Old Korean - Wikipedia
Chinese women usually feel that marrying foreigners is a kind of infinite . As someone who really hates Japanese people, in comparison, I too. More than Japanese and Chinese, Koreans adhere to traditionalConfucian principles . Although casual dating is now more common, most interaction between. However, the similarities between Japanese and Korean are confined to general grammatical features and about 15 percent of their basic.
Jomon skeletons show a high incidence of abnormal bone growth in the ears, often observed in divers today. Among land animals hunted, wild boar and deer were the most common prey. They were caught in pit traps, shot with bows and arrows, and run down with dogs.
The most debated question about Jomon subsistence concerns the possible contribution of agriculture. Many Jomon sites contain remains of edible plants that are native to Japan as wild species but also grown as crops today, including the adzuki bean and green gram bean.
The remains from Jomon times do not clearly show features distinguishing the crops from their wild ancestors, so we do not know whether these plants were gathered in the wild or grown intentionally. Sites also have debris of edible or useful plant species not native to Japan, such as hemp, which must have been introduced from the Asian mainland. All these tantalizing clues make it likely that Jomon people were starting to practice some slash-and-burn agriculture, but evidently in a casual way that made only a minor contribution to their diet.
Archeologists studying Jomon hunter-gatherers have found not only hard-to-carry pottery including pieces up to three feet tall but also heavy stone tools, remains of substantial houses that show signs of repair, big village sites of 50 or more dwellings, and cemeteries—all further evidence that the Jomon people were sedentary rather than nomadic.
Their stay-at-home lifestyle was made possible by the diversity of resource-rich habitats available within a short distance of one central site: Jomon people lived at some of the highest population densities ever estimated for hunter-gatherers, especially in central and northern Japan, with their nut-rich forests, salmon runs, and productive seas. The estimate of the total population of Jomon Japan at its peak is ,—trivial, of course, compared with today, but impressive for hunter-gatherers.
Their lives were very different from those of contemporary societies only a few hundred miles away in mainland China and Korea. Jomon people had no intensive agriculture. Apart from dogs and perhaps pigsthey had no domestic animals.
They had no metal tools, no writing, no weaving, and little social stratification into chiefs and commoners. Regional variation in pottery styles suggests little progress toward political centralization and unification. Despite its distinctiveness even in East Asia at that time, Jomon Japan was not completely isolated.
Pottery, obsidian, and fishhooks testify to some Jomon trade with Korea, Russia, and Okinawa—as does the arrival of Asian mainland crops. Compared with later eras, though, that limited trade with the outside world had little influence on Jomon society.
Jomon Japan was a miniature conservative universe that changed surprisingly little over 10, years. To place Jomon Japan in a contemporary perspective, let us remind ourselves of what human societies were like on the Asian mainland in b. Beginning around b. Those developments were also spreading to Korea, which itself had had agriculture for several thousand years including rice since at least b. With all these developments going on for thousands of years just across the Korea Strait from Japan, it might seem astonishing that in b.
Japan was still occupied by people who had some trade with Korea but remained preliterate stone-tool-using hunter-gatherers. Throughout human history, centralized states with metal weapons and armies supported by dense agricultural populations have consistently swept away sparser populations of hunter-gatherers.
How did Jomon Japan survive so long?
To understand the answer to this paradox, we have to remember that until b. China itself and Jomon Japan were probably not in direct contact. But rice had been domesticated in warm southern China and spread only slowly northward to much cooler Korea, because it took a long time to develop cold-resistant strains of rice. Early rice agriculture in Korea used dry-field methods rather than irrigated paddies and was not particularly productive.
Hence early Korean agriculture could not compete with Jomon hunting and gathering. Jomon people themselves would have seen no advantage in adopting Korean agriculture, insofar as they were aware of its existence, and poor Korean farmers had no advantages that would let them force their way into Japan. As we shall see, the advantages finally reversed suddenly and dramatically.
More than 10, years after the invention of pottery and the subsequent Jomon population explosion, a second decisive event in Japanese history triggered a second population explosion.
This second transition poses in acute form our question about who the Japanese are. Does the transition mark the replacement of Jomon people with immigrants from Korea, ancestral to the modern Japanese? That agriculture came in the form of irrigated rice fields, complete with canals, dams, banks, paddies, and rice residues revealed by archeological excavations.
Archeologists term the new way of living Yayoi, after a district of Tokyo where in its characteristic pottery was first recognized. Unlike Jomon pottery, Yayoi pottery was very similar to contemporary South Korean pottery in shape. Many other elements of the new Yayoi culture were unmistakably Korean and previously foreign to Japan, including bronze objects, weaving, glass beads, and styles of tools and houses.
While rice was the most important crop, Yayoi farmers introduced 27 new to Japan, as well as unquestionably domesticated pigs. They may have practiced double cropping, with paddies irrigated for rice production in the summer, then drained for dry-land cultivation of millet, barley, and wheat in the winter.
Inevitably, this highly productive system of intensive agriculture triggered an immediate population explosion in Kyushu, where archeologists have identified far more Yayoi sites than Jomon sites, even though the Jomon period lasted 14 times longer.
