![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
This text has nothing to do with post-occupation Japan. Equally a long description of rule in Korea is not suitable for this article - it is supposed to cover all of Japanese history. We can't have that level of detail here. Perhaps if someone wants to have a bit on Japanese colonialism that might be interesting, but in the meantime we need to keep this as tight and fluid as possible. So I have removed the new addition. John Smith's ( talk) 18:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
At the end of the Muromachi Period section, we see this link:
See also: Christianity in Japan
I would propose changing this to simply say "See also Kirishitan" because the title "Christianity in Japan" is misleading, given that the article in question only deals with Christianity within a two century period, and not in the modern day. CopaceticThought ( talk) 22:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
|
The Korean user Caspian blue wrote. "This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent." [5] [6] However, this is a theory only of South Korea. (He is using not the source of Japan but the source of South Korea.[ [7]]) According to the history book on legitimate Japan, Rulers of Japan is not a descendant of Korean. It is Chinese's descendant or Japanese.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.131.245.112 ( talk • contribs) 2009-01-04T07:00:55 (UTC)
Same old stuff and same writing style. Why are afraid of logging in your current account? (I already figure out who you're though) [15]. Read the cited sources. Whether you do not like the content or not, those are properly cited "academic sources" unlike your insertion of mere primary sources. One is even from National Geography, which is clearly not a South Korean source. In the article, a professor at a Japanese university claimed so as mentioning Akihito's own admission. Moreover, you must present "academic source", not your original research nor interpretation since you're not obviously an academic.-- Caspian blue 07:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand the relevance of the comment. The preceding sentence says that military aid was sent to Japan - how does the belief that Japanese rulers were of Korean origin counter this? Furthermore this seems to be a fringe/controversial view. If it is to be fitted in it needs to be done much more carefully in a relevant section, specifically detailing the exact theory, etc. John Smith's ( talk) 23:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
You are misusing the source, national geographic [ [16]]. They say only that "prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains". This is a rumor, and futher, they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.", because this source give suggestions that the rulers of Korea could be of Japanese descent (written in prior) either. And so the writing in this point can not be countercharge of prior context. Windybluesea ( talk) 12:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Windybluesea, welcome back, well. You're still misreading the source as always. The source says like these.
“ | But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all.
Korean Bones
Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.
But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring. "Blood links between Korea and the Japanese imperial family are documented from the eighth century," he said."Even the current emperor [Akihito] has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity. |
” |
they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." - You're blatantly dishonest about the source. I also did not know that Akihito is not the ruler of the Japan although the position is rather symbolic in politics. Note the word "seem" from the passage, "the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent". I recommend you re-read the source and others.-- Caspian blue 17:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
First, who are "the rulers of Japan"? It is a meaningless statement. Second, my earlier point has not been answered. How does this disputed topic contradict the statement that "The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397[15] and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402.[16]"? John Smith's ( talk) 22:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
This section was initiated by long term sockpuppeter,
Azukimonaka (
talk ·
contribs ·
block log) and his offspring including dear
Windybluesea (
talk ·
contribs)
See
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eichikiyama and
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Azukimonaka--
Caspian blue 19:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Caspian blue demands to add the part of the bold-type.
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
He presented the source of his grounds.
But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all.Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring. "Even the current emperor Akihito has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
210.175.255.217 (
talk •
contribs) 2009-01-06T11:55:10 (UTC)
His insistence is as follows.
Korean Bones
Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.
But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring.
"Blood links between Korea and the Japanese imperial family are documented from the eighth century," he said.
"Even the current emperor [Akihito] has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity.}}
they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." - You're blatantly dishonest about the source. I also did not know that Akihito is not the ruler of the Japan although the position is rather symbolic in politics. Note the word "seem" from the passage, "the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent". I recommend you re-read the source and others. -- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Note-1:National Geographic News (April 28, 2008) "Japanese Royal Tomb Opened to Scholars for First Time" [20]
The event marked the first time that scholars had been allowed inside a royal tomb outside of an official excavation led by Japan's Imperial Household Agency. Archaeologists have been requesting access to Gosashi tomb and other imperial sites since 1976, in part because the tombs date to the founding of a central Japanese state under imperial rule. But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all. Although the team's visit didn't lay any of those issues to rest, experts celebrated it as a first step toward expanded access to the mysterious tombs. "The main achievement of the occasion was that for the first time we could enter to do [our own] research," said Koji Takahashi, a Toyama University archaeologist and spokesperson for the group.
Note-2:Press Conference on the Occasion of His Majesty's Birthday (Date: 18 December 2001) [21]
Question
Next year Japan and the Republic of Korea will co-host the global event, the 2002 FIFA World Cup. As the tournament draws ever nearer, exchange on a person-to-person level between the two countries is intensifying. Could Your Majesty tell us of any interests or thoughts you have concerning the Republic of Korea, which both historically and geographically is Japan's close neighbor?
Answer
That the people of Korea and Japan have from ages past had deep interchange is recorded in detail in the Nihon Shoki(Chronicles of Japan,compiled in 720), among other historical records. Those who immigrated or were invited to come to Japan from Korea introduced culture and technology. Of the musicians in the Music Department of the Imperial Household Agency, some are direct descendants of musicians who came over to Japan from Korea at that time, and have inherited the music for generations and still perform the Gagaku (Imperial Court Music) on various occasions. It was truly fortunate that such culture and technology was brought to Japan through the enthusiasm of Japanese people and the friendly attitude of the Korean people. I also believe that it contributed greatly to Japan's subsequent development. I, on my part, feel a certain kinship with Korea, given the fact that it is recorded in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, compiled in 797), that the mother of Emperor Kammu (reign 781~806) was of the line of King Muryong (reign 501~523) of the Kingdom of Paekche*. King Muryong had strong relations with Japan, and it was from his time that masters of the Five Chinese Classics (books compiling the teaching of Confucianism) were invited to Japan one after another to teach Confucianism. King Song Myong(reign 523~554), son of King Muryong, is recognized as the one who introduced Buddhism to Japan.
His proposal received the cross-examination.
Explanation by Britannica
Thus, by the end of the 4th century, Yamato was a kingdom well settled on the Nara plain with considerable control over the peoples of the archipelago. It was in contact with Chinese rulers, exchanged diplomatic envoys with several of the kingdoms on the Korean peninsula, and was even strong enough to have sent an army against the powerful state of Koguryo, which then dominated the peninsula. Yamato was most closely associated with the southeastern kingdom of Paekche, whence came the "seven-pronged sword." Contact with the mainland, although involving conflict, also encouraged a marked rise in standards of living in the archipelago, as many of the fruits of advanced Chinese civilization reached Japan via people from the peninsula. Weavers, smiths, and irrigation experts migrated to Japan, and the Chinese ideographic script also was introduced at that time, together with Confucian works written in this script. Claims by historians prior to World War II that Paekche paid "tribute" to Japan, and that Japan conquered the southern tip of the peninsula where it established a "colony" called Mimana have since been largely discounted by historians in both Japan and Korea.
