Tell me what you think the modern Viet is. However, you don't have to have North vietnamese origin to honor the Bai Yue.

The mordern Viet is the local people, residing in Vietnam before QinShiWang.
The people who were not local may come to joint them to form the mordern Viet.
The mordern Viet are not the foreigners who killed all the local to take over the land.

Who tells me a foreigner when my ancestors have been in North Vietnam for milleniums?
My ancestor have never been in China or any foreign lands as those who are BaiYueists.
However, whoever foreigners came to Vietnam and become Vietnamese, are welcome
to be members of my Vietnamese family. They deserve equal rights as local Vietnamese.

Yeah, that's right. Some members of BaiYue wanted to join the Han family and were welcome.

Really trueViet? Every post you wrote, I read carefully and related with all the post you made!

Regards,

TTA

i'm a newbie...just want to know more about ancient history...
must I have to accept the fact that Chinese have all record of history, while the Vietnamese have none...so let we conclude that the Chinese history are real, accept that the Southern of China are all Chinese...

Now, let's us look back about the ancient Vietnam culture...if the Chinese can verify as what the wrote in the history that they were the master of argiculture, that they taught the Vietnamese how to plant water-rice, how to make the bronze drum, then I'll believe in the Chinese History...

But unluckily, most of the bronze drum are found the in the region of North Vietnam and Southern China, how could the Chinese explain that?? On the bronze drum, there are several picture tells about Vietnamese (or Yue) cultures, such as plant water-rice, one of the most important things in the ancient history, which somehow related to Than Nong (Shen Nong) which the Vietnamese (or Yue) declared as one of their ancestors, the picture about hunting somhow related to the story of Lac Long Quan, who have been told as the father of Hundred Yue

As the time goes on, the pre-history of ancient Vietnamese is more opposed with what have been wroted in Chinese Ancient History. many Historians believe that the Vietnamese Culture have been developed before the Han Culture...

the Cantonese is Han-Chinese or not make no different now, because the fact that China and Vietnam is both independent country, they have their own borders, government. What I want to know more about is the real history of the Hundred Yue, and her ancient culture, and teritory.

Like the communists are letting you see or learn all the information of their history. They just showed the positive sides and whatever brings them together, even if they have to create an illusion or a mystery. They think the Bai Yue are no important and that was why the Ming dynasty destroyed all the historical documents of Vietnamese. Luckily we had some oral traditions still alive with us although a large account was lost. Don't worry, when the Chinese and Vietnamese are under democratic governments, we will find out.

You ask that, I answer 'no'.

It's clear that China recognises many ethnicities, 26 of them are in Yunnan. Who claims "Southern of China are all Chinese"??

No one claim that Chinese made bronze drum.

Unluckily, the names were changed because of the Chinese so that they look as if they came from China .
Chinese claiming Shen Nong as their ancestor does not look contradicting with if Vietnamese do.
And I would like to know if any other tribes of "Bai Yue" has 100-egg legends, I only know the "brother-sister in flood" legend.

I believe you meant "before Xia culture", but did those actually give rise to Vietnamese or not?

Culture: Hundreds, Teritory: Hundreds. That's why they are called Hundred Yue, because actually there are hundreds of identifiable "ethnicities". No matter how similar they were, they should still be considered hundred kinds. Bai Yue was Chinese generalization about some people South of them, with no racial specification, unlike the Di which supposedly have "Australoid" features (the name "Di" itself means "low"/"low class").

One amongst hudred Yues (1%) became nowaday Vietnamese.
The rest of hundred Yues (99%) became today Chinese - non-Han minorities or Han.

TrueViet...I think you lean too much on the Chinese side without rational explanation. YOu could be a Chinse undercover.

I think we should concentrate on the message, not the messenger. Though TrueViet's points of view about BaiYue is close to that of our Chinese posters here, it is not necessarily Chinese. It might just be a perspective of the Muong, whose ethnic he is from. As we know, probably from the Tang Dynasty on, The Muong separated from the lowland Vietnamese, for Tang administration was not able to reach deeper into Vietnamese territories. TrueViet's points of view might just reflect a desire to have nothing to do with China, typical of the Muong political and cultural traditions. The Muong of course are descendants from the Luo Yue, as the lowland Vietnamese. The majority of Luo Yue descendants chose a path of development that is close to the Chinese culture after the Nan Chao undisciplined behavior towards lowland Vietnamese, yet separate, as demonstrated once and for all 1000 years ago with the reestablishment of independence.
I can see TrueViet coming to terms with the fact that the Luo Yue were classified, albeit by the Chinese, as belonging to the ill-defined Bai Yue. I agree with him that the Luo Yue did not migrate to North Vietnam from the North. Sometimes TrueViet speaks in a tone that is not conducive to friendly discussions among compatriots, but I hope we can all forget that and concentrate on his message.

