뉴스레터

On May 13, 2014, the Northeast Asian History Foundation (President Kim, Hakjoon) hosted the 1st Conference on Ancient History at its Grand Conference Hall. The purpose and significance of this conference are well illustrated in President Kim's message: "Although we at the NAHF recognize the importance of research in ancient history, our efforts so far do not quite measure up. We will seek opinions to find out what topics need to be studied in this field, what fresh perspectives and methodologies need to be introduced, and how to attract young researchers to study ancient history." President Kim also stressed that "research in ancient history should not be approached from a single perspective, but based on objective and empirical evidence in order to respect and gather various opinions."

At this conference, six scholars of ancient history gathered together, presenting papers and having a discussion on the theme "Various Perceptions of the Ancient History of Korea," and the audience filled 150 seats. This conference confirmed that there were various opinions and arguments in the field of ancient history. In concluding the general discussion, Professor Yoon Myung-chul (Dongguk Univ.), the presider, showed his respect to the participants for their passion for history, and stressed that historians needed an open mind and respect for others with arguments and research results different from their own. This can be said to the conclusion of the event. The contents and arguments of the papers presented at this conference are summarized below.

None of the History Books of Korea Were Forged (Park Seong-su, Professor Emeritus at the Academy of Korean Studies)

It has been thought that the three unofficial accounts of Korean history (Ancient History of Tangun's Miraculous Deeds, Historical Stories of Kyuwon, and Ancient Records of Tangun and Hwangung) were forged. But this idea is wrong and hard to root out. When we say forged history books, we usually refer to books of ancient history. In other words, we imply that all the historical accounts in those three books are lies. This is to say that we are unaware of the existence of our roots and foundations, and do not understand that they need to be established first. To establish our foundations on our own without relying on help from others, we need to understand our ancient history. In this respect, these history books need to be reexamined.

A Linguistic Review of the Founding of Koguryo and Terminology (Choi Gi-ho, Former President and Current Chair Professor at Ulaanbaatar University)

Through a linguistic comparison between the Korean and the Mongol, an analysis of the Gwanggaeto Stele inscriptions, and a comparison between the myths of Mongolia and Koguryo, new arguments were made about who founded Koguryo and when it was founded, the terms related to the founding of the country, and the locations of the places names. The name of the man who founded Koguryo is 'Chumo,' which means Venus. Umridaesu, which appear on the Gwanggaeto Stele inscriptions, refers to the Amur River. Heulseunggol, the site of the founding of the country, refers to Khalkhin Gol in eastern Mongolia. Biryusu or Bosulsu also refers to the Buir Lake and the Khalkhin River.

The Chronological Order of Bal (發), Joseon, and Sushen, and Measures against the Northeast Project (Shin Dong-jun, Director of the 21st Century Politics and Economy Research Institute)

The chronological order of Bal, Joseon, and Sushen was verified through an analysis of the contents of the Chinese history books: Guanzi, Zuo Zhuan, Kuo yu, and Records of the Grand Historian. The view that Silla is the legitimate state of Korea, which originated from History of the Three Kingdoms by Kim Bu-sik, was criticized. With this view alone, we cannot cope with the Northeast Project because it removes and reduces portions of our territory, people, and history. All the three kingdoms of Koguryo, Baekje, and Silla, as well as the first Korean nation of Gojoseon, should be given equal treatment. Shin Chae-ho and Kim Kyo-heon argued that Jin and Goryeo, and Qing and Joseon should be viewed as the North and South Dynasties, and this historical perception could be a possible solution for coping with the Northeast Project.

In Search of the Roots of the Korean: Beyond the Paradigm of the 1,000-Year History of Ancient Korea (Kim Woon-hoi, Professor at Dongyang University)

An attempt to find the identity of the Korean people was made based on a review of the studies made in various fields that explored the roots of the Korean people. Specifically, the identity of the Liao Dynasty, which inherited the spirit of Gojoseon, the identify of the Hsienpei, Suchen and Malgarin peoples as the posterity of Gojoseon, the Gwanggaeto Stele and Wa, the identities of Korea and Mongolia were analyzed. This has made it clear that the people of Korea or Joseon are not limited to the Korean people on the Korean Peninsula. With the Korea-centric perception of history, influenced by Sinocentrism, no academic progress can be expected, nor can Korean history be explained.

The Origin of the Ancient State of Japan Great Wa (大倭), and Han (韓) (Soh Jin-cheol, Professor Emeritus at Wonkwang University)

The relationship between Great Wa (大倭), known to be an ancient state of Japanese, and Han (韓), which used to exist in the southern Korean Peninsula, and how they existed were reviewed. Daisotsu (大率), who appears in the section about Han of the Book of the Later Han and in the section about Wa of the Book of Wei, should be seen as the ruler of Great Wa. Under the reign of Daisotsu, Great Wa conquered the southern Kyushu region in about the 4th to 5th century, and, moving on to Honshu (本州), advanced as far as to the present-day Kansai region and governed the country of Wa. This verified the falsehood of the common view of Japan that the origin of Wa was the Yamato regime in the Kansai region in the 4th to 5th century.

Research in the History of Gojoseon: Results and Issues (Seo Young-su, Professor at Dankook University)

The results and issues of the research in the history of Gojoseon that had been carried out by the North and South Korean academia were summarized, with focus on the time of the founding of Gojeseon, its capital and territory, and the issues of Gija Joseon and Wiman Joseon. The history of Gojoseon has been continuously studied in the North and South Korean academia. Recently, however, the Chinese academia is denying the identity of Gojoseon while trying to include its related relics and sites in Chinese history. To establish the history of Gojoseon, written sources need to be collected, and translated and annotated accurately. Also needed are establishing the identity of Gojoseon and the theory of state formation, and continued academic exchange between the North and South Korean academia.

The NAHF will continue to host conferences to address other topics on ancient history, and also carry out annual research projects in this field.