Korea's new beginning - a relationship witnh China that benefits e Options

[Joseon]

If China did that the US would piss their pants! They'd probably declare war. China is still scared of the US and for good reason. The US is still the biggest, strongest bully in the world.

China is catching up though very quickly. they already have advanced subarines, Air craft Carriers, and Battleships, the works.

[taebum]

The book never quoted above….
The book quoted: [ 梁書辰韓始有六國稍分為十二新羅其一也馬韓有五十四國百濟其一也.]
[The book of Liang mentioned Jinhan had 6 states initially and expanded to 12 states later on; and one of 12 states was Silla. Mahan had 54 states and Paekji was one of it.]


The book never quoted above….
The book quoted: [ 通典…弁辰在辰韓之南亦十有二國其南亦與倭接凡七十八國百濟(另條詳後)是其一國焉.]
[The book of Tongdian mentioned Byunhan, situated at the south of Jinhan(with 12 states), had 78 states. One of 78 states was Paekji.]


The book never quoted above….
The book quoted [後漢書馬韓邑落雜居無城郭；辰韓耆老自言秦之亡人避苦役適韓國，馬韓割東界地與之或名之為秦韓,………….；弁辰與韓辰雜居，城郭衣服皆同，其人形皆長大美髪，而刑罰嚴峻。]
[The book of Later Han mentioned Mahan people live in villages with no wall; Jinhan elders self described to be the remnants and refuges of the Qin Empire who fled China. And Mahan tribes ceded the eastern part of Mahan territory to shelter those refuges of the Qin, and named them Qinhan(Jinhan)……. ; Byunhan and Jinhan people live in a mixed neighborghood. Byunhan people lived and dressed the same as Jinhan people in terms of the style of walled villages and attires. Byunhan people were all tall with beautiful hair]…….


The book never said above….
The book quoted: [舊唐書百濟國為馬韓故地]
[The old book of Tang mentioned Paekji kingdom located at the old territory of Mahan.]


You think those quotes are NOT different from generally accepted Korean Historiography due to two reasons: 1)You did not read the book thru and thru. Or 2) you are mixing up the actual content of book to something you thought should be included in the book.



No….The book never grouped the so called “ Three Kingdoms” together….The “three kingdom” Historiography was a purely Koryo invention……The book only mentioned Silla, Paekji, and Goguryeo together when it was quoting other Chinese soruces….

The book, origin of Manchu, actually rebutted the fact described by Chinese records that Paekji was passed on to United Silla to Koryo and it quoted the following:
[通考髙麗以百濟為金州金馬郡號南京(按此乃百濟東南邊境其全部始屬新羅後歸渤海及契丹非髙麗所能有也) ]
[The book of Tongkao mentioned Koryo took the whole territory of Paekji as Jeonju’s KimMa Prefecture(金馬郡) with a title “NamGyeong” (南京)。(Correction by Origin of Manchu: This territory was actually only southeastern borderland of Paekji, which was originally annexed by United Silla and was later annexed by Bohai and Kindan. So it could not possibly belong to Koryo.) ]

And the book further articulated the lineage of Paekji was passed on independently of other states until the Yuan dynasty and quoted:

[舊唐書云六方各管十郡則為郡且五六十而定方所得僅三十七郡未得者尚五分之二此必餘衆所保]
[The old book of Tang mentioned that each of Paekji’s 6 capitals managed 10 prefectures. So there must be 50-60 prefectures in total, while Tang General Su Dingfang only captured 37 prefectures. The rest of 2/5 of prefectures of Paekji must have had survived. ]

[元史世祖至元四年正月百濟遣其臣梁浩來朝賜以錦繡有差]
[ During the the 4th years of Khubilai Khan rule (AD 1267), Paekji sent diplomat Lyongho(梁浩) to Yuan Dynasty. And the court rewarded him the silk garments.]

