This is from “Are These from the real Korean textbook?” a thread from the “Little Bridge” blog of Jacky Peng, another interesting Chinese blog that reports that some Chinese internet users are accusing Korean history text books as attempting to “distorting history and trying to steal Chinese land” — pretty much the same accusation that is commonly made about the Chinese Government and their attempts to reinterpret or revise historical fact to suit their own political purposes.
Per Jacky’s blog:
. . . This time someone dug out a Korean history textbook, scanned and posted on the Chinese BBSs. These historical maps, which show ancient Korean had occupied big part of the Chinese territory, are completely different from what Chinese learn in the schools. This inevitably spurred some uproars on Chinese BBSs. They’re bashing Korean for distorting the history and trying to steal Chinese land. . . .
and
. . . The animosity to Korean (sic) is seeded by these posts on the China side, while people in Korean have no clue of what is happening . . . If there is a fight, let’s fight on the net. By all means, a web war is better than any real war.
I wonder just where this sort of nonsense is going to go since it is undoubtedly indirectly sponsored by the Chinese Government or, rather I wonder if there is going to be a Chinese Dokdo in the future.
Sphere: Related ContentRelated Posts
- Japanese gov’t instructs textbooks to include Dokdo as Japanese territory
- Distorting Korean history: not just a Japanese thing / Parhae Mania
- Gov’t helpless against flood of anti-Korean sites: Kyunghyang Shinmun
- Koguryo, Chinese Inferiority Complexes, and the Chosun Ilbo
- Hey, Who Said You Could Map Dokdo
91 Comments
Like Baduk usually says, Korea had better think seriously about becoming more friendly with Japan as a hedge against China.
Chinese agit-prop takes the internet. I wonder how many of these Chinese netizens know about real Chinese history. Based on the conversations I’ve had with one of my Chinese friends in Korea, I’d guess not many of them know of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. (”Really? That’s terrible! We couldn’t talk about that in China. It would be very dangerous.”)
The Chinese “Northeast Project” is part of their research that claims sovereignity of Korea’s Koguryo, which cover modern day Chinese provinces of Heilongjiang, Jilin and Liaoning. How do they explain that?
It’s a neverending story, the bickering over rocks and ancient (and not-so-ancient) history. *sigh*
BTW, enjoy reading your blog very much!
Uhh, no. You’d be amazed at the level of irrational national pride in China, the free pass given to its government, and the rabid defense of the nation in the face of any perceived slight. I think this is what it appears to be.
And ditto to Mark.
I’ll concur with SomeguyinKorea that many of the Chinese netizens don’t know the real Chinese history, but I’m pretty sure they’re right that the large orange territory, from Japan to the Himalayas, wasn’t Korea’s. Ever.
Nonetheless, it would be fun to encourage VANK to press this issue. Go on, mess with the Chinese. I’m sure they’ll humor your flights of fancy just like the Americans and the Japanese have done.
What’s interesting about the Chinese netizen stink about this is that there was an online stink about the same maps in the same books in May of last year, apparently after one of the Shanghai papers ran a story on it. The Korean consulate in Shanghai issued a statement at the time explaining—correctly, as far as I know—that the opinions held by the scholars in question were not considered mainstream by Korean historians.
Another interesting point, if I might add, is that while I’d ordinarily chalk this up to a slightly over-zealous attempt to defend the nation’s history in the face of China’s “Northeast Project,” at least one of the books, written by the former vice-chancellor of Daejeon National University, was published in 2002, which was before the “Northeast Project” became a major issue in Korea. But hey, you have, ahem, non-mainstream historians everywhere.
Anyway, I’m surprised the story still has traction. Then again, nothing drives up hit counts more than posting shit that drives the Chinese netizens wild—I was getting hits for months after posting this map.
PS: The books in question are not school textbooks.
So Bhutan ain’t Korea’s? Shucks.
looks plenty possible. If we could only ally ourselves with the Canadian Eskimos.
irrational, blind pride (which is surely present in korea and japan, to a lesser degree).
considering the b.s. you can hear on korean history (ie the sumerian civilization was founded by migrated dongyi aka koreans?), its sorta hard to blame the chinese. i just wish more fresh, accurate and knowledgable research would be done on korean history.
The map is from a book published by some marginal extremist group of - how should I say politely? - “ultra-nationalist amateur historians”. Very few people in Korea (and nearly nobody in the professional community) would consider their claims seriously. Needless to say, nothing like it is to be found in Korean textbooks. Shanghai consukate is right 101%.