If the 5th century represents an expansion of power throughout the archipelago, it also was a time of involvement in Korean affairs, as the struggle for peninsular hegemony intensified. At the time of Yamato's expedition against Koguryo in the late 4th century, Paekche and Yamato found themselves allied against Silla or Koguryo (or both); while the latter looked to northern Chinese kingdoms for support and legitimation, Yamato and Paekche usually turned to southern China. In fact, Yamato dispatched some 10 embassies to the Southern Sung between 421 and 478.
Paekche was frequently attacked by Koguryo during the century, prompting continued requests for assistance from Yamato; it is recorded that Paekche even sent a crown prince to Yamato as a hostage on one occasion and the mother of the king on another. Yet, probably because of internal dissension, Yamato did not dispatch any troops to the peninsula, although a lengthy memorial sent with the embassy of 478 and presented to the Southern Sung emperor requested that the Yamato king Yuryaku be appointed commander of a large army being raised for dispatch against Koguryo.
Yamato's interest in Korea was apparently a desire for access to improved continental technology and resources, especially iron, which was especially plentiful near the lower reaches of the Naktong River in the south. Yamato apparently gained a modicum of power in this region, controlled by the league of the Kaya (Japanese: Mimana) states between Paekche and Silla, though the exact relationship--whether ally or tributary--is unclear. But in the 6th century, Silla became militarily powerful, and Yamato faced several reversals in the area, ultimately being driven entirely from the peninsula when Silla annexed the Kaya league in 562.
The 6th century, in fact, represented a decline of Yamato power both at home and abroad. It was also marked by another shift of the court, this time back to the old region around Mount Miwa sometime late in the reign of Keitai (507-c. 531). From Keitai's reign there was a marked reduction in royal power. A large force assembled to be sent against Silla, for example, had to be detoured to Kyushu in 527 to put down the rebellion of a local chieftain named Iwai, who had apparently refused to raise soldiers and supplies for the continental campaign. That campaign on the continent also ended in defeat, signaling the decline of Yamato power. The rest of the 6th century can be characterized by the growing accumulation of power by regional clan leaders and a weakening of royal power, as well as the rise of new clans, mostly of recent continental origin, who managed technical service groups.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
210.175.255.217 (
talk •
contribs) 2009-01-06T11:55:10 (UTC)
1. Caspian blue did not clarify the definition of Rurers. The reader can do some interpretations by the knowledge of a Japanese history. However, the fact of the history of Japan denies all the insistences on Caspian blue.
2. "This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." This is Caspian blue's personal impression. This information is a noise to understand " History of Japan".
-- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
About this unisgned comment
«...it is recorded in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, compiled in 797), that the mother of Emperor Kammu (reign 781~806) was of the line of King Muryong (reign 501~523) of the Kingdom of Paekche*»... So, how this does contradicts the article of National Geographic ? The point is you do not have to delete a third party source even if you do not like what it says. Add another stating the opposite view if you have one... -- Flying tiger ( talk) 14:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way that whole book of Song and book of Sui info are incorrect you know that weird stuff about the Wa kings: "As Egami (1964) notes, it may look very strange that the names of six or seven states listed in the self-claimed titles included Chin-han and Ma-han which had preceded, respectively, the states of Silla and Paekche. Perhaps the King of Wa had included the names of six or seven south Korean states in his title merely to boast of the extent of his rule. But Wa Kings could not have included the names of nonexistent states." The Mahan and Chinhan were predecessor nations, so they didn't exist with Silla and Paekche in the same time period nor did they exist with the Japanese Wa and definately not in the same time as the Wa Kings.
May be the Wa kings were able to have sovereignty in Korea by breaking the laws of physics and time. One nation was the predecessor to the other but by Bending Time Japan can be the King to both. (eventhough one nation existed before Japan existed) We know the Japanese can travel back in time. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 03:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
This Japan history section has inconclusive text as if they were real and are trying to protray it that way to fit Japan's invalidated theories. "Some Japanese scholars have attempted to fill the gaps" from five kings of Wa the yamato chronicles. Just because a Japanese person from the past filled in the unreadable text and translated it doesn't mean that is the only translation. Always look at the original :) Can someone fix this weird non-sensical wa king gets military sovereignty sections. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 01:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I love it when the Japanese fill in stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Song "some volumes were already missing. Later editors reconstructed those volumes" and "Modern historians believe that it had glaring problems; one of them being that the book maintained a very foggy attitude and was biased against the surrounding ethnic groups" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 02:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
The discussion of one week ended. Caspian blue's proposal has the following problems.
It is appropriate that his proposal is rejected by occasion of the above-mentioned. I will report on this conclusion to the Administrator in several days. Thank you. -- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 10:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the lack of discussion from Caspian Blue is a real problem if he wishes to maintain his position. He should really start taking part in this discussion again - otherwise when the page is no longer protected there is a danger of reversions happening again. John Smith's ( talk) 12:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the relevance is addressed. In order for this article to be good it needs to have equal points of view. The fact that the 12th cent writing was a retranslation and it was a translation of warring states and the context made the original statement unclear whether they were Kin who takes control of the Yamato Navy or hostages is still questioned. In historical sense the term Wa in NE Asia was a derogatory term meaning migit pirate makes it unclear what was really being stated.
I am also going to assume that no one on this board believes Japan can travel through time, break the laws of physics or bend the fabric of time so the whole paragraph on the Book of Song and book of Sui insinuating Wa kings haveing soveriegnty in Korea will be systematically changed or deleted. If you don't want it changed please let us know how to travel through time.-- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 20:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Strange I would have thought the link to the Japanese organisation would imply that they were Japanese. I found the accusations of gaming to be laughable, considering you just reported me for 3RR for edits I had already been blocked for. Pot/Kettle/Black カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! ( talk) 03:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Caspian blue. Please present grounds of your insistence "Ancient Japan was being ruled by Korean." -- 219.105.45.141 ( talk) 14:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Due to slow edit warring, this article has been protected. Please continue the discussion above to come to a consensus, and then let me know. I will unprotect the article once a wording is reached which is acceptable to everyone involved. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, 219.105.45.141 ( talk · contribs), another Ip user. You seem to have the same writing style as that of the above Ip as well as Kamosuke ( talk · contribs), Princesunta ( talk · contribs) or Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs) (geez, all indef.blocked for sockpupetry and harassment, what a coincidence!). Could you provide diffs that I insisted that "Ancient Japan was being ruled by Korean."? Many scholars claim as such though. I think I restored your blanking of "rulers of Japan seems to be Korean descendants". Anyway, don't worry. I'm preparing something to please for you. Well, here is just for a quick preview.
