparisons of limbs and skulls and PARTIAL DNA matching between selected examples.

However other theories such as those proposing a Korean Peninsula origin, or a far northern origin also have strong evidence as well, which also include genetic comparisons, archaeological examples from pottery, tools, etc, and even some linguistic comparisons of few known examples of proto-Japonic.

Unfortunately there are many nationalistic peoples who selectively choose one theory and misinterpret it while ignoring others in order to promote their pride. Your post shows nothing being overturned at all. Since this is primarily an English section, you should do your best to post or translate sources into English. Here is the same article but translated

http://www.trussel.c...ist/news111.htm

note that NOTHING is overturned, all the article states is evidence to support one theory.. not evidence that overturns other theories (which already have substantial amount of evidence supporting them).

Edited by ryukyurhymer, 24 November 2007 - 11:20 PM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

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

The problem is that 秦 could mean any early immigrant from China, not just Xu Fu, and this is generally how the origin of the surname Hata has been interpreted (i.e. 'Hata' is a generic label for descendants of immigrants from 'Qin', i.e. China).

The Xu Fu legend probably wasn't Chinese at all, but a Japanese one. Nihongi was the first source which hinted this. The Hada(Qin ren) which resided in Western Aya wasn't just a name that referred to all Chinese; they were directed to a specific prestiged group who claimed to be descended from Qin Shi Huang. The other Chinese were known as Han ren, not Qin ren. It was the Japanese which brought this legend to China during the five dynasties period under the monk Hong Shun probably around 927 AD. Since the Nihongi and this claim were somewhat related, I suspect that the legend was formed in Japan even prior to the 10th century. Its most probable that the Japanese at the time simply made up the Xu fu legend after examining Shiji and Hanshu to enhance their prestige as typical for many "Dong Yi" of the time. From an examination of Nihongi we know that many speeches made by these early Japanese emperors such as Tennu Jimmu were words taken right out of the mouth of Han Gaozu in Shiji and Han shu.
The popularization of Xufu as ancestors of at least a major portion of the Japanese population in modern times is not just a Chinese claim, but was made by a number of Japanese historians as well in the mid-20th century. In fact mainland China seem to be quite late in the reception of this theory.(Being prevalent in Hong kong, Taiwan and Japan first). The previous Japanese prime minister Tsutomu Hata also openly announced to the public that he was descended from Qin Shi huang through Xu fu.(I suspect that this might have political reasons).

Regarding the "legends" of the Japanese in ancientChinese written accords, Wei Zhi - Dong Yi Chuan (Official history of Wei, about Eastern Strangers, /Gishi-touiden/ -- jp, or known as /Gishi-wajinden/) reports about Japanese in AD 3c. Beside a description of the female governor and the tattooed faces of men, there is a part that says, "When asked, everyone answered they were descendants of TaiBo of Wu. Sima Qian also wrote that "wrote that Xu Fu said to Shi Huang Di of Qin, that he was leaving for the Eastern Sea to search for a medicine for eternal life in Fenglai islands, which the Chinese people consider to be Japan. He left with about 3000 people, but didn't come back because he became the king there. Certainly, we would view such written accords with skepticism since it appears to be written by speculation more than actual facts (people wrote what they know and certain the two Chinese writers had limited access to extremely limited sources of information back then).

The original source can be found in Jin Shu, Biography of the Four Yi:
晋书·四夷传：“倭人，在带方东南大海中，依山岛为国。地多山林，无粮田，食海物。旧有百余小国相接。至魏时，有三十国通好。户有七万。男子无大小，悉黥面纹身。自谓太伯之后。又言上古使诣中国，皆自称大夫。昔夏少康之子封于会稽，断发纹身，以避蛟龙之害。今倭人好沉没、取鱼，亦纹身以获水禽。”

This just gives more evidence to the fact that the Xufu was just a later legend since the original Wo people claimed to be descended from Taibo! Since many Japanese probably immigrated from the Wu region, that might be where the story originated(since Wu was also said to be founded by Taibo).

Edited by Borjigin Ayurbarwada, 09 August 2008 - 11:10 PM.