Study: Korean, Japanese DNA similar
August 04, 2005 ㅡ The Korean Center for Disease Control and Prevention announced yesterday that Korean people are genetically closer to Japanese people than to Chinese people. The study found that Koreans' DNA is closer to that of Japanese people than that of Chinese. Koreans are genetically closer to Chinese than to Caucasians, and to Caucasians than to Africans, according to the center.
The DNA study, which was led by Jo In-ho, a senior researcher at the center, was based on the gene sequences of 43 South Korean women whose families have lived on the Korean peninsula for over three generations. Their gene sequences were averaged and compared to those of other nationalities. The comparison data was provided by TSC, an American research team that collects genetic information and carries out large-scale DNA analyses.
Mr. Jo said such DNA research would define the future direction of medical research on Korean genetic disorders. "These findings will lay the foundation for a deeper understanding of genetic disorders, and point us in the right direction for potential cures," he said. Mr. Jo also said that due to genetic differences with its Northeast Asian neighbors, future research on Korean genetic disorders should focus on "the unique aspects of Korean DNA."
However, should joint genetic research be carried out with foreign research teams, Mr. Jo said Korean researchers should work more closely with Japanese researchers than with those from China. The results of the study will be published on the August edition of Genomics, an international journal on genetics.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com
Full Version: Study: Korean, Japanese DNA similar
China History Forum, Chinese History Forum > Off Topic Heaven > Asian History and Culture > Asian Anthropology
This would fit in with the human migration patterns of which I am aware.
Apparently, a small portion of Japanese people actually originated from Korean pennisular, while some say the chinese migration to Japan brough by Xufu during Qin dynasty also added some chinese bloods in Japanese...
That would seem to fit with most current theories, but in regard to the study itself, is the use of just 43 women enough upon which to be a scientific study?? 
Seems like we need more information for this report to be useful. The Chinese population is remarkably diverse. One wonders, for example, are Koreans closer to Northeastern Chinese than to Japanese? We need more information.
One thing is for sure though.
Koreans and Japanese are closer to the Han Chinese than they are to the Mongols. Genetically speaking.
Koreans and Japanese are closer to the Han Chinese than they are to the Mongols. Genetically speaking.
so korea are japanese formal masters not japanes are the korea formal masters ?
QUOTE(PandaBear @ Aug 12 2005, 04:39 PM)
so korea are japanese formal masters not japanes are the korea formal masters ?
[snapback]4747712[/snapback]
Excuse me?
QUOTE(PandaBear @ Aug 13 2005, 02:39 AM)
so korea are japanese formal masters not japanes are the korea formal masters ?
[snapback]4747712[/snapback]
Do I speak for everyone here if I say: "Huh?"
Back to the main theme.....yes, it makes sense if you consider how many times Koreans and Japanese populationswould mix since very remote times (at least the Yayoi period, but it would make sense that those who immigrated to the japanese archipelago when it was relied to the continent would, at least for some of them, have common ancestry with those who established themselves in Korea).
43 women is a very small amount. I doubt the accuaracy of this research. However it is quite clear from physical appearanve that the Koreans are similar to the Japanese. Historically this is the case too. Geographical they are next to each other... very obvious, no need for conplex research.
When two people orginate from similar areas, they would have similar DNA. So i would assume that the Chinese living close to the Yalu border would have almost identical DNA to the fellow Korean on the otherside. However, a Cantonese would probably have different DNA altogether. Since on average, Japanese people are closer to Korea, they share similar DNA.
When two people orginate from similar areas, they would have similar DNA. So i would assume that the Chinese living close to the Yalu border would have almost identical DNA to the fellow Korean on the otherside. However, a Cantonese would probably have different DNA altogether. Since on average, Japanese people are closer to Korea, they share similar DNA.
QUOTE(PandaBear @ Aug 13 2005, 08:39 AM)
so korea are japanese formal masters not japanes are the korea formal masters ?
[snapback]4747712[/snapback]
Erm... I think he/she meant this:
"So, the Koreans were the Japanese's former masters and not vice versa?"
I believe there was a confusion of the words "former" and "formal".
QUOTE(wei @ Aug 19 2005, 02:48 PM)
43 women is a very small amount. I doubt the accuaracy of this research. However it is quite clear from physical appearanve that the Koreans are similar to the Japanese. Historically this is the case too. Geographical they are next to each other... very obvious, no need for conplex research.
When two people orginate from similar areas, they would have similar DNA. So i would assume that the Chinese living close to the Yalu border would have almost identical DNA to the fellow Korean on the otherside. However, a Cantonese would probably have different DNA altogether. Since on average, Japanese people are closer to Korea, they share similar DNA.
When two people orginate from similar areas, they would have similar DNA. So i would assume that the Chinese living close to the Yalu border would have almost identical DNA to the fellow Korean on the otherside. However, a Cantonese would probably have different DNA altogether. Since on average, Japanese people are closer to Korea, they share similar DNA.
[snapback]4749940[/snapback]
near Yalu Jiang there are a autonomous region of Korean ethnic. Most Chinese there would be of Korean ethnic. (Chinese=>in PRC not the same as Han, since all who live in PRC is "Chinese")Never mind, the genetical difference between farthest people is only 0.03%
QUOTE(General_Zhaoyun @ Aug 5 2005, 01:19 PM) 
Apparently, a small portion of Japanese people actually originated from Korean pennisular, while some say the chinese migration to Japan brough by Xufu during Qin dynasty also added some chinese bloods in Japanese...
This is basically confirmed by other studies of DNA. Japanese are basially Korean.
QUOTE(kaixin @ Aug 9 2005, 09:03 AM)
One thing is for sure though.
Koreans and Japanese are closer to the Han Chinese than they are to the Mongols. Genetically speaking.
Koreans and Japanese are closer to the Han Chinese than they are to the Mongols. Genetically speaking.
Actually genetic tie between Mongols, Manchus, Koreans, and even Hungarians is more tight than each one's tie to the Han Chinese. I mean Buyeo, Mohe (Mogher), Merkit, Khitan, Komo su, ...
You heard any of these?
I'm pretty sure Koreans are most closest with the Mongolians, not the Japanese.
QUOTE(jebusrocks @ Oct 2 2007, 09:17 AM)
I'm pretty sure Koreans are most closest with the Mongolians, not the Japanese.
A simple internet search will verify that the closest relationship among the Oriental groups is the Koreans and Japanese.
QUOTE
Abstract Using the data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction polymorphism, the gene pools of Koreans (N = 164) and Mongolians (N = 48) were characterized. It was demonstrated that the gene pools were represented by the common set of mtDNA haplogroups of East Asian origin (M*, M7, M8a, M10, C, D4, G*, G2, A, B*, B5, F1, and N*). In addition to this set, mtDNA haplogroups D5 and Y were identified in Koreans while Mongolians possessed haplogroup Z. Only in Mongolians, a European component with the frequency of 10.4% and represented by the mtDNA types belonging to haplogroups K, U4, and N1, was identified. Phylogenetic and statistical analyses of the data on mtDNA variation in the populations of South Siberia, Central, and East Asia suggested the existence of interpopulation differentiation within these regions, the main role in which was played by the geographical and linguistic factors. Analysis of the pairwise F ST distances demonstrated close genetic similarity of Koreans to Northern Chinese, which in turn, were clearly different from Southern Chinese populations. Mongolians occupied an intermediate position between the ethnic groups of South Siberia and Central/East Asia.
huh.. can anyone actually read what it means? Cuz I'd love to know
QUOTE(jebusrocks @ Oct 3 2007, 01:35 AM)
huh.. can anyone actually read what it means? Cuz I'd love to know
This particular quote does not deal with the relationship between the Koreans and the Japanese, but it basically says that among the groups mentioned the Koreans are closest to Northern Chinese' The Mongolians are in between the more distantly related ethnic groups of South Siberia.
