How much of Japan's traditional culture comes from China ?

[miles7tp]

Chinese, Indian or Arabic cultures are quite "pure" if you ask me.

If you study Chinese history, you can find that some different ethnic people ruled China by turns.

Undoubtedly ancient Chinese culture deeply influenced on old Asian culture.
Similarly, undoubtedly "ancient Greek culture", "ancient Egyptian culture", "ancient Roman culture" and "Islamic culture" made the base of European cultures.
You enthusiastically find a point in common between Japan and China. But in a point in common you will be able to find a cultural gap.

I don't want to think that you disregard the difference between Japan and China. If you do so, you will never understand Asian cultures. I don't want you to look down on Asian cultures.
Do you believe European people could develop "ancient Roman culture" but Asian people could NOT develop "ancient Chinese culture" for a long time ?

It seems to me that Japan grew as much of the Ancient Chinese civilisation as modern China, Korea or Vietnam. The roots are mostly the same, and these cultures now have more similarities than differences.

I advise you to study Asian history and culture harder.
And you will be able to notice diversity of Asian cultures.

[Maciamo]

If you study Chinese history, you can find that some different ethnic people ruled China by turns.

Really ? The Mongols and Manchu only came in the 14th and 17th centuries. That's not "ancient history". In English (or European languages), "ancient" refers to the Antiquity, which ended with the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century. After that and until the 15th century, it is the "medieval" period.

You enthusiastically find a point in common between Japan and China. But in a point in common you will be able to find a cultural gap.

So what ? If there was no cultural gap, China and Japan would be the same nation. It is clearly not the case. Not more than France, Germany, Italy or Spain have the same culture. My point is that the differences between European cultures are similar to the differences between East Asian countries. We could even say that French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese are at the same level as the various Chinese linguistic groups (Mandarin, Cantonese, Wu, Hokkien, Hakka...), while Japanese would be like English (both being hybrid languages). Mongolian and Manchurian would be more like Scandinavian languages, and Korean like German.

I don't want to think that you disregard the difference between Japan and China. If you do so, you will never understand Asian cultures. I don't want you to look down on Asian cultures.

Did I disregard the differences between Japan and China. I could list dozens of differences, mainly in the way of thinking. Yet, it's interesting to see that a lot of the objects, clothes, festivals, beliefs, social systems, etc. in Japan came from China, the same way as the old Greco-Roman system (Latin alphabet, festivals, technologies...) spread to areas that were never in the Roman Empire, like Ireland, Scotland, Scandinavia or Northern Germany.

Do you believe European people could develop "ancient Roman culture" but Asian people could NOT develop "ancient Chinese culture" for a long time ?

What does this sentence mean ?

I advise you to study Asian history and culture harder.
And you will be able to notice diversity of Asian cultures.

I don't need to study more to know that. Maybe it is you who does not understand the cultural differences between European cultures. It's obvious that an English person and an Italian, or a Finn and a Greek have very little in common in terms of way of thinking and working. Likewise, the Chinese and Japanese think quite differently. But the system, fundamental values, clothing style, technologies, etc. have evolved together in all European countries, while the have also evolved at the same time in North-East Asian countries. When a new political or economic system was developed somewhere in Europe, the rest followed. Artistic current (Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic...) changed at about the same time in all Europe for architecture, painting, fashion or music. Likewise, new technologies or artistic styles in China spread to Vietnam, Korea and Japan (rarely the other way though, since China looked down on its neighbours). I would say that the main difference is that most of the "new stuff" in Asia came from China, while in Europe it could come from any region (although mostly Italy, France, the Netherlands, Germany and Britain) as no country was big and powerful enough to look down on all others. I guess that's because of the different geographical divsion of Europe and East Asia.

I also wanted to show that countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia or Myanmar do not really belong to this "East Asian" group. They were much less influenced by China, and maybe more by India. They first followed Theravada Buddhism, as opposed to Mahayama Buddhism in China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam. They also adopted Hinduism, then Indonesia and Malaysia converted to Islam when the Muslims ruled Moghul India. These countries also did not inherit most of the Chinese inventions and traditions listed above.

[bossel]

Really ? The Mongols and Manchu only came in the 14th and 17th centuries. That's not "ancient history".

but

If you study Chinese history, you can find that some different ethnic people ruled China by turns.

