U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-05-2013, 07:47 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 45,344,192 times
Reputation: 11862

Advertisements

Is Han even an Ethnic Group? - Chinese Ethnic Groups and Peoples - China History Forum, Chinese History Forum

The idea of the 'Han ethnicity' is interesting, and there's been debate as to when this idea of the 'Han' people, or what most people would think of as 'Chinese' arose. The ROC recognised only a few ethnic groups, Han, Manchu, Mongol, Tibetans, Uyghurs, Russians and Koreans, but the PRC recognises 54. How different really are sinified ethnic groups like Manchu or Zhuang from Han? Especially if they speak Mandarin etc. And if that's the case, what's there to stop Cantonese or the Hoklo people from identifying as their own ethnic group, since oftentimes their language is as different to Mandarin as many minority languages.

Many people often emphasis Chinese unity, but in some ways China is almost as diverse as Europe. Both genetically and culturally. There definitely is a collective national myth (Yellow Emperor.etc) and an ancient civilisation which I think is the main thing which unites China and the idea of being 'Chinese.'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2013, 09:29 PM
kyh
 
Location: Malaysia & Singapore
383 posts, read 1,061,345 times
Reputation: 143
As long as the Chinese concept unifies the Han, who cares what divisions they may have or should they be separate groups instead of one?

The French and Germans used to be ruled as one kingdom (Frankish Kingdom) and the inhabitants in both countries were called the Franks. But that didn't seem to work out as both realized they spoke a different language and had different customs and traditions, although there might be some intermingling in the gene pools of both peoples.

So if the whole Han (whether Hoklo, Cantonese, Mandarin etc) agrees to be unified as one Chinese race, good for them!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 09:35 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 45,344,192 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyh View Post
As long as the Chinese concept unifies the Han, who cares what divisions they may have or should they be separate groups instead of one?

The French and Germans used to be ruled as one kingdom (Frankish Kingdom) and the inhabitants in both countries were called the Franks. But that didn't seem to work out as both realized they spoke a different language and had different customs and traditions, although there might be some intermingling in the gene pools of both peoples.

So if the whole Han (whether Hoklo, Cantonese, Mandarin etc) agrees to be unified as one Chinese race, good for them!
Yes Chinese history is also marked by divisions, and at many times during China's history it has been divided into various states. The Warring States period, as well as the later divisions during the Song for instance, shows there was a sufficient sense of autonomy that derived from China's ethno-linguistic diversity. I agree that the concept of a unified 'Han race' probably didn't really solidify until the Qing dynasty, although there was probably some awareness that they were kin. Which groups were included into this 'family' is interesting. The story of the Han Chinese has two sides: the expansion of the Huaxia tribes from the Wei river valley, a tributary of the Huang He in Shanxi province (they arose as a civilisation about 4000 years ago), and the intermixing and absorption of the other natives who lived in what is now China. That's the greatness of the Chinese civilisation and the nationality or 'race', how it brought together disparate and diverse peoples as one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 09:39 PM
kyh
 
Location: Malaysia & Singapore
383 posts, read 1,061,345 times
Reputation: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
Yes Chinese history is also marked by divisions, and at many times during China's history it has been divided into various states. The Warring States period, as well as the later divisions during the Song for instance, shows there was a sufficient sense of autonomy that derived from China's ethno-linguistic diversity. I agree that the concept of a unified 'Han race' probably didn't really solidify until the Qing dynasty, although there was probably some awareness that they were kin. Which groups were included into this 'family' is interesting. The story of the Han Chinese has two sides: the expansion of the Huaxia tribes from the Wei river valley, a tributary of the Huang He in Shanxi province (they arose as a civilisation about 4000 years ago), and the intermixing and absorption of the other natives who lived in what is now China. That's the greatness of the Chinese civilisation and the nationality or 'race', how it brought together disparate and diverse peoples as one.
From what I know (I could be wrong), the Hans already had a strong ethnic consciousness during the Ming Dynasty as during the takeover of the throne by the Qings, the Hans would rise against the Manchu Qings as they deemed them invaders and an unwelcomed alien in their country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 09:48 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 45,344,192 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyh View Post
From what I know (I could be wrong), the Hans already had a strong ethnic consciousness during the Ming Dynasty as during the takeover of the throne by the Qings, the Hans would rise against the Manchu Qings as they deemed them invaders and an unwelcomed alien in their country.
True, but the term 'Han' was coined in the 20th century, and there was dispute over who belonged to this group. The Hakka or Tanka, for instance, were often not considered Han while the Zhuang were. Whether a certain minority is Han or not is largely based on their culture, not genetics. So the She of something in Fujian are practically Han nowadays, as are Manchu, Mongols.etc.

