QOTD: Where do Japanese Come From?

[atlasien]

Choose an option and discuss...

[minbo]

Are you talking about anyone in Japan, or do you intend to separate, for example, the Zainichi, Ainu and Ryukyuans (Okinawans)? Or are you mainly trying to sound out the Jomon/Yayoi cultural/technological/possibly genetic boundery?

If you include the former, then definitely mixture of many. If you are only discussing the latter, then I would go with the belief that Koreans, Ryukuans and Japanese having common ancestors in the distant pre-history, much as the Koreans, Tibetans and Mongolians have common ancestors, but the Japanese on a whole are not descended from Koreans.

While there may have been significant cultural and genetic mix, especially at the Jomon/Yayoi boundery event vis a vis royalty/aristocracy, the basic genetic stock for the Japanese population on a whole would IMHO be genetic cousins to Korea.

[atlasien]

It's not that I don't think they're Japanese in nationality, but to define it further, I would definitely exclude Zainichi (modern origin) and Ainu (separate origin). I have no idea if Okinawans should be considered separately though.

[Tyger Durden]

interesting stuff from Jared Diamond on the subject--

http://discovermagazine.com/1998/jun/japaneseroots1455/

[Anansasem]

Africa, where else?

All of us, aren't we related to each other by no further than 80 generations?

[Hater Depot]

interesting stuff from Jared Diamond on the subject--

Jomon Japan sure sounds like paradise.

[ZhuBaJie]

Africa, where else?

All of us, aren't we related to each other by no further than 80 generations?

80 generations ago there was already an empire in China. so the answer is no, not for me.

[minbo]

I would be inclined agree with the Jared Diamond piece Tyger Durden linked to. I don't know if I would classify the Yayoi transition as the Japanese descending from Koreans, because the culture and language family that went on to become "Japanese" disappeared in Korea and replaced by the people, culture and language that we consider modern Koreans. They certainly were related (the article postulates 4,000 years from common language ancestry based on language analysis?). I also find it hard to believe that there was a sudden successful colonization and expansion at the Jomon/Yayoi boundery event without some external stimulus to migrate beyond simple confluence of technologies enabling it. I personally think it would be more likely the people who went on to populate Japan was pushed out of Korea due to some sort of conflict in Korea by other proto-Korean tribes.

I'd consider Ryukyuans (Okinawans) separately. They are unique enough in culture, language, geographical proximity to other peoples/cultures, as well as being a completely separate national/political entity till the 17th century, existing as a nominal separate national/political entity till 1879 to merit a separate consideration. In that regard however, I would believe that the current dominant population genetic stock arrived in Okinawa as part of the same cultural and population push of the Jomon/Yayoi boundary event, but that the modern Okinawans were populated by a separate but related ethnic/cultural/linguistic group, and that there was far more genetic mingling with the indigenous people of Okinawa than Japan had with the indigenous people of the other islands considered Japan.

To draw a very rough analogy, I don't consider the Celtic Irish to be of Spanish descent, even though Irish oral tradition believes that was the migration path.

The problem is using a modern classification for a ethnicity/language/culture/national identity upon pre-historic people who don't fit neatly into such classifications.

[Heyyu]

Mongoloid.

[da13371ama]

heres an intresting video about it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T3tQGU8Q7c

btw this guy have a lot of intresting videos about japan

[Subwaybrum]

Africa, where else?

All of us, aren't we related to each other by no further than 80 generations?

it's supposed to be more like 2000+ generations ago isn't it? :S

[kwak76]

I always thought the Japanese were a race of their own but mix with whatever that came their way.

[kimtae]

Damn it! I wanted to be first to vote Martian.
The Japanese royal family is of a self-admitted Korean line but other than that how else do you explain Ultraman, Astro-boy, Sailor Moon, and Hello Kitty? All alien influenced obviously.

[nekohead]

I voted on the Korean choice.

[ZhuBaJie]

the current Japanese people came from the Yamato culture, which has very strong links to Korea, specifically to Baekje. but as for the Yayoi, i think the Yayoi people came from China. they've found Yayoi period artifacts that are exactly the same as cultural symbols from Qin dynasty China.

[RebelAzn]

I heard Koreans are from some Chinese people that got lost and settled in Korea today. Japanese are probably originated from Korea or some Chinese fishermen got lost at sea and ended up in Japan. Who really knows anyway?

[Heyyu]

I heard Koreans are from some Chinese people that got lost and settled in Korea today. Japanese are probably originated from Korea or some Chinese fishermen got lost at sea and ended up in Japan. Who really knows anyway?

