Lanna T'ai - What's in the name?

[CMHomeboy78]

The etymology of the name Lanna T'ai is unambiguous.  Lahn: million.  Nah: field; ricefield in context.  T'ai: the people; classified as Altaic, along with native Americans and several other races who are thought to have originated somewhere near the Altai Mountains in Central Asia.

The Shans [T'ai Yai], the Lao, and the Siamese are all descended from the same racial group, the T'ai, who made their first historical appearance in the 6th century BC.  From that time onwards the Chinese chronicles made frequent reference to them.

The warlike kingdom of Nanchao had a T'ai population and its territory included most of what is now Yunnan.  Between 757 and 763 AD Nanchao conquered the valley of the upper Irrawaddy River.  Returning in 832 they carried their conquests south as far as the delta region, destroying the Pyu capital near what is now Rangoon [Yangon].  They twice invaded China and on one occasion besieged Chengtu, also raiding Tongking and Annam, then under Chinese rule.

The T'ai never ceased to be on the move, infiltrating south along the river valleys of central Indo-China.  Small groups of them settled among the Khmers, the Mons, and the Burmese.  T'ai mercenaries appear on the bas-reliefs of Angkor Wat.  North of Raheng [Tak] at the junction of the Mae Ping and the Mae Wang rivers, the small independent T'ai state of Phayao came into existence as early as 1096.

In the 12th century their settlements began to form small states under chieftains called chaos and sawbwas in what is today Northern Thailand, Upper Burma, and Laos.  In 1238 two T'ai chiefs attacked and defeated the Khmer commander at Sukhotai, then the the capital of the northwestern part of the Angkor Empire.  They established a T'ai kingdom that was to become a powerful state under King Ramkhamheng in the latter part of the century.

Kublai Khan's conquest of Nanchao in 1253 caused a mass-migration of T'ais southward, adding to the population of the small states already in existence.

King Mengrai, the 25th king of the Lavachakkaraj Dynasty, whose capital was Chiang Saen on the upper Mekong, conquered the Mon state of Haripunjaya [Lamphun] in 1290, and in 1296 founded Chiang Mai as the new capital of his kingdom.  Together with King Ramkhamheng of Sukhotai, and King Ngam Muang of Phayao the three kings had formed an alliance in 1287 that created Lanna T'ai... the million ricefields of the T'ai.

 

[brommers]

Thank you so much for this very interesting piece. It is always a pleasure to learn from your writings.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[CMHomeboy78]

Thank you so much for this very interesting piece. It is always a pleasure to learn from your writings.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

...and thank you for your encouragement.

I sincerely appreciate it.

[Johpa]

Sorry, but I don't recall seeing any references to the Tai people as having Altaic origins, nor are there any lingustic connections between the Tai languages and the Altaic languages. The Altaic groups form a broad northern arch from Turkey (relatively recent nomadic migrants into present day Turkey) up and over northern Asia and then back down into Korea and Japan.

[CMHomeboy78]

Sorry, but I don't recall seeing any references to the Tai people as having Altaic origins, nor are there any lingustic connections between the Tai languages and the Altaic languages. The Altaic groups form a broad northern arch from Turkey (relatively recent nomadic migrants into present day Turkey) up and over northern Asia and then back down into Korea and Japan.

There are several theories about the origins of the T'ai race.

Central Asia seems to be favored over places like Vietnam and Polynesia.

I really don't know myself.  I'm just repeating what most historians have written since the 19th century. If there have been any recent discoveries to challenge that view I would be interested in knowing about them because it is a subject that interests me.

Thanks for your input.

[konjianghai]

The original homeland of Daic people or Tai-Kadai speakers is in Guangxi and Guangdong in south eastern China. Note that not all Tai-Kadai speakers are of Tai-Kadai ethnic since some ethnic do live among the Tai-Kadai speakers there for the infuences is high. To anyone who is interested on this might want to search up on the internet for more informations, please look up at Daic/Tai-Kadai/Zhuang/BaiYue or hundred Yue. You should make connections with these. And if you want to look up further you will come across with Liangzhu culture.
Hope this help. Edited July 27, 2014 by konjianghai

[CMHomeboy78]

The original homeland of Daic people or Tai-Kadai speakers is in Guangxi and Guangdong in south eastern China. Note that not all Tai-Kadai speakers are of Tai-Kadai ethnic since some ethnic do live among the Tai-Kadai speakers there for the infuences is high. To anyone who is interested on this might want to search up on the internet for more informations, please look up at Daic/Tai-Kadai/Zhuang/BaiYue or hundred Yue. You should make connections with these. And if you want to look up further you will come across with Liangzhu culture.
Hope this help.

