What are 'Yue' culture influences found in Japan?

Don't ignore Cham..

One small point apparently Tongking and your 安南 (annam) have co existed side be side at one time. I had always thought the two were the same geopolitical entity? I speculate that Tongking is North Vietnam. Annam is Mid Vietnam. Cham is South vietnam. I wondered how applicable such a scenario to the events of Au Lac as in which part is Au and which part is Lac.

I enjoyed reading in the great tome of western military annual Qin General Ming Tien and Chao To led a number of epic campaigns South of the Yangtze and there by conquered Fukien, Kwangtung, Kwangsi, Tongking, and later Korea. Now disappointingly after reading up on The Biography of Meng Tian in the Records of the Grand Historian of Sima Qian translated by Burton Watson, I can not found any of the grand deeds mentioned above. This has put serious doubt on whether the afore mentioned events really happened. Can anyone enlighten me on the matter? As it stands there is no historical documentation that Ming Tien and Chao To conquered any of the above places.

I think we need to clarify the terms Mongoloid, Southern Mongoloid, Yue, Southern Yue, Luo Yue, Cham, Khmer.
Mongoloid is a type in East Asia. Southern Mongoloid type includes all "Han" Chinese, and SouthEast Asians. Yue included all ethnics in South China. Southern Yue included all ethnics in SouthWestern GuangDong, SouthEastern, SouthWestern and Central GuangXi, Yunnan, and Northern Vietnam. Luo Yue included all people in SouthWestern GuangDong, SouthEastern GuangXi, and Northern Vietnam. Cham included people in Central Vietnam. Khmer included people in Southern Vietnam, or rather the other way around, together with mostly Luo Yue and Cham, and 5 ethnics Fujianese, Hakka, Teochew, GuangDongese, and Hainanese, from the 3 SouthEastern provinces of China: Fujian, GuangDong, and Hainan.
I think however, that we should not limit our discussion to the litteral phrase of the title of the thread, namely the relation between the southern yue and the vietnamese.
Then, I would say that the Cham is an Austronesian speaking, and consisted of 2 subethnics: that descended from the tribe of the betel in North Central Vietnam, and that from that of the coconut in South Central Vietnam. There is still a slight difference linguistically, though they all speak Vietnamese now, except for a small unintegrated population, and probably physically a bit different as well.
People in Southern Vietnam is predominantly so called Jing, which is an ambiguous term as the term Han. The Southern type is a mixture of Cham, Funanese-Khmer hybrid.
There is a slight physical difference between the Northern Vietnamese and North Central Vietnamese type, the Southern Central type, and the Southern type; so delicate that even I, being fairly race concious, cannot distinguish.
About the Japanese, I heard a theory that the Wa descended from refugees from Wu and Yue fleeing takeover during The Warring States Period. Before that, the 12000 year old Jomon Culture probably got severed from Mainland China because of the last time the sea level went up (100 meters) and basically stay up till now. Then the Hemudu Culture occurred 7000 years ago, then a bit later, the Dawenkou Culture probably founded by the Hemudu Culture people (this is the link between the Yue and the DongYi). Both the Hemudu and the Jomon Cultures are Australoid. Besides, I heard that in Japan there were localities named Yue Anterior (Tien in Vietnamese Chinese), Yue Zhong, and Yue Posterior (Hau in Vietnamese Chinese). These could indicate three waves of Yue immigration to Japan.

I may got wrong "Chinese" - "Burmese" comparison above, but "Burmese" can be changed to "Karen" (which I'm sure look Indo).

Well, it's too rough to assume correspondence Y-lineage to race. Mongolian shares C/RSP4Y/M216 with Australoid?
Moreover, the dominant lineage in China (almost everywhere) is M175/M214 descents such as M122.

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


In my thought 'Tongking' was a city, while Annam was a state/country.
*Hà Nội was once named Thăng Long 昇龍 and also once Đông Kinh 東京 (well, in Modern Accent)*

http://www.uglychinese.org/vietnamese.htm


Edit: I thought your 4 quotes was to avoid long post. Search the book Cihai 辞海 if you can use Mandarin. Or just ask Ah Xiang, the guy who runs the uglychinese.org

I think you should clarify your assumption on the long sentence here.
(I think you meant) Khmer included 5 ethnics Fujianese, Hakka, Teochew, GuangDongese, and Hainanese? Those 5 ethnics look no similar to native Cambodian/Khmer. I can only say that those ethnics exist in Cambodia.


Yes, I think so.

I also don't know that types are called 'North Chinese'.

What 'Yue' is used here? Yue+ 先/中/后. And what is 'localities'?

Grasy, Thanks for the url to

http://www.uglychinese.org/vietnamese.htm

The article is very long and complicated. But are they claiming that the 'bai yue' people are descendents of the xia dynasty ?

