Talk:Yamato period

message: Sorry! I accidentally blanketed the article when playing around with the History of Japan template; wanted to compare it to History of Korea template. I apologize Deiaemeth 05:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wondered!  That didn't look like something you'd normally do, and I was afraid someone had hijacked your account.  Glad to hear it was only a goof.  :)  Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi 16:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding my edits 

message: The South Korean described it. 
:"Japan of the Kofun Period was very positive towards the introduction of Korean culture". For example, Yamato links to the mainland and the Liu Sung Dynasty in 425 and 478 were facilitated by the maritime knowledge and diplomatic connections of Baekje. . Iron working technology was introduced into Japan from Korea around 300.
However, there are neither Korea nor Baekje in the site linking ahead. 
:The Japanese Experience is an authoritative history of Japan from the sixth century to the present day. Only a writer of W.G. Beasley's stature could render Japan's complicated past so concisely and elegantly. This is the history of a society and a culture with a distinct sense of itself, one of the few nations never conquered by a foreign power in historic times (until the twentieth century) and the home of the longest-reigning imperial dynasty that still survives. The Japanese have always occupied part or all of the same territory, its borders defined by the sea. They have spoken and written a common language, (once it had taken firm shape in about the tenth century) and their population has been largely homogeneous, little touched by immigration except in very early periods. Yet Japanese society and culture have changed more through time than these statements seem to imply. Developments within Japan have been greatly influenced by ideas and institutions, art and literature, imported from elsewhere. In this work Beasley, a leading authority on Japan and the author of a number of acclaimed works on Japanese history, examines the changing society and culture of Japan and considers what, apart from the land and the people, is specifically Japanese about the history of Japan.
:The arrival of Buddhism in the sixth century brought a substantially Chinese-style society to Japan, not only in religion but in political institutions, writing system, and the lifestyle of the ruling class. By the eleventh century the Chinese element was waning and the country was entering a long and essentially "Japanese" feudal period--with two rulers, an emperor and a Shogun--which was to last until the nineteenth century. Under the Togukawa shogunate (1600-1868), Chinese culture enjoyed something of a renaissance, though popular culture owed more to Japanese urban taste and urban wealth.
:In 1868 the Meiji Restoration brought to power rulers dedicated to the pursuit of national wealth and strength, and Japan became a world power. Although a bid for empire ended in disaster, the years after 1945 saw an economic miracle that brought spectacular wealth to Japan and the Japanese people, as well as the westernization of much of Japanese life.
I think that I should accurately describe the content of the source. --Kamosuke 18:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Google service is accesible to anyone with a G-mail account. Also, google books are just scanned forms of ACTUAL books. So, if you want to, you may go look for those books in libraries/amazon.com, etc. It is perfectly in attunment with Wikipedia's source citing policy. Deiaemeth 18:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason why it cannot introduce the page of substitution is that the South Korean's insistence is not general?　--Kamosuke 01:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean's Edit Problem 

message: I think the method which South Korean's source looks for to be strange. 
South Korean's retrieval key word is "kofun tumuli korea" "history of japan and korea". (There is no "China". )I feel the possibility that the South Korean is not bearing a neutral edit in mind. 
The Google account is necessary to see South Korean's source. 
The person who doesn't have the account cannot see the source. 
I think that I should present the open to the public source. --Kamosuke 18:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Google service is accesible to anyone with a G-mail account. Also, google books are just scanned forms of ACTUAL books. So, if you want to, you may go look for those books in libraries/amazon.com, etc. It is perfectly in attunment with Wikipedia's source citing policy. Deiaemeth 18:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason why it cannot introduce the page of substitution is that the South Korean's insistence is not general?　--Kamosuke 01:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean's Edit Attitude

