Southern Han Chinese and their relationship with the Baiyue

[jkroo]

Mr. Xi said: China have to cut his hand to rescue the body. Is this right ?

壮士断腕，刮骨疗伤

Haha, I think you never know what is mean right? Show how you educated because you have some culture background.

 

[Lux de Veritas]

Teach you a lesson son,
1. do homework and search “蚩尤” if you can.
2. you have a badly delusion and you mixed the ethnic and nationality up.
3.do your best to act as a qualified troll.

Thank you. You think I don't know Chi You?

 

[jkroo]

To those VN people.

Though I am new herw, from this thread I know something list below, correct me if wrong:

1. FROM A HISTORY PERSPECTIVE. You people repeatedly claim that VN is independ

2.You VN people claim that the terrority of
3southern China belongs to VN by VNs
historic book.

3.You VN people wish China collapse.

Right?

 

[INDIC]

@Fattyacids @faithfulguy This thread seems to be very informative. Put your views here.

 

[Viet]

You are still not getting fully sinicized, end of story.

what is fully sinicized? the Viets are more sinic than those of your bothers and sisters in Tibet and Xinjang. lol
by the way, did I mention the cultural destruction under Mao Zedong? You intentionally destroyed cultural heritage for the sake of nothing.

China is fighting for the tomorrow of Asia, and you should be grateful that your big brother is now protecting you from another US invasion.

no thanks. we can take care of ourselves. the likelyhood that America invades Vietnam again is much much much lower than of China. so pls keep your vessels and jets at bay. we are no longer in the cold war. luckily.

Xisha is China's sovereignty, it is geographically closer to Hainan than to Vietnam, why it should belong to you?

that is disputed. but well, status quo is the best solution yet until a solution for both sides has been worked out. be by a war or by peaceful means. I suggest you control Paracels, we Spratlys, both share control of the sea lane 50:50. same share for CN and VN about the sea resources 50:50.

 

[Viet]

To those VN people.

Though I am new herw, from this thread I know something list below, correct me if wrong:

1. FROM A HISTORY PERSPECTIVE. You people repeatedly claim that VN is independ

2.You VN people claim that the terrority of
3southern China belongs to VN by VNs
historic book.

3.You VN people wish China collapse.

Right?

I see you are quick to draw a conclusion.
1. yes, that is right we fight for independence, like China fights for its right to be independent and free from slavery.
2. history debate, no claim of Chinese territory today
3. do I have a wish?

welcome to the forum, and happy new year

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

that is disputed. but well, status quo is the best solution yet until a solution for both sides has been worked out. be by a war or by peaceful means. I suggest you control Paracels, we Spratlys, both share control of the sea lane 50:50. same share for CN and VN about the sea resources 50:50.

You should be happy if China has the mood to maintain the status quo, asking to return the islands is simply too much.

 

[Speeder 2]

Happy Chinese New Year to you ALL!!!

If population of vanquished are exterminated 99%, then Northern China will be Mongols, Turks and Manchus. Also Y chromosome tell us that Chinese is from SE Asia.

It doesn’t disprove what I argued though. The Han built the Great Wall which protected them from the other northern nomads. So from the reverse angle, because the Han didn’t want their lands, Mongols and Manchus survived. If Northern Han determined to expand as North as possible at ANY expanses, the Mongols and Manchus would probably have been rooted out long ago.


The Northern Han was and still is the major sub-race in the northern region, alongside with Mongols and Manchus, who mostly have been marginalised/assimilated by the former in the history. As for the Turks, they were chased away by the Northern Han to Central Asia.

Your quote is only a theory based on one research suggesting that Chinese is from SE Asia. It’s not conclusive yet. This mainstream theory (by PC big name geneticists, and adopted by some Korean & Japanese ultra nationalists from Youtube) has a BIG loophole and it can be very well to be another way around that Han Chinese were from the North from the very start - both of which I’ll address later.

If you look at Y Chromosome ONLY the migration pattern suggest the other way round. Not the northern Chinese begets Southern Chinese, but people in Southern Chinese give rise to Northern Chinese. The theory was put forward by PRC scholars more than anyone else.

However given the complicated waves of migration patterns of human being, it would be plausible that the earliest waves of human migration saw Northern Chinese branched out of Southern China tribe as a separate people. Later, Northern Chinese returned to the South.