Linguistic studies would suggest China as the original homeland of the T'ai people, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise.

Before the 6th century BC when the Chinese first recorded their existence, all is conjecture.  Nobody knows.

The proto-history of Southeast Asian races is very well summed-up in D.G.E.Hall's  A History of South-East Asia [St. Martin's Press].

According to Hall, the theory that the T'ai originally came from Central Asia was put forward by westerners in the 19th century, based on racial similarities with other Central Asian peoples and native Americans, who are believed to have originated there as well.

That seems to be the most plausible explanation; at least until compelling evidence turns up to contradict it.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[konjianghai]

The original homeland of Daic people or Tai-Kadai speakers is in Guangxi and Guangdong in south eastern China. Note that not all Tai-Kadai speakers are of Tai-Kadai ethnic since some ethnic do live among the Tai-Kadai speakers there for the infuences is high. To anyone who is interested on this might want to search up on the internet for more informations, please look up at Daic/Tai-Kadai/Zhuang/BaiYue or hundred Yue. You should make connections with these. And if you want to look up further you will come across with Liangzhu culture.
Hope this help.

Linguistic studies would suggest China as the original homeland of the T'ai people, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise.
Before the 6th century BC when the Chinese first recorded their existence, all is conjecture.  Nobody knows.
The proto-history of Southeast Asian races is very well summed-up in D.G.E.Hall's  A History of South-East Asia [St. Martin's Press].
According to Hall, the theory that the T'ai originally came from Central Asia was put forward by westerners in the 19th century, based on racial similarities with other Central Asian peoples and native Americans, who are believed to have originated there as well.
That seems to be the most plausible explanation; at least until compelling evidence turns up to contradict it.
Thanks for your reply.
 

Yes, but that's 19th century, not now we live in 21th century. We have DNA test to emphasize new theories. Languages or physical changes over time but DNA tell more deeper of the origins, not that languages are less important.

To always compare appearances to look for similarities is for me sketchy. Since people who look totally different can still have more close DNA connection then their supposed kinship.

Works of Hui Li is a great evidence on Daic populations and on their immigration routes. In his research he took many blood samples from different ethnic groups and compared relations among them.
Tai people in northern Thailand (Khon Muang) today are of West group. Immigration into south east asia was just some 2000 years ago, quite recent.

http://comonca.org.cn/lh/doc/A08.pdf

Please read more info in the link below.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0060822

194 samples from four additional populations were genotyped in this study: Han (Yunnan), Dai (Dehong), Dai (Yuxi) and Mongolian. The results of genetic distance comparisons, genetic structure analyses and admixture analyses all indicate that populations from northern origin hypothesis have large genetic distances and are clearly differentiated from the Tai. The simulation-based ABC analysis also indicates this. The posterior probability of the northern origin hypothesis is just 0.04 [95%CI: (0.010.06)]. Conversely, genetic relationships were very close between the Tai and populations from southern origin or an indigenous origin hypothesis. Simulation-based ABC analyses were also used to distinguish the southern origin hypothesis from the indigenous origin hypothesis. The results indicate that the posterior probability of the southern origin hypothesis [0.640, 95%CI: (0.5240.757)] is greater than that of the indigenous origin hypothesis [0.324, 95%CI: (0.2110.438)]. Therefore, we propose that the genetic evidence does not support the hypothesis of northern origin. Our genetic data indicate that the southern origin hypothesis has higher probability than the other two hypotheses statistically, suggesting that the Tai people most likely originated from southern China.

Thank you for your reply and reading.