message: The following is a quote from the "Early immigrants in Japan" section:
Acording to Shoku Nihongi, Emperor Temmu requested the introduction of a strict political system, Ritsuryo, based on that of T'ang dynasty China. Two of the 19 members of the committee drafting the Taiho Code were Chinese priests while none were from Korea. 
However, Korean influence on Japanese laws is seen in the placement of Korean immigrants on committees that drew up other legal codes. Though it is not written in the history record of Japan, eight of the 19 members of the committee drafting the Taiho Code were from Korean immigrant families while none were from China proper. Further, the system of local administrative districts and the tribute tax were both based on Korean models.
William Wayne Farris, Sacred Texts and Buried Treasures: Issues on the Historical Archaeology of Ancient Japan, University of Hawaii Press, 1998. . 
I can certainly imagine that proper scholarship disagrees on this point. But I do not think we can contradict ourselves in an encyclopedia article like this. Historically, one of these two statements must be true, the other false, though we might not know which is which. Some kind of reconciliation needs to be achieved here. LordAmeth 18:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. While I don't know which side is right, I hate to see only the Korean-friendly POV restored and the conflicting one kept commented out at the same time – well, at least it hasn't been deleted. I'm sick of Koreans' (or Japanese's) pushing their POV in WP articles, which tend to inform you not about a subject itself but on the alleged Korean influence on it, while displaying the Korean people as a perpetual victim in other articles. Wikipeditor 13:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taiho Code 

message: in Japan,大和朝廷 is an old idea and 大和王権 is a main current. I rewrote "yamato imperial court" in "yamato dynasty" but Will the translation of "大和王権" be yamato Dynasty?
In what on I wanted to insist, a (大和王権 yamato dynasty ?) was not an unitary state at all. It is said that (大和王権 yamato dynasty ?) was only an alliance of a local powerful clan in 2 century. The look of a single nation is not shown if not going back until the 5 century. Is the state of this country good when expressing it like any?--Forestfarmer 04:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know the details of whether or not the "Yamato nation" was united in this period; but in any case, "dynasty" is not a proper substitute for "court" or "state". The Yamato Dynasty, which hypothetically continues today, does not fairly describe the political situation of the Yamato period; to speak of the Yamato state developing from a tribal set of clans into an established government is more appropriate. LordAmeth 11:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  translation of 大和王権 

message: I don't know why I never noticed it before, but the introduction to this article claims "The Yamato period is the period of Japanese history when the Japanese Imperial court ruled from modern-day Nara Prefecture, then known as Yamato Province." So the Yamato period didn't even begin until the various clans and tribes made their way up from Kyushu and settled in "Yamato"? What about the earlier period, when the Yamato people were in Kyushu and southern Honshu? The Yamato people are not the same people as the Yayoi natives, right? So, should it not be more pertinent and accurate to say that the Yamato period began once the clans in Kyushu/Honshu, having come over from Korea, formed up into an organized "nation"? LordAmeth 11:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: early yamato kingship(大和王権 This expression comes most harmoniously me.) is not known.The theory that Wa became Yamato kingship is doubtful. There were kofun in Kyushu, the Chugoku region, and nara region at the kofun period, and a lot the capital was put on asuka in Nara in the Asuka period.The Yayoi people might be a race who came from a mainland China. However, division of people of the Yayoi people and Jomon people did not have this distinction in this age beause the word made modern ages. Division named Emishi(may be ainu lived in hokuriku) and Kumaso(lived in kyusyu) was done in these age.--Forestfarmer 08:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yamato period = Nara area? 

message: Please quit trying to associate the Jomon cultures, Ainu, or Japanese with Malayo-Polynesian languages, cultures, or people. There is absolutely no basis for making such a ridiculous claim, and I'm tired of seeing ignorant fools perpetuate such nonsense. Ebizur 07:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malayo-Polynesian BS 

message: I added amenohiboko's description.but user:John Smith's revert it. please explain why.--Forestfarmer (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the grammar was poor and in places it repeated itself. Don't just cut-and-paste - read the whole article and edit it that way. John Smith's (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  amenohiboko 

message: Popeyeatucb added a description "However, it is clear that what is now known as Japan was formed by Koreans in the fourth century AD most likely by the kingdom of Paekche." with two books as references. However one book states it is a fiction, "This work of historic fiction is an epic tale of intrigue, sabotage, espionage, lust, betrayal, and war between Korea and China against Japan come to life." Another book titled "Fighting ships of the Far East: Japan and Korea AD 612-1639" writes nothing about the history of the fourth century in Japan. So please provide the corresponding page numbers and direct quotes per WP:V. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow. Just about every historian views the origins of Japan as still debatable, with many different theories (although Korean and Chinese influences are undeniable.) But whether the "Japanese" came up through the southern route via the islands or across from mainland Asia is not definitely known. "It is clear ..." would set off alarm bells at any (non-nationalist) university. 50.111.19.178 (talk) 04:37, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Popeyeatucb's edit