Abstract Using the data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction polymorphism, the gene pools of Koreans (N = 164) and Mongolians (N = 48) were characterized. It was demonstrated that the gene pools were represented by the common set of mtDNA haplogroups of East Asian origin (M*, M7, M8a, M10, C, D4, G*, G2, A, B*, B5, F1, and N*). In addition to this set, mtDNA haplogroups D5 and Y were identified in Koreans while Mongolians possessed haplogroup Z. Only in Mongolians, a European component with the frequency of 10.4% and represented by the mtDNA types belonging to haplogroups K, U4, and N1, was identified. Phylogenetic and statistical analyses of the data on mtDNA variation in the populations of South Siberia, Central, and East Asia suggested the existence of interpopulation differentiation within these regions, the main role in which was played by the geographical and linguistic factors. Analysis of the pairwise F ST distances demonstrated close genetic similarity of Koreans to Northern Chinese, which in turn, were clearly different from Southern Chinese populations. Mongolians occupied an intermediate position between the ethnic groups of South Siberia and Central/East Asia.
QUOTE(DaMo @ Aug 3 2005, 09:45 PM)
This would fit in with the human migration patterns of which I am aware.
Koreans and Mongolians look exactly alike. As babies we all have purple asses.
QUOTE(General_Zhaoyun @ Aug 4 2005, 11:19 PM)
Apparently, a small portion of Japanese people actually originated from Korean pennisular, while some say the chinese migration to Japan brough by Xufu during Qin dynasty also added some chinese bloods in Japanese...
I'm disappointed that you said "small portion." In fact a great amount of Japanese people have actually originated from Korea. I don't know anything about Xufu but a great amount of Wangs fled to Japan when the Yi dynasty took over. The Wangs are Chinese descendants but before the Wangs many Koreans migrated to the Japanese islands.
Number one proof. The Korean grammar and Japanese grammar are 99% identical.
QUOTE(jebusrocks @ Oct 1 2007, 07:17 PM)
I'm pretty sure Koreans are most closest with the Mongolians, not the Japanese.
if you "GENERALIZE" every fact and studies done on relations between japan and korea. The majority Japanese people are mixture of the actual southern Japanese people and Koreans who migrated or fled to Japan. yeah so you can pretty much say japanese are koreans. just not all of them. most of them. especially the politicians and the celebrities.
QUOTE(sangwich @ Oct 13 2007, 05:42 PM)
Koreans and Mongolians look exactly alike. As babies we all have purple asses.
Don't some Chinese, Japanese and even native American babies have purple asses too?
I would imagine that Japanese people are a mixture of people who came from the area of Tibet or further North, through Mongolia through Korea and then to Japan (Yayoi). I would also imagine that the Ainu were already there (Jomon). I also know for certain during historic time many Chinese migrated to Kyoto and many ethnic Koreans fled from Korea to Kyushu and Southern Honshu.
Basically, like most Island people, the Japanese are muts. They are a amalgamation of various people who came from different areas of Mainland Asia at different times. Before there was political unity on the Island, people had no sense of "Japanese" they were just various tribes that lived in the same area that overtime consolidated.
Same thing happened in China over a much longer period of time and with much more diversity. There are no pure Han Chinese.
Genetic test are tricky as they are usually small (due to expense) and focus on major cities. I'm almost certain that Tokyo, Kyushu, Osaka, and Sendai people will vary somewhat as Japanese further north in Honshu probably have more Ainu ancestry and less Chinese ancestry for example.
You can see that Tibetans, Japanese, and Koreans are fairly closely related. I would assume that northern Chinese are close to them too, but Southern Chinese are divergent. They are more closely related to South East Asians, which makes sense, because Vietnam was part of China and bordered Guangdong and the Thai came from Southern central China...
I would guess that Southern Chinese are a mix of Han from Northern China who mixed with and assimilated the various tribes of Nan Yue. The Northern Chinese who expanded North assimilated tribes on the border who were related to Asians in the Northeast.
This does not mean that North and South Chinese are not related to each other more than anyone else. It just means that the North is more related to the North East than the South. I guess the Chinese are an intermediate population in Asia between Northeast and Southeast due to location. So truly the Middle Kingdom.
http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm
Basically, like most Island people, the Japanese are muts. They are a amalgamation of various people who came from different areas of Mainland Asia at different times. Before there was political unity on the Island, people had no sense of "Japanese" they were just various tribes that lived in the same area that overtime consolidated.
Same thing happened in China over a much longer period of time and with much more diversity. There are no pure Han Chinese.
Genetic test are tricky as they are usually small (due to expense) and focus on major cities. I'm almost certain that Tokyo, Kyushu, Osaka, and Sendai people will vary somewhat as Japanese further north in Honshu probably have more Ainu ancestry and less Chinese ancestry for example.
You can see that Tibetans, Japanese, and Koreans are fairly closely related. I would assume that northern Chinese are close to them too, but Southern Chinese are divergent. They are more closely related to South East Asians, which makes sense, because Vietnam was part of China and bordered Guangdong and the Thai came from Southern central China...
I would guess that Southern Chinese are a mix of Han from Northern China who mixed with and assimilated the various tribes of Nan Yue. The Northern Chinese who expanded North assimilated tribes on the border who were related to Asians in the Northeast.
This does not mean that North and South Chinese are not related to each other more than anyone else. It just means that the North is more related to the North East than the South. I guess the Chinese are an intermediate population in Asia between Northeast and Southeast due to location. So truly the Middle Kingdom.
http://www.friesian.com/trees.htm
QUOTE (WangKon936 @ Oct 15 2007, 02:26 PM)
Don't some Chinese, Japanese and even native American babies have purple asses too?
yes they do. This is called a Mongolian Spot. Most Japanese and Koreans have it. Some Chinese do, mostly people from the North and almost all Mongolians and Central Asians (Kyrgyz, Kazakh, Uzbek) have it. A lot of Native Americans have it to, being that they came from North East Asia in ancient times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_spot
Another thing to think about when judging genetic distance is that men typically moved in homogeneous groups with few or no females and marrying/raping local women after subduing, enslaving, or killing the males of the other ethnic group. This is pretty much how the Anglo-Saxons (and Jutes) conquered England from the Celto-Romans. They buy, kidnap, or rape local women, and raise the children as Germanic. Their daughters likley marry pure Germanic people or the sons of Germanic fathers/Celtic mothers. They raise the resulting children Germanic, speaking proto-English and practicing German culture (which became English) although, now they are only 1/4 Germanic (Anglo-Saxon or Jute).
It is likely the Yayoi did the same thing to the Jomon in Japan. Yayoi culture became dominant due to Yayoi men dominating the Jomon and stopping the most Jomon men from procreating in large numbers.
It is likely the Yayoi did the same thing to the Jomon in Japan. Yayoi culture became dominant due to Yayoi men dominating the Jomon and stopping the most Jomon men from procreating in large numbers.
QUOTE (dingy @ Dec 29 2007, 05:42 AM)
Koreans do not have a DNA YAP+ at all that 50% of japanese men have. 
Koreans do not have a DNA YAP+ at all that 50% of Japanese men have.
Koreans do not have a DNA YAP+ at all that 50% of Japanese men have.
Yes, because Ainu didn't live in Korea. That does not mean that Yayoi were not from the Korean Penn.
Modern koreans and japanese are the two most closest related people on this planet who are not part of the same country. We have to look at mtdna, not y. siberians and steppe people are matrilineage; even shang people.
modern koreans have 7% yap+
give it a rest.
modern koreans have 7% yap+
give it a rest.
QUOTE (heosuabi @ Dec 30 2007, 09:00 PM)
Modern koreans and japanese are the two most closest related people on this planet who are not part of the same country. We have to look at mtdna, not y. siberians and steppe people are matrilineage; even shang people.
modern koreans have 7% yap+
give it a rest.
modern koreans have 7% yap+
give it a rest.
Tibetans have more Yap and almost all Africans have Yap.
It comes from D Y chromosome Haplgroup.
D came from E, the super group, that is present in almost all of Africa (like 80%) and much of the Mediterrean region.
It is odd, in Asia, D is very ancient...it seems the people who have D came from Asia from the South and moved North.
Most Asians are O, which came from Central Asia from the north and came South into China, Korea, Japan all the way to Indonesia.
QUOTE
In human genetics, Haplogroup D (M174) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.
D is believed to have originated in Africa some 50,000 years before present. Along with haplogroup E, D contains the distinctive YAP polymorphism, which indicates their common ancestry.
