yellowscientist, why so hostile in your last response to Akuma?
I really do appreciate your help, but if you search in english, you'll find most sources from Japan.
I do rather a lot of historical research and I am always happy to help when I can.
I do search in English, but I also follow source material from all language groups, including dead ones. I do not follow any single source and always look for corroboration.
I'm looking into it in Korean and have found many sources(some from Japan itself) to fuel my doubt on the story, but thanks anyway.
I am not looking into the story from any angle, I neither have doubt, nor belief, I just follow historical trails to the best of my ability, regardless of the outcome.
What I highly doubt about Akuma's story is the part where Japan had influence over Korea. The reason why I was so flabbergasted then amused over this was because I had never even heard of it.
I understand. Many cultures are unaware of ancient history, others would rather have the histories be false, or true. I however do not take sides.
I have noticed that I can source information, find documents and third party accounts of civilization as far back as the 6th millennium BC. Even before that, but one must work much harder and information is rather scant.
My point here is that, I find it odd that 3rd century A.D. would be considered 'beyond recorded time', because I can follow up that time period with little problems.
Yeah, I do acknowledge Japan having war starting at 1592, but back in the 2nd century?
So long ago that the very fact, an unpleasant one at that, would have passed away from memory.
The last part I really can't quite understand.
What does those Southern Asian countries and a country in Egypt even have to do with the issue at hand?
Ah well, it has all been leading up to this question.
It comes down to corroboration and the location of the countries is less important than the time frame at hand.
Those countries were kingdoms, kingdoms that were active in the time frame that Jingū lived. That being the case, those kingdoms would have traded with other kingdoms in the same time frame, so information would be readily available. Even if the kingdoms listed had not traded with Japan or Korea, they would have traded with others that had.
This is how one corroborates historical accounts. Follow informational sources, find all records available, including records from other kingdoms. Such records are kept over wars, trades, migrations, etc.
Sometimes even simple things, like a drought being recorded by kingdoms that did not have any contact, but shared a basic geographic location and lived during the same time frame.
Sorry for the long response, the short one of course is that those countries were around at the correct time in history. That being the case, one should be able to ascertain if any of them had contact with China, Koera or Japan.
They may have been trading partners, enemies or allies. They may have records where other kingdoms mention China, Korea or Japan as trading partners, enemies or allies...etc.
Not to long ago I spoke with a person from Korea, who had no idea that Japan had occupied Korea in modern times. It is not uncommon for some countries to rewrite history as they want it to be, or to destroy it and write a new history altogether.
You said,
I do acknowledge Japan having war starting at 1592, but back in the 2nd century?
I do not find that hard to believe at all.
It is only about 80 miles from Japan to South Korea when going from island, to island, across the sea.
It is 18 miles from the main land of Japan to Iki Island, then 30 miles for Iki Island to Tsushima Island and just another 30 miles from there to the next closest land mass near South Korea.
In fact, I would find it odd if these areas did not have contact in the 2nd century and even way before that.
No matter how one looks at the historical aspect, one must realize that the truth to the history of the area is one that connects China, Korea and Japan.
All share a common history, are in close proximity and all three want to have their own separate, identities as nations. The truth is more complex and all three nations have a shared history, one of war, battles, trades, etc.
Ignoring that will not help anyone.
I might have some free time where I could look into this and I will when I can.
However, being closed of mind, set in ones ways and holding the assumption that only 'your history' is the 'real history', will get you nowhere.