Balhae controversies

The Balhae controversies is a dispute between the three main parties conducting the study of this state Korea, China and Russia whose position is fully supported by Japanese historians , over the history of the Balhae/Bohai kingdom. Due to its origins as the successor state of Goguryeo, Korean scholars consider Balhae as part of the North–South States Period of Korean history, while Chinese scholars argue Bohai is a part of Chinese history. (See Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)[1] In traditional Russian historiography, this state is recognized as the first highly organized independent state formation of the Tungus-Manchurian peoples.,[2]

Korean position

Korean Goguryeo kingdom

Korean scholars have generally regarded Balhae as an extension of or successor to the Korean Goguryeo kingdom (37 B.C. - 668 A.D.) ever since the publication of Jewang ungi in the 1290s.[3] The 18th century, during the Joseon, was a period in which Korean scholars began a renewed interest in Balhae. The Qing empire and Joseon dynasties negotiated and demarcated the Sino-Korean border along the Yalu and Tumen rivers in 1712. Jang Ji-yeon (1762–1836), journalist, writer of nationalist tracts, and organizer of nationalist societies, published articles arguing that had Joseon officials considered Balhae as part of their historical territory, they would not have been as eager to "give up" lands north of the rivers.

Yu Deuk-gong in his 18th-century work Balhaego, an investigation of Balhae, argued that Balhae should be included as part of Korean history, and that doing so would justify territorial claims on Manchuria. Korean historian Shin Chae-ho, writing about Jiandao in the early 20th century, bemoaned that for centuries, Korean people in their "hearts and eyes considered only the land south of the Yalu River as their home" and that "half of our ancestor Dangun's ancient lands have been lost for over nine hundred years." Sin criticized Kim Busik, author of the Samguk Sagi, for excluding Balhae from his historical work and claiming that Silla had achieved unification of Korea.[4] Inspired by ideas of Social Darwinism, Sin wrote:

How intimate is the connection between Korea and Manchuria? When the Korean race obtains Manchuria, the Korean race is strong and prosperous. When another race obtains Manchuria, the Korean race is inferior and recedes. Moreover, when in the possession of another race, if that race is the northern race, then Korea enters that northern race's sphere of power. If an eastern race obtains Manchuria, then Korea enters that race's sphere of power. Alas! This is an iron rule that has not changed for four thousand years.[5]

Modern scholars

Neither Silla nor the later Goryeo wrote an official history for Balhae, and some modern scholars argue that had they done so, Koreans might have had a stronger claim to Balhae's history and territory.[6]

The Old Book of Tang says that "Dae Jo-yeong of the Balhae-Mohe, was originally from a division of Goguryeo" (渤海靺鞨大祚榮者，本高麗別種也.).[7]

Chinese position

Chinese historians have considered Bohai as its own distinct Bohai ethnic group, which consisted mostly of Mohe people. The New Book of Tang states that the Bohai "was originally the Sumo Mohe, began to ally themselves with Goguryeo, and took the surname Dae." (Dae is 大 in Chinese, Wade Giles : Ta ; Pinyin : Da)(渤海，本粟末靺鞨附高丽者，姓大氏.),[8] The Samguk Sagi and the Tang dynasty Tongdian stated that Bohai was originally Sumo Mohe.[9] The Ruijū Kokushi says that Mohe tribes founded Bohai and made up the majority of Bohai .[10] Historically, the Jurchens (later renamed the Manchus), considered themselves as sharing ancestry with the Mohe. According to the History of Jin (金史), the history of the Jurchen Jin Dynasty (1115–1234), Jin founder Wanyan Aguda once sent an edict to Bohai claiming that "the Jurchens and Bohai were originally of the same family" (女直渤海本同一家).[11][12] In 1778, the Qing empire regime in Qianlong reviewed Various history books and found that Bohai was an ancestor of the Manchurian, and published Researches on Manchu Origins(Manchu: ᠮᠠᠨᠵᡠᠰᠠᡳ
ᡩᠠ
ᠰᡝᡴᡳᠶᡝᠨ ‍‍ᡳ
ᡴᡳᠮᠴᡳᠨ
ᠪᡳᡨᡥᡝ; Möllendorff: Manjusai da sekiyen-i kimcin bithe; Abkai: Manjusai da sekiyen-i kimqin bithe; Chinese: 滿洲源流考; pinyin: Mǎnzhōu Yuánliú Kǎo) to provide the Bohai as a history of Manchurian. An earlier, opposing view comes from Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai, who said in 1963 that Korean people have lived in the northeastern region of China since ancient times and excavated relics prove that Bohai is a branch of ancient Korea. The former Chinese premier's remarks have been made public through a document entitled “Premier Zhou Enlai's Dialogue on Sino-Korean Relations.“[13] Finnish linguist Juha Janhunen argues that it is possible Goguryeo language could have been an Amuric language related to today's Nivkh language isolate.[14][15]

A dragon head artifact from Bohai at the National Museum of Korea.

