[MC420]

heosuabi, on Oct 16 2007, 04:56 PM, said:

This is non-issue, now. Do PRC ever regret pursuing this kind of controversy? My prediction is that PRC will eventually lose the Tibet, Xinxiang by the process of independence movement with international support. Part of land in manuchuria could become an independent state, with some part bordering russia taken over by unified korea. Possibly the Yr 2030 AD, and forward.

Which turtle shell did you use, Heosuabi?

[Tungus]

heosuabi, on Oct 16 2007, 04:56 PM, said:

This is non-issue, now. Do PRC ever regret pursuing this kind of controversy? My prediction is that PRC will eventually lose the Tibet, Xinxiang by the process of independence movement with international support. Part of land in manuchuria could become an independent state, with some part bordering russia taken over by unified korea. Possibly the Yr 2030 AD, and forward.

Sure. And an unified Korea or seperated koreans must return northeast korean peninsula (the land annexed by koreans from Jurchens, where you koreans polluted it with nuclear testing. ) to a newly crteated and independent Manchuguo. Possibly around the yr 2031 AD, and forward. LOL!!!!

This post has been edited by Tungus: 16 October 2007 - 06:07 PM

[ty99]

This post has been edited by ty99: 06 February 2009 - 04:48 PM

[Tungus]

ty99, on Oct 16 2007, 06:16 PM, said:

First, Korea has every right to Koguryo history. We are the ones who kept the culture alive; Koguyro's capital in Pyongyang, North Korea, which the heart of the Korea today. The kingdom of Koguryo with its people MOVED from Manchuria to well within Korea's borders with its capital still the capital of Korea today. Not to mention Koguryo controlled 3/4 of the Korean peninsula including most of South Korea; and you are telling me Koguryo has nothing to do with Korea? That is enough evidence that modern Koreans are decendents Koguryo.

koguryo capitals were also in China. Japan controlled 100% of korean peninsula. So koreans should claim Japanese history? The reason I said there are very thin lineage between Koguryo and koreanic people is exactly because that there are very few evidences can prove the existence of an intensive relationship between koguryo and koreans.

Quote

how is it that Manchus have no connection to Koguryo? Please learn your history. There was no such thing as Manchu until 1400's. Koguryo existed from 40 CE to 600 AD well before Manchus even existed.

I know Manchus history very very well. The first ever documented ethnic group in Manchuria was "Sushen people". They were ancesters of Manchus and pre-dated koguryo and of course Sushen also pre-dated koreanic samhan people. Thank you.

Quote

Koreans are sinized? Most Korean can't read hanja; North Korea no longer use hanja. OTOH Manchus are no longer distinguishable from Han Chinese and are adapted the Chinese language and culture.

You really have a warped view of things and you are totally distorting Korean history to suit your own needs.

You are not getting my point. My point is cultures of Manchuria, be it Manchus, Koguryo, Jurchens, or Bohai,..., were not sinicized to the point to unrecognizbable to its original forms. So we can practically say historically Manchuria was a region with her own independent history and independent culture with relatively little relationship with Sino culture sphere which included Chinese central plan and korea. So Han Chinese and Korean should just stop wasting their time to pollute the history of Manchuria. Koreans' claim to Macnhuria history is no better than Han Chinese' Sino-centric thinking. Get it?　Ｉ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｏｂｊｅｃｔｉｏｎ　ｔｈａｔ　ｋｏｒｅａｎｓ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｃｌａｉｍ　Ｐｙｏｎｇｙｏｎｇ　Ｋｏｇｕｒｙｏ　ｃｕｌｔｕｒｅ．　Ｂｕｔ　ｄｏｎ＇ｔ　ｃｏｍｅ　ｎｅａｒ　ｔｏ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｒｉａ　ｔｏ　ｌｏｏｋ　ｆｏｒ　ｙｏｕｒ　ａｎｃｅｓｔｒｙ．　Ｙｏｕｏ　ｇｕｙｓ　ｈａｄ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｔｈｉｎ　ｌｉｎａｇｅ　ｔｏ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｒｉａ．　