Konjianghai Edited July 28, 2014 by konjianghai

[CMHomeboy78]

 

Yes, but that's 19th century, not now we live in 21th century. We have DNA test to emphasize new theories. Languages or physical changes over time but DNA tell more deeper of the origins, not that languages are less important.

To always compare appearances to look for similarities is for me sketchy. Since people who look totally different can still have more close DNA connection then their supposed kinship.

Works of Hui Li is a great evidence on Daic populations and on their immigration routes. In his research he took many blood samples from different ethnic groups and compared relations among them.
Tai people in northern Thailand (Khon Muang) today are of West group. Immigration into south east asia was just some 2000 years ago, quite recent.

http://comonca.org.cn/lh/doc/A08.pdf

Please read more info in the link below.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0060822

194 samples from four additional populations were genotyped in this study: Han (Yunnan), Dai (Dehong), Dai (Yuxi) and Mongolian. The results of genetic distance comparisons, genetic structure analyses and admixture analyses all indicate that populations from northern origin hypothesis have large genetic distances and are clearly differentiated from the Tai. The simulation-based ABC analysis also indicates this. The posterior probability of the northern origin hypothesis is just 0.04 [95%CI: (0.010.06)]. Conversely, genetic relationships were very close between the Tai and populations from southern origin or an indigenous origin hypothesis. Simulation-based ABC analyses were also used to distinguish the southern origin hypothesis from the indigenous origin hypothesis. The results indicate that the posterior probability of the southern origin hypothesis [0.640, 95%CI: (0.5240.757)] is greater than that of the indigenous origin hypothesis [0.324, 95%CI: (0.2110.438)]. Therefore, we propose that the genetic evidence does not support the hypothesis of northern origin. Our genetic data indicate that the southern origin hypothesis has higher probability than the other two hypotheses statistically, suggesting that the Tai people most likely originated from southern China.

Thank you for your reply and reading.

Konjianghai

 

Genetic studies, if they are carried out properly by capable people, would probably influence the controversy more than anything else.

When I have more time I will study the material in the links you provided.

Incidentally, I'm a graphic artist, not an academic; but I have spent most of my adult life in Chiang Mai. I have an abiding interest in the history, and a love for the traditions and culture of the Kohn Muang among whom I live and have a family.

Many thanks for the information you have provided.  I can assure you that it is much appreciated.

Edited July 28, 2014 by CMHomeboy78

[Saan]

I find it all fascinating. Thanks to those that shared their knowledge and keep it coming.

[Johpa]

Linguistic studies would suggest China as the original homeland of the T'ai people, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise.

 

Before the 6th century BC when the Chinese first recorded their existence, all is conjecture.  Nobody knows.

The proto-history of Southeast Asian races is very well summed-up in D.G.E.Hall's  A History of South-East Asia [St. Martin's Press].

According to Hall, the theory that the T'ai originally came from Central Asia was put forward by westerners in the 19th century, based on racial similarities with other Central Asian peoples and native Americans, who are believed to have originated there as well.

That seems to be the most plausible explanation; at least until compelling evidence turns up to contradict it.

Thanks for your reply.

 

 

 

It is clear to anyone who has spent significant time in Asia that Southeast Asians do not physically resemble Central Asians  And it looks like the genetic evidence prersented here, which greatly post-dates my academic days when no such genetic information was available, supports the linguistic evidence that the Tai languages developed in southern China, perhaps on Hainan Island, and then spread further southward into Southeast Asia as pressure from the migrating Han to the north increased. 

 

I find it interesting that some hypothesize that the homeland of the Tai languages may have been Hainan as many hypothesize that the Austronesian languages had the island of Taiwan as a point of origin. 

[mccw]

I agree , it's all very interesting.

But as has been said the early stuff is mostly guess work.
Even the genetic studies can be influenced by migrations of people in to pre existing communities rather than those later communities coming from x location.

Take the recent work on the current Jewish population of Isreal. Apparently they are genetically closer to European and Middle Eastern; and the Palestinians are closer genetically to what were the original Jewish people of that areas.
This is work carried out by an Israeli Jew in a association with Stanford University in the US I think it was; saw it in the press recently.
So they are concluding that these Jews are in fact European converts from over the past thousand years or whatever. They are Jewish however so their jeans say they are largely European but they still obviously originated from the original home land of the Jews- their jeans just got blended with Europeans through hundreds of years of inter marriage.

