Credible Korean sources stated that Eastern china and Japanese Islands was a colony of Baekje, Koreanic Empire.




KBS: Eastern China was a part of Baekje 5/7
KBS: Eastern China was a colony of Baekje

There is some evidence that Baekje's territory might have extended to Liaoxi, in Liaoning, during the Age of Fragmentation in which the northern (nomad-established) states were weakened from constant fighting amongst themselves and Goguryeo - as opposed to any "Chinese" state - was the main power broker in southern Manchuria. I don't think there's any good evidence that Baekje extended beyond that. In any case, the next time China unified - under the Sui and then the Tang - Baekje colonial presence was nowhere to be seen, signifying that whatever presence Baekje had, it was short-lived.

Still, it is disturbing that KBS is engaging in this sort of nationalist revisionism, but then KBS has always had controversial programs, and this is Cheon1Son's "interpretation," which no one should take at face value.

cool story bro

VANK: Korean History Channel Baekje Kingdom

lol china funny

I wouldn't be surprised if Baekje was able to colonize many coastal areas of China when China is in chaos. Baekje was the most seafaring out of the kingdoms of Korea.

db

The problem is that there is no evidence. The program on KBS actually shows how flimsy the existing evidence is - much of it based on a few lines of text in later records being interpreted "generously," to say the least. Where is the archaeological and anthropological support? If Baekje had a significant presence on many coastal areas of China there should be Baekje tombs, architecture, material goods, skeletons, and so on. Going to a village in Guangxi and showing that the locals "believe" they came from Shandong is not proof of anything - how is Shandong equivalent to Baekje?

It is possible that Baekje raided China's coasts and took over, or were granted, a few trading towns in concession. Beyond that, where's the archaeological and anthropological evidence?

Having said that, I think that Liaoxi (the western part of Liaoning + the eastern tip of Hebei) might indeed have fallen under Baekje or Goguryeo control for a time. The records must be checked against that of nearby Xianbei kingdoms, however.

Let me rephrase in Chinese context:

I wouldn't be surprised if Ming China was able to colonize many coastal areas of Europe, America, India and Africa when those continents were in chaos, after all Ming China did have historical record to show that Ming China had seefaring fleets. Baekje does not even have extensive historical records of seafaring adventures and you have the audacity to claim it colonized China? lol

Do you see how ridiculous your assertion sounds? Capability =/= historical facts. The good thing is Chinese does not stoop to this low level to fabricate colonization of other continents based on seafaring adventures of Ming China.

Do you even know how to read Chinese?

Why?

You Chinese do know this history stuff all started to be pursued by Korea only after China claimed Gorguyeo right?

You realize that's a lie, right?

Shin Chae-Ho was engaged in revisionist nationalist history in the early 1900s. Much of the works cited by modern nationalists were written in the 80s and 90s.

The better description of events is that the Korean public began to take more interest in their nationalist discourses due to China's claims on Goguryeo.

None of it has gotten publicty or been pursued until recently. Same as the Gorguyeo is Chinese claim that was started around the 30 years ago but getting more aggressive as China grows, so Korea is responding with defending itself with an offensive strategy instead of staying purely defensive. I saw a Korean documentary about how the Jin Dynasty was founded by a Korean man, in that documentary the Korean presenter specifically says, in light of what China is claiming GOrguyeo it is important to know this peice of our history. THe history wars was started by China for its North East project.

Which implies that this has been the "correct" view all along - only that now the public should "know" about it. The publicity campaigns probably did get a huge boost from China's claims on Goguryeo, but the Korean academia has been pursuing this line of research for some time. The most prolific era of revisionist history was probably in the 80s and 90s; the "Dongyi = Korean race" argument emerged around this time, and there were actual attempts by scholars to argue that, for example, "Shang = Dongyi = Korean," and to deny the presence of any Chinese commanderies on Korean soil.

Much of this is documented in Pai's 2000 book, Constructing "Korean" Origins, as well as Gi-Wook Shin's more recent 2006 book, Ethnic nationalism in Korea: genealogy, politics, and legacy.

I dont see why or how it implies it as the correct view all along at all. China had 2000 years to claim it.

Claiming Gorguyeo as Chinese is much like claiming Yuan is Chinese history when it is Mongols. Gorguyeo as Chinese history is about CHina consolidating and legitmising all the histories of the land it encompasses today its all political not factual.