That means that the han and bai yue people actually have same ancestors ?

Or is it due to my misunderstanding of the article ? I wish these guys would write that article in a more systematic and simplified manner.

That's a long article, I may also read wrongly but however somehow I long ago started to think it's not so credible in that section.

May be a confusion between Yue kingdom and BaiYue.

But if anyone wishes to make theory that they originated the same, may be it's the conclusion.

Only GuJian (sp?) claimed to be descended from Dai Yu of Xia to justify his reign to his people and/or his competitors. Whether his people were related to the Xia people is not the same matter. Such as the English had Danish and Norman kings, Gu Yue could easily have a Hua king, if he were indeed Hua.

AhXiang obvious did lots of research, as demonstrated by the volume of his writing on his website. And I found it covered so much and serves as a quick place to find information about East Asian people history, but convenience can be dangerous and unscientific. As with most current Chinese scholars, he relies too much on classic writings without much critical questioning, and doesn't use it in conjunction with other disciplines.

Sorry, what I meant was that the people in Southern Vietnam is a mix of, in order of importance, Luo Yue, Cham, 5 ethnics from Fujian, GuangDong, and Hainan, and Khmer. (There exists unintegrated Khmer populations there as well).
I don't have those localities in Japan that I mentioned. I used a book about anthropology written by an amateur (albeit a good one), and he himself did not clarify, unfortunately (in the spirit of a true amateur, indeed). I have no reason to doubt him, and I think since he has pointed out that fact, it can easily be researched, though it would be too time consuming for lay people like us (I'm assuming your interest in this is similar in scope as mine).
The North Chinese to me are those who live North of ShangHai and Hunan, East of ShanDong, excluding Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, and XingJiang.

I must protest strenuously that I did not get my San Miao information from the
http://www.uglychinese.org/vietnamese.htm He did not even give a reference source for that particular information where as I did. He does however introduce other researchers by name from whom he implied he got his ideas. He also covered the Fujian Bai Yue relationship in regard to the Yue Kingdom. This theory I have exposited long before. He did not attributed it to me which would indicate it is following a pattern where I have complaint previously about a number of people you had used my original ideas with out proper attribution. A final note I have never visited the site before.

The world does not collect little information about the ethnic minorities. Most of the ethnic minorities had the tendency to isolate themselves from flat plain areas and retreat themselves to live on mountainous areas in order to avoid conflict with other groups as much as possible and retain their own identity. The Yue Kingdom used to on flat land and they had a good history with China, a well known country in the world. Even with latin American people, they always call me Chinese although I told them that I am not. Among them, I would have to accept what they call me but among the real Chinese, I would prefer myself to be Vietnamese.

Goujian. Yeah, actually Zhao Tuo himseld is already a very good example of that.


Who claimed that you did?

How to justify if it's you that think it the first?
However, I can't find your sites if there are.

I guessed the 'localties' was place names, but I found none actually.

I know where North Chinese should live in, but I don't know how is one called by look as 'North Chinese' 'South Chinese' except some strange types of "Han Chinese".

Sorry, yes, they are places; but you didn't find any? Oh, well...

I see what you mean now. I guess being tall, having fairer skin color, narrower and taller nose that covers the nostrils more, smaller eyes, single eyelids, longer face.
But Northern Chinese traits are present in South China, even among ethnic Vietnamese (some of them even look Korean), and Southern Chinese traits are present in North China, even Korea (my neighbor is Korean, and she is pretty dark).
Now, I'd like to talk straight for a minute. I heard a Northern Chinese making fun of Southern Chinese as having the opposite of these traits. Needless to say, Southern Chinese do not appreciate such attitude. But they have the same attitude towards Southeast Asians. Even Vietnamese have that attitude towards other Southeast Asians (though I also heard criticism of small eyes and single eyelids, or square and flat faces).
I guess in Europe, there is such a thing as Nordic pride as well, and some of the above traits, which are also prevalent in Northern Europe because of similar temperature, are also prefered. This mentality has been adopted by many among Southern peoples as well, as this is the norm of our age.
But I wonder how it was when Rome, a nation in Southern Europe, ruled. And how it was when the Arabs colonized Spain, and was more advanced.
Asthetics is something subjective, and it tends to reflect people's preferences, which in turn favors the strong of the times. That is not to say there isn't real beauty in some of the preferred traits, just that what we call taste may be partial. Hopeful in the coming integrated world, taste will be more balanced.

