Tracing Chinese Beginning

Happen to stumble onto another interesting article about DNA of the Chinese. Here is a small extract of the article.

Hmm, sounds like Chinese and Korean belongs to the same family. Is that right? Read on to conclude for yourself. Correct me if I am wrong, cos sometimes I do misinterpret facts. There is an English and a Chinese site to this article. Here is the English site. And Here's the Chinese site.

PRE-HISTORY extract

Routes of migrations of early chinese and DNA mutation of migrant
To expound the myth of Koreans and the Altaic-speaking people, most recent DNA analysis needs to be incorporated. Doctorate Li Hui from Fudan University of China had analyzed the DNA of Asians to derive a conclusion that the ancestors of Mongoloid Asians possessed a distinctive Mark M89 by the time they arrived in Southeast Asia. About 30,000 years ago, from the launching pad of Southeast Asia, the early Mongoloids went through a genetic mutation to Marker M122.

Li Hui, at http://web.wenxuecity.com/BBSView.php?SubID=memory&MsgID=56818, claimed that the early migrants to the Chinese continent took three routes via two entries of Yunnan and Guangxi-Guangdong provinces. In the timeframe of about 10,000 years and developing a genetic mutation to marker M134, this branch of people who went direct north would penetrate the snowy Hengduan Mountains of Tibetan-Qinghai Plateau to arrive at the area next to the Yellow River bends. Owning to cold weather, big nose, heavy lips and long face developed among this group of people. Splitting out of this northbound migrants would be those who went to the east with a new genetic marker M117, i.e., ancestors of modern Han Chinese. However, our ancestors forgot that they penetrated northward the Hengduan Mountains from today's Vietnam. "Walking down Mt Kunlun", i.e., the "collective memory of ethnic Han Chinese" that was echoed in Guo Xiaochuan's philharmonic-agitated epic, was the starting point of the eastward migration which our Chinese ancestors remembered.

Li Hui grouped the 3000-year-old Chu and Qi people in the same category as Han Chinese, albeit meeting the ancient classics records as to Qi statelet's lineage from the Qiangic-Tibetan Fiery Lord. The rest would develop into ancestors of today's Tibetans. This seems to corroborate with Scholar Luo Xianglin's claim that early Sino-Tibetan peoples originated from Mt Minshan and upperstream River Min-jiang areas of Sichuan-Gansu provincial borderline and then split into two groups, with one going north to reach Wei-shui River and upperstream Han-shui River of Shenxi Prov and then east to Shanxi Prov by crossing the Yellow River.

The second branch of early Mongoloids, about 10,000 years ago, entered China's southeastern coastline with genetic marker M119. Li Hui, claiming that same ancestry as the Dai-zu and Shui-zu minorities of Southwestern China, firmly believed that his ancestors had dwelled in Hangzhou Bay and Yangtze Delta for 7-8 thousand years. The people with M119 marker would be the historical "Hundred Yue Peoples". Li Hui then pointed out that the ancient Wu people, with M7 genetic marker, came to the lower Yangtze area about 3000 years ago. While Li Hui claimed that the M7 Wu people had split away from the northbound M134 Sino-Tibetan people, historical classics pointed out that Wu Statelet was established by two uncles of Zhou Dynasty King Wenwang, i.e., migrants from the Yellow River area.

The last interesting theory adopted by Li Hui would be still one more possible Mongoloid branch of people who, at about 20,000 years, continued to travel non-stop along the Chinese coastline to reach the Liao-he River area of Manchuria where they developed into Altaic-speaking peoples, i.e., ancestors of Huns, Turks and Mongols. This claim did corroborate with this webmaster's historical analysis of Huns, Turks and Mongols which yielded the conclusion that the Mongoloid had a pattern of raiding to the west, not the other way around by the Indo-Europeans.