*
Emperor Ojin, 15th ruler, Korean prince of Baekje according to 百済から渡来した応神天皇―騎馬民族王朝の成立 by Ishiwatari Shin'ichiro (
石渡信一郎) and 日本古代の國家形成 (講談社: 1978)by Yū Mizuno (水野祐), professor at Waseda University
|
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I adapt the IP user's format.-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
|
Korean User Caspian blue demands to add the part of the bold-type again.
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
His suggestion was rejected. The one of the reasons is the lack of the source of information.And, he submitted the source again.
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
This book was published in 1977. And, this book was not reprinted. The source cannot be verified. You should present another source. If "Emperor Nintoku is Korean prince" is historic common sense, you can easily present another source.
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
- Well, somebody added a very interesting information on Yayoi period but it was blanked by Amagase ( talk · contribs). After checked on the source, the latter is partially right on the point that the content does not fit the Yayoi period but Heian period or this article. Shinsen shoji roku (新撰姓氏錄), the royal genealogy book proves that Japanese imperial house is indeed rooted from the Baekje royal house. "日本の神話を考える" ( ISBN 4094600655) written by a noted Japanese historian and emeritus professor at Kyoto University, Ueda Masaaki (上田正昭) presents such claim. He is also famous for his analysis on Chiljido, one of evidences for Wa of Japan was a colony of Baekje (倭国の世界 (1976年)). You know that Shinsen shoji roku was written by commission of Emperor Kammu, whose mother was a Korean descendant. With the book, the 30th emperor Bidatsu was also a Korean. The section has many potential to be expanded indeed, so what is your rationale? -- Appletrees ( talk) 14:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I regret that Appletrees edited it based on such history knowledge.
- Ueda Masaaki introduces the difference point and the common feature of the myth of Korea and the myth of Japan. [34]
- "The Bidatsu emperor is Korean" is one of the ear dusters that the South Korean tried to make popular. [35] [36] [37] "大原真人 出自謚敏達孫百済王也" is translated into "Ohara no mahito takayasu is Bidatu emperor's king grandchild's Kudara descendant.". However, South Koreans misinterpreted it. "The grandchild of Bidatu is a royal family of Baekje. Therefore, Bidatu is South Korean." 百済王 is a name of a person. The Baekje coming from is written 出自百済國. For instance, father of Takano Nigasa is written like this. "和史乙継 出自百済國都慕王十八世孫武寧王也" -- Princesunta ( talk) 04:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- You regret? www That's a good one. You visit here with the ID as I'm getting to almost forget this matter. Your appearance always draw my attention back to the ancient history of Japan. Yeah, I'm studying it hard. I have to take a nap, so see yeah soooooooooon-- Appletrees ( talk) 05:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
The same kind of burial mounds, such as the Saki mounds in Nara City and the Umami mounds of Koryo Town and Kawai Town were constructed in the northern and the western part of the basin between the late fourth and the fifth century. In the sixth century, the Soga Clan, one of the political powers of that time, moved to Asuka and then strengthened their power by intermarrying with the imperial family. As the clan had close ties with the immigrants from the Korean Peninsular, they supported the immigrants' efforts to bring Buddhist faith throughout the region. Eventually, the Buddhist culture flourished in and around Asuka and Ikaruga, where Horyuji Temple was erected.
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I see that Pkakita ( talk · contribs) intentionally and unnecessarily put my name to every "threads" to attack me. I feel very offended by such rude manner. You overly emphasize my ethnicity, and try to discredit sources that I brought in here because scholars (even Japanese) suggested that the imperial lines may be Korean descendants. Besides, you might have forgotten that the material is not originally inserted by me, and Flyingtiger see no problem with the contents. You have constantly antagonized me from the start which is clear harassment and racist attack. The funny thing is after the sockpueppter was (again) indef.blocked, you have appeared and asked help from several editors which selection looks odd such as Kintetsubuffalo and Badagnani whom I had disputes 3 months ago. A certain editor tried to console the former. You also use the internet cafe IP to avoid scrutiny which is also odd coincidence given the fact that Azukimonaka/Eichikiyama's underlying IPs have been range-blocked for 3 months. I don't see any coincidence with this. Besides, I looked trough every talk pages that you suggested to compare. I found the very same format as you have done here. I paste it here
Sockpuppeter, Kamosuke ( talk · contribs) at Talk:Kofun_period#Korean's hypothesis |
---|
Korean's hypothesisPart Article that South Korean deletesAccording to an official history record at a Liu Song Dynasty [1]. Liu Song Dynasty recognized that the Yamato Imperial Court reigned over Silla and Baekje and Gaya confederacy. According to an official history record Sui Dynasty [2], Silla and Baekje feared and respected the power of Yamato. They always dispatched the messenger and wished Japan friendship. According to an official history record at a Goryeo(Samguk Sagi). Baekje submitted the royal prince of Baekje (Jeonji of Baekje) to the Yamato Imperial Court in 394. [3]Silla submitted the royal prince of Silla (Misaheun) to the Yamato Imperial Court in 402. [4] Influence of Japan in Korean peninsula continued until being defeated at Silla and Tang Dynasty in the Battle of Hakusukinoe in the 7th century. The South Korean deletes this part many times. However, All Koreans never write the deletion reason. Korean's hypothesisKorean civilization ? A Korean peninsula of this age is being written the same barbarian as Japan. Concretely, could you teach the civilization of South Korea? Korean immigrants in JapanIf current Japanese Emperor traces his family genelogy to Koreans/ Korean kingdom Baekje. This makes Chinese immigrant is more important then Korean immigrant in the history of Japan?? Please refrain yourself making bias opinion. The Chinese immigrant is more important than the South Korean immigrant in the history of Japan. According to the history record "Shinsen-Joujouroku ( 新撰姓氏録) [39]" "Detailed research by historians had made clear that the greatest wave of immigration took place immediately after the unification of Japan by the Yamato court. If the Yamato court was established without any relation to Korea, how can these facts be explained?" :Perhaps, I think, the source in this part is "Japanese race's origin (日本民族の起源)" published in 1958. However, this insistence is being denied by most historians now. [40] Ruling classJapan's Emperor Kammu's mother is known to be a Baekje descendant.