Both D and E also contain the M168 change, which is present in all Y-chromosome haplogroups except A and B.
Like haplogroup C, D is believed to represent a great coastal migration along southern Asia, from Arabia to Southeast Asia and thence northward to populate East Asia. It is found today at high frequency among populations in Tibet, the Japanese archipelago, and the Andaman Islands, though curiously not in India. The Ainu of Japan and the Jarawa and Onge of the Andaman Islands are notable for possessing almost exclusively Haplogroup D chromosomes, although Haplogroup C chromosomes also occur among the Ainu at a frequency of approximately 10%, similar to the Japanese. Haplogroup D chromosomes are also found at low to moderate frequencies among all the populations of Central and Northeast Asia as well as the Han and Miao-Yao peoples of China and among several minority populations of Yunnan that speak Tibeto-Burman languages and reside in close proximity to the Tibetans.
Unlike haplogroup C, it did not travel from Asia to the New World.
SNIP
Haplogroup D is also remarkable for its rather extreme geographic differentiation, with a distinct subset of Haplogroup D chromosomes being found exclusively in each of the populations that contains a large percentage of individuals whose Y-chromosomes belong to Haplogroup D: Haplogroup D1 among the Tibetans (as well as among the mainland East Asian populations that display very low frequencies of Haplogroup D Y-chromosomes), Haplogroup D2 among the various populations of the Japanese Archipelago, Haplogroup D3 among the inhabitants of Tajikistan and other parts of mountainous southern Central Asia, and Haplogroup D* (probably another monophyletic branch of Haplogroup D) among the Andaman Islanders. Another type (or types) of Haplogroup D* is found at a very low frequency among the Turkic and Mongolic populations of Central Asia. This apparently ancient diversification of Haplogroup D suggests that it may perhaps be better characterized as a "super-haplogroup" or "macro-haplogroup."
The Haplogroup D Y-chromosomes that are found among populations of the Japanese Archipelago are particularly distinctive, bearing a complex of at least five individual mutations along an internal branch of the Haplogroup D phylogeny, thus distinguishing them clearly from the Haplogroup D chromosomes that are found among the Tibetans and Andaman Islanders and providing evidence that Y-chromosome Haplogroup D2 was the modal haplogroup in the ancestral population that developed the prehistoric Jōmon culture in the Japanese islands.
D is believed to have originated in Africa some 50,000 years before present. Along with haplogroup E, D contains the distinctive YAP polymorphism, which indicates their common ancestry.
Both D and E also contain the M168 change, which is present in all Y-chromosome haplogroups except A and B.
Like haplogroup C, D is believed to represent a great coastal migration along southern Asia, from Arabia to Southeast Asia and thence northward to populate East Asia. It is found today at high frequency among populations in Tibet, the Japanese archipelago, and the Andaman Islands, though curiously not in India. The Ainu of Japan and the Jarawa and Onge of the Andaman Islands are notable for possessing almost exclusively Haplogroup D chromosomes, although Haplogroup C chromosomes also occur among the Ainu at a frequency of approximately 10%, similar to the Japanese. Haplogroup D chromosomes are also found at low to moderate frequencies among all the populations of Central and Northeast Asia as well as the Han and Miao-Yao peoples of China and among several minority populations of Yunnan that speak Tibeto-Burman languages and reside in close proximity to the Tibetans.
Unlike haplogroup C, it did not travel from Asia to the New World.
SNIP
Haplogroup D is also remarkable for its rather extreme geographic differentiation, with a distinct subset of Haplogroup D chromosomes being found exclusively in each of the populations that contains a large percentage of individuals whose Y-chromosomes belong to Haplogroup D: Haplogroup D1 among the Tibetans (as well as among the mainland East Asian populations that display very low frequencies of Haplogroup D Y-chromosomes), Haplogroup D2 among the various populations of the Japanese Archipelago, Haplogroup D3 among the inhabitants of Tajikistan and other parts of mountainous southern Central Asia, and Haplogroup D* (probably another monophyletic branch of Haplogroup D) among the Andaman Islanders. Another type (or types) of Haplogroup D* is found at a very low frequency among the Turkic and Mongolic populations of Central Asia. This apparently ancient diversification of Haplogroup D suggests that it may perhaps be better characterized as a "super-haplogroup" or "macro-haplogroup."
The Haplogroup D Y-chromosomes that are found among populations of the Japanese Archipelago are particularly distinctive, bearing a complex of at least five individual mutations along an internal branch of the Haplogroup D phylogeny, thus distinguishing them clearly from the Haplogroup D chromosomes that are found among the Tibetans and Andaman Islanders and providing evidence that Y-chromosome Haplogroup D2 was the modal haplogroup in the ancestral population that developed the prehistoric Jōmon culture in the Japanese islands.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_D_(Y-DNA)
QUOTE (dingy @ Dec 31 2007, 09:49 AM)
As the world's population ( of all races & ethnicities ) are intermixing more then ever before,I wonder how those DNA markers evolve over time or mostly would stay the same 
To trace back certain geneology by using genetic markers; it's sorta like the ... ink blot would spread out in water ... the more density it is ... certainly we could track back to its root (not other way around) by following certain haplogroup markers in our DNA.
I have had made a lot of educational posting regards to gene-markers, and at some threads I had completely outlined the Y and MtDNA composition of Modern Koreans. Time frame required for genetic mutation to have caused the branching of gene-marker would be in order of 10 to 50 thousand years. I can assure you that *No* modern humans originated from today's land of China. Some people had passed thru China and arrived at Korea/Japan. But a lot more of Koreans and Japanese originated from as Siberians and Pacific Islanders and East Asian Coastal people than the continental China. If we want to look at the cultural flow we may only need to go back to neolithic period ( 6K - 7K years ago ). Korea and Japan are definitly the receipient of cultural elements originating from India/Central Asia/China. Exchange of people are both ways, as many Koreans went to China and became part of Chinese.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 1 2008, 08:36 PM)
I can also assure you that " no " modern humans originated from today's land of Korea 
Take it easy Dingy, yet you have posted many valuable information to this topic, but you display anti-Korean attitude, which will bring Korean nationalists to this forum.
The human DNAs doesn't actually show any single race since DNAs can be mutated over long periods, since most east asian race are migrated from central-asian, India, and China regions and traveled via Siberia & Korea way made to Japan, many Japanese will show similar DNA strands to Chinese & Korean (25% & 24%); frankly 1% of DNA difference doesn't actually show who's more closer to Japanese. Since Korean DNA also have Chinese existence; therefore most east asian race end up approx. 1/4 DNAs from Chinese. But even Chinese DNA themselves are also show relation to Korean as well, particularly NE Chinese DNA stock.
When Japanese mentioned about 25% of their genes are related to Chinese, are actually mean NE Chinese stock, very little evidence to prove this since most DNA studies from Japan are politically filtered.
So my conclusion is NE Chinese DNA + Korean DNA + Ainu + other minor Polynesian stock became modern Japanese DNA family. From my past knowledge Korean DNA also have approx. 30% of their DNA is related to NE Chinese.
Anyway; logical human migration pattern is more studied than DNA due to its difficult to differentiate the origins.
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/
Here is good example;
Just take Australia for instance:-
1. Since approx. 80% of Australian population are European descendants or directly migrated European race
Original Australian is more closely related to European culture rather than Australasian habitants. (True/False)
2. Also since Australian also have 3% of Asian race; Australians are also related to asian culture (True/False)
3. Since White Australians have 30% Irish, 25% Scotts, 15% Germanic etc.. - That put Australians are more closely related to Irish race family. (True/False)
This is why we should not take modern DNA sample into RACE theory!