So when studies say because of these linguistic or that genetic trait means these people "came from" x location- it really does not mean that at all; all it means is "x" population has been influenced by "y" population and any thing beyond that with out historical writings as evidence is just plucking ideas out of the air.
Even with historical evidence such as writings - the writings are of course just snippets from one biased / subjective angle.

So all very interesting and I do enjoy hearing these things;
but I don't take it all too literally or as fact.
Just interesting thoughts like the nature of dark matter or what goes on inside black holes. (I recently read that a new theory is that black holes switch to eject matter shortly after they form but we didn't observe this because of the effects of the holes gravity on time. )

[mccw]

Above should read that the current Israeli population is genetically closer to European THAN middle eastern. Not "and" but "than".
Typo.
Sorry

[CMHomeboy78]

I agree , it's all very interesting.

But as has been said the early stuff is mostly guess work.
Even the genetic studies can be influenced by migrations of people in to pre existing communities rather than those later communities coming from x location.

Take the recent work on the current Jewish population of Isreal. Apparently they are genetically closer to European and Middle Eastern; and the Palestinians are closer genetically to what were the original Jewish people of that areas.
This is work carried out by an Israeli Jew in a association with Stanford University in the US I think it was; saw it in the press recently.
So they are concluding that these Jews are in fact European converts from over the past thousand years or whatever. They are Jewish however so their jeans say they are largely European but they still obviously originated from the original home land of the Jews- their jeans just got blended with Europeans through hundreds of years of inter marriage.

So when studies say because of these linguistic or that genetic trait means these people "came from" x location- it really does not mean that at all; all it means is "x" population has been influenced by "y" population and any thing beyond that with out historical writings as evidence is just plucking ideas out of the air.
Even with historical evidence such as writings - the writings are of course just snippets from one biased / subjective angle.

So all very interesting and I do enjoy hearing these things;
but I don't take it all too literally or as fact.
Just interesting thoughts like the nature of dark matter or what goes on inside black holes. (I recently read that a new theory is that black holes switch to eject matter shortly after they form but we didn't observe this because of the effects of the holes gravity on time. )

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

[mccw]

I agree , it's all very interesting.

But as has been said the early stuff is mostly guess work.
Even the genetic studies can be influenced by migrations of people in to pre existing communities rather than those later communities coming from x location.

Take the recent work on the current Jewish population of Isreal. Apparently they are genetically closer to European and Middle Eastern; and the Palestinians are closer genetically to what were the original Jewish people of that areas.
This is work carried out by an Israeli Jew in a association with Stanford University in the US I think it was; saw it in the press recently.
So they are concluding that these Jews are in fact European converts from over the past thousand years or whatever. They are Jewish however so their jeans say they are largely European but they still obviously originated from the original home land of the Jews- their jeans just got blended with Europeans through hundreds of years of inter marriage.

So when studies say because of these linguistic or that genetic trait means these people "came from" x location- it really does not mean that at all; all it means is "x" population has been influenced by "y" population and any thing beyond that with out historical writings as evidence is just plucking ideas out of the air.
Even with historical evidence such as writings - the writings are of course just snippets from one biased / subjective angle.

So all very interesting and I do enjoy hearing these things;
but I don't take it all too literally or as fact.
Just interesting thoughts like the nature of dark matter or what goes on inside black holes. (I recently read that a new theory is that black holes switch to eject matter shortly after they form but we didn't observe this because of the effects of the holes gravity on time. )

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

I have a book called "the great divide" about this but didn't get around to reading it yet. According to the back it's claiming basically that the inhabitants walked across the ocean at the last ice age from Asia.

An interesting theory is found in "the secret history of the world" by Jonathan Black. Collating many religious, esoteric and tribal (south American included) "myths", he concludes a new time line of early history (amongst many other things but I stick to this point here)- basically all the cultures of the world have this massive flood story which caused migrations across the world from previously more advanced civilisation of island nations in the Atlantic somewhere.
Many evidence for this around too if research around. Talking 12+ thousand years ago.
These Atlantans moved in to already inhabited continents but those already there were at a much lower level of technological evolution.

