Japanese and Koreans?

[梁铠赞]

no problem Lexico...you're a very wise person...I salute you...^^

 

[Eisuke]

Here is information about this subject from Wikipedia:

Origins of the Japanese people

There is archeological evidence of stone age people living in Japan from 32,000 years ago in the paleolithic period. At this time Japan was connected to Asia by land bridges, and nomadic hunter-gatherers crossed. They left flint tools, but no evidence of permanent settlements. According to one theory, it was during this time that the earliest immigrants to Japan came from the islands lying off the Southeastern coast of Asia. Borne along on the swift Japan current, they drifted past the Ryukyu Islands (now known as Okinawa )where some settled, then continued on to Kyushu and Honshu, two of Japan's principle islands. The large-eyed, heavy-lidded, oval-faced, high-nosed segment of the Japanese people derives from this source, which was of Malayan ancestry. However the most accepted theory is that modern Japanese are principally descended from the Jōmon and the Yayoi people, with later cultural influences from Tang China and Paekche Korea.

Jomon Period
Pottery was first developed by the Jōmon people in the 11th millennium BC. Their name, which means "rope pattern", comes from the characteristic markings they made in Jōmon pottery. The Jōmon people were Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, though late Jōmon people may have developed a proto-agriculture.

Yayoi / Kofun Period
In about 300 BC the Jōmon were displaced and absorbed by the Yayoi. The Yayoi people were a bronze-age people and they introduced metalworking and rice cultivation to Japan. The Yayoi were probably descendants of people living in what is now the Gobi desert. (Genetics data suspects, Buryat share the common ancestors) Displaced by the desertification of their land they spread east. it is possible that the Yayoi language eventually developed into modern Japanese. The Shinto religion also probably developed from Yayoi beliefs.

Japanese people - Wikipedia

I think that the most accepted theory is the best.

 

[lexico]

Here is information about this subject from Wikipedia:

Origins of the Japanese people
......
Japanese people - Wikipedia

I think that the most accepted theory is the best.

The material you quoted is outdated and included incorrect dates and controversial hypotheses still awaiting verification; some are obviously incorrect or doubtful ones. Also note that your reference to 'the most accepted theory' referred only to

'modern Japanese are principally descended from the Jomon and the Yayoi people'​

and not the whole passage that you quoted; I've cleared up most inaccuracies in the Wikipedia account except for Diamond & Riley which I was not able to verify; please check current content below.

Japanese people - Wikipedia

Origins of the Japanese people

There is archeological evidence of stone age people living in Japan from 33,000-21,000 years ago in the paleolithic period. At this time Japan was connected to Asia by land bridges, and nomadic hunter-gatherers crossed over from the continent. They left flint tools, but no evidence of permanent settlements. The most accepted theory is that modern Japanese are principally descended from the Jomon, a paleo-Asiatic people, and the Yayoi, a neo-Asiatic people, with cultural influences from Imna, Gaya, Baekje, and Shilla Korea and later from Sui-Tang China.

Jomon Period

Pottery was first used by the Jomon people in the 11th millennium BC. Their name Jomon ﾃ｣ﾅ?窶禿､, which means "cord-impressed pattern", comes from the characteristic markings found on Jomon pottery. The Jomon people were Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, though at least one late Jomon site ca. 1200-1000 BC had rice agriculture (Minami misote 窶愿ｬﾂ溝ﾅｽﾃｨ site).

Yayoi / Kofun Period

In around 400-300 BC the Yayoi began to displace the Jomon. The Yayoi people were a bronze-age people and they introduced metalworking and rice cultivation to Japan. Although it is widely assumed that the language and culture of the Yayoi must have seved as the basis for modern Japanese and religion, there is no direct evidence to prove this assumption.