I think of Vietnamese as being like that: the name "Viet" was given by Chinese, but Vietnamese use that name as an identity to separate them from Chinese.

I see some lineages originating in China as a majority, but I think that's very old and before "Chinese" was developed (and should be before "Luo Yue" formed).

1- Viet is used by both ancient Chinese and ancient Vietnamese.
However, most of the Viets were Chinese, and only one Viet was and is Vietnamese.
Therefore, when someone saying "Viet" he mixes up a minority of Vietnamese with the majority Chinese.
Some Vietnamese even think that the mordern Vietnamese are from Yue (which fought the Wu).
Some Vietnamese even think that the mordern Vietnamese are from YueChang (which had the beautiful birds).
Some Vietnamese even think that the mordern Vietnamese are from BaiYue which were from the south bank of Yanzi River (ChangJiang) to today north Vietnam.
Amongst those Vietnamese, only me standing apart, use Viet as an indentity to separate the Vietnamese from the Chinese. My Viet have been the local who have never been beyound today boundary.

2- I totally agree with your statement that most of ethnic groups had been existing before the historic time.
Therefore, all the Viets/Yues beyound the mordern boundary were ancient Chinese - Non-Han Chinese - and now they are either minority Chinese or cinisized Chinese, and only one Viet/Yue below the mordern boundary was ancient Vietnamese who remain mordern Vietnamese.

1. I don't agree that most of the Bai Yue were Chinese. Actually I think perhaps only 3 "Yue" was Chinese in the early Zhou age, I mean the Chu, Wu and Yue states. Perhaps Ou and Luo were Vietnamese, but the others should be neither, ignoring the cases where a tribe later became part of Chinese.

2. I meant that the genesis relationship was far before the ethnicities really formed. Therefore though they were from North they did not count to be Chinese.

If you don't agree that most of the Bai Yue were Chinese, then where/who they are now?
Do you think they disappear without a trace?
They are either Chinese (non-Han or Hanized Chinese) or Vietnamese, or Laotian, or Thailand.
They cannot all became mordern Vietnamese, a small place for all people from much larger place in BaiYue territory.
Besides, you need to consider that the Viet (Jing) locate far below the mordern Viet-China boundary.
The area around the Viet-China boundary is the highlander, Viet minority groups, who speak Tai-Takai.
They have been there for 2 thousands of years.
If most of the BaiYue were ancient Vietnamese, they had come to the Red river delta across the territory of the Tai speaking people.

I think the theory of BaiYue becoming Vietnamese has been solved?

I didn't mean they never be Chinese, but originally they could not be considered Chinese (assuming the Chinese identity was established during Zhou).

BaiYue is a generalization (so it leads to "part of BaiYue became Vietnamese"). I see that we can also have "BaiYue" covering up to absurd Magaskar, depending on your opinion/generalization.
My opinion is simple: just some people Southeast of China who had distinct culture but did not receive racism from Chinese.

I think "Bai Yue" is an obsolete term, so there should not be any positive present tense sentence containing "Bai Yue". Actually we all have agreed on the Southern ethnics, but they are "people who were formerly/descended from Bai Yue" not "people who are presently Bai Yue".
And actually I didn't say all of them became Vietnamese.

Are native Nanjingren, Hangzhouren and Shanghairen belong to the same Yueh as the Cantonese and Fujianese? I know that "Hundred Yueh" or Baiyueh founded the Wu and Yue states during the Spring and Autumn period in present day Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces, respectively. I am wondering because I am Nanjingren and we don't look like Cantonese.

They look distinctly differently, same as you can tell a Chinese and a Korean apart. But they share many common features such as small statures, pale skin, very dark hair, small eyes....etc. It's hard to distinguish Catonese today and Shanghainese in HK because so many Shanghainese migrated to Hongkong. I used to consider Maggie Cheung a typical HKger until I knew her parents are Shanghainese.

I believe you can tell the distinctions between these:
Shanghainese, Cantonese, Fujianese, Hakka
the distinction is perhaps smaller than Korean vs Chinese, but not like Dearcoolz who said Shanghainese look nothing different from Southern Chinese.