Actually, Kaerupop is quite right. Your view falls a bit short of the truth, Maciamo. A lot of ethnicities ruled China, some Chinese (you forgot that there are different Chinese ethnicities), some foreign. The Mongols were not the 1st foreign rulers in China, though perhaps the 1st who ruled all of it (don't really remember). Esp. in Northern China (during the time of South-North division) you have quite a number of foreign rulers.

There are other foreign influences as well, eg. during Tang there were a number of high officials of Turk origin.

I don't know, whether Kaerupop thought of this, when he wrote the above, but if you include Chinese ethnicities other than Han, you'll get even more varying influences.

Korean like German.

Er..., I think, your linguistic comparisons are limping a bit.

[Maciamo]

A lot of ethnicities ruled China, some Chinese (you forgot that there are different Chinese ethnicities), some foreign. The Mongols were not the 1st foreign rulers in China, though perhaps the 1st who ruled all of it (don't really remember).

Foreign ruler or other ethnic group. Then it depends what you call "ethnic groups" in China. The Chinese government defines 56 ethnic groups (Wikipedia writes "nationality", but their nationality is all "Chinese citizen"). However, many of these are in fact the same ethnic group genetically. The Hui are just like the Hans except that they are Muslim. Could you give me an example of dynasty ruling most of China (not just a small kingdom) that lasted enough to have some influence on the culture (the topic of this thread) ?

Anyhow, if this ethnic group always belonged to historical China, I'd consider them Chinese. Many European countries have not been ethnically pure since the Roman Empire. Spain and Italy have had Celts, Phoenicians/Cathaginians, Greeks, Romans, then Germanic tribes... France has had Celts, Greeks, Romans, (both southern and northern) Germanic tribes... Even if they were ruled by one then the other, they were still all European, with the possible exception of the Phoenicians (depends how one defiens "European"), who didn't leave much behind.

Esp. in Northern China (during the time of South-North division) you have quite a number of foreign rulers.

So, were they foreign or one ethnic group of China ?

There are other foreign influences as well, eg. during Tang there were a number of high officials of Turk origin.

It does not mean that the Turks ruled China. Kaerupop (=miles7tp) said "If you study Chinese history, you can find that some different ethnic people ruled China by turns." Don't forget that the topic of this thread has always been about importing culture from abroad. So to be to the point and relevant, what did Chinese culture inherit from the Turks or other non-Chinese ethnic groups ?

Er..., I think, your linguistic comparisons are limping a bit.

I was not saying that these languages bear any similarity (why would you think that ?). I was just giving very random comparison that if Latin languages in Europe (the big chunk in term of population) were Chinese languages (Mandarin, Wu, Hokkien, Cantonese...), then the relation between Japanese and Chinese is similar to the relation between Latin languages and English, because English comes half from French/Latin and half from Anglo-Saxon/Norse (the same way as Japanese comes half from Chinese and half from the Yamato language, itself possibly a mix of Ainu and Old Korean).

As for Korean, I compared it to German because German also imported many words from Latin/French, like Korean language imported words from Chinese (although probably Korean imported more words). Another similarity is that the English/Anglo-Saxon left their home region of Northern Germany for a big island next to it, and the Japanese left their home region of Korea for another big island (in fact 3, and Hokkaido became Japanese about at the same time as Ireland became British). In what way is that limping ?

[bossel]

The Chinese government defines 56 ethnic groups[...]However, many of these are in fact the same ethnic group genetically.

M-W: ethnic
2 a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background <ethnic minorities> <ethnic enclaves> b : being a member of an ethnic group c : of, relating to, or characteristic of ethnics

Ethnicity is obviously open to definition; the 56 ethnicities for China that you mentioned are only a political (communist) qualification. They lumped together which doesn't belong together, they drew lines where there are none. Actually, you can distinguish hundreds of ethnicities in China, even the Han are not one homogenous block.

Could you give me an example of dynasty ruling most of China (not just a small kingdom) that lasted enough to have some influence on the culture (the topic of this thread) ?

Why do you need a dynasty to have foreign influence? IIRC, eg. Buddhism grew without being forced upon the Chinese by a foreign dynasty. Except for invasions, when a "foreign" ethnicity achieved rulership, they were already very much sinicised. Which, then again, doesn't mean that on their way to sinicisation they didn't leave their mark on society & culture (albeit regionally).