Genetics and Biology

Skeletons of Jomon and Yayoi people have been examined and detailed DNA studies have been made in recent years. Most Jomon and Yayoi skeletons are readily distinguishable. The Jomon people were shorter, with relatively longer forearms and lower legs, more wide-set eyes, shorter and wider faces, and much more pronounced facial topography, with strikingly raised browridges, noses, and nose bridges, while the Yayoi people averaged an inch or two taller, with close-set eyes, high and narrow faces, and flat browridges and noses. (Diamond 1998)

Studies of teeth show two distinct patterns — Sundadonty and Sinodonty. The former represents Southeast Asians, Micronesians, and Polynesians and the latter Koreans and Manchus. The former is preeminent among pure-blood Ainu and Okinawans. The teeth evidence supports the thesis that "ancient demic diffusion commencing with the Yayoi era at about 300 B.C. when an immigrant population from continental Asia entered the archipelago in north Kyushu and expanded eastward, assimilating the aboriginal inhabitants". (Riley 2002)

sources used for update:

窶廣ﾅ?ﾂｿﾃｺﾂｺ ﾂ『窶愿ｺ窶怒의 ﾂ考ﾅ津??ｺ{ﾂ』 窶ｺ{硏窶｢ﾂｶ窶ｰﾂｻﾅｽﾃ 2002 Seoul
ﾂ湘ｻﾅ陳ｴﾋ彗ﾃｻﾂｶ ﾂ『窶愿ｺ窶怒ﾂ人窶堙坂?堙??堋ｱ窶堋ｩ窶堙ｧ窶堋ｫ窶堋ｽ窶堋ｩﾂ新窶愿ｺ窶怒ﾂ人窶ｹNﾅ陳ｹﾋ彑窶堙固ｽﾅｽ窶堙ｫ窶堙敖』 ﾂ渉ｬ窶ｺ{ﾅ?ﾃ 1984, 1986

 

[lexico]

Eisuke, can you check the source of the following claims in original studies ?
Please provide evidence in standard referencing convention.

claim no. 1:

The Yayoi were probably descendants of people living in what is now the Gobi desert.

Please define this idea more clearly. What evidence do you have that proves that the Yayoi were direct descendants of early Gobi residents ? What do you know of early Gobi culture in terms of anthropology, paleobiology, climate studies, linguistics, and archeology general ? What probability are you suggesting ? 90%, 75%, 67%, 50%, 33%, 20%, 17%, 14%, 13%, 11%, 10%, 9%, 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1%, or below 1% ? Please define your idea more clearly.

claim no. 2:

Genetics data suspects, Buryat share the common ancestors (with modern Japanese).

What kind of genetic data was studied, and what was the method of collecting data, and the interpretation of collected data ? What was the sample size ? What statistical analysis was employed ? How was the statistics interpreted and represented ? What internationally recognized journal carried the article, and what kind of scholarly peer reviews did it receive in general ?

claim no. 3:

Displaced by the desertification of their land they spread east.

Please define your idea in a general setting of paleoclimatology. What standard references adopt this model you are quoting ?

claim no. 4:

it is possible that the Yayoi language eventually developed into modern Japanese.

We know nothing about Yayoi language. How can you employ an undefined idea to define another ?

claim no. 5:

The Shinto religion also probably developed from Yayoi beliefs.

Please define Yayoi beliefs, and your model of development from the Yayoi beliefs to modern shintoism in detail.

Awaiting your reply,
(signed)
Lexico

 

[Eisuke]

Well my source was wikipedia. It looks like it has been changed. I'm not a expert on this. Therefore I used that because I figure the people who write the information at wikipedia know much about the subjects.

I don't think one person knows the correct story unless he can back it up with links to acknowledged evidence from other professors and experts on that field.

 

[lexico]

I understand. Nobody knows everything. Neither do I, but I think if we gather our heads together, and work together, we can actually contribute to drawing a more solid, healthy picture of the subject matter.

I don't think one person knows the correct story unless he can back it up with links to acknowledged evidence from other professors and experts on that field.

Looking for solid studies that have been published in reliable journals, and thoroughly and objectively reviewed by scholars of good standing could be a start. That's why claims by scholars with strong nationalist tendencies are best avoided when our aim is to achieve an ojbective understanding.

Wikipedia is in the making. Some material is good, but some have not been worked out to the level of international acceptance. I've cleared up some problems in the passages you quoted, and the talk on disputed ideas is continuing. Claims alone do not make sound history. There has to be objective, positive evidence and analytical peer reviews in order for a piece of knowledge to be considered acceptable and current.

