Talk:State of Nangnang

message: At that time(around 30AD when Choi Ri was destroyed by Goguryeo), the local governor of Lelang commandery was 王調 and 劉憲. Thus, it is obvious that the king Choi Ri is different person from Wangjo and Yuheon. Consequently, the Nangnang State is different from the Lelang commandery. In addition, Book of Later Han refer to the governor of the Lelang commandery as 太守 not king....Even 王 can be used for a local governor, Nangnang commandery governors was called as 太守.
後漢書, 初，樂浪人王調據郡不服。秋，遣樂浪太守王遵擊之，郡吏殺調降。遣前將軍李通率二將軍，與公孫述將戰於西城，破之。夏，蝗。秋九月庚子，赦樂浪謀反大逆殊死已下。
更始敗，土人王調 殺郡守劉憲，自稱大將軍、樂浪太守。建武六年，光武遣太守王遵將兵擊之。至遼東，閎與郡決曹史楊邑等共殺調迎遵，皆封為列侯，閎獨讓爵。帝奇而征之，道病卒。--Hairwizard91 12:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In chinese history books, the local governors only for lelang commandery used the name of 太守 Therefore, the expression of 王 in the nangnang nation shows that it is independent nation.--Hairwizard91 01:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The local governors of Lelang commandery when Choi Ri governed the Nangnang State

message: 集解張晏曰：「朝鮮有濕水、洌水、汕水，三水合為洌水，疑樂浪、朝鮮取名於此也。」索隱案：朝音潮，直驕反。
高驪平壤城本漢樂浪郡王險城，即古朝鮮地，時朝鮮王滿據之也。
括地志云：「高驪都平壤城，本漢樂浪郡王險城，又古云朝鮮地也。」 
集解徐廣曰：「昌黎有險瀆縣也。」
索隱韋昭云「古邑名」。
徐廣曰「昌黎有險瀆縣」。
應劭注「地理志遼東險瀆縣，朝鮮王舊都」。
臣瓚云「王險城在樂浪郡浿水之東」也。 
This is cited from Shiji written by Sima Qian.
The lelang commandery was located around the current Hebei(河北 昌黎 險瀆縣 may correpons to Hebei. It is sure that 河北 昌黎 險瀆縣 is not Pyongyang) (河北 昌黎 險瀆縣).
So, the commandery cannot be located at Pyongyang.
Consequently, the Nangnang that was located at Pyongyang is different from Lelang that was located at Liaoning. --Hairwizard91 08:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The above interpretations/translations by User:Hairwizard91 is original research, directly contradicting the Encyclopedia Britannica's article on Nangnang.  According to Britannica, Lelang Commandery (Nangnang) "occupied the northwestern portion of the Korean peninsula and had its capital at P'yongyang".  User:Hairwizard91 is strongly advised not to violate WP:OR by fabricating his own personal interpretations.--Endroit 09:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe I have some mistakes in the article because there existed Lelang commandery in Liaoning and Nangnang state existed in Pyongyang. --Hairwizard91 08:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical reason why the Lelang cannot be located in Pyongyang

message: If I'm not missing anything, the following points are not in dispute regarding the "State of Nangnang" theory:
#This theory was first advanced by Sin Chaeho in the Joseon Sanggosa 
#People currently supporting this theory include many North Koreans and the South Korean Prof. Yun.
#This theory is neither universally accepted nor universally derided by the Korean mainstream; hence we find some Korean encyclopedias that accept it and some that do not mention it at all.
#Virtually nothing is known about the details of this state, or what in practice distinguished its society, culture and politics from those of the Nangnang commandery.
#The possible historical references to this state are ambiguous and very sparse.
In view of the above, it seems clear that:
*Since this is a matter of legitimate scholarly dispute, we should report on the dispute rather than attempting to resolve it; this is in accord with WP:NOR and WP:NPOV.  
**Accordingly, this information should be included in some form.
*Since everything Wikipedia says about this hypothetical state must be verifiable, this article can never be more than a few paragraphs long.  This is in accord with WP:V.  
**Accordingly, this should be merged into a general article located at either Lelang, Nakrang or Nangnang.  Perhaps a better target can be suggested, but it does seem clear that a merger should take place.
Thoughts?  -- Visviva 09:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm for all this, if the merge target is the current Lelang Commandery article, to be renamed to a more appropriate name such as Nangnang Commandery (樂浪郡) or Nangnang (樂浪).--Endroit 09:45, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support Nangnang commandery or nangnang as a title for both if they should be merged, because this article is about nangnang and not about a command post China put in northern Korea. Good friend100 12:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The explanation about nangnang state by Visviva  is also applied to lelang commandery. In the primary source such as shiji, lelang commandery does not exist. --Hairwizard91 01:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some things that seem clear 