Before that the world and all with in it materialised in to physical material matter from an immaterial existence.

According to various religions, Hindu, Buddhist, Native American , and more,, this current cycle is just one tiny cycle in huge multi cycles of epochs of time.
Mostly occurring in spiritual / non material existence.
Like we are experiencing life just now on an island of materiality in an infinite sea of immaterial existence.

If there is something then there can not be nothing.

Some things are just so remarkable.
Like did you ever see an eclipse of the sun? Mathematically what are the chances that the moon forms at such a perfect size and distance to so perfectly fit to block the sun like that.

Or have a research on the mathematics contained in the great pyramid. It contains Py the golden ration and the speed of light, the base is exactly the width that it takes the earth to rotate in one second. There is more.

Ancient civilisations depicting sirus as a two star system long before the technological means to observe it.

What does this all mean?

The world is more fantastic and amazing than we could ever hope to prove with science.
The best way to explore is through mediation I have found. Direct experience of ones own mind rather than placing belief on the imaginations of others.

All that stuff I just talked about is fluff really too. Best not to get too caught up in any fixed views of anything.
Other than what is light and dark on a morality spectrum. That's the objective spectrum rather than the cultural subjective one. But that's another topic. I have gone on a real ramble here 55

Good evening.

[Johpa]

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

 

On the contrary, there is some newer tantalizing linguistic evidence in the proposed Dene-Yeniseian language group.

 

[CMHomeboy78]

 

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

 

On the contrary, there is some newer tantalizing linguistic evidence in the proposed Dene-Yeniseian language group.

 

 

What is the consensus of informed opinion now? ...that native Americans originated in Central Asia and that the T'ai race originated somewhere in South China?

 

[Johpa]

 

 

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

 

On the contrary, there is some newer tantalizing linguistic evidence in the proposed Dene-Yeniseian language group.

 

 

What is the consensus of informed opinion now? ...that native Americans originated in Central Asia and that the T'ai race originated somewhere in South China?

 

 

 

I believe that would be the consensus opinion but not a unanimous opinion.

[CMHomeboy78]

 

 

 

What about native Americans?  Is it still believed that they originated in Central Asia, or has there been some doubt cast upon that as well?

 

On the contrary, there is some newer tantalizing linguistic evidence in the proposed Dene-Yeniseian language group.

 

 

What is the consensus of informed opinion now? ...that native Americans originated in Central Asia and that the T'ai race originated somewhere in South China?

 

 

 

I believe that would be the consensus opinion but not a unanimous opinion.

 

The reason I ask is because I'm putting together a series of short articles on Chiang Mai and Lanna T'ai history and I don't want to quote out-of-date theories.

Maybe the most accurate thing to say would be that the classification of the T'ai race as Altaic has been challenged by recent linguistic and genetic studies.

Thanks for sharing what you know about this.

 

[RikDao]

As usual, almost everything I've read in this and similar threads is fascinating. 

[CMHomeboy78]

As usual, almost everything I've read in this and similar threads is fascinating. 

It's always good to hear from others with similar interests.

I grew up north of New York City near the Hudson Highlands, an area that played a key role during the Revolution.  History and the remains of it were a living presence, and I took a great interest in it, even as a child.

I feel the same way about Chiang Mai and Lanna T'ai. History is a living presence here also... as Faulkner said  "The past is never dead, it's not even past."

All the best.

[RikDao]

 

As usual, almost everything I've read in this and similar threads is fascinating. 

It's always good to hear from others with similar interests.

I grew up north of New York City near the Hudson Highlands, an area that played a key role during the Revolution.  History and the remains of it were a living presence, and I took a great interest in it, even as a child.

I feel the same way about Chiang Mai and Lanna T'ai. History is a living presence here also... as Faulkner said  "The past is never dead, it's not even past."

All the best.

 

 

Thanks. I'm from Texas, descended from two slave-owning families (father's father's and mother's mother's sides), but haven't taken too much interest in local history there. I know it's not fashionable to admit any connection with the abomination of slavery, but it's historical fact, and acting like it didn't exist by not talking about it isn't helping anything. Of course, talking about it doesn't help too much, either. Still, slavery exists in certain parts of the world today, even if the forms it's taken are decidedly different. 