No, evidences on the table could suggest either way. BUT, the loophole of the mainstream “South-to-North theory” is that it completely ignores and contradicts the average IQ of the people involved. It remains mainstream because no mainstream scientist dares to mention non-PC truth of IQ, so they don’t need to explain it.

1. it’s an almost commonly held belief that high IQ could only be evolved in the high altitude regions soon after the last Ice Age. High IQ of East Asians (and of NE Europeans, for that matter) was mainly formed during that time. This also insinuates that when “Out of Africa” (if it is true), the route of the ancestors of current NE Asians and NE Europeans was towards the far North, rather than seemingly “easy” Southern route via South Asia and/or SE Asia, because the temperatures there couldn’t explain Cold-Selected IQ level.

2. human IQ has evolved very “slowly” in time, e.g. A peer-reviewed research suggests that the last time that genes of North East Asians subject to natural selection was about 6,500 years ago coinciding with their large scale farming and city-building activities, which were generally deemed giving NE Asian average IQ a further boost.

3. IQ works generally in a way that when tribe A (IQ=105) breeds with tribe B ( IQ=85), the offspring have avg IQ of 95 in time, the mid way; when tribe C (IQ=85) breeds with tribe B, the offspring still have avg IQ of 85, not 105, at least not within a span of thousands of years of drastically evolution under some extraordinary natural selection conditions.

4. In light of 1, 2 and 3, if Han Chinese was originally came to the North from SE Asia ( or saying that SE Asians and/or Southern Chinese “gave birth” to the Northern Chinese) were true, then it couldn’t explain:

A) why SE Asians have lower avg IQ than Northern Chinese,

B) why “Southern”Chinese with almost identical IQ to the Northern Chinese today even if the former were not Cold-Selected at all, since they “originally came from the south”, and

C) how come that the offspring of SE Asians (indigenous, with avg IQ=85) and “Southern Chinese ( assume with IQ max.105 at a time, or closer to 85 according to the half-baked mainstream theory) became 105 (Northern Chinese) all of a sudden?

PC-driven mainstream geneticists and anthropologists can not and dare not explain above obvious contradictions.

Therefore, it suggests that only “North-to-South” migrations ( and invasions as we all know) could be the case. It is also the most logical one that fits into many well-documented history.

As for the facts ( assume they are facts) that in some pockets of far south of China or Southern Tibet there seems to have more O3 concentration, it could well be due to some small waves of early Han Chinese migrations to the regions and later became isolated. They can’t serve as a conclusive evidence to suggest "South-to-north".

Many such cases in history. e.g., actually I even can venture to argue that probably some “Southern Chinese” from some historically isolated mountainous regions of Western Sichuan province or Southern Hunan province are in fact MORE “Northern” than so-called “northern Chinese”, simply because the “Southern Chinese” were originally likely from the north anyway and they married within thus remain “Nothern Chinese” by bloodline, while some of their “northern Chinese”counterparts whom have never lived in the South before are probably even non-Han with certain degrees of possible Manchu, Mongol or Turkish, etc admixtures for one reason or another.

Anthropologist suggest Southern Chinese are mestizo of Northern and locals, not entirely Northern.

mainstram Anthropologists are wrong, as explained above.

Also, it is conclusive that Thai, Malay and Burmese are from China.

This proves my point that most indigenous ppl of south china had either been rooted out or been chased off the region when they lost wars to the Han in ancient times, the similar happened to most northern China nomads.

…

Moreover, the East Asian dominant haplogroup O3a3c1-M117 shows a network structure similar to that of O3a3b-M7. These patterns indicate an early unidirectional diffusion from Southeast Asia into East Asia , which might have resulted from the genetic drift of East Asian ancestors carrying these two haplogroups through many small bottle-necks formed by the complicated landscape between Southeast Asia and East Asia. The ages of O3a3b-M7 and O3a3c1-M117 were estimated to be approximately 19 thousand years, followed by the emergence of the ancestors of HM lineages out of MK and the unidirectional northward migrations into East Asia.

I still can’t see any conclusive evidence why “unidirectional diffusion” and why must be “from Southeast Asia into East Asia”. Actually as I explained earlier, both logic and IQ seem to indicate that the other way around is much more likely the case, although it didn’t root out the possibility that some Han Chinese mated with indigenous women AFTER they migrated to the Southern China and SE Asia.

Don't fall for those graphs, Veritas. Any graph is based on data. If those original data source is wrong, the graphs and analysis can be very misleading. Even some Chinese scholar-sourced data could be badly gathered at a time.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Happy Chinese New Year to you ALL!!!