Many important figures in Emperor Ojin's reign were immigrants from the Korean kingdom of Baekje.
according to the Nihongi, a Korean was in charge of taxes levied on shipments. The introduction of Chinese writing to Yamato was one Baekje's most important gifts to the court
One-third of the noble families on a list compiled in 815 had their origins in China or Korea: 170 of the 1200 listed were from China, 240 from different parts of Korea. These immigrants received noble titles from the rulers of the Yamato, and were valued as experts, especially on iron-working, horseriding and writing.
Korean influence on Japanese laws is also attributed to the fact that Korean immigrants were on committees that drew up law codes.
Eight of the 19 members of the committee drafting the Taiho Code were from Korean immigrant families while none were from China proper.
Further, idea of local administrative districts and the tribute tax are based on Korean models.
-- Kamosuke 12:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC) |
And also very same arguments and same writing pattern can be seen from
|
-- Caspian blue 13:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Pkakita ( talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log) has been identified as Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log), so indef.blocked again. His complaints are grouped together, and his offensive labeling of my name is removed per WP:Talk. Don't worry, Azukimonaka, I will continue the ongoing discussion, but not with you. You should think yourself lucky that your complaints are not deleted as against WP:BAN policy.-- Caspian blue 02:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC) |
Note: Please confirm the reliable source of information. -- Pkakita ( talk) 12:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
Andrew c ( talk · contribs) removed Pkakita's comment because he thought that is a clear personal attack. [42]-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: Please compare with existent theories.-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Current status at History of Japan#Kofun period |
---|
Close relationships between the Three Kingdoms of Korea and Japan began during the middle of this period, around the end of the 4th century. According to a controversial part on the Gwanggaeto Stele, Japan actively participated with large armies on the Korean Peninsula during the late 4th and early 5th centuries. According to the Book of Song, of the Liu Song Dynasty, the Liu-Song emperor formally awarded the king of Yamato, which he considered to be his vassal, the title of military sovereignty over Silla and the Gaya confederacy. [5] However, others dispute this theory, claiming there is no evidence of Japanese rule in Gaya or any other part of Korea. [6] [7] [8] The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 [9] and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. [10] This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent. [11] [12]
|
-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
This is repeating comments that I've made earlier, but for sake of clarity I will make them again. Who is this "imperial ruler" you mention? The current comment "rulers of Japan" is so vague it is meaningless and must be cut or changed. If someone wants to clarify it and improve it, please do. But if no one can be bothered/is able to then that is too bad. Blue, I can see that you are not completely fluent in English. Please understand that I am coming from the position of someone who does speak English as my first language - what we have now is very sloppy. Also despite your feelings I do not have an interest in the squabbles between Japanese and Koreans over their history. That's why earlier on I said I was happy to have the hostages reference removed if it was the only way to get rid of the comment about "rulers of Japan" in that inappropriate part of the article.
I am not objecting to any discussion of the possibility that an emperor's mother was from Korea in any part of the article. But whether that is true or not is not a rejoinder to the source that states hostages were sent to Japan as it was then. If you want to criticise the source you need a citation that says the princes were not hostages. John Smith's ( talk) 10:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
The horse riding race conquest dynasty theory" ja:騎馬民族征服王朝説" is a theory that will lose logical grounds at latest by the 1980's. It is negative from the result of archeology clearly. Moreover, the alternation theory of the dynasty" ja:王朝交替説" doesn't necessarily mean a Yamato king is a Korean peninsula coming from. Because the theory related to a Korean peninsula has received a strong influence of the horse riding race conquest dynasty theory to a multi amount, Caspian blue may still say that it loses logical grounds by 20 years ago. Even if the writing of the researcher in a center standpoint of the ancient history research (present age of 吉田孝『日本の誕生』岩波新書 1997、吉村武彦編『古代史の基礎知識』角川選書 2005 and 白石太一郎『古墳の語る古代史』岩波現代文庫 2000) is seen, there was no description that those from a Korean peninsula who introduced established the royal prerogative of Yamato at all, and it was possible to look to the receipt of the horse riding race culture for "It was caused by the collision of a Yamato country that advanced to the southern part of a Korean peninsula for the iron resource and Koguryo that had gone south"'s common opinion at present.-- Forestfarmer ( talk) 10:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Forestfarmer ( talk · contribs), use Engish, since "Here is English Wikiedia". a theory that will lose logical . Interesting choice of word; that means "your hopeful thinking based on "no academic journals or book or news"?. Wikiedia calls it "original research". If it is so ridiculed by academics, why still his theory are still introduced to "many" reputable books by reputabe scholars or even advanced by them like Gari Ledyard? Evidences from journals and books or news please if you want to insist more? You know the theory that Wa of Japan ruled southern tip of Korean peninsular cooked up during the Meiji period has been generally discredited since 1960s, but why you've insisted on keeping it and "deleting counter theories" over multiple articles? Given you involvement in anti-Korean forum, 2channel and secret plots regarding liancourt Rocks, I would not be surprised by your appearance here though. On contrary to your assertion with no evidence that the theories are discredited since 1980s, I have read published books in Angloshere in 21st century. You're losing your logical ground here. Funny.-- Caspian blue 15:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I was considering contributing to this talk page, however certain anti-Japanese editors who like to write 5000 word essays accusing everyone of being racist, a sock-puppet, a member of 2ch or shooting JFK, make it annoying to even start reading. Good Luck Guys, when the dust clears I might contribute. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! ( talk) 12:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
4.23.83.100, most of your edits were original research and not supported by sources. Given we had a stale edit-war don't you think we should discuss your edits here and at Kofun period first to reach consensus? You had a month to discuss them yet I didn't hear a peep from you. Why make so many changes without discussing them first? John Smith's ( talk) 20:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Lets try this if you guys don't want to insert opposing views then lets keep it simple. How about: Close relationships between the Three Kingdoms of Korea and Japan began during the middle of this period, around the end of the 4th century. They had a close friendly relationship during the Kofun period, but the exact nature of the relationship is not conclusive. Maybe something like this? Or lets put in both opposing translations and intrepretations. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 23:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I removed all the text that was at the centre of this dispute. If anyone wants to expand, please do - but use sources we can all agree on at least for the moment. John Smith's ( talk) 08:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
This text has nothing to do with post-occupation Japan. Equally a long description of rule in Korea is not suitable for this article - it is supposed to cover all of Japanese history. We can't have that level of detail here. Perhaps if someone wants to have a bit on Japanese colonialism that might be interesting, but in the meantime we need to keep this as tight and fluid as possible. So I have removed the new addition. John Smith's ( talk) 18:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
At the end of the Muromachi Period section, we see this link:
See also: Christianity in Japan
I would propose changing this to simply say "See also Kirishitan" because the title "Christianity in Japan" is misleading, given that the article in question only deals with Christianity within a two century period, and not in the modern day. CopaceticThought ( talk) 22:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
|
The Korean user Caspian blue wrote. "This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent." [5] [6] However, this is a theory only of South Korea. (He is using not the source of Japan but the source of South Korea.[ [7]]) According to the history book on legitimate Japan, Rulers of Japan is not a descendant of Korean. It is Chinese's descendant or Japanese.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.131.245.112 ( talk • contribs) 2009-01-04T07:00:55 (UTC)
Same old stuff and same writing style. Why are afraid of logging in your current account? (I already figure out who you're though) [15]. Read the cited sources. Whether you do not like the content or not, those are properly cited "academic sources" unlike your insertion of mere primary sources. One is even from National Geography, which is clearly not a South Korean source. In the article, a professor at a Japanese university claimed so as mentioning Akihito's own admission. Moreover, you must present "academic source", not your original research nor interpretation since you're not obviously an academic.-- Caspian blue 07:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand the relevance of the comment. The preceding sentence says that military aid was sent to Japan - how does the belief that Japanese rulers were of Korean origin counter this? Furthermore this seems to be a fringe/controversial view. If it is to be fitted in it needs to be done much more carefully in a relevant section, specifically detailing the exact theory, etc. John Smith's ( talk) 23:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
You are misusing the source, national geographic [ [16]]. They say only that "prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains". This is a rumor, and futher, they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.", because this source give suggestions that the rulers of Korea could be of Japanese descent (written in prior) either. And so the writing in this point can not be countercharge of prior context. Windybluesea ( talk) 12:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Windybluesea, welcome back, well. You're still misreading the source as always. The source says like these.