This post has been edited by Tungus: 16 October 2007 - 07:10 PM

[WangKon936]

Tungus, on Oct 16 2007, 04:01 PM, said:

Sure. And an unified Korea or seperated koreans must return northeast korean peninsula (the land annexed by koreans from Jurchens, where you koreans polluted it with nuclear testing. ) to a newly crteated and independent Manchuguo. Possibly around the yr 2031 AD, and forward. LOL!!!!

Tungus,

This is a warning. The post above is borderline flame baiting.

[ty99]

This post has been edited by ty99: 06 February 2009 - 04:46 PM

[WangKon936]

ty99, on Oct 16 2007, 04:16 PM, said:

You really have a warped view of things and you are perverting history to suit your own needs.

You get a verbal warning for the quote above. Keep things civil.

[Tungus]

WangKon936, on Oct 16 2007, 06:50 PM, said:

Tungus,

This is a warning. The post above is borderline flame baiting.

Ｗｈｙ　ｉｓ　ｓｏ？　Ｋｏｒｅａｎｓ　ｃａｎ　ｋｅｅｐ　ｃｌａｍｉｎｇ　ｈｉｓｔｏｒｙ　ｏｆ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｒｉａ　ａｎｄ　ｗｅ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｓ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｒｉｇｈｔ　ｔｏ　ｃｌａｉｍ　Ｎｏｒｔｈｅａｓｔ　Ｋｏｒｅａｎ　ｐｅｎｉｎｓｕｌａ，　ｗｈｉｃｈ　ｗａｓ　
ｐａｒｔ　ｏｆ　ｊｕｒｃｈｅｎ＇ｓ　ａｎｃｅｓｔｒｉａｌ　ｈｏｍｅｌａｎｄ？　Ｗｈｙ？




　

[WangKon936]

Tungus, on Oct 16 2007, 04:31 PM, said:

koguryo capitals were also in China. Japan controlled 100% of korean peninsula. So koreans should claim Japanese history? The reason I said there are very thin lineage between Koguryo and koreanic people is exactly because that there are very few evidences can prove the existence of an intensive relationship between koguryo and koreans.
I know Manchus history very very well. The first ever documented ethnic group in Manchuria was "Sushen people". They were ancesters of Manchus and pre-date koguryo and of course Sushen also pre-dates koreanic samhan people. Thank you.
will repond to you later..

Tungus,

Several things to keep in mind. The connection between Koguryo and Korea are a lot deeper then you think. First of all, what about etymology: Koguryo==>Koryo==>Korea?

Moving on... Koguryo surnames, such as Yul, Ko, Kwak in Korea are rare, this is true. But the Samguk Sagi has an explaination of this. Many Koguryo settlers changed their names to Kim and Park once they became Silla citizens OR they were forced to adopt the more common Silla names as a form of assimilation. Another reason, common with the Kaesong Wangs, former subjects of Koguryo who became kings during the Koryo Dynasty. They changed their surnames because of persecution from the Yi Dynasty. In anycase, Korea has very view surnames compared to other countries because people want to have the surnames of the ruling families. This is also the reason why there are so many Lees in China and Guptas in India. However, the effect is more magnified in Korea because it's a smaller country.

Koguryo originated from Puyo. A branch of the Puyo went further south to found Paekje. Puyo clans merged with Yemaek people to create Koguryo and Puyo people merged with Han people to create Paekje. Yemaek people ranged in both southern Manchuria and northern Korea. The Han primarily in southern Korea. Todays Koreans are a blend of these three ancient strains: Puyo, Yemaek and Han. We speak a Han based language, but our shamanistic belief system is clearly more northern in origin. Many Korean as well as knowledgeable non-Korean scholars accept this or some variation of it. Those that deny any Korean connection with Koguryo and the older Yemaek tribes are generally scholars in the PRC, however, not all PRC scholars are in agreement.

