Goguryeo controversies

The Goguryeo controversies refers to the disputes between China and Korea on the history of Goguryeo, an ancient kingdom located mostly in the present day Northeast China and North Korea. In 2004 this dispute threatened to lead to diplomatic disputes between China and both Koreas when China formalized this view into a government project.

Background

Goguryeo has been conventionally viewed as one of the Three Kingdoms of Korea. Chinese characterization of Goguryeo as a regional power of China in modern times has spawned heated disputes with both North Korea and South Korea who claim Goguryeo was an independent Korean state. At heart of the Goguryeo controversy is whether Goguryeo was a part of the greater Chinese nation, or an independent Korean kingdom.

Starting from the 1980s when the PRC constitution was amended to redefine the People's Republic of China as a "unitary multinational state built up jointly by the people of all its nationalities", some Chinese historians began to re-identify Goguryeo, especially the first half of Goguryeo's history before it moved its capital to the Korean peninsula, as part of the regional history of China rather than of Korea. [Byington, Mark.“The Creation of an Ancient Minority Nationality: Koguryo in Chinese Historiography.”In Embracing the Other: The Interaction of Korean and Foreign Cultures: Proceedings of the 1st World Congress of Korean Studies, III. Songnam, Republic of Korea: The Academy of Korean Studies, 2002.] This historical revisionism was intensified in the 1990s when a head historian of a North Korean delegation accused Chinese historians of conceiving of ancient China in terms of the territorial bounds of the modern Chinese state, which, he claimed, is a view unsupported by historical evidence. More recently in 2002, this effort has been taken up by the PRC government in the form of the Northeast Project.

Chinese scholars perceive the Korean nationalistic sentiments of some Koreans in both North and South Koreas as threatening to its territorial integrity. In fact, some Korean ultra-nationalists in both the Korean liberal and conservative camps make claims for the “restoration of the lost former territories.” [Kim, Hui-kyo 2004,“Chunggukuitongbuk kongjonkwa hanguk minjokjuuiui chilro ( China’s Northeast Project and the Course of Korean Nationalism)”, Yoksa pip’yong (History Critics) 2004, Spring, Seoul:Yoksa bip’yongsa.] Chinese scholars are afraid of border changes when the North Korean government collapses. Because there are more than 2 million ethinic Koreans living in Manchuria, China fears that they might secede from China and join a newly unified Korea. [http://hnn.us/articles/7077.html The War of Words Between South Korea and China Over An Ancient Kingdom: Why Both Sides Are Misguided ] ] China may be making claims to Goguryeo to validate their control over current Chinese land.

Meanwhile, North Korea has glorified Goguryeo's independent qualities as part of their Juche ("self-reliance") ideology, identifying itself with Goguryeo, while equating South Korea with Silla, and the United States with Tang. North Korea has distorted their national history to conform it to Juche, by denying any indication of foreign occupation of the Korean peninsula, such as the existence of any Chinese commanderies there. Nevertheless, North Korea tries to be relatively silent, due to its political and economic dependence on China. [Cite journal
title = Restoring the Glorious Past: North Korean Juche Historiography and Goguryeo
last = Petrov
first = Leonid A.
url = http://www.aks.ac.kr/aks_kor/book/pdf/7-3-9-Restoring%20the%20Glorious%20Past.pdf
year = 2004
journal = The Review of Korean Studies Vol. 7 No. 3
pages = 231–252
publisher = The Academy of Korean Studies
accessdate = 2007-06-05 ]

During the 19th and 20th Centuries, the Japanese Empire also differentiated Goguryeo from the other Three Kingdoms of Korea to highlight Japanese (Wa) influence in the non-Goguryeo kingdoms of Baekje and Silla in order to justify its colonization of Korea. In order to demonstrate their theories, they moved the a stone monument (棕蟬縣神祠碑), which was originally located at Liaodong, into Pyongyang, [cite book|first=순진|last=리|title=평양일대 락랑무덤에 대한 연구(A Research about the Tombs of Nangnang around Pyongyang)|publisher=중심|location=서울|id=ISBN 89-89524-05-9|year=2001] In addition, the Japanese vandalized or altered part of the Gwanggaeto Stele to validate the colonization of the Southern Korean peninsula by Japan. Part of the controversy then came from the inability to interpret the Japanese altered/vandalized part of the Gwanggaeto Stele erected by the Goguryeo king Gwanggaeto.

Chinese views

China views Goguryeo as a part of the regional history of China rather than of being solely or uniquely Korean.Fact|date=June 2007 Chinese historian Sun Jinji in 1986 suggested that Goguryeo is separate from the history of the Three Kingdoms in the Korean Peninsula. He argued that “the people of Buyeo and Goguryeo had the same lineage as the Chinese in the Northeast region, while the Korean people were a part of the Silla lineage.” [Sun, Jinji 1986, "Dongbei minzu yuanliu" (The Ethnic Origin of the Northeast), Harbin: Heilongjiang Renmin Chubanshe. ] This view has since been supported by many other prominent Chinese historians.Fact|date=June 2007 However, Chinese scholars are not all of one voice on this issue. There are also many Chinese historians who acknowledge Goguryeo history as being shared by both Korea and China within “a framework of the dual elements of a single history”(一史两用论, "yishi liangyong lun"). [Sun, Jinji 2004-a, “Zhongguo Gaogoulishi yanjiu kaifang fanrong de liunian (Six Years of Opening and Prosperity of Koguryo History Research)”, paper presented at the conference titled Koguryo yoksawa munhwa yusan (History and Cultural Heritage of Koguryo), March 26-27, 2004] More recently, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) generated new controversy through its Northeast Project study of China's three Northeast provinces.