“ | But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all.
Korean Bones
Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.
But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring. "Blood links between Korea and the Japanese imperial family are documented from the eighth century," he said."Even the current emperor [Akihito] has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity. |
” |
they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." - You're blatantly dishonest about the source. I also did not know that Akihito is not the ruler of the Japan although the position is rather symbolic in politics. Note the word "seem" from the passage, "the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent". I recommend you re-read the source and others.-- Caspian blue 17:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
First, who are "the rulers of Japan"? It is a meaningless statement. Second, my earlier point has not been answered. How does this disputed topic contradict the statement that "The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397[15] and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402.[16]"? John Smith's ( talk) 22:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
This section was initiated by long term sockpuppeter,
Azukimonaka (
talk ·
contribs ·
block log) and his offspring including dear
Windybluesea (
talk ·
contribs)
See
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eichikiyama and
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Azukimonaka--
Caspian blue 19:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Caspian blue demands to add the part of the bold-type.
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
He presented the source of his grounds.
But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all.Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring. "Even the current emperor Akihito has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
210.175.255.217 (
talk •
contribs) 2009-01-06T11:55:10 (UTC)
His insistence is as follows.
Korean Bones
Other experts have suggested that the hesitation is because courtiers and conservatives fear excavation will uncover blood ties between the supposedly pure Japanese imperial line and the Asian mainland, specifically Korea.
But Walter Edwards, professor of Japanese studies at Tenri University in Nara, argues that the "Korean bones" issue is a red herring.
"Blood links between Korea and the Japanese imperial family are documented from the eighth century," he said.
"Even the current emperor [Akihito] has said that he has Korean ancestry." Edwards suggests that the agency's attitude has more to do with trying to maintain the imperial family's dignity.}}
they never say that "the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." - You're blatantly dishonest about the source. I also did not know that Akihito is not the ruler of the Japan although the position is rather symbolic in politics. Note the word "seem" from the passage, "the rulers of Japan seem to be of Korean descent". I recommend you re-read the source and others. -- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Note-1:National Geographic News (April 28, 2008) "Japanese Royal Tomb Opened to Scholars for First Time" [20]
The event marked the first time that scholars had been allowed inside a royal tomb outside of an official excavation led by Japan's Imperial Household Agency. Archaeologists have been requesting access to Gosashi tomb and other imperial sites since 1976, in part because the tombs date to the founding of a central Japanese state under imperial rule. But the agency has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea—or that some tombs hold no royal remains at all. Although the team's visit didn't lay any of those issues to rest, experts celebrated it as a first step toward expanded access to the mysterious tombs. "The main achievement of the occasion was that for the first time we could enter to do [our own] research," said Koji Takahashi, a Toyama University archaeologist and spokesperson for the group.
Note-2:Press Conference on the Occasion of His Majesty's Birthday (Date: 18 December 2001) [21]
Question
Next year Japan and the Republic of Korea will co-host the global event, the 2002 FIFA World Cup. As the tournament draws ever nearer, exchange on a person-to-person level between the two countries is intensifying. Could Your Majesty tell us of any interests or thoughts you have concerning the Republic of Korea, which both historically and geographically is Japan's close neighbor?
Answer
That the people of Korea and Japan have from ages past had deep interchange is recorded in detail in the Nihon Shoki(Chronicles of Japan,compiled in 720), among other historical records. Those who immigrated or were invited to come to Japan from Korea introduced culture and technology. Of the musicians in the Music Department of the Imperial Household Agency, some are direct descendants of musicians who came over to Japan from Korea at that time, and have inherited the music for generations and still perform the Gagaku (Imperial Court Music) on various occasions. It was truly fortunate that such culture and technology was brought to Japan through the enthusiasm of Japanese people and the friendly attitude of the Korean people. I also believe that it contributed greatly to Japan's subsequent development. I, on my part, feel a certain kinship with Korea, given the fact that it is recorded in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, compiled in 797), that the mother of Emperor Kammu (reign 781~806) was of the line of King Muryong (reign 501~523) of the Kingdom of Paekche*. King Muryong had strong relations with Japan, and it was from his time that masters of the Five Chinese Classics (books compiling the teaching of Confucianism) were invited to Japan one after another to teach Confucianism. King Song Myong(reign 523~554), son of King Muryong, is recognized as the one who introduced Buddhism to Japan.
His proposal received the cross-examination.
Explanation by Britannica
Thus, by the end of the 4th century, Yamato was a kingdom well settled on the Nara plain with considerable control over the peoples of the archipelago. It was in contact with Chinese rulers, exchanged diplomatic envoys with several of the kingdoms on the Korean peninsula, and was even strong enough to have sent an army against the powerful state of Koguryo, which then dominated the peninsula. Yamato was most closely associated with the southeastern kingdom of Paekche, whence came the "seven-pronged sword." Contact with the mainland, although involving conflict, also encouraged a marked rise in standards of living in the archipelago, as many of the fruits of advanced Chinese civilization reached Japan via people from the peninsula. Weavers, smiths, and irrigation experts migrated to Japan, and the Chinese ideographic script also was introduced at that time, together with Confucian works written in this script. Claims by historians prior to World War II that Paekche paid "tribute" to Japan, and that Japan conquered the southern tip of the peninsula where it established a "colony" called Mimana have since been largely discounted by historians in both Japan and Korea.
