동북아역사재단 NORTHEAST ASIAN HISTORY FOUNDATION 로고 동북아역사재단 NORTHEAST ASIAN HISTORY FOUNDATION 로고 뉴스레터

화제의 책
A Study on the Perception of Chinese History and the Narrative of Korean History in Western Academia
  • Woo Seong-min, Researcher, Research Institute for International Relations and Historical Reconciliation

Recently, the foundation published A Study on the Perception of Chinese History and the Narrative of Korean History in Western Academia, which shed new light on the perception of Chinese history in western academia and studied how western academia describes Korean history in the narrative of China’s foreign relations history. As China rapidly emerges as a global superpower, the US-China conflict is escalating day after day. This book provides a new perspective on recognizing the relationship between Korea and China for those of us living in the age of US-China conflicts. This book was written by over 20 authors, and the main content is described as follows;



책1



Background of The Cambridge History of China Compilation in Western Academia


『The Cambridge History of China was intended to provide western readers with knowledge of Chinese history with the support of the US government as public interest in China increased in the US and Europe in the 1950s. In 1958, the U.S. government passed the National Defense Education Act, which stated that the Chinese threat was clearly weakened strategically, and some universities opened courses on Chinese language and culture.


The chief editor was John Fairbank, who laid the foundation for Chinese studies in the United States. He not only proposed the 'Shock-Response Logic,' an important theoretical framework for understanding Chinese history but also played an important role in the US government's policy toward China. He saw the Qing Dynasty as the period when the old order came to an end due to a conflict with the western world in the 19th century. According to the 'Shock-Response Logic,' Chinese culture was a closed culture and led Chinese society to stagnation, and only through the shock of the west they can destroy the original social order and take the path of modernization. Fairbank's assertions were also reflected in the Outline History of East Asia published in the 1960s.



책2



Changes in the Perception of Chinese History in Western Academia


In the 1960s and 1970s, criticism of the western-centered view began to be raised in western academia. As the awareness of regional uniqueness expanded, there was an attempt to adjust the perspective on the 'Shock-Response Theory.' Characteristics of this period are that there were efforts to explain the subjectivity of the Chinese people and the continuity of history regarding Chinese history while maintaining the basic framework of the Shock-Response Theory. It reflected expectations for China to become a partner again during reformation and opening. While China was pursuing reformation and open-door policies and western countries such as the United States and Europe were encouraging China to participate in the world market, the logic of external shock and China's response has been the subject of reflection since the 1980s. The world began to focus on changes and developments and internal drivers within China instead of the model of western shock and Chinas response.


In western academic circles in the 1990s, postmodern, postcolonial, and decentralized discourses spread, which impacted the study of New Qing History in the United States. The so-called 'New Qing History' study emphasized that Manchus during the Qing Dynasty were not completely assimilated into the Hans and that non-Han identities are very important for understanding the Qing Empire. The biggest feature of the study of New Qing History that distinguishes it from previous studies of Chinese history was its criticism of Han-centrism.


In the same context, The Cambridge History of China: Volume 6, published in 1994, also reflected the importance of the history of Mongolia, which was a world empire. It found the cause for Mongolia's loss of supremacy in the decline of the power of the Great Khan instead of the conflict between Mongolia and the Han Chinese elites, as explained by Chinese academia. It also separated Tibet and the Uyghur Empire from Chinese history and described them in the section for Inland Asia.


Meanwhile, the relatively late publication, The Cambridge History of China: Volume 9, Part 2 Qing Dynasty until 1800」』 has relatively well-reflected the new trends of non-New Qing History scholars, such as Paul A. Cohen, who studies China in the Sino-centrist view instead of the existing western-centered idea. It is pointed out that this is a case in which the academic network of western academic circles and Chinese academic circles has worked well.


Volume 2 of the most recently published The Cambridge History of China: The Six Dynasties (220-589)showed the 'de-Sinicization' tendency again by turning toward emphasizing the role of non-Han people, that is, Nomad in the Nomad-Han relations.



Chinese Academia's Reactions


Chinese scholars positively evaluated The Cambridge History of China for they could see western scholars perceptions of Chinese history, but criticized the little use of original texts recorded in Chinese characters, absence of research achievements of Chinese academic circles, and the narrative focused on political history. In particular, they criticized that there was a problem in the narrative of ethnic relations.


For example, they pointed out that it is difficult to agree that Tibet and Balhae are treated equally with Japan and Silla in international relations in The Cambridge History of China: Volume 3. They also suspected that the New Qing History had political intentions rather than merely historical research.


In response to the efforts of western modern Chinese history scholars to understand China from a new perspective, the Sino-centrist approach, since the 1970s, Chinese academia has argued that it reflects a position in favor of western imperialistic aggression.


The Chinese History Research Institute, established in January 2019 as the largest historical research institute and think tank in China, stated in the first issue of a famous historical magazine called History Criticism, Ignoring the errors and perversions of The Cambridge History of Chinacan undermine the legitimacy of the People's Republic of China. It must be dealt with actively." In particular, regarding the so-called 'anti-American aid,' which is a Chinese expression of the Korean War, he emphasized, "It states that it had more negative impact than positive impact, which is the rise of China's patriotism, but I absolutely cannot agree with this."


From China's viewpoint, the western perception of Chinese history shown in The Cambridge History of China is a subject to overcome, and it can be said to be a real problem faced by Chinas historical studies.



Narrative of Korean History in Western Academia


『The Cambridge History of China series supports Korea's position in the historical interpretation of the history of Korea-China relations. In particular, the contents on Korean history in the ancient history section of The Cambridge History of China accurately describe the illusion of the theory of Imna Ilbonbu (an idea that Japan politically controlled the southern part of Korea in ancient times) asserted by Japan. It also presented the same position in the Korean academic circles about the Korean War, emphasizing the importance of the Korean Peninsula in international relations in Northeast Asia.


Therefore, it can be seen that the remarks by the former US President Trump in 2017 that Korea was actually a part of China as a way of delivering the words of Chinese President Xi Jinping are different from the general opinion of western academic circles.


The writing staff of the book commonly pointed out that the descriptions of Korean history in each volume of The Cambridge History of China are fragmentary and brief. This is because most western East Asian history researchers mainly cite research results in English, Japanese, and Chinese, and rarely cite research results from Korean academic circles. For this, it is necessary to publicize the achievements of the Korean academic community through active exchanges with western academia when the Cambridge History of Korean Series has not yet been published.


It is necessary to introduce the diversity and interaction of East Asian history by publishing an English outline book that introduces Korean history, which has been approached with concepts and terms that western scholars can understand.

OPEN 공공누리 - 공공저작물 자유이용 허락(출처표시 - 상업적이용금지 - 변경금지)

동북아역사재단이 창작한 '구미학계의 중국사 인식과 한국사 서술 연구' 저작물은 "공공누리" 출처표시-상업적이용금지-변경금지 조건에 따라 이용 할 수 있습니다.