Talk:Heo Hwang-ok

message: In the notes to this article it says that Ha and Mintz suggest that Heo's geographical origin is uncertain and she may actually have been from Ayuthia in Thailand. From which work by Ha and Mintz is this taken? If we're talking about the kingdom of Ayutthaya in Thailand and not Ayodhya, India, we have a major historical problem. Heo is said to have come to today's Korean peninsula in 48 AD; the writing of the Samguk Sagi was completed in 1145; but the Ayutthaya kingdom was not founded until 1350. How then could the reference to Ayuta/Ayuthia/Ayodhya in a 12th-century account actually have been referring to 14th-century Ayutthaya? Why did Ha & Mintz suggest Ayutthaya specifically?
  - metonyme
-----
:I think it was a mistake.--D-Boy 17:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They noted it, but didn't say it was it. Removed because the citation is inaccurate as is the book that cites it which embellishes with things like she sailed on a stone boat, which is not what the text says. (Can't figure out what pasa stones are) and confuses Gimhae Heo with Yongchon Heo and so on... That disqualifies the second link. I have the Samguk Yusa in front of me which says no such thing. --Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are several editions/recensions of the text. Also, the earliest surviving edition of the text is from 1512. Even those who consider Il-yelon as the main compiler accept that the text was modified by others, several years after his death. utcursch | talk 05:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Mintz's text does not argue that it's in Thailand though... which makes the citation inaccurate. The exact text says, "I am Princess of Ayuta (in India)"<-- this is a citation in the text.... Then at the END of the paragraph it says, "It is interesting to note that the city of Aythia was at one time the capital of the Kingdom of Thailand." But the text itself argues for India being the origin. It just makes an "interesting note" which is not the same as arguing it. The citation is getting removed, again. And Ilyeon was the original compiler, but we don't cite people who come after people as the originators either who modify it to please themselves. So the second source is invalid if it's citing something that does not exist in the text. For all intensive purposes, the original text is considered lost/destroyed, so Ilyeon's version is the only one we have.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think Mintz's meaning Ayothaya (Ayodhya) a capital of Lavo Kingdom sometime said Lavo-Ayothaya (450–1388), later Lavo became to the Ayutthaya Kingdom. --แอนเดอร์สัน (talk) 17:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  He might, but both that city and the Kingdom existed AFTER (42 CE) (By 450, Gaya was starting to decline.) and an interesting note does not make for an argument. All of the other references added in were flat out wrong and lead back to the Grafton Mintz translation, an older one, which makes those references invalid. You need independent resources with citations that don't lead back and prove that what was said in the second hand resource was a misreading of the original text, or at least to an earlier version.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 12:46, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How the hell did an Indian girl travel all the way to Korea by boat in 48CE? Also, an Indian girl having a dream of a Korean guy :O shock.. lol.. I am just kidding. But this entire story seems like a figment of imagination. --74.140.120.11 08:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stranger things have happened.  Humans are fickle in understanding past history.  India was known to the Romans at the time, the Greeks before them had managed to conquer large portions of it.  So, how is it hard to imagine that Korea, a nation of similar distance in the other direction, would be out of reach of India?  Plus, DNA evidence from her grave seems to link her to India.  I think that's pretty cool.  I suppose it would be offensive to Korean culture to study her skeletal structure (especially her facial structure) for similarities to Indian skeletons from the same time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Some user86 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do so many people talk about DNA to support their argument? All human beings have similar DNA with each other and simply citing "Oh they have similar DNA" does not substantiate the claim that Heo Hwang Ok came from India. I'm pretty sure that Heo Hwang Ok did not come from India. However, I'll just leave as it is for the diplomacy with India. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 04:37, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF?? 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The soldier citation was removed because it was a third level citation. First of all, the soldier refers to Grafton Mintz's copy, but then we don't get references for his other claims. And then I went to search for who he did actually refer, and it's a 1965 article, which is severely out of date. And wikipedia has rules against out of date references, which in turn refers to an earlier copy of the Grafton Mintz translation, which is a third level citation and has to be thrown out. The other assertions are not supported in the 1965 book...
The one from Mark is flat out wrong and read the original, which, BTW, references the Grafton Mintz copy of the Samguk Yusa. So it has to be thrown out.
So let's review... a third level citation that leads back to the original text is called a circular citation and since the information referenced is flat out wrong without further citations, we can't take it. It's like the telephone game.
And the other guy just refers to the whole thing wrong.
In order to get a citation in, you need a citation that is INDEPENDENT of any of the other references. The BBC one passes muster because it's referring to archaeological work. So unless you can find something that refers to something else that doesn't lead back to the Grafton Mintz's Samguk Yusa or the Samguk Yusa, it's going to be deleted.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 12:42, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation removals

