Balhae controversies: Difference between revisions

The Balhae controversies is a dispute between Korea and China and Russia over the history of the Balhae kingdom also known as Parhae, Bohai, and Po-hai. Due to its origins as the successor state of Goguryeo, Korean scholars consider Balhae as part of the North–South States Period of Korean history, while Chinese and Russian scholars argue Balhae is a part of Chinese and Russian history.^{[1] [2]}

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

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

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

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

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

Chinese historians have considered Balhae as its own distinct Balhae/Parhae/Bohai/Pohai ethnic group, which consisted mostly of Mohe people and Korean people. The New Book of Tang states that the Bohai "was originally the Sumo Mohe, began to ally themselves with Goguryeo, and took the surname Dae." (Dae is 大 in Chinese, Wade Giles : Ta ; Pinyin : Da),^[8] Historically, the Jurchens (later renamed the Manchus), considered themselves as sharing ancestry with the Mohe. In 1778, the Qing empire regime in Qianlong reviewed Various history books and found that Bohai was an ancestor of the Manchurian, and published Researches on Manchu Origins to provide the Bohai as a history of Manchurian. An earlier, opposing view comes from Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai, who said in 1963 that Korean people have lived in the northeastern region of China since ancient times and excavated relics prove that Bohai is a branch of ancient Korea. The former Chinese premier's remarks have been made public through a document entitled "Premier Zhou Enlai's Dialogue on Sino-Korean Relations."^[9] Finnish linguist Juha Janhunen argues that it is possible Goguryeo language could have been an Amuric language related to today's Nivkh language isolate.^{[10] [11]}

According to news articles citing a recent US report, China considers Bohai to be a province of the Tang Dynasty.^{[12] [13]} This view is linked to the Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences conducted by the Chinese Academy of Social Science. Bohai often paid tribute to China, and an heir who lacks this sanction was called by China 知國務 ("State Affairs Leader"), not king; also, China considered every king simultaneously the Prefect of Holhan/Huhan Prefecture (忽汗州都督府都督).^[14]

Classical Chinese

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

English

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

— 据魏焕《皇明九边考》卷二《辽东镇边夷考》^[15] Translation from Sino-J̌ürčed relations during the Yung-Lo period, 1403-1424 by Henry Serruys^[16]

The People's Republic of China is accused of limiting Korean archaeologists access to historical sites located within Liaoning and Jilin. Starting from 1994, increasing numbers of South Korean tourists began to visit archaeological sites in China and often engaged in nationalistic displays. This was aggravated by a series of tomb robberies and vandalism at several of these archaeological sites between 1995 and 2000.^[17] South Korean archeologist Song Ki-ho, a noted professor at Seoul National University who has published several papers criticizing the Chinese government's interpretation of Bohai 's history, made several visits to China in the 1990s, 2000, 2003, and 2004, examining several historical sites and museums. However, he found himself restricted by limitations on note-taking and photography and was even ejected from several sites by museum employees.^{[18] [19]} North Korea has restricted independent archaeologists from its historical sites, many of which may be Balhae-related, since at least the early 1960s.

In traditional Russian historiography, this state is recognized as the first highly organized independent state formation of the Tungus-Manchurian peoples.^[20] On the territory of Russia, over 80 years, 18 small objects, 19 villages and 7 cities of this state have been studied.^[21]

Also in Russian academic science there is other data on the borders of this state than in Korea and China.^[22]

In the West, Balhae is generally characterized as a successor of Goguryeo that traded with China and Japan, and its name is thus romanized from Korean.^{[23] [24] [25]} Alternate romanizations such as "Parhae", from Korean, or "Bohai", in the pinyin format, are also common in English.^{[26] [27] [28] [29]} While it is seen as a conglomeration of peoples from Manchuria and Korea, there has been much debate on the ethnicity of Balhae's elite class. Koreans generally believe Balhae founder Dae Jo-yeong was of Goguryeo ethnicity while others sometimes characterize him as an ethnic Mohe from Goguryeo.^{[30] [31] [32] [33]} China also considers Balhae as part of the history of its ethnic Manchus.^[34]

Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov have criticized political bias in North Korean historiography, and have accused North Korean scholars of reconstructing or even fabricating historical sites.^[35] Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov assert that Balhae was independent in its relations with the Tang Dynasty. Australian scientist Leonid A. Petrov describe Balhae as a kingdom of displaced Goguryeo people.^[35] They do admit that Balhae had a strong Chinese and Central Asian influence.^[36]

• Balhae
• History of Korea
• History of China

• CS1 errors: external links
• CS1 errors: missing periodical
• Articles that may contain original research from May 2018
• All articles that may contain original research
• Wikipedia neutral point of view disputes from May 2018
• All Wikipedia neutral point of view disputes
• Articles with multiple maintenance issues