It would appear at first to be quite fair to criticize my new theories. I accept that. However it is perfectly justified to argue that such criticism is done unfairly. When such unfair criticism were done unjustly and is done often enough with the intention to deliberately to overload the time and effort capacity of the respondent or the capacity of the reader to retain the clarity of the argument then it is perfectly justified to criticize the criticism of my new theories. Unjustly also in the sense the criticism is too short with out substance and there are many of them and many of them are written in anarchic style which make it very hard for the respondent and the reader to understand what were the substance of the argument. Many criticisms were short and trifle. Many criticisms were not exactly right and not exactly wrong which can leave me with a false sense of security as I held my theories to be still correct and therefore not worth my effort to defend myself. For example in my justify criticism of the current understanding of the complex Vietnam, Yue, Austro-Asiatic, Sinitic, theories, I do not criticize them with just a few word sentence and I do not use a few word sentence criticism repeatedly to under mine the validity of these theories. What I do was I present a theory of my own or I use a theory that is already in existence and which I support to argue against the theories I do not agree with. This is done with long sentenced paragraph and/or paragraphs. Presenting theories of my own to counter argue some of the current theories is not a trifle matter as I open myself for inspection and criticism. On the other hand continuously attack with many short trifle criticisms is unfair. In such cases it is not worth the respondent to answer.




I respond to implied future accusation/criticism as well as to current literal ones as many readers of the forum are becoming aware. For example long before now readers of this forum have witness a number of times where I have caught people’s unfair attempts at swindle or plagiarize original ideas with which I have claimed to be first. I think I need moderators of this forum as well as the general readers of this forum as witnesses to testify to me being the original propagator of my new theories. It is sad that I can not rely on hostile opponents or aggressive critics of my new theories in this forum to judge impartially on my disputes with regard to plagiarism.

^Well, then the 'seemingly wrong' thing is actually 'little' errors who can write long paragraphs? OK, let everybody try.

No one accused you of taking San Miao theory. About the sites you are accusing of 'plagiarism stuff' are ouside the control of CHF.

Some of the things you claimed to be 'originally yours' anybody can think of it. If you didn't take others theory, then it must be independent development. Some of 'theories' you claimed are found in old sites which are more than 1 years old, I've visited there long ago.

I can't find where your placed your theory outside CHF... Did you use other names?

I do not think you are impartial enough to judge fairly as demonstrate from your determine criticism of my theories. As such I do not think you can fill the capacity as an arbiter in my protestation at plagiarism. I do welcome your citation of these many cases of plagiarism by which I have become more aware of the actual situation than would be the case even though your presentation of such cases is in the form of under mining my protestation of being wronged.

Regarding the etymology of Yue 越, the radical 走 zou does fit the description of the Bai Yue of the Yue Kingdom and the Hakka. This is in the sense of refugees as travelers who may have to flee from dangers and pursuers from time to time. However the radical 戉 is an unknown factor for me. Could anyone enlighten me on the last?

Maybe I need higher resolution map to find them, if there are any.

Tall and skin color do not qualify to be an important trait for me, i.e. affected too much living style. e.g. I am lazy to do sport so I'm fat and short. Japanese males were very short, shorter than Indonesian, and that was far past before WW2. Heavy change of lifestyle have changed Japanese very much.
However, with these very small eyes and single eyelids I'm still commented to be Southerner, don't know why.
I've heard that Northerner being squarer face.
Too long a face are claimed by someones e.g.DearCoolZ to be from Caucasian. We know Mongolian and North Chinese are buffer between Caucasoid and Mongoloid.
About higher nose bones, I don't see anything is so different as the frequencies of highnose is seemingly almost the same between Beijinger and HongKonger. (both are low)


Unless very extreme, darkness is not a good qualifier.


Northern Chinese making South Chinese by the features above is not very relevant as they are not that different. As South Chinese and Malays there are large difference of physical appearance.
Vietnamese are often said to be too East-Asian by other SEA. I've also heard that Vietnamese treated its neighbors as Barbaric. "Chinese" enough to make that attitude.

Well, I think East Asians mostly look 'Southern', excluding Mongolian and close neighbors; even Kazakh, Manchu, Japanese and Korean I saw look more like Southern. (maybe you can point me out which I got wrong)

Yeah, but where can I find your things (beside CHF)?


越 was made by meaningsignify+soundsignify, i.e. 越 sounded like 戉 and meaning related to 走. It did not mean refugee, but meant 'pass' (in fact till now this meaning is still preserved).
戉 itself is said to be meaning+sound while the meaning is close to 戈 and sound is the remaining part.
Sorry I can't type Chinese from here maybe I'll add somethings later.

