What do you think, Mr. Masakazu?
It appears that Japanese have more Chinese blood (25.8%) than Korean (24.2%)
Also, Chinese resemble 1.5% Honshu Japanese, while Koreans do not.

I find it interesting because Chinese seem to have more contribution to Japanese gene pool than I thought.

Also, about the "Koreans civilizing Japan" myth, it is not true.





I highly doubt Korea at the time could master agriculture, and bronze/iron making.

the yayoi were proud nomadic altaic speaking warriors who invented archery

LOL LOL JK! just wanted to impersonate a pan altaic nationalist. all this education and culture can drive you insane so you have to act stupid once in a while

what kind of info is that...it's full of ambiguities.

now youre claiming that the yayoi are also the ancestors of modern day chinese, or what?

origin lay north of china? so that would make the mongolians the "original" yayoi, so to speak, eventually settling in greater korea and into japan, if that blurb of info is true.

When was there ever a massive chinese influx into ancient japan, let alone a minor influx of migration? what classifies as "chinese blood" anyway?

Let's not get into this and instead read a book with proven facts, not changing those facts into becoming prepostrous opinions. End of story.

listen jomon, no one is claiming that yayoi are Chinese. the present day Mongols(united under Genghis) did not populate Mongolia until 1000-1500 years ago so the time frame of your rebuttal is silly.

second, this discussion is that about the fact that the Jomons were primitive as hell. yayoi seem to have cultural and genetic affinities with pacific islanders and the aboriginals of present day Yunnan as opposed to the arctic Jomon proto-Koreans

Yayoi came after Jomons right? I thought Jomons were hunters and collects fruits and stuff.

correct, Jomons were proto-Korean hunter gatherers

yes, jomon were the first to arrive from the peninsula, then later the yayoi came from korea as well.

how were the yayoi more affiliated with pacific islanders, they were known to be from the three kingdoms period of korea.

Actually, from books and articles, even pictures and drawings, it depicts the yayoi culture very similiar to the Malaysian culture. Having the similiar houses, and even the clothes looked similiar.

If they ARE from the 3 kingdoms period of Korea, wouldn't they still be more developed
So, where did the yayoi come from?

Didn't Japan developed during the Tang Dynasty of CHina? Tang came only a few hundred years after the Han when the 3 kingdoms era in Korea began. Wouldn't having the Jomon culture come from China be more accurate?

Yayoi originated from Korea during the Three Kingdoms?
彌生 Yayoi culture in Japan began in about 300 B.C.

did you not read the paper ive posted written by Jared Diamond on japanese roots? If you think youre such a historian and dont know who he is then youre simply a joke.

http://www2.gol.com/users/hsmr/Content/Eas...tory/roots.html

Explains a lot about jomon and yayoi.

are you refering to Samhaan? if so, then you're playing into our hands 2 Samhaan was one of the first instances of major Chinese influence on the Korean penninsula. either way, i see no cultural affinity with yayoi and samhaan korean culture. furthermore, the geography of samhaan didn't reach the southern tip of Korea while the yaoyi seem to have spent a large amount of time there before migrating to Japan

yayoi skulls don't look like the gargantuan Jomon proto-korean skulls, yayoi skulls are more angular to

EDIT: BY THE WAY, NO ONE IS CLAIMING THE YAYOI WERE CHINESE SO STOP b!tchING. either way, its unclear which groups were truly korean (in that they didn't JUST use the penninsula as a step towards the Japanese island, understand?)

EDIT: by the way CJK, the source you listed poses a theory that japanese ancestors descended from rice paddy farmers from Central China

Perhaps you should read 日本史 issued by Japanese scholars themselves.

how do you explain kofun culture and their burial mound tombs and all the other culture nowhere else to be found except for korea.

by the way, if some pan altaic nationalist tries to argue that Dong Yi are korean ancestors, you should use that burial mound point to help me

is it found in japan? i've never heard of that in japan, doesn't help your point much

archealolgists agree that the Yayoi culture resembles the cultures of Oceania as opposed to the arctic cultures of Korea

YES< the Jomon and Yayoi came through Korea but the fact is that they POPULATED japan, as opposed to civilizing it. Japan would remain extremely primitive(not even a writing system) until contact with China, that is a fact.

In the US, Indians had huge burial mounds, the biggest in the world. maybe Yomon originated from the Americas. They had these in Scotland, Europe, everywhere.


And during this Samhan(haha) Confucianism influeced Korean culture dramatically. Samnhan flourished after the fall of the Han Dynasty.