And i dont know much about the 80s and 90s attempts to do that but i do know the claims of Gorguyeo as Chinese were heard around that time as well.

Your original suggestion was that this is all retaliation for China's claims on Goguryeo. My contention is that this ignores the general trend of Korean nationalist historiography from the time of Shin Chae-Ho and even earlier. Korean nationalism is at least as old as Chinese nationalism and revising history has been part of it from the beginning, as it has been for China. There is no point in partaking in the blame game with respect to where this revisionism came from. It is simply an outgrowth of the ethnic nationalist view of modern statehood.

History has always been mobilized on behalf of contemporary politics. This is simply the latest phase of it.

Well i agree that Korean nationalists have claimed parts of Manchuria as Korean even back in the times of Goryeo but this recent heated outbreak was started by the Chinese.

THe revisionism and debacle today between CHina and Korea was started by the North East asian project even though yes, there has always been revisions of national histography in any nation with varying degree's of attmepts to take them seriously.

The northeast project by the Chinese government have it's intentions of studying the history of the region from a Chinese POV but aside from that, i hardly hear any official documents stating that Goguryo is a "full legitimate" Chinese kingdom. From what i heard on the Chinese forums, the Chinese government didn't even list the kingdom as official history comparing those of such as Tang or Ming but i think they do list them as a mere tributary kingdom with Chinese cultural influences set up by ethnics of north east. Although scholars do tend to said that Goguryo is a kingdom share by the Koreans and other north east minorities. Then the Korean media went berserk and claiming all these and that. I just don't get it. Did anyone said the kingdom is not Korean? No i don't think so, the main bulk of their power are in the hands of proto korean people. So yea, just some food for thoughts

Someone's bound to be asking it. You seem to be commenting quite a lot on Chinese history, but I don't recall you ever once making reference to any Chinese language material or study. When it comes to pre-modern Chinese history, the use of English can only get you so far. This leads me to conclude that you don't actually understand Chinese, just like these other Korean pseudo-history buffs here.

Then I should say that I know enough Classical Chinese to understand what a particular passage in an ancient text means, most of the times. Modern Mandarin gives me some trouble; however, most pre-modern Chinese texts were not written in a vernacular format, so it's not a prerequisite. It does unfortunately mean that I am not very schooled in Chinese-language articles published in the PRC. That is a limitation that I deal with by following people who do keep up with the research there, and who publish summaries of them from time to time. But if you asked me to cite the last ten articles published in China about, say, the relationship between Wei and Qi during the Warring States, I wouldn't be able to do it.

As for the Korean pseudo-history buffs, you should understand that they don't actually do the research themselves. Like I said, there are networks of nationalist historians in Korea that provide the material, and these people do know Chinese, even if they sometimes distort it to suit their agendas.

The video has given tons of evidence. Unless you can find stronger evidence that completely opposes it, I have to go with the superior position.

Actually, that's the problem. The video doesn't give much concrete evidence at all.

I'll give you a few examples off the top of my head:



This is an oft-cited sentence. It is, in fact, present in the Songshu, which likely got it from the Liangshu, which later Chinese historians seemed to have simply copied. Where is Yoseon? Well, it is thought to be between Liaodong and Hebei, so the natural candidate is Liaoxi. This isn't too far-fetched. Liaoxi was close enough to Baekje and Goguryeo for the two to contest it, and a war between the Xianbei state and Baekje may indeed have taken place over such a territory, which they would've bordered. There is no archaeological evidence of a major Baekje presence in Liaoxi, and if we read the Weishu (of the Xianbei dynasty in question) we note that Liaoxi was thought to have been lost for only about 8 years, not 100+, but so far, it's credible.

Here is where the problems start. So where is Jinping? Jinping, in the Song record, sounds like it became the name of the district Baekje took over in Liaoxi (晋平, the Chinese characters for the province in question, likely derives from the 晋 of the 晋 state, which was a major northern Chinese power in the years preceding Baekje's rise). The video, however, claims that Jinping is in fact in Guangxi, near Vietnam, northeast of the capital at Nanning, based on the name of a later Song Dynasty district.