Instead of fully relying on on-line material or one person's claim, spend some time in the library, invest some time and effort in academic journals, textbooks, references, and compare at least three distinct sources. Doing so can raise the reliabilty of information greatly. Take a college course, attend lectures, talk with professors, get help from librarians, do some serious research, build up bibliographies, read some masters/doctorate theses, read book reviews, and write some critical articles, keep track of new findings, and contribute to wikipedia yourself once you reach a certain level. Try it, and you will not regret it at all.

Thanks for replying, Eisuke.

 

[lexico]

note: My reasoning of 'unrelenting, sporadic migration/invasion resulting in social turmoil and the loss of historical records/writing' is not my own idea but that of Gary Ledyard in his article entitled (Sorry I forgot; I'll try to find it and suppy it if I can.) He analyzes the Germanic invasion of Britannia and blames that for the loss of hostorical memory during that period. He then applies the Brithish model to the Korean peninsula in the Sanguo Wei-Jin Nanbeichao period ﾅｽOﾅ｡ﾂ?ﾃｩﾂｰﾂ敕ｧ窶愿ｬ窶徒窶卍ｩﾅｽﾅｾ窶佚｣. Here I applied basically the same idea to Japan during the same period but extending it into Sui-Tang period ﾃｧﾂｬ窶懌? down to the inauguration of Nippon 窶愿ｺ窶怒 in 712-720.

The author of the article was mistyped: should have been Prof. Gari Ledyard, King Sejong Professor of Korean Studies Emeritus, Columbia University in the City of New York, USA.
The article: Ledyard, Gari. 1975. 'Galloping along with the Horseriders: Looking for the founders of Japan'. Journal of Japanese Studies 1:2.217–254.

Here is an excerpt from An Interview with GARI LEDYARD on his article which can serve as a summary by the author himself:

"the most widely read thing I have ever published is my article, 'Galloping Along with the Horseriders, Looking for the Founders of Japan.' It is a critique of Egami Namio's famous book, The Horserider State: An Approach to Ancient Japanese History. (Egami Namio, Kiba minzoku kokka: Nihon kodaishi e no apurochi, Iwanami, Tokyo, 1960, 14th printing, 1970).

Egami, a specialist in Central Asian history, wrote from outside the community of Japanese historians of Japan, and caused quite a furor with his thesis that the Japanese state had been founded by horseriding invaders from the Asian continent. He imagined that the closest Korean connection to these 'horse riding' invaders would have been the 'Chinwang 窶僂窶ｰﾂ､,' who according to Chinese sources dominated Samhan politics in the southern Korean peninsula in the 3rd century.

I thought that the Chinwang was too early for this role, and that in general Egami's understanding of the Korean connections was wrong. On the other hand, I admired the panache of his theory, which seriously proposed that non-Japanese outsiders founded the Japanese state. If there were such outsiders, they could only have gotten to Japan from Korea, and if that were the case, one would have to consider the Korean politics of the 4th century, a period of militarism and war during which the definitive forms of the peninsular 'Three Kingdoms' were established.

I linked the process to the wars between Paekche and Kogury˘o, and Kogury˘o's period of dominance in Shilla politics. Of the three kingdoms, Paekche played the greater role in terms of a cultural impact on Japan.

Whether or not there were 'horseriding' warriors-and there are many critics of this idea both in Japan and internationally there was certainly an age of militarism, which left a huge impact on both Korea and Japan in the 4th century. My paper was an analysis of this matter. It is well known among historians of Japan in Europe and North America, and has also attracted some attention in Japan."

 

[FenixAzul]

Hi Everybody, I was born in Peru but my grandparents are japaneses ( I am full blood japanese) I have to say that Lexico is right, every asian has a genetic relationship, I know that koreans have a lot or reasons to hate Japaneses but I think that it is time to try to have a good relationship.. and sorry for my spelling, I don´t speak english very well....

Lexico you are a great guy

 

[ricecake]

The Japanese shouldn't despise the Koreans simmply because their own emperor is in fact a Korean.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TAKING ABOUT ???

Koreans' phony claim of Japanese emperor was " Korean " when THERE WAS NO kingdom named Korea of that time period.

Japanese race is MADE-UP of several peoples from Asia continent plus Pacific Islanders NOT KOREAN SETTLERS as Koreans fictitious claimed.

 

[ricecake]

Yayoi and it's culture CAME FROM China's Yantze River,NOT KOREAN peninsula.