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 12:21 PM)
One of the enduring mysteries of Japan is the origin of the language ... Indiana University-Bloomington linguistics professor Christopher Beckwith's relatively new tome Koguryo: The Language of Japan's Continental Relatives offers a fascinating and plausible solution to the enduring origin puzzle ... Based on the work of Gisaburo N. Kiyose, Beckwith proposes a somewhat radical immigration narrative for the Wa. He puts the original Koguryoic homeland in Liao-Hsi (present day Liaoning) on the coast of Northeast China ... Beckwith's theory pretty much puts the Japanese and Koreans as distant relatives - cousins at best and definitely not the "brothers" as Diamond would like them to be ... At best, the modern day Koreans have a minority strain of Koguryo in their DNA and language. (emphasis added)
Christopher Beckwith's research is not news to me,as you can see, and I do think Beckwith is on the right path in suggesting a much stronger affinity between Koguryo and the Japanese than can be established by modern Korean nationalists intent on claiming this long-estinguished kingdom as "theirs", but that Koguryoic contributed virtually nothing to modern-day Korean does not in any way establish either that its speakers were an insignificant portion of the ancestors of living Koreans or that Koreans and Japanese are therefore more distantly related than has been assumed.
Oh, and while we're on the topic of Koguryo, Korean-Japanese genetic relatedness to its peoples notwithstanding, I find it utterly absurd that modern-day Koreans should lay claim to the ruins of Koguryo which happen to lie behind China's borders just because what was left of the kingdom in its declining days happened to be conquered by Shilla. Such reasoning seems as tenable to me as the Danish laying claim to English ruins from the Danelaw period, and an Italian declaration of suzerainty over ruins left behind by the Romans in all of Continental Europe would have far more legitimacy to it than such Korean maneuverings:the nail in the coffin is that as Beckwith's work indicates, Japan would have an even stronger claim to ancient Koguryo's heritage than the Koreans themselves, even by the warped standards favored by Korean nationalists.
http://foreigndispatches.typepad.com/dispa...rigins_of_.html
Christopher Beckwith's research is not news to me,as you can see, and I do think Beckwith is on the right path in suggesting a much stronger affinity between Koguryo and the Japanese than can be established by modern Korean nationalists intent on claiming this long-estinguished kingdom as "theirs", but that Koguryoic contributed virtually nothing to modern-day Korean does not in any way establish either that its speakers were an insignificant portion of the ancestors of living Koreans or that Koreans and Japanese are therefore more distantly related than has been assumed.
Oh, and while we're on the topic of Koguryo, Korean-Japanese genetic relatedness to its peoples notwithstanding, I find it utterly absurd that modern-day Koreans should lay claim to the ruins of Koguryo which happen to lie behind China's borders just because what was left of the kingdom in its declining days happened to be conquered by Shilla. Such reasoning seems as tenable to me as the Danish laying claim to English ruins from the Danelaw period, and an Italian declaration of suzerainty over ruins left behind by the Romans in all of Continental Europe would have far more legitimacy to it than such Korean maneuverings:the nail in the coffin is that as Beckwith's work indicates, Japan would have an even stronger claim to ancient Koguryo's heritage than the Koreans themselves, even by the warped standards favored by Korean nationalists.
http://foreigndispatches.typepad.com/dispa...rigins_of_.html
Great so Goguryeo should be part of Japanese history?
This doesn't really fit the logic and seems radically Pro-Japanese and supporting groundless claims..
In my understanding, both Goguryeo and Baekje came from Buyo royal lineage. That put approx. 3/4 Korean peninsula population under this lineage. This is why some pro-Japanese scholars trying to dump part of Korean heritage under sub trees of what is considered to be Japanese or Chinese. Which is questionable...
It's true that Silla conquered both Baekje & Goguryeo, and forced them to assimilated into Silla, but we can't just ignore main population of Korean peninsula being Buyo lineage.
Moreover, the similarity between Goguryeo & Japanese language is actually false, because Silla had more closer ties with ancient Japan's trades & migrations due to proximity of their locations. Baekje-Gaya links came after Gaya confederation teamup with Baekje during early Baekje-Silla war.
Remember, State of Wa was located some where in Southern Korean peninsula.
Btw, spoken dialect of Silla is more closer to Japanese spoken dialect than people of Northern part of Korean peninsula. There are many similar folk tales with Silla-Japan than folk tales from Goguryeo.
If there is any link between Goguryeo and Japan then it would be Gaya & Baekje since huge numbers of cultural exchanges made between Yamato Japan and Baekje.
"Koguryoic contributed virtually nothing to modern-day Korean does not in any way establish either that its speakers were an insignificant portion of the ancestors of living Koreans or that Koreans and Japanese are therefore more distantly related than has been assumed."
Well, Goguryeo is long gone and most of Goguryeo heritage being held mostly by North Korean & China and most of foreign researchers only could see the remainants of Silla, Koryo, baekje etc.. could actually looks like there aren't any relations between modern Korea & Goguryeo. This sound like someone have very little knowledge of Korean history and its culture.
Btw, that black dude who wrote his opinions on his blog - I don't think he's considered to be Korean or Japaneses experts. Dingy - next time I suggest get reputable source than this.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 02:05 PM)
Read below " C & P " posts written by history expert CHF moderator WangKon936 ( ethnically S Korean )
* I for one will only allow Koguryo's Korean heritage to be ripped from my dead cold hands. However, after much research and soul searching I've found out that Parhae is not nearly as Korean as most Koreans would hope it would be. The Mohe contribution is undeniable and significant.
* I also believe that Koguryo is not as Korean as modern Koreans think it is as well, although they have a better case there.
Daniel Kane and Mark Byington, probably the two best experts on early Korean History in North America.
The Mohe (or Malgal, Mogher) were a Tungusic people in ancient Manchuria.They are considered the ancestors of medieval Jurchen and modern-day Manchus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
Anyways, essentially Reckel says that Parhae ( 渤海 or Bohai ) did indeed a significant Mohoe element to their population, it had to as the Tang took most of Koguryo’s population and relocated them to the central plain as well as areas as remote as today’s Burma. Out of the 600,000 households of the original Koguryo Kingdom, there was probably only 100,000 households left in Southern Manchuria, not enough to defend against Tang, Silla and Kihtan tribesman. The Mohe changed sides during the Tang/Koguryo wars. Traditional allies to the of Koguryo, the Mohe sided with Tang, but once they figured out that the Tang didn’t really have any plans to develope or effectively rule the Northeast, they decided to revolt, using the distraction that the Kihtan provided to do so. Da Go Wang (or Tae Jo Young in Korean pronounciation) was a Mohe chieftan who was also a Koguryo general. He was ethnically Mohe, not Koguryo.
* I for one will only allow Koguryo's Korean heritage to be ripped from my dead cold hands. However, after much research and soul searching I've found out that Parhae is not nearly as Korean as most Koreans would hope it would be. The Mohe contribution is undeniable and significant.
* I also believe that Koguryo is not as Korean as modern Koreans think it is as well, although they have a better case there.
Daniel Kane and Mark Byington, probably the two best experts on early Korean History in North America.
The Mohe (or Malgal, Mogher) were a Tungusic people in ancient Manchuria.They are considered the ancestors of medieval Jurchen and modern-day Manchus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
Anyways, essentially Reckel says that Parhae ( 渤海 or Bohai ) did indeed a significant Mohoe element to their population, it had to as the Tang took most of Koguryo’s population and relocated them to the central plain as well as areas as remote as today’s Burma. Out of the 600,000 households of the original Koguryo Kingdom, there was probably only 100,000 households left in Southern Manchuria, not enough to defend against Tang, Silla and Kihtan tribesman. The Mohe changed sides during the Tang/Koguryo wars. Traditional allies to the of Koguryo, the Mohe sided with Tang, but once they figured out that the Tang didn’t really have any plans to develope or effectively rule the Northeast, they decided to revolt, using the distraction that the Kihtan provided to do so. Da Go Wang (or Tae Jo Young in Korean pronounciation) was a Mohe chieftan who was also a Koguryo general. He was ethnically Mohe, not Koguryo.
Please retain posting someone's opinions. Even he's not considered to be Korean history experts.