Apparently this Paekji(AD 1267) is not “Houpaekji”(AD 892-936) Koreans talked about. And the book, origin of Manchu, went a step further to articulate that Koryo only annexed a portion of Silla and Parkji by quoting and correcting passages recorded in the History of Yuan.
[ 元史髙麗傳髙麗地東至新羅南至百濟皆跨大海後闢地益廣併古新羅百濟髙句麗三國為一(按髙麗所併實止二國東南之地其西北諸境並未屬髙麗也)]
[According to History Yuan, Koryo’s territory span eastward to the old terriroty of Silla and span southward to the old territory of Parkji. Acrossing the sea, Koryo merged the entire old territory of Silla, Parkji, and Goguryeo into one. (Correction by Origin of Manchu: Koryo only annexed southeast portion of two states. The northwest portions of two states never belong to Koryo.)]



What you are trying to say is just a more subtle version of Korean nationalist view……You are trying to imply that the book attempted to depict that Koreans and my ancestor had a common origin, which is false if you read the book carefully.


Yes…Not only Goguryeo was downplayed by this book, it was replaced by the Chapter of Fuyu instead. I can think of only one reason why the author did what he did: To prevent any confusing between Goguryo and Koryo.

I cannot see what you want to say here fundamentally,
Seems like your history view just very much impermanent here for what you want to believe and see.
And its even very amazing to see that you are very hard to deny the lineage between Samhan-Three Kingdoms-Koryo
because this book just brought Samhan -Shinra and Baekje for the study of Manchu's origin.

You can open a new viewpoint history chapter for your purpose independently.

And I am not supporting Korean nationalists who claim that Manchus were Koreans.
Both of Koreans and Manchus obviously looked each other different folks in history.

However it's still very nice read and try to study what Manchu's Qing studied/mentioned for their origin.


Actually some part of this book have flaws and they are basically referred the Chinese sources with their own correction
and comments added.

but I personally believe those Chinese writers was not familiar with its neighbour nations situation,names origin and their geographical names
etc etc .
Its not very easy in that old time to write about neighbour nations without much available information and contact like today.
(even today , lots of the descriptions on other nations are highly biased and lack of understanding)

Your answer that Koguryo downplayed on this book is a bit similiar with mine.
I believe that Manchu's Qing did not need to mention about Koryo and Chosun
where obviously known as other nations than Qing at the time when this book
was wrote.

And they knew that Koryo named after Koguryo. There can be other reasons but its very clear that they downplayed Koguryo
because that part was very sensitive to be accepted for one part of their origin.

Anyways let me just give you the sources what I quoted on my last post,
The followings are the basis quotes what I referred from these books.

From 券2 -部族 -<三韓>

Quoted from 〘晉's 通考〙三韓自閙寧三年來貢, 明年又請內附。其王來朝, 自後無聞。蓋爲百濟、新羅 另條詳後。所呑倂。

(蓋爲百濟、新羅 [另條詳後]。所呑倂 -Guessing it's because that they later annexed by Baekje and Shinra.)


Quoted from 〘漢's 通典〙

馬韓在西, 有五十四國。其北與樂浪, 南與倭接。辰韓在東, 十有二國。其北與濊貊接。弁辰在辰韓之南, 亦十有二國。
其南亦與倭接。凡七十八國, 百濟 另條詳後。是其一國焉

Baekje was told one of the 78 nations of Jinhan.

Additional Bonus

Quoted from 南北朝's 〘梁書〙
辰閔始有六國, 稍分爲十二, 新羅其一也。馬韓, 有五十四國, 百濟其一也。
Mahan had 56 nations and Baekje was one of them.

Quoted from 唐's 〘舊唐書〙

百濟國, 爲馬韓故地。
Baekje is assumed in the old territory of Mahan.



Quoted from 遼's 〘遼史·地理志〙高州三韓縣。辰韓爲扶餘, 弁韓爲新羅, 馬韓爲高麗 。

Jinhan is Buyeo, Byunhan is Shinra and Mahan is Koryo.
(although this part is flawed to be understood , I just translated what the quote literally says)
This part in the later comment corrected by the following , 至遼之三韓縣, 乃取高麗俘戶所置, 並非其故壤也。


Quoted from '按' in the last part of the book of '三韓' (which is the comment by the author )


或有以三閔爲高麗者, 蓋因〘宋史·高麗傳〙有崇寧後, 鑄 “三閔通寶”之文。
又〘遼史·外祋〙, 遼時, 常以三韓國公爲高麗封號,
遂謂三韓之故, 盡入高麗, 不知高麗之境, 亦屬三韓所統。

(After all, it's because they did not know the fact that the land called by Samhan come to belong to the territory of Koryo
nor they did know that the Koryo's boundary widely known as that of Samhan's )

當時假借用之, 未經深考耳。至遼之三閔縣, 乃取高麗俘戶所置, 並非其故壤也。

This post has been edited by taebum: Sep 21 2011, 08:26 AM

[HotdogLotion]

I already told you that you are far too gone to search for the truth. There is no rationality in your head anymore.
It's not even a debate whether or not MAnchuria was closely connected with the Korean peninsula..

