Were Paekche and Shilla vassals of Yamato?

[Jangkwan]

There was a pre-technological caveman culture in the southern tip of Korea, and moreso where Silla was. (The north side of Silla is protected by the sea from the arctic cold fronts that move south, thus creating a somewhat large climate safe zone for primitive humans.) This is indicated by the distribution of 'goindol'/'dolmen' rock monuments that suddenly disappear outside the Korean peninsula, Shandong, and Japan. As humans moved up the technology tree, they were able to settle further away from the coast in northern areas. However, it is not the natives of this region that overcame the caveman technology plateau (where most cave-people had been stuck). The technologists came from outside the region on sailing ships, initially setting the colder parts of northeast Asia. These outside technologists brought the Korean language to the region when they created a colony in the previously unsettled northeast Asia/China. That colony is Joseon/Chaoxian in the Liaodong-Beijing coastal corridor.

The previous natives in the southern tip of Korea were more like southeast Asians and the Ainu, but even more cold adapted because it was colder, making them larger and taller. The outside technologists? Well, they were basically like ancient Egyptians or were their key influencers, who were essentially orientals in appearance already.

They were horseriders but were also intrinsically seafarers. I surmise that they developed into horseriders in the highlands of East Africa, and quickly moved to building ships on the massive lakes they lived next to when they discovered metalworking. (And were basically the proto-culture of every advanced ancient civilization)

As far as East Asians/Orientals are concerned, they expanded from an initial colony in the Liaodong-Beijing corridor. This colony probably originated from East Africa and was built there because it was uninhabited by the previous natives of East Asia. ie. Outside the 'goindol' range. (However, this original homeland in East Africa was probably lost due to the Bantu expansion. Thus there is no distinct highland African group who look like orientals anymore.)

So the big picture is, East Africa, then old Joseon/Chaoxian. The language of the previous natives is probably more like Chinese, and was probably heavily influenced by its isolated geography that made it a holdout for relatively large populations of para-humans (ie. Neanderthals, etc.). I surmise that multi-syllable words were difficult for the para-humans. And as such, the large number of syllables in Japanese is highly unusual, since they live right next to a culture that is completely mono-syllabic. This would almost have to be intentional.

 

[Vaderfan]

Ah, the jester reappeared.

 

[Jangkwan]

Ah, the jester reappeared.

You're just saying that because I criticized your linguistic approaches/theories. Your side has simply taken to ignoring it and resorting to ad hominem like you are doing now. I hope you realize one day that Mandarin is probably as old as China and that China was founded by non-Chinese speakers. In other words it was distorted by non-native speakers from its onset. It's a myth you are trying to protect, and what I'm telling you undermines that myth.

It's so sad what you are doing. African cultures do not use writing because their inconsistent weather patterns do not favor cultures of permanent habitation, and writing can not be easily moved or transported. Yet the oldest technologically advanced civilization was probably from Africa. I don't understand your problem. The Celts were technologically advanced but they did not use writing.

So try to imagine a culture that didn't use books, and try to imagine that they weren't just completely primitive. Or you're just creating a lie.

 

[Hwacha Nation]

Why do you even need to go to East Africa for origin of East Asian civilization when the Hongshan culture was just in the Liaoning river valley encompassing Liaodong and Bohai regions, and at 4700BC, was the most advanced culture at the time, building the first pyramids in the world?

Hongshan culture - Wikipedia

Some Chinese archaeologists such as Guo Da-shun see the Hongshan culture as an important stage of early Chinese civilization.[11] [12] Whatever the linguistic affinity of the ancient denizens, Hongshan culture is believed to have exerted an influence on the development of early Chinese civilization.[13] The culture may also have contributed to the development of settlements in ancient Korea. [14]

Mystery of the Hongshan Pyramid - The National Paranormal Society

 

[Vaderfan]

You're just saying that because I criticized your linguistic approaches/theories. Your side has simply taken to ignoring it and resorting to ad hominem like you are doing now.

I tried to argue with you back when you were trying to press a simple claim that "Altaic" Khan and Hawaiian Kahuna are cognate without any evidence. You disregarded back then what I said. Now you moved on to claiming that East African horseriding sailors started East Asisn civilisation. I don't see much point in trying to prove anything anymore.

I hope you realize one day that Mandarin is probably as old as China and that China was founded by non-Chinese speakers. In other words it was distorted by non-native speakers from its onset. It's a myth you are trying to protect, and what I'm telling you undermines that myth.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Mandarin refers to the language that developed in Song-Yuan period from Middle Chinese. In English we don't refer to previous stages of the language as Mandarin. Also, of course China was not founded by Chinese people. Chinese people, Han people, Huaxia people, were formed due to the rise of Sinic civilisation. And I have no idea what you mean by distortion or what kind of myth you have in mind.

It's so sad what you are doing. African cultures do not use writing because their inconsistent weather patterns do not favor cultures of permanent habitation, and writing can not be easily moved or transported.

Of course African cultures use writing. Maybe you should decide on the time period you are talking about and exact location? Ethiopia, Somalia, Maghreb is in Africa. Not to mention Egypt.