I will agreed with balhae being not totally Korean since there are too many Mohe or Malgal stocks; but at least their co-founder was Goguryeo lineage and many of their royals & noble classes were from previous Goguryeo stocks.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 02:44 PM)
* According to Chinese history records, Huimo ( Yemak 穢貊 ) was formed by two peoples ( Korean nationalists staunchly claimed these were their ancient ancestors ).One being Hui (穢) and the other being Mo (貊).Hui (穢) people used to populated around China's Shangdong peninsula. Mo (貊) people used to populated around the northern edge of China's Hebei and Shangxi provinces.Some branches of Hui (穢) people and Mo (貊) people migrated to Manchuria. After their arrival to the southern Mancuria and North Korea, some clans of Hui and Mo merged and evloved into a new tribal alliance of Huimo ( Yemak 穢貊 ) at the eastern side of North Korea.Some of Hui and Mo populated a large territory of southern and south-central Macnhuria. They did not merged into a single people initially and live independently in Southern Manchuria. Maybe I should change the wording of Huimo system into Hui-Mo system just to make a distinguishing from that single Huimo tribal alliace in the eastern North Korea.Later,they became the Puyo 夫餘 clans ( predecessor of Baekje or Paekche in southern Korea peninsula ).
Oh .. Koreans romanticized that Yamato Royal House was founded by the 夫餘 Puyo people.Then,Japanese Royal House originated in China 
Source below :
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=z...2US233%26sa%3DG
* Koreans are only genetically related to Japanese by 24%+ ( mostly Tungus heritage -Baekje & Koguryo origins ) versus 25%+ between Chinese & Japanese ( both Chinese NE Tungus & southern Chinese )
http://oniazuma.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/idenshi/
* A reputable Japanese archaeologist named 樋口隆康 noted 2 Chinese migration routes
* China's lower Yangtze River ( today China's coastal provinces of Jiangsu & Zhejiang ) > northern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan
* southern China via Taiwan and Ryukyus ( Okinawa ) > southern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan.
日本考古学研究家 " 樋口隆康 "
http://shinshomap.info/theme/roots_of_japanese_g.html
『日本人はどこから来たか』(樋口隆康著、講談社現代新書)は、考古学者の日本人起源論である。樋口は日本 人を「日本列島に住み、同じ体質を持ち、日本的な文化を持つ一群の人類群」と定義した上で、「日本人の起源 とは日本文化の起源である」という立場から、起源を、日本文化の形成過程に求めている。他分野の知見も参考 にし、石器や土器、稲作の伝来や農具など発掘から得たデータをもとに考察する樋口は、文化は樺太、朝鮮半島、( 中国 )東シナ海 、台湾・南西諸島、小笠原諸島の5ルートから日本に移入されていて、その合成により日本文化は形成されたが、中でも中国江南地域から東シナ海を通って伝えられた文化が最も重要な役割を果たしており、形成時期は弥生時代であ る、という仮説をたてる。
http://www.google.com/search?q=%E6%A8%8B%E...art=20&sa=N
Oh .. Koreans romanticized that Yamato Royal House was founded by the 夫餘 Puyo people.Then,Japanese Royal House originated in China
Source below :
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=z...2US233%26sa%3DG
* Koreans are only genetically related to Japanese by 24%+ ( mostly Tungus heritage -Baekje & Koguryo origins ) versus 25%+ between Chinese & Japanese ( both Chinese NE Tungus & southern Chinese )
http://oniazuma.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/idenshi/
* A reputable Japanese archaeologist named 樋口隆康 noted 2 Chinese migration routes
* China's lower Yangtze River ( today China's coastal provinces of Jiangsu & Zhejiang ) > northern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan
* southern China via Taiwan and Ryukyus ( Okinawa ) > southern Kyūshū 九州 of Japan.
日本考古学研究家 " 樋口隆康 "
http://shinshomap.info/theme/roots_of_japanese_g.html
『日本人はどこから来たか』(樋口隆康著、講談社現代新書)は、考古学者の日本人起源論である。樋口は日本 人を「日本列島に住み、同じ体質を持ち、日本的な文化を持つ一群の人類群」と定義した上で、「日本人の起源 とは日本文化の起源である」という立場から、起源を、日本文化の形成過程に求めている。他分野の知見も参考 にし、石器や土器、稲作の伝来や農具など発掘から得たデータをもとに考察する樋口は、文化は樺太、朝鮮半島、( 中国 )東シナ海 、台湾・南西諸島、小笠原諸島の5ルートから日本に移入されていて、その合成により日本文化は形成されたが、中でも中国江南地域から東シナ海を通って伝えられた文化が最も重要な役割を果たしており、形成時期は弥生時代であ る、という仮説をたてる。
http://www.google.com/search?q=%E6%A8%8B%E...art=20&sa=N
Look dude, Buyo is definitely Korean stock, at least 3/4 of Korean population were belongs to this stock. case over.
I am not buying some the claims you mentioned above (again someone's opinions rather than actual reputable sources).
Many Japanese nationalists fabricated this "Japanese origins"; and I am surprise that someone like you (Guessing Taiwanese nationalist) actually buying their theories.
OK, I get you, you are saying Japanese are actually Chinese and same goes for Korean to be summurized. Which will be very offensive to Korean audiences here. You are basically quoting someone's opinions after opinions to making yourself indulge yourself to your another personal opinion.
IMHO; Japanese are Japanese (they have no relations with Koreans & Korean peninsula - they are trying to bring this some ridiculous theory of them being original people of Korea and Buyo) - which is hardly a case. Btw, Japanese people are more closer to Filipinos than Koreans.
Also, Koreans are Korean stock that lived on Korean peninsula for thousands of years, they have strong identity, Go-Joseon, Buyo, Goguryeo, Baekje, Silla, Gaya, Koryo, and finally Joseon are filled with Korean stocks. They are inseparatable Korean lineage. <case over>
Taiwanese are now Chinese stock, yes with some survived indigenous people as well, other than KMT and some political & economy, I don't know if Taiwanese should considered to be separate entity from China.
The problem is that you kept on claiming Korean nationalists fabricated Dongbei relations with Korean, yet you posted nothing but another fabricated theories from another opinions.
If you really want to argue with this theory, then argue with some of historians and reputable scholars. I don't like playing game of "Who's your daddy" or "Who's better".
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 03:11 PM)
Well,much based on credible mateirals written by Western history scholarly experts 
Daniel Kane and Mark Byington, probably the two best experts on early Korean History in North America.
The Mohe (or Malgal, Mogher) were a Tungusic people in ancient Manchuria.They are considered the ancestors of medieval Jurchen and modern-day Manchus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
Anyways, essentially Reckel says that Parhae ( 渤海 or Bohai ) did indeed a significant Mohoe element to their population, it had to as the Tang took most of Koguryo’s population and relocated them to the central plain as well as areas as remote as today’s Burma. Out of the 600,000 households of the original Koguryo Kingdom, there was probably only 100,000 households left in Southern Manchuria, not enough to defend against Tang, Silla and Kihtan tribesman. The Mohe changed sides during the Tang/Koguryo wars. Traditional allies to the of Koguryo, the Mohe sided with Tang, but once they figured out that the Tang didn’t really have any plans to develope or effectively rule the Northeast, they decided to revolt, using the distraction that the Kihtan provided to do so. Da Go Wang (or Tae Jo Young in Korean pronounciation) was a Mohe chieftan who was also a Koguryo general. He was ethnically Mohe, not Koguryo.
How do I know this ? Well Dr. Reckel notices that early Parhae tombs contained more Mohe artifacts than Koguryo ones. However, as time went by, the Mohe element started to disappear as the Koguryo ruling class solidified their hold on the government. Mohe names disappeared from the diplomatic registers to Japan and Mohe artifacts disappeared from royal tombs. Mohe artifacts also began to be pushed outward to areas away from the cities and on to the northern fringes of the kingdom. Sure, Parhae was a heavily sinofied kingdom, but probably no more then say the Paekje kingdom was or the Unified Shilla Kingdom was becoming at the same time. Anyways, the remaining Koguryo population in the decades after the Tang/Koguryo wars was not enough to create a viable kingdom. The Mohe poplulation did not have the literacy and sophistication to create a kingdom and would not be able to do so until the 17th century when they evolved into the Manchus and defeated the Ming Dynasty.