Today's Koreans, in the opinion of Li Hui, would be the mixtures of the early migrants to Manchuria and the later Dong-yi [Eastern Yi] migrants from Eastern China. This certainly dealt a blow to the Korean nationalists' claim of "Siberian origin". (See Assertions By Wang Zhonghan for clues as to the relationship between Qiangic Proto-Tibetan and Altaic Proto-Hun activities: "the northern barbarians and western barbarians were similar [i.e., Qiangs] at Spring-Autumn time period, but by the time of late Warring States, Chinese began to see the northern barbarians as different from the western barbarians".)

In both cases, Tungusic or continental, Koreans shared inseparable relations
with the Chinese. In Shang, we discussed the ancient Chinese record stating that Shang Prince Ji-zi was dispatched to southern Manchuria as a ruler of old Choson. http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~korea/Old_1.html, states that "in 1122 BC (note different calendar was used here), there was an alleged arrival of Kija from Shang China." Chinese chronicles recorded that the Archduke of Zhou Dynasty sent prince Ji-zi of ex-Shang Dynasty to the Korean Peninsula as a ruler, in a sense that Zhou tried to have ancient Korea contained in the larger Chinese sphere. Prince Ji-zi's kingdom was said to have continued for 41
generations, till Korean King Ji Zhun was usurped by an invader from the Yan Principality during the turmoil years of the Qin Empire demise. Ji-zi was the uncle of last Shang ruler, Shang King Zhouwang. http://www.koreanhistoryproject.org/ proposed a different story, namely, the Ji-zi exodus happened during the first campaign of Zhou King Wuwang, sometime before Zhou overthrew the Shang rule. It said that the group of people who migrated to Korea would be about 5000 in total. Ancient records show that Ji-zi was imprisoned by last Shang King
Zhouwang and would not be set free till Zhou King Wuwang took over the Shang capital. Ji-zi exodus must have occurred after Shang's demise. (The Korean school of thought used a different calendar than what Chinese had adopted. Their timeframe for Zhou Dynasty would be 1122 BC - 256 BC.) The Korean school of thought discusses the prehistory of "Dongyi" people, i.e., the ancestors of the Koreans between 7193 BC-2333 BC. My impression is that it is a recitation of the same legends as Chinese. It touches upon such familiar names as
Fuxi the Ox Tamer - approx. 3528 BC
Shen-nong the Divine Farmer
- approx. 3168 BC
Xuanyuan the Yellow Overlord - in between 2707 BC-2598 BC who are among the Three Huang ("lords") and Five Di ("lords") prior to Xia Dynasty. http://www.chinapage.com/ had compiled the dates slightly differently, with the years of reign for Huangdi or the Yellow Lord as BC 2697 - 2599; l. 2707 BC-2598 BC, however, did coincide with historical saying of 113 years though. "Grand Korean View" said that the Dongyi people established "Bak-dal Nara" (Korean words), the first Dongyi state, with territories covering:
North: Lake Baykal vicinity. Stanovoy Mountains
South: Yangtze
River (includes present Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Anhui)
East: Russian Maritime
provinces
West: Dunhuang, near the Gobi Desert In this perspective, the Yi people would be a super majority in contrast with the Hua people in and around the Yellow River. This could only be construed as classifying the Huangdi Tribal Group as still a 'Yi' element after their western expansion. As emphasized earlier, Lord Shun, treated as an ancestor by Shang Dynasty people, was a Dongyi leader; Shang people were considered Dong-yi; and Qin ancestors were said to
have migrated to the west from eastern China. The concept of 'Dong-yi' should be interpreted more as a place of origin than a political or social entity.

The Yi People of early times would occupy a much wider space extending to the Korean Peninsula in the east and Lake Baykal in the west, and the Amur in the north and the Yangtze in the south, according to a "grand" viewpoint from the Big Korea Nation school of thought, http://www.clas.berkeley.edu/~korea/Nat. The "grand" Korean viewpoint (against a so-called stereotyped image of "meekness, subjugation, and servility" associated with Koreans) would single out the Koreans and other Altaic-speaking people, like Jurchens (Manchus) and Mongols etc, as the representative of Yi People.