If the 5th century represents an expansion of power throughout the archipelago, it also was a time of involvement in Korean affairs, as the struggle for peninsular hegemony intensified. At the time of Yamato's expedition against Koguryo in the late 4th century, Paekche and Yamato found themselves allied against Silla or Koguryo (or both); while the latter looked to northern Chinese kingdoms for support and legitimation, Yamato and Paekche usually turned to southern China. In fact, Yamato dispatched some 10 embassies to the Southern Sung between 421 and 478.
Paekche was frequently attacked by Koguryo during the century, prompting continued requests for assistance from Yamato; it is recorded that Paekche even sent a crown prince to Yamato as a hostage on one occasion and the mother of the king on another. Yet, probably because of internal dissension, Yamato did not dispatch any troops to the peninsula, although a lengthy memorial sent with the embassy of 478 and presented to the Southern Sung emperor requested that the Yamato king Yuryaku be appointed commander of a large army being raised for dispatch against Koguryo.
Yamato's interest in Korea was apparently a desire for access to improved continental technology and resources, especially iron, which was especially plentiful near the lower reaches of the Naktong River in the south. Yamato apparently gained a modicum of power in this region, controlled by the league of the Kaya (Japanese: Mimana) states between Paekche and Silla, though the exact relationship--whether ally or tributary--is unclear. But in the 6th century, Silla became militarily powerful, and Yamato faced several reversals in the area, ultimately being driven entirely from the peninsula when Silla annexed the Kaya league in 562.
The 6th century, in fact, represented a decline of Yamato power both at home and abroad. It was also marked by another shift of the court, this time back to the old region around Mount Miwa sometime late in the reign of Keitai (507-c. 531). From Keitai's reign there was a marked reduction in royal power. A large force assembled to be sent against Silla, for example, had to be detoured to Kyushu in 527 to put down the rebellion of a local chieftain named Iwai, who had apparently refused to raise soldiers and supplies for the continental campaign. That campaign on the continent also ended in defeat, signaling the decline of Yamato power. The rest of the 6th century can be characterized by the growing accumulation of power by regional clan leaders and a weakening of royal power, as well as the rise of new clans, mostly of recent continental origin, who managed technical service groups.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
210.175.255.217 (
talk •
contribs) 2009-01-06T11:55:10 (UTC)
1. Caspian blue did not clarify the definition of Rurers. The reader can do some interpretations by the knowledge of a Japanese history. However, the fact of the history of Japan denies all the insistences on Caspian blue.
2. "This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent." This is Caspian blue's personal impression. This information is a noise to understand " History of Japan".
-- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
About this unisgned comment
«...it is recorded in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, compiled in 797), that the mother of Emperor Kammu (reign 781~806) was of the line of King Muryong (reign 501~523) of the Kingdom of Paekche*»... So, how this does contradicts the article of National Geographic ? The point is you do not have to delete a third party source even if you do not like what it says. Add another stating the opposite view if you have one... -- Flying tiger ( talk) 14:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way that whole book of Song and book of Sui info are incorrect you know that weird stuff about the Wa kings: "As Egami (1964) notes, it may look very strange that the names of six or seven states listed in the self-claimed titles included Chin-han and Ma-han which had preceded, respectively, the states of Silla and Paekche. Perhaps the King of Wa had included the names of six or seven south Korean states in his title merely to boast of the extent of his rule. But Wa Kings could not have included the names of nonexistent states." The Mahan and Chinhan were predecessor nations, so they didn't exist with Silla and Paekche in the same time period nor did they exist with the Japanese Wa and definately not in the same time as the Wa Kings.
May be the Wa kings were able to have sovereignty in Korea by breaking the laws of physics and time. One nation was the predecessor to the other but by Bending Time Japan can be the King to both. (eventhough one nation existed before Japan existed) We know the Japanese can travel back in time. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 03:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
This Japan history section has inconclusive text as if they were real and are trying to protray it that way to fit Japan's invalidated theories. "Some Japanese scholars have attempted to fill the gaps" from five kings of Wa the yamato chronicles. Just because a Japanese person from the past filled in the unreadable text and translated it doesn't mean that is the only translation. Always look at the original :) Can someone fix this weird non-sensical wa king gets military sovereignty sections. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 01:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I love it when the Japanese fill in stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Song "some volumes were already missing. Later editors reconstructed those volumes" and "Modern historians believe that it had glaring problems; one of them being that the book maintained a very foggy attitude and was biased against the surrounding ethnic groups" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 02:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
The discussion of one week ended. Caspian blue's proposal has the following problems.
It is appropriate that his proposal is rejected by occasion of the above-mentioned. I will report on this conclusion to the Administrator in several days. Thank you. -- 210.175.255.217 ( talk) 10:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the lack of discussion from Caspian Blue is a real problem if he wishes to maintain his position. He should really start taking part in this discussion again - otherwise when the page is no longer protected there is a danger of reversions happening again. John Smith's ( talk) 12:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the relevance is addressed. In order for this article to be good it needs to have equal points of view. The fact that the 12th cent writing was a retranslation and it was a translation of warring states and the context made the original statement unclear whether they were Kin who takes control of the Yamato Navy or hostages is still questioned. In historical sense the term Wa in NE Asia was a derogatory term meaning migit pirate makes it unclear what was really being stated.
I am also going to assume that no one on this board believes Japan can travel through time, break the laws of physics or bend the fabric of time so the whole paragraph on the Book of Song and book of Sui insinuating Wa kings haveing soveriegnty in Korea will be systematically changed or deleted. If you don't want it changed please let us know how to travel through time.-- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 20:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Strange I would have thought the link to the Japanese organisation would imply that they were Japanese. I found the accusations of gaming to be laughable, considering you just reported me for 3RR for edits I had already been blocked for. Pot/Kettle/Black カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! ( talk) 03:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Caspian blue. Please present grounds of your insistence "Ancient Japan was being ruled by Korean." -- 219.105.45.141 ( talk) 14:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Due to slow edit warring, this article has been protected. Please continue the discussion above to come to a consensus, and then let me know. I will unprotect the article once a wording is reached which is acceptable to everyone involved. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, 219.105.45.141 ( talk · contribs), another Ip user. You seem to have the same writing style as that of the above Ip as well as Kamosuke ( talk · contribs), Princesunta ( talk · contribs) or Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs) (geez, all indef.blocked for sockpupetry and harassment, what a coincidence!). Could you provide diffs that I insisted that "Ancient Japan was being ruled by Korean."? Many scholars claim as such though. I think I restored your blanking of "rulers of Japan seems to be Korean descendants". Anyway, don't worry. I'm preparing something to please for you. Well, here is just for a quick preview.
