Newsletter

Editor's Note: At the "International Workshop on East Asian Maritime History" held at the NAHF in August 2015, experts in maritime history gathered together to take a look at East Asian history from the perspective of maritime history and review the status of results of the study of maritime history in Korea and the rest of East Asia. One of the participants in this workshop, Professor Enomoto Wataru met Research Fellow Lee, Jeong-il at the NAHF for an interview. The two researchers talked about the concept and validity of the Theory of an East Asian World and the trend of the Japan-led study of maritime history.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il The research on East Asia by Japanese scholars from the 20th century onwards is receiving attention from the world over. Please give us a brief introduction to the study of Medieval East Asia, including its trend over the last thirty years, its challenges, its outlook, etc.

A. Enomoto Wataru First of all, as for the research on Japanese history from the 1980s onward, numerous studies have been made of maritime history (referred to as the history of foreign relations or the history of maritime area in Japan). Various historical facts and phenomena are currently being re-examined based on these studies. Especially in recent years, vigorous efforts have been made to verify and study the impact of foreign culture on literature, the arts, and religion. This subject area has been extensively studied by Japanese scholars because they realized that a historical view centered around a particular country had its limitations and took the initiative in overcoming them. In that sense, there is something common with what is happening in the World Systems Theory, the Theory of the Nation-State, and the like.

Similar trends can be also found in studies on Korean history, Chinese history, and Southeast Asian history as well as Japanese history. There are increasingly more studies that pay attention to international contracts in relation to the evolution of history. This trend seems to be very clear and strong, especially in the study of Korean history. A similar trend is also observed in the study of Chinese history. Meanwhile, as regional differences in China draw more attention, regional history is also being studied with vigor. As with the study of maritime history, the re-examination began with questioning the belief that the nation-state and national traditions are clearly defined and established.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il What do you think of the concept of East Asian world order?

A. Enomoto Wataru The concept of East Asian world order is valid as long as it is used with the acknowledgement of the fact that the framework of 'East Asia' is a modern concept. But when it comes to explaining a historical phenomenon that occurred in broad areas, it is as dangerous to regard East Asia as an absolute framework as to regard Korea, China, and Japan as a fixed and absolute framework because both will narrow the possibilities of research on history. For instance, one may fail to see that the Japanese Archipelago was closer to the Philippines or Java than it was to the Gansu Province (甘肅省) or Shanxi Province (山西省) of China during the 16th and 17th centuries, unless the trade during those periods is brought to the center stage. We need to break free from the idea that the sphere of a particular region is fixed, and allow ourselves to expand the concept to include various regional spheres depending on, for example, trade, culture, and political control.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il Could you tell us how much progress have Japanese scholars made in their discussion of the Theory of an East Asian World and the Theory of Eastern Eurasia?

A. Enomoto Wataru The Theory of an East Asian World, which emerged from the 1950s through the 1960s, presented the 'East Asian World' as a transnational historical framework. It was revolutionary in that it laid a foundation for discussion of the evolution of the individual histories of Korea, China, and Japan at the international level. But from the 21st century onwards, some began to question the validity of the theory of an East Asian World. They argue, for example, that historically the focus of Eastern Asia has often been placed on Northeast China, Mongolia, and Central Asia, and that 'the East Asian World' is not necessarily a complete one, and has not been a major player, either, in the context of world history. It is no surprise, then, that they wonder if the 'East Asian World' is a framework good enough to use in analyzing history. Of course, I don't deny that the 'East Asian World' can provide a valid perspective from which to view certain facts or phenomena. But we also need to consider improvising an 'Eastern Eurasian World' or a 'Maritime World' as an ad-hoc solution, depending on when and what the analysis is about. Needless to say, we need to first realize that in analyzing history there are times when a certain hypothetical 'world' is valid and other times when it is not.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il What do you think of the recent European trend of presenting a new version of East Asian history and world history? And could you also say briefly about the current academic exchange between European and Japanese scholars?

A. Enomoto Wataru European researchers are interested primarily in periods from the 15th century onwards, although, to tell you the truth, there has been little contact. There are some aspects of 'world history' as established by Europeans that may open the eyes of us as East Asians to new truths. And there are other aspects with which we may feel at odds. The meaningful response to the European trend of presenting East Asian history or world history would be to critically review and understand it, instead of utterly rejecting or blindly following it.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il I agree. I think it is time for new research on an East Asia that is different from the one that is a part of the Western version of world history or global history. In this connect, I wonder if there are Japanese scholars who try to start a new trend of reinterpreting the history of 9th-14th-century East Asia.

A. Enomoto Wataru I notice that there are such studies, but I don't think they are only about 'East Asia.' They point out the presence of Mongolia or Tibet in East Asian international order, countries of the inner Asian world. Furthermore, there is also the increasing tendency to emphasize the need to fairly define the international status of countries like Khitan (Liao), Jurchen (Jin), and Dangxiang (Xixia), without assuming Tang or Song as the center of East Asia.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that the study of East Asian maritime history has been led by Japanese scholars. What advice would you like to give Korean and Chinese scholars?

A. Enomoto Wataru The study of Japanese maritime history from the 1980s onwards is characterized most notably by its attempt to criticize narrow-minded chauvinism instead of encouraging it by taking a nationalistic point of view that seems almost determined to demonstrate Japan's overseas expansion. During the 1930s and 1940s, on the other hand, Japanese scholars were encouraged to study maritime history from the perspective of colonialism and expansionism, and they published many papers. While some of these papers are very good and still worth referring to, not a small number of them were used at that time by the state to fulfill its agenda of overseas expansion. Maritime history as a research topic has the great potential to open people's eyes by encouraging the formation of new points of view in the academic world. On the other hand, however, it is also vulnerable to use for political purposes instead of for its original purpose of substantiation. Researchers in Korea, China, and Japan are advised to be extremely aware and cautious about this.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il I understand that you currently work for the International Research Center for Japanese Studies. Could you tell us about its organization, network, and research topics?

A. Enomoto Wataru The International Research Center for Japanese Studies is devoted to research related to Japanese culture. It has a full-time faculty of about 30, and its research covers a wide variety of topics, from history to literature, to philosophy, to the arts, to international politics, to folklore, and even to pop culture. And it is producing leading results in each of these research areas. The International Research Center for Japanese Studies, as the word 'international' in its title suggests, invites international scholars from various countries and regions and engages them in activities and joint studies, while avoiding addressing research topics that are relevant only to Japan. The aim is to encourage those global citizens to bring their own perspectives to the study of Japanese culture. The Research Center also runs a visiting scholar program that invites fifteen scholars each year from different countries all over the world. Many of them come from Korea, China, Taiwan, India, and countries of Europe, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.

Q. Lee, Jeong-il Could you share with us your thoughts on the outlook of academic exchange or cooperation between the International Research Center for Japanese Studies and the Northeast Asian History Foundation? What approach to exchange do you think the two institutions should take?

A. Enomoto Wataru The International Research Center for Japanese Studies wishes to conduct joint research with researchers from other countries. The main focus is on international research cooperation at the level of individual researchers. The Research Center also considers the continuation of establishing a relationship with overseas research institutions. In the future I hope to see further development of exchange and cooperation with the Northeast Asian History Foundation as the leading research institute of Korea.