Several Mohe tribes that Da Jo Yeong ( 大祚榮 ) had influence over joined with these Koguryo remnants to create Jin-Guk, the state of Jin in 698 A.D. In 713 A.D., after beating several Tang attemps to eliminate him, Dae Jo Yeong ( 大祚榮 ) declared himself King of Koguryo (高句麗). The name Bohai or Parhae in Korean was given by Tang. Parhae sometimes addressed themself as Koryo-Guk ( or Gaoliguo in Chinese) to Japan, probably because Japan was the only nation that would recognize them with that name as Tang certainly would not given that they had spent so much time and resources in eliminating Koguryo in the first place. The Parhae king went as far as to tell the Japanese Emperor, "We have restored the lost territory of Koguryo (高句麗) and have preserved the remaining customs of the Puyo."
Daniel Kane and Mark Byington, probably the two best experts on early Korean History in North America.
The Mohe (or Malgal, Mogher) were a Tungusic people in ancient Manchuria.They are considered the ancestors of medieval Jurchen and modern-day Manchus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
Anyways, essentially Reckel says that Parhae ( 渤海 or Bohai ) did indeed a significant Mohoe element to their population, it had to as the Tang took most of Koguryo’s population and relocated them to the central plain as well as areas as remote as today’s Burma. Out of the 600,000 households of the original Koguryo Kingdom, there was probably only 100,000 households left in Southern Manchuria, not enough to defend against Tang, Silla and Kihtan tribesman. The Mohe changed sides during the Tang/Koguryo wars. Traditional allies to the of Koguryo, the Mohe sided with Tang, but once they figured out that the Tang didn’t really have any plans to develope or effectively rule the Northeast, they decided to revolt, using the distraction that the Kihtan provided to do so. Da Go Wang (or Tae Jo Young in Korean pronounciation) was a Mohe chieftan who was also a Koguryo general. He was ethnically Mohe, not Koguryo.
How do I know this ? Well Dr. Reckel notices that early Parhae tombs contained more Mohe artifacts than Koguryo ones. However, as time went by, the Mohe element started to disappear as the Koguryo ruling class solidified their hold on the government. Mohe names disappeared from the diplomatic registers to Japan and Mohe artifacts disappeared from royal tombs. Mohe artifacts also began to be pushed outward to areas away from the cities and on to the northern fringes of the kingdom. Sure, Parhae was a heavily sinofied kingdom, but probably no more then say the Paekje kingdom was or the Unified Shilla Kingdom was becoming at the same time. Anyways, the remaining Koguryo population in the decades after the Tang/Koguryo wars was not enough to create a viable kingdom. The Mohe poplulation did not have the literacy and sophistication to create a kingdom and would not be able to do so until the 17th century when they evolved into the Manchus and defeated the Ming Dynasty.
Several Mohe tribes that Da Jo Yeong ( 大祚榮 ) had influence over joined with these Koguryo remnants to create Jin-Guk, the state of Jin in 698 A.D. In 713 A.D., after beating several Tang attemps to eliminate him, Dae Jo Yeong ( 大祚榮 ) declared himself King of Koguryo (高句麗). The name Bohai or Parhae in Korean was given by Tang. Parhae sometimes addressed themself as Koryo-Guk ( or Gaoliguo in Chinese) to Japan, probably because Japan was the only nation that would recognize them with that name as Tang certainly would not given that they had spent so much time and resources in eliminating Koguryo in the first place. The Parhae king went as far as to tell the Japanese Emperor, "We have restored the lost territory of Koguryo (高句麗) and have preserved the remaining customs of the Puyo."
Look, don't try changing the topic here.
Why bring this Mohe or malgal theory here; and where are this people now? Gone, disappeared into history! Are you trying to relate them to japanese? Get over it.
OK, I get it Mohe or malgal father of Jurchens, so what is special about them? Do you know how many of different clans and tribes of Malgal stocks? So are they totally different stock from Chinese and Korean?
QUOTE (SNK_1408 @ Jan 2 2008, 06:33 PM)
Take it easy Dingy, yet you have posted many valuable information to this topic, but you display anti-Korean attitude, which will bring Korean nationalists to this forum.
The human DNAs doesn't actually show any single race since DNAs can be mutated over long periods, since most east asian race are migrated from central-asian, India, and China regions and traveled via Siberia & Korea way made to Japan, many Japanese will show similar DNA strands to Chinese & Korean (25% & 24%); frankly 1% of DNA difference doesn't actually show who's more closer to Japanese. Since Korean DNA also have Chinese existence; therefore most east asian race end up approx. 1/4 DNAs from Chinese. But even Chinese DNA themselves are also show relation to Korean as well, particularly NE Chinese DNA stock.
When Japanese mentioned about 25% of their genes are related to Chinese, are actually mean NE Chinese stock, very little evidence to prove this since most DNA studies from Japan are politically filtered.
So my conclusion is NE Chinese DNA + Korean DNA + Ainu + other minor Polynesian stock became modern Japanese DNA family. From my past knowledge Korean DNA also have approx. 30% of their DNA is related to NE Chinese.
Anyway; logical human migration pattern is more studied than DNA due to its difficult to differentiate the origins.
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/
Here is good example;
Just take Australia for instance:-
1. Since approx. 80% of Australian population are European descendants or directly migrated European race
Original Australian is more closely related to European culture rather than Australasian habitants. (True/False)
2. Also since Australian also have 3% of Asian race; Australians are also related to asian culture (True/False)
3. Since White Australians have 30% Irish, 25% Scotts, 15% Germanic etc.. - That put Australians are more closely related to Irish race family. (True/False)
This is why we should not take modern DNA sample into RACE theory!
The human DNAs doesn't actually show any single race since DNAs can be mutated over long periods, since most east asian race are migrated from central-asian, India, and China regions and traveled via Siberia & Korea way made to Japan, many Japanese will show similar DNA strands to Chinese & Korean (25% & 24%); frankly 1% of DNA difference doesn't actually show who's more closer to Japanese. Since Korean DNA also have Chinese existence; therefore most east asian race end up approx. 1/4 DNAs from Chinese. But even Chinese DNA themselves are also show relation to Korean as well, particularly NE Chinese DNA stock.
When Japanese mentioned about 25% of their genes are related to Chinese, are actually mean NE Chinese stock, very little evidence to prove this since most DNA studies from Japan are politically filtered.
So my conclusion is NE Chinese DNA + Korean DNA + Ainu + other minor Polynesian stock became modern Japanese DNA family. From my past knowledge Korean DNA also have approx. 30% of their DNA is related to NE Chinese.
Anyway; logical human migration pattern is more studied than DNA due to its difficult to differentiate the origins.
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/
Here is good example;
Just take Australia for instance:-
1. Since approx. 80% of Australian population are European descendants or directly migrated European race
Original Australian is more closely related to European culture rather than Australasian habitants. (True/False)
2. Also since Australian also have 3% of Asian race; Australians are also related to asian culture (True/False)
3. Since White Australians have 30% Irish, 25% Scotts, 15% Germanic etc.. - That put Australians are more closely related to Irish race family. (True/False)
This is why we should not take modern DNA sample into RACE theory!
you have to remember that the so called NE chinese(dongbei chinese) are basically migrants from shandong,henan and other chinese provinces.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 06:13 PM)
.... how would you answer to some S Koreans' claim of " Siberian " origin for the entire pure Korean population No ... Japanese finally openly willing to accept closer genetically ties to Asia continent ( including Korea peninsula
),they're indeed more genetically diversed. ... I am a Vietnam born ethnic Chinese,not Taiwanese nationalist as your baseless suggested.OK OK I get it. Look Dingy, I don't like arguing over history since most history are in fact distorted by survivals, the deads don't speak for themselves. So basically so called claimed history can be little out of sequence, this is why we should becareful especially dealing with NE Asian history.
Firstly; Siberian theory actually fits into Korean logic - and this is extensively studied by many foreigners and proved that Koreans are more closely associated with some Siberian tribes, therefore it's not entirely false.
Secondly; as you pointed out Japanese FINALLY ACCEPTED their genetically relationship with other asians, but they mostly incorporate non Japanese theory into their race theory to prove themselves that they were once belongs to advanced civilizations, this type of theory once used by many races specially Germans, Greeks and British, and some still do.
Frankly, original Japanese civilization and cultures aren't that fancy as we think of. I'm not saying I'm anti-Japan, but I'm pointing out Japanese have been lying about their history ever since their ruthless military campaigns. Believe me I have been to Japan many times and even worked there before, Japan is hardly multi-ethnic nation, it's single race family culture that force other ethnics to assimilate into theirs just like Chinese and Korean.