I think these idiots should be just ignored. There are so many of their kind around. Now I am in Moscow and a quick look through the shelves of the history section at the local bookshops always leaves me perplexed. Last week I saw a well-published book whose author insists that the Etruscans were actually proto-Russians (if you doubt, he provides reading of the Etruscan text in MODERN Russian: obviously, the poor retard has no idea that languages change over time). And few months ago in Kyobo I nearly bought a book which claims that Sumers were proto-Koreans. I wonder, by the way, how many nationalists worldwide lay claims on the Sumer civilization?
But in one regard I have to agree: in East Asia we now see clash of rather irrational nationalisms, each with serious domestic support and hence attractable to power-seeking politicos. Somewhat similar to the situation in Europe at the end of La Belle Epoch, in, say, 1905. We all remember how it ended there.
well, it’s the Chinese army that’s all lined up nicely across the North Korean border and ready to move in to take over North Korea…If you believe former US diplomat to South Korea, Lilley.
no such military plans planned by South Korea or even North Korea.
Robert,
I am not sure how much you follow South Korean pop culture regarding Korean history, but per Ggoma Chief’s comment, the South Korean revision regarding Korea’s ancient past is indeed troubling and frankly defies logic.
In particular, it appears to me that, consistent with the maps you have linked, South Korean pop culture increasingly depicts Gojoseon or Daungun Joseon as encompassing most of China and Siberia, and even extending to Tibet and Indochine. This is evident from any cursory perusal of Korean history boards, for instance.
Of course, you may say that online fora are a heaven for quacks and madmen, and that is of course true. But the pop culture revisionism is so pervasive that it is essentially presented as facts on various popular television saguks (historical dramas). For instance, in SBS’s spectacularly revisionist “Yeon Gaesomun,” starring the controversial and perhaps brutal but brilliantly talented Koguryo tyrant, China is said to have been former Gojoseon land, and it is almost always referred to as “Seohttoh” (”Western land). This redesignation is a stark contrast to the traditional Korean term for China (”Joongwon”), which emphasizes China’s centrality in the cosmos, as occupying the middle space. In fact, I believe the drama in its webpage literally says that Korea was the center of the world during Yeon’s time.
Another example is a planned saguk that will tackle Gojoseon itself later this year. Let the description of the drama speak for itself:
“고조선이 동쪽으로는 사할린부터 서쪽으로는 티벳에 이르는 대영토의 제국으로 기록돼있는 재야사서를 바탕으로 상고사를 정면으로 다룬다.”
The first half of the sentence says that Gojoseon occupied “Sakhalin to the East and Tibet to the West.”
These are some grandiose claims.
Finally, you may say that these are still television dramas, but I would reply that in Korea historical dramas are often presented as the gospel truth (the “Yeon Gaesomun” writer, for instance, has argued that his version is the true Yeon Gaesomun, and that the existing historical records are Chinese fabrications or the archetypal “winner’s history”). Moreover, even if these dramas are self-proclaimed fiction (which is not the case), one wonders the effect of these dramas when they are so avidly watched by a people (esp. the young) who increasingly read very little and thereby obtain much of their historical education from the tube and the net.
“I am not sure how much you follow South Korean pop culture regarding Korean history, but per Ggoma Chief’s comment, the South Korean revision regarding Korea’s ancient past is indeed troubling and frankly defies logic.”
I meant to say “revisionism,” not “revision” here.
my humble opinion; it almost seems this new wave of intrepretation in Korean history is a natural step after the distortions done by imperial Japan. The sad thing is, both historians and the audience are too emotional about their history, a subject that should be looked at objectively.
Even mainstream historians seem often immature, i.e. their vehement denial of the existance of gija joseon (which in turn puts the existance of the untouchable dangun and dangun joseon in jeopardy). They dismiss 일본서기 in a similar manner (though it is inarguably true the text is full of myths and exaggeration, no doubt it is a valuable historic text). The point is, both historians and Koreans in general look at history as a win-or-lose deal and fail to value accuracy and objectiveness.