Scholar Luo Xianglin's Assertions Scholar Luo Xianglin, in "History of Chinese Nationalities" (Chinese Culture Publishing Enterprise Co, Taipei, Taiwan, May 1953 edition), stated that ancient China possessed five tribal groups: Xia, Qiang, Di[1], Yi, and Man[2].

1. Per Luo Xianglin, Xia people first originated in Mt Minshan and upperstream River Min-jiang areas of Sichuan-Gansu provincial borderline.

An ancient City unearth: Xia Dynasty the earliest known Chinese civilisation. Read article.

• Xia people then split into two groups, with one going north to reach Wei-shui River and upperstream Han-shui River of Shenxi Prov and then east to Shanxi Prov by crossing the Yellow River.

Studies of tomb burials from Yangshao and Longshan excavations, per Liu Qiyu,
had disclosed two drastically different cultures, with the eastern China
containing male-female joint burials while the western China merely single male
burials. Liu Qiyu pointed out that the Xia people to the west had adopted the
ancient 'concubine inheritance system', i.e., the successors of nobles or lords
would take over the concubines and wives of their fathers and brothers instead
of forcing those women to be buried alive with their late husbands. Hence, one more linkage, i.e., 'concubine inheritance system', exists to point to the Huns and Turks as the descendants of the Xia people.

1. The second group, per Luo Xianglin, went south to populate southern Chinese provinces as the 'Yue' people. Luo Xianglin's linking Yue people to Xia people was based on the common lexicon 'yue' which meant for excavated ancient "stone axe". Luo Xianglin stated that five tribal groups of Xia, Qiang, Di[1], Yi, and Man[2] shared the same origin.

• Yi, a word meaning the people with bows semantically, had spread across Jiangsu-Anhui-Shandong-Henan-Hebei-Manchuria to become Dong-Yi per Luo Xianglin. Yi-people were noted for their bird-totem which had its imprints in excavations from Liangzhu Culture 7000 years ago, and Yangshao/Longshan Cultures 4000-5000 years ago. Yi people's totem should be considered the mainstream of Chinese civilization should we examine the domain of the Yi people to find out that it was much larger than the southern Shanxi Prov where the Xia people originally dwelled. Lord Shun (l. 2257 - 2208 BC ?) was said to be a Dong-yi, but he also could be traced to the same family as Huangdi. The big family lineage is apparent. Lord Shun was considered more of 'Yi' because he was born near Mount Yaoqiu, near Yuyao of Zhejiang Province in Yangtze Delta. Zhou Chu's Feng Tu Ji (Records of Winds and Soils), further commented that Lord Shun was a Dongyi. Later Shang Dynasty people took pride in Lord Shun being their ancestors. According to Sima Qian's Shi Ji, the ancestor of the Shang people was named Xie, a son of Lord Diku (l. BC 2436 - 2367 ?). Legend said that Xie was born after his mother, Jiandi (Yousong-shi woman, a statelet located in Yuncheng of Shanxi Prov), swallowed an egg of a black bird (swallow). Fourteen generation descendant would be Tang (Shang-Tang), the founder of Shang Dynasty.
  

Japanese Link to Chinese Ancestry?
Yandi and Huangdi, said to be sons of Shaodian tribe, should be considered brotherly tribes or tribes with close bloodline ties. Yandi, the ancestor of Qiangic and Tibetan people, had their offshoots reaching as far south as today's Yunnan Prov of Southwestern China, i.e., the seat of Nan-zhao and Da-li statelets. Today's Yi-zhu and Bai-zhu minorities in the Southwest could be traced to ancient Di[1]-Qiang[2] people who migrated southward along the Hengduan Mountain Range. Ancient Di[1]-Qiang[2] people had much greater influence in ancient China than people could imagine: They were commented to have also shared genetical similarity with ancient Jomon people in Japan, i.e., ancestors of Ainu. maternal side and that the people living in the same place 2000 years ago had shared similar traits as today's Central Asians. Details are linked athttp://tech.sina.com.cn/ology/2000-08-10/33254.shtml and http://xdyeb.dayoo.com/content/2000-11/05/content_32448.htm .http://xdyeb.dayoo.com/content/2000-11/05/content_32448.htm

Scholar Wang Zhonghan pointed out that the character 'Yi', having appeared as Shi-fang statelet in Shang Dynasty's oracle bones, would still exist in Shangdong-Jiangsu provinces and around Huai-shui River by late Spring & Autumn time period of Eastern Zhou Dynasty. Wang Zhonghan, after analyzing the wars between Zhou people and numerous Yi people, had concluded that "Eastern Yi" [in Shandong Peninsula] had declined as a result of expeditions by Duke Zhou-gong and King Cheng-wang in early Western Zhou time period; that "Huai-yi" [around Huai-shui River] emerged from middle to late time periods of Western Zhou Dynasty; that "Nan-yi" [in southern or southeastern direction] rose up in influence at time of Zhou King Liwang; and that by the time of Qin-Han Dynasty, 'Dong-yi' would be designation for people in northeastern China, including Korea and Japan. Shi Ji stated that Huangdi did not have a fixed palace and that the domain would extend in four directions: Huangdi drove off the ancient 'Xunyu' barbarians in the north, reached Gansu Province in the west, and climbed Mount Xiongshan on the Yangtze bank in the south.
-->
In ancient times, the Yi was associated with the word 'niao' for bird as a totem, and there were eight to nine different 'niao-yi' people in the eastern China.
(More interesting will be the claim that the 'San Miao' could be traced to the infilial son of Yandi the Fiery Lord, but Yandi and Huangdi both originated from the Shao-dian Tribe.)
Sima Qian, in parapgraph about Ji-zhou Prefecture inside section on Xia Dynasty, did use the designation of Niao-Yi (bird); the term meant for barbarians in the east and northeast. The interpretation would be that Niao-yi would be those people who made a living by capturing birds and beasts.
Chen Shou's San Guo Zhi covered the island of Japan and grouped the early Japanese in the section on Dongyi (Eastern Yi).
Hence, the word Yi would denote a much restricted meaning, specifically for the Yi-In-The-East as the word "dong" exemplifies itself directionally as meaning east.
Later history records referred to Japanese as Dao-yi (Island Alien).-->

1. Huangdi's Wars With Chiyou & Yandi, Respectively When Huangdi was in regency, he had 83 Chiyou brothers in his court. Since the Chiyou brothers were very cruel to people, Xuanyuan or Huangdi (the Yellow Lord) fought 73 successive battles against Chi-u (Ciyou), the leader of Jiuli tribe. Jiuli, i.e., nine 'li' people, were considered a group of Yi people.
2. Some advocates for southern aboriginals claimed that Chiyou (Chi-u) belonged to southern Chinese who descended from the Liangzhu Culture and that southerners had expanded into Hebei areas of northern China, instead.
3. Qin Yanzhou speculated: that Jiuli was an alliance of ox-totem southern proto-Nan-Man people and bird-totem eastern proto-Dong-Yi people; that after Jiuli's defeat,
4. proto-Nan-Man people evolved into San-Miao people;
5. that proto-Dong-Yi inter-married with Lord Zhuanxu's tribe into later ancestors of Chu-Qin-Zhao statelets;
6. and that proto-Dong-Yi inter-married with Lord Diku's tribe into later Shang people. Qin Yanzhou further divided the San-Miao into Dong-yue (Eastern Yue or She-tribe) in the Southeast, Yao-tribe in the South and
7. Wuling-man barbarians (Miao tribe) in the Southwest.
8. Qin Yanxhou classified Nan-yue (Southern Yue people) and today's Zhuang-tribe of Guangxi/Yunnan provinces as a mixture between Mongolians and Malays. Note Qin Yanzhou's speculation is not supported by either written classics or archaeology. In Vietnamese & Southerners, I had expounded the compositions of Hundred Pu People and Hundred Yue People.