It doesn’t disprove what I argued though. The Han built the Great Wall which protedted them from the OTHER northerners. So from the reverse angle, because the Han didn’t want their lands, Mongols and Manchus survived. If Northern Han determined to expand as North as possible at any expanses, the Mongols and Manchus would have been rooted out long ago.

The Northern Han was and still is the major sub-race in the northern region, alongside with Mongols and Manchus, who have been marginalised/assimilated by the former in the history. As for the Turks, they were chased away by the Northern Han to Central Asia.

Your quote is only a theory based on one research suggesting that Chinese is from SE Asia. It’s not conclusive yet. This mainstream theory (by PC big name geneticists, and adopted by some Korean & Japanese ultra nationalists from Youtube) has a BIG loophole and it can be very well to be another way around that Han Chinese were from the North from the very start - both of which I’ll address later.

No, evidences on the table could suggest either way. BUT, the loophole of the mainstream “South-to-North theory” is that it completely ignores and contradicts the average IQ of the people involved. It remains mainstream because no mainstream scientist dares to mention non-PC truth of IQ, so they don’t need to explain it.

1. it’s an almost commonly held belief that high IQ could only be involved in the high altitude regions soon after the last Ice Age. High IQ of East Asians (and of NE Europeans, for that matter) was mainly formed during that time. This also insinuates that when “Out of Africa” (if it is true), the route of the ancestors of current NE Asians and NE Europeans was towards the far North, rather than seemingly “easy” Southern route via South Asia and/or SE Asia, because the temperatures there couldn’t explain Cold-Selected IQ level.

2. human IQ has evolved very “slowly” in time, e.g. A peer-reviewed research suggests that the last time that genes of North East Asians subject to natural selection was about 6,500 years ago coinciding with their large scale farming and city-building activities, which were generally deemed giving NE Asian average IQ a further boost.

3. IQ works generally in a way that when tribe A (IQ=105) breeds with tribe B ( IQ=85), the offspring have avg IQ of 95 in time, the mid way; when tribe C (IQ=85) breeds with tribe B, the offspring still have avg IQ of 85, not 105, at least not within a span of thousands of years of drastically evolution under some extraordinary natural selection conditions.

4. In light of 1, 2 and 3, if Han Chinese was originally came to the North from SE Asia ( or saying that SE Asians and/or Southern Chinese “gave birth” to the Northern Chinese) were true, then it couldn’t explain:

A) why SE Asians have lower avg IQ than Northern Chinese,

B) why “Southern”Chinese with almost identical IQ to the Northern Chinese today even if the former were not Cold-Selected at all, since they “originally came from the south”, and

C) how come that the offspring of SE Asians (indigenous, with avg IQ=85) and “Southern Chinese ( assume with IQ max.105 at a time, or closer to 85 according to the half-baked mainstream theory) became 105 (Northern Chinese) all of a sudden?

PC-driven mainstream geneticists and anthropologists can not and dare not explain above obvious contradictions.

Therefore, it suggests that only “North-to-South” migrations ( and invasions as we all know) could be the case. It is also the most logical one that fits into many well-documented history.

As for the facts ( assume they are facts) that in some pockets of far south of China or Southern Tibet there seems to have more O3 concentration, it could well be due to some small waves of early Han Chinese migrations to the regions and later became isolated. They can’t serve as a conclusive evidence to suggest "South-to-north". Many such cases in history. Actually, e.g., I even can venture to argue that probably some “Southern Chinese” from some historically isolated mountainous regions of Western Sichuan province or Southern Hunan province are in fact MORE “Northern”than so-called “northern Chinese”, simply because the “Southern Chinese” were originally likely from the north and they married within thus remain “Nothern Chinese”, while some of their “northern Chinese”counterparts whom have never lived in the South before are probably even non-Han with certain degrees of possible Manchu, Mongol or Turkish, etc admixtures for one reason or another.


mainstram Anthropologists are wrong, as explained above.


This proves my point that most indigenous ppl of south china have either been rooted out or been chased out of the region when they lost wars to the Han, the similar happened to those northern nomads.



I still can’t see any conclusive evidence why “unidirectional diffusion” and why must be “from Southeast Asia into East Asia”. Actually as I explained earlier, both logic and IQ indicate that the other way around is much more likely the case, although it didn’t root out the possibility that some Han Chinese mated with indigenous women AFTER they migrated to the Southern China and SE Asia.

Don't fall for those graphs, Veritas. Any graph is based on data. If those original data source is wrong, the graphs and analysis can be very misleading. Even some Chinese scholar-sourced data could be badly gathered at a time.

The ancestral O evolved in Southeast Asia, but O3a was evolved in the Tibetan plateau.

So the Pro-Sino-Tibetan is closest to the modern Derung group and Qiang group.

BTW, happy new year to you and the rest of PDF members.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The modern North Chinese look like these people who are almost 100% O3a, it is so funny that some stupid “皇汉” from South China keep calling the pure blood Sinic people such as North Chinese as Mongols and Manchus.

 

[Viet]

The modern North Chinese look like these people who are almost 100% O3a, it is so funny that some stupid “皇汉” from South China keep calling the pure blood Sinic people such as North Chinese as Mongols and Manchus.

thank god that the Viets look differently, and not like as North Chinese. Below are 100% pure Hanoier girls and other. Zero O3a. lol

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

The modern North Chinese look like these people who are almost 100% O3a, it is so funny that some stupid “皇汉” from South China keep calling the pure blood Sinic people such as North Chinese as Mongols and Manchus.

Which north part do they come from? They look like Mongol. They are shepherd. They can't represent all North Chinese. And still Han account for the majority of North Chinese population.

The traditional boundary between North Chinese and South Chinese is Qinling-Huai River.

 

[Grand Historian]

nothing to avoid here, it is the debate in English, not in Chinese.

King Goujian of Yue State defeated Fuchai's King of Wu state and united Wu Yue the first kingdom of Bai Yue people in their history. He should been called as Emperor of WuYue. This story is similar to GiaLong Emperor who united Vietnam, in English he is called as Gia Long Emperor of Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam.

and more, WuYue had something to do with Vietnam in ancient time when King Goujian ordered envoy to Hung King to establish the ally to counter King Fuchai of Wu. Its reported by Đại Việt sử lược (大越史略),

Hegemon is different from Emperor,Goujian did not have the ambition to conquer all of the other warring states and uproot the Zhou king.

No,WuYue has nothing to do with Vietnam Dai Viet su luoc was written in 1377,Goujian reigned in 496-465 B.C.

The text is written almost 2000 years later while no previous Chinese texts mention this.

Why don't you provide the quote in Hanzi?

In ancient time period of Hong Bang Thi and Xich Quy, before 3,000 year BCE, Tonkin Delta is under sea level.

Kinh Duong Vuong and Xich Quy was in mainland of South China, including Lingnan and south of Dongding lake.

Lịch sử Việt Nam – Wikipedia tiếng Việt

No they never existed using a flimsy wiki link doesn't prove anything.

You don't have Chinese textual evidence and archaeological proof.

In fact the only "proof" you have is written thousands of years later and are riddled with factual errors?

Making wild claims is equivalent to trolling.

 

[Viet]

You should be happy if China has the mood to maintain the status quo, asking to return the islands is simply too much.

you should be happy too that Vietnam always wants to maintain a good relationship with China. We can be soft or act as hard and hostile as Japan and the Philippines. it is your choice.

Don´t make the mistake and assume that you can intimidate us with your show of hubris, arrogance and aggression. we have some tough options on the table to deal with a hostile China.

 

[Grand Historian]

Both Fuchai and Goujian may not be "Chinese". Not only that the ancient Yangtzu river Chu kingdom 楚国 may not be "Chinese". The Chinese historical text say 楚子荆蛮， （Chu are barbarian）, 南蛮鸟舌之人 (talk like a bird, meaning the language is quite different). That was BC300.

Even Sichuan is very non Chinese at relatively late stage，AD300. There is 7 campaign by Zhuge Liang 诸葛亮 against the "barbarian"。

Yunnan is very non Chinese until today.

I agree with you there is no singular Chinese identity back then however the states of GouWu,YuYue,Ba,Shu and Chu orbited the Chinese world order.

They did this by Sinicizng themselves,fabricating or stating genealogies to Zhou kings or Chinese sage kings(which was accepted by the the other states).

Qin was vilified as barbarian by other states does that automatically make it non Chinese?

Would you argue that Qu Yuan,Xiang Yu or Liu Bang(though later texts state his ancestors are from Wey) are non Chinese because they came from the former lands of Chu?

So in the end these states Sinicized themselves and viewed themselves as "Chinese".