In other words everyone is just Chinese and they don't know it...

[RebelAzn]

In other words everyone is just Chinese and they don't know it...

Exactly. Chinese people called Koreans the stubbornest people since they refuse to be conquered. China already have 56 minority groups and Koreans are one of them. Who knows exactly what happened in the past. There is a rumor some scholar that did not get along with the emperor years ago and he led 5000 of his followers to Korea and found the nation of Korea. Who knows if there is truth in that or other bunch of theories.

[awong]

i thought koreans came from the turks...

japanese...haha divine origin j/k

[minbo]

I wouldn't classify the Mon or Khmer people as "used to be Chinese", even though they radiated out into SE Asia from what is now considered southern China. The same would go for the Thai Kadai, and their migration is much more recent. I also wouldn't consider the Malay or Malagasy as "used to be Chinese", even though the whole Malayo-Polynesian language/cultural group are thought to have originated from Taiwan or the immediate area on the mainland near Taiwan. I wouldn't call Scandinavians and Icelandic people as "used to be of German" just because they are Norse in origin, Germanic tribes. You wouldn't classify WASPs of the New England as "used to be German" even though the Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes. You wouldn't call the people of Sicily as "used to be Lebanese", "used to be Greek" or "used to be Spanish" even though the population is essentially descended from Sicani who were originally of Iberian origin, or descended from Phoenician or Greek colonists.

It just doesn't work to assign a modern nationality retroactively upon ancient people, and it doesn't work to define geographic origins of ancient population migrations with modern national boundaries.

[ellencho]

What is wrong with you people? Koreans came from a post op bear-human lady having sex with the prince of the heavens. Jeez people! It's 2007 for crying out loud!

[atlasien]

It just doesn't work to assign a modern nationality retroactively upon ancient people, and it doesn't work to define geographic origins of ancient population migrations with modern national boundaries.

In scientific terms I agree, but in popular consciousness "used to be X" is really powerful. It's the nature of the human mind to seek a unitary origin. It's a fascinating issue for me, the way that everyone seems to have a slightly different interpretation of where Japanese come from...

[Anansasem]

Here's a migration map detailing the movement of mankind from 200,000 B.C to just before the present.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/science/dna/timeline_flash.html
Just click on the 'start' option to precede, the year, and you can then check 'info' to learn a very general time line of human mass migration.

Although, in terms of ethnic migration this probably wouldn't help too much.

[Dimeron]

Where's the option

"We all come from Africa"

[Tyger Durden]

I wouldn't classify the Mon or Khmer people as "used to be Chinese", even though they radiated out into SE Asia from what is now considered southern China. The same would go for the Thai Kadai, and their migration is much more recent. I also wouldn't consider the Malay or Malagasy as "used to be Chinese", even though the whole Malayo-Polynesian language/cultural group are thought to have originated from Taiwan or the immediate area on the mainland near Taiwan. I wouldn't call Scandinavians and Icelandic people as "used to be of German" just because they are Norse in origin, Germanic tribes. You wouldn't classify WASPs of the New England as "used to be German" even though the Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes. You wouldn't call the people of Sicily as "used to be Lebanese", "used to be Greek" or "used to be Spanish" even though the population is essentially descended from Sicani who were originally of Iberian origin, or descended from Phoenician or Greek colonists.

It just doesn't work to assign a modern nationality retroactively upon ancient people, and it doesn't work to define geographic origins of ancient population migrations with modern national boundaries.

great points, very insightful. I agree. Makes a lot of sense. Thanks for summarizing it in that manner.

[DijabutiA]

What is wrong with you people? Koreans came from a post op bear-human lady having sex with the prince of the heavens. Jeez people! It's 2007 for crying out loud!

HEY, show some RESPEKT when you talk about Hwanung!

[Tyger Durden]

it's supposed to be more like 2000+ generations ago isn't it? :S

Generations are usually intervals of 30-35 years (http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/generation.html)

In scientific literature, I have yet to see the term generations used in any other fashion. I believe the Bible uses 40 years as the interval, generation = 40 years.

Of course, Millennium are intervals of 1000 years (http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/millennium.html)

So, if we have to use generations as the time-measuring standard, Humans leaving Africa happened approximately 2000 and 2800 generations ago, acknowledging they left about 80,000 years ago.

Scientifically, with generations were used as intervals of 30 years, then it happened 2600+ generations ago.

Biblically, with generations = 40 years, it would be 2000 generations ago.

In both cases, you're right: it was 2000+ generations ago.

[Subwaybrum]

awesome+++