And as the same Yue as the Vietnamese?
And as the same Yue as the Zhang in YunNan and GuangXi?
Who today is the "true" Yue 2 thousands years ago,
Nanjingren, Hangzhouren and Shanghairen,
Cantonese, Fujianese, Zhuang, and Vietnamese?
When did some of Yues become Chinese, or Vietnamese?

yeah, if we go to rural areas in Jiangnan we still see some people who look not much different from modern Vietnamese. But the majority do look different from Vietnamese.
When I visited Nanning (capital of zhuang autonomous zone) there are too many Northern looking Chinese there + Cantonese. I wonder if real Zhuang has been pushed into mountainous areas?

Hi Folks:

It would be quite confused when some of us attempt to analyze the Bách Việt (Bai Yue) people by modern boundary and within give or take 4-5,000 years context! We are easily getting stuck in such predicament due to:

1) Virtually all tangible records (archaeological artifacts, written records, cultural develoments, etc) mostly have been contained within this duration.

2) The exchanges and minglings of cultures and ideas actually have taken places in many ways; not merely one way flow from the central plain of current China alone like few would still like to suggest!

3) Both of the modern Han (Chinese) and Kinh (Vietnamese) were merely one of the ancient ethnic groups; the Kinh people was merely one of the domimant groups of the Bách Việt while the ethnic Han has been super imposed and expanded within a cultural context merely 2,000 years or so.

If we just focus a little bit further, let say adding to another 4-5,0000 years or so; we would see the landmark and human settlements in this region would be vastly different due to .... the last ice age affects! Some may still focus on the superficial differences among us while ignoring our commonness and likeness of the rather short span of our contempory people.

I personally believe that the original Việt (Yue) and even the Hán are very different to the people who claim to represent them today. We're all have inherited the cultural and social developments not merely in one short span of 5,000 years but much longer than that. As a few studies have already being done; our ancestors had domesticated animal (chicken, pig, etc.) and planted rice in Southeast Asia (which was a much larger region than modern boundary) around 15,000 years ago. Where were the Việt or the Hán would claim their root came from then?

How about the theory or hypothesis that the ancient Vietnamese were originally
in the center of China instead of the Red River Delta?
In History, a theory has meanings only when it contains names, places, and times altogether.

The Han has a clear history of formation since they had written language.
The Han has no history before that.

The Vietnamese does not have clear history of formation before the civilization of the Han.
The Vietnamese learnt the Han written language, and recoreded the history of the Vietnamese.

The formation of the Viet ethnic form the beginning can be in either of the two hypothesises as:

1- People from center of China migrated to Vietnam and civilized the local.
The people who hold this hypothesis quoted written history as evidences.
They do not differentiate the ancient Vietnamese from the BaiYue.
They believe that all ancient Chinese with the names that include "Yue" were ancient Vietnamese.
All the above "Yue" were the migrants to Vietnam, and they were the core of the Viet ethnic group.

2- The local people accepted migrants from othe places including people from China.
This hypothesis believes that most of ethnic groups have been in Asia long before the written history.
Theses ethnic groups develop on their own from pre-historic time to the mordern time.
The core of the Viet ethnic group is the local people from the beginning.

"The beginning" here is defined as the time the ethnic groups have been distinct from one another.
At that time or later, the Han was still a small group in the north of the Yellow river.

Hi Folks:

Even in modern time, the terms "civilization" & "barbarian" are remained quite subjective and a few appear having rather constrictive view regarding what would considered to be civilized and what's not? Most of us have already known by historical fact that the cultural delopment of the Vietnamese has been quite parallel to that of of the Chinese during the recent past 4-5,000 years or so! Who would dispute that Chinese civilization is one among the most developed civilizations of the world; nevertheless, China definitely was not the 'center' of the universe like few would still like to hold on such belief!

In East Asia, particularly, Southeast Asia, there have been other sophisticated civilizations which developed independently from that of the Chinese civilization despite of its vincinity; let's take a look of the Khmer's civilization as an example; the Khmer kingdom had flourished give or take merely 2,000 years old but the apex of the Khmer's civilization took place from the 8-14th century had become one of the wonders of the civilized world.

The Vietnamese, as a people who has long history in this region and there was time being considered as "barbarian" by the dominant Chinese; nonetheless, if there was without external interference the Dong Son's culture could be advanced much further than those few ancient artifacts we have dugged up from China, Thailand, the Philippines, through Malayu penisula down to Eastern New Guinea ...! For such a barbaric group of people, the ancient Viet was able to develope such culture and trade routes .... a few thousand years ago ...; I believe that didn't gather such knowledge from the civilized people who lived in the central plain of China at the time though!

Many Vietnamese believe that their ancestors were
in the Lake of DongTing (in center of China) area
rather than in Red River Delta.
No Chinese has such belief.