News articles

According to news articles citing a recent US report, China considers Bohai to be a province of the Tang Dynasty.[16][17] This view is linked to the Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences conducted by the Chinese Academy of Social Science. Bohai often paid tribute to China, and an heir who lacks this sanction was called by China 知國務 ("State Affairs Leader"), not king; also, China considered every king simultaneously the Prefect of Holhan/Huhan Prefecture (忽汗州都督府都督).[18]

Classical Chinese

建州毛怜则渤海大氏遗孽，乐住种，善缉纺，饮食服用，皆如华人，自长白山迤南，可拊而治也。

English

The (people of) Chien-chou and Mao-lin [YLSL always reads Mao-lien] are the descendants of the family Ta of Po-hai. They love to be sedentary and sow, and they are skilled in spinning and weaving. As for food, clothing and utensils, they are the same as (those used by) the Chinese. (Those living) south of the Ch'ang-pai mountain are apt to be soothed and governed.

— 据魏焕《皇明九边考》卷二《辽东镇边夷考》[19] Translation from Sino-J̌ürčed relations during the Yung-Lo period, 1403-1424 by Henry Serruys[20]

Historical sites

The People's Republic of China is accused of limiting Korean archaeologists access to historical sites located within Liaoning and Jilin. Starting from 1994, increasing numbers of South Korean tourists began to visit archaeological sites in China and often engaged in nationalistic displays. This was aggravated by a series of tomb robberies and vandalism at several of these archaeological sites between 1995 and 2000.[21] South Korean archeologist Song Ki-ho, a noted professor at Seoul National University who has published several papers criticizing the Chinese government's interpretation of Bohai 's history, made several visits to China in the 1990s, 2000, 2003, and 2004, examining several historical sites and museums. However, he found himself restricted by limitations on note-taking and photography and was even ejected from several sites by museum employees.[22][23] North Korea has restricted independent archaeologists from its historical sites, many of which may be Bohai -related, since at least the early 1960s.

Russian position
Bohai at the time of maximum expansion in the 9th century (according to Russian archaeological research).

In traditional Russian historiography, this state is recognized as the first highly organized independent state formation of the Tungus-Manchurian peoples.,[2] On the territory of Russia, over 80 years, 18 small objects, 19 villages and 7 cities of this state have been studied.[24] Based on what these conclusions were made. The official Japanese science support this position.[25]

Also in Russian academic science there is other data on the borders of this state than in Korea and China.[26]

In the English-speaking world

In the West, Balhae is generally characterized as a successor of Goguryeo that traded with China and Japan, and its name is thus romanized from Korean.[27][28][29] Alternate romanizations such as "Parhae", from Korean, or "Bohai", in the pinyin format, are also common in English.[30][31][32][33] While it is seen as a conglomeration of peoples from Manchuria and Korea, there has been much debate on the ethnicity of Balhae's elite class. Koreans generally believe Balhae founder Dae Jo-yeong was of Goguryeo ethnicity while others sometimes characterize him as an ethnic Mohe from Goguryeo.[34][35][36][37] China also considers Balhae as part of the history of its ethnic Manchus.[38]

Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov have criticized political bias in North Korean historiography, and have accused North Korean scholars of reconstructing or even fabricating historical sites.[39] Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov assert that Balhae was independent in its relations with the Tang Dynasty. Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov describe Balhae as a kingdom of displaced Goguryeo people.[39] They do admit that Balhae had a strong Chinese and Central Asian influence.[40] In relations with Japan, Balhae referred to itself as Goguryeo, and Japan welcomed this as a kind of restoration of its former friendly relationship with Goguryeo.[41][42]