How sensible is this? For Baekje to invade Guangxi it would have to pass through Guangdong and circumnavigate the whole of China. Maritime travel would literally take months, and for what? Jinping, according to the video, is located northeast of Nanning. Nanning is an inland capital, and northeast of it is nowhere close to the coast. Thus, we would have to believe that, after they stopped along Guangxi's coast, the Baekje fleet traveled up a river to the middle of a jungle to establish a colony that it can't possibly govern from home.

Is this a logical interpretation of the texts?



The video makers claim to visit Baekje Hur in Guangxi. It then claims that there are no traces of Baekje Hur to be found, just Chinese countryside. It then discovers the Zhuang (a Tai speaking ethnic group with affinities to Vietnamese) minority, finds a handful of traditional cooking tools that "look just like Korean traditional cooking tools," and declares that the Zhuang must've been from Baekje.

...

Really?



The first half of the program was dedicated to proving that Japan was colonized by Baekje. So, you would think, the video makers would know that painting their teeth black was a custom that the ancient Japanese practiced. Yet, for seemingly arbitrary reasons, they suddenly declare that "black teeth = Southern Asian" and that therefore Baekje must've held territories in southern Asia.

...

Again, really?

Are you sure you're not misunderstanding or confusing something? I didn't find anything strange about the video.

Korean seafarers from Kaya sometimes took ships as far as India. Baekje was even more of a maritime power Kaya, they had strong armies too, and were expansionist.

The rulers of Baekje were nation builders who knew how to conquer territory and create states. In a way they are kind of like the Normans, who sail around creating kingdoms everywhere. The rulers of Baekje originally came from a kingdom in northern Manchuria called Buyo.

You neglected to mention that there are records about 100,000 horseman attacking Baekje territory and losing, even though such an event would be impossible unless Baekje had territories in China during the times of chaos in China. Just ask yourself this.. why would you need 100,000 horseman to attack Baekje if they only had a little village?

You seem to have an overly high opinion of Baekje, but fails to address the actual issue: why would Baekje create a single colony in inland Guangxi? Because Jinping and Liaoxi are all the Chinese records offer. There is no actual textual support of further Baekje expansionism in China. In fact, Baekje was only really expansionist in the late 4th century. Before, it was considered a regional power in Korea, and afterwards, Goguryeo would consistently best Baekje in peninsular conflicts.



Because Baekje likely did hold Liaoxi for a short period of time. I've already said this above and you actually responded to that post. It is entirely unnecessary to hold territory within China proper to be attacked by Northern Wei, since Northern Wei was a semi-nomadic dynasty that was not confined to the Chinese sphere.

This theory, solely based on Chinese historical text, is disputed among Korean scholars due to lack of archaeological evidence. I guess BurdenOfAges did all the talking for me.

It's a theory worth looking into. There is nothing implausible about Baekje creating territories in China during China's period of fragmentation. There is even evidence of it in Chinese historical texts.

What is there to dispute at this point? Get digging!

There is nothing wrong with using HISTORICAL texts to paint a picture of history. You even use historical texts to interpret your finds in archeology.

Outside of Liaoxi, there is little to no evidence even in Chinese historical texts. If we accept that the Chinese knew about Baekje enough to record its brief conquests in northeast China, then there is no reason to believe that they would not have also recorded its conquests elsewhere, if such conquests had occurred. The video's attempt to stretch - if not outright distort - philological details to exaggerate Baekje's expansion is what makes makes it dubious, even disturbing - such as in the declaration that "Koreans would have an easy time expanding into Eastern China because they were Dongyi, and Dongyi were Korean kin," which is simply a rehash of the "Dongyi = Tungus = Korean" idea started back in the 80s of Korean nationalist historiography, presented without any critical examination, as if it were something that the rest of the history community accepts.

As a way to encourage further inquiry, it's an interesting hypothesis. As a way to present history to the Korean public, which is, after all, what the KBS program was designed to do, it is deleterious, and only further contributes to discrepancies between Koreans' understanding of history and the world's. Through this program and a few others, it has become obvious to me that KBS is more interested in tooting the nationalist horn and waxing about how great the Korean race is than in actually examining the facts. Perhaps they see it as a way to counter Chinese claims on Goguryeo, but if so, they are simply lowering themselves to the same level.