In virtually no time, Yayoi farming jumped from Kyushu to the adjacent main islands of Shikoku and Honshu, reaching the Tokyo area within years, and the cold northern tip of Honshu 1, miles from the first Yayoi settlements on Kyushu in another century.
After briefly occupying northern Honshu, Yayoi farmers abandoned that area, presumably because rice farming could not compete with the Jomon hunter-gatherer life.
For the next 2, years, northern Honshu remained a frontier zone, beyond which the northernmost Japanese island of Hokkaido and its Ainu hunter-gatherers were not even considered part of the Japanese state until their annexation in the nineteenth century. It took several centuries for Yayoi Japan to show the first signs of social stratification, as reflected especially in cemeteries.
After about b.How to Date Korean vs Japanese
As the Yayoi population explosion continued, and as all the best swamps or irrigable plains suitable for wet rice agriculture began to fill up, the archeological evidence suggests that war became more and more frequent: These hallmarks of war in Yayoi Japan corroborate the earliest accounts of Japan in Chinese chronicles, which describe the land of Wa and its hundred little political units fighting one another. In the period from a. Kofun are up to 1, feet long and more than feet high, making them possibly the largest earth-mound tombs in the world.
The prodigious amount of labor required to build them and the uniformity of their style across Japan imply powerful rulers who commanded a huge, politically unified labor force. Those kofun that have been excavated contain lavish burial goods, but excavation of the largest ones is still forbidden because they are believed to contain the ancestors of the Japanese imperial line.
The visible evidence of political centralization that the kofun provide reinforces the accounts of kofun-era Japanese emperors written down much later in Japanese and Korean chronicles. Massive Korean influences on Japan during the kofun era—whether through the Korean conquest of Japan the Korean view or the Japanese conquest of Korea the Japanese view —were responsible for transmitting Buddhism, writing, horseback riding, and new ceramic and metallurgical techniques to Japan from the Asian mainland.
As ofthe people inhabiting Japan were at last unquestionably Japanese, and their language termed Old Japanese was unquestionably ancestral to modern Japanese.
Emperor Akihito, who reigns today, is the eighty-second direct descendant of the emperor under whom that first chronicle of a. He is traditionally considered the th direct descendant of the legendary first emperor, Jimmu, the great-great-great-grandson of the sun goddess Amaterasu. Japanese culture underwent far more radical change in the years of the Yayoi era than in the ten millennia of Jomon times. The contrast between Jomon stability or conservatism and radical Yayoi change is the most striking feature of Japanese history.
Obviously, something momentous happened at b. Were the ancestors of the modern Japanese the Jomon people, the Yayoi people, or a combination? What caused that change? A passionate debate has raged around three alternative hypotheses. One theory is that Jomon hunter-gatherers themselves gradually evolved into the modern Japanese. Because they had already been living a settled existence in villages for thousands of years, they may have been preadapted to accepting agriculture.
At the Yayoi transition, perhaps nothing more happened than that Jomon society received cold-resistant rice seeds and information about paddy irrigation from Korea, enabling it to produce more food and increase its numbers. This theory appeals to many modern Japanese because it minimizes the unwelcome contribution of Korean genes to the Japanese gene pool while portraying the Japanese people as uniquely Japanese for at least the past 12, years. A second theory, unappealing to those Japanese who prefer the first theory, argues instead that the Yayoi transition represents a massive influx of immigrants from Korea, carrying Korean farming practices, culture, and genes.
Kyushu would have seemed a paradise to Korean rice farmers, because it is warmer and swampier than Korea and hence a better place to grow rice. According to one estimate, Yayoi Japan received several million immigrants from Korea, utterly overwhelming the genetic contribution of Jomon people thought to have numbered around 75, just before the Yayoi transition.
If so, modern Japanese are descendants of Korean immigrants who developed a modified culture of their own over the last 2, years. The last theory accepts the evidence for immigration from Korea but denies that it was massive. Instead, highly productive agriculture may have enabled a modest number of immigrant rice farmers to reproduce much faster than Jomon hunter-gatherers and eventually to outnumber them. Like the second theory, this theory considers modern Japanese to be slightly modified Koreans but dispenses with the need for large-scale immigration.
By comparison with similar transitions elsewhere in the world, the second or third theory seems to me more plausible than the first theory. Over the last 12, years, agriculture arose at not more than nine places on Earth, including China and the Fertile Crescent. Twelve thousand years ago, everybody alive was a hunter-gatherer; now almost all of us are farmers or fed by farmers.
In Search of Japanese Roots | kompletni.info
Farming spread from those few sites of origin mainly because farmers outbred hunters, developed more potent technology, and then killed the hunters or drove them off lands suitable for agriculture. In modern times European farmers thereby replaced native Californian hunters, aboriginal Australians, and the San people of South Africa. Farmers who used stone tools similarly replaced hunters prehistorically throughout Europe, Southeast Asia, and Indonesia. Korean farmers of b. Which of the three theories is correct for Japan?