Yayoi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The History of Japan
Jomon
Yayoi
Yamato Period
Nara Period
Heian Period
Kamakura period
Muromachi period
Azuchi-Momoyama period
Edo Period
Meiji Era
Taisho Period
Japanese expansionism
Occupied Japan
Post-Occupation Japan
Heisei
Yayoi (弥生時代) is an era in Japan from 300 BC to A.D. 250. It is named after the section of Tōkyō where archaeological investigations uncovered its trace. Yayoi period is marked either by the start of the practice of growing rice in a paddy field or a new Yayoi style earthenware.

Following the Jōmon period, the Yayoi flourished between about 300 BC and A.D. 250 from southern Kyūshū to northern Honshū. Modern discoveries believe that it started early as 900 BC. Because of the seemingly abrupt and dramatic cultural change especially as it was considered a half millennium as shorter, it was once generally assumed that the Yayoi culture did not develop directly from the Jōmon, but that the Yayoi were a people who migrated from the Asian mainland. A recent discoveries like evidences of farming rice on a dry clop of land that predates a paddy field and the fact that the genetic makeup of Japanese rice is similar to that of sticky rice that came from Laos made the following theory mostly obsolete.


A Yayoi jar, 1st-3rd century, excavated in Kugahara, Ota-Ku, Tokyo.As Korea is the most accessible location, a theory publicized in early Meiji period in Japan argued that these immigrants were Korean most likely of the Goguryeo or the Baekje. This theory is confounded by the fact that there is no obvious similarity between the modern Korean and ancient Japanese languages and that it is unlikely that an upward of 4 million people which is needed to fill the population gap between Jōmon and Yayoi period, could have migrated in such a short time. On the other hand, grammatical structures are similar between the 2 languages, and some aspects of Japanese language closely resemble that of the Goguryeo. Historians such as Jared Diamond have theorized that the Yayoi may have been related to the Goguryeo or the Baekje, tribes that were eventually incorporated into the medieval Korean state[1] (http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so191/PacificRimReadings/JapaneseRoots.html). Information on the Goguryeo language is limited, but analysis by Christopher Beckwith and others appears to support a connection to ancient Japanese.[2] (http://www.brill.nl/m_catalogue_sub6_id22045.htm)

The current theory is that the Yayoi culture did emerge out of the Jōmon culture with only a limited immigration from Baekje upon its extinction. The practice of farming rice that was once believed to be passed on from China trespassing the Korean peninsula is instead recognized to have been passed from southern China by the way of Okinawa and passed onto southern Korea.

The earliest Yayoi people, themselves using chipped stone tools, appear to have started from northern Kyūshū and intermixed with the Jōmon. Although the pottery of the Yayoi was more technologically advanced--produced on a potter's wheel--it was more simply decorated than Jōmon ware. The Yayoi made bronze ceremonial nonfunctional bells, mirrors, and weapons and, by the 1st century A.D., iron agricultural tools and weapons. As the population increased and society became more complex, they wove cloth, lived in permanent farming villages, constructed buildings of wood and stone, accumulated wealth through landownership and the storage of grain, and developed distinct social classes. Their irrigated, wet-rice culture was similar to that of central and south China, requiring heavy inputs of human labor, which led to the development and eventual growth of a highly sedentary, agrarian society. Unlike China, which had to undertake massive public works and water-control projects, leading to a highly centralized government, Japan had abundant water. In Japan, then, local political and social developments were relatively more important than the activities of the central authority and a stratified society.


Building at a Yayoi settlement (reconstructed)The earliest written records about Japan are from Chinese sources from this period. Wa 倭 (the Japanese pronunciation of an early Chinese name for Japan) was first mentioned in A.D. 257. Early Chinese historians described Wa as a land of hundreds of scattered tribal communities, not the unified land with a 700-year tradition as laid out in the Nihongi, which puts the foundation of Japan at 660 BC. 3rd century Chinese sources reported that the Wa people lived on raw vegetables, rice, and fish served on bamboo and wooden trays, had vassal-master relations, collected taxes, had provincial granaries and markets, clapped their hands in worship (something still done in Shinto shrines), had violent succession struggles, built earthen grave mounds, and observed mourning. Himiko, a female ruler of an early political federation known as Yamatai, flourished during the 3rd century. While Himiko reigned as spiritual leader, her younger brother carried out affairs of state, which included diplomatic relations with the court of the Chinese Kingdom of Wei (A.D. 220-265).

[edit]
A recent study
A new study that used AMS method to analyze carbonized remain on potteries and wooden stakes discovered that these were dated back to 900-800BC, nearly 500 years earlier than previously believed. These artifacts came from the northern region of Kyūshū and to further confirm this finding, artifacts of the same time period from Korea and Tohoku's Jōmon earthware were compared with the same result. Another researcher used different artifacts from similar Yayoi period sites and found that these were dated back to 400-500BC.