I really cannot understand why everyone is all up in arms about this in the first place. I mean really who cares what a bunch of crazy nationalists think? They're going to believe what they want anyways, therefore just let them. Meanwhile the rest of us will continue living on planet earth.

All that it takes for lies to spread is for honest people to do nothing.

Besides, this isn't just some crazy nationalists talking. KBS is a major Korean broadcasting network. Its programs are notable, at least in Korea itself, and are widely watched.

Exactly, it's a South Korean channel that broadcasts to 50 million people in a world of 6.5 billion. Again I ask, why should it matter and how is it relevant? If the channel was an American broadcast that programs to 300 million Americans, maybe then I'd be concerned but KBS? LOL. I respect your valiant effort and academic prowess, I just prefer not to waste my time on such trivial matters.

Yeah which can now be broadcast on Youtube where the rest of the human population can get easy access to it and be misinformed. While you are well intentioned, this pacifist approach allows more people to spread myths and lies. At least here, people can see both sides of the argument and its up to them who they want to believe.

You do have a point but on the same token not everyone in the world has internet and most that do....have no interest in Asian history much less Korean distorted Asian history. I don't have a problem with defending our viewpoint, I just hope no one makes more to it than what it is. There are even more offensive claims to Chinese history such as Eurocentrists claiming that the white man founded the entirety of Chinese civilization....likewise for Afrocentrists. Maybe I'm just too idealistic to assume that most people are smart enough to buy into lies and propaganda.

Researchers will present their findings even if it is flimsy in order to increase funding so they can keep digging. But I should add that not all of it was flimsy. Like you said, there is good evidence that Liaoxi was conquered by Baekje for a time.

During the Dark Ages, the Vikings didn't use their longboats to try to conquer just one locations. They invaded many places. It's possible that Baekje tried to conquer other regions in Eastern China as well.

You don't need to worry. South Koreans are some of the most educated people in the world. They're not going to fall for anything stupid.

It's a shame how some ultra-nationalistic people can go delusional tho. But not many Koreans are what the Chinese view as, they are few. And KBS and MBC are idiots, they forget what they should be representing. A year ago, MBC had a documentary as 'Kim's ancestor is Xiongno', but that's just one part of theory and even though it's true they were just part of it. Not like Shinla was founded by them, but effect on some people were huge, that some often used its theory to distort people from Kyongsang province

So pretty much, you don't understand Chinese, correct? What is your background then?

I don't understand how not knowing vernacular Chinese (the misnomer "Mandarin" has nothing to do with written language) has anything to do with examining pre-modern sources. And I don't see how not being "schooled in Chinese-language articles published in the PRC" is relevant to anything. Are you suggesting you can are somehow "schooled" in Chinese language articles published outside the PRC?

Whether or not there is a "network" of "nationalist historians" in South Korea is not my concern. The Koreans not exactly well known when it comes to the study of Chinese history (or even their own history). This probably has to do with their incompetence in understanding the written Chinese script. If anything, the Japanese are by far, much more well regarded when it comes to studying Chinese history.

Korean History and Civilization

Why revive an old thread??? Anyways this issue is a goner, the Dongbei Region (The area that Pan-Altai nationalist looneys nut over) is already sinified. I for one am not concerned about who it belonged to in the past, it doesn't matter now just as it doesn't matter that the entire New World was once dominated by Native Indians, that was then this is now.

Maybe they should get reunited first before talking about conquering lost stretches of ancestral homeland in China's Northeast.

If you can't get your present situation under control, don't even think about talking about something you lost 1600 years ago.

Titanium, KBS is broadcast in the U.S. It is almost the sole source Americans have for Korean information, especially Korean history. Not that it takes any notable market share in American broadcasting, but it has no opposition to anything it broadcasts that is presented as truth. American who don't take the time to question historical dramas or documentaries coming KBS have only very westernized productions to give any other viewpoint - and those are usually even more distorted than what comes from KBS. There are a occasional Chinese produced programs broadcast here about Chinese history on a Chinese network, but only if you have one of the rare satellite providers that airs it. but that is maybe 12 episodes of one show vs. maybe 12 shows in the course of a single month from KBS.