 

At least I can say that Travis County (Austin, my home in the US) voted 2 to 1 NOT to join the Confederacy and fight in the Civil War. As we all know, they were in the minority state-wide. 

[Mekong Bob]

 

The original homeland of Daic people or Tai-Kadai speakers is in Guangxi and Guangdong in south eastern China. Note that not all Tai-Kadai speakers are of Tai-Kadai ethnic since some ethnic do live among the Tai-Kadai speakers there for the infuences is high. To anyone who is interested on this might want to search up on the internet for more informations, please look up at Daic/Tai-Kadai/Zhuang/BaiYue or hundred Yue. You should make connections with these. And if you want to look up further you will come across with Liangzhu culture.
Hope this help.

Linguistic studies would suggest China as the original homeland of the T'ai people, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise.

Before the 6th century BC when the Chinese first recorded their existence, all is conjecture.  Nobody knows.

The proto-history of Southeast Asian races is very well summed-up in D.G.E.Hall's  A History of South-East Asia [St. Martin's Press].

According to Hall, the theory that the T'ai originally came from Central Asia was put forward by westerners in the 19th century, based on racial similarities with other Central Asian peoples and native Americans, who are believed to have originated there as well.

That seems to be the most plausible explanation; at least until compelling evidence turns up to contradict it.

Thanks for your reply.

 

 

 

 

Dr James Chamberlain (Tai Linguistics) cites linguistic evidence that the T'ai originated in Northern Vietnam.

 

Do Thai schools still teach that the Thai originated in the Nan Chao Kingdom of Yunnan Province?

 

 

[mccw]

Hi
Just happened to see this on sky news app:
""
The Government has launched a campaign to raise awareness of the growing problem of modern day slavery in Britain.

Last year 1,746 potential victims of trafficking were identified in the UK, a 47% increase on the figure for 2012.

As part of the campaign, a TV advert shows actors in the kind of squalid conditions that victims are forced to live in.

Checks at airports have also been stepped up with border force officers trained to identify passengers who could be being brought into the country to be treated as slaves.
""
I'm sure slavery still exists in the US also.
The Muslim countries are particularly cruel in this "modern world"; Africa still has slave markets in the bad lands (which are geographically and humanly massive areas). With population growth to what it is today I am not sure but could be there are higher numbers of slaves at this point in time than there were at the hight of the colonial slave driving days. It's just now a black market and some what out of sight for us westerners, rather than legal and government sponsored as before. We moving steps in the right direction but still the world is a horrendous place for many people.

 

As usual, almost everything I've read in this and similar threads is fascinating. 

It's always good to hear from others with similar interests.
I grew up north of New York City near the Hudson Highlands, an area that played a key role during the Revolution.  History and the remains of it were a living presence, and I took a great interest in it, even as a child.
I feel the same way about Chiang Mai and Lanna T'ai. History is a living presence here also... as Faulkner said  "The past is never dead, it's not even past."
All the best.
 

 
Thanks. I'm from Texas, descended from two slave-owning families (father's father's and mother's mother's sides), but haven't taken too much interest in local history there. I know it's not fashionable to admit any connection with the abomination of slavery, but it's historical fact, and acting like it didn't exist by not talking about it isn't helping anything. Of course, talking about it doesn't help too much, either. Still, slavery exists in certain parts of the world today, even if the forms it's taken are decidedly different. 
 
At least I can say that Travis County (Austin, my home in the US) voted 2 to 1 NOT to join the Confederacy and fight in the Civil War. As we all know, they were in the minority state-wide. 

[CMHomeboy78]

 

 

The original homeland of Daic people or Tai-Kadai speakers is in Guangxi and Guangdong in south eastern China. Note that not all Tai-Kadai speakers are of Tai-Kadai ethnic since some ethnic do live among the Tai-Kadai speakers there for the infuences is high. To anyone who is interested on this might want to search up on the internet for more informations, please look up at Daic/Tai-Kadai/Zhuang/BaiYue or hundred Yue. You should make connections with these. And if you want to look up further you will come across with Liangzhu culture.
Hope this help.