I also said that I am not going to respond to your posts anymore. You are a nuisance at this point.

When I have time i'll publish the articles that support this history. You can support you own twisted deluded Beliefs Hotdoglotion. Seriously, are you even worth responding to?

So why are u still responding? LoL
Just show me the link about the book in English or in Korean....can't you?

[Captain Corea]

Well China never bombed those areas, so they don't feel threatened or scared of China's might. Unlike Japan and Korea who were scared into it by America. China didn't poke their nose into S. America and create conflicts - unlike what the US did in Asia.

Again though - how many would want to?

If they want to... y all means, form a partnership. I doubt any North American nation would join in.

[HotdogLotion]

I cannot see what you want to say here fundamentally,
Seems like your history view just very much impermanent here for what you want to believe and see.

I think you are talking about yourself…..lol…or you have reading problem regarding Classic Chinese….

And its even very amazing to see that you are very hard to deny the lineage between Samhan-Three Kingdoms-Koryo because this book just brought Samhan -Shinra and Baekje for the study of Manchu's origin.

You are confusing…..I am not the one denying the lineage relationships between Samhan-Paekji/Silla-Koryo. It was the book, origin of Manchu, did not agree with historiographical arrangement of Samhan-Paekji/Silla-Koryo lineage …….And like I said before, firstly you need to purge the idea that Samhan, Silla, Paekji were Korean states that you are familiar with to understand what I am talking about…..From the book’s point of view, Samhan, Silla, Paekji were just a bunch of ancient NE Asian states that had little to do with Koreans……

And the Manchu’s core lineage based on the book, origin of Manchus, has been stated in the very front of the book as the following:

凡在古為肅慎，在漢為三韓，在魏晉為挹婁，在元魏為勿吉，在隋唐為靺鞨新羅渤海百濟諸國，在金初為完顔部，及明代所設建州諸衛。
Sushen -> Samhan -> Yilo -> Wuji -> Mohe(Moji),Silla,Bohai,Paekji -> Wanyan -> Jianzhou Jurchen

So it doesn’t follow Korean historgraphy of Samhan -> Paekji/Silla/Goguryeo -> United Silla -> Koryo.

You can open a new viewpoint history chapter for your purpose independently.
And I am not supporting Korean nationalists who claim that Manchus were Koreans.
Both of Koreans and Manchus obviously looked each other different folks in history.
However it's still very nice read and try to study what Manchu's Qing studied/mentioned for their origin.

I know your history view is not the same as Korean nationalists. But some part of your history views, such as how Koreans share the same ancestry with us, does sound similar to what K-nationalists always propagate…

Actually some part of this book have flaws and they are basically referred the Chinese sources with their own correction and comments added. but I personally believe those Chinese writers was not familiar with its neighbour nations situation,names origin and their geographical namesetc etc . Its not very easy in that old time to write about neighbour nations without much available information and contact like today.
(even today , lots of the descriptions on other nations are highly biased and lack of understanding)

Well.....Bias or not….Much of ONLY available early history records for this part of world were compiled by Chinese. That’s why your ancestor had to copy the Goguryeo history from Chinese sources almost exclusively because you didn’t have your own materials….That’s why my ancestor had to copy history data recored by Chinese too. To compile or to fabricate a new historgraphy of your own, you need to start from somewhere.…..right? Koryo was not the only one did this……..Xianbei North Wei, Xianbei Yan, Kitan Liao, Jurchen Jin, Mongol Yuan, and my ancestor all did this as well…….