Yayoi Pot

Yayoi Tower

very well...fine, ill agree with that. But you cant doubt that most of the initial ancient japanese cultural exchanges did come from the peninsula as well as boatloads of people. Im not doubting the $hitload of ideas that came from china via japan/china via korea via japan.

and yes, there are many mound tombs found in japan with the same ancient korean signature of having a $hitload of stuff like mirrors.

hmmm the burial mounds, its just 古墳. where did you hear that it was only in Korea/japan?

In ancient China, the Mirror and the sword are the symbols of Imperial Power.

well as far as i know, within east asia those mounds were and continue to be practiced in korea. It obviously died off in japan.

Of course it was practiced also in other parts of the world.

but you said it was only found in Korea

anyway, its nothing to argue about, we're only questioning whether yayoi were from korea as opposed to just migrating through korea. IF yayoi were really samhaan inhabitants, then your ancestors didn't resemble you much. Samhaan was already Chinese influenced by that point, even the name samhaan is taken literally from a canto pronounciation

NOT to say yayoi were Chinese related but their culture was obviously influenced by rice cultivating aborginals (in central and south China), remember original Han Chinese (HuaXia/Dong Yi) were from Northern China and the south China was populated by austronesian aboriginals

There are a lot of Chinese making this claim. But mainstream academics, including westerners side with Koreans, and virtually none gives credence to any Chinese theory. And I'd trust any Westerner over a Chinese cause first of all they're impartial. Face it, that study looks quite bogus to me and it can be manipuated as you're obviously doing to no end. No mainstream academic believes there's a Chinese-Japanese connection. I mean what do these western academics have to gain from siding with Koreans and second their reasoning and analytical ability is superior to any asian. Eg have you read any sholarly article writteny by an asian? It sound a 5th grader wrote it. If Japanese came from mainland China, why doesn't the native population of that particular province in China have any residue of a Japanese language. You mean to tell me that all of them packed their bags and just headed off to Japan one day?

However, there's plenty of evidence of a Korean linkages similarities with Japanese people-

You must understand that especially in the West, Korea and Korean relics
were typically labeled as "Chinese" or "Japanese." Famous museums and
universities have all made these labeling errors, and slowly, they are being
made to correct their earlier errors. This process will take a long time,
because most Westerners haven't the slightist idea of the difference
between, for example, pure Chinese taoist imagery and pure Korean Altaic
shamanistic imagery, much less combinations or native interpretations of
these. The Japanese and Chinese never would go out of their way to to tell a
westerner that a Korean item was to them obviously or likely Korean, or at
least "definitely not ours." Due to the earlier isolation of Korea and the
Japanese occupation of Korea, Korea was terribly shortchanged in the way
Westerners understand Korea, Korean history, Korean dialect linguistics, or
Korean art history. This means that the Japanese have been able, wholesale,
to claim everything in Japan, from the Horaji to sushi is 100% Japanese,
always "uniquely" Japanese--except when they are challenged. Then they'll
say it was "Chinese" or "Chinese-influenced." They have to be intellectually
dragged, kicking and screaming to use the word "Korean" and if they do
they'll try to get away with saying the Koreans were little more than the
UPS or FEDEX delivery men of their day, carriers of "Chinese civilization",
not independent thinkers, artists, planners, or rulers.


Japanese "logic" of convenient cultural attribution might also require us to
say that Indian Buddhism "passed through" Tibet, "was merely tranferred by
the Chinese" to Korean haulers who off-loaded Indian Buddhism at the docks
of Korea and then into Japan as "Indian Civilization." Would the Japanese
like to suggest that not only Koreans did not add their own stamp to
Buddhism but that the Chinese and Tibetans did not also? Is the world just a
delivery service of the civilizing arts for the Japanese so that they could
claim it as their sole property? Would Japanese scholarship wish to suggest
that the Japanese are culturally Indian?


This is not in any way, shape or form a derision of the great multiethnic
gift to the world known as Chinese Civilization, the combined product of the
Han, Tibetans, Manchus, Mongols, Turks, Koreans, Vietnamese, and many other
nationalities. This is about sanity.


I'll give you a free one: If you want to say the Japanese were under so much
influence or direct contact from China, I would like you to explain, for
example, how Confucianism barely scratched the surface in Japan, whereas in
Korea it was imported into China and remained (probably far longer than it
should have.) Confucianism developed in China well after Chinese and even
Japanese ship technology could maneuver the rough seas between the two
countries. There was direct trade between the two countries by that time. My
answer was that during that period, Japanese-Korean contact was less than it
had been in the earlier period when Korean shamanism and Korean Buddhism
came in. (Also, I would suggest, Japan still was not a centralized state.
Its little warrior-chiefs in the provinces were too enamored of killing one
another to abide by a philosophy that considered effete scholars higher than
soldiers. Not surprisingly, the cultural hero for the Japanese still today
is the sword-wielding samurai, not the scholar.)