Linguistic studies would suggest China as the original homeland of the T'ai people, and there is no hard evidence to prove otherwise.

Before the 6th century BC when the Chinese first recorded their existence, all is conjecture.  Nobody knows.

The proto-history of Southeast Asian races is very well summed-up in D.G.E.Hall's  A History of South-East Asia [St. Martin's Press].

According to Hall, the theory that the T'ai originally came from Central Asia was put forward by westerners in the 19th century, based on racial similarities with other Central Asian peoples and native Americans, who are believed to have originated there as well.

That seems to be the most plausible explanation; at least until compelling evidence turns up to contradict it.

Thanks for your reply.

 

 

 

 

Dr James Chamberlain (Tai Linguistics) cites linguistic evidence that the T'ai originated in Northern Vietnam.

 

Do Thai schools still teach that the Thai originated in the Nan Chao Kingdom of Yunnan Province?

 

 

 

The place of origin of the T'ai race is a vexed question.

The accuracy of linguistic and even genetic studies of people in the very remote past can be legitimately doubted.

Closer to our own time and more amenable to study is the Nanchao kingdom in what is now Yunnan.

That it had a majority T'ai population is, I believe, generally accepted by most historians based on the plausible evidence of the Chinese chronicles that first mention them as early as the 6th century BC, and frequently thereafter.  Also there is a large number of T'ai speakers in Yunnan to this day.

I don't really know what the Thai schools teach.  But it would be hard to imagine that their history lessons are much worse or less inspiring than the ones in the US.

[mccw]

Not sure if you guys can zoom in to see the back chat. Just about to read this. Personally I am interested in the minds of the people / us humans as well as the battles, migrations and states they/ we have built. [attachment=277346:ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1406789796.167585.jpg][attachment=277347:ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1406789830.951817.jpg]

[mccw]

According to this; Neanderthals colonised Europe at least 400,000 years ago and showed signs of ritual and belief in a should apparent through burial finds; homo-sapiens (our species) moved in later. But it seems likely that there were some kind of human thinking people in Thai / South East Asian region for millennia before modern day records.
Technology wise west we talk about Iron Age etc but if you think Asia especially but else where, bamboo can do so much, cutting tool, spears, building, irrigation, etc, it's most likely kingdoms rose and fell across the ages but little / nothing in the ground to show of it because of the technology based in organic degradable materials.
That we can only confidently talk of the last thousand or two thousand years just shows how limited our perspectives are in this little bubble of present "understanding".
Belief in souls for hundreds of thousands of years but only a tiny physical history available for our deliberation. Yet it is possible to "imagine" the effects of thought, action and effect and how this turns the wheel of Karma across all the times we can not see the physical remains of the past and equally to the future yet to happen. Of course; We all have our choices every present moment.

[CMHomeboy78]

Not sure if you guys can zoom in to see the back chat. Just about to read this. Personally I am interested in the minds of the people / us humans as well as the battles, migrations and states they/ we have built. ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1406789796.167585.jpgImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1406789830.951817.jpg

I share your interest... regardless of the fact that most of what is written about it sounds like the work of unbalanced people.  There are exceptions however, notably Carl Jung and Mircea Eliade.

Clearly defined origin and migration myths would be a great help in determining where the T'ai race came from. If they ever existed as oral transmission or in written form they haven't been preserved.

The Chinese chronicles referred to the Nanchao T'ai as barbarians, but little meaning should be attached to this expression. They called all foreigners barbarians down to a very recent date, and doubtless the term is not even yet obsolete.

The Chinese themselves don't have migration myths, and perhaps for similar reasons - a preoccupation with who they are and where they are.

According to Eliade many traditional societies share common outlines in their mythical geographies. In the middle of the known world is the sacred Center, the Omphalos/Axis Mundi/Sadu-Muang.  This Center anchors the established order; around the sacred Center lies the known world, the realm of order; and beyond the known world is a chaotic and dangerous realm peopled by ghosts, demons, and foreigners.

For whatever reasons, the T'ai people have no myths or legends of a homeland that they left in the distant past.