Yet the oldest technologically advanced civilization was probably from Africa. I don't understand your problem. The Celts were technologically advanced but they did not use writing.

Define technologically advanced then. Celts were certainly far behind Romans or Greeks.

 

[Jangkwan]

Why do you even need to go to East Africa for origin of East Asian civilization when the Hongshan culture was just in the Liaoning river valley encompassing Liaodong and Bohai regions, and at 4700BC, was the most advanced culture at the time, building the first pyramids in the world?

Hongshan culture - Wikipedia

Some Chinese archaeologists such as Guo Da-shun see the Hongshan culture as an important stage of early Chinese civilization.[11] [12] Whatever the linguistic affinity of the ancient denizens, Hongshan culture is believed to have exerted an influence on the development of early Chinese civilization.[13] The culture may also have contributed to the development of settlements in ancient Korea. [14]

Mystery of the Hongshan Pyramid - The National Paranormal Society

I can give two reasons.

1. East Asians are not cold evolved and basically hairless. They basically look like their closest cousins are black Africans, but have much fairer skin. Cold evolution did take place in groups like Ainu, who lived in places that are warm compared to Liaoning river valley. Heck, it even takes place in India and Persia. People tend to be hairy in places north of Africa.

2. It's a matter of historical records. There is only one group that the Egyptians point out as their precursors, and this group is in all likelihood the people of Egypt's "land of the gods" in East Africa. The Atlanteans, whom the Greeks learned of from the Egyptians, who are the Egyptians only specified precursor civilization. Who also probably lived at the source of the Nile River where there are massive lakes basically in the mountains. Even to Koreans, a certain lake in the mountains holds special significance to them. In other words, in terms of available details that are in historical records, this is specified as the oldest from a very old and immensely influential source. A carbon dating comes with a lot of uncertainties, like what if you find artifacts in the future that are give older dates. The Egyptians were extremely advanced and sophisticated., so i would take their word for what they consider to be their elder civilization. If we ignore the dating of available artifacts, Egypt would appear to be older than Sumerian or any Anatolian civilizations. Which makes it likely that we just haven't found the oldest Egyptian artifacts to date them yet. The ancient Egyptians also had a long tradition of depicting people with long slanted eyes with oriental looks.

To be frank, Liaoning is a pretty bad location to emerge as a civilization. It's somewhere you need to already be relatively advanced, with orders of magnitude in technology to live in and you just won't have the time to develop them if you are pre-technological and dying to the cold when winter comes. But it does make an ideal location for a technologically advance seafaring group's initial colony as it was empty and too cold for pre-technological groups.

 

[Jangkwan]

I tried to argue with you back when you were trying to press a simple claim that "Altaic" Khan and Hawaiian Kahuna are cognate without any evidence. You disregarded back then what I said. Now you moved on to claiming that East African horseriding sailors started East Asisn civilisation. I don't see much point in trying to prove anything anymore.


I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Mandarin refers to the language that developed in Song-Yuan period from Middle Chinese. In English we don't refer to previous stages of the language as Mandarin. Also, of course China was not founded by Chinese people. Chinese people, Han people, Huaxia people, were formed due to the rise of Sinic civilisation. And I have no idea what you mean by distortion or what kind of myth you have in mind.


Of course African cultures use writing. Maybe you should decide on the time period you are talking about and exact location? Ethiopia, Somalia, Maghreb is in Africa. Not to mention Egypt.


Define technologically advanced then. Celts were certainly far behind Romans or Greeks.

I'm not sure what I was trying to say at the time. But certainly it must have been about something bigger in scope. Are you aware of the army composition of the Normans when they invaded England? They had a sizeable number of cavalry. That is ships and horses. They can go well together.

No. That is your linguistic definition of Mandarin. In a historical context, Mandarin simply refers to the most common dialect of Chinese, or the language of the bureaucracy aka Mandarins. The historians of the times never used the term "Middle Chinese". Your (faulty?) linguistic definitions have historical consequences. You imply that the Chinese name for other states were simply meaningless words that don't properly describe the other states. And implies that the ancient Chinese were frivolous in their statecraft and details. This might seem like nothing to you, but its actually important. If we overlay Mandarin on the Han dynasty, the names actually have a systematic meaning and purpose. And show a deeper understanding of the states in the west.

The myth is that China is the oldest civilization in East Asia. I'm saying there was no civilization in East Asia until another civilization from East Africa established a colony in East Asia. And that the colony was outside of ancient China and didn't even speak Chinese.

You do realize African cultures generally did not use writing. I don't know what you're trying to pull here.

The Celts were at a high technology level and did not use writing. I don't see what your confusion is. They were able to sack Rome among other things. They probably could have ended Rome right there if they wanted to. Do you really not know what "advanced technologically" means in an ancient historical context? They were an apex group.

 

[Vaderfan]

I'm not sure what I was trying to say at the time. But certainly it must have been about something bigger in scope. Are you aware of the army composition of the Normans when they invaded England? They had a sizeable number of cavalry. That is ships and horses. They can go well together.

Normans didn't try to ship their cavalry from East Africa to Liaodong though.