message: Here is a sampling from Page 19 that's flat out wrong. He's not a reliable source.
:An interesting foundation myth of Kaya also survives. According to this myth the first king oof Kaya was named Suro, with the surname Kim. He married a maiden who sailed into the harbor of Kaya (present-day Kimhae) on a boat made of stone. She is credited with bringing Buddhism to Kaya. She was from the royal family of a Kingdom called Ayuta, a Southeast Asian Kingdom that had adopted Buddhism. (Ayuta is the Korean transcription for what was the ancient Thai Kingdom of Ayodhya.) King Suro and his queen had numerous sons, and they all took their father’s surname of Kim. Feeling sorry that his wife’s line was lost forever, he had his second son take the queen’s surname, Ho. Their descendants are numerous in Korea today. Because the Yangcheon Heo and Kimhae Kim have the same ancestor...
It's not Yangcheon Heo. It's Gimhae Heo. Gimhae Heo and Gimhae Kim are the same line. Yangcheon Heo is a different line. Yangcheon is a different location and progenitor, in case you don't know how clan seats work. (Reference Voices of Foreign Brides, Page 30.)
The Samguk Yusa says, that it's red sails on a boat *carrying pasa stones* It's not a boat made of stone. (Samguk Yusa, original)
He's referencing the Samguk Yusa, which is Grafton Mintz. He's soooo mistaken about the reading of the original text it has to be thrown out as unreliable. If you look at the Grafton-Mintz text, they *never* conflate the Thailand with the Indian city. He read that part wrong. And if you doubt that, look up in the talk, the complete passage is typed out.
He's also wrong about the second son. It's never mentioned which son takes the surname, and it's mentioned by Korean scholars to be TWO sons, not just one. The King didn't make that choice either, which is a load of fiction. Because in the Samguk Yusa it doesn't explain why beyond the fact that the Queen was really, really good for the King, it's other texts dug up by other scholars that has that info, from a Buddhist monastery, which shows up in Voices of Foreign Brides, though some of that work is also spotty in places.
He's so starkly wrong, he needs to be thrown out. That many factual errors in a paragraph shows he didn't do his research. It's third hand... and that makes it not reliable and shows what a horrible scholar he is.
Mark Peterson is also a white foreign scholar referencing Grafton Mintz's translation, but failing to read it correctly. Why add someone who can't read his references right? Whereas the Korean government with the erection of the stone near Saryu have categorically accepted India as the defacto place, totally making Peterson unreliable.
Please do not re-add it. It's a wrong reference.
--198.188.210.37 (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Peterson is wrong. He's not credible. Throw him out.