"High" civilizations usually consider neighboring civilizations as "barbarians". Like how Rome once considered Germans barbarians.

Well, it seems assumed that "Dong Son culture" were Vietnamese.

It's "independent" from China, but it resembles ancient India.
And I've heard that Funan had something like Han coin

As always. a Vietnamese who thinks of being a "Yue" rather than just "non-Chinese".
I've not heard any "foreigners" considered as "barbarians", but sure there could be. (even Rome and India were possible?). And I'm not sure heavily Sinicized country like Japan and Korea were considered "barbarians" by the Chinese.

TrueViet:

Pls keep in mind that there are 54 official ethnic groups living in Vietnam at the present! The Bách Việt (Bai Yueh) people were living all over from the South of the Yangze river down the current Central Vietnam and from the Yunan's areas to as far as Hai Nan & Taipei as well!

Oral history <== of course is always difficult to prove; however, current written history merely existed give or take merely last 2,000 years or so and also be subjective to those who recorded (i.e. I've recently reviewed the Mingshilu records and paid attention to their references regarding the Jiaozhi prefecture during the Ming's annexation of Annam ... it's extremely one sided recording at best)!

Since you took on the nick of TrueViet; I'm curious to know which true Viet or true Yueh you would prefer yourself to? Kinh, Nùng, Mường, Mán, Tày, Thái, v.v.

You have no discussion on the idea in my post.

To your personal question, True Viet mean the Vietnamese nationalists, regard his/her ethnic.
He may be Chinese who has been naturalized to be a Vietnam citizen.

I am personally from Muong ethnic, but I cannot speak Muong or understand Muong language.
I think that does not matter someone thinking that I am a Kinh or a Muong.
When I am in a Muong village, I look like a Muong.
When I am in a Nung or Tay village, I look like a Nung or Tay, or Thai.
When I were in China, I look like a Chinese.
I am now in the US, and people assumed that I am a Chinese.
Why people do not assume that I am a Japanese or Korean in America?
I do not look like Kinh as I look like a Vietnamese minority.
However, I live amongst the Kinh, then I am assumed to be a Kinh.

I think anyone with common sense think that way.
Do you means you are thinking differently?

Come back to my previous post:
I believe that prior to the formation of Han empire,
all areas in south east Asia were populated with people.
They were not died off or all killed in any events.
Therefore, there is not neccessarily an assumtion that all people in south east Asia today,
including the Viet, or the Kinh in Vietnam, were from China or were Chinese immigrants.
There is no proof for my belief. Neither be evident for the assumtion that the Chinese
populated the south east Asia and Vietnam. Believe what your heart tells you, but do not
attempt to brainwashing those who do not share the same belief with you.

I would beg to differ. Prior to the formation of the Han empire (>2,000 years ago); most areas in East and Southeast Asia were merely scattering populated with pocket of people, most of whom lived a normadic lifestyle except very few groups were settled in the delta areas such as the yellow and red river's areas. Since you claim to be true Vietnamese nationalist, I would presume you would have already learned that the vast area of current southern Vietnam (formerly thủy chân lạp) were also scatterly populated with few pockets of people (Khmer); It took many generations of the Vietnamese pioneers to desalinate and develop the land to make it usable for farmings, etc.



I'm somewhat confused with such statement; I believe most of us come here to share and to learn; very few would dare to impose their value onto others and I would doubt if it could be done therefore ... ?

qrasy:

Of course the Dong Son's civilization was developed by the ancient Vietnamese who settled in the red river valley. It sounds like you could understand Vietnamese and understand quite a bit of Vietnamese history; I don't think we need to dig up the old stories whereas the sinization process was imposed by the Hans since the Ma Yuan time until their last attempt during the brief 20 years occupation from 1407-1427 during the peak of the Ming's dynasty eh!

Vietnam <--- regardless of its barbarian status, she's served as sanctuary for quite a few elitist Han Chinese since the Wang Mang's rebellion to the time the Mongolians, Manchurians, and eventually the recent 1949's revolution in China! Well, after the KMT fled to Taiwan, the Chợ Lớn (Chinese district ) of Saigon boasted to have the best Chinese cuisine from anywhere on earth (thanks to many Chinese chefs from Shanghai, Bejing, etc had taken refused there)!

While some other source I read says the condition of Land Chenla is worse than that of Water Chenla. I think river delta is a good place for ancient civilization. The Mekong delta is said to had been in Cambodia (should be in Western part of Water Chenla, around Phnom Penh) but now it's shifted to South Vietnam... Water Chenla territory which ended up being in Vietnam is just Eastern part.

Talking about Khmer, I remembered of one thing... Teeth test.