 

[mccw]

I also picked up a book about the Shan history. They have chronicles recorded on papyrus detailing kings and lineage back to the 13th century. Before that is detailed but assumed to be a work of fancy - the first king was an ordinary herdsman, delivered to the people by being carried to a large village from his herds some distance away through the air by a flock of Crows! When they set him down there were royal robes magically awaiting him, which he slipped on and then the towns people saw him and had a great mutter what to do; the local elders and astrologers declared him not to harmed, made in to the first King and so long as they continued in such a way great good fortune would be upon the people.
This history gives a view that people were living as disorganized peoples until a royal order was created at any rate.
Interesting and rather charming that the 'myth' claims the first king was a simple herds man; rather nicely humble compared to the Egyptians and Greeks and such claiming to be direct descendants of the gods.
As I say, I find it likely that cultures, kingdoms and people arose and fell over longer periods than the relatively recent past we have recorded; mostly lost in the mists of time. But the human conditions of peace and war, creative and destructive seem continuous. We can see how great civilizations like the Romans largely disappeared, the technology of sewer systems and such forgotten for over a thousand years. Makes one wonder if such cycles will be repeated and an evolution or devolution of today's society can or will occur. Depletion of natural resources and such as a possible cause, or who knows, maybe everything be fine and great new technologies can propel us to renewable energy future and even spread out from this tiny little fragile rock we are on.

Carl Jung is excellent. I also like the writing of Rudolf Stiener. I don't subscribe to anything; but it's alls good for ones own mental stimulation.

For example almost a hundred years ago now Steiner was theorizing about the life cycle being split down essentially in to 7 years of evolutionary smaller cycles with in the one life. I read the other day that science has now found that on a cellular level our cells actually are fully replaced by new cells every 7 years. They didn't mention Stiener of course but it's amazing "coincidence" all the same. I think many knowledge can be gained through expanding consciousness before the science catches up. Even more fundamentally - where do the scientists ideas come from in the first place? Or any of our thoughts for that matter. Popping in to our heads. "Eureka" while sat in the bath and realizing the answer to kings question of the fake gold in his crown wasn't it; displacement; pop he sat in the bath and boom the realization came in to his mind. Realization of the way something is through experience; rather than a worked out piece of work like arithmetic. Apple falls on the head of Newton , boom , realized how gravity existed, when everybody else had just experienced it all already of course but with out realizing it. These were great minds obviously, amazingly open minds, but that thought - eureka - magical


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[mccw]

I know what you mean about the unbalanced people though. There's a thin line between genius and madness, if any. Some peoples thought seem so far out there, but then they are obviously experiencing their world in a very different way. This subjective, objective reality questions come in to play. Some times a mad man might be the only sane man amongst the mad no. It's only the power of the state or community that decide what is or is not sane in the physical world. Like stoning a rape victim to death seems pretty insane to me; but is the only acceptable thing to do in some communities in the world today.
However saying this- personally I have reasoned that there is an objective light and dark, good and bad. Love, compassion, kindness being the good, light and harm, hate vengeance etc being the bad. Dark.

If a state, culture or communities of maniacs are acting by the dark side then just because they think the are right does not make them right. The objective reality of Light and Dark will cause them the respective Karma/ future effects of their actions. So the mad man can be the only sane one amongst the truely insane. The madness is following and indulging in the ways of darkness; especially if one knows things to be bad in their heart but continue or join some actions just because other are doing it at that time. I'm talking only about "them" over there; but all of us peoples everywhere. Personally I have been practicing meditation/ observation of the breath, to step outside my subjective thinking and found many things I used to reason are ok , are actually really not very desirable or positive actions. By consciously learning how to address these things through consciousness of the breath cycle and being able to catch emotions and senses and then clear to a view more free of those things it's had a very good effect on my life. Not wanting to get all preachy- just sharing my experience/ thoughts. It also acts like a magnifying glass on the world, on life, of what read and experience, hear etc, putting the large cycles throughout the mini cycles of the breath. Good fun; too, exploring the existence

I think there for I am- the famous quote, Plato was it? Or Socrates ;) excellent adventure

More like - I am aware there for I am
Since thought come in to our awareness, they are not us


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand