Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Gojoseon
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Academic perspectives=== {{POV|date=January 2023}} Gojoseon mythology and history can be divided into three phases, Dangun, Gija Joseon, and Wi Man Joseon.<ref name=c-bar0-12/> # Kang & Macmillan (1980), Sohn et al. (1970), Kim J.B. (1980), Han W.K. (1970), Yun N. H. (1985), Lee K.B. (1984), Lee J.B. (1987) viewed the Dangun myth as a native product of proto-Koreans, although it is not always associated with Gojoseon.<ref name="c-bar0-12" /> Kim J.B. (1987) rejected the Dangun myth's association with Gojoseon and pushes it further back to the Neolithic period. Sohn et al. (1970) suggested that the Dangun myth is associated with the [[Dongyi]], whom they viewed as the ancestors of Koreans. Kim C. (1948) suggested the Dangun myth had a Chinese origin, tracing it to a Han dynasty tomb in the [[Shandong peninsula]]. # Gardiner (1969), Henderson (1959), McCune (1962) considered the Gija myth to be a later conflation. Sohn et al. (1970) dismissed the Gija story as a Chinese fabrication. On the other hand, Hatada (1969), gave Gojoseon a Chinese identity, exclusively ascribed it to the Gija myth, and moved it to the 3rd century BCE.<ref name="c-bar0-12" /> Shim Jae-Hoon (2002) accepted the eastward migration of Gija, but denied the relationship between Gija and Joseon, suggesting that the existence of Gojoseon could not be extended to the second millennium BCE.<ref name="Shim 2002">{{cite journal|last1=Shim|first1=Jae-Hoon|title=A new understanding of Kija Chosŏn as a historical anachronism|journal=Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies|date=2002|volume=62|issue=2|pages=271–305|doi=10.2307/4126600|jstor=4126600}}</ref> # Kim C.W. (1966), Han W.K. (1970), Choi M.L. (1983, 1984, 1985, 1992), Han W.K. (1984), Kim J.B. (1987), Lee K.B. (1984) accepted Wi Man as a historical figure.<ref name="c-bar0-12" /> Gardiner (1969) questioned authenticity of the Wi Man myth, although he mentioned there were interactions between Gojoseon and the Han dynasty and social unrest in the area during that time period.<ref name="c-bar0-12">Cited in {{cite book|last1=Barnes|first1=Gina|title= State Formation in Korea: Historical and Archaeological Perspectives |date=2014| publisher=Routledge| location=New York| isbn=9780700713233|pages=10–13}}</ref> ====Controversies==== Around the mid-[[Joseon dynasty]], the established view among historians traced Korean origins to Chinese refugees, considering Korean history that of a long series of kingdoms connected with China. As such, the [[Gija Joseon]] and [[Silla]] states were valorized, while the Gojoseon and [[Goguryeo]] states were not considered as important.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Northern Territories and the Historical Understanding of Territory in Late Chosŏn |first=Anders |last=Karlsson|date=December 2009 |page=3 |series=Working Papers in Korean Studies|publisher=School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London}}</ref> According to this view, the first state in Korea, [[Gija Joseon]], was founded by [[Jizi]] in 1122 BCE, who was a disgruntled Chinese advisor to the [[Shang dynasty]]. The story of how he brought poetry, music, medicine, trade, and a political system to the Korean peninsula was conceived similarly to the proposed [[Founding of Rome]] by the [[Trojan War|Trojan]] refugee [[Aeneas]].<ref name="Simons70">{{Cite book|title=Korea: The Search for Sovereignty|first=G. L.|last=Simons|publisher=Palgrave MacMillan|year=1999 |page=70}}</ref> But by the 1930s, under the influence of [[Shin Chaeho]]'s histories, the Jizi Korean founding story became less popular than that of [[Dangun]], the son of a tiger and a bear – the latter being common in [[Japanese folklore]] – who brought civilization to the Korean peninsula.<ref name="Simons70"/> Shin and the other historians who promulgated this myth had been influenced by [[Daejonggyo]], a [[new religious movement]] which worshipped Dangun,<ref>{{Cite journal|title=The Parliament of Histories: New Religions, Collective Historiography, and the Nation|first=Boudewijn|last=Walraven|journal=Korean Studies|volume=25|issue=2 |year=2001|page=158 |doi=10.1353/ks.2001.0024|s2cid=145784087}}</ref> but attacked pre-annexation textbook narratives of Dangun which portrayed him as the brother of the Japanese god [[Susanoo]].<ref>{{Cite journal|first=Young-woo|last=Han|year=1992|title=The Establishment and Development of Nationalist History|journal=Seoul Journal of Korean Studies|volume=5|pages=69–70}}</ref> To Shin, Dangun was both the founder of the Korean ''minjok'' and the first Korean state (''kuk''), and thus the necessary starting point for Korean history.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Centering the Periphery: Manchurian Exile(s) and the North Korean State|first=Charles K.