All I hope is, this is just another stage as the subject of korean history matures. Japan went through a similar stage a hundred years ago, but now, it seems like Japanese graduated frenzy nationalistic history.
aside, on woon jun choe’s comment:
” In fact, I believe the drama in its webpage literally says that Korea was the center of the world during Yeon’s time.”
actually, the Koreans during Yeon’s time (that is, the Goguryeo-ites) DID believe they were the center of the world. This is readily apparent in the name ‘중원고구려비’, ironaically, the only goguryeo monument present in South Korea. Also, in 광개토대왕비, the Goguryeo-ites chiseled in Silla as ‘dongyi’ or eastern barabarians, which would throw out the so-loved 단일민족 theory (no, goguryeo and silla were ethnically different and wouldnt have understood each other).
To disgress again, the theory that Baekje had a colony in modern China (shandong area) is a very interesting theory that is not readily accepted by Korean mainstream historians. Though no archaeological evidence (yet?), the theory has several concrete supports from well-accepted Chinese texts (위서, wei-shu, for example). I wonder how the chinese will take this. Baekje’s Chinese territory theory could develop into a solid, credible theory if only those frenzy korean netizens wouldnt include the phillipines, vietnam, australia and who knows what else.
Adding to Dr. Lankov’s identification of the book’s authors as being outside the mainstream, I would also note that the images and use of Chinese characters with Hangeul in parentheses suggest that the book was published prior to the 1970s, when Park Chung-hee discouraged the use of Chinese characters in school. Amongst my small collection of old and modern Chinese and Korean textbooks is a school atlas published in 1952, using the same Chinese Character (Hangeul) writing style. The maps published in this atlas are similar to those found in current textbooks and in mainstream Korean history books. I left a message at Jackie’s blog with this information and asked him whether Americans should get worked up about anti-American content in Cultural Revolution era textbooks. Below are links to textbook images I’ve uploaded to Flickr:
Korean and Chinese textbook images
self-correction: use of Hangeul with Chinese characters in parentheses
The textbooks in my collection dating from the 1980s do not use Chinese characters at all, including the sections on China in the 2002.07.30 edition of High School World History.
These maps would have a bit more credibility than they have (ie none) if they actually bothered to get their basic geography correct before coloring outside the lines, as it were. Whoever made the map appears to have absent-mindedly left off Hokkaido and Sakhalin, not to mention the piss-poor job they did representing the actual contour of the lands they depict. Maybe this map is meant to represent a time period before those particular islands came up out of the ocean or East Asia got a well-defined coastline.
Of course, I kinda think any modern nation ‘claiming’ a historical one is the height of masturbatory historiography. Sure, it may make you feel good, but you probably shouldn’t do it in public.
sonagi, my mother says she’s weaker than most Koreans at Chinese characters, because she happened to go to high school when Park Chung Hee was experimenting.
That wouldn’t be the only anti-Chinese characters in books phase.
I think it happenned again quite recently.
People would say they are not of the Han-ja sae dae.
Personally, I think the Chinese characters help Koreans understand many of the Korean words better, similar to Latin. Xtra work, but worth it if you have time.
Chinese claim of the Korean peninsula’s northern half is nothing new. Koguryo was constantly facing attack by the Chinese. Tang tried to steal most of Korea from Shilla. Shilla pretty much held only on to south of Pyong Yang, and started this tributary-to-the-Chinese system, which lasted through Koryo and Chosun. The Chinese seemed to have lost interest in physically attacking the Korean peninsula after Shilla decided Korea should always be a vassal state to China. People would say this was the wisdom of the Shilla people. I don’t agree.
During regime changes in China, Korea was physically attacked. And also, the other tribes of Manchuria liked to attack Korea regularly as well.
This is what I think. I agree with the Chinese.
1)Korea was a part of China till late 19th century. “Wang” is not a king but a local magistrate. China has many Wangs. But, only one emperor. Korea could not use the term emperor till “Korean Empire” emerged in late 19th century through the help of Japan.(Later on, this help proved to be too much of liability)
2) All Korea belonged to China. Most history books were doctored by the Japanese or interpreted by them to make Koreans to think they had been an independent people. Using a separate language is not a sign of “separate people”. China at present have five major languages spoken inside country.
3) Lee Sunggye who set up Chosun dynasty was a Chinese. His father served as a Chinese magistrate in Manchuria. I believe Lee spoke fluent Chinese and maybe the only language he spoke.
This, however, does not mean Koreans should go back to being a part of the Chinese empire. The Chinese hate South Koreans for killing their soldiers in Korean war and they will deal with Koreans harshly once the US pulls out. I mean rapings, servanthood, killings, mass starvation and such. China will kill off Korean men by starting Korea-Japan war. And, then disperse Koreans throughout China, the northwest provinces near Tibet being the most likely place. Russia has done the same thing.