That's an assumption. I can't even make some logical argument if I wanted to say 3 culture in China: Yangshao culture etc. were progenitors of the Chinese. I simply don't have any clue. Maybe someone else has but see whether it's convincing.
The oldest clue (I think) is from legends and are never close to exact (very rough approximation), and as far as I know that does not show real links with those ancient people.

not really.

Sinicization just meant originally was unlike Chinese. Nothing further is said. Not even implies that modern Viets were from Bai Yue.

I'm wondering whether Sinicized countries would be considered "barbarians" by Chinese. And during the Chinese occupation I don't think Vietnam was.

I would beg to differ as well. The original Water Chenla definitely wasn't a good place to build anything; when the pioneer Vietnamese arrived, it was considered to be a god forsaken place due to its wild status (full of crocodiles, tigers, and lots, lots of mosquitos, etc.); During the monsoon season, the vast majority of this region would be submerged under water (therefore it's called as Water Chenla); other drier places were barely cultivable due its natural high saline & alkaline content. Few pockets of workable areas were already occupied by the Krom Khmer. It took generations of Vietnamese pioneers to dig canals (to alleviate the flood & for transportation purposes), and develop techniques to desalinate and de-alkalinate the land before they could farm rice and plant other crops as well as fruit trees, etc. Recently, the Vietnamese have also utilize the same technique to reform the land from harmful defoliate (orange) agent, which also rendered many areas almost useless during the recent Vietnam war.




I would also beg to differ here; The Lou Yue people had already settle in this red river areas for milleniums. Dong Son's civilization developed during the Hung kings (give or take around 3,000 years ago), which ceased to exist after Ma Yuan led his troops to re-occupy this part from the Zheng's sisters revolt in 43 AD. During the apex of Dong Son's civilization, the Han's cilization had already well developed in the central plain of China; As one could see, the designs and pictograms depicted from the Dong Son's artifacts reflect virtually no resemblance from any northern (Chinese) influences. (pls review the link below for identication & assessment purpose)

http://old.blades.free.fr/utilities/dongson.htm

http://www.hawaii.edu/cseas/pubs/vietnam/v...am.html#dongson

The Dong Son's culture did not develop its own well written language compatible to that of the Northern Chinese; however, one would not underestimate the sophistication and development of the Lou Yue people during this period when they were able to establish commerce and trades with the neighboring people from all over Southeast Asia to as far as New Guinea as well!



You have already said it; high or low civilization <== would be quite subjective. As we all learn from history, if we all go back a little bit further, we would find that we share more commonalities than differences therefore we would learn to respect one another in lieu our Vietnamese legend of Lạc Long Quân & Âu Cơ indicated "we're all brothers and sisters" from the beginning eh!

Well, what I saw was like that Land Chenla is landlocked; Phnom Penh is close to the sea so that what you're referring to is just Eastern part of Water Chenla. Of course, anyone can make a different definition. But what I want to say is based on the 2 empires which split from Chenla...

Yeah, I just thought about the drums. Just made an insight on Dong Son culture. In the Zhou age the Luo was said to have been settled around there.
Vietnamese seek ancestry in Ou and Luo just like modern Han Chinese seek roots to Huaxia. But Shang considered Chinese ancestors might be a little dubious, to some.
"Some Dong Son-like drums are still used by the Muong people" could be a clue for Vietnamese? BUt how about cultural diffusion?

Last Dong Son artifact was found to be around 43 AD?

I want to see the letters...

By "compatible" you meant "comparable"?
Dong Son drums found in New Guinea and Siberia would be still a mystery for me. As far as I know there was no ancient country in New Guinea; just some misdirectioned shipper occasionally landed on there I suppose. I just see some East-Asian-specific gene marker found on there.

"High" is rather subjective, but what I'm referring to are "popular ancient civilizations" like the Greek. What I was thinking about was regarding to considering as "barbarian" or not. After assimilation, "former barbarians" would still be considered "barbarians"?

Well, you was what you saw and you only know what you know; nevertheless, the Khmer Kingdom used to cover a vast area to north of Thailand and as far as the current western part of Malaysia itself not merely the small landlocked pocket as you saw eh!


Have you heard of the stories after Ma Yuan defeated the Zheng's sisters and he controlled the Yueh people by the tip of the sword and that he ordered to confiscate the sacred bronze drums from the Yueh chieftans and melted them down to make sacrifical horse to send back to China, etc? Should one dig a little farther, the vast majority of commerce conducted in the red river delta areas with other people in the Southeast Asia regions was not done by the Han but still by the Yueh people themselves though!