The only direct way to answer this question is to compare Jomon and Yayoi skeletons and genes with those of modern Japanese and Ainu.
Measurements have now been made of many skeletons. Jomon and Yayoi skeletons, researchers find, are on the average readily distinguishable. Jomon people tended to be shorter, with relatively longer forearms and lower legs, more wide-set eyes, shorter and wider faces, and much more pronounced facial topography, with strikingly raised browridges, noses, and nose bridges. Yayoi people averaged an inch or two taller, with close-set eyes, high and narrow faces, and flat browridges and noses.
Some skeletons of the Yayoi period were still Jomon-like in appearance, but that is to be expected by almost any theory of the Jomon-Yayoi transition. By the time of the kofun period, all Japanese skeletons except those of the Ainu form a homogeneous group, resembling modern Japanese and Koreans. In all these respects, Jomon skulls differ from those of modern Japanese and are most similar to those of modern Ainu, while Yayoi skulls most resemble those of modern Japanese.
Similarly, geneticists attempting to calculate the relative contributions of Korean-like Yayoi genes and Ainu-like Jomon genes to the modern Japanese gene pool have concluded that the Yayoi contribution was generally dominant.
Thus, immigrants from Korea really did make a big contribution to the modern Japanese, though we cannot yet say whether that was because of massive immigration or else modest immigration amplified by a high rate of population increase. Genetic studies of the past three years have also at last resolved the controversy about the origins of the Ainu: Given the overwhelming advantage that rice agriculture gave Korean farmers, one has to wonder why the farmers achieved victory over Jomon hunters so suddenly, after making little headway in Japan for thousands of years.
What finally tipped the balance and triggered the Yayoi transition was probably a combination of four developments: That iron and intensive farming reached Japan simultaneously is unlikely to have been a coincidence. We have seen that the combined evidence of archeology, physical anthropology, and genetics supports the transparent interpretation for how the distinctive-looking Ainu and the undistinctive-looking Japanese came to share Japan: But that view leaves the problem of language unexplained.
If the Japanese really are recent arrivals from Korea, you might expect the Japanese and Korean languages to be very similar.
More generally, if the Japanese people arose recently from some mixture, on the island of Kyushu, of original Ainu-like Jomon inhabitants with Yayoi invaders from Korea, the Japanese language might show close affinities to both the Korean and Ainu languages.
Instead, Japanese and Ainu have no demonstrable relationship, and the relationship between Japanese and Korean is distant. How could this be so if the mixing occurred a mere 2, years ago? I suggest the following resolution of this paradox: The Jomon inhabitants of Kyushu, however, surely did not. From the southern tip of Kyushu to the northern tip of Hokkaido, the Japanese archipelago is nearly 1, miles long. In Jomon times it supported great regional diversity of subsistence techniques and of pottery styles and was never unified politically.
During the 10, years of Jomon occupation, Jomon people would have evolved correspondingly great linguistic diversity.
In fact, many Japanese place-names on Hokkaido and northern Honshu include the Ainu words for river, nai or betsu, and for cape, shiri, but such Ainu-like names do not occur farther south in Japan. This suggests not only that Yayoi and Japanese pioneers adopted many Jomon place-names, just as white Americans did Native American names think of Massachusetts and Mississippibut also that Ainu was the Jomon language only of northernmost Japan.
That is, the modern Ainu language of Hokkaido is not a model for the ancient Jomon language of Kyushu. By the same token, modern Korean may be a poor model for the ancient Yayoi language of Korean immigrants in b. In the centuries before Korea became unified politically in a. Modern Korean is derived from the language of the kingdom of Silla, the kingdom that emerged triumphant and unified Korea, but Silla was not the kingdom that had close contact with Japan in the preceding centuries.
Early Korean chronicles tell us that the different kingdoms had different languages. China is viewed throughout the region both with favor as a nation and with concern about its territorial ambitions.
Japan is also quite popular, at least outside of northeast Asia. And its leader, Shinzo Abe, inspires confidence in his handling of world affairs in many Asian countries, at least among those who have heard of him. The poll shows Asians with quite disparate opinions about each other. Half or more in seven of 10 Asian countries surveyed express a favorable view of Japan, while majorities in six of 10 say this about China.
Fellow Asians take a fairly critical perspective on Pakistan — there is no country other than Indonesia in which a clear plurality gives Pakistan a positive rating. Meanwhile, Pakistan is the only Asian nation polled in which less than half see the United States favorably. Allies and Threats Whatever feelings Asians harbor about each other, most are likely to view the United States as the country they can rely on as a dependable ally in the future. There is widespread concern among publics in East, Southeast and South Asia that these frictions could lead to military conflict.
And that apprehension is shared by many Americans.
The most prominent of these is with longtime adversary Japan, over what Tokyo calls the Senkaku Islands and Beijing terms the Diaoyu Islands, small uninhabited islands in the East China Sea.
And Beijing claims that the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which the two nations battled over in the Sino-Indian war, actually belongs to China.
Neither nation shares a border with China.