Anyhow, if this ethnic group always belonged to historical China, I'd consider them Chinese. Many European countries have not been ethnically pure since the Roman Empire.

Neither was China ever ethnically "pure."

So, were they foreign or one ethnic group of China ?

At the time of the establishment of their states they were foreign.

It does not mean that the Turks ruled China.

At least one half-Turk did: Li Yuan Tang

So to be to the point and relevant, what did Chinese culture inherit from the Turks or other non-Chinese ethnic groups ?

From the Turks? Honestly, I don't know, but probably (since Turks lived inside China for several centuries, before they finally assimilated) some folk dances, a few words, dishes, costumes aso. Sogdian traders also brought a lot of Western (European) stuff into China.

Influences of other non-Chinese ethnic groups, apart from what I already wrote about the Turk peoples? Buddhism, Islam, warfare (weaponry & tactics), perhaps (well, probably) influence on literature & arts. Esp. during Tang we have quite a lot of foreign students & scholars in ChangAn, not only being influenced, but also influencing.

I was not saying that these languages bear any similarity (why would you think that ?).

Yes, why would I.

I was just giving very random comparison that if Latin languages in Europe (the big chunk in term of population) were Chinese languages (Mandarin, Wu, Hokkien, Cantonese...), then the relation between Japanese and Chinese is similar to the relation between Latin languages and English, because English comes half from French/Latin and half from Anglo-Saxon/Norse (the same way as Japanese comes half from Chinese and half from the Yamato language, itself possibly a mix of Ainu and Old Korean).

Since Japanese is a different language family from Chinese, while both Germanic & Romance languages belong to one & the same, the comparison still limps, IMO.

As for Korean, I compared it to German because German also imported many words from Latin/French, like Korean language imported words from Chinese (although probably Korean imported more words). Another similarity is that the English/Anglo-Saxon left their home region of Northern Germany for a big island next to it, and the Japanese left their home region of Korea for another big island (in fact 3, and Hokkaido became Japanese about at the same time as Ireland became British). In what way is that limping ?

Ah, you see, this explanation actually makes sense to me.

[newasian]

M-W: ethnic
2 a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background <ethnic minorities> <ethnic enclaves> b : being a member of an ethnic group c : of, relating to, or characteristic of ethnics

Ethnicity is obviously open to definition; the 56 ethnicities for China that you mentioned are only a political (communist) qualification. They lumped together which doesn't belong together, they drew lines where there are none. Actually, you can distinguish hundreds of ethnicities in China, even the Han are not one homogenous block.


Why do you need a dynasty to have foreign influence? IIRC, eg. Buddhism grew without being forced upon the Chinese by a foreign dynasty. Except for invasions, when a "foreign" ethnicity achieved rulership, they were already very much sinicised. Which, then again, doesn't mean that on their way to sinicisation they didn't leave their mark on society & culture (albeit regionally).


Neither was China ever ethnically "pure."


At the time of the establishment of their states they were foreign.


At least one half-Turk did: Li Yuan Tang


From the Turks? Honestly, I don't know, but probably (since Turks lived inside China for several centuries, before they finally assimilated) some folk dances, a few words, dishes, costumes aso. Sogdian traders also brought a lot of Western (European) stuff into China.

Influences of other non-Chinese ethnic groups, apart from what I already wrote about the Turk peoples? Buddhism, Islam, warfare (weaponry & tactics), perhaps (well, probably) influence on literature & arts. Esp. during Tang we have quite a lot of foreign students & scholars in ChangAn, not only being influenced, but also influencing.



Yes, why would I.


Since Japanese is a different language family from Chinese, while both Germanic & Romance languages belong to one & the same, the comparison still limps, IMO.


Ah, you see, this explanation actually makes sense to me.

Yeah, but chinese came from south east asia.

[bossel]

Yeah, but chinese came from south east asia.

Aha, I see very clear now.

[ricecake]

Yeah, but chinese came from south east asia.

CORRECTION ....

Only Chinese ABORIGINAL MINORITIES like Zhuang,Miao,Yao,Dai,plus others CAME FROM South East Asia,not Han Chinese who ARE MAINLY OF NE Asian stock same as Japanese and Koreans migrated through Tibet Kunlun mountains over 6000 years ago.

Han Chinese dialects belong to Sino-Tibetan language family.

Those SOUTHERN Chinese aboriginal minorities' languages are in the same Tai-Kadai group.