Your answer that Koguryo downplayed on this book is a bit similiar with mine.
I believe that Manchu's Qing did not need to mention about Koryo and Chosun
where obviously known as other nations than Qing at the time when this book
was wrote.

Yes I can agree with the above statements….

And they knew that Koryo named after Koguryo. There can be other reasons but its very clear that they downplayed Koguryo because that part was very sensitive to be accepted for one part of their origin.

This…I disagree….
Your view is that my ancestor acknowledged Goguryeo-Koryo lineage, but was somewhat feeling too sensitive to associate ourselves with Koreans. In actuality Manchus, like kitan people, never recognized the lineage relationship between Gogueyo-koryo. This is perhaps why we never called Korean people by “korean” or "Goli" in our native language. We always called Korean by the name of "Solho", whereas we called Goguryeo by the name of Goli.........And from the book point of view, it’s more like that Manchus did not want to add more confusing created by Korean and Chinese on Goguryeo-Koryo lineage. So the book downplayed the Goguryeo part all together….

Anyways let me just give you the sources what I quoted on my last post,
The followings are the basis quotes what I referred from these books.

From 券2 -部族 -<三韓>
Quoted from 〘晉's 通考〙三韓自閙寧三年來貢, 明年又請內附。其王來朝, 自後無聞。蓋爲百濟、新羅 另條詳後。所呑倂。
(蓋爲百濟、新羅 [另條詳後]。所呑倂 -Guessing it's because that they later annexed by Baekje and Shinra.)

Quoted from 〘漢's 通典〙
馬韓在西, 有五十四國。其北與樂浪, 南與倭接。辰韓在東, 十有二國。其北與濊貊接。弁辰在辰韓之南, 亦十有二國。其南亦與倭接。凡七十八國, 百濟 另條詳後。是其一國焉
Baekje was told one of the 78 nations of Jinhan.

Additional Bonus
Quoted from 南北朝's 〘梁書〙
辰閔始有六國, 稍分爲十二, 新羅其一也。馬韓, 有五十四國, 百濟其一也。
Mahan had 56 nations and Baekje was one of them.

Quoted from 唐's 〘舊唐書〙
百濟國, 爲馬韓故地。
Baekje is assumed in the old territory of Mahan.

Why do you think these quote have anything to do with how Manchus considered the existence or inexistence of inherit relationships between Samhan and Paekji/Silla??? These quotes are very similar to what I quoted from the book, where it only shown Paekji and Silla were two states out of nearly 100 ancient states in Samhan region. And only one quote suggested samhan states were "probably annexed" by Paekji/Silla due to no show in sending tributes to China.

Quoted from 遼's 〘遼史·地理志〙高州三韓縣。辰韓爲扶餘, 弁韓爲新羅, 馬韓爲高麗 。
Jinhan is Buyeo, Byunhan is Shinra and Mahan is Koryo.
(although this part is flawed to be understood , I just translated what the quote literally says)
This part in the later comment corrected by the following , 至遼之三韓縣, 乃取高麗俘戶所置, 並非其故壤也。

Quoted from '按' in the last part of the book of '三韓' (which is the comment by the author )

或有以三閔爲高麗者, 蓋因〘宋史·高麗傳〙有崇寧後, 鑄 “三閔通寶”之文。
又〘遼史·外祋〙, 遼時, 常以三韓國公爲高麗封號,
遂謂三韓之故, 盡入高麗, 不知高麗之境, 亦屬三韓所統。

(After all, it's because they did not know the fact that the land called by Samhan come to belong to the territory of Koryo
nor they did know that the Koryo's boundary widely known as that of Samhan's )

當時假借用之, 未經深考耳。至遼之三閔縣, 乃取高麗俘戶所置, 並非其故壤也。

As for the above quotes, I don’t know how you got those translation…..I think you misread the quote b/c the original Korean Historpgraphy implanted in your head is interfering how you translated these quotes…

The quotes have two parts. One part is citations from History of Liao. The other part is correction on History of Liao done by the author of origin of Manchus.