The Chinese voyage to Africa was not in ancient times but in the 1500's,
Kazuo. It's sad that you should be so desirous to deride Japan's Malay
ancestors as coming "in small boats." Is size or grandeur all that matters?
Is that why it is better to say Chinese when you mean Korean? Well, let's
not say England was conquered by north German tribes called Angles, Saxons
and Frisians. Let's call them ancient Greeks or Egyptians. Or Romans. After
all, this English is written in Roman script derived from Greek and
Phoenician antecedents, and half the words aren't germanic. You know, the
incense used in Catholic and certain other Christian services is said to
have derived from Egypt. And there is record in Rome that the Pope sent a
pretty note to an old English king. There. That proves that the Germans
weren't the conquerors of Celtic Britain. How would you put it? That there
is some evidence of Angle and Saxon settlement in England, but no proof that
the kings were Anglo-Saxon.


As far as "genetic studies" are concerned, as far as technologically
advanced nations go, the Japanese, are perhaps the most bogus, most gullible
believers of every sort of faked "evidence" they could be given. The
Japanese pharmaceutical industry, for example, is at the technological level
of the snake-oil, voodoo potion, and the woe is the poor Japanese who has to
depend on Japanese medicine to cure him. Japan is the only technologically
advanced nation on earth where bloodtyping is an obsession, and where
certain bloodtypes are considered better than others, where certain
bloodtypes are commonly believed to carry with them certain personality
traits. "Scientific evidence" is often provided to "prove" these claims.
This is naturally seen by the rest of civilized humanity as pure horse$hit,
and yet another example of the Japanese's obsession and fears about their
own racial makeup.


Hitler and the Nazis were able to produce every sort of supposedly
scientific "evidence" to "prove" their evil, false and racist theories. How
was that? Kazuo, a powerful and unchallenged regime can do whatever it
wants, and if its people wish to believe in racist theories, they will not
question the validity of so-called "evidence." (Paging Charles Murray!) When
you understand that the Japanese people have been lied to ON A GRAND SCALE,
then you will stop regurgitating your so-called "studies."


Frankly, Kazuo, I have to admit that I am getting tired. I actually have a
real job in the real world and I can sit around and try to get people to see
THE OBVIOUS, but you seem to have an endless ability to refer to bogus
IceMan theories and settlement from Planet X studies. Nothing I say is
acceptable to the Japanese Right, the regional sales managers for the
Chrysanthemum Club, and the gullible. Koreans only came as immigrants. They
only came as artisans. They only introduced the writing system. They only
brought the two religions and the national game. Oh yes, and in addition to
ssurim (sumo), they brought yudo (judo). They created the architecture, the
court dress, physical appearance and the grammar of Japanese. They
introduced the silk trade and banking (paging the Hata clan!) But these
long-detested folk were allowed to do all these far-reaching things only as
hated alien immigrants, never as fellow countrymen of the Yamato or earlier
rulers. The emperor Nintoku was found to have been buried in a Korean style
burial mound replete with Korean princely regalia. But he wasn't Korean.
That's cool. He just wanted to be buried with stuff from some alien people
who basically only were his exalted and unnamed people's servants. Must have
been a pretty open-minded guy. Kind of like Richard Nixon being buried with
a Mexican sombrero and huaraches. (I am joking, here, Kazuo) I like emperors
that don't get hung up about race, emperors that respect the culture of
others. It sounds pretty far-fetched, Kazuo, but I like the sound of it.


Just as there is an obsession by the insane Japanese Right to write out the
Koreans as the "northern" element out of their history, they are obsessed
with pushing the Malays out of discussion as the "southern" element. I don't
care if it from a Westerner or a Japanese, so-called studies" that "prove"
the Malays were not the ancestors of the Japanese should always be held in
the deepest suspicion as either ignorant, misguided, provided with
insufficient or falsified "evidence" or following orders.


In the Japanese population people look either wholly Korean, Korean-Malay
or Malay. Most look either wholly Korean or a mix of the two. They do not
look Chinese. Of course, looks can be deceiving, and I know that a northern
Chinese can really be an ethnic Manchu or a Mongol and could therefore not
look very different from a Korean. I know that there is a Malay element in
many southern Chinese that can nearly make a Chinese look Japanese. The
issue is that Koreans and Malays do not look alike, but that Korean and
Malay people were seafarers and that it is INSANE to say that they could not
have settled Japan. Kazuo has cited "findings" that prove that the origin of
the Jomon was not Southeast Asian. Once again Japanese-dictated "science"
conveniently leads us ever farther away from truth, ever closer to mystery,
to shrouded mists of unknowable peoples, disappeared races, undocumented
histories, to Ice Ages where the truth never to be found, as if melted away
with the glaciers.


If the "southern" ancestors of the Japanese were not Malay, who were they?
The only other likely candidates would be the Negritos, who preceded the
Malays to the Philippine Islands and still live in the Philippines, both
mixed in with the general Malay population and as separate tribes. Perhaps
rather than asking Japanese high school kids their blood types, Japanese
science should go to these people and ask them their histories. Even if it
is found that they weren't the ancestors of the Japanese, they are the close
neighbors of the Japanese and have ancient histories and cultural-linguistic
information that the world should know before they disappear altogether.
Surely Japanese money could do this small service for a neighbor and the
world.


But Japanese "science" and Western "studies" of Japan have never been
interested in real, living people. There is an endless amount of money made
available to study lunatic theories about every non-Asian origin of the
Japanese, but mention Malay or Korean and your Japanese patron will go
ballistic. And that is not nice. It is impolite to discuss such issues. It
is OK for Japanese members of Parliament
...

The key strategy of the Japanese Right is to throw curve balls. A korean
mirror found in a tomb is "really chinese", we are told. What grounds?
Because there are Chinese characters on the mirror. But the only writing
system the Koreans used (until idu, then hangul) was Chinese characters.
It's kind of like saying if it's metal and has two wheels then it MUST be a
wheel barrow, NEVER a bicycle.


I deliberately am choosing in these postings, besides my laziness, to speak
in general terms and to lay out MY THEORIES. How dare I have my own
theories? Because if the Japanese Right can make purely nonsensical myth
into the serious discussion of some of the West's so-called top academics,
then I must conclude that my theories can only be a step in the right
direction. Do I know the name of the Kaya chief in present-day Fukuoka who
sat down with the Malay chief 2000 years ago and made a truce? NO. Do I know
why certain Kaya settlers left Kyushu after the Paekche invasion to found
another Korean-like kingdom in the heart of Malay Okinawa? No. But I know
something like that happened, because the Japanese people, their language
and culture are OBVIOUSLY a Korean-Malay hybrid. In normal scientific
analysis you first proceed from the obvious, following the known natural
rules, such as gravity. If that is disproved, then you go on to other
possibilities. In the discussion of Japanese origins, however, the OBVIOUS
has been deliberately and evilly removed from discussion until recently and
only the crazy theories have been dealt with. Were the Koreans really
Korean? Come on!


Before we analyze the most recent Japanese commisioned blood-study or skull
measurement statistics to show that maybe, maybe, Xerxes of Persia may have
been the first Yamato, let's all get out a map of the countries around
Japan. All along the southern Korean coastline are islands. Fish and people
like islands, and fisherman go to such islands to fish and to settle
permanently. That is how nearby Koreans came to live in Japan. Now, going
from the Philippines, in northern Luzon, follow the path up to the Babuyan
Islands, to the Batan Islands, to Taiwan to Iriomote Jima in the Ryukyus,
throught Okinawa, Yoron, Okino Erabu, Tokuno, and up till you reach southern
Kyushu. This is how the Malays from the Philippines, who are still related
to the Malay aboriginals of Taiwan (see Ethnologue on the web: languages of
Taiwan, Philippines). They are still alive and well. Like the Koreans, they
are not some unknown primeval prehistoric Ice Men, but ordinary folks who
are the ancestor-people of the Japanese. Just as the Japanese have changed
in 2000 years, so have the Koreans and the Taiwanese aboriginals. Nothing
remains static. Dialects of Korean, Koreo-Malay, Koreo-Ainu have died out
with little written trace. Records kept in Chinese characters did not help,
so their interpretation must be made by open-minded, self-confident Japanese
and others, not by individuals deliberately seeking to destroy evidence or
hide the truth.


Doug, my evidence is simple and open to question and further investigation,
but I ask one thing: that those who are so eager to jump on my "Obvious
Origins of the Japanese" Theory demand one thing from the other side, which
is also simple. If the founders of Japan were not Koreans and Malays, who
were they? But they cannot say vague terms, like "Tungusic", "Altaic",
"Manchurian", "Northern", "Continental", "Peninsular", "Yayoi", "Southern",
"Austronesian", "Jomon", "Southeast Asian". Since we are not talking about
ancient times, but rather about only 2000 years of history, we should have
no excuse for not stating publicly and widely the exact names of these
founder-races. History, as bad as it was written, at least made mention of
all the peoples in the neighborhood. But remarkably, the Japanese cannot
find the names of their founding races. Lost in the mists of time? That's
precisely what they want us to believe.


The Koreans, for their own military security, kept careful watch of their
northern borders. There were no unrecorded incursions by horseriders bent
merely on taking over Japan. They fought Khitans and Jurchen and none of
those people succeeded in taking over Korea or any Korean kingdom. In fact,
those Manchurian forces never succeeded in defeating Korgoryo, Korea's
northern kingdom. So non-Korean aliens never were even in the southern
states of Paeche, Kaya and Shilla in order to launch any kind of military
attack or even peaceful settlement of Japan. This is simple stuff, as is the
"mystery" of Japanese origins. Actually, it's silly to have to demand that
"scholars" once and for all recognize these OBVIOUS details so that they
could go on to, what I think is the really exciting stuff: how did this
coming together of Korean and Malay in Japan mesh. There probably are
interesting records hidden away in closets written 2000 years ago describing
encounters, treaties and all sorts of issues a multiethnic Japan would have
discussed. But we are not permitted to see them. Probably a tremendous
amount of invaluable national cultural treasure has been destroyed by the
Japanese Right over the last 100 years

haha dont get carried away

Trust me, I know asians.

About difference in languages. Do you even know Korean? It's like a brother language to Japanese if you've ever studied it. In fact a lot Chinese people, I know who've studied Japanese say they're's no connection to Chinese whatsoever. I've also heard that this people who studied Korean and then went on to Japanese had no trouble adapting. In fact they were ahead of everyone else in their class because Korean was so similar to Japanese and they had no trouble switiching.

Bottom line....Japanese culture was heavily influenced by Chinese culture. However genetically speaking, Japanese have more in common with Koreans than Chinese.

I thought we've already went over this in the Korea thread. I suggest you read it. What do you mean by heavily influenced? I disagree with you. Koreans adapted Chinese culture blending their own innovation in it which they then transferred to Japan, so how can you say the Chinese "heavily" influenced Japan? Do you call Roman culture a Greek one, because they've adapted Greek influences? No! Each is unique.

Hey whatever floats your boat kiddo, if you want to deny Chinese influence on Japan, particularly during the Tang dynasty relations with Japan by all means do so. Thankfully the academic world disagrees with you.

I don't think any East Asian culture can deny Chinese influence, but that's not to say that those cultures aren't uniquely their own. Either way, regardless of how much Chinese and Korean influence the Japanese have had, the Japanese are still their own people and own culture.

We've had a hell of lot more influence on Japanese culture then you guys. By your statement do you mean to say while Korean are only genetically tied to Japanese we gave had no influence at all. That's freakin' absurd. I mean does Japanese speak a Sino-derived language or a language similar to Korean. I took Japanese myself, and I couldn't get over the fact of how similar Korean and Japanese are alike. White people I know who know nothing about asian culture have commented on how Japanese and Korean were alike. Koreans adapted Chinese culture and then tranferred its own mix to Japan. If you say otherwise, it's like saying Romans had no distinct culture, and everything Roman was Greek. That's history the way you'd like to see it huh? Stop taking credit for other people's labors!

I admit the Chinese have had contact with the Japanese in its history, but those contacts were sporadic. And most of influences came through Korea first before ever getting to Japan. Japan was a backwater then and no one paid attention to them until, it did gain any real power until 18-19th century. Before then, they were hardly known, so it wasn't as if anyone had constant relations with them.

And another thing, are you taking your cue from that CMT guy? Well he seems more American to me than a Japanese. No offense, but I'd rather trust a Japanese person to give a more representative view of what they actually think, rather than a relying on someone who's giving rather distorted view of an Americanized person. Sorry. So if there's anyone whose native Japanese here, I'd like to hear your views.

LOL I take it that I touched a nerve? I don't remember ever stating that Japanese culture is absent of Korean influence in my post. I must say, you are a rather sensitive poster and not exactly a winner in the reading comprehension department either. My point is that Chinese influence on Japanese culture is undeniable and trying to argue against that is equally as absurd as negating Korean influence on Japanese culture. So far I've never stated that Japan had no influence from Korea, you're just being over hyper-sensitive. As for CTM, he's a third generation Japanese American or so he claims. Whatever the case may be, I don't care as he's a person I've duked it out with on these boards. Besides like IABATY stated already, arguing who played a bigger role in shaping Japanese culture is pointless as Japanese are a different and unique culture. If Koreans are going to brag about how they shaped Japan and how Japanese owe them so much, Chinese can equally claim the same thing about Koreans and it will continue to be an endless cycle of pointless flaming on all three sides. Bottom line, Japanese culture has taken influence from BOTH Chinese and Korean culture. If you want to claim Korean culture played a bigger role, fine I could care less. But either way, the Japanese are their own people and culture.