Korea should be pro-America to the max, to avoid upcoming China-Japan hegemony fight.
OOPS! I forgot to close a tag, so I’m reposting. Please delete the previous post, Robert.
I have a little time to kill on a Saturday afternoon, so I looked at the one of the cover images,Searching for Hidden History :
I cannot make out every single Chinese character on the cover, but below is a translation of what I am able to read:
top left corner: the roots of the Donggeul People (Koreans generally regard Donggeul as part of Chinese history and all of the history textbooks I own do not claim Donggeul as part of Korean history)
title: Searching for Hidden History
1. from the year 503 to the 9th century, the Chosun people’s Shilla was ?country (two countries?)
2. There was no Baekjae ?Hanseong (old name for Seoul) or ?__jin.
3. Sun?___ from the 9th Century BC were Goguryo People. (Goguryo Historical Record, New ?__ Tang Book)
in the top right corner of the map: ?__ __ territory Peaceful Great Dynasty Goguryo (Goguryo with different last character - this character is the name of one of China’s 56 official minority ethnic groups)
in parentheses: For the sake of correct history,…(rest unreadable)
It is hard to make out every character in the bottom, but the sentence includes the names of Shilla, Goryo, and Baekjae.
In the bottom right corner is the author, Oh Jaesung, or Wu Zaicheng.
At one of the Chinese BBSes linked on Jackie’s blog, I found additional images including this old book? map?
I’m not going to translate the whole thing but will note that the map labels the Korean peninsula as Goguryo ?, Siberia as Goguryo, eastern China as Baekjae and Shilla. The publishing company at the bottom is the Li People Research Association. I doubt any Koreans have even heard of the Li ethnic group.
Chinese netizens can’t read Korean, but they can read Chinese and ought to notice that these books are obviously old.
According to this Naver story, the book was published in 2002 by a former vice-president of Daejeon University, but the images circulating around Chinese websites, which presumably were taken from the book, seem to originate mostly from the same source, author Oh Jaesung.
It’s called Korea. Long-live the Lolang and Taifang commanderies!
it’s pure speculation, but histories of Koguryo and Paekchae are murkier and more unclear than that of Shilla. What’s more clear is that, Shilla and post Shilla Korea’s history is and was, dictated by the Chinese.
This is why ultra Korean nationalists like to imagine and speculate that Koguryo and Paekchae were larger than what Chinese dicated history says it was.
said Curzon…
/I’ve talked to mainland Chinese people in the US, who say,
they’ve never heard of a one child policy. There is no religious persecution that they are aware of. They claim it’s western media probably trying to make China look bad. Hmm…
If you check the pictures, you’ll see clearly, as Sonagi pointed out, that some of the books look very old. It’s not just the fonts but also alos the cover art and the yellowed with age paper.
For anyone interested, Harvard University Press has just released a new history of Baekche by Jonathan Best,Professor of Art History @ Wesleyan University. The book contains two parts, a history of Baekche based primary written and material evidence, and an extensively annotated translation of the Samguk sagi’s Baekche pon’gi (the Baekche Annals). The translation is further supported by twenty-two Appendices (focused discussions of particular problems in Baekche history as it is represented in the Baekche Annals), a Concordance of terms and all proper nouns in the Baekche Annals, a Geographical Glossary of all place names in the annals, six historical maps, and an index.
The issue of early state formation in Korea also is a topic of lively, serious and meticulously objective scholarly investigation - at least outside Korea. See http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~ko.....2_011.html
History is primarily the glorification of murderers as told by liars to idiots.
thank you for link @ sperwer
(btw, is it just me or, in the link, does the far right guy look like he is just about to speak korean)
The sovereign nations of China and South Korea are modern constructs. It seems an impossible feat to draw a line on a 2,000 year old map and label one side as Chinese and the other Korean. To claim Goguryo as a cultural and historical ancestor to modern Korea is one thing. To declare it exclusively or pure Korean is another.
Any evidence?
Could a French historian rightfully claim the history of the Normans as being purely French, and not also British? Does Mohawk history belong to that of Canada? America? Britain or France? The Mohawks exclusively?
I’m very curious as to when - or if - people of the three kingdoms period, or Goryeo, or even Joseon began to identify themselves as Korean, versus being from their local “eup” or “gun”.
