The First Chinese
By Dr. Clyde Winters
Edited by Ogu-Eji-Ofo-Annu
It can be reasonably assumed that the first inhabitants of the chinese mainland were Black Brown Africans from East, West and Central regions of Africa given that the earliest human skeletal remains in China are of “Negro” (or “Negritos†a psuedo-scientific term commonly used today) people. The next oldest skeletal type after the period of predominance of the African immigrants were the Classical Mongoloids or Austronesian speakers.
Archaeological research makes it clear that “Negroids” (read: Central African skeletal types) were very common to ancient China. F. Weidenreich in Bull. Nat. Hist. Soc. Peiping 13, (1938-30) noted that the one of the earliest skulls from north China found in the Upper Cave of Chou-k’ou-tien, was of a Oceanic Negroid/ Melanesoid ” (p.163). This is the so-called Peking Man. This would place people in China during the Mesolithic looking like African/Negro people , not native American.
These Blacks were the dominant group in South China. Kwang-chih Chang, writing in the 4th edition of Archaeology of ancient China (1986) wrote that:” by the beginning of the Recent (Holocene) period the population in North China and that in the southwest and in Indochina had become sufficiently differentiated to be designated as Mongoloid and OCEANIC NEGROID races respectively….”(p.64). By the Upper Pleistocene the Negroid type was typified by the Liu-chiang skulls from Yunnan (Chang, 1986, p.69).
Negroid skeletons dating to the early periods of Southern Chinese history have been found in Shangdong, Jiantung, Sichuan, Yunnan, Pearl River delta and Jiangxi especially at the initial sites of Chingliengang (Ch’ing-lien-kang) and Mazhiabang (Ma chia-pang) phases (see: K.C. Chang, The archaeology of ancient China, (Yale University Press:New Haven,1977) p.76) . The Chingliengang culture is often referred to as the Ta-wen-k’ou (Dawenkou) culture of North China. The presence of Negroid skeletal remains at Dawenkou sites make it clear that Negroes spread out from the North to South China. The Dawenkou culture predates the Lung-shan culture which is associated with the Xia civilization.
Many researchers believe that the Yi of Southern China were the ancestors of the Austronesian, Polynesian and Melanesian people.
In the Chinese literature the Blacks were called li-min, Kunlung, Ch’iang (Qiang), Yi and Yueh. The founders of the Xia Dynasty and the Shang Dynasties were blacks. These blacks were called Yueh and Qiang. The modern Chinese are descendants of the Zhou. The second Shang Dynasty (situated at Anyang) was founded by the Yin. As a result this dynasty is called Shang-Yin.
The Yin or Classical/Oceanic Mongoloid type is associated with the Austronesian speakers ( Kwang-chih Chang, “Prehistoric and early historic culture horizons and traditions in South China”, Current Anthropology, 5 (1964) pp.359-375 :375). Djehuti your Austronesian or Oceanic ancestors were referred to in the Chinese literature as Yin, Feng, Yen, Zhiu Yi and Lun Yi.
It is not clear that contemporary European and Chinese people are descendants of the original Black population which lived in Europe and Asia; neither is it clear that the Chinese are descendants of the Austronesian speaking people.
Textual evidence and the skeletal record seem to indicate that contemporary Chinese and European people come out of nowhere after 1500 BC, the European Sea People came from the North and attacked Egypt, and the Chinese (Hua) people came from the North and ran the Black Qiang and Yueh tribes, along with the Austronesian Yin (classical mongoloid or Austronesian speakers) off the Chinese mainland back into Southeast Asia or on to the Pacific Islands.
You put a lot of stuff on Latif, so forgive me if I leave anything out.
The Shang Dynasty was called the Shang Dynasty, and they were not given the name “Nakhi”. There are just no credible historical evidence to suggest this.
“The black Chinese established the basic forms of graceful calligraphy that has lasted to the present day” – Please site your source for this, I am interested in how they proved this, because, again, there are no written records, and if the Shang people painted themselves on any surface, it did not survive the 3700 plus years of time.
