뉴스레터

Song, Ki-ho. Professor

There is such a dearth of historical record on ancient history that even the smallest leads become the starting point of a large-scale study. That is precisely the background behind my paper that uncovered the standing of Balhae. My paper showed that while Balhae presented itself as a wangguk [kingdom] externally, it held itself as a hwangjeguk [emperordom] internally. That is to say, I was able to shed light on Balhae's dual system of identity, thereby discrediting in one blow China's claim that Balhae was not an independent state.

I chanced upon my first lead during my first visit to Yanbian in 1990. I had a two-hour conversation with Bang Hak-bong, a researcher specializing in Balhae history. He pointed out that we can tell China's claim is wrong just by how King Mun of Balhae is referred to as "Hwangsang" [皇上] in Princess Jeonghyo's mausoleum. I knew of the mausoleum, but the title "Hwangsang" had escaped my attention. I made note: "'Hwangsang' means 'hwangje' [emperor]."

The second lead came from Japan. I found the Buddha Stele from the 4th year of Hamhwa[javascript:flink(%22a%22);the chronological era of Balhae] included in a sourcebook on stone inscriptions by Hwang Su-yeong. However, it was not easy to make out the inscriptions. It was written that the stele was housed at the Ohara Museum of Art in Kurashiki [倉敷], so I asked an acquaintance at the National Museum of Korea to request photos from the Ohara Museum of Art. It was possible to clearly make out the inscriptions on the stele from the black-and-white photo that was sent to us. The following is from a 1992 paper on the stele:

The inscription says Cho Mun-hyu worked at a government ministry called "Heowang-bu" [許王府]. I showed the photo of the stele to Professor Park Han-je, who specializes in the history of the Southern and Northern Dynasties period. He, too, homed in on the mention of "Heowang-bu" whose existence would imply that there was the invested position of "heowang" [recognized-as-king] which in turn would suggest that there was a king above this "king." That is to say, the king of Balhae could not but have been a hwangje[emperor]-like entity. It is also highly unlikely that Cho Mun-hyu worked at the Heowang-bu of Tang China.

Balhae: "Wanguk" internally, "Hwangjeguk" externally

I spoke about the stele when I was at Kyushu University in early 1996, but Professor Hamada Kosaku [浜田耕策] said the stele was probably fake and refused to believe my claims. We went to the Ohara Museum of Art together. Upon examining the stele firsthand, Professor Hamada said the stele seemed authentic. In effect, I had been fortunate enough to discover a Balhae artifact in Japan before any Japanese scholar. The only regrettable part was that there was no information on where the stele was found and other potentially valuable details.

Be that as it may, I still did not have enough to go by for a full-fledged research paper. Then I was suddenly reminded of the "chronicle on Balhae" in Xin Tangshu [New Book of Tang; 新唐書]. It occurred to me that I may have overlooked something in a historical source with which just about every Korean historian is familiar. In it, Seonjoseong [宣詔省] is listed as one of the three government ministries of Balhae. "Seonjoseong" means a ministry that issues "joseo"; it occurred to me that "joseo" may be referring to royal edicts. This finding was buttressed by "jogosain" [詔誥舍人], a government post in charge of drafting royal edicts. The "jogo" in "jogosain" refers to imperial edicts.

This led me to examine a government ministry called Seongyoseong [宣敎省], established in the late Silla period. Seonjoseong handled the joseo [royal edicts] while Seongyoseong dealt with the gyoseo [imperial edicts]. "Joseo" refers to orders from the emperor while "gyoseo" denotes orders from the king. This finding shed light on the stark contrast between the national status Unified Silla strove for and that which Balhae attempted to attain.

As one thing led to another, I found the small glimmer of light guiding my research growing brighter. Balhae had employed an independent system for era names since King Mu, the second king of the dynasty. The designation of era names was a prerogative of a hwangjeguk [emperordom]; a wangguk [kingdom] was obligated to use the era names designated by a hwangjeguk. Silla had been using an independent era naming system before unifying the Korean peninsula but had to give it up under Tang pressure. Balhae maintained an independent era naming system the longest out of any dynasty in Korean history. And that is why Chinese history books use the expression ¡°without permission¡± with the explanation that Balhae used a system of designating era names unacceptable to China.

I was also reminded of the incident in which Balhae's king was subjected to severe backlash from Japan for referring to himself as "Descendant of Heaven" [天孫] in an official state letter to Japan. While China used "Son of Heaven" and Japan, "Emperor of Heaven," Balhae mimicked Goguryeo and used "Descendant of Heaven." While there are slight differences in terminology, all three terms signify heavenly origins and refer to heavenly agents. It is a concept too elevated for a mere king to aspire adopt. When a Balhae envoy went to Japan, he was accompanied by regional heads. This was taking after the entourage of kings an emperor would bring along in making a state visit to another country.

I finally had a sizable body of historical sources and materials for my paper. Alas, I presented my findings in a paper entitled "Historical Records on Balhae's Title of Emperor" at an international academic symposium held in March 1993 at Korea University's Research Institute for Korean Studies.

Evidence of Balhae's dual system of identity from an excavation report of a Balhae tomb

Site of Balhae government
ministry ruins
in Shangjing Longquan
(From The illustrated book of
ruins and relics of Korea)

Last fall—16 years since the presentation of my paper, I was ecstatic when I received an academic journal from China. I had heard that a new Balhae tomb had been excavated; I was burning with anticipation to find out what had been uncovered. A condensed report of the excavation was published in 2009 in the Archeology [考古], Vol. 6. The excavation revealed that the wife of King Mun—Balhae's third king—was Empress Hyoeui [孝懿皇后] and that the wife of King Gan—Balhae's ninth king—was Empress Sunmok [順穆皇后]. Empress Sunmok's epitaph is reported to read, "King Gan's Empress of Family Name Tae." If the husband were but a king, how could the wife have been an empress? Did the wife enjoy a higher status? That was obviously not the case. Although the king of Balhe was referred to as "wang" [king], he was a "hwangje"[emperor]-like figure. Mindful of its powerful neighbor China, Balhae used the title "wang" and paid tribute to China. Internally, however, it maintained an emperordom. This was the claim I had made a long time ago, and recently discovered historical evidence reaffirmed my claim; what could be more rewarding for a researcher?

It was not just Balhae that had such a dual system of identity. While Goryeo presented itself a kingdom externally, there were many "kings" under the king. The historians working on Goryeosa [History of Goryeo] in the early Joseon period were confounded by the "imperial" terminology employed by Goryeo. Goryeo probably learned about the workings of the dual system—i.e., internally a hwangjeguk but externally a wangguk—from Balhae.

Korean history can be divided into Unified Silla and Joseon, which pledged submission to China, and Balhae and Goryeo, which adopted a dualistic stance toward China. Korea only proclaimed itself both internally and externally a hwangjeguk during the Daehan Jeguk [Great Han Empire] period and in times of insurrection; it was never a mainstream foreign affairs policy for Korea. This is something to look back on if we are not sure about the kind of stance we should adopt vis-à-vis China today.