Your questions have become more of a distraction and hold up in the continuation of discussion on this topic. Beside lack of relevancy it is also a small intrusion in to my private activities out side this forum. I wrote the latter as it is not advantageous for me to disclose my very limited activities on the internet. My criticism of a one time previous inaccuracy of yours has been very helpful but now I have to limit myself. Your exposition of 走 zou is not exactly right in regard to discredit my explanation of the radical. This is because I am quite correct in my explanation. You have misled readers who do not know as well as yourself and me. Your alternative explanation is not wrong because that is the simple explanation. You have just limit your explanation to one simple case where like most words and radicals there are a number of different meanings and a number of different usages. However you are wrong in excluding my meaning and usage. For example in English the word inclination can mean a human tendency and a slope. I have explained that it could mean a human tendency and preference then you come discrediting my explanation and putting forward it means a slope. You are right in that it means a slope but you are wrong in discrediting my explanation of it meaning a human tendency and preference. This happened too often in your short anarchic criticism of my theories where it is not worth it for me to refute your not right and not wrong answers. This is I know to be a danger of over confidence in my correct expositions. But I just can not bother with your many little mistakes and for me to write half a page of correction like what I am doing now. You just post too many of them and I can not get through them all.

No, you're not wrong. I heard that Mongoloids are divided between Northern Mongoloids and Southern Mongoloids. I don't recall about Japanese and Korean (though I tend to agree with you about them as well), but all "Han" Chinese are classified as Southern Mongoloids.

OK, you want your own privacy.

Everybody knows "inclination" have related meaning with "slope" and thus "tendency", those have related meanings.
越的本意是“度也”。 "to pass". That's 越's "original meaning". Every meaning hereafter are usually related, unless loaned phonetically and emptied of relation of meaning.
So it comes to have 'can'(able)-'can'(vessel) analogy. But if 越 meant 'retreat' and related to 走, it will contradict Chinese 假借.
Combining meaning is called 会意 and usually will not have similar reading to the components, e.g. 明 related to neither 日 nor 月. Those with close reading is usually 'human-split':
1. like 系 and 係, actually same word (系 also had the meaning of 'to be'),
2. 娶 and 取, where 娶 is a more specialized form of 取.
2.like 嫁 and 家, they were on the same root but with old imflection that is no longer avalaible. There seems no perfect parallel but in English we have 'have'/'has', 'go'/'gone'. Imagine if those were written in Hanji they could have different characters though related.

Also most (not all) 'migration'-related element are 辵/辶.
Far 辽遥远 Near 近 Go ahead 进 Migration 迁徙 Run away 逃
though 越 can also mean 'far' 'disperse', but only few other in 走.

Are they distinguished clearly by appearance?

Those division are also sometimes refer to HLA, immunoglobulin and some other genes.
I just once read and not read anymore. If I'm not wrong:

1. Immunoglobulin
South Chinese, Taiwanese Aborigines='Southern Mongoloid'
North Chinese, Japanese='Northern Mongoloid'

2. HLA (class I?)
South Chinese, Viet, Yi-zu='Southern Mongoloid'
North Chinese, Manchu, Tibetan='Northern Mongoloid'.
Japanese= close to 'Africans'
Taiwan Aborigine= close to 'Pacific Islanders'

3. HLA class II (?)
I didn't make any conclusions.

3. Other genes in Cavalli-Sforza's chart:
South Chinese, Malay, Thai='Southern'
Tibetan, Japanese, Korean, Ainu='Northern' (! Closer to Caucasoid than they are to Southerner)

^sources: www.hoklo.org (said to be political, may turn things wrong or hide some facts), a pdf of 'HLA class II' I occasionally read, Cavalli-Sforza's chart, Quetzalcoatl Forum.

Well, this is a hot topic.

See

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=7396

6 generations is not much - 6 x70 = 400 years ago ? Which is not even during the han to tang dynasty. You may discover you had chinese ancestors if you trace even further back. Unluckily, most vietnamese would not have this information.



I agree with you. The northern vietnam look very similar to the southern chinese. Whereas the southern vietnam was part of the champa kingdom and cham people are similar to the indonesian. Southern vietnam also has khmer people due to its proximity to cambodia. Khmer people look like the indonesian malays.



True, all east asians belong to the major group of mongoloid but there are distinctly 2 distinguishable subgroups of mongoloid . Read my url

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...opic=7396&st=45

The so-called difference between north and south chinese are minor differences .

I've said it before and I will say it again. Genetic studies clearly show sharp genetic differences between northern and southern Chinese. Besides, anyone with eyes can see that. It seems to me that many members of this forum are simply unable to accept that northern Han are northern Mongoloids. I can't imagine why this is.

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

In Cavalli-Sforza's genetic clustering work (1988) South Chinese join Southeast Asians while the North Chinese associate with Koreans, Japanese, Ainu, Bhutanese and Tibetans.

I never thought this respected document was so old (older than me). The Cavalli-Sforza tree is said to be outdated with the unveiling of Genome Project, nevertheless it seems that till now South Chinese is always be in the position close to Southeast Asians in any chart.
Example: http://www.racialcompact.com/PhylogeneticTree.jpg

I looked at the URL.