The first Chinese emperor, (through the mutual consensus of historians), was Huang Di. At the dawn of Chinese civilization, many tribes fought each other for dominance and 3 tribes came out to be the strongest of them. Huang Di’s tribe, Chi You’s tribe, and Yan Di’s tribe. Chi You’s tribe was the strongest of the three, and he was a brutal leader and was said to use bronze weaponry to great effect. So Huang Di joined forces with(some historians say subdued) Yan Di and defeated Chi You, saw massive technological advances in Huang Di’s reign, and formed the first Chinese identity.
That’s why Chinese people have the title “Children of Yan-Huang”.
When you said that the first Chinese emperor “was without doubt black”, please support your claim.
It’s actually a very common Western misconception that an Indian monk named Damo(Chinese name) came and taught the other monks at Shaolin Temple martial arts. In fact, Damo was not linked to Chinese Martial Arts until 1000 AD, and the book that this apperared in was determined by modern historians as a illegitimate source for historical information. Again, this is a very popular Western misconception. Though Damo was accredited with teaching Chen (Zen in Japanese) Buddhism.
The ancient name for China is not Manchuria. Manchuria is an modern Western name for Man Chu, or The State of Man; an soverign nation to the north-east of the Ming Dynasty before the Qing Dynasty. You are right though in saying that “China is a modern name”. Before the Southern Song Dynasty (before 206 BC), the people called themselves by the state, meaning that during the Qin Dynasty, the people called themselves the People of Qin, and the term “Zhongguo” varied in it’s use with each dynasty, for example, it could mean the capital of the nation in one dynasty, and switch to meaning the geographicaly inner kingdoms in another dynasty. It was during the Southern Song Dynasty that the term Zhongguo, or Zhongyuan, was used to imply, the Middle Kingdom, the center of the world.
You stated yourself that the name China was a fairly modern English name, but then you wrote
“In the Hindu scriptures Mah?bh?rata (5th century BC ) and Laws of Manu (2nd century BC), the word C?na is used to refer to a country of “yellow-colored” barbarians located in the Tibeto-Burman borderlands east of India”
You just tried to explain a fairly modern English term with Sanskrit (the ancient Indian language, if that was indeed what your passage says, for I really don’t know much about actual Sanskrit texts). That’s illogical.
“Its stunning how when you look on a map how many place are found on what’s now know as the african continent but still you wish us to believe they’re not apart of the continent” – I don’t know what you’re trying to say here, are you saying that the Continent of Asia is part of Africa?
“The text says these people came from the west, through what’s presently called Iran and brought there sciences” – China is one of the Five (or Four depending on who you ask) of the earliest civilizations on earth. So they had to be pretty original, but of course traveling people would bring new ideas and such to other regions. Is that what you meant?
“copper hued people have been here for thousands of years and are the originators of civilization” – First of all, I beg to differ in the case of Greeks, as not all of them are copper hued. Secondly, back then, the people didn’t have any artificial means to protect themselves from the sun; the human body produces its natural sunscreen and the effect is that peopled get tanned. That’s why in Europe where there are less sunlight, the people are lighter, and further down South, the native people are darker, because of more intense sunlight.
“Here in America we still think Columbo discovered America” – I personally have never heard that claim from an educator, even in elementary school. It was always ‘Oh, the Spanish built in the modern day American South-West before Jamestown was founded’, and ‘The vikings reached modern day Canada hundreds of years before Columbus’ and whatnot. There are still possibilities of other people reaching the Americas even earlier. Maybe you talked to some ignorant people, or had a bad teacher?
“How much longer are we going to deny our ancient ancestors and origins?” – I never denied the fact that all humans originated from East Africa, but as I before wrote:
I apologize in advance for any grammar mistakes that makes my post hard to comprehend.
Sources:
“???????”
“Classic of Rites”
“?????”
“????”