Yeah, if Dong Son drums found in Siberia <== indeed it would be a mystery to me as well!

but it was found in New Guinea .... one could extract from these links:

http://www.bulletprooffilm.com/catalogue/empire.pdf

http://faculty.washington.edu/plape/worldarch.pdf

What are you going to say? I was talking about the "age of fragmentation" of Cambodian history, not after the 2 Chenlas united.

Horse?
And actually what's the use of the Bronze Drums?
{EDIT: nevermind, from the article most likely for decorative and ritual use, rather than musical instruments}
What/when do you mean? [logically: how could Han do significant trade there if they were very small minority?]

I heard it somewhere and only the person who said that who could knew where he heard.

Again, "Yue" is the word that gives you a hard time to express yourself with better precisely.
DongSon drums was made by only and only the ancient Zhuang in YunNan, GuanXi
and ancient VietNamese in north Vietnam.
They were totally well distict ethnic group at that time.
DongSon drums was not made by the "undefined Yue."

MaYuan (Ma~ Vie^.n) was not the first general from ancient China empier to come to Vietnam.
Prior to MaYuan, ancient Vietnam was under the Qin, and later ZhaoTuo, who was a;so a han general.

By the time the pioneer Vietnamese reached to the "water Chenla" areas (southern part of Vietnam presently), the Kingdom of Khmer had already passed its peak (8th-12th century AD); regardless of the timetable; Funan or Khmer; this part could never be suitable to build anything until countless pioneer Vietnamese took risk to reform the land, to redirect some of its water to make it usable afterward. The excavations and finds at the former Oc Eo port, which suggested a trade center in this region <== merely a layover or exchange post since population of the original inhabitants in the areas was quite scattered, isolated, and small at best.



"At the beginning of Later Han imperial authority was confirmed by the campaigns of Ma Yuan against the rebellion led by the Zheng (or Trung) sisters in the region of the Red River between 40 and 43 AD. The heroic sisters are still remembered in Vietnam as symbols of national independence and resistance, but Ma Yuan, titled General Who Calms the Waves, who enforced Chinese culture at the point of the sword and melted the sacred bronze drums of the Yue chieftains in order to cast a triumphal horse for presentation at Luoyang, was celebrated centuries later as a god and a hero...."

One could review from this link: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/decresp...outh_china.html

TrueViet:

Perhaps we should reserve the discussion of Dong Son's culture in another thread!

Bellwood-Blust's China-Taiwan-The Philipines Austronesian expansion theory has been discounted by Stephen Oppenheimer's Eden in the East --The Drowned Continent of SouthEast Asia. Since its publication in 1998, only Bellwood attacked the work, but only technical aspects, not the main theme. It is safe to conclude that there was no massive immigration to Vietnam.
As to why the Southern Mongoloid Vietnamese speak an Austroasiatic language with substantial Austronesien contribution, other Southern Chinese peoples, aka BaiYue by the HuaXia, also spoke languages of these two related families. The originating point of the Austroasiatic family was probably the Malayan Peninsula. From there, immigration to India brought about the Munda language, which shares with the Mon-Khmer family words of agriculture, and surprisingly metallurgy. The area of the latter language covered Thailand and Vietnam. Chances are the Sanxingdui bronze civilization was related to that of this area.
Within the Mon-Khmer family, there are many ethnics who look different. This is no exception. The same holds true with any big family. The French may look Nordic, but speak a Latin language.

I never think it's safe to assume there's no migration from North to South in East Asia. Yes, just because of the Y-gene and mtDNA markers. It's very small a probability of developing the same marker independently.



Actually I've not found any Austronesian non-Austroasiatic word in Vietnamese. The cẳng is not similar to Indonesian "kaki" or Javanese/Sundanese "suku".
The Mon-Khmer-ness of Viet-Muong seems weaker than Bahnaric, etc. [Just my feeling after seeing the databases ]
What is the definition of "Southern Mongoloid" ? [am I asking the same question again and again? Do you think it's valid and relevant and why?]

Before any major contact between language families, the ethnics who spoke similar language shared similar gene, look, etc.
I don't know why are there some who ignore this, which implicitly assumes that two people can obtain same language family independently.

Sorry, these terms frustrates me as well, as they are used loosely. First I heard was that all Chinese and peoples South of China are Southern Mongoloid. Then I heard of generalized Mongoloids, specialized Mongoloids, sinica Mongoloids, submongoloids, pre-Mongoloids. Then there are all these haplogroups, Y chromozome, mtDNA, etc....
You seem to know more about this; why don't you make sense of all this for me, honestly.