Tungus, also... many scholars believe that the Sushen talked about in Chinese sources as appearing in the 6th century BC may not be related to Suchens who appeared later. The Chinese sources may have just been confused and given an earlier name to a more recent Moho migrant groups. Despite who these Suchen may have been (and it is very much in despute who the earlier Suchen actually were as the Chinese sources were so vauge and there is a lack of archeological evidence), proto-Korean people have been in southern Manchuria and the Korean peninsula longer. Archeology of megalithic rock formations, pottery and stone knifes would indicate they have been around till at least the prehistoric neolithic period.

[Tungus]

ty99, on Oct 16 2007, 06:51 PM, said:

Again, sorry to burst your bubble but actually that Manchurian capital was abandoned and laid defunct. Pyongyang became the central capital of Koguryo after the move. Therefore the central headquarters of Koguryo was within the borders of Korea not Manchuria.

Koreans have kept Koguryo culture alive for thousands of years. We've reminded others that we are the decendents by naming the Koryo dynasty as well as the present name of our country after Koguryo. Koguryo in its heyday controlled most of the Korean peninsula. I fail to see how they anyone with a straight face can say that our connection to Koguryo is "slim".

Ｉ　ｄｏｎ＇ｔ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｐｕｂｌｉｃａｌｌｙ　ｈｕｍｉｌａｔｅ　ｋｏｒｅａｎ　ｎａｔｉｏｎａｌｉｓｔｓ．Ｂｕｔ　ｈａｖｅ　ｙｏｕ　ｅｖｅｒ　ｒｅａｄ　＂ｋｏｒｙｏｓａ＂？　Ｉ　ｄｉｄ．　Ｐｌｅａｓｅ　ｃｉｔｅ　ｍｅ　ｏｎｅ　ｐａｓｓａｇｅ　ｔｈａｔ　ｋｏｒｙｏ　
ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｓａｉｄ　ｔｈａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｎａｍｅ　ｏｆ　ｋｏｒｙｏ　ｈａｄ　ａｎｙｔｈｉｎｇ　ｔｏ　ｄｏ　ｗｉｔｈ　Ｋｏｇｕｒｙｏ？　Ａｃｕｔａｌｌｙ　ｔｈｅ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｆｉｒｓｔ　ｓｅｎｔｅｎｃｅ　ｏｆ　Ｋｏｒｙｏｓａ　ｓｔａｔｅｄ　ｔｈａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ａｎｃｅｓｔｒｉａｌ
ｌｉｎｅａｇｅ　ｏｆ　Ｋｏｒｙａ　ｗａｓ　ＵＮＣＬＥＡＲ！！！　

Quote

Your Japanese example is totally irrelevent to this discussion. Koguryo didn't "occupy" Korean territories and if so Koreans are descendents of the Koguryo "occupiers" with relation through family lineage. Hence, we can rightfully claim them as ancestors. Koreans OTOH are not descendents of Japanese occupiers.

Sushen history is itself pretty flimsy. There is no concrete evidence that Sushen people existed let alone that the Manchus are descendants other than word of mouth. For instance, there is no archeological evidence of such people. Also, how are the Sushen people related to Koguryo?

who says there is no archeological evidences proving the existence of Sushen people. Yigeling archeological site （莺歌岭文化） in heilongjiang province is one. xinkailiu culture (新开流文化) is another. How is Sushen related koguryo? You have to ask some korean historians. They prononce sushen culture as "the great jusin culture". It's a tungisic culture. The founder of koguryo was tungisic-yaemak and manchus are tungusic-sushen. You see?... even korean scholors agree that koguryo were tunguisc. So we Manchus are indirectly related to Koguryo. However, koreanic people are not tunguisic. Koreanic Samhan people were not Tunguisic at all.