Lastly, honestly, you have been displaying some aggressive attitude to Koreans here. I can clearly see this coming from, but do understand we are here to learn and express our opinions. And I do highly value your opinions as well.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 06:35 PM)
Except Mohe 靺鞨,The Mohe (or Malgal ) were a Tungusic people in ancient Manchuria.They are considered the ancestors of medieval Jurchen and modern-day Manchu people.They're actually real indigenous people of present day NE region in China,they have always lived there long before Hui-Mo ( Yemak 穢貊 ) .Very few Mohe left homeland of China's NE region ( Manchuria ) for Korea peninsula or Japan because no documented massive migration(s) .
[ Hui people used to populated around Shangdong province. Mo people used to populated around the northern edge of Hebei and Shangxi provinces. Some branches of Hui (穢) people and Mo (貊) people migrated to Manchuria.Later,they became the Puyo 夫餘 clans ( predecessor of Baekje or Paekche in southern Korea peninsula ). ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
[ Hui people used to populated around Shangdong province. Mo people used to populated around the northern edge of Hebei and Shangxi provinces. Some branches of Hui (穢) people and Mo (貊) people migrated to Manchuria.Later,they became the Puyo 夫餘 clans ( predecessor of Baekje or Paekche in southern Korea peninsula ). ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohe
I don't think Hui-Mo theory is worth while for study since it happended long long time ago, I only count Gojoseon-> Buyo->Goguryo->Baekje-Silla-Gaya->Koryo->Joseon as part of Korean history.
So called Mohe or Malgal is so insignificant now since most of them are disapeared or became part of Chinese, Korean and Russian demography. Even their culture and language are not even used anymore, furthermore their population aren't large enough to dominate other asian race.
Kithans (Guhran), Xanbei (Sunbi), Mohe (Malgal), Jurchen (Yeojin) are gone yet, Korean, Chinese and Japanese survived. Did you know Malgal tribes actually served Goguryeo and participated in wars with Goguryeo to the last?
Yeojin once called Korea as their brother and then back stab Koreans by invading and rooting Korea for centuries and founded Jin and Qing Dynasty.
The sad fact is that Linguistically speaking Chinese language is clearly isolated from other NE Asian languages.
QUOTE (sonnori @ Jan 3 2008, 10:05 AM)
The sad fact is that Linguistically speaking Chinese language is clearly isolated from other NE Asian languages.
There's over 1 billion speakers of various Chinese languages.. and I really emphasize languages..
while some may view them as dialects.. quite a number of them can be unintelligible or barely intelligible.
Linguistically it could easily be argued that the Chinese language, is actually its own language family in its own right
with a number of languages that are common but have varying intelligibilities.. (i.e Yue, Minnan, Wu, etc).
of course language classification itself is very political.
you can view that the speakers of these related languages have been successful in forming a single state together and
a single identity.. while in Europe.. speakers of Danish and Norwegian (classified as seperate but are quite close and somewhat intelligible), Italian and Spanish.. etc and etc) failed in doing so.
QUOTE
Since when did language groups denote race ?
Racial characteristics do not always correlate with the langage spoken by particular people.I have simply shown you that racial and linguistic features do not correlate very often.
Racial characteristics do not always correlate with the langage spoken by particular people.I have simply shown you that racial and linguistic features do not correlate very often.
Sure this does not only say race ,
the Brazilians speak Portuguise but their ethnic combination is not always correspondent with Portuguise.
However this language link can explain a lot for the relation between Brazilians and Portuguise,
this is not only about genetic relation but it even covers the wider range of interaction between ethnic group.
linguistic evidence often accepted as an important key to explain the ethnic relations widely,not always go only with genetics.
I explained the case of the Malagasy relation with other Austronesian language family.
This linguistic exampled a lot for the case such as relation Greek/Latin/French and other European languages like German/English.
this does not always go with genetic relation , this says much much more.
it even can relate with genetics but not always of course.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 3 2008, 10:48 PM)
I've read many dubious S Korean theories on their origins ... Mongols ... Sumerians .... Siberians ... Genetically related to European groups because Korean language is now group in the " Altaic " by Western linguists.Oddly,every nationality except Chinese & it bothers S Korean netizens greatly that Japanese do accept Chinese heritage in their population.
The real indigenous Siberian tribe Evenks,they're closely related to some Native American tribes on the West Coast & Canada.Both Japanese & Koreans are not descended from them.There is a DNA mapping posted on AE forum indicates genetic disparity between Evenks & Koreans.I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenks
The real indigenous Siberian tribe Evenks,they're closely related to some Native American tribes on the West Coast & Canada.Both Japanese & Koreans are not descended from them.There is a DNA mapping posted on AE forum indicates genetic disparity between Evenks & Koreans.I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenks
That's because you only referencing to one type of siberian tribe;
Try look for Koryaks & Buryats.
Btw, Evenks is very small Siberian tribe, their number is insignificant counting them as major Siberian tribe.
Also from little digging, they are sub group of Tungus stock.
Are you saying Koreans have no relation with Tungus?
Again you do try to downgrade Korean claims, yet you accept everyone else; I found this little disturbing.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 4 2008, 01:12 AM)
Since when did language groups denote race ?
Racial characteristics do not always correlate with the langage spoken by particular people.I have simply shown you that racial and linguistic features do not correlate very often.
As a Mongol ethnic group, Xianbei completely assimilated into Han Chinese since Tang was established.There were no longer any record about Xianbei since Tang in Chinese history. In fact, it was Xianbei's own willing of Sinization led to this result. The "self-Sinizing" process took place almost a century before the foundation of Tang. The process was not only assimilation of blood, but also cultures.Xianbei assimilated into the Han population. I surmise that, if you're a Han Chinese, chances are you have a small fraction of Xianbei blood.
Racial characteristics do not always correlate with the langage spoken by particular people.I have simply shown you that racial and linguistic features do not correlate very often.
As a Mongol ethnic group, Xianbei completely assimilated into Han Chinese since Tang was established.There were no longer any record about Xianbei since Tang in Chinese history. In fact, it was Xianbei's own willing of Sinization led to this result. The "self-Sinizing" process took place almost a century before the foundation of Tang. The process was not only assimilation of blood, but also cultures.Xianbei assimilated into the Han population. I surmise that, if you're a Han Chinese, chances are you have a small fraction of Xianbei blood.
Dingy, small fraction usually don't get count. Only the main stream DNA counts.
Chances are even I have some Xanbei blood as well since my clan came out of NE China.
Your assumption of mix varieties of human DNAs are un-logical. If you take your theory of Han-Chinese, then general Chinese population is all of east asian + central asian DNAs, making the Chinese the most mixed asian race, which is hardly a case.
QUOTE (sonnori @ Jan 3 2008, 11:05 AM)
The sad fact is that Linguistically speaking Chinese language is clearly isolated from other NE Asian languages.
Chinese is very diverse and is only considered "a language" due to politics as was said above. Chinese is related Tibetan, Thai, Lao, etc. It is not an isolate, it is part of a group, just not grouping with NE Asia.
There is some evidence that present day Koreans and Japanese are distant cousins.
The Japanese being a mix of aboriginal Jomon (ancient Ainu) and Koguryo. Most of the Koguryo were absorbed into China, not present day Korea. The Koguryo language was also quite divergent from present day Korean and ancient Shilla Korean, but looks much like ancient Japanese.
The belief is the ancestors of the Wa, who populated Japan (including Ryukus) came from Liaoning and their most closely related cousins lived in Koguryo.
http://www.pliink.com/mt/marxy/archives/20...o-japanese.html
There is some confusion because many Koreans noble fled to Japan when Paekche collapse, and also Chinese came to Kyoto as well....mostly religious figures and artisans, however those people were always a minority in Japan.
The Japanese being a mix of aboriginal Jomon (ancient Ainu) and Koguryo. Most of the Koguryo were absorbed into China, not present day Korea. The Koguryo language was also quite divergent from present day Korean and ancient Shilla Korean, but looks much like ancient Japanese.