Seriously, it depends on how you define "race". The original definition was from appearance. [not lineages]
The off-topic thread here "All [East] Asians look the same" excludes "native-Indonesian" Mongoloids and "native-American" Mongoloids.
Another thing of this "racism" is from teeth.... Sinodonty & Sundadonty among these "Mongoloids". It deals with dental features like shoveling, etc...
"Native Indonesians" and *some* South/Central "native Americans" are Sundadont peoples. I can't say anything more since I don't have any data.

I think all ethnic groups speaking languages belongging to the same language family share the same root.
Therefore, the Vietnamese are closer relatives of the Cambodian than the Chinese.
On the other hand, the mordern Vietnamese obtain Chinese genes from Chinese immigrants to Vietnam.
Therefore, the Vietnamese are closer relatives of the Chinese than the Cambodian.

Turkish is linguistically close to Mongolian, [South Asian] Indians do not look like Nordics in England, and many American of African origin speaks English.

I wonder why language replacements were excluded by some

On contrary to your assumption, I think it's more likely that the Cambodians are mixed more heavily with "Australoids" so that they turned out to be Indonesian-like.
Chinese genes are mostly "weaker" than Indonesian genes, so you must have overwhelming Chinese flow into Vietnam, so it's not very possible.

i disagree with you, it is relevent in his point, as to how the yue is made up of diverse tribes and mixture of nothern chinese that fled war and famine in the north. Genetically polynesian is related to the southern peoples as they are also related to the indigenous taiwanaese (www.tv3.co.nz , search for documentary new zealand ) i am by ethnicity is teochew also called chaoran, chaozhou, teochew.

also have involvement with the the Yue, some say we are originated from the Zhou dynasty but after the fall of the dynasty were enslaved by the conquerer and sent south to conquer the south, and eventually mixed with the yue peoples, and later form our own cultures and traditions.

futuremore i want to know the history of the teochew in particular.

The ancient Vietnamese appeared to settle from the same region from north central of current Vietnam for milleniums long before the arrival of other ethnic groups! A few recent genetic studies have indicated the southern Chinese also came from the same stock of the ancient Viet (Yueh) from this area. The Khmer and Cham people appeared to migrate to this region more recently (less than 3,000 years).

Basically the southern Chinese and Vietnamese are closely related; much closer than to that with the Khmer or other ethnic groups from Southeast Asia!

southern chinese are basically the immigrants from the north a thousands years ago,along the way,they may have mixed with some local yues,but majority of southern chinese are HANS.

shouldn't southern chinese closely related to northern chinese than vietnamese


BTW: Ancient vietnamese might have looked different from modern vietnamese due to thousand years of chinese rule(mixed with chinese) and recent chinese migrants.

DearCoolZ:

Have you forgotten to review these links to find out more about your ancestors eh!

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...pic=9353&st=195

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4435009.stm

and these:


Excerpt came from these reports:

Chromosomal DNA variation in east Asian populations and its potential for inferring the people of Korea. Kim W, Shin DJ, Harihara S, Kim YJ. Department of Biology, Dankook University, Cheonan, Choong-Nam, Republic of Korea.

and

Y-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East AsianSpecific Haplogroup O3-M122
Hong Shi,1,2,6 Yong-li Dong,3 Bo Wen,4 Chun-Jie Xiao,3 Peter A. Underhill,5 Pei-dong Shen,5 Ranajit Chakraborty,7 Li Jin,4,7 and Bing Su1,2,7

Phylogeographic Differentiation of Mitochondrial DNA in Han Chinese
Yong-Gang Yao,1 Qing-Peng Kong,1 Hans-Jürgen Bandelt,2 Toomas Kivisild,3 and Ya-Ping Zhang1

1Laboratory of Molecular Evolution and Genome Diversity, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, Yunnan, China; 2Fachbereich Mathematik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg; 3Department of Evolutional Biology, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Tartu University and Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia

Received September 20, 2001; accepted for publication December 4, 2001; electronically published February 8, 2002.

