Comments on: Cultural Identify and What Is It? http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/ Korea... in Blog Format Sat, 5 Jul 2008 04:56:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: WangKon936 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148171 WangKon936 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:17:29 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148171 "Putting Goguryeo in Korea’s “historiography” is clever, but doesn’t really get you where you want to go." Hummm... so where is it that I want to go? “Putting Goguryeo in Korea’s “historiography” is clever, but doesn’t really get you where you want to go.”

Hummm… so where is it that I want to go?

]]> By: WangKon936 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148170 WangKon936 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:14:51 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148170 True, both China and North Korea have not done what should be done to protect Koguryo artifacts. North Korea can cite budgetary considerations, whereas China is just apathetic, or worse. http://www.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200110/200110030281.html True, both China and North Korea have not done what should be done to protect Koguryo artifacts. North Korea can cite budgetary considerations, whereas China is just apathetic, or worse.

http://www.chosun.com/w21data/.....30281.html

]]> By: Sperwer http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148169 Sperwer Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:09:18 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148169 Picking between China and Korea as to whom will be more preservation minded is a choice between Tweedledee and tweedledum. Picking between China and Korea as to whom will be more preservation minded is a choice between Tweedledee and tweedledum.

]]> By: WangKon936 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148168 WangKon936 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:06:52 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148168 "Why not just let Goguryeo be Goguryeo?" I suppose we could, but it takes money to maintain and restore all those Koguryo sites. It also takes a sort of cultural will to not develop over important Koguryo artifacts. You have to think something is yours before you spend resources to try and preserve / understand it. There are tons of important Indian burial grounds that have just been built over once the Indians were relocated to reservations... “Why not just let Goguryeo be Goguryeo?”

I suppose we could, but it takes money to maintain and restore all those Koguryo sites. It also takes a sort of cultural will to not develop over important Koguryo artifacts.

You have to think something is yours before you spend resources to try and preserve / understand it.

There are tons of important Indian burial grounds that have just been built over once the Indians were relocated to reservations…

]]> By: Sperwer http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148164 Sperwer Fri, 18 Apr 2008 04:50:03 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148164 Putting Goguryeo in Korea's "historiography" is clever, but doesn't really get you where you want to go. It's also legitimately part of China's historiography, and Manchuria's and the various tribal groups that dominated Manchuria before the ones that became the Qing took the reins. Why not just let Goguryeo be Goguryeo? Putting Goguryeo in Korea’s “historiography” is clever, but doesn’t really get you where you want to go. It’s also legitimately part of China’s historiography, and Manchuria’s and the various tribal groups that dominated Manchuria before the ones that became the Qing took the reins. Why not just let Goguryeo be Goguryeo?

]]> By: WangKon936 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148153 WangKon936 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:46:25 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148153 Lastly, claiming historical heritage and claiming land are two very different things. It's okay for Koreans to say that Koguryo is an important (even integral) part of their historical heritage and identity. It is not okay for them to claim southern Manchuria's territory. Lastly, claiming historical heritage and claiming land are two very different things. It’s okay for Koreans to say that Koguryo is an important (even integral) part of their historical heritage and identity. It is not okay for them to claim southern Manchuria’s territory.

]]> By: WangKon936 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148152 WangKon936 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:40:04 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148152 I'd put Koguryo firmly in Korea's historiography for the following reasons: 1) In King Gwanggaeto's stele, the ONLY existing piece of Koguryo history that's from the pen of Koguryo people, China and Japan are clearly described as foreign powers and Baekje and Silla are described as wayward tributaries that should be ruled and/or administered by Koguryo. 2) There is evidence that the original Koguryo language was different then what people in Silla spoke. However, the main proponent of this theory, Dr. Christopher Beckwith (Eastern Linguistics, Indiana University), admits that later on, the original Koguryo language began to die off and most Koguryo people spoke the same language of Silla (the "Han" language). This is likely as Koguryo spent more time in northern and central Korea. 3) Even the traditional Chinese method of historiography would say that the official court histories would include a conquered state in their canonal documents. However, China never wrote a court history devoted to Koguryo, but Koryo did through the Samguk Sagi. 4) A majority Koguryo's population was probably located in the Korean peninsula. Manchuria is less arable then northern and central Korea. Colder too. Northern Koguryo (southern Manchuria) is broad, but it's land is less productive. I’d put Koguryo firmly in Korea’s historiography for the following reasons:

1) In King Gwanggaeto’s stele, the ONLY existing piece of Koguryo history that’s from the pen of Koguryo people, China and Japan are clearly described as foreign powers and Baekje and Silla are described as wayward tributaries that should be ruled and/or administered by Koguryo.

2) There is evidence that the original Koguryo language was different then what people in Silla spoke. However, the main proponent of this theory, Dr. Christopher Beckwith (Eastern Linguistics, Indiana University), admits that later on, the original Koguryo language began to die off and most Koguryo people spoke the same language of Silla (the “Han” language). This is likely as Koguryo spent more time in northern and central Korea.

3) Even the traditional Chinese method of historiography would say that the official court histories would include a conquered state in their canonal documents. However, China never wrote a court history devoted to Koguryo, but Koryo did through the Samguk Sagi.

4) A majority Koguryo’s population was probably located in the Korean peninsula. Manchuria is less arable then northern and central Korea. Colder too. Northern Koguryo (southern Manchuria) is broad, but it’s land is less productive.

]]> By: “History is linked to legitimacy” | The Marmot's Hole http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148013 “History is linked to legitimacy” | The Marmot's Hole Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:04:42 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148013 [...] could do if they really dedicated more resources to doing the same with the history of Gogureyo (per another thread on “Cultural Identity”)? Considering such, the punch line for the article leaves one with some thoughts about such: Mr. [...] [...] could do if they really dedicated more resources to doing the same with the history of Gogureyo (per another thread on “Cultural Identity”)? Considering such, the punch line for the article leaves one with some thoughts about such: Mr. [...]

]]> By: “History is linked to legitimacy” | The Marmot's Hole http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148012 “History is linked to legitimacy” | The Marmot's Hole Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:04:27 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-148012 [...] could do if they really dedicated more resources to doing the same with the history of Gogureyo (per another thread on “Cultural Identity”)? Considering such, the punch line for the article leaves one with some thoughts about such: Mr. [...] [...] could do if they really dedicated more resources to doing the same with the history of Gogureyo (per another thread on “Cultural Identity”)? Considering such, the punch line for the article leaves one with some thoughts about such: Mr. [...]

]]> By: michael http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-81372 michael Wed, 09 May 2007 02:02:09 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/05/08/cultural-identify-and-what-is-it/#comment-81372 Which Koreans are presently claiming what Chinese territory? The S.K. gov't? That's news to me. I'm saying quite consistently that Goguryeo was a precursor to modern Korea in that its people are the ancestors of Koreans, just as Romans are the ancestors of Italians. If you have evidence otherwise the world is waiting to hear from you. China on the other hand is arguing that Goguryeo was a provincial regime of Han Dynasty China rather than an autonomous entity. We're obviously never going to agree on this, and I'm not the one with a vested interest in it, so have a nice day, I'm outta here. Which Koreans are presently claiming what Chinese territory? The S.K. gov’t? That’s news to me.

I’m saying quite consistently that Goguryeo was a precursor to modern Korea in that its people are the ancestors of Koreans, just as Romans are the ancestors of Italians. If you have evidence otherwise the world is waiting to hear from you.

China on the other hand is arguing that Goguryeo was a provincial regime of Han Dynasty China rather than an autonomous entity.

We’re obviously never going to agree on this, and I’m not the one with a vested interest in it, so have a nice day, I’m outta here.

]]>