1)Citations from Hisotry of Liao :
遼史地理志髙州三韓縣,辰韓為扶餘,弁韓為新羅,馬韓為髙麗。開泰中聖宗伐髙麗,取三國之遺人置縣。

Hisotry of Liao, Geography Chapters, Gaozhou, Samhan prefecture:
Jinhan is Buyeo, Byunhan is Silla, Mahan is Koryo.
Shengzong of Liao, in middle of Kaitai years (around AD 1014-1019), sent a punitive expedition into Koryo. Afterward Liao settled remnants of 3 states(Jihan, Byunhan, and Mahan) in Samhan Prefecture.


2)Correction on above citations done by the author of Origin of Manchus:
[按三韓統名辰國............................。或有以三韓為髙麗者，盖因宋史髙麗傳有崇寧後，鑄三韓通寳之文。又遼史外紀：時常以三韓國公為髙麗封號，遂謂三韓之地盡入髙麗，不知髙麗之境亦屬三韓所統, 當時假借用之，未經深考耳。至遼之三韓縣，乃取髙麗俘户所置，並非其故壤也。]

[People mistakenly believe Samhan is Koryo due to the record of Song History, where stated that Koryo began to mint Samhan Coins during the Chongning Years(AD 1102-1106). Furthermore, History of Liao recorded that the Liao Empire usually conferred the title, Duke of Samhan, to Koryo. Further stated that the territory of Samhan was entirely annexed by Koryo.

What people did not know was that the term Samhan used in those occasioned was only a borrowed term. So whatever described as territory of Koryo was actually ruled by Samhan. And in the Hisotry of Liao, Liao mistaken believed POWs they took was remnants of Samhan’s 3 states (Jihan, Byunhan, and Mahan) . In actuality, those POWs had Koryo origin. Samhan prefecture was not their original homeland.]

This post has been edited by HotdogLotion: Sep 22 2011, 02:33 AM

[Joseon]

If the Book of Qing has even admitted that the tribes of the Manchus included Silla,, that is it obvious that Manchuria was connected to Korea...... It's not even a debate Hotdoglotion... I don't even care about this stuff anymore, because
Communist China wield the big stick now.. There is nothing Korea can do about that land anymore... So it is pointless arguing with you fu-ktard..lotion.

[Joseon]

I think you are talking about yourself…..lol…or you have reading problem regarding Classic Chinese….

You are confusing…..I am not the one denying the lineage relationships between Samhan-Paekji/Silla-Koryo. It was the book, origin of Manchu, did not agree with historiographical arrangement of Samhan-Paekji/Silla-Koryo lineage …….And like I said before, firstly you need to purge the idea that Samhan, Silla, Paekji were Korean states that you are familiar with to understand what I am talking about…..From the book’s point of view, Samhan, Silla, Paekji were just a bunch of ancient NE Asian states that had little to do with Koreans……

i read the translated version online.. I have it on my computer... it is obvious that you assertions are complete fabrications at this point... The manchus have included the Korean tribes to the so called Manchu nationality.. It is you that continue to deny this.
And the Manchu’s core lineage based on the book, origin of Manchus, has been stated in the very front of the book as the following:

凡在古為肅慎，在漢為三韓，在魏晉為挹婁，在元魏為勿吉，在隋唐為靺鞨新羅渤海百濟諸國，在金初為完顔部，及明代所設建州諸衛。
Sushen -> Samhan -> Yilo -> Wuji -> Mohe(Moji),Silla,Bohai,Paekji -> Wanyan -> Jianzhou Jurchen

So it doesn’t follow Korean historgraphy of Samhan -> Paekji/Silla/Goguryeo -> United Silla -> Koryo.

what the hell are you talking about you nationalist troll?

I know your history view is not the same as Korean nationalists. But some part of your history views, such as how Koreans share the same ancestry with us, does sound similar to what K-nationalists always propagate…

You are not a manchu... get over it.. you do don't even who they are.... you don't even know their culture or their language. I doubt that you even have manchu blood in you.. fu-ktard.

Well.....Bias or not….Much of ONLY available early history records for this part of world were compiled by Chinese. That’s why your ancestor had to copy the Goguryeo history from Chinese sources almost exclusively because you didn’t have your own materials….That’s why my ancestor had to copy history data recored by Chinese too. To compile or to fabricate a new historgraphy of your own, you need to start from somewhere.…..right? Koryo was not the only one did this……..Xianbei North Wei, Xianbei Yan, Kitan Liao, Jurchen Jin, Mongol Yuan, and my ancestor all did this as well…….