And how many Americans actually watch KBS? Don't get me wrong, I see your point but it's not as if KBS revisionism is taken seriously by anyone other that Korean nationalists. I'm more concerned about the present, like China's wonderful relationship with NK for example

The problem is .... Why didn't this Korean civilization survive till modern day??? This civilization indeed had trouble preserving their history. Also, besides, mesopotniums and Egyptian were the first to civilize, and some ancient chinese characters were related to Egyptian heirogluphics... I believe it was the egyptians work who made this Korean civ, w/ the most Egyptian influnce back in the day, hence why this Korean civilization couldn't survive.

Excuse the typing as this is from my iPod

Questions.

Which source have you used in studying FE Asean History? Mostly Chinese written, aren't they?

Don't you ever think, sometime over history, Chinese themselves, for whatever reason, have distorted the history to their benefit?

Likewise, talking about Korean history only based on Korean literature would be a risky hole.

Now, the texts supporting the Baekje presence in the East Coast of China are written in history books written by Chinese themselves. Shouldn't they be regarded as potentially more objective source about the truth?

It is not to claim that Baekje were there to conquer for hundreds of years. Only at the peak of Baekje power and during the chaos of China. Why should they be all lies?

And in the midst of all Chinese chaos, why should it be totally impossible, for even only a short time, Baekje people were even deep in the South? And the KBS video does not even claim that Baekje main power was there. According to the old man, the people have fled from the Shandong peninsula for whatever reason; perhaps Han Chinese regained its control and were becoming stronger.

Shandong and Liaxio (West of Lia) is not a long distance. And it is not to be claimed that the two regions were connected inland by Baekje occupancy. Now that Baekje was an ocean country it could have been that she once occupied some tips of coastal land here and there.

And that those who were in Shandong were to be expelled, and it was easier for them to fleeth into the South along the coast than back to the North where, perhaps, by the time, there was no Baekje presence anymore and so their protection.

China, for thousands of years, have been invaded by many foreign ethnic groups, mostly by Northern horse-riding nomads. Baekje, also descendants of such nomads, occupying tips of Chinese coast, for only a short period time... why should it be so impossible?

Han Chinese started from Xian, deep and up the Yellow river, and it took long until they got full control of the whole coast lines, and even after that, there have been quite times when they lost control of those lines. Not impossible.

You said there's no archeological evidence. Do you reconstruct history only from that science? Does every history has to be proven by that? Written texts, language, culture, living habits, coins and potteries... all contribute in one way or another to reconstruction of the true history.

It's also amazing how Europeans or Western scholars have so biased view on the Asian history and full with mythical image of China. There are over hundreds of millions of people here in this corner of the world, not ethnic Han Chinese, and have lived with history over half million years. Have you ever traveled here and listened and found by yourself what they have to say and keep as their history? Also note that most nomad didn't keep written histories. Leaving anything behind was considered as evil than virtue in their culture. Coming bare hands, going bare hands. Most of them were illiterate, and most historical records which you can find are written by Chinese, mostly ethnic Han Chinese.

Try to learn England history written by French only. Or that of Scotland written by English only. Would you get an objective view to all of which the other part would fully agree?

Europeans are already so much sinicized(?), I'm afraid.

I couldn't believe you guys actually spent time discussing this subject.

According to someone's point of view, Baekje even taught Japanese people how to dress.

Gonna address the key points so that more distortions aren't thrown around here.



Yes but you can easily say the same about every other ethnic group.



Okay and just a second ago you were arguing that Chinese may be distorting history to benefit themselves, now you are in full support of their claims? Not advocating truth or false here, just questioning your agenda.



You're arguments pose an interesting possibility but it is mere speculation at best. The idea of that an event may not have been impossible doesn't necessarily conclude it's verifiability either.



Really? Then why was Baekje only known for occupying the Korean peninsula and not known for carving out a major empire like the other nomadic tribes? I guess the idea that Korean nationalists (Certains ones anyways) having a fixation on the Mongols and other nomadic tribes hold a certain degree of truth. People seem to forget that virtually every nomadic tribe that attacked China throughout history also invaded the Korean peninsula.

Seriously though, linguistic and even cultural relations mean very little in geopolitical context. Technically speaking, Spaniards, French and Germans are all classified under the Indo-European family but I highly doubt any of them would proudly claim kinship with one another as evidenced by the # of wars they fought with each other throughout the centuries. An even better example are Koreans and Japanese who share obvious linguistic and cultural similarities as well yet again I highly doubt nationalists of either group would ever proudly claim kinship with one another.