I agree with you Tit. I am trying to be argumentative here. I concede Japan has a unique culture shaped by lots of cultures, and Japan certainly doesn't owe anyone anything.

But, I have to say there are a lot of things a lot of similarities between Japanese and Koreans also that are not written in history books that people really don't know about. For instance, there are hand gestures that are very similar as well as certain gesticulations when Japanese speak--sometimes I can kind of mistake their gesticulations by the way my grandfather acted.

That said, I think Japanese are their own people. I don't believe they owe anyone anything. Case closed.

Gez. Another over-sensitive Korean nationalist

ROFL! I stopped after reading this line. This is absolutely not true. If anything they believe Chinese had a stronger connection with Japanese than Koreans, at least culturally. Japanese adopted things from the Chinese which aren't seen in Korea, so your "theory" about passing on "Koreanized" Chinese culture to Japan simply isn't true. It's not a coincidence that Japanese referred to many Chinese adopted things as "Han" 漢, including the script which they used for their written language: Kanji 漢字. They even sent Japanese people to China to learn from them.

Furthermore, not all culture was imported through Korea. In ancient times China had strong connection with Japan's most southern islands, Okinawa. So don't be surprised if a lot of Chinese culture was imported through Okinawa.



LOL, another one of your laughable (made up?) comments. Everyone who learned Japanese knows it's somehow related to Chinese. If they learn Kanji they know it's related, not only because of the similarity to the Chinese script, but also because of the pronunciations of the characters. Kanji usually have two pronunciations, one native to Japan (Kunyomi 訓読み), the other one the Chinese derived one (Onyomi 音読み). It's no surprise that those pronunciations sound more like various Chinese dialects than Korean.

By the way, didn't you say you've studied Japanese? If so, you should've known this. Better try next time.

ego wakarimasen!

Yes, they've sent many Japanese scholars and monks to China to study confuscianism and Buddhism during the Tang dynasty. It was during that time when Chinese culture had one of the biggest impact on Japanese culture and Japanese political system. The Japanese court dresses were largely influenced by the Tang court dress, before then the Japanese costumes were very different. The Japanese Katana were also based on designs of the Sui and Tang swords, but of course they developped their own unique design later on.


It was the early Ming dynasty that China had strong political ties and trades with Okinawa (Ryukyu), their culture were quite heavily influenced by Chinese, for example their cuisine and also Karate. But they were not part of Japan until recent times.

No mainstream academic believes that there is significant Chinese/Japanese connection, where most agree on Koreans/Japanese link. If you know of any list'em and provide a link.

Never denied that there were transfers between China and Japan, but they were too few in history to be very significant. You seem to forget Japan was not the power it is today. They were really a minor player and were pretty isolated for most of its existence until most recently in the 19th Century. There was not a constant back and forth between China and Japan as you suggest. Japan was isolated for most of history and this accounts for its uniqueness in culture, dresss etc.

Excuse me Adee? I believe Buddhism was brought from Korea to Japan etc.
Excerpt:

According to Understanding Japanese Buddhism, Buddhism entered Japan on October 13, 538. The ruler of Paekche, a small kingdom in southwest Korea presented the imperial court with a bronze image of Shakyamuni (The Buddha), banners, and several manuscripts of Buddhist scriptures. The Paikche ruler told Emperor Kimmei how Buddhism came to Korea from India and China, and that it was always looked at with the highest respect wherever it went.

You guys are totally making things up that never existed in history. Can you PLEASE stop taking credit for other people's labors and claim things that aren't yours? I have other questions as well about Confucianism etc. But there are too numerous to name here.

The only significant borrowing from China was kanji. So what? How do get that from China having a great influence in Japan. So the Japanese use Chinese character big deal. I know Chinese people actually studying Japanese who say the language differences are like worlds apart. They tell me there's no similarity between Chinese and Japanese except kanji, and that similarity is "superficial."

I also know tons of people who have studied Japanese and Korean and they are astounded by the similarities. Some of them have even said their knowledge in Korean made them on of the best students in their Japanese class. They're basically "cousins" in terms of language relations. My theory is that Japanese derived from Korean, hence the similarities.

I also think your dialect theory is mere coincidence. You're just itching to find similarities that aren't there.