To say that a south chinese looks the same as the indonesian and philipines malays is stretching it. There is a HUGE difference between these 2 subgroups as I see them almost everyday. I wonder what is wikipedia's definition of "south chinese", the current south chinese or the "people who lived in china few hundred/thousand years ago" like the yunnan thai people or the malays who supposedly came from there and migrated to indonesia/philipines etc. So their definition is not exact.

If you say that the current chinese (north and south han) as compared to the malays , then I would agree with their classfication. Because that would be comparable to my classification of fair and dark mongoloid.

There is another name for the people in malaysia, indonesia, philipines, maori, they are sometimes called malayo-polynesian.

Like what I said there are slight difference between south and north chinese as mentioned in this url

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

The stereotypical northerner:

Is taller, plumper, has fairer skin and straighter hair

The stereotypical southerner:

Is shorter, lankier, has darker skin and wavier hair


But I have seen tall southerner with tall, fair skin and straight hair (eg chow yun faat). The difference is not nearly as great as comparing the chinese with the malays-polynesians.

The wikipedia archive also link to this year 2000 study: http://scienceinchina.com/yk/yc/0005/yc0472.pdf
The study considered 38 loci (with 130 allelles), while the old one took account, if I recall correctly, only 15 loci (with 68 or 69 allelles).
This results seems better, since the old one said North-South difference was larger than North-Caucasian difference, while logically Mongoloid-Caucasoid are very different compared to they each other. But in this article it does not mention Southeast Asian populations.

What makes Malay-Polynesian people terribly different from other Mongoloids may be mixture with Papuan or Dravidian people.
You ask the timeline, while I asked whether "South Chinese" are "Minorities in South China" (e.g. Hani-zum Wa-zu etc.) or "Southern Han Chinese". In turn I found that it points to "Southern Han Chinese".


Tall-short, plump(fat)-lanky(thin) depend heavily in diet, while slightly fairer/darker skin is very environmental.
You can change your fatness and skin by a few days.
I see almost all Chinese are straight-haired.
Wavy hair genes might be brought to China during dynasties.
I don't know whether there exist 'natural' condition that makes curliness different from how it should but I think hot environment may destruct the original structure of hair.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Sun Wu and Wu Chi, Page 35, The Commercial Press LTD., Hong Kong, 1975.

The Pai-yueh is the Bai Yue 百越 and they are south of the Chu State.


Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Kou-Chien, King of Yueh, Page 55, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.

Chu State’s victory over the Yue State causing the Yue State and its hegemony to fragment comes after Chu’s conquest of the Pai-yueh Bai Yue 百越 in the book. This does not disqualify the Bai Yue 百越 origination from the Yue State because one explanation is this part of the book could have been written out off sequence with the real sequence of history.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Fan Sui and Tsai Tse, Page 115, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.

This detail of events matches exactly to that of the above top. This matching of Pei-yueh people with the Yangyueh tribesmen is a historical documented proof that Bai Yue 百越 are from Yang-Yue.


Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-ma Chien, By Burton Watson, Volume II, The Age of Emperor Wu, 140 to Circa 100 B.C., Shih Chi 113, The Account of Southern Yueh, Page 239, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.

Initial doubt cast on Lu Liang and Yang-yueh could be explained if we were to considered the passage as a description of the route and steps of the military campaign undertaken by the Qin where they first conquered the state of Yang then the state of Yue, and then finally Lu Liang where they then divided the Lu Liang Kingdom to Nan Hai, Guilin, and Xiang. Lastly the Bai Yue 百越 of Yang and Yue are resettled in Guilin and Xiang.

http://scienceinchina.com/yk/yc/0005/yc0472.pdf

This site is interesting about the existence of North and South Mongoloids. They were pretty sure about that North and South Mongoloids did not come from one another. The cause for this was 2 routes started from Africa to China, and Yangtse river was where they met. Yangtse River had a significant role in this part. Now you know why I said the Yangtse river was important for history of Bai Yue and gene flow between the Northern and Southern Mongoloids.

Those are gained from statistics of frequency of genes.
I think Southern genes is far from absent in Northern Chinese, or vice versa.

I wonder how they could say they split before reaching asia, I think they could split anywhere.

That article make me questions:
The genetic distance of Caucasoid to them is even highly farther than between them, so if Mongoloid split before reaching Asia, where did Caucasoid split with Mongoloid?

If passing did not occur very long time ago, why M175 Y-gene is preserved best in Korea while its descendant M122 have the highest diversity in Southern China?

nevertheless, as stated in the article, Still, many studies 'contradict' each other, e.g. in one of them Mongolian are "separate" from other East Asians+Amerindians.
http://www.nmnh.si.edu/rtp/students/2002/v...02_seebauer.htm

I mean surely Lu Liang can not be called Yang-Yue at the same time. Anyway according to a map shown in this forum Yang-yue was the former Xu Yi Kingdom of Yang. The forum map has established the Yang Kingdom to be comparable to the present province of Jiangxi. The addition of the suffix of Yue to the Yang State could be a political development in the Diaspora of the Bai Yue 百越 from the fragmented Yue Kingdom.

