뉴스레터

This book is a collection of studies conducted by NAHF on the theme of ‘The Formation of East Asian Modernity and History’ since 2017. In order to solve the historical and territorial conflicts in East Asia, it is necessary to comprehensively understand how each country's historical perception is produced, distributed and consumed. Then everyone can start a conversation to overcome the difference in perception. This study is a basic work to approach these issues at the level of modern academic history. We took the first step but we have a long way to go.

Why we started the study

'Past' does not exist at present, but it is an indispensable factor in understanding reality and looking forward to the future. Whether it's an individual or a group, we can't predict the future without knowing the past. The historical conflict in East Asia is due to the different futures pursued by each country. In other words, this is caused by the process of reorganizing history as an ideology in which mobilizes the people and each country predicts the future centered on its own country. The Northeast Borderland History and the Chain of Events Research Project is a classic example.

Therefore, in order to approach issues, it is necessary to reflect on the way East Asian countries have formed their own history since modern times. We need to know: what kind of scientific methods and institutions are the basis of the modern history of East Asia to form a nation and a territory, and to describe the history of the nation. And how to imagine the relationship between the world and oneself in the process and to otherize the surroundings is the key. This study is an attempt to grasp these issues in the context of academic history.

There is a reason why the study put forward 'East Asia' and 'modernity'. It is because of historical experience: the modern East Asia, a mixture of empire and colonization, invasion and resistance, has been progressed in structural interworking. However, fundamentally, the modern history of East Asia internalized the method and the frame of recognition of Western modern history. Japanese history or oriental studies internalize the Western imperialist methods and frame of recognition and project them around. And they hierarchically build history around their people, in a way that rationalizes imperial aggression - a fact that is already well known. The view of history that justifies colonial rule is merely the use of Western orientalism.

The modern history of China, which created the (so-called) 'Chinese people' and tried to build its own history by replacing the territory of Qing Dynasty with historical territory, was also in the same context. Especially, it was no different from that of Japan that built its history by integrating all the peoples in the territory centering on Han Chinese. It used scientific methods such as modern thinking, investigation, and surveying that originated in the West. And it went through the process of self-establishment in response to Eastern Classic Studies in the West and Japanese Oriental Studies. The history of the country was built through this process, which combined with extreme popular nationalism with the occasion of resistance and the Cold War, and formed a prototype of today's historical conflict.

In this way, reflecting on the process of establishing modern history in East Asia is like a work of seeking alternatives by looking at the current historical conflict in a fundamental context.

What we studied

This book is a study on 'Manchuria' based on the academic planning and system of the empire. Manchuria is a historical homeland for a long time and is the core of Korean historical identity. This is an important geopolitical space directly linked to the safety of the Korean peninsula since Jurchen became active. It is a tragedy that this space is highlighted as the core of historical conflicts between countries in the region.

However, this conflict over Manchuria has been ongoing since the 20th century. In particular, China, Japan, and Russia have been involved in various academic planning for the dominance of Manchuria. They divided space on the premise of privileged control over Manchuria. And they reconstructed the genealogy of ethnic groups and nations to synthesize and systematize knowledge of nature, geography and resources. As a result, they tried to form Manchuria as a local space. The study of Manchurian-Korean History and Manchurian-Mongolian History, which Japan carried out under the name of the policy on the continent, is a representative example. And the modern knowledge formed like this still has a great influence.

This book divided these processes into three parts. First, it is to reveal the knowledge and political context of the study on Manchuria of the Empire. After the Royal Geographical Society explored Manchuria and Mt. Baekdu in the late 19th century, and after the Russo-Japanese War, Japanese academic planning began in earnest. This produced the concept of space that intentionally separates Manchuria from China. And this stimulated Chinese nationalism and formed the concepts of 'Borderland' and 'Northeast'. In other words, this study analyzed how the space of Manchuria was formed as modern knowledge and how it was raised as a historical conflict.

Second, the study on Oriental Studies and Manchuria of Imperial University was reviewed through Tokyo Imperial University and Manchu Genkoku University. This part explains how each university conducted research on Manchuria in line with imperial governance policies and whether it still has influence.

Third, the study analyzed Korea which was not equipped with modern academic system because it was deprived of the opportunity to build a national-state. In the 1930s, Koreans recognized Manchuria as the home of the nation and an extension of Joseon. But it was difficult to counter the ideology established by China and Japan. It left only a ‘complex image’.

What more to study in the future

The purpose of this study is to clarify the current East Asian historical conflict at the East Asian academic level. In the future, we will also analyze the history of East Asian countries in context. The background would be a history of aggression and resistance from the 1930s until the Cold War. In particular, we are interested in academic policies, surveys, theorem which are necessary for the construction of history, and the reorganization of oriental studies in the Western Empire. This will dissect the ideology embedded in modern history in East Asian countries, and seek a desirable direction of history that will help to predict the future.

Repeatedly, after Jurchen's power grew and became more active, Manchuria always decided on the fate of Korea and the territory of East Asia. Manchuria was a military base during the Korean War, and after the ceasefire, it maintained its role for a long time on the premise of a virtual war. It still symbolizes that Manchuria is a geopolitically important space. We need humanistic research to secure the local order and to embrace Manchuria as a living space. History is the past, but it is also the present and the future.