This post has been edited by Tungus: 16 October 2007 - 07:29 PM

[ty99]

This post has been edited by ty99: 06 February 2009 - 04:44 PM

[WangKon936]

Tungus, on Oct 16 2007, 05:12 PM, said:

Ｗｈｙ　ｉｓ　ｓｏ？　Ｋｏｒｅａｎｓ　ｃａｎ　ｋｅｅｐ　ｃｌａｍｉｎｇ　ｈｉｓｔｏｒｙ　ｏｆ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｒｉａ　ａｎｄ　ｗｅ　Ｍａｎｃｈｕｓ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｒｉｇｈｔ　ｔｏ　ｃｌａｉｍ　Ｎｏｒｔｈｅａｓｔ　Ｋｏｒｅａｎ　ｐｅｎｉｎｓｕｌａ，　ｗｈｉｃｈ　ｗａｓ　
ｐａｒｔ　ｏｆ　ｊｕｒｃｈｅｎ＇ｓ　ａｎｃｅｓｔｒｉａｌ　ｈｏｍｅｌａｎｄ？　Ｗｈｙ？

For accusing Koreans in general of "perverting" history. Those that are most guilty are internet savvy, thus you see more of the distorted history on the web rather then a Korean university library or classroom. You can't accuse Koreans in general just as much as you can accuse Chinese in general of "perverting" history.

Be more careful in your choice of words.

[WangKon936]

Tungus, on Oct 16 2007, 05:28 PM, said:

Ｉ　ｄｏｎ＇ｔ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｐｕｂｌｉｃａｌｌｙ　ｈｕｍｉｌａｔｅ　ｋｏｒｅａｎ　ｎａｔｉｏｎａｌｉｓｔｓ．Ｂｕｔ　ｈａｖｅ　ｙｏｕ　ｅｖｅｒ　ｒｅａｄ　＂ｋｏｒｙｏｓａ＂？　Ｉ　ｄｉｄ．　Ｐｌｅａｓｅ　ｃｉｔｅ　ｍｅ　ｏｎｅ　ｐａｓｓａｇｅ　ｔｈａｔ　ｋｏｒｙｏ　
ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｓａｉｄ　ｔｈａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｎａｍｅ　ｏｆ　ｋｏｒｙｏ　ｈａｄ　ａｎｙｔｈｉｎｇ　ｔｏ　ｄｏ　ｗｉｔｈ　Ｋｏｇｕｒｙｏ？　Ａｃｕｔａｌｌｙ　ｔｈｅ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｆｉｒｓｔ　ｓｅｎｔｅｎｃｅ　ｏｆ　Ｋｏｒｙｏｓａ　ｓｔａｔｅｄ　ｔｈａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ａｎｃｅｓｔｒｉａｌ
ｌｉｎｅａｇｅ　ｏｆ　Ｋｏｒｙａ　ｗａｓ　ＵＮＣＬＥＡＲ！！！　
at all.

Tungus,

The Koryosa didn't have to mention the connection, because Chinese and Japanese sources started calling Koguryo (Gao Gu Li) Koryo (Gao li) in the 4th or 5th century AD, long before Koguryo was destroyed. The connection didn't have to be explained because it was very very obvious to any contemporary.

[WangKon936]

ty99, on Oct 16 2007, 05:30 PM, said:

Just because of a theoretical so-called "tungus" category you have a better claim to Koguryo than Koreans who've continuously occupied for Koguryo territory since its fall in 600---1400 years. I see.

It is rather irrational to say that one theory trumps the other as things that distant in the past tend not to be so concrete or black and white. Koguryo can still have tungistic elements and still be strongly connected with Korea. Since the Moho tribes were important subjects of the Koguryo kingdom, I can see why the Jurchens would feel connected as well. However, all this talk of ONE must be True OVER the other is just not the right approach.

Just present your arguements on facts rather than emotion.