Anyway, this isn’t unique to Korea, but it is interesting to see how impassioned people here can get over historical issues, yet admit in the same breath they barely remember studying it in school…
“Lee Sunggye who set up Chosun dynasty was a Chinese. —— I believe Lee spoke fluent Chinese and maybe the only language he spoke.”
Actually, his father was Korean.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Ja-chun
babarian,
If you read what I wrote carefully, you will get those evidences.
SungGwenGwan kept the record of what each Korean king has done. Even these kings are allowed to look or edit the records. Do you know who had previlege of reading these records? Chinese auditors dispatched by the Chinese Emperor.
Basically, SungGuyenGwan scholars were spies working for the Emperor. As I wrote, “king” was just a regional administrator.
As you know, when a king wants to make his son continue his job, he had to get OK from the emperor.
If you are familiar with the Chu-Han war of Liu Bang and Xiang Yu, then you would understand that “king” was indeed just a local king, and the Emperor trumped all in authority.
Chu-Han War
You can find “Chu” and “Han” on any Jiang Gi set. Or Chinese chess. Or Korean chess. Or more correctly Indian chess.
Interestingly, the Chinese don’t credit the Indians for this form of chess, which you can find in Korea, China, Japan, and India.
The Chinese claim that this form of chess was invented by Han Xin, the key military strategist general who was the reason why Han won the war. Legend is that Han Xin made this game as a summary of his various military tactics. He passed it on to a prison guard, during Han Xin’s last days in prison. Han Xin
I meant “even kings were not allowed to look at these records”. Isn’t it funny that even the kings were not allowed to do that. Yet, the envoys from China readily looked at these records.
Now, you get it. These records were ordered by the emperor to keep check on Korean king.
China had a northern king, a southern king, a middle region king, etc. The emperor had about seven to twenty kings under him and Korean king was one of them. You cannot say all these “kingdoms” had a seperate identity from China.
If you read the Hamel’s record, Korean king seemed to be busy sucking up to the Chinese envoys.
http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr
“Visit of the Tartarian envoy
When the Tartarian envoy visits the country, the king personally has to ride toward him with all his noblemen to pledge the necessary honor. He accompanies him to his accommodation. Music is made during this, while clowns show their tricks. In fact the envoy is shown more respect than the king himself, when he rides out.
In the parade which accompanies the envoy, also old pieces of arts are carried along and during the stay of the envoy, the street from his residency to the court is closed off by soldiers. These are lined up in long rows, two or three fathoms apart from each other. There are also two or three men who do nothing else then bringing notes which come from the residency to their king, so he knows any moment what the envoy is doing. Furthermore they do everything in their power to please the envoy, so he takes favorable messages about them to the emperor in Peking.”
http://www.hendrick-hamel.henn.....land12.htm
in one of those old maps, if you look carefully, they label the Sea of Japan as, GaSP !…
Gulf of Corea
Corean Sea !
Baduk, I didn’t ask your explanation, but evidence. I woulod believe you if you could present a credible evidence. I’m sure you can find it online somewhere without too much difficulty in this day and age, if your claims are true.
Who originally said that?
That was “Bluejives” Dogbertt, though it sounds almost like Bernard Shaw.
barbarian,
It’s pretty complex. Choson Korea was essentially a vassal state of China, but it’s not clear to me how much influence China had on the Korean King.
In any case, lots of stuff occured in 1894 (sorry, but I don’t have a clear timeline).
Korea declared independence from China.
King Gojong asked China for help to put an end to the Donghak Rebellion of 1894-1895. The Chinese Emperor sent troups to Korea to offer support.(note: King Gojong became crowned an emperor in 1895. Lee Sunggye was made an emperor posthumously in 1898 by Emperor Gojong)
Japan invaded Korea under the pretext of protecting it from China.
One thing that is clear is that these events led to the First Sino-Japanese war. Both China and Japan claimed control over Korea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.....panese_War
China recognized Korean independence in the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, essentially promising not to protect Korea from another Japanese invasion.
Again, just because China recognized Korean independence doesn’t mean it wasn’t already essentially independent. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s something that the Japanese had put in the treaty just to be sure China wouldn’t fight them over Korea.
Sorry, there’s a timeline here…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.....of_the_war
Ben Tripp, unless he, like bluejives, lifted it from someone.
R. Elgin, we’ve seen in the past that all of bluejives’s best writing is plagiarized from other sources.
Hence my question.
He had a good comeback to Sperwer though, that was probably original.
