Talk:Lelang Commandery

message: Based on chinese history books, it was located at west manchuria. 
So, the location of lelang commandery should be modified.
See below for reference
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。 --Hairwizard91 16:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The above is original research by User:Hairwizard91, which directly contradicts 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".--Endroit 09:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not original research. It is already published as books. >, .       --Hairwizard91 03:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The location of lelang commandery

message: According to the following entry from Merriam-Webster Unabridged Collegiate Encyclopedia, Lelang and Lo-lang are variant names for Nangnang:
:Main Entry: Nangnang
:Variant(s): or Lelang or Lo-lang
:Colony of Han-dynasty China in N Korea, near modern-day Pyongyang, from which the Chinese incorporated S Korea and parts of Japan into their sphere of influence. The Chinese maintained a commandery there for 400 years. Its presence introduced the local people to wet-rice cultivation, iron technology, and high-fired ceramic technology.
:Collegiate Encyclopedia copyright © 2006 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
--Endroit 07:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're all the same name, just different pronunciations and romanizations thereof.  Nangnang is the SK pronunciation; if I'm not mistaken, Nakrang is the standard NK pronunciation.  Lelang and Lolang, of course, are differing romanizations of the standard Mandarin Chinese pronunciation. Would not oppose a move to Nangnang, although it's striking that there has never been any interest in such a move...  If I'm not mistaken, this is only at the Chinese name because User:Nanshu happened to create it.  -- Visviva 09:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, should we move it to "Nangnang Commandery" or just "Nangnang"?  Either way, I think we should merge/redirect State of Nangnang into this article as well.--Endroit 09:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Assuming that a merge is in the offing, I think "Nangnang" would be best, per WP:NPOV and also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (unambiguous and easier to link).  -- Visviva 10:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I will agree with that merge.  And "Lelang Commandery" could still be mentioned as an alternate name in the first paragraph.--Endroit 18:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate names for "Lelang" 

message: The location of lelang was Liaodong and Liaoning. 
See the references >, . --Hairwizard91 04:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For historical reference, the first group of references (in Korean) were added by User:Hairwizard91, and presumably support the Liaoning hypothesis; the second group (in English) were added by User:Endroit, and support the Pyongyang hypothesis.  -- Visviva 16:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: For my part, I think this article should mention that the location of Lelang/Nangnang is not known with certainty, and that some sources believe it was not located on the Korean Peninsula at all -- but also that the consensus of historians supports the Pyongyang hypothesis.  -- Visviva 16:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clarifying, Visviva (I forgot to sign).  The links in English above show the consensus view outside of Korea.  We should definitely mention that North Korea opposes this consensus view, as Gina Lee Barnes suggests (in her link above).  I am curious to see if there are any sources in English elaborating, and even supporting, any alternate view.  If there aren't any sources in English, it probably proves that the alternate views are in the minority.--Endroit 16:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Secondary source for the location of lelang

message: *Columbia Chronologies of Asian History and Culture, By John Stewart Bowman 2000 Columbia University Press, 
*State Formation in Korea: historical and archaeological perspectives, By Gina Lee Barnes 2001 Routledge, 
**map showing the location (Gina Lee Barnes)
*"Nangnang" Encyclopædia Britannica
*The History of Korea, By Djun Kil Kim, Chun-gil Kim 2005 Greenwood Press, 
:For historical reference, the first group of references (in Korean) were added by User:Hairwizard91, and presumably support the Liaoning hypothesis; the second group (in English) were added by User:Endroit, and support the Pyongyang hypothesis.  -- Visviva 16:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For my part, I think this article should mention that the location of Lelang/Nangnang is not known with certainty, and that some sources believe it was not located on the Korean Peninsula at all -- but also that the consensus of historians supports the Pyongyang hypothesis.  -- Visviva 16:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clarifying, Visviva (I forgot to sign).  The links in English above show the consensus view outside of Korea.  We should definitely mention that North Korea opposes this consensus view, as Gina Lee Barnes suggests (in her link above).  I am curious to see if there are any sources in English elaborating, and even supporting, any alternate view.  If there aren't any sources in English, it probably proves that the alternate views are in the minority.--Endroit 16:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources in English

message: several koreans have removed the chinese names os people mentioned in the article, this vandalism needs to stop.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 02:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  korean trolling  

message: Some disruptive chinese editor named  has removed the Korean category and tried to insert redundant links to the article, this vandalism needs to stop.--Caspian blue (talk) 02:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, mocking the above editor won't help your cause though (as you did here and in your edit summary when you edited the article). If the editor in question is really a nationalist, you wouldn't want to mock him or her! 122.105.150.242 (talk) 04:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

text: You did, so I reverted your vandalism. Stop such disruptive behaviors.--Caspian blue (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Hut, look whose talking? you're very arrogant for everything from the start. Do not falsely accuse somebody who disagree with your nationalistic POV of being a vandal. That does not help you for anything.--Caspian blue (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  chinese disruptive trolling 

message: Can the two above editors accept that quite often, an event or place can be part of the history of more than one country please? Or have I missed something here? 122.105.150.242 (talk) 04:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Please stop fighting!

message: Lelang location has never been in controversy. The academia has globally confirmed it to be in the northern Korea peninsula with sufficient written records and archeleogical evidence. The Korean nationalists keep moving Lelang outside Korea peninsula which has been considered as a sad joke by western scholars. Several supporting evidence are listed below; as a reminder, the ref book "Korea, Old and New" is reviewed by academia to be "most reliable and useful" on Korean history study.
1. the book "Korea, Old and New":
pp 13: The territorial extent of the Four Chinese Commanderies seems to have been limited to the area north of the Han River.
pp 14: As its administrative center, the Chinese built what was inessence a Chinese city where the governor, officials, merchants, and Chinese colonists lived. Their way of life in general can be surmised from the investigation of remains unearthed at T'osong-ni, the site of the Lelang administrative center near modern P'yongyang. The variety of burial objects found in their wooden and brickwork tombs attests to the lavish life syle of these Chinese officials, merchants, and colonial overloads in Lelang's capital. ... The Chinese administration had considerable impact on the life of the native population and ultimatedly the very fabric of Gojoseon society became eroded.
pp 16: map of "Korea in the confederated Kingdoms period (ca. 1st-3rd centuries A.D)"
2. http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Korea.html
Han Chinese built four commanderies, or local military units, to rule the peninsula as far south as the Han River, with a core area at Lolang (Nangnang in Korean), near present-day P'yongyang. It is illustrative of the relentlessly different historiography practiced in North Korea and South Korea, as well as the projection backward of Korean nationalism practiced by both sides, that North Korean historians deny that the Lolang Commandery was centered in Korea. They place it northwest of the peninsula, possibly near Beijing, in order to de-emphasize China's influence on ancient Korean history.
3. the book "A history of Korea, from Antiquity to the present":
pp 18: For the next four centuries a northwestern part of the Korean peninsula was directly incorporated in to the Chinese Empire.... The Taedong River basin, the area where the modern city of P'yongyang is located, became the center of the Lelang commandery.
pp 19: The way of life maintained by the elite at the capital in the P'yongyang area, which is known from the tombs and scattered archaeological remains, evinces a prosperous, refined, and very Chinese culture. --EJcarter (talk) 08:31, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lelang location, once and for all