Quote:
Originally Posted by tangomike
Im not trying to be hostile or anything but I'm a double major in History and Japanese with a Psychology minor. Ive been studying East Asian and Western History in particular as well as Japan specifically with my universities professors. This is what ive learned from them, research, reading Korean and Chinese sources (3rd party perspective) and from reading the Nihon shoki/Kojiki (translated)
|
Um.. History is irrelevant with regard to the Jomon and Yayoi mostly.
If you said you were an archaeology major I might have a bit more respect.
Nihonshoki/Kojiki is not a historical document in the sense that what is written in it is not considered to be factual accounts of events that preceded it. Not to mention that Chinese records mentioning Japan didn't appear untill well after the Yayoi had been established and there is no mention of major hostilities between Yayoi and Jomon peoples. In the first mention of Japan in Chinese records (centuries after the Yayoi had established themselves), Japan is referred to as a land of 100 kingdoms. In fact Chinese records seem to suggest that the Yayoi fought amongst themselves.
The stuff about Baekje and the Japanese government being involved in some big historical cover up?.. well it's irrelevant really and a completely seperate topic.
Furthermore, as I mentioned earlier, archaeology is the discipline in which the most information on the era is relevant.
And as I said before.. there is no evidence of major hostilities between the Yayoi and Jomon.