Someguy wrote:
Mainstream Chinese history does not lay claim to the entire Korean peninsula. In the 2001 Chinese Ministry of Education 8th grade history textbook, none of the maps of the various dynasties includes the entire peninsula. Since both the Chinese and the Koreans claim Goguryo as their own, the historical borders differ between Chinese maps and Korean maps. In fact, the name Goguryo itself does not appear on any of the maps in the Chinese textbook. The territory itself is simply part of another Chinese dynasty or empire.
It’s called oppression, it doesn’t mean it was Chinese or will be Chinese. I hope someday China disappear from the map for everything they are doing.
BTW, Chinese are a disgusting race. It will be nothing more than a disgusting annoying stalker until it disappears from the Earth. I say once more, I hope they pay for the millions of N. Koreans, and the S. Koreans that are suffering for it.
Katz,
Are you a genuine racist hater, a drunk teenager, or an unfortunate combination of the two? You speak about race and the destruction of this race with all the lucidity and maturity of a white supremacist - or Iranian president - talking about Jews.
I disagree with baduk. It is true that ‘kings’ were local rulers under the Chinese emperor. But the chosun dynasty (and goryo as well), used 조, 종 as suffixes for their king’s title after death, which is uniquely given only to emperors. For short periods of time, goryo kings even took the title of emperor, although they did not exert this to their chinese friends (song dynasty at the time).
It wasnt like the korean king had to report to the chinese emperor, it was rather a formal relationship to denote Korea’s position in the Chinese world order.
But really, whatever the title of the ruling class etc was, the Koreans were able to defend their cultural identity and heritage and held economic activities and foreign relations independantly.
won joon choe wrote in post #12:
Yes, they would be grandiose claims if the drama were claiming historical accuracy. I googled the quote and found a number of websites making reference to the Dangun drama that will air this year. Below is the quote in a more meaningful context:
Please notice that the drama is described as a “판타지 사극.” (fantasy drama)
This standard promotional blub appears in a number of websites easily located by cutting and pasting the quote into a search box. Here is one for reference. Thanks for the quote and next time a link would be helpful.
And actually, the expanse of territory from Sakhalin to Tibet refers not to old Joseon but to the fantasy empire established when Dangun comes back to earth from Heaven. Is Dangun the Messiah of the Korean people?
correction: the real old Joseon
Sonagi,
1. You are indeed right that the upcoming “Dangun” drama advertises itself as a “판타지 사극” or “fantasy historical drama.” But that revelation has less importance to our debate than you think it does.
To begin with, you conveniently (deliberately?) mistranslated the term “판타지 사극” as “fantasy drama” and left out “historical.” And perhaps here is the nub of the matter that you may be trying to elide. Fantasy and fiction has commingled in the Korean historical conscisousness to the point that it is not so easy to separate the two. If this is not a deliberate mistranslation, then the mistranslation perhaps indicates the gulf between your American way of looking at history and its traditional Korean counterpart?
To illustrate my point, consider the mytho-historical background of the drama in question. The Dangun story itself is almost certainly a myth or “fantasy.” It does not have the same evidentiary weight as Kija Joseon and certainly not Wiman Joseon. Nonetheless, the myth has captivated the Korean historical consciousness to the point where it has become the publicly accepted myth of the origin of Koreans. While deep down most Koreans may reject that Dangun existed, in public speech he is honored as the founder of the Korean people, and his authority buttresses the incessant public and international claims regarding Korea’s “5000 year history.”
So I don’t think the description of the Dangun drama does not mitigate the historical or factual claims of the drama as much as you would like to think. After all, I was always taught while attending school in Korea that the Dangun story was a “jeonseol” (”legend”).
2. You have also conveniently ignored the claims of “Yeon Gaesomun,” which is highly revisionist and based as much on Sin Chaeho’s revisonist works than official histories. Here there is no question that the maker of the drama clearly said that his version is the authentic version, and that he wrote the drama to counter what he perceives Chinese-originating “yuksa waegok.”
Are you going to recommend that they include compulsory after-episode guided study sessions to ensure that this all is put into the appropriate (real) historical perspective?
Sonagi,
The details aren’t clear to me, but the point I was trying to make is that although it appears they were claiming the whole peninsula when they fought over it with Japan in the first sino-japanese war, they could have just been trying to protect Korea from Japan.
won joon choe wrote:
No, I left out the word “historical” inadvertently, but I wondered if you had deliberately taken the quote out of context to make it look like the drama was trying to pass itself off as real history.
Spewrer wrote:
Sure, if this drama were to be used in the classroom.