Plus all I’ve learned from college classes
[but as I before wrote:]
According to the most accepted theory, the “Out of Africa” theory, Homo Sapiens evolved into anatomically modern humans in Africa and began migrating out of Africa as early as 250,000 years ago.
Original humans do not have the physical characteristics that the population today regard as “races”.
It is after the migration that different languages and cultures are developed.
Therefore, claiming that “Black Africans”, who are just as modern people as “White Europeans”, and “Yellow East Asians” etc, as the founder of Chinese civilization is absurd.
Sorry for that, my computer was having problems
I’m sure everyone has seen this!
Its all coming out now!
Posted: Thursday, May 12, 2005
CNA, HONG KONG
An international study has found that the Chinese people originated not from “Peking Man” in northern China, but from early humans in East Africa who moved through South Asia to China some 100,000 years ago, Hong Kong’s Ming Pao daily reported yesterday in a finding that confirms the “single origin” theory in anthropology.
According to the newspaper, a research team led by Jin Li (of Fudan University in Shanghai has found that modern humans evolved from a single origin, not multiple origins as some experts believe.
In China, school textbooks teach that the Chinese race evolved from “Peking Man,” based on a theory that humans in Europe and Asia evolved from local species.
But Jin and his fellow researchers found that early humans belonged to different species, of which only the East African species developed into modern humans.
This new finding nullifies the theory that the ancestors of the Chinese people were “Peking Man” who lived in northern China 400,000 years ago.
Based on DNA analyses of 100,000 samples gathered from around the world, a number of human families evolved in East Africa some 150,000 years ago, said Li Hui, a member of Jin’s team.
About 100,000 years ago, some of those humans began to leave Africa, with some people moving to China via South and Southeast Asia, Li said.
According to the newspaper article, it has been proven that the “65 branches of the Chinese race” share similar DNA mutations with the peoples of East and Southeast Asia.
It said that the Shanghai scientists were part of an international team comprised of researchers from Russia, India, Brazil and other nations in a five-year project studying the geographic and genealogical routes related to the spread and settlement of modern humans.
Original river tamers. . . rulers of the mesolithic, neolithic and early bronze age . . . original imperialist . . . foundation . . . PRE HIStory
Mr. Darwin, you should realize that all you see is due to all that was. We still run tings, you should listen and not depend on eyes. And we still have dung dwellers and termite eaters because we are the original individual. We are not sheep as many non original people have an ability to emulate. While our great nations were laying the foundation for civilization the rest of the originals were probably shaking their heads as they knew all that glitters is not gold. It is much easier for a so called “primitive” person to live a so called “civilized” life than the other way around. When it comes to humanity there is no such ting as “new and improved.”
What are you guys arguing about? People came from africa or chinese ethic came from africa? Do you guys even know what’s the definition of ethic and how to differ one from another? I found it funny how that one claims a ethic to be the entity to another without even knowing the other. I don’t consider Japanese ethic came from chinese ethic even though their writing system and culture are deeply influenced by chinese writing system and cultrue.
China = country, chinese = people in china, Han = the majority ethic in china along with tens of other ethics.
Shang have nothing to do with nakhi people as far as I know. nakhi is an ethic group that came from tibet region, west region of china which still exists today. while shang dynasty occupied northern china.
How do you even put the origin of mankind with a country in asia, and the ethic which resides there on the same level? Get a dictionary anywhere and look up there three terms: African, Asian, Country, Ethic, and Mankind. Unless an UFO came along pick up a tribute in africa, drop it somewhere in china and they as group made the shang dynasty of course. The culture art from shang does not even come close to any of African art ever to be discovered. Look at this way, people a lived in area A, people a moved to area B and give birth to people b. people b made a tool in area b. Given that people a and b have distinct difference in culture and ethics, do you argue that people a have credit in making that same tool?
And why are people on this article keep using the logic: If A is not B then it’s C. Example, A = Chinese, B = Peking Man, C = Africans. Are you people so undereducated? You can say that it only disprove that the theory A came from B so it’s not C.