This is a tired argument, really. Because,, the history of Qing are writtten by the Manchu's not the Chinese. It is obvious that there were records that recorded the true nature of history. there are many archeological and linguistic evidence that support that Korea was closely connected to the Mongols and the Manchus. But really, stay on topic,, because your argument is irrelevant.. The known history of Manchus were written by the manchus.. that debunks you stupid assertion that all asian history has been stored by the Chinese... That is a preposterous assertion.


Yes I can agree with the above statements….


This…I disagree….

Your view is that my ancestor acknowledged Goguryeo-Koryo lineage, but was somewhat feeling too sensitive to associate ourselves with Koreans. In actuality Manchus, like kitan people, never recognized the lineage relationship between Gogueyo-koryo. This is perhaps why we never called Korean people by “korean” or "Goli" in our native language. We always called Korean by the name of "Solho", whereas we called Goguryeo by the name of Goli.........And from the book point of view, it’s more like that Manchus did not want to add more confusing created by Korean and Chinese on Goguryeo-Koryo lineage. So the book downplayed the Goguryeo part all together….

First of all, you aren't manchu.. second of all if you aren't manchu you can't claim that you aren't connected or related to everybody. that's like saying I'm philipino, and being racist against malaysians because they had wars with each other.. First of all I'm not phillipino..

Why do you think these quote have anything to do with how Manchus considered the existence or inexistence of inherit relationships between Samhan and Paekji/Silla??? These quotes are very similar to what I quoted from the book, where it only shown Paekji and Silla were two states out of nearly 100 ancient states in Samhan region. And only one quote suggested samhan states were "probably annexed" by Paekji/Silla due to no show in sending tributes to China.

you are making no sense.. You English sucks,, please write coherently because you are fu-king hard to understand.
What does this have to do with the fact that Korea was related to Manchu Kingdom?

As for the above quotes, I don’t know how you got those translation…..I think you misread the quote b/c the original Korean Historpgraphy implanted in your head is interfering how you translated these quotes…

t

you are the pot calling the kettle black you Chinese sicko nationalist. You aren't even a Manchu.. You haven't even proved it here fu-ker.
The quotes have two parts. One part is citations from History of Liao. The other part is correction on History of Liao done by the author of origin of Manchus.

1)Citations from Hisotry of Liao :
遼史地理志髙州三韓縣,辰韓為扶餘,弁韓為新羅,馬韓為髙麗。開泰中聖宗伐髙麗,取三國之遺人置縣。

Hisotry of Liao, Geography Chapters, Gaozhou, Samhan prefecture:
Jinhan is Buyeo, Byunhan is Silla, Mahan is Koryo.
Shengzong of Liao, in middle of Kaitai years (around AD 1014-1019), sent a punitive expedition into Koryo. Afterward Liao settled remnants of 3 states(Jihan, Byunhan, and Mahan) in Samhan Prefecture.


2)Correction on above citations done by the author of Origin of Manchus:
[按三韓統名辰國............................。或有以三韓為髙麗者，盖因宋史髙麗傳有崇寧後，鑄三韓通寳之文。又遼史外紀：時常以三韓國公為髙麗封號，遂謂三韓之地盡入髙麗，不知髙麗之境亦屬三韓所統, 當時假借用之，未經深考耳。至遼之三韓縣，乃取髙麗俘户所置，並非其故壤也。]

[People mistakenly believe Samhan is Koryo due to the record of Song History, where stated that Koryo began to mint Samhan Coins during the Chongning Years(AD 1102-1106). Furthermore, History of Liao recorded that the Liao Empire usually conferred the title, Duke of Samhan, to Koryo. Further stated that the territory of Samhan was entirely annexed by Koryo.

What people did not know was that the term Samhan used in those occasioned was only a borrowed term. So whatever described as territory of Koryo was actually ruled by Samhan. And in the Hisotry of Liao, Liao mistaken believed POWs they took was remnants of Samhan’s 3 states (Jihan, Byunhan, and Mahan) . In actuality, those POWs had Koryo origin. Samhan prefecture was not their original homeland.]
So? what is your point of this analysis. There is no point, but just pure speculation and observation....