No. That is your linguistic definition of Mandarin.

No, this is the only definition of Mandarin. Mandarin doesn't have the same exact meaning as 官话.

In a historical context, Mandarin simply refers to the most common dialect of Chinese, or the language of the bureaucracy aka Mandarins.

No, that's guanhua. Mandarin is not used in this context, as simple as that.

[quote[The historians of the times never used the term "Middle Chinese".[/quote]
Find me a source in which Mandarin appears which predates Qing era please. Then I'll happily agree with your point.

You imply that the Chinese name for other states were simply meaningless words that don't properly describe the other states.

Where do I imply that? And no word is meaningless, ancient Chinese exonyms were some times phonetic transcriptions, some times were appelations created in ancient Chinese.

And implies that the ancient Chinese were frivolous in their statecraft and details.

How?

This might seem like nothing to you, but its actually important. If we overlay Mandarin on the Han dynasty, the names actually have a systematic meaning and purpose. And show a deeper understanding of the states in the west.

Examples? And anyway it is very well documented that Guanhua underwent changes. Claiming that it did shows only that you are completely clueless about the topic.

The myth is that China is the oldest civilization in East Asia. I'm saying there was no civilization in East Asia until another civilization from East Africa established a colony in East Asia. And that the colony was outside of ancient China and didn't even speak Chinese.

Unofrtunately, you have no evidence to claim that.

You do realize African cultures generally did not use writing. I don't know what you're trying to pull here.

Yes, because they generally were on lower civilisational level, bar the regions I mentioned before.

The Celts were at a high technology level and did not use writing. I don't see what your confusion is. They were able to sack Rome among other things. They probably could have ended Rome right there if they wanted to. Do you really not know what "advanced technologically" means in an ancient historical context? They were an apex group.

No, they were not on higher technological level. What was the biggest metropolis? Did they have a robust administration or higher culture? Were they even a united empire or just a bunch of migrating tribes? Celts were to Rome and Greece as Mongols to Ming China. Tribal force, focused on military exploits, fghiting against settled agriculturalist population.

 

[Hwacha Nation]

I would like to see any academic papers or books regarding anything related to East Africa and whatever Jungkwan is talking about here.

At least the Hongshan influence on Korea has something to go on by in terms of research by the academia.

But really, we should create a new topic if you want to discuss origin of korea. If anyone wants to continue the topic of yamato baekje relations, I recommend reading some chapters of the book I linked first, and commenting on it.

 

[Jangkwan]

Normans didn't try to ship their cavalry from East Africa to Liaodong though.

The Ming used their treasure fleets to bring animals like the giraffe from Africa to China.

No, this is the only definition of Mandarin. Mandarin doesn't have the same exact meaning as 官话.

"When Jesuit missionaries learned this standard language in the 16th century, they called it "Mandarin", from its Chinese name Guānhuà (官话/官話), or "language of the officials"."
Mandarin Chinese - Wikipedia

No, that's guanhua. Mandarin is not used in this context, as simple as that.

Well, read above.

Find me a source in which Mandarin appears which predates Qing era please. Then I'll happily agree with your point.

Relevance?

Where do I imply that? And no word is meaningless, ancient Chinese exonyms were some times phonetic transcriptions, some times were appelations created in ancient Chinese.

Calling the Roman Empire 'daqin' meaning "Great Qin (China)" is a fairly meaningless appellation. What is "Great China" or "Great Qin" if you didn't know they were referring to the Romans?

How?

By the apparent nonsensical names they gave to the states in the west. That is if we are going by your linguistic reconstruction, which overrides the actual pattern in the naming that give them meaning and significance. Regardless, this is off topic. I only brought it up because of your initial hostile response.

Examples? And anyway it is very well documented that Guanhua underwent changes. Claiming that it did shows only that you are completely clueless about the topic.

Again, maybe some other time I can show you that Guanhua probably underwent very little changes and that there is a problem with your conclusion.

Unofrtunately, you have no evidence to claim that.

I have a lot of evidence. Maybe you should read my other posts here. I'll remind you that not being convinced is one thing, saying there is no evidence is another.

Yes, because they generally were on lower civilisational level, bar the regions I mentioned before.

But we're talking about technology level. The history of Africa is somewhat shrouded in mystery. But recently there was a African tribe discovered that seemed to have developed advanced steelmaking techniques before anyone. Living in cities is one thing. Technologists and specialists is another. It's commonly believed that cities are required for specialists, but this isn't true if the group has higher mobility and were horseriders. Because horseriding makes excess food supplies possible to create specialists by making hunting and gathering more efficient.

No, they were not on higher technological level. What was the biggest metropolis? Did they have a robust administration or higher culture? Were they even a united empire or just a bunch of migrating tribes? Celts were to Rome and Greece as Mongols to Ming China. Tribal force, focused on military exploits, fghiting against settled agriculturalist population.

The Romans gladius is a basically a Celtic sword. The Romans borrowed a lot of technology from the Celts. They were at a high technology level, and this has nothing really to do with cities, administration, or higher culture. You merely mistakenly think it does.