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Heo Hwang-ok. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303230845/http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T49/2039_002.htm to http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T49/2039_002.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:31, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the origins section- the content does not prove the city/country location of Heo Hwang Ok. This needs to be contested and the right way to put it is as follows:- "The exact birth place or Heo Hwang Ok's country of origin is obscure. Currently, the information is Contradictory and hence it is uncertain."
And new section called-Research needs to be included:-
Many historians believe that Heo Hwang Ok actually came from Ayutha kingdom (present name is kanyakumari) in Tamil Nadu state of India. The name 'Ayutha' was the state/province of Tamil country name, 2000 years ago.
Vignesh kumar cb (talk) 18:20, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That claim needs a reliable source. utcursch | talk 21:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  City 

message: First of all, I must say that this topic is sensitive topic since Kim and Lee(which accounts for about 40% of the total population in South Korea) are involved. Hence, people should not just see the South Korean reference, but also Indian reference as well to assess the South Korea's argument. Moreover, Heo Hwang Ok is utilized as a diplomatic tool between South Korea and India nowadays, so this hampers my neutrality on this issue. Sincerely, B2V22BHARAT (talk) 04:54, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The validity of Heo Hwang Ok's origin(from India) 

message: Her name was Seembavalam , she was tamil princess from Pandiya dynasty 111.92.42.61 (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2021 

message: Is Korean has Indian blood Dipika singh 07 (talk) 09:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suriratna Queen heo 

message: Actually the content contains lots of false statements and after lots and lots of research I found at the princess is from Tamil Nadu and not North India side. For example look at the culture the word similarities, the respect manners, even traditional snacks and foods are same in South Korea and Tamil Nadu. And if you translate heo hwang ok it means coral which literally means seembavalam which is proved to be the Tamil Nadu princess name.
So please let me change people may having/knowing the wrong things. Also look at years when ayodhya is named also before two thousand years it is ayodha in Tamil Nadu. Snowiesticy (talk) 12:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2021 

message: 2409:4072:6109:6F24:7049:6D7:A837:FDDB (talk) 07:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2021 

message: It's not ayotha from uttar pradesh it's from aytha dynasty in Tamil Nadu present known as kanyakumari she is Tamil princeness 2409:4072:290:A64A:2E11:B63C:7EBE:150C (talk) 17:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  She is tamil princeness 

message: The reference we get is from Korean work Samguk Yusa , written by a buddhist monk Ilyon in 13th century in chinese language , in which he mentions about a 16 yr old Princess Sempavalam (Heo Hwang-ok) who got married at the year 48CE to the first King Suro of Geumgwan Gaya and became the first queen of korean kingdom of Geumgwan Gaya , after her dream in search of her pair that drove her to travel from Ayi kingdom(Tamilnadu) to Korea.
According to Samguk Yusa the legend queen Heo Hwank Ok, the name also mean Sem Pavalam in Korean language (industry for Coral ornaments was found only in ancient Tamil Nadu at that time). Heo was said to be the princess, who came from the "Ayuta Kingdom".
Ayuta Kingdom here refers to Ayi kingdom that was a vassal to Pandyan Empire of ancient Tamilagam , this can be substantiated with the fact that Princess Sempavalam carried with her the symbol of Pandyas ie) twin fish and Thirisoolam. Mother worship known as “Ayai” existed in ancient tamilagam , and one of the philanthropist of last sangam was known as “Aai” , all these factors proves her link with the Pandyan Kingdom.
Some wrongly connect Ayuta kingdom with Ayodhya. The ancient name of Ayodhya was “Saketa” at the time when the Samguk Yusa was written in 13th century , therefore it doesn’t refer to Ayodhya.
Korean culture have many similarities with Tamils , they call their mother and father as ‘Amma’ and ‘Appa’ just like tamils. Marriage between kids of paternal Aunt and maternal uncle (Murai Pen , Payyan(Concubitant)) like that of tamils is being followed in Korea. Tamil language has more close similarity with the Korean , words such as Pudhu , Puthiya , Pul Vettu , Theru , Naal , Appaada , Achchacho, Nee Inge Baa , Uyaram called in korean as uram etc. Similar to tamils, Pearl diving is popular in Korean tradition too. Koreans too celebrate pongal festival as Chusuk. Pickles are famous there too in korea.
While Madurai Pandyas had single fish as their symbol , whereas Korkai Pandyas had twin fish as their symbol. Samguk Yusa mentions heo belong to “Kaara” Community that actually denotes the sea faring karaiyar community of Tamilnadu and Eelam , pali people used to call them as Kaarava , and koreans used to call them as Kaaya , that might have derived from the tamil word “Kaayal”. All these factors proves the fact that Heo (Sempavalam) must be from Tamilagam , she has no links with Uttarpradesh in any context , it is not even a sea/port city.
According to research historian Orissa Balu, Korean language and culture is intertwined with Tamil language and culture , Koreans are largely rice eaters and their paddy cultivation was said to have taught to them by tamils. The old method of thatched houses found in korea looks very similar in style with that of the tamils.
Hope, a Memorial being built in Pothiya hills or in Kanyakumari , Tamil Nadu (Ayi/Aai Kingdom) for the Queen Sempavalam (Heo Hwank Ok) to commemorate and to establish her Tamil roots. 117.248.1.112 (talk) 15:06, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sempavalam tamil princess 