Sometimes I really wonder whether this section of wikipedia is written by amateurs to generalise north and southern chinese as such.

I saw in the study there are some comments that are subjective and unrelated to the study (e.g. 'separated before reaching asia' while they could stay for a few thousand years and cause the diversity before they split)

Actually it can be interpreted reverse of your argument, since it's also:
1. Northern boundary of Dong-Jin
2. Southern boundary of Bei-wei
3. Border between South and North dynasties
4. North border of Nan Song
So "Chinese could be South Mongoloid, and the Yangtze 'prevented' Northern invasion." (which is also a wild claim)
So I prefer not to conclude anything before the number of loci analyzed reach thousand.

Yeah, it can be edited by anyone, so if the article is not watched by admin then people can do 'uncorrected' trolling.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Sun Wu and Wu Chi, Page 35, The Commercial Press LTD., Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Fan Sui and Tsai Tse, Page 115, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-ma Chien, By Burton Watson, Volume II, The Age of Emperor Wu, 140 to Circa 100 B.C., Shih Chi 113, The Account of Southern Yueh, Page 239, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.

The available evidence support Yang-yueh is the region of the Xu Yi Kingdom of Yang of the Jiangxi province today. Chu had conquered Jiangxi. Chu had settlements in Guangxi but there is no evidence of Chu occupation of Guangdong. The Chu and Wu war give some detail of Chu having suzerainty over Jiangxi. If my theory is correct Qin campaign conquered Jiangxi first. Next they used the Changsha to Guilin route to conquered north Guangxi. They then used the Ganzhou to Nanxiong corridor to conquered Guangdong. They finally conquered south Guangxi.

Correction: in the Chu and Wu war, Wu seemed to have suzerainty over northern part of Jiangxi (the former Yi Xu Kingdom of Yang). As Wu won this war and then established the Wu hegemony over other states, Wu suzerainty could have extended over all of Jiangxi (the former Yi Xu Kingdom of Yang). However almost immediately, the Yue Kingdom conquered Wu and with it won the former Wu’s position of Hegemony. The historical details showed the Yue King gave away Wu’s possessions of conquest that are in the central plains. This is probably because the Yue Kingdom was unable to defend these far flung conquests of the former Wu State. The Yue Kingdom must have kept Wu’s other conquests such as Jiangxi (the former Yi Xu Kingdom of Yang). The Yue Kingdom keeping possession of Jiangxi (the former Yi Xu Kingdom of Yang) could account for the genesis of Yang Yue. The conception for Yang Yue is the same as that for Min Yue (the former Yi Shu Kingdom of Min) where the Min Kingdom came under the suzerainty hegemony of the Yue Kingdom. Even though the break up of the Yue Kingdom affected both Yang Yue and Min Yue and therefore could account for the Diaspora of Bai Yue in both Yang Yue and Min Yue. Chu conquest of the Bai Yue in Yang Yue (Jiangxi) appeared to have happened before the fall of the Yue Kingdom.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Sun Wu and Wu Chi, Page 35, The Commercial Press LTD., Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Kou-Chien, King of Yueh, Page 55, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Historian, Szuma Chien, Translated by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang, Chapter Fan Sui and Tsai Tse, Page 115, The Commercial Press, Hong Kong, 1975.

Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-ma Chien, By Burton Watson, Volume II, The Age of Emperor Wu, 140 to Circa 100 B.C., Shih Chi 113, The Account of Southern Yueh, Page 239, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.

Chu could well have gain suzerainty over Yang (Jiangxi) before the Wu State. Chu might not have gain control over all of Jiangxi then certainly they must have the northern portion of it. This seemed likely because it is a certain fact that Wu had conquered northern Jiangxi in the Chu and Wu War. As Wu was fighting Chu at the time then Wu must have successfully wrestle northern Jiangxi from Chu. Northern Jiangxi was a part of Wu.

Anyhow Chu subjugated the Bai Yue tribes’ men of Yang Yue. Now Jiangxi was described as being politically Yue rather than an independent Yang Kingdom. This meant Chu conquest of the Bai Yue tribes’ men of Yang Yue happened some time after the Yue Kingdom had conquered Wu where the Yue Kingdom had gained suzerainty over the Yang Kingdom and hence Yang Yue. Chu conquest of the Bai Yue tribes’ men of Yang Yue (Jiangxi) happened either during Yue’s hegemony or after Yue had lost its hegemony or after the Yue Kingdoms collapse when it was defeated by Chu.