During the Han, Southerners were considered 'barbarians' (anyone south of the Yangtze). As the Han spread southward, they conquered but also mixed and absorbed these barbarians, also pushing them southwards and into places like Yunnan. Today's Southern Chinese are a mix of people from central-northwest China and southern China. The Cantonese language itself is clearly related to SE Asian languages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 10:45 PM
 
6,722 posts, read 6,597,578 times
Reputation: 2386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
Is Han even an Ethnic Group? - Chinese Ethnic Groups and Peoples - China History Forum, Chinese History Forum

The idea of the 'Han ethnicity' is interesting, and there's been debate as to when this idea of the 'Han' people, or what most people would think of as 'Chinese' arose. The ROC recognised only a few ethnic groups, Han, Manchu, Mongol, Tibetans, Uyghurs, Russians and Koreans, but the PRC recognises 54. How different really are sinified ethnic groups like Manchu or Zhuang from Han? Especially if they speak Mandarin etc. And if that's the case, what's there to stop Cantonese or the Hoklo people from identifying as their own ethnic group, since oftentimes their language is as different to Mandarin as many minority languages.

Many people often emphasis Chinese unity, but in some ways China is almost as diverse as Europe. Both genetically and culturally. There definitely is a collective national myth (Yellow Emperor.etc) and an ancient civilisation which I think is the main thing which unites China and the idea of being 'Chinese.'
From a linguistic point of view, Zhuang is closely related to Thai, and is far from Chinese (any dialect).
Cantonese is definitely Chinese though it sounds different from Mandarin.

Manchu people used to speak their own language too, though they all speak Chinese now.

Technically, only Han and Hui speak Chinese exclusively. All other groups have their own language(s).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2013, 12:36 AM
 
1,099 posts, read 1,667,247 times
Reputation: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
True, but the term 'Han' was coined in the 20th century, and there was dispute over who belonged to this group. The Hakka or Tanka, for instance, were often not considered Han while the Zhuang were. Whether a certain minority is Han or not is largely based on their culture, not genetics. So the She of something in Fujian are practically Han nowadays, as are Manchu, Mongols.etc.

During the Han, Southerners were considered 'barbarians' (anyone south of the Yangtze). As the Han spread southward, they conquered but also mixed and absorbed these barbarians, also pushing them southwards and into places like Yunnan. Today's Southern Chinese are a mix of people from central-northwest China and southern China. The Cantonese language itself is clearly related to SE Asian languages.
I haven't heard that the term "Han" is only coined in the 20th century, but if one studies Chinese history, there definitely is a very clear distinction on which dynasties or states were Han and non-Han. The Hakka are considered Han, as the reason given for their name is that they come from the north and migrated to the south.

Am also skeptical about the statement that anyone south of the Yangtze were considered barbarians during the Han. Probably some areas, but not the entire territory south of the Yangtze. After the Han dynasty came the Three Kingdoms period, and the states of Shu and Wu were based south of the Yangtze and definitely Han, with the state of Shu being actually ruled by descendants of the Han dynasty emperors.

The last kingdom that was non-Han in Fujian and Guangdong were around the time of the Three Kingdoms as well. To this day, people from these two provinces often call themselves "Tang people", so I think the concept of people in the south identifying themselves as the same Chinese as those from the north most likely started during the Tang dynasty or even earlier. Actually, there are even more non-Han states and dynasties from Northern China rather than from Southern China. In some ways, the Southern Chinese languages actually retain a lot of features from the Chinese spoken during the Tang dynasty than Mandarin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2013, 09:54 PM
 
1 posts, read 1,667 times
Reputation: 10
Does "Han" mean "Khan" ?
I noticed watching TV that In India/Pakistan/Bangladesh/Srilanka some people pronounce "Khan" (as in Aga Khan, etc) as "Han".

Is "Han" simply a 20th century "journalese" word with liitle or no merit ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2013, 01:29 AM
 
6,722 posts, read 6,597,578 times
Reputation: 2386
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelmullins207 View Post
Does "Han" mean "Khan" ?
I noticed watching TV that In India/Pakistan/Bangladesh/Srilanka some people pronounce "Khan" (as in Aga Khan, etc) as "Han".

Is "Han" simply a 20th century "journalese" word with liitle or no merit ?
Han (漢)is the name of a dynasty (over 2000 years ago) in China. Since then, Chinese people have called themselves Han people.
It has nothing to do with the word "Khan" in Turkic/Mongolic languages, though some scholars suspected that "Khan" may have originated from Han. In Chinese, the word Khan is translated as 可汗 or 汗. This loanword has been in Chinese literature for over a thousand years.

In Japanese, the Chinese word Han is pronounced as "kan", with the same character 漢 as in Chinese.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top