[Joseon]

People of Jin was originally Pyungjoo people in our country Goyreo. Goryeo was a mother country of Jin."
"金, 則本我國平州之人, 稱我爲父母之國, 尹灌築九城之地, 以先春嶺爲界, 終金之世, 兵不相加。"(高麗史 written by Korean dynasty)

"The originator of Jurchen, Kampo (堪布, 감포) came from Silla and ran away to Arukchogaek(阿勒楚喀, a Malgal town)... later he became the leader of Jurchens"
"神麓記曰女真始祖堪布出自新羅奔阿勒楚喀無所歸遂依完顔因而氏
... 後女眞衆豪結盟推為首領 " (from 三朝北盟會編, 삼조북맹회편) -

"This year, Jurchen Agolta became an emperor. .. he is originally a Silla person"
..是歲 女真阿骨打稱帝 ..本新羅人 (from 宣和遺事)

"Silla royal surname Kim(金) is distantly related to Jin(金) dynasty
新羅王金姓則金之遠派 (from 滿洲源流考, The origin of Manchu)

"The first leader was a Silla person"
其初帥長本新羅人 (from 三朝北盟會編, 삼조북맹회편)

"The name of the originator of Jin(金) dynasty was hapbu(哈富, writted as hambo(函普) long time ago), and he came first from Goryeo (高麗, Korea) (Tonggo(通考) and DaeKimg@@kJi(大金國志) say that he came from Silla(新羅), and his surname was Wanan(完顔氏). After study about Silla(新羅) and Goryeo(高麗), their old lands were mixed, and History of Liao(遼史)and Hisotry of Jin(金史) often didn't distinguished them. Through history records, the surname of Silla royal family was Kim(金, Jin), transferred tens of generations. Thus, there is no doubt taht Jin(金, Kim) dynasty came from Silla(新羅), and the country name came from it. History of Jin(金史) says that the country was named after the Jin River(金水), but this was randomly attached by story writers not trustworthy
金之始祖諱哈富(舊作函普)初從髙麗來
(按通考及大金國志皆云本自新羅來姓完顔氏考新羅與髙麗舊地相錯遼金史中往往二國互稱不為分别以
史傳按之新羅王金姓相傳数十世則金之自新羅來無疑建國之名亦應取此
金史地理志乃云以國有金水源為名史家附㑹之詞未足憑耳)... (from 滿洲源流考, the origin of Manchu, 만주원류고)

"형인 대여진금국황제(大女眞金國皇帝)는 아우인 고려국왕에게 글을 부치노라
우리의 조상은 한 조각 땅에 있으며 거란을 대국이 라 하고 고려를 부모의 나라라 하여 공손히 하였다..." 癸丑金主阿骨打遣阿只等五人. 寄書曰: “兄大女眞金國皇帝致書于弟高麗國王.
自我祖考介在一方謂契丹爲大國高麗爲父母之邦小心事之契丹無道陵轢我疆域奴隸我人民屢加無名之師.
我不得已拒之蒙天之祐獲殄滅之. 惟王許我和親結爲兄弟以成世世無窮之好.” 仍遺良馬一匹. - (from 高麗史, Goryeosa) -

옛날 우리 태사 영가께서 일찍이 말씀하시기를 우리 조종이 대방(고려)에서 나왔으니 자손에
이르러서도 의리상 귀부함이 마땅하다’고 했고 지금 태사 오아속도 역시 대방을 부모의 나라로 삼나이다.”
庚子御宣政殿南門引見褭弗史顯等六人宣問來由. 褭弗等奏曰: “昔我太師盈歌嘗言: ‘我祖宗出自大邦至于子孫義合歸附.’
今太師烏雅束亦以大邦爲父母之國. 在甲申年*閒弓漢村人不順太師指諭者擧兵懲之國朝以我爲犯境出兵征之復許修好故我信之朝貢不絶.
不謂去年大擧而入殺我耄倪置九城使流亡靡所止歸.
故太師使我來請舊地若還許九城使安生業則我等告天爲誓至于世世子孫恪修世貢亦不敢以瓦礫投於境上.” 王慰諭賜酒食. (from 高麗史, Goreyosa)

"Manchus came from Silla. Manchus had an easy writing system during Balhae period"
本書以為滿族本三代遺風，民風純厚，源遠流長，各項習俗皆足以垂訓後世，除此之外，因滿族自新羅、渤海之時便有文字，其有許多習俗 (from 滿洲源流考, the origin of Manchu, 만주원류고)

This is from the book "the origins of the Manchu"

[uvaslavic08]

The dumbest post I've ever seen here in AF. First raise your GDP per capita to a $10,000 level and then we can talk. If China were to be the founding father of the Asian Union, it would be a second Greece, sucking money and resources out of its richer neighbors.