Among the arguments that China uses for its claims on Goguryeo:
* Goguryeo was founded from Han Chinese commandaries such as Xuantu (in Chinese territory).http://koreaweb.ws/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreaweb.ws/2004-January.txt.gz]
* Gogyryeo was a local administration of the imperial China throughout history. [http://chinaborderland.cass.cn/more_news.asp?class_id=706]
* Goguryeo kings accepted a tributary relation with Chinese dynasties.
* Goguryeo was founded by the Mohe (Malgal) peoples, an ancestor of modern day Manchurians, who ruled China's last dynasty; ["Renmin jiaoyu chubanshe lishixi" (History Department of People’s Education Press), "Zhongguo lishi" (Chinese History) II, Beijing: "Renmin jiaoyu chubanshe" (People’s Education Press), 2004, p.16. ]
* Goguryeo was established in Northeast China, and that two-thirds of its territory was in present day China
* Goguryeo actively sought a tributary relationship with successive Chinese empires. This relationship is supported by international scholars; [See Byeon Tae-seop (변태섭) (1999). 韓國史通論 (Hanguksa tongnon) (Outline of Korean history), 4th ed.. ISBN 89-445-9101-6, p. 40. See TANAKA Toshiaki:"The Rise of Goguryeo and Xuan-Tu Shire" 田中俊明:《高句丽的兴起和玄菟郡》, from 32 BC to 666 AD Goguryeo paid 205 tributes to the Chinese Central Plains dynasties. From 32 BC to 391 AD, Goguryeo paid only 17 tributes, but between 423 AD and 666 AD, 188 tributes were paid.]
* That after the end of Goguryeo, some of its people were assimilated into Han and other ethnicities of China; [ [http://www.asiaquarterly.com/content/view/174/43/ Harvard Asia Quarterly - Will Flowers Bloom without Fragrance? Korean-Chinese Relations ] ]
* That some remains of the tombs purported to be of Goguryeo in Ji’an are not Goguryeo’s but are those of the Han or Xianbei (Sonbi) ethnicities of China. [Sun, Jinji and Sun Hong 2004, “Gongyuan 3-7 shiji Ji’an yu Pingrang diqu bihua mu de zushu yu fenqi, mingming (The Racial Affiliation and Periodisation of Graves With Murals in the Ji’an and Pingrang Area From 3-7 Century A.D.)”, paper presented at the conference titled Koguryo yoksawa munhwa yusan (History and Cultural Heritage of Koguryo), March 26-27, 2004]

Korean views

Korean historians dispute the legitimacy of the Northeast Project [ [http://100.naver.com/100.nhn?docid=772376 네이버 백과사전 ] ] , generally making these arguments: [cite book|first=The Society of Korean History|last=|title=동북공정과 고대사 왜곡의 대응방안 |publisher=백암|location=서울|id=ISBN 89-7625-119-9|year=2006]

* A state established in what is now China does not necessarily mean it is Chinese. For example, during Yuan Dynasty, the whole China became part of the Mongol Empire. With no doubt, this is part of History of Mongolia. Besides, Goguryeo's territories comprised of land in both Manchuria and the Korean peninsula. Goguryeo's second capital was located at Pyongyang, North Korea. Before the capital city was moved, Goguryeo territory comprised what is today North Korea and parts of Manchuria.
* Goguryeo is a country founded by Buyeo people, one of the major ancestors of Korean people. Both Goguryeo and Baekje are successor nations of Buyeo. The fact that large numbers of Goguryeo people were assimilated into China does not necessarily make it Chinese as many were also assimilated into other dynasties at the time. [Discovered of Goguryeo (고구려의 발견), Written on South Korea historian Kim Yong-man.]
* Approximately 30,000 Goguryeo households were assimilated to China. This is insignificant when looking at the fact that Goguryeo listed more than 700,000 households.China had not absorbed a significant amount of Goguryeo's total population. Balhae received the most Goguryeo immigrants. Its founder was a Goguryeo noble. When the Khitans invaded Balhae, the majority population fled to Goryeo.
* Goguryeo lasted about 700 years while no Chinese dynasty concurrent with Goguryeo's rule lasted for more than 400 years. It was Imperial China's tributary only during some of its existence. More important, being a tributary of Imperial China doesn't make it Chinese. Many Korean dynasties and kingdoms, like Sila, Goryeo etc., had tributary relationships with Chinese Dynasties during some time of their existence. But it is ridiculous to say that they belong to Chinese histoy.
* Many of the customs (Ssireum, Taekwondo, ondol, dancing etc.) depicted in the murals are present in some form in Korean culture today.
* The name "Korea" has its roots from the name "Goryeo", which in turn took its name from "Goguryeo". "Goryeo" is the more correct term for the Goguryeo dynasty as Goguryeo is mainly referred to Goryeo in most Chinese and Japanese historic texts after the reign of King Jangsu of Goguryeo. Goguryeo is also stated as "Goryeo" on the Gwanggaeto Stele The dynasty Goryeo was founded on the basis that it was the descendant dynasty of Goguryeo, therefore adopting the name of Goguryeo.
* Only Southern Koreans from the Jeolla and Gyeongsang regions were descendants of Samhan, which is south of the Geum River. There are more Koreans descended from inhabitants outside Samhan and Silla, i.e., north of Geum River. Many Koreans are descendants of people outside Samhan (especially people that have families originated from Norther Korea), ie Goguryeo Fact|date=June 2007, but we cannot state that the North Koreans are Chinese while they share the same language and culture with South Korea.
* The view that Goguryeo is Chinese contradicts with Chinese history records of the past Chinese dynasties and the world academia of history.
* Northeast China Project is politics under the cover of academics, fearing that the possible unification of North and South Korea may cause border disputes between Korea and China.