No mainstream academic source? Hmm that's funny, just about every book I've read about Japan or Japanese history be it from western scholars or Japanese scholars emphasize huge Chinese cultural influence especially during the Tang dynasty. If you are so uncomfortable with that idea why don't you take your ideas and present them to the history/Asian studies faculty to your nearest university? It seems rather pointless of you to complain about it to a bunch of people you don't know online. Wouldn't it be more productive and academic yourself to actually go out and search for the truth? Just a suggestion.

why don't you provide your source. You keep saying it but your not providing concrete evidence. Name names so I can search it online or link.

I don't have the actual books with me but tell you what, since I remember reading about it at Barnes and Noble, I'll make a trip home this weekend and provide you with both the name of the book and the quote. How does that sound? Oh and like I said, why don't YOU present your ideas to a person of higher academic prestige? You seem irked by the fact that Japanese culture was heavily influenced by Chinese and will go to great lengths to disprove it. Nothing wrong with having an opinion but it seems as though your notions naturally contradict what the academic world believes. Tell you what, I'll bring the sources for you next week. That I will do, in the meantime you should take my suggestion and find an academic or professor who is willing to back your arguments up. Sounds fair? Oh and if you want to search online, just google Japanese history or Japanese culture. Hell you can even google "Chinese influence on Japanese culture" or other variations like "Chinese influence, "Japanese culture". Not that hard to do.

Can you tell me of Chinese influence that wasn't first filtered through Korea, except kanji? I'm speaking of direct and pure Chinese influence on Japan, not influences going from China to Korea to Japan. Please provide a respected source preferably not partial, that is, not Chinese, Korean or Japanese.

I'm not irked by anything.

All the important stuff went directly from China to Japan during Tang synasty where Japan imported everthing whole sale before adapting it.
Confucuism, Zen(Chan) Buddahism, Kanji, City building, statecraft. Archetecture, Gardening , dress style , manners , food , music , story writing , history writing , picture books , warfare.

I don't see why you want to argue that Korea was the main foreign influence on Japan when it an't.

Im not saying Korea never influenced Japan just not as much as China.

Look I don't deny there are contact between Japan and Korea, especially in the early times of their civilisation. I know that shamanism practiced by the Japanese were just the same as the Korean, the costumes that they wore at that time also resembles Korean. Yes Buddhism was first introduced to Japan from Korea, however the form of Zen Buddhism which is still practised today was introduced to Japan from China later on. Here some links:
http://theosophy.org/tlodocs/teachers/Eisai.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisai
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/zen/hd_zen.htm

Japan has always had good contact with China during Tang, Song and early Ming dynasty, although the relation was on and off. All you need to understand is Chinese influence came to Japan a bit later than Korea, but that does not mean China had little effect on Japanese culture. The Kimono is the most obvious example of Chinese influence.

Too few to be significant? About everything of in ancient Japan came from China. Here's a small list:
-language
Written (Kanji)
Spoken (Onyomi)
-Art
Painting
Music
Goldfish breeding
-Clothing
-Architecture
And countless other things.

Nobody denies that Japan was isolated in most of their history, but that doesn't mean they never made contact with other countries. The contrary is true. Japanese were very interested in China and frequently made contacts. Did you forget I said the Japanese sent people to China to learn from the Chinese? So your statement about transfers between China and Japan were few and insignificant is simply false. Every historian can tell you, even Japanese won’t deny it.



Kanji are part of the Japanese language and are used daily. Why wouldn't that be a significant part of Japanese culture? If anything, that ALONE would already be a great influence.
Just to remind you: Japanese can pronounce Kanji in two different ways: the first one is Kunjomi (the native Japanese pronunciation) the second one is Onyomi (Chinese loanword). Just to give to an example: 山 (mountain) is prounced "yama" in Kunyomi, but "San" in Onyomi, which resembles Chinese "Shan". And this goes for countless other words. Notice how the Onyomi always are monosybillic and most Kunyomi are mutisybillic? That's because most Chinese words in Middle Chinese (Tang) were monosybillic, something that Korean words weren't.

Japanese derived from Korean? A Japanese (or any other sane person) would burst out laughing if you said that. Japanese and Korean do have quite similar grammar, I agree. But that DOESN'T mean one language derived from another, in the most extreme case they have a common root and belong in the same language family, but that only means they’re related though a “common root” and evolved separately. Japanese and Korean don’t sound that similar by the way.

I'm glad you said it's only your "theory", because that already indicates you made it up. My suggestion is that you should read some books about Japanese history, no doubt it will mention China and it’s influence on Japanese culture. I’m not trying to brag about Chinese culture, but your idea of “stealing” things which were created by Chinese people, and claim them as your own is simply wrong and disgusting. –sure

If you want proof, just google or read some books. There’s plenty of academic stuff out there.