References
  1. Jinwung Kim (2012). A History of Korea: From "Land of the Morning Calm" to States in Conflict. Indiana University Press. p. 85. ISBN 978-0-253-00024-8.
  2. ШАВКУНОВ Эрнест Владимирович
  3. Joo Yong-lip (1991) Wang Cheng-li, Bohai Jianshi,; Li Dian-fu & Sun Yu-liang, Bohai guo; Yang Bao-long, Bohai-shi rumen
  4. Andre Schmid (2000). "Looking North toward Manchuria". The South Atlantic Quarterly. 99 (1): 219–240. doi:10.1215/00382876-99-1-219.
  5. Andre Schmid (1997). "Rediscovering Manchuria: Sin Ch'aeho and the Politics of Territorial History in Korea". The Journal of Asian Studies ( – Scholar search). 56 (1): 26–46. doi:10.2307/2646342. ISSN 0021-9118. JSTOR 2646342. Sin was criticizing previous generations of Korean historians, who had traced Korean history back to the ancient peoples of the Korean peninsula. Sin believed that by doing so, and regarding "minor peoples" as their ancestors, they were diluting and weakening the Korean people and their history. He believed that the Korean race was in fact mainly descended from northern peoples, such as Buyeo, Goguryeo, and Balhae, and (re)claiming such a heritage would make them strong.
  6. Lee, Peter H.; Ch'Oe, Yongho (2001-02-14). Sources of Korean Tradition: from the sixteenth to the twentieth centuries - Google Books. ISBN 9780231518000.
  7. Old Book of Tang, Original: 渤海靺鞨大祚榮者，本高麗別種也. Link
  8. New Book of Tang, Original: 渤海，本粟末靺鞨附高丽者，姓大氏. Link
  9. “渤海本粟末靺鞨,至其酋祚荣立国,自号震旦。先天中,始去靺鞨号,专称渤海”。
  10. 天皇二年(698年),大祚荣始建渤海国,其国延袤二千里,无州县馆驿,处处有村里,皆靺鞨部落。其百姓者 靺鞨多,土人少,皆以土人为村长.
  11. History of Jin, chapter 1, p. 25 of the Beijing Zhonghua shuju edition.
  12. History of Jin volume 1 English
    The Jurchens and Bohai were originally of the same family.
    Classical Chinese
    女直、渤海本同一家。
    — 金史 卷1 Chinese Wikisource has original text related to this article: 金史/卷1
  13. 周恩来总理谈中朝关系（摘自《外事工作通报》1963年第十期）1963年6月28日，周恩来总理接见朝鲜科学院代表团时，谈中朝关系 “朝鲜民族进驻朝鲜半岛和东北大陆以来，长期生活在那里。这是发掘于辽河和松花江流域及图们江和鸭绿江流域的许多遗物和碑文等史料所证明的，在许多朝鲜文献中也遗留了那些历史痕迹。” , “镜泊湖附近留有渤海遗迹，曾是渤海的首府。在这里出土的文物也证明那里也曾是朝鲜民族的一个支派。”
  14. Pozzi & Janhunen & Weiers 2006, p. 109
  15. Janhunen, Juha (2005). "The Lost Languages of Koguryo". Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies. 2–2: 65–86.
  16. "U.S. Senate Report Highlights Chinese View of Korean Kingdoms". english.chosun.com. Retrieved 2013-03-22.
  17. "US to publish report on Chinese distortion of Korean history: sources". www.koreatimes.co.kr. 2012-12-23. Archived from the original on 2014-08-08. Retrieved 2013-03-22.
  18. Old Book of Tang, vol. 199, part 2.
  19. 萧国亮 (2007-01-24). "明代汉族与女真族的马市贸易". 艺术中国(ARTX.cn). p. 1. Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  20. Serruys 1955, p. 22.
  21. Mark Byington (2004). "The War of Words Between South Korea and China Over An Ancient Kingdom: Why Both Sides Are Misguided". History News Network.
  22. Ross Terrill, The New Chinese Empire: And What it Means for the United States (2004), pp. 198-200 (ISBN 9780465084135).
  23. "한국학중앙연구원" (PDF). Review.aks.ac.kr. 2009-01-19. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-09-28. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  24. http://rezerv.narod.ru/texts/gorodischa.html
  25. https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%AB%98%E5%8F%A5%E9%BA%97%E8%AB%96%E4%BA%89&section=3#%E6%B8%A4%E6%B5%B7
  26. http://www.suchan.narod.ru/artcls/Bohai_granica.pdf
  27. "24 X 7". Infoplease.com. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  28. "North Korea - Silla". Countrystudies.us. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  29. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ht/06/eak/ht06eak.htm
  30. Ogata, Noboru. "A Study of the City Planning System of the Ancient Bohai State Using Satellite Photos (Summary)". Jinbun Chiri. Vol.52, No.2. 2000. pp.129 - 148. Retrieved November 10, 2011.
  31. Kim, Alexander (2011). "The Historiography of Bohai in Russia1". Historian. 73 (2): 284–299. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6563.2011.00292.x.
  32. Pike, John. "Balhae / Bohai - 698AD-926AD". Globalsecurity.org. November 7, 2011. Retrieved November 10, 2011.
  33. "Parhae". Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic Edition. 2011. Retrieved November 10, 2011.
  34. "Parhae (ancient state, China) - Britannica Online Encyclopedia". Britannica.com. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  35. Keith Pratt (1999). Korea: A Historical and Cultural Dictionary. Curzon Press. p. 340. ISBN 9780700704637. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  36. MacDonald, Donald Stone (1996-08-23). The Koreans: Contemporary Politics And Society, Third Edition - Donald S Macdonald, Donald N Clark - Google Books. ISBN 9780813328881. Retrieved 2012-09-15.
  37. Ulrich Theobald. "Chinese History - Bohai 渤海 (Parhae)". www.chinaknowledge.de. Retrieved 2012-09-15.
  38. "Ethnic Groups". china.org.cn. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  39. Leonid A. Petrov (2004). "Restoring the Glorious Past: North Korean Juche Historiography and Goguryeo". The Review of Korean Studies. 7 (3): 231–252.
  40. Terrill, Ross (2009-03-05). The New Chinese Empire: And What It Means For The United States - Ross Terrill - Google Books. ISBN 9780786740352. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  41. Archived January 9, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
  42. "발해 - Daum 백과사전" (in Korean). Enc.daum.net. Archived from the original on 2007-09-22. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.