For a group that is supposedly one of the Horse-Riding nomad club, the Koreans sure did very little expanding throughout history.



Well any historian will argue that archaeological evidence is vital since it is scientific, it is the backbone of literary evidence. I'll give you an example, there is plenty of written evidence that the Xia dynasty existed in Chinese records but due to the lack of archaelogical evidence, historians and scholars cannot verify it's existence.



I don't remember anyone here or on any respectable scholarly site that has argued that all people living in Asia were Han Chinese. Not sure where you're going with this.



LOL no offense but you obviously know very little about the history of that region. Even Genghis Khan wanted to create a script to record the history of his empire as did the Manchu Emperors. Long before even them were the Xianbei, the Khitan and Jurchens that all developed their own scripts. If leaving anything behind was evil to them, how in the hell would anyone ever know about the history of their empires? I highly doubt the Mongols would have wanted the world to paint them in such a negative light (well maybe Chinghiz wouldn't mind but Kubilai certainly would).

Either way not sure why this applies to Baekje since they were clearly not illiterate nomads by any stretch of imagination.



:::SIGH::

Oh yes it must be because those Europeans just love China hence all the reason for their glorifications of Chinese history... Their written histories glorifying Chinese civilization has nothing to do with actual scholarly research whatsoever, it is simply due to extreme Panda nuthuggery......but I could have sworn they hated us though lol. Are you the type of person that gets irate over the idea that the Yuan and Qing dynasties are listed as part of Chinese history even though it is accepted by virtually every western scholar?

If I sounded like an @$$ with this comment, I apologize to an extent but your likewise your statement was rather ahistorical and uncalled for.

He's trying to "re-correct" history just like every other nationalists.

Why is one a nationalist if he is seeking for the true history of his country/people and so regain the peoples identity? What's your problem?

If he is using that study to encourage attacks against any other countries, then that surely would be a problem.

But, for any countries or peoples, seeking for their real history and identity is more than natural and to be respected at its face value.

So, what's your problem with all these? All fakes?

If you're really neutral, just indicate where anything is wrong and try to bring the truth to the people.

Coreans don't think it as nationalism. It's about awakening about their real identity.

For over thousand years, (since Silla), Korean kingdoms and governments have been so faithful to China, even collecting and burning all native history books, and rewrite histories to the taste of China. Corea ended as such at the end of Lee Dynasty, only to be occupied by Japan.

It is only after WW II, that Corea has slowly waking up and wondering what they really area, asking for their real identity, which had been fabricated to the taste of China (over a thousand years) and Japan.

Waking up and asking and searching for their real identity.. what's wrong about it? If you don't have a correct view of your own identity, you're not a human being anymore, just another animal.

Suppose an adopted person would grow and start questioning his/her own real identity and would be seeking for her/his real roots. Is it wrong? Isn't it just human?

What's wrong about re-searching for the 'real' history?

Do you see and hear Chinese voices in this forum still sacking Corean sentiments, and so humiliating? Think to yourself that Corea has been in such a status of humiliation by China over a thousand years. What happens now is just continuation of the past.

Do you think it has to go like this for another thousand years or that Corea has had it enough and it maybe time for them to recover their real identity and pride.

Pride for China, of course. But save the pride for Corea, too, just to be fair.

I didn't mean to say that ALL Chinese history books are fake. Not at all. I meant to say that NOT ALL Chinese books say should be regarded faithful to truth.



Because the first ever written Corean history book (SamGukSaGi: History of Three Kingdoms) was written by descendants of Silla people and that during Goryeo period (even after collapse of Silla people). Although Goryeo claimed its lineage towards Goguryeo, but that was only a strategic slogan to stand against the falling Silla kingdom, and the all political leaders of Goryeo, in fact, come from the Silla region. The founder, WangGeon himself, was a member of the Silla royal family.

In fact, the whole political hegemony of Corea, from Shilla, thru Goryeo, and to Joseon, and up until now, come from the GyeonSangDo region (South Eastern part of the Corean peninsula), the former Silla region, almost ALL of them. And there has been only one single person from the old region of Baekje (now called Jeolla-do) and he is Kim Dae Jung who was the president for five years, 2008-2003. Not a single high commanding politician, except him, came from that old Baekje region. Can you imagine how people in that region have had to suffer for so long years, up till now?