So the Yue were in kingdoms instead of others' claim that they were in tribes. So the Vietnamese is right about their own history. The Yue were invaded by the Han Chinese. The Yue Guangdong changed afterward and Yue Vietnamese did not change.

Another classification here says that all Han Chinese are North Mongoloid:

http://forum.stirpes.net/showpost.php?p=41010&postcount=3

Back tracking on my Yi 夷 Southern Migration Theory, the Yue 越 Kingdom was composed of Huai Yi 淮夷 migrating from the Huai River Valley. The Min 閩 Kingdom was composed of Shu Yi 舒夷 migrating from Anhui. The Wu Kingdom was composed of Lai Yi 萊夷 migrating from Shandong. The Yang Kingdom was composed of Xu Yi 徐夷 in Jiangxi. These groups of Yi 夷 people formed their respective kingdoms from the beginning of the Western Zhou Dynasty.

Back tracking on my Yi 夷 Southern Migration Theory further, during the time of the Shang Dynasty the different Yi 夷 people was known collectively as the Dong Yi 東夷. The Dong Yi 東夷 occupied the Yellow River Delta region. When the Dong Yi 東夷 migrated south from the Yellow River Delta region and settled in to different areas of the Yangtze Basin, they separated in to the different groups known as the Huai Yi 淮夷, Shu Yi 舒夷, Lai Yi 萊夷, Xu Yi 徐夷.

Back tracking even more, during the time of the Xia Dynasty the Dong Yi 東夷 occupied the Hebei and Bejing regions. They migrated south and by the time of the Shang they occupied the Yellow River Delta region.

At the start or before the Xia, the Dong Yi 東夷 was originally the Yi 夷 people who occupied the region of the Gobi Desert around the bent of the Yellow River in the Northwest of China. These Yi 夷 people migrated East in to the Hebei and Beijing regions and became known as the Dong Yi 東夷. The Yi 夷 people of this time must have been related to the archer hero myth of Yimou 夷牟.

In accordance to my original Yi 夷 Southern Migration theory, I maintained the Bai Yue 百越, whom the Qin employed to garrison Guilin and Xiang, had been resettled to Guilin and Xiang by the Qin from Fujian. Now the new findings showed the Bai Yue 百越 were from Yang-Yue, and Yang Yue is in Jiangxi the former Yang Kingdom of the Xu Yi 徐夷 people. Therefore Bai Yue 百越 from Yang Yue were the Yi 夷 people of Xu 徐 and Yue 越. This linear historical events time line is logical and best fit to the available evidence.

Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-Ma Chien, Volume I, Early Years of the Han Dynasty 209 to 141 B.C., Burton Watson, Page 31, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.

The above quotation could show in a linear fashion that the Qin General Meng Tien could have conquered Luliang and he could have administered the Qin resettlement programs of the Bai Yue 百越 then he went North to build and to complete the Great Wall and so on.



Records of the Grand Historian of China , Ssu-Ma Chien, Volume II, The Age of Empeoror Wu, 140 to Circa 100 B.C., Burton Watson, Page 258, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.

Traditional Korean scholars concluded ‘the mallet-shape hairdo and dress of the eastern barbarian’ can be translated as Dong Yi 東夷. The quote track indicated Wei Man rule over Chen-pan and Chao-hsien whose population were Dong Yi 東夷 and Chinese refugees. Some of the Dong Yi 東夷 and some of the Chinese were originally from the States of Yen and Chi. However Some of the Dong Yi 東夷 and some of the Chinese could have been already living in Chen-pan and Chao-hsien a long time before then. Anyhow at about this same time there was a large Eastern Barbarian Empire covering Manchuria and Eastern Mongolia. This Eastern Barbarian Empire can be a Dong Yi 東夷 Empire that covered the regions of Manchuria and Eastern Mongolia. Later the Xiong-nu conquered this Eastern Barbarian Empire or possible Dong Yi 東夷 Empire and incorporated it into the Xiong-nu Empire as Xiong-nu Empire of the Left. This showed that the Dong Yi 東夷 were living in both Korea and Manchuria at this time period.



Records of the Grand Historian of China, Ssu-Ma Chien, Volume I, Early Years of the Han Dynasty 209 to 141 B.C., Burton Watson, Lu Chia, Page 275, Columbia University Press, New York and London, 1961.




'...hair done up in the mallet-shaped fashion of the natives of Southern Yueh...' showed the natives of Southern Yueh 南越 mentioned here were the Bai Yue 百越 in accordance to my original Yi 夷 Southern Migration Theory. Chao To and his army and new settlers were from the north. They were in alliance with the Bai Yue 百越 ruling over Southern Yueh 南越. They had a patron client relationship with the Bai Yue 百越. Chao To is partly dependent on the Bai Yue 百越 to maintain his control of his kingdom. I believe Chao To wanted to build a cohesive united kingdom. Here by integrating the custom and practices of different groups such as the traditional head dress, hair style, and attire of the Bai Yue 百越, he hoped to build a stronger state. This same traditional head dress, hair style, and attire of the Bai Yue 百越 was the same as the Eastern Barbarian or Dong Yi 東夷 mentioned above in Korea. The only place the Bai Yue 百越 could have originated from is Yang-yue of Jiangxi. Jiangxi is where the former Yang Kingdom of Xu Yi 徐夷 is situated.