The belief is the ancestors of the Wa, who populated Japan (including Ryukus) came from Liaoning and their most closely related cousins lived in Koguryo.
http://www.pliink.com/mt/marxy/archives/20...o-japanese.html
There is some confusion because many Koreans noble fled to Japan when Paekche collapse, and also Chinese came to Kyoto as well....mostly religious figures and artisans, however those people were always a minority in Japan.
Instead of speculating all kinds of B.S., study some real history from books written by qualified historians, other than chinese scholars and wikipedia. ( some PRC scholars are re writing world history, funded by gov. ).
QUOTE (LongMa @ Jan 4 2008, 09:54 AM)
There is some evidence that present day Koreans and Japanese are distant cousins.
The Japanese being a mix of aboriginal Jomon (ancient Ainu) and Koguryo. Most of the Koguryo were absorbed into China, not present day Korea. The Koguryo language was also quite divergent from present day Korean and ancient Shilla Korean, but looks much like ancient Japanese.
The belief is the ancestors of the Wa, who populated Japan (including Ryukus) came from Liaoning and their most closely related cousins lived in Koguryo.
http://www.pliink.com/mt/marxy/archives/20...o-japanese.html
There is some confusion because many Koreans noble fled to Japan when Paekche collapse, and also Chinese came to Kyoto as well....mostly religious figures and artisans, however those people were always a minority in Japan.
The Japanese being a mix of aboriginal Jomon (ancient Ainu) and Koguryo. Most of the Koguryo were absorbed into China, not present day Korea. The Koguryo language was also quite divergent from present day Korean and ancient Shilla Korean, but looks much like ancient Japanese.
The belief is the ancestors of the Wa, who populated Japan (including Ryukus) came from Liaoning and their most closely related cousins lived in Koguryo.
http://www.pliink.com/mt/marxy/archives/20...o-japanese.html
There is some confusion because many Koreans noble fled to Japan when Paekche collapse, and also Chinese came to Kyoto as well....mostly religious figures and artisans, however those people were always a minority in Japan.
^ Baekje sent endless missions to Japan, as they saw Japan as their secondary base for recruiting army and resources, just like Western colonial powers back in Africa and Americas. This show you guys have little knowledge on Baekje.
I have to disagree with you, most of southern Goguryeo were absorbed into Silla, rest went to either Mohe or Tang China.
Just because China now occupied part of used to be Goguryeo that still doesn't prove most of Goguryeo stock became Chinese.
Remember, nearly all later Goguryeo heritage and relics are located in North Korea and NE part of South Korea.
Infact, Japan have very little relationship with Goguryeo, just because Goguryeo stopped Yamato entry to southern part of Korean peninsula during Gwangetto campaign, also have Goguryeo sent envoys to Yamato court, specially during Sui-Goguryeo war that doesn't justified the this theory.
Goguryeo language are almost identical to Buyo which is Baekje's language as well, don't quickly jump into assumption that Goguryeo have more similarity to ancient Japan.
If there is any cultural exchanges between old Japan/Korea then it would be more Baekje/Gaya than Goguryeo. I personally think Japanese also fabricated this special link to claim the Korean peninsula as theirs.
It just disturbing I'm actually seeing this from Chinese folks as well, all leading to down grade Korean claims and also to justify Korea as part of Japan's history.
As I mentioned it before, Korea have no relation with old Japan, don't get any wrong idea.
QUOTE (dingy @ Jan 4 2008, 12:45 PM)
.... Like this one A text titled Dangi Gosa 단기고사 檀奇古史.It was written by a Parhee ( 渤海 Bohai ) man named Dae Yabal 대야발 大野勃 in the year 727 ce,it supposedly covers from Gojoseon to Gija Joseon.This book turned out to be a fabrication.It was written by Korean nationalist Lee Gwan Koo ( 李觀求 ) between 1945-1949.The oldest existed Korean authentic history book is 'Samguk Sagi ' which was written in 1145.
Chinese source links & entries posted here are documented in authentic Chinese & Korean history chronicles.
This show you have little knowledge of Korean history - I bet you; you are just getting this information from Wikipedia and Google searches.
Here, I bet you got above info from:http://forums.yellowworld.org/showthread.php?t=33894
This 단기고사 is controversial book, and we still don't know if this book is totally fabricated or not, and book is still under investigation by Korean historians.
I don't know why you bring this book topic here when we were discussing "Replying to Study: Korean, Japanese DNA similar". Talk about fabricated history books, there are tonnes of more controversial history books in Japan and Europe.
Did you know even part of Samguk Sagi was distorted by Japaneses? And Japanese even destroyed most of Korean history books and stolen many of them as well.
QUOTE (heosuabi @ Jan 3 2008, 10:23 PM)
Instead of speculating all kinds of B.S., study some real history from books written by qualified historians, other than chinese scholars and wikipedia. ( some PRC scholars are re writing world history, funded by gov. ).
the only rewritten world history i have seen are done by korean historians fund by korean gov. even aired on korean tv
for example:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fuTLAhPV-UM&feature=related
《Handan Chronicle》 consist of four volumes. 《Samsung history》 contains the histories of Hanin and Hanung, 《Tangun Chronicle》 contains the histories of Tangun Josun, 《Bukbuyo Chronicle》 contains the histories of Bukbuyo, the predecessor of Koguri, the last 《TaeBaek history unknown to the world》 contains the histories from ancient times to Koguri.
And a whole surprising world of history spreads in these books. The history of the Korean race is declared to be not only 5,000 years but even 10,000 years. There are already 5,000 years histories before Tangun Josun.
The first country was Han, and Baedal was called Sinsi, and Tangun Josun followed next. Bukbuyo was the predecessor of Koguri, Koguri took over Bukbuyo, Balhae was also called The Great Sin, and the last Kori.
The histories of ancient times were especially glorious. 10,000 years ago, Han appeared as the first country. The 7 Hanins ruled Han for 3,301 years. Later in Sinsi Baedal, the 18 Hanungs ruled for more than 1,500 years.
After about 5,000 years rule by Han and Sinsi Baedal. Tangun Josun appeared and the 47 Tanguns ruled it.
Unlike the historical materials we knew, they specifically describe the greatness of their ancient histories and the territories at the times. It can be said that, regardless of the facts, these books are really important for those want the greatness of the identity of the Korean race.
The scope of the Korean race's activities described in 《Handan Chronicle》 is unimaginable. The following records are found in 《Samsung history》, there was a Hanin's country at the foot of Mt. Panaru east of Cheonhae. It extended 50,000 li north and south and 20,000 li east and west. They say that Mt. Panaru is today's central Siberian plateau and Cheonhae is today's Lake Baikal.
If this was true, Han's territory 10,000 years ago was larger than Asia. At the time, Han was a country of the vast territory extending 50,000 li north and south and 20,000 li east and west, and ruled 12 countries in its territory.
Sumiri was one of these countries. There is some viewpoint to take Sumiri as the ancient Sumer. According to this viewpoint, the Sumerian tribe who established the Mesopotamian civilization was the Korean race.
Not only its vast territory but the legendary heroes are also written in 《Handan Chronicle》. The most famous hero is the Emperor Ciw. They say that this ghost roof tile of Sinna was make in the image of the Emperor Ciw's face.
The Emperor Ciw, the 14th Hanung of Baedal, had the iron weapons as far as 5,000 years ago and is known as the god of war. There was the Hanung Zaoji who twisted copper around the head and covered his forehead with iron and made the iron weapons, He shook the entire world and people called him the Emperor Ciw.
The Chinese Huangje Huanyuan challenged him to a fight dozens of times but was not able to win even once.
According to 《Handan Chronicle》, this Chinese history, the wars against the Emepror Ciw, actually was the korean history. The 5th Hanung Daeuibal's youngest son is Taeho Bokhi. He was the first of the three Sovereigns, holding a government post Wusa, and later went to Jin kingdom. He is a legendary sovereign known as the founder of China. If he was actually a Hanung's son as written in the book, Chinese history began with the Korean race, not the Chinese.
As we have seen, 《The Handan Chronicle》 says the Korean race as the divine nation established the fulgent civilization and flourished around the vast continent
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.