The hostility of WangGeon, founder of Goryeo, against Baekje people is even more dramatic that, at his dying bed, he asked cabinet people around them 'not to ever hire a person from the Jeolla-do (Baekje) region, they are not to be trusted'.

So, the history of Baekje was so much distorted by these Silla people, and at modern times, there are a lot of Coreans questioning the validity of this first and official history book.

In fact, Silla was the weakest country of the three. Goguryeo was a very strong one with major part of its land in Manchuria, not to be destroyed even by a series of whole-scale invasions by China (Sui and Tang). Baekje, on the other hand, changed their survival strategy from horse-riders (in Manchuria) to sea people (escaping the threat by Goguryeo) for trade in the Yellow sea and up to Japanese islands.

Being the weakest, Silla called in Chinese power, Tang, to sack/destroy Baekje first, and then Goguryeo(by Tang later). The SamGukSaGi is written to glorify the greatness of Silla (much fake) and picture Baekje as a negligible country. The Baekje history has never been dealt with fairness in Corea over the last thousand and three hundred years.

That's part of the reason why the records are rare even from Corean books.



Yes, they did. But over those periods (Liao, Yuan, Qing), Corea (Goguryeo and Joseon) have been a vassal country of China, and they would regard their old brotherhoods in Manchuria as barbarians just as China did, and wouldn't listen to the horse-riding powers. The governments in the peninsula were so sinocized that they fought against their own bloods.

Mongols and Manchus would invade into Corea (Goryeo and Joseon) but would not kill the kings even though these Corean kings would repeatedly betray them and coalesce backdoors with China. Mongols and Manchus had the sense of brotherhood, but the bastards in the Corean peninsula, the governing political groups, would not.



Not, of course. For, in a nutshell, Corea now is continuation of Silla whereas Japan now is virtually continuation of Baekje. (Many of Japanese would not like theory, either).

Both Corean official history books and Japanese history books deny their blood lineage, out of mutual hatred and shame. Coreans (Silla-centric view) cannot acknowledge that Baekje was such a vast powerful country, for it had to be Silla that was great. And they claim that they fought for unification, when, in fact, they only betrayed their own blood brother countries with the help of foreign ethnic group China (who has been enemy of Goguryeo and all Corean kingdoms that once existed in Manchuria), the long-time enemy of their own bloodline. What Silla took, after collapse of the other two, is only half of the Corean peninsula, let alone the vast land of Goguryeo in Manchuria.

Baekje, officially, existed from 18BC to 660AD, but already from around 470AD, the emperor was in Japan (Asuka), not in Corea, and there'd be only kings in Gonju, Corean peninsula, and Liaodong peninsula. After collapse at 660AD, not only royal families but also most of Baekje people, if they can, fled (boat people) into Japanese islands to escape from slavery. At 663, the Yamato kingdom (as it is called in Japan; in fact, Baekje's central government) sent over 40,000 troops and 800 ships to revive the fallen Baekje, but only too late and strategically flawed to be sacked by Tang brutally.

In 721, the Japanese empire wrote its first official history book (Nihonshiki) and claimed Japanese people came from the ocean led by a Sun Goddess. They totally deny their lineage back to the continent, because, if they do, they then have to explain why there lost their land in the peninsula and Liaodong. So shameful of them.

And such denial of lineage was also the demand of Tang and Silla, the war winners, to Japan, not to ever try to reclaim its old land in the peninsula or in Liaodong.

And Japan also changed her country name (from Yamato, Wa, Kudara(Japanse name for Kudara) and renamed themselves Nihon, Origin of Sun, for that had been a nickname of themselves because Japan is in the direction of sunrise as seen from Corea or China.

So, yes. Japanese and Coreans share a lot linguistically, culturally, and ethnically, but after all, they were enemies and had to remain as such for over 1300 years.



True. In this Corean peninsula, there have been only political elites to protect their political power at the expense of their own history, and under protective blessing of a foreign big power, China. The same thing, the two Corean governments now, North and South, cannot exist without blessings of other big powers of their choice or destiny, China and US.




I'm not sure whether you're a real professional historian or not. Whether we have to converse in that level of professionalism. But if you'd argue seriously for that, I'd buy that. OK.