Formerly I posited the Hokkien population of Fujian was composed of Yi 夷 people migrating from the neighboring Yang Kingdom of Jiangxi and remnant Yi 夷 people of the Yue Kingdom in the Yangtze Delta. However new findings in accordance with my Yi 夷 Southern Migration Theory showed the Yi 夷 population of the Yang Kingdom had been resettled in Guangxi. The remnant Yi 夷 people of the Yue Kingdom in the Yangtze Delta having formed the new Tung Hai Kingdom with the Capital Tung-ou or Eastern Ou were finally resettled in the upper Huai River valley. Also historical records had details of Yi 夷 people in the Min Yue (Fujian) resettled in the upper Huai River. Thus the Yi 夷 people of Zhejiang (Yue) and Fujian (Min Yue) were resettled in the Huai River valley, and the Yi 夷 people of Jiangxi (Yang) were resettled in Guangxi. This would lead me to conclude the current Hokkien population of Fujian could not have been descended from the Yi 夷. The current Hokkien populations of Fujian were descended from another historical ethnic group.



A further proof of the Yi 夷 as the Bai Yue 百越 from Jiangxi have been resettled in Guangxi is the existence of Western-ou in or close to Guangxi. Western-ou must have parallel roots to Eastern-ou in that they were both composed of Yi 夷 people. In accordance to my Yi 夷 Southern Migration theory Yi 夷 people formed the Yue Kingdom that later became the Tung Hai Kingdom with the capital Eastern-ou. As the Yang Kingdom became Yang-yue its population was later transfer to Guangxi where a part of the Yi 夷 people as Bai Yue 百越 formed the Western-ou polity.

King Tao or Dao Wang 悼王 of Chu reigned from 401 to 381 B.C. and King Wei or Wei Wang 威王 of Chu reigned from 339 to 329 B.C. Therefore in King Tao of Chu’s reign Chu’s conquest of the Yangyueh Bai Yue 百越 in Jiangxi occurred before the Yue Kingdom’s collapse in King Wei of Chu’s reign when the Chu King defeated the Yue.

Yun an administrator of this forum has referenced a web site of the historical zhuang in Guangxi. The academic contributors of the site wrote archaeological evidences showed some significant settlements from the Chu State expanding into Guangxi only after the collapsed of the Yue Kingdom. This meant people from the Chu State appeared in Guangxi after King Wei or Wei Wang 威王 of Chu's reign from 339 to 329 B.C., during which King Wei defeated the Yue Kingdom. Where as the Chu State had conquered Yang-yueh during the reign of King Tao or Dao Wang 悼王 of Chu who reigned from 401 to 381 B.C.

I myself can not so readily find the web address again but if Yun could readily recall the web address again here I would be grateful. What the data showed along with my information above is to prove that Chu's conquest of the Bai Yue 百越 of Yang-yue happened over half a century earlier in Jiangxi before the Chu settlements appeared in Guangxi.

From the web address below I now learned the Eastern Barbarians Empire above most likely was referring to the Dong Hu Empire and not Dong Yi Empire. However even though Eastern Barbarian Empire most likely referred to Dong Hu Empire, the translated text of ‘eastern barbarians’ does refer to Dong Yi. So Eastern Barbarian Empire is Dong Hu and eastern barbarians are Dong Yi.


http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=75&st=0

Please refer to the section 2.3 THE XI OU AND THE INFLUENCE OF CHU
in site address below:
http://mcel.pacificu.edu/as/resources/zhua...r-CHAPTER-37516

The information gleamed from the academic contributors of the site showed Chu defeated Yue in 334 B.C. After which a more substantial Chu presence appeared in the archaeological evidence in Guangxi which some what confirmed my statement in the previous post above. Because when Chu conquered the Bai Yue of Yang-yue the Chu would have left significant archaeological remains of their conquest and subsequent occupation. The archaeological evidence of Chu presence in Guangxi is just too cooperative in nature with the local native which does not fit with the Chu violent conquest of the Bai Yue of Yang-yue. The Guangxi natives were long time allies of the Chu through out the Eastern Zhou period. Whereas the Chu war with the Bai Yue of Yang-yue was a long prepared campaign of animosity. The archaeological evidence from Guangxi does not fit the description of the Chu conflict with the Bai Yue of Yang-yue during the reign of King Tao or Dao Wang 悼王 of Chu.