message: Heo Hwang-ok was Tamil pandian princess from Ay kingdom. The proof is you can see many similarities between Tamil language and Korean language. There is no sea or ocean near the ayodhya then how can she was travelled to Korea?. Use your brain to think about that. Pandian kingdom had fish symbol in their flag, even fish symbol found in Korea. We both have food similarities also. We both call our parents amma appa. Sanskrit do not have any influence in Korean language then how can you tell that seembavalam queen was a Sanskrit. No proofs you have. Needed much more investigations in this matter. You people are wanted to hide our Tamil history but that won't happen anymore. Soon the truth will come out. Tamil Wikipedians open your eyes and investigate this. 49.205.87.49 (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heo Hwang-ok was a Tamilan 

message: Kim-suriratna is the name of the queen who went to Korea from ayodhya it is actually a historic part of southern India as language of Korea is similar to Tamil language which is also a language spoken in southern India and Hindi is mainly spoken in northern India Saifalhmd (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heo-hwang ok 

message: === Origins ===
The legend of Heo is found in Garakguk-gi (the Record of Garak Kingdom) which is currently lost, but referenced within the Samguk Yusa. According to the legend, Heo was a princess of Ayodhya in India. StellaMc2020 (talk) 05:31, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Aidan9382 (talk) 09:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2022 

message: The legend of Heo is found in Garakguk-gi (the Record of Garak Kingdom) which is currently lost, but referenced within the Samguk Yusa. According to the legend, Heo was a princess of Ayodhya in India. StellaMc2020 (talk) 05:31, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Aidan9382 (talk) 09:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: Princess kim of Korea 2A04:CEC0:1176:6567:0:57:4E8C:F201 (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Princess kim of Korea 

message: I have serious doubts over the name "Suriratna" because the original source, doesn't list her Indian name and the sources that say that is her name don't give their source for where they got the name. In addition, the major archaeologist that went to India couldn't find such records. It's not in Samguk Yusa. In order to add it, we need the historical text or source where they got it, instead of it being pulled from the air.
Also, saying this as a Korean, often Korean archaeology can be erratic where they make jump assumptions, so we should examine the source rather than taking it at face value.
There was a comic book that claimed her name was "sri ratna" but that's not a reliable source. Where is the historical source of the name? Nowhere, then it is in serious doubts since it was made up in 2015! 2015! So no, you can't claim iit's in the Samguk Yusa, when it's not. You can't retcon with a comic book made in 2015! They are doing it to promote his work, but it doesn't mean it's correct. Sri, btw, is an honorific in Hindi as well. The fact it morphed as it did is another indication people should be wary.--KimYunmi (talk) 16:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm adding here, Ratna is a Hindi name, but Hindi as a language didn't exist until much later in history. The name would have to be in Sanskrit for it to count. But the fact that the person who made the comic skipped this fact should put the name into serious doubts.--KimYunmi (talk) 19:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Doubts over Suriratna