*
Emperor Ojin, 15th ruler, Korean prince of Baekje according to 百済から渡来した応神天皇―騎馬民族王朝の成立 by Ishiwatari Shin'ichiro (
石渡信一郎) and 日本古代の國家形成 (講談社: 1978)by Yū Mizuno (水野祐), professor at Waseda University
|
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I adapt the IP user's format.-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 03:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
|
Korean User Caspian blue demands to add the part of the bold-type again.
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
His suggestion was rejected. The one of the reasons is the lack of the source of information.And, he submitted the source again.
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
This book was published in 1977. And, this book was not reprinted. The source cannot be verified. You should present another source. If "Emperor Nintoku is Korean prince" is historic common sense, you can easily present another source.
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
- Well, somebody added a very interesting information on Yayoi period but it was blanked by Amagase ( talk · contribs). After checked on the source, the latter is partially right on the point that the content does not fit the Yayoi period but Heian period or this article. Shinsen shoji roku (新撰姓氏錄), the royal genealogy book proves that Japanese imperial house is indeed rooted from the Baekje royal house. "日本の神話を考える" ( ISBN 4094600655) written by a noted Japanese historian and emeritus professor at Kyoto University, Ueda Masaaki (上田正昭) presents such claim. He is also famous for his analysis on Chiljido, one of evidences for Wa of Japan was a colony of Baekje (倭国の世界 (1976年)). You know that Shinsen shoji roku was written by commission of Emperor Kammu, whose mother was a Korean descendant. With the book, the 30th emperor Bidatsu was also a Korean. The section has many potential to be expanded indeed, so what is your rationale? -- Appletrees ( talk) 14:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I regret that Appletrees edited it based on such history knowledge.
- Ueda Masaaki introduces the difference point and the common feature of the myth of Korea and the myth of Japan. [34]
- "The Bidatsu emperor is Korean" is one of the ear dusters that the South Korean tried to make popular. [35] [36] [37] "大原真人 出自謚敏達孫百済王也" is translated into "Ohara no mahito takayasu is Bidatu emperor's king grandchild's Kudara descendant.". However, South Koreans misinterpreted it. "The grandchild of Bidatu is a royal family of Baekje. Therefore, Bidatu is South Korean." 百済王 is a name of a person. The Baekje coming from is written 出自百済國. For instance, father of Takano Nigasa is written like this. "和史乙継 出自百済國都慕王十八世孫武寧王也" -- Princesunta ( talk) 04:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- You regret? www That's a good one. You visit here with the ID as I'm getting to almost forget this matter. Your appearance always draw my attention back to the ancient history of Japan. Yeah, I'm studying it hard. I have to take a nap, so see yeah soooooooooon-- Appletrees ( talk) 05:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Evaluation
The same kind of burial mounds, such as the Saki mounds in Nara City and the Umami mounds of Koryo Town and Kawai Town were constructed in the northern and the western part of the basin between the late fourth and the fifth century. In the sixth century, the Soga Clan, one of the political powers of that time, moved to Asuka and then strengthened their power by intermarrying with the imperial family. As the clan had close ties with the immigrants from the Korean Peninsular, they supported the immigrants' efforts to bring Buddhist faith throughout the region. Eventually, the Buddhist culture flourished in and around Asuka and Ikaruga, where Horyuji Temple was erected.
-- Pkakita ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I see that Pkakita ( talk · contribs) intentionally and unnecessarily put my name to every "threads" to attack me. I feel very offended by such rude manner. You overly emphasize my ethnicity, and try to discredit sources that I brought in here because scholars (even Japanese) suggested that the imperial lines may be Korean descendants. Besides, you might have forgotten that the material is not originally inserted by me, and Flyingtiger see no problem with the contents. You have constantly antagonized me from the start which is clear harassment and racist attack. The funny thing is after the sockpueppter was (again) indef.blocked, you have appeared and asked help from several editors which selection looks odd such as Kintetsubuffalo and Badagnani whom I had disputes 3 months ago. A certain editor tried to console the former. You also use the internet cafe IP to avoid scrutiny which is also odd coincidence given the fact that Azukimonaka/Eichikiyama's underlying IPs have been range-blocked for 3 months. I don't see any coincidence with this. Besides, I looked trough every talk pages that you suggested to compare. I found the very same format as you have done here. I paste it here
Sockpuppeter, Kamosuke ( talk · contribs) at Talk:Kofun_period#Korean's hypothesis |
---|
Korean's hypothesisPart Article that South Korean deletesAccording to an official history record at a Liu Song Dynasty [1]. Liu Song Dynasty recognized that the Yamato Imperial Court reigned over Silla and Baekje and Gaya confederacy. According to an official history record Sui Dynasty [2], Silla and Baekje feared and respected the power of Yamato. They always dispatched the messenger and wished Japan friendship. According to an official history record at a Goryeo(Samguk Sagi). Baekje submitted the royal prince of Baekje (Jeonji of Baekje) to the Yamato Imperial Court in 394. [3]Silla submitted the royal prince of Silla (Misaheun) to the Yamato Imperial Court in 402. [4] Influence of Japan in Korean peninsula continued until being defeated at Silla and Tang Dynasty in the Battle of Hakusukinoe in the 7th century. The South Korean deletes this part many times. However, All Koreans never write the deletion reason. Korean's hypothesisKorean civilization ? A Korean peninsula of this age is being written the same barbarian as Japan. Concretely, could you teach the civilization of South Korea? Korean immigrants in JapanIf current Japanese Emperor traces his family genelogy to Koreans/ Korean kingdom Baekje. This makes Chinese immigrant is more important then Korean immigrant in the history of Japan?? Please refrain yourself making bias opinion. The Chinese immigrant is more important than the South Korean immigrant in the history of Japan. According to the history record "Shinsen-Joujouroku ( 新撰姓氏録) [39]" "Detailed research by historians had made clear that the greatest wave of immigration took place immediately after the unification of Japan by the Yamato court. If the Yamato court was established without any relation to Korea, how can these facts be explained?" :Perhaps, I think, the source in this part is "Japanese race's origin (日本民族の起源)" published in 1958. However, this insistence is being denied by most historians now. [40] Ruling classJapan's Emperor Kammu's mother is known to be a Baekje descendant.