 

[korean_turtle87]

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TAKING ABOUT ???
Koreans' phony claim of Japanese emperor was " Korean " when THERE WAS NO kingdom named Korea of that time period.
Japanese race is MADE-UP of several peoples from Asia continent plus Pacific Islanders NOT KOREAN SETTLERS as Koreans fictitious claimed.

well, there's some truth to the claim. Emperor Akihito acknoledged that he has korean blood in him.

 

[ricecake]

well, there's some truth to the claim. Emperor Akihito acknoledged that he has korean blood in him.

You meant birth mother of his ancestor Emperor blah blah blah was Baekje's princess.

Do you know Baekje's Royal House of Puyo had " political marriages " between Han Chinese House of Kung Sung of China's Liao-Dong peninsula during those centuries in their homeland where's now China's Jilin province ?

That Baekje princess probable had a few drops of Han Chinese blood in her.

 

[yoshirotokagewaki]

OMG. if you're going to talk about ancestry thousands of years ago, why not talk about the Darwinian theory that human beings are descended from apes. I mean, every race is just connected with every race, scientific and anthropological studies show that the first homo sapien sapiens are actually from Sudan, and they are black. So, it would be that awful to say that everyone is .000000000000000001% black. that wouldn't be significant anymore.

Anyway, about the Emperor's ancestry, I think it is significant even if it's already that "far". He wouldn't be alive anyway if even one of his ancestors weren't born. There would sure be an emperor, but it would no longer be His Imperial Highness himself. And to think that some zainichi koreans are ridiculed in Japan, this is a very significant thing. It's like saying "The Emperor has Korean blood too, so why look down on us?"

 

[tokapi]

I found this English-subtitled video about the root of Japanese people.

Delves into genetic research which has totally changed notions of who the Japanese are. Overturns Koreans' claim that the Japanese are descendants of Koreans.

Rather, the Japanese are a very diverse people made up of Ainu, Okinawan, Chinese, Korean, and various other genetic sequences.

The Modern Japanese were thought to be a mixture of ancient Jomon and Yayoi Peoples. Recent Genetic Research has proven that the Jomon and Yayoi People themselves were a mixed ethnicity even when they first reached the Japanese Islands.

Complete report ..... http://oniazuma.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/idenshi/

 

[hamsterboye1]

i think this is a bad post,
just saying that koreans hate japanese when you live in britain and know nothing of this subject.

you cant just say something like that, my korean friend is dating a japanese girl and they're engage, just because they were born where they were doesn't mean they hate each other,

 

[Kyoto Returnee]

He is a serious question for you people to answer.

Why is it that korean people don't like japanese people and the other way around?
I should think their will be a link with the the 2nd world war.

I would say many older Japanese don't feel fond going back to the war days and vica versa, although I suspect you can incude Chinese, Kiwis, Americans, Thai, Aussies, and no doubt many other nations who the Japanese are NOT popular with.

Japan was of course allied with Germany and In turn Adolf Hitler during the second world war.

I would hazard a guess and say that many younger Koreans and Japanese DO like each other, with the odd jealousy case pending.

You hear the odd excuse if my memory serves me of some younger Japanese always saying that the Koreans copy their fahsion, etc. Tit for Tat I guess..

Personally, I think Korean people are fantastic and a lot of fun(Girls especially;-))

 

[pipokun]

How Manga Reflect Resurgent Japanese Chauvinism
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200712/200712180013.html
"Postwar Japanese comics have been through several stages -- fear of war, nihilism and otaku-like obsession. Now, they directly analyze the war and even support imperialism." So says Prof. Park Soon-ae at the department of Japanese Language and Literature at Honam University. Prof. Park's paper about how manga deal with war, was published in the latest issue of the biannual magazine Japan Space.
...
1950s-60s: Fear of war turns into technological aspiration
70s and 80s: Post-ideology, nihilism and otaku
After the 1990s: Re-emergence of ideology and imperialism

Lucky as I am, I have not been so interested in anime/manga.
But the relations between political orientation and manga is a bit dubious, for the infamous far-left terrorists, Japan Red Army, said "We're all Tomorrow's Joe!" before they hijacked a plane for the DPRK.
Since they have been still living there, I bet they are missing J manga/anime there.