message: In the above link, there is a section that discusses Nangnang.
"232년동안 평양을 중심으로 해서 낙랑국이라는 나라가 있었어요."
The above can translate into "The Nangnang nation existed for 232 years, located in Pyongyang".
Good friend100 13:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At another point in that page, Prof. Yun Chang-ryeol (at least according to this unofficial transcript) goes on to say "."  He appears to believe that the commanderies were actually set up by Goguryeo.  Am I just taking this out of context, or is he completely off his rocker?  Has this theory actually been published, and if so where?  And what should we make of the fact that this theory appears to be based on the Hwandan Gogi, a probable 19th-century fabrication?  -- Visviva 13:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Pai's book would be an ideal source, if anyone can get their hands on a copy. -- Visviva 22:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldnt find that the nangnang nation is based on the juche.. There is no word of juche where you have cited. Apprently, your citation says that the artifact or relics in pyongyang is imported by Japanese when colonial period.--Hairwizard91 01:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nangnang existed 

message: See this book, History of Korean: from Gojoseon to posteria three kingdoms,  --Hairwizard91 02:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Secondsary source of nangnang state

message: State of Nangryang? I suggest we move this article to State of Nangryang. The Korea 낙랑 should be translated to "Nangryang". Its not "낭낭", which would be then "Nangnang". I believe that the article should be moved. 
I know this is really trivial, but don't you think "Nangnang" just sounds so corny? Good friend100 03:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, the romanization must be done based on the sound after consonant assimilation자음동화 is applied. But, I am not sure. --Hairwizard91 03:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of Nangryang 

message: Note that Hairwizard91 has been making the same kind of revisionist edits to Wiman Joseon. -- ran (talk) 05:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is Nangnang... Why do you post the content about Wiman??? --Hairwizard91 05:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wiman Joseon]] 

message: 正義音致。 
漢使楊信於匈奴。
是時漢東拔穢貉、朝鮮以為郡，而西置酒泉郡以鬲絕胡與羌通之路。
漢又西通月氏、大夏，又以公主妻烏孫王，以分匈奴西方之援國。
又北益廣田至胘雷為塞，而匈奴終不敢以為言。
是歲，翕侯信死，漢用事者以匈奴為已弱，可臣從也。
楊信為人剛直屈彊，素非貴臣，單于不親。
單于欲召入，不肯去節，單于乃坐穹廬外見楊信。
楊信既見單于，說曰：「即欲和親，以單于太子為質於漢。」
單于曰：「非故約。故約，漢常遣翁主，給繒絮食物有品，以和親，而匈奴亦不擾邊。今乃欲反古，令吾太子為質，無幾矣。」
匈奴俗，見漢使非中貴人，其儒先，以為欲說，折其辯；其少年，以為欲刺，折其氣。
每漢使入匈奴，匈奴輒報償。
漢留匈奴使，匈奴亦留漢使，必得當乃肯止。 
正義即玄菟、樂浪二郡。 
正義今肅州。 
是時漢東拔穢貉、朝鮮以為郡，而西置酒泉郡以鬲絕胡與羌通之路。 
This says that Hyungdo(玄菟) and Lelang(樂浪) was located at the current 甘肅省, 肅州.--68.75.25.47 06:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Insufficient information, failing WP:V.  Cannot verify what document is being cited.--Endroit 08:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can find it Shiji in wikisource. --Hairwizard91 09:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Location of boundary between Yan and Gojoseon

message: 集解孔安國曰：「碣石，海畔之山也。」 
集解徐廣曰：「海，一作『河』。」索隱地理志云「碣石山在北平驪城縣西南」。
太康地理志云「樂浪遂城縣有碣石山，長城所起」。
又水經云「在遼西臨渝縣南水中」。
蓋碣石山有二，此云「 夾右碣石入于海」，當是北平之碣石。 
It is so obvious that Lelang commandery is in Liaoning and Nangnang nation is in current Pyongyang.--Hairwizard91 06:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another source that Lelang is located at Liaoning or Liaodong

message: I can guess what you are going to say about state or kingdom... Nangnang was a small nation such like Dongye, Okjeo, Samhan.  So, I made this article as Nangnang nation, but someone has moved to State of Nangnang. I also could not get her book...  --Hairwizard91 14:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: State or Kingdom

message: Finally I can get her book. I am the first borrower of this book. Nobody have checked it out... haha
This book seems to be a bound volume of her previous paper and add a few chapters even though I have not read it very carefully.
She provides other historical theories about Nangang or Lelang including Yoon and North Korean histoirans, and then she explained her thoery because her thoery is based on the assumption that there is no nangnang nation. So, she just explained the relation between Lelang, goguryeo, samhan and Wa. I think this is not good source for nangnang state, but is a good source about cultural interconnection by lelang commandery. --Hairwizard91 20:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your opinion is reasonable. Thank you for going to the trouble of looking at her book. I agree that it seems that only North Koreans and Professor Yoon have looked at the possibility that Nangnang was located in Liaoning or otherwise outside the Pyeongyang area. --Mumun 21:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I have the book by Pai