Many important figures in Emperor Ojin's reign were immigrants from the Korean kingdom of Baekje.
according to the Nihongi, a Korean was in charge of taxes levied on shipments. The introduction of Chinese writing to Yamato was one Baekje's most important gifts to the court
One-third of the noble families on a list compiled in 815 had their origins in China or Korea: 170 of the 1200 listed were from China, 240 from different parts of Korea. These immigrants received noble titles from the rulers of the Yamato, and were valued as experts, especially on iron-working, horseriding and writing.
Korean influence on Japanese laws is also attributed to the fact that Korean immigrants were on committees that drew up law codes.
Eight of the 19 members of the committee drafting the Taiho Code were from Korean immigrant families while none were from China proper.
Further, idea of local administrative districts and the tribute tax are based on Korean models.
-- Kamosuke 12:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC) |
And also very same arguments and same writing pattern can be seen from
|
-- Caspian blue 13:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Pkakita ( talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log) has been identified as Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log), so indef.blocked again. His complaints are grouped together, and his offensive labeling of my name is removed per WP:Talk. Don't worry, Azukimonaka, I will continue the ongoing discussion, but not with you. You should think yourself lucky that your complaints are not deleted as against WP:BAN policy.-- Caspian blue 02:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC) |
Note: Please confirm the reliable source of information. -- Pkakita ( talk) 12:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent.
Andrew c ( talk · contribs) removed Pkakita's comment because he thought that is a clear personal attack. [42]-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: Please compare with existent theories.-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Current status at History of Japan#Kofun period |
---|
Close relationships between the Three Kingdoms of Korea and Japan began during the middle of this period, around the end of the 4th century. According to a controversial part on the Gwanggaeto Stele, Japan actively participated with large armies on the Korean Peninsula during the late 4th and early 5th centuries. According to the Book of Song, of the Liu Song Dynasty, the Liu-Song emperor formally awarded the king of Yamato, which he considered to be his vassal, the title of military sovereignty over Silla and the Gaya confederacy. [5] However, others dispute this theory, claiming there is no evidence of Japanese rule in Gaya or any other part of Korea. [6] [7] [8] The Samguk Sagi (Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms) recorded Baekje and Silla sent their princes as hostages to the Wa to ensure military support; King Asin of Baekje sent his son Jeonji in 397 [9] and King Silseong of Silla sent his son in 402. [10] This interpretation is complicated by the claim that the rulers of Japan could be of Korean descent. [11] [12]
|
-- Caspian blue 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
This is repeating comments that I've made earlier, but for sake of clarity I will make them again. Who is this "imperial ruler" you mention? The current comment "rulers of Japan" is so vague it is meaningless and must be cut or changed. If someone wants to clarify it and improve it, please do. But if no one can be bothered/is able to then that is too bad. Blue, I can see that you are not completely fluent in English. Please understand that I am coming from the position of someone who does speak English as my first language - what we have now is very sloppy. Also despite your feelings I do not have an interest in the squabbles between Japanese and Koreans over their history. That's why earlier on I said I was happy to have the hostages reference removed if it was the only way to get rid of the comment about "rulers of Japan" in that inappropriate part of the article.
I am not objecting to any discussion of the possibility that an emperor's mother was from Korea in any part of the article. But whether that is true or not is not a rejoinder to the source that states hostages were sent to Japan as it was then. If you want to criticise the source you need a citation that says the princes were not hostages. John Smith's ( talk) 10:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
The horse riding race conquest dynasty theory" ja:騎馬民族征服王朝説" is a theory that will lose logical grounds at latest by the 1980's. It is negative from the result of archeology clearly. Moreover, the alternation theory of the dynasty" ja:王朝交替説" doesn't necessarily mean a Yamato king is a Korean peninsula coming from. Because the theory related to a Korean peninsula has received a strong influence of the horse riding race conquest dynasty theory to a multi amount, Caspian blue may still say that it loses logical grounds by 20 years ago. Even if the writing of the researcher in a center standpoint of the ancient history research (present age of 吉田孝『日本の誕生』岩波新書 1997、吉村武彦編『古代史の基礎知識』角川選書 2005 and 白石太一郎『古墳の語る古代史』岩波現代文庫 2000) is seen, there was no description that those from a Korean peninsula who introduced established the royal prerogative of Yamato at all, and it was possible to look to the receipt of the horse riding race culture for "It was caused by the collision of a Yamato country that advanced to the southern part of a Korean peninsula for the iron resource and Koguryo that had gone south"'s common opinion at present.-- Forestfarmer ( talk) 10:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Forestfarmer ( talk · contribs), use Engish, since "Here is English Wikiedia". a theory that will lose logical . Interesting choice of word; that means "your hopeful thinking based on "no academic journals or book or news"?. Wikiedia calls it "original research". If it is so ridiculed by academics, why still his theory are still introduced to "many" reputable books by reputabe scholars or even advanced by them like Gari Ledyard? Evidences from journals and books or news please if you want to insist more? You know the theory that Wa of Japan ruled southern tip of Korean peninsular cooked up during the Meiji period has been generally discredited since 1960s, but why you've insisted on keeping it and "deleting counter theories" over multiple articles? Given you involvement in anti-Korean forum, 2channel and secret plots regarding liancourt Rocks, I would not be surprised by your appearance here though. On contrary to your assertion with no evidence that the theories are discredited since 1980s, I have read published books in Angloshere in 21st century. You're losing your logical ground here. Funny.-- Caspian blue 15:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I was considering contributing to this talk page, however certain anti-Japanese editors who like to write 5000 word essays accusing everyone of being racist, a sock-puppet, a member of 2ch or shooting JFK, make it annoying to even start reading. Good Luck Guys, when the dust clears I might contribute. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! ( talk) 12:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
4.23.83.100, most of your edits were original research and not supported by sources. Given we had a stale edit-war don't you think we should discuss your edits here and at Kofun period first to reach consensus? You had a month to discuss them yet I didn't hear a peep from you. Why make so many changes without discussing them first? John Smith's ( talk) 20:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Lets try this if you guys don't want to insert opposing views then lets keep it simple. How about: Close relationships between the Three Kingdoms of Korea and Japan began during the middle of this period, around the end of the 4th century. They had a close friendly relationship during the Kofun period, but the exact nature of the relationship is not conclusive. Maybe something like this? Or lets put in both opposing translations and intrepretations. -- 4.23.83.100 ( talk) 23:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I removed all the text that was at the centre of this dispute. If anyone wants to expand, please do - but use sources we can all agree on at least for the moment. John Smith's ( talk) 08:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)