Criticism

China revealed its claims on Goguryeo in 2002 with the Northeast China project. In 2003, they tried to incorporate Goguryeo tombs in China as their own. Wei Chunchung, a professor, declared that Goguryeo was established by Chinese ethnic groups. [http://www.ou.edu/uschina/gries/articles/texts/Gries2005KoguryoEAIQ.pdf 02Gries.pmd ] ] South Korea soon found out that China deleted mentions of Goguryeo in its government website. This caused an outrage in South Korea.

From other countries

The PRC's revision of Goguryeo history, in an attempt to recharacterize it as a Chinese provincial state rather than an independent Korean kingdom, has received international criticism for making a flawed and politically motivated rewriting of history. Such criticisms came from numerous scholars from other countries such as the United States, Russia, Mongolia, and Australia, [cite news
first = Young-dae
last = Bae
coauthors = Min-a Lee
title = Korea finds some allies in Goguryeo history spat
url = http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2470382
work = Joongang Ilbo
date = 2004-09-16
accessdate = 2007-03-06 ] including Goguryeo historians such as Mark Byington, indicated by an e-mail sent when completing a postdoctoral program at the Korea Institute, an autonomous non-departmental entity [cite web
url = http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~korea/about.html
title = About the Korea Institute
publisher = Korea Institute
accessdate = 2007-05-28 ] physically located at Harvard UniversityHarvard University Korea Institute and R. Sh. Djarylgashinova of Russian Academy of Science Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography. [cite web
url = http://news.naver.com/news/read.php?mode=LSD&office_id=078&article_id=0000026912&section_id=117&menu_id=117
title = Korean-Russian academia jointly respond to Northeast Project
accessdate = 2007-03-06
date = 2006-10-31
publisher = Naver
language = Korean]

Mark Byington believes that China's claims are "flimsy" and do not have much weight when their arguments are analyzed.

From Korea

Peter Gries noted that after UNESCO granted both China and North Korea's applications for world heritage status, Chinese websites subsequently consistently referred to it as "China's Koguryo", which became a popular issue in South Korea, exhibited in editorials and op-eds Furthermore, Gries quoted Kim Woo Jun, a history professor, as suggesting that the events might shift South Korea's strategy from being anti-U.S., pro-China to anti-China, pro-U.S.

Yonson Ahn, a Korean researcher noted for her work on Korean women's issues [http://hnn.us/articles/21617.html The Korea-China Textbook War-What's It All About? ] ] , writes that historians such as Quan Zhezhu, Sun Jinji, Kim Hui-kyo, and Mark Byington "perceive the launching of the Project as a defensive reaction to preserve China’s own territorial integrity and stability."

North Korea's state run media has denounced Chinese claims as “a pathetic attempt to manipulate history for its own interests” or “intentionally distorting historical facts through biased perspectives” in North Korean media. [ [http://www.freenorthkorea.net/archives/freenorthkorea/00818.html north korea teaching english in at freenorthkorea.net ] ]

In 2004, in an effort to prevent the issue from weakening bilateral ties with South Korea, China promised to not assert claims over Goguryeo and also pledged to not distort Goguryeo history in its textbooks. [http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=4414 Skepticism Lingers over History Issue ] ]

Jo Beop-jong, a professor at Woosuk University in South Korea, said China may not correct the distorted history about Goguryeo because if Beijing admits Goguryeo as Korean history, China must give up its Northeast Asia project

From China

The Northeast Project is not universally accepted in the PRC. In 2006, in an interview with the Chosun Ilbo, a senior scholar from Peking University affirmed Goguryeo as a part of Korean history. [cite news
title = Chinese Scholar Slams Co-opting Korean History
url = http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200609/200609130027.html
work = Chosun Ilbo
date = 2006-09-13
accessdate = 2007-03-06 ] He has expressed disagreement with the CASS institute, the PRC government institution running the Northeast Project, and indirectly criticized the project on behalf of the Peking University Department of History.

See also

* China-South Korea relations
* Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Notes