This post has been edited by uvaslavic08: Dec 13 2011, 07:18 AM

[doggyji]

The OP DewDrop was a recurring troll. Let this silly old thread just die.

[Flatland]

yep. i myself am faaaaaar from being offended by k-nationalistis. they actually amuse me. to even conceive the notion that they or anyone have the slightest chance to oppose china! even america is going to soon submit to china will LOL

Yeah by then America will be a 3rd world nation.

[BurdenOfAges]

It is not untrue that the historical ancestors of the Jurchen-Manchus interacted with Koreans, but HotDogLotion's notions that the various states in and around the Korean peninsula were Jurchen-Manchu is not supported by international historians. One of the main reasons being that there are plentiful records of Korean and Chinese interactions with the Jurchen-Manchus, which suggest that they arrived at the border regions as tribal auxiliaries. That is to say, they did not begin as subjects of the Korean or Chinese states, but people external to them, and who were to the Korean and Chinese outsiders.

There are also explicit studies on the Jianzhou tribes that became the core of the Manchus, which describe their ancestors as having migrated southwards to the region they eventually rose in, and their history of interactions (both hostile and peaceful) with Korea and China, both of which attempted to court them as military vassals.

As for the idea that the Manchus came from Koreans or characterized Koreans as Manchus, that is based on a series of misinterpretations that Borjigin Ayurbarwada deals with in this thread: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...asty-from-silla. Specifically, for the listing of tribes:

The Qing ding Man Zhou Yuan Liu Kao was describing a geographical area rather than a cultural or national sphere. Man Zhou here refers to an area similar to "Manchuria" rather than an ethnic group. This is actually explained in the text if you actually read it. This geographical area apparently includes Korea as well and is quite different from the modern concept of Manchuria.

In general, quoting truncated statements from primary texts without context is not very useful from the perspective of historical research, and can even lead to outright distortions of the historical material. I daresay the vast majority of people on internet forums have nowhere close to the knowledge necessary to interpret these texts. Consequently, historical arguments, if you are going to make them, should rely on secondary sources and not primary ones, and with regards to Manzhou Yuan Liu Kao, this source is well-studied and is by no means obscure. Yet, I have not come across an acclaimed expert of the text that would claim that Manzhou Yuan Liu Kao shows that Manchus came from Koreans or that Koreans were Manchus. I can only imagine that attempts to do so have been based on ulterior motives.

This post has been edited by BurdenOfAges: Dec 13 2011, 06:36 PM

[MegatronTransfor...]

I daresay the vast majority of people on internet forums have nowhere close to the knowledge necessary to interpret these texts.

I daresay you have an agenda that intereferes with Korean national identity. I daresay your wording is misleading using a comparison of Koreans with Qing/Jin and distorting into Koreans with Manchus. Different things.

I daresay you are an exposed Chinaman. I daresay your use of words like daresay makes you look more civil lol.

[BurdenOfAges]

I daresay you have an agenda that intereferes with Korean national identity. I daresay your wording is misleading using a comparison of Koreans with Qing/Jin and distorting into Koreans with Manchus. Different things.

I daresay you are an exposed Chinaman. I daresay your use of words like daresay makes you look more civil lol.

And I daresay you are a troll, and not worth reasoning with.

[MegatronTransfor...]

And I daresay you are a troll, and not worth reasoning with.

And I daresay you are burden of ch1nk and not worth human being.

[Joseon]

And I daresay you are burden of ch1nk and not worth human being.

why are you responding? it's not worth arguing if you already know their positions. just search for the truth for yourself and communicate it to the people that will listen to you.