Talk:Jin dynasty (1115–1234)

Under "Posthumous Names" why does it read: "We don't care". This is hardly NPOV and rather presumptous to boot (who is we? Is the author speaking for all wikipedians? That's what it sounds like.). Wouldn't "No noted name" or something similar be better? --maveric149

Okay I'll change that. I intended to mean the posthumous names were way too tedious thus not worthy to be mentioned. They were also not used when referring to emperors. -- Ktsquare

OK, then how about simply saying "name to lengthy to list" or something similar. --maveric149

What you said is better. :) --maveric149

---

• The table didn't look good on my browser, so I inserted some <br>s in the entries; I hope it is an improvement for other readers too.
• I also turned "too tedious..." and "did not exist" entries into numbered table footnotes.
• I changed "too tedious" to "quite long". (While "too tedious" is probably more accurate, when I first saw this page I had the same reaction as maveric149, and presumably many other readers will feel the same.)
• I added "(second)" in header line to warn reader that there is more than one "Jin Dynasty". Jorge Stolfi 03:24, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

korean invasion

im trying to figure out when the koreans successfully invaded china. jin sounds like a korean name to me because its the same as kim.

I'll answer the question. Koreans of Goryo dynasty (918 - 1392) didn't invade China. At most they recaptured some territory near nothern border several times, and tried to occupy Liaodong(Liaotung) peninsula in the last period(1388). Dynasties which invaded China after unified song dynasty established were Liao (907 - 1125), Jin (1115 - 1234), and Yuan(1271 - 1368). But there might be relationship between royal families of Shilla (57 BCE - 935) and Jin (1115 - 1234). According to History of Jin (金史), one of 24 histories,

The first ancestor of Jin, whose name was 函普, came from Korea, when he was more than 60. His elder brother, 阿古 liked buddhism, and wanted to stay in Korea, and said "Our descendants may meet together in the future.", so only younger brother, 保活里 followed him. ... (金之始祖諱函普, 初從高麗來, 年已六十餘矣. 兄阿古好佛, 留高麗不肯從, 曰: "後世子孫必有能相聚者, 吾不能去也." 獨與弟保活里俱.)

The royal family name of Shilla(新羅) is Kim(金) and that of Jin(金) is Aisin Gioro(愛新覺羅), and you can find Shilla(新羅) at the second and fourth letter of Aisin Gioro(愛新覺羅). I know Aisin means gold(金) in Manchu language, but if they had had no relationship they would have used different letters to represent their family name not to be confused with Shilla. --- there are lots of alternatives to represent it --- And the meaning of Aisin Gioro(愛新覺羅) literally may be "Love and perceive(remind) Shilla". So 函普 might be one of the royal family members of Shilla dynasty, who could not stay in Goryo dynasty and moved to Manchuria after Shilla collapsed, and that might be why his elder brother became a buddhist priest.

So Kim and Jin's similarity is not related to invasion at all. --J.H. Yeom 01:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but this sounds like something a nationalistic school teacher would tell his students to justify some terriotirial claims. While it may very well be the case that the Manchus had close relationship with the Koreans, the interpretation of the name Aisin Gioro is a bit farfetched. The sentence "...if they had no relationship they would have used different letters..." is asking the reader to prove the negative. Please quote a source! --Niohe 14:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Kaifeng as the Jin capital, 1157 or 1214?

I've come across two websites ([1], [2]) which say Jin Emperor Wanyan Liang moved the "southern" capital from Beijing to Kaifeng in 1157. However, later in the article, it is said the Jin capital was moved to Kaifeng in 1214. This bit of info only has one website with corroborating info ([3]). Now I'm not saying this didn't happen, it's just I've never seen this mentioned on any other site. A lot can happen in 57 years! If both times are going to co-exist on the same article, then the time between 1157 and 1214, when the capital was moved from Kaifeng to wherever, needs to be addressed. Right now both seem like conflicting views. (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 10:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC))

I figured out what the problem was:

"Genghis Khan first led the Mongols into Xi Xia territory in 1205 and ravaged them four years later. In 1211 about 50,000 Mongols on horses invaded the Jin empire and began absorbing Khitan and Jurchen rebels. The Jin army had a half million men with 150,000 cavalry but abandoned the western capital. The next year the Mongols went north and looted the Jin eastern capital, and in 1213 they besieged the central capital. The next year the Jin made a humiliating treaty but retained the capital. That summer Emperor Jin Xuanzong (r. 1213-24) abandoned the central capital and moved the government to the southern capital."[4]

This means that after the Mongols sacked the Jin's Western, Eastern, and Northern capitals (in order), they finally brought their central government to Kaifeng, the "southern" capital. End of story.(!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 19:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC))

Jin and Silla

I find the remarks on supposedly Korean origins of the Jin dynasty wide of the mark. First, the claims about the similarity between Aisin Gioro and Silla sound extremely speculative. Second, strictly speaking, Nurhaci was not the founder of the Qing, but of the later Jin. One of his sons, later changed the name of the dynasty to Qing and created the name Manchu. Third, what is ethnic homogeneity between Manchus and Koreans supposed to mean? They don't even speak the same language.

In sum, these claims like they were taken from the works of Sin Chae'ho, who wanted to claim Manchuria for Korea. If no credible source is quoted, I suggest that this paragraph be deleted.--Niohe 15:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I have always heard of the correlation between Korean and Manchus. However, I feel the aforementioned info needs a serious rewrite with some sourly needed citations. It seems the original author “assumes” more than s/he can proove with citations. I didn't initiate the Jin Dynasty page, but I can proudly say I've rewritten or drastically expanded the article by at least 60%. What's funny is that I mention in the bottom of the article, just as you said, that Nurhaci founded the Latter Jin and that his 8th son and heir renamed the entire tribe and Dynasty later. I can see how that is confusing because wikipedia's article on the Manchus even states:

"The name Manchu was formally adopted by Nurhaci of the Jianzhou Jurchens in 1635, though it may have been in use as early as 1605."

(This can't be since he died in 1626. And in a later sentence it says his son later adopted the name. So they are both conflicting views. The "origins" part of that page needs to be rewritten as well!)

I personally don't think the paragraph should be deleted, but moved to the Jurchen page. The reason I say this is that this article is about their Dynasty and not the tribe itself. The "Korean" info describes the possible origins of the Jurchen tribe, so it should be there. I feel that every area of Jurchen history should be covered. If the original author can provide a credible source for the info, and if this contrary view is widely enough known, then a "controversy" section should be made to show this. (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 18:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

欽定 滿洲源流考