@someguyinkorea:
I was agreeing with you and adding support to your view.
Probably not, by we can see today and history.
Sonagi wrote:
“No, I left out the word “historical” inadvertently, but I wondered if you had deliberately taken the quote out of context to make it look like the drama was trying to pass itself off as real history.”
That’s understandable; I too wondered if you had deliberately mistranslated the term “판타지 사극” to dismiss the Dangun drama as a “fantasy drama” in the order of, say, “The Lord of the Rings.”
In all seriousness, my initial point was simply that the boundary between myth and actual history in the “Oriental” (for a lack of better word) mind or historical consciousness is not as clearly demarcated or static as compared to its American counterpart. When your official history begins scarcely over 200 years ago,after the Enlightenment and the emergence of “scientific” history, there is little room for myth of fantastic nature in your national historiography. The issue is radically different when your history is putatively “5000 years old” or even by more objective measure 2000 years old or so.
P.S. Is it permissible for me to use the term “Oriental,” given that I am usually designed as a member of that group myself?
Does that mean you’ve taken such a position regarding the well-publicized tendentious stuff about the role of the US in Korean history foisted on kids in Korean classrooms by the the Korean Teacher’s Union?
Sonagi,
There is a religion in Korea that worships Dangun, the “Chungyodo”. The belivers made the entire Korea celebrate the birth day of Dangun, 3rd of October I believe, the day called “Gaechunjol”(the day Heaven opened up) until recently. The day is no longer celebrated as I am sure that the membership is disappearing quickly.
They were the ones who took part of DongHak movement in late 19th century.
baduk wrote
It was a public holiday last year and my calendar shows it will be a public holiday this year.
Until recently, several major Korean newspapers published the “Tangun date” on their frontpages alongside the dates according to the Western calendar. Did you know that?
Then again, what is the B.C./A.D. dating system if not our own analogue of the Tangun dating system?
BC/AD isn’t premised on a complete fantasy.
Thank you, dogbertt.
I guess those loonies are still riding their “nationalism” into religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chondogyo
Any politician who advocate the abolishment of that holiday will be automatically branded as “non-patriotic” and, therefore, lunacy continues.
Thank you for the background info on the connection between the holiday and the religion, baduk.
Even somebody like me who has grown up in Korea and claims to know everything about everything in Korea still has things to learn.
After doing some research, I found out that the Chundogyo does not worship Dangun. There is totally different religion, albeit it started at the same time as Chundogyo and for the same reason, called DaeJongyo(Big religion, or all religions rolled into one) which does do out-and-out worship of Dangun.
These people keep claiming to fight the Japanese and to maintain Korean identity a native religion must be established. Talk about “Aryan race”.
These loonies believe all Koreans have to believe in a fable to maintain Korean identity. Soon, China may eat up Korea. Maybe these guys knew something I don’t know. Maybe all Koreans united under their “religion”, Korea may have been a strong country which may have resisted Russian and American influence. Not! Just look at them. They already split into “chundogyo” and “daejongyo”. In the end, all these man-made religion comes down to “whoes dick is bigger”(ego matches).
If they know these are “manuefactured religion”, who is going to die for it?
Absolutely. I mean, just look at how Christianity, Judaism, and Islam have made a bloody mess out of the Middle East. People need to stop making up religions and start making up some basic common sense.
Hey, it worked for Japan… at least for a while.
Koreans seem especially anxious to believe in a continuous identity unaffected by relations with their neighbors, and so these kinds of silly “religions” come up along with the usual xenophobia. They realize that many cultures (including Korean) incorporate aspects of other cultures, or we would have no culture per se–it’s an ongoing process of borrowing and influencing.
“They should realize”
dammit
Isn’t it pretty clear that while Chosun kings were vassals of the Chinese and had to pay tribute (protection money) to whoever, Chin or Mongol or Tartar) was controlling China at the moment, they also had a pretty free rein to do what they wished within Korea, and that standing armies of foreign troops were not around in normal times?
Just because a shopkeeper has to pay protection money monthly to a mobster, doesn’t mean he doesn’t own the shop.
Hugh wrote:
True enough. I just wonder how much protection money Korea will pay to China today, at the current exchange rate and if they can handle a wire transfer.
