Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 1st, 2017, 04:16 PM   #1
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2
Evidence for Kojoson?


What evidence do we have for Kojoson? I'm aware of the references in Chinese writings, but what exactly about the purported state can we determine from these? Do we have any archaeological evidence?

Last edited by Haakbus; October 1st, 2017 at 04:44 PM.
Haakbus is offline  
Remove Ads
Old October 2nd, 2017, 04:06 AM   #2
Archivist
 
Joined: Sep 2016
From: 天下
Posts: 159

From writing we can attest 5 rulers ( 4 of which we know names) who have very high likelyhood to have existed, a prince and 2 or 3 officials. Also we can vaguely point to the location.

From archeology we know that Pyeongyang and Liaodong were important centers of population and probably centers of states, but we can only guess their relationship to Gojoseon.
Vaderfan is online now  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 09:39 AM   #3
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaderfan View Post
From writing we can attest 5 rulers ( 4 of which we know names) who have very high likelyhood to have existed, a prince and 2 or 3 officials. Also we can vaguely point to the location.

From archeology we know that Pyeongyang and Liaodong were important centers of population and probably centers of states, but we can only guess their relationship to Gojoseon.
According to Song Ho Jung there are a number of very large settlements with earthen walls in the Pyongyang area which emerge in the fourth to third centuries BC and by the second century BC the large numbers of weapons in wood-frame tombs in other sites indicates social stratification.

I'm honestly not certain about all his conclusions, but it does appear some type of social development was going on in what is now South Pyongan and Hwanghae provinces. Certainly not a state-level polity, but possibly some network or federation of Iron Age chiefdoms?

Last edited by Haakbus; October 2nd, 2017 at 09:44 AM.
Haakbus is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 09:47 AM   #4
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

However, a case can be made pre-Yan Kojoson could have been in Liaodong or Liaoxi. Yan didn't conquer the Liaoxi region until circa 280 BC.

If I remember correctly Yan artifacts appear as far as the Chongchon river but the wall they built only went as far as the Liao river.

Last edited by Haakbus; October 2nd, 2017 at 11:33 AM.
Haakbus is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 11:50 AM   #5
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

Interestingly the Yan conquest of the region put the chiefdoms around Jilin in direct contact with trade with the Central Plains, which was one of the most important factors contributing to the formation of the state of Puyo. It also apparently caused cultural (and possibly population) influx into the southern regions of the peninsula, eventually leading to state formation in the late third century AD.

Last edited by Haakbus; October 2nd, 2017 at 11:54 AM.
Haakbus is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 12:00 PM   #6
Academician
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 85

Is there any evidence pre-Yan Liaoxi/Liaodong spoke Koreanic?

The Han era Fangyan has a Northern Yan/Joseon region that extends from Liaoxi to Northwestern Korea.
https://www.academia.edu/12619063/Sp...Medieval_China

What's intriguing is the existence of a non-Sinitic northeastern Han(韓) polity that ruled over the Zhui and Mo(Yemaek?).
http://www.academia.edu/11416704/An_...y_Debate_2012_

Last edited by Wansui; October 2nd, 2017 at 12:08 PM.
Wansui is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 02:47 PM   #7
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wansui View Post
Is there any evidence pre-Yan Liaoxi/Liaodong spoke Koreanic?

The Han era Fangyan has a Northern Yan/Joseon region that extends from Liaoxi to Northwestern Korea.
https://www.academia.edu/12619063/Sp...Medieval_China

What's intriguing is the existence of a non-Sinitic northeastern Han(韓) polity that ruled over the Zhui and Mo(Yemaek?).
An Ever-contested Poem: The Book of Poetry's "Hanyi" and the Sino-Korean History Debate (2012) | Jae-hoon Shim - Academia.edu
I don't know of any way of knowing for certain what language (or languages) were spoken in Kojoson, but Koguryo (which originated in the Huanren area in eastern Liaoning) primarily spoke a Koreanic language so far as we can determine.
Haakbus is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 03:23 PM   #8
Academician
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 85

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakbus View Post
I don't know of any way of knowing for certain what language (or languages) were spoken in Kojoson, but Koguryo (which originated in the Huanren area in eastern Liaoning) primarily spoke a Koreanic language so far as we can determine.
From what I can understand, linguists postulate that northeastern China was inhabited by a mix of Sinitic,Koreanic,para-Mongolic and Tungusic speaking polities.

1. Shang allied polities such as the Guzhu,Yan(晏?) etc.

2. Sinitic speaking clans that fled from the Shang-Zhou transition such as the Ji(㠱) of the Daling River Valley. This Ji clan/polity presumably formed the basis of the Gija Joseon myth.

3. The feudal state of Yan(燕),a collateral branch of the Zhou rulers who intermarried with local elites and ruled over non-Sinitic subjects.

4. Pseudo ethnic confederations such as the Donghu and Shanrong who were hostile to the Zhou.

5. Individual tribes/polities such as Sushen,Han,Fa,Hui/Mo(Yemaek),Chaoxian(Gojoseon).

I wonder if there is a connection between the Buyeo of the Sungari river and the Yemaek tribes of modern day Liaoning. There seems to be very little information on pre-Wiman Joseon and Gojoseon's relationship with Buyeo/Goguryeo.

Last edited by Wansui; October 2nd, 2017 at 03:32 PM.
Wansui is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 03:37 PM   #9
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wansui View Post
From what I can understand, linguists postulate that northeastern China was inhabited by a mix of Sinitic,Koreanic,para-Mongolic and Tungusic speaking polities.

1. Shang allied polities such as the Guzhu,Yan(晏?) etc.

2. Sinitic speaking clans that fled from the Shang-Zhou transition such as the Ji(㠱) of the Daling River Valley. This Ji clan/polity presumably formed the basis of the Gija Joseon myth.

3. The feudal state of Yan(燕),a collateral branch of the Zhou rulers who intermarried with local elites and ruled over non-Sinitic subjects.

4. Pseudo ethnic confederations such as the Donghu and Shanrong who were hostile to the Zhou.

5. Individual tribes/polities such as Sushen,Han,Fa,Hui/Mo(Yemaek),Chaoxian(Gojoseon).

I wonder if there is a connection between the Buyeo of the Sungari river and the Yemaek tribes of modern day Liaoning. There seems to be very little information on pre-Wiman Joseon and Gojoseon's relationship with Buyeo/Goguryeo.
The early records state the Puyo language was almost identical to that of Koguryo with small differences. The data we have for Koguryo (Korean-like morphological markers, a number of glosses, large number of loanwords in Jurchen and Manchu) really seem to point to a language related to Korean. Place names are not a reliable source.

I'm not sure how much other evidence there is of connections between Puyo and Koguryo, other than both Koguryo and Paekche deriving their royal legitimacy from Puyo. I think one early source might have said the customs of the Puyo and Koguryo people were similar but their clothing and other stuff was different I don't remember.

One important thing is to remember that each state/polity should be viewed as separate and of itself, and wasn't part of a greater "Korea" or "China" until those concepts developed later.

The Three Kingdoms appear to have been Koreanic, but not Korean. Think of it something like the Germanic tribes vs modern Germany.

Last edited by Haakbus; October 2nd, 2017 at 03:54 PM.
Haakbus is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2017, 04:46 PM   #10
Reptilian Shapeshifter
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Draco
Posts: 2,750
Blog Entries: 2

According to Gina Barnes at least one of the early sites (Unsong-ri) I was thinking of is associated with the commanderies.
Haakbus is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
evidence, kojoson



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inca evidence InfinitelyCurious American History 174 May 15th, 2015 02:38 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.