To characterize the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation in Han Chinese from several provinces of China, we have sequenced the two hypervariable segments of the control region and the segment spanning nucleotide positions 1017110659 of the coding region, and we have identified a number of specific coding-region mutations by direct sequencing or restriction-fragmentlengthpolymorphism tests. This allows us to define new haplogroups (clades of the mtDNA phylogeny) and to dissect the Han mtDNA pool on a phylogenetic basis, which is a prerequisite for any fine-grained phylogeographic analysis, the interpretation of ancient mtDNA, or future complete mtDNA sequencing efforts. Some of the haplogroups under study differ considerably in frequencies across different provinces. The southernmost provinces show more pronounced contrasts in their regional Han mtDNA pools than the central and northern provinces. These and other features of the geographical distribution of the mtDNA haplogroups observed in the Han Chinese make an initial Paleolithic colonization from south to north plausible

Y-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East Asian–Specific Haplogroup O3-M122

The prehistoric peopling of East Asia by modern humans remains controversial with respect to early population migrations. Here, we present a systematic sampling and genetic screening of an East Asian–specific Y-chromosome haplogroup (O3-M122) in 2,332 individuals from diverse East Asian populations. Our results indicate that the O3-M122 lineage is dominant in East Asian populations, with an average frequency of 44.3%. The microsatellite data show that the O3-M122 haplotypes in southern East Asia are more diverse than those in northern East Asia, suggesting a southern origin of the O3-M122 mutation. It was estimated that the early northward migration of the O3-M122 lineages in East Asia occurred ~25,000–30,000 years ago, consistent with the fossil records of modern humans in East Asia.

Recent Spread of a Y-Chromosomal Lineage in Northern China and Mongolia

We have identified a Y-chromosomal lineage that is unusually frequent in northeastern China and Mongolia, in which a haplotype cluster defined by 15 Y short tandem repeats was carried by 3.3% of the males sampled from East Asia. The most recent common ancestor of this lineage lived 590 ± 340 years ago (mean ± SD), and it was detected in Mongolians and six Chinese minority populations. We suggest that the lineage was spread by Qing Dynasty (16441912) nobility, who were a privileged elite sharing patrilineal descent from Giocangga (died 1582), the grandfather of Manchu leader Nurhaci, and whose documented members formed 0.4% of the minority population by the end of the dynasty.

ok???

why do i need to read those technical DNA articles? i already know that all humens came from africa,we are all descent from one single mother,the real eve( its a good program from NGM),i hightly suggest you to watch it.

you can't get the exact area from genetics. Furthermore the studies point to Y-gene haplogroup, the largest haplogroup (according to one convention is "haplogroup O") of East Asia dominates from Manchuria to West Indonesia. And the age is too old, if I recall correctly around 10.000 years of history in East Asia. That was before any Dong Son civilization. I still believe the "Yue" were originally from Yangtze River Area rather than from Southeast Asia; perhaps actually should be the original homeland of Tai speakers, somewhere in China. http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/jour...8/42338.web.pdf
The study of M122, as rudeboy said, did not take into account the migration pattern of Tai speakers; we know they were not in Southeast Asia until rather recently.
"Recent Spread of a Y-Chromosomal Lineage in Northern China and Mongolia" takes a very small amount of dominance in percentage, but something like 2.5% is already enormous (hundreds of thousands).

As for the mtDNA, I believe just the frequency is considerably different, but all in East Asia still share ABCDFG (well, occasionally M and N as they're the "more original" form).

Vietnamese don't need to be mixed with local Cantonese men to have "Chinese" look. Besides, many Cantonese can just pass for Southeast Asian. There are jsut some few people here claimed the relation between Cantonese and Vietnamese.. even more so they aren't even Vietnamese themselves

I think you echoed a lot of my writings in other threads which people tried to ignore due to their biased views.

The conclusion I got was:
Overseas Vietnamese wouldn't want anything to do with chinese for fear of losing their identity.
Overseas chinese wouldn't want anything to do with vietnamese because of a perceived superiority ?

1. How can an area which was under china's direct rule for more than 1000 years not have any mass intermarriages ?

2. How is it possible that even after the tang dynasty ends, that there are no migration of chinese to vietnam when they are direct neighbours. Just look at thailand.

3. How is it possible that there are no migration of chinese to vietnam when the chinese have migrated in larger numbers to South east asian countries which have a greater distance than vietnam. For example, singapore, malaysia, indonesia.

4. How is it possible that the language and culture borrows so much from the chinese but the gene pool is isolated ?

5. How is it possible that there were no intermarriages in the past when there are intermarriages until this day when you can see Taiwanese, singaporeans and malaysian chinese marrying vietnamese brides.
It is not just a matter of chinese males with vietnamese females, but also of chinese female with vietnamese men. Ho chi ming himself married a cantonese woman.

It is probably true that during the han and tang dynasty, there may be quite a number of tai-chinese intermarriages in Gwangdung, Fujien . But the later continuous migration from the north have diluted the tai (yue) genes. Hakka are recent migrants to Gwangdung but they are different from some (not all) of the olden cantonese which have some zhuang blood.

He has not been to indonesia to see the real natives. The cantonese looks the same as the malays just as the cat looks the same as the dog.