That’s mindless legalism at its worst. He only owns the shop so long as he can enforce his right to run it, either directly or by calling on the legitimately authorized authorities to do it for him. Paying protection negatives the first in the short-run and may end by delegitimizing the system of rules that makes the concept of ownership (as opposed to possession on sufferance of the local thug)meaningful. Chinese suzerainty over Korea may have been relatively benign most of the time, but they sure knew how to punch up the Koreans when they started to get frisky.
And they still do.
“BC/AD isn’t premised on a complete fantasy.”
I know several Jews, Muslims, and atheists who would disagree.
Sure, it’s clear enough that Korea was at one point a vassal state of China (Genghis Khan lived in Korea for 3 years), but to what degree was it so following the fall of the Mongol empire (and the beginning of the Choson dynasty)?
so few people understand the nature of china’s vassal relationship with korea, it’s easy to use it as a weapon to once again ridicule koreans.
i’ve only read about korea’s relationship with china twice in my life. both sources said about the same thing. korea and china for most of their shared history maintained cordial relations. while it’s true that korea sent tribute to china, people may be surpirsed to learn that the chinese also sent booty the other way. it did not happen yearly but china sent treasure to korea about every three years or so.
moreover, china’s vassal relationship with korea was about security not treasure. indeed, sometimes the changs had to stop the kims because they were sending TOO MUCH!
lastly, the relationship that korea chose with china has resulted in a society that has it’s own language and culture. that seems to be lost on those who say that koreans were just chinese for most of their history.
btw, baduk, are the vietnamese also chinese? how about the thais?
And I know a guy who gets radio transmissions from Vesuvians on his old silver/mercury dental fillings. So what?
Spewver wrote:
I find the anti-American, anti-Japanese brainwashing in Korean schools as apalling as you probably do.
Won Joon Choe wrote:
Well, if the premise of the drama is that half-human, half-bear Dangun came down from Heaven and established a vast Korean empire stretching from Tibet to Sakhalin, then this drama is about as realistic as “The Lord of the Rings.”
:) 
Well, it’s not China, but S. Korea IS paying protection money to another country. Who says history doesn’t repeat itself?
Check out this time-map computational simulation of Korean history.
http://www.ecai.org/Area/AreaT.....ation.html
The animated map is great. I think that should be posted at Jacky’s site, definitely.
“…are the vietnamese also chinese?”
Pawirogi, they were, back when their territory covered a fair chunk of southern China and what is today Hanoi was in the deep southern part. Modern Vietnam covers what was Champa (Danang down to Saigon) and a chunk of territory taken from Cambodia (the Mekong Delta), while a fair chunk of what was the Dai Viet two thousand years ago now lies across the border. But, understand that it is a thousand miles by road from the Chinese border down to Saigon. Korea’s smaller size and peninsular character makes it an easier to define. My impressison is that the Chinese have always recognized Korea as a separate nation, even when it was in a vassal status. Vietnam’ troubles with China would arise every few dynasties when some emperor remembered that Vietnam had been a part of their empire.
Bluejives, Thanks fot the cool map. I was especially interested to see the Lolang Commanderies included - don’t (domestic) Korean scholars fight against their existence as autonomous Chinese entities with tooth and nail?
If you were to look at how Chinese map developed over a period of time and how America as a Country developed, killing off Injins one at a time, they both would look very familiar.
Would Tibet be considered part of China now? You wouldn’t find a single Chinaman who would ever argue that Tibet was ever an Independent State, let alone a Country.
I personally don’t mind bunch of white settlers killing off Indians as long as they keep few of them around and have them build casinos and feel guilty about all the Indians they have killed over the years, but, I’m not too sure if the Chinese ever feel guilty about killing off their ethnic minorities, not that they ever had enough to feed their own to begin with.
Somebody made fun of me about robots. See the following link.
http://tv.joins.com/tv_detail......123_114252
Korea, Japan and China will mass produce these robots for military purposes. Japan and Korea will have nasty robots with many capabilities.
Ten years. Then, we will see robots in the battlefield.
About robots.
http://tv.joins.com/tv_detail......123_114252
3 Trackbacks
[...] Jacky’s post about Chinese BBS’s discussion of Korean textbook has some follow up discussion at Marmot’s Hole by R. Elgin. There is a long comment thread with some more background about the issue. Oiwan Lam [...]
[...] beginning and end of the Korean war. Speaking of the internationalization of Korean history, the China-Korea history wars continue, and the Japan-Korea conflicts have spilled over into US school testing, but [...]
[...] remember this controversy over an ultra-nationalist Korean group writing a book claiming an ancient Korean kingdom was larger [...]