|last=Armstrong|journal=Korean Studies|volume=19|year=1995|pages=3|doi=10.1353/ks.1995.0017|s2cid=154659765|url=http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:168680/CONTENT/19.armstrong.pdf}}</ref> In response to a challenge by the Japanese scholars [[Shiratori Kurakichi]] and [[:ja:今西龍|Imanishi Ryū]] of Dangun as a fabrication by the author of the ''[[Samguk yusa]]'', nationalist historian [[Choe Nam-seon]] attacked [[Japanese mythology]] as being built upon fabrications.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Northeast Asia Centered Around Korea: Ch'oe Namsŏn's View of History|first=Chizuko T.|last=Allen|volume=49|issue=4|date=November 1990|pages=793–795|journal=The Journal of Asian Studies|doi=10.2307/2058236|jstor=2058236|s2cid=162622386 }}</ref> By focusing on a mythological god which founded a "sacred race" (''shinsŏng chongjok''), Korean nationalist historiography aims to portray ancient Korea as a golden age of "gods and heroes" where Korea's cultural achievements rivaled those of China and Japan.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Constructing "Korean" Origins: A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories|first=Hyung Il|last=Pai|publisher=Harvard University Asia Center|year=2000 |page=2}}</ref> Accordingly, Shin Chaeho elevated Dangun to play a similar role as did the [[Yellow Emperor]] in China and which [[Amaterasu]] does in Japan.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Rediscovering Manchuria: Sin Ch'aeho and the Politics of Territorial History in Korea|journal=Journal of Asian Studies|volume=56|number=1|page=32|year=1997|first=Andre|last=Schmid|doi=10.2307/2646342|jstor=2646342|s2cid=162879663 |doi-access=free}}</ref> [[Choe Nam-seon]], according to his {{ill|Purham culture theory|ko|불함문화론}}, places Dangun even above the Chinese and Japanese emperors, because those rulers were supposedly [[Shamanism|Shamanistic]] rulers of the ancient Korean "Părk" tradition.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Northeast Asia Centered Around Korea: Ch'oe Namsŏn's View of History|first=Chizuko T.|last=Allen|volume=49|issue=4|date=November 1990|page=800|journal=The Journal of Asian Studies|doi=10.2307/2058236|jstor=2058236|s2cid=162622386 }}</ref> The Dangun story also lends credence to claims that Korean heritage is over 5000 years old. According to Hyung Il Pai, the popularity of Dangun studies can be said to "reflect the progressively ultra-nationalistic trend in Korean historical and archaeological scholarship today".<ref>{{Cite book|title=Constructing "Korean" Origins: A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories|first=Hyung Il|last=Pai|publisher=Harvard University Asia Center|year=2000 |pages=95–96}}</ref> Shin Chaeho named [[Mount Paektu]] in the [[Changbai Mountains]] on the Sino-Korean border as a part of Korean heritage, by virtue of connection with the mythical Dangun. The mountain, however, was also claimed by the [[Manchu people|Manchus]] of the [[Qing dynasty]] as part of their origin myth at least since the 17th century,<ref name="Pai254"/><ref>{{Cite journal|title=Ginseng and Border Trespassing Between Qing China and Chosŏn Korea|first=Seonmin|last=Kim|journal=Late Imperial China|volume=28|number=1|date=June 2007|pages=42–43|doi=10.1353/late.2007.0009|s2cid=143779357}}</ref> and the mountain range is considered sacred in [[Han Chinese]] culture as well.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Centering the Periphery: Manchurian Exile(s) and the North Korean State|first=Charles K.|last=Armstrong|journal=Korean Studies|volume=19|year=1995|page=2|doi=10.1353/ks.1995.0017|s2cid=154659765|url=http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:168680/CONTENT/19.armstrong.pdf}}</ref> This nationalist identification of Baekdu with Koreans was cemented by the operation of [[Korean independence movement]] partisans operating from the Chinese border and legitimized with associations to the history of the Gojoseon and [[Balhae]] states.<ref name="Pai254">{{Cite book|title=Constructing "Korean" Origins: A Critical Review of Archaeology, Historiography, and Racial Myth in Korean State Formation Theories|first=Hyung Il|last=Pai|publisher=Harvard University Asia Center|year=2000 |page=254}}</ref> The Chinese civilizational connection to ancient Korea continues to be attacked by North Korean historians, who allege that the history of [[Gija Joseon]] was "viciously distorted by the feudal ruling class, the [[sadaejuui]] followers, and the big-power chauvinists".<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Reinterpreting Traditional History in North Korea|first=Yŏng-ho|last=Ch'oe|volume=40|issue=3|journal=The Journal of Asian Studies|date=May 1981|pages=503–505|doi=10.2307/2054553|jstor=2054553|s2cid=145140808 }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)