The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Finally, you seem to want links to sources, but I can't oblige. I'm of the opinion that most web sources are useless, especially when discussing a topic as obscure as this. Why should I search high and low for a website that will have less information than a book I have at my fingertips? Most websites are rather short and cursory, like that site you linked to. Only six paragraphs on the Yayoi? What a joke. My "brief history" of both Japan and China has three pages on the Yayoi. If you really want to know about early Japan, you should read the first volume of "The Cambridge History of Japan". Truly an excellent source. I'll list more books, if you really want to know where I've gotten my information from. I can't make any guarantees that I'll remember magazine and journal articles I've read.

Dear Drake Tungsten,

I am glad you joined this debate! When there are studies about Japan or Korea that you can recommend in particular, please list them here! I cannot promise I will read them all, but I am curious at least. In general -this will perhaps surprise some poster who seems to know my tastes better than I do myself- I am far more interested in early history, though pre-history is generally not my topic. So studies that end in about 1600AD or earlier would be fine.

It is a pity a "Cambridge History of Korea" does not exits yet. That situation should definitely be amended. By the way, what's your opinion about the work of Fairbank and Reischauer?

Thanking you in advance!

S.Kroeze

[yin26]

Drake: No worries, and thanks for the kind clarification.

[siredgar]

See post below.

[siredgar]

Dear Drake,

In this message, I will refrain from using real evidence, such as quotes from books and Web sites, since you seem to disregard the ones I have posted from books and believe most Web sites are "useless" resources. Instead, like you, I will use feelings, impressions, and general opinions that I have acquired through my readings.

This is primarily because I have asked you to show me any evidence, that is quotes from any source, and you have not. If you would like to engage in a worthy discussion, please do not simply list a book or two, but make a point and then post a quote with its source (author, publication, and year).

Anyhow, if you need to "search high and low" for a Web site that will support your argument, while it takes me less than 30 minutes to produce 12 solid quotes from different sources to support mine, then you may have to re-think the strength of your position.

I deliberately selected "short and cursory" sources to provide evidence in an expedient manner and, at the same time, not burden you with a lengthy read simply to prove a specific point. Regardless, if you consider information from PBS and the Metropolitan Museum "useless", then I cannot have a discussion with you.

--

Drake:
It is misleading to refer to the culture of Paekche as "Korean".

Edgar:
Why don't you go tell that to a professor of Korean history, or someone walking down a street in Seoul for that matter, and see what kind of a response you get?

I doubt you question the culture of Yamato as "Japanese" and yet you have skepticism of Paekche's Korean qualities. Could Yamato be "Korean"? I'm sure you wouldn't even think of that as a possibility and yet other scholars have speculated about this. I do not, Paekche is Korean and Yamato is Japanese.

Drake:
We don't even know what language was spoken in Paekche; one interesting theory proposes that Paekche's language was closer to Japanese than Korean.

Edgar:
LOL. Of course, you phrase it that Paekche's language may have been closer to Japanese than Korean and not the other way around.

Are you suggesting that Japanese were sent to Korea to teach writing and help build a civilization? No, wait, it was the Koreans who were sent to Japan!

There is no evidence of Japanese being sent to Korea during this period for teaching purposes, except maybe in learning how to be pillaged by barbarians.

Could it be that the Japanese language was similar to Paekche's language because it inherited many traits from it, not the other way around. Paekche is "Korean", case closed.

Drake:
Anyway, my point is that even referring to the influx of Paekche's culture in Japan as a "Korean" influence is debatable.

Edgar:
Really, this is tiring. "You don't seem to get what I'm saying." I have given you specific evidence that distinctly Korean influence, especially through Paekche, played an important role in shaping early Japanese civilization. If you would like more evidence, I am prepared to compile an exhaustive list.

Drake:
I never claimed that there was a Japanese civilization before the 7th century. I claimed that there was a distinct Japanese culture. There is a difference between a civilization and a culture.

Edgar:
Yes, and it is the Koreans who helped convert it from a "culture" to a "civilization."

So, there is a distinct Japanese culture prior to the 7th century and yet there is no distinct Korean culture at that time? That is what you are suggesting by saying that Paekche is not "Korean", etc.

Drake:
Once again, these were mostly Chinese advance merely transmitted through Korea. I don't know how that is relevant.

Edgar:
While many of the civilization advances were Chinese and "merely transmitted through Korea", the vast majority were distinctly Korean in their qualities. They were developed in Korea and very unlike Chinese ones. Many historians and archaeologists are now recognizing this and de-emphasizing Korea as simply a "bridge" between China and Japan.

If you cannot accept this, then I give up on this discussion because it means that you have deep respect for the Chinese civilization and none for the Korean one. Korean civilization existed long before Japanese "culture" made its steps toward civilization.

Drake:
Today's Korean culture is descended from the culture of Silla.

Edgar:
"It is obvious that you lack expertise in this area."

Paekche and Koguryo culture remained significant forces in Korea long after Shilla rule. They especially continued to exert regional influence, despite Shilla domination.

Drake:
Anyway, a major problem I see with your arguments is that you don't distinguish between the early colonizers of Japan, called the Yayoi, and later Koreans.

Edgar:
You're right. I don't. I see the Yayoi as "Korean" migrants who helped form the basis of Japanese "culture", as you call it. However, I attribute much of early Japanese civilization to Paekche influence, which is more important.

--

It is without doubt that I have challenged the "orthodox" interpretation of Korean pre-history. That is partly because through my education and additional research, I have become highly suspect of the Western take on a lesser known Asian civilization's story.

Best regards,

Edgar

[siredgar]

"Korea" vs. "Corea"

Does anyone have good information on the general acceptance of "Korea" over "Corea"? I still haven't gotten a clear verdict on this issue.

[yin26]

That's an interesting story, if I have it right:

The Japanese, seeing 'Corea' come before 'Japan' in the English Alphabetical order [C before J] changed the spelling to 'Korea' [K after J]. Honestly, I have heard from 'good authority' on this one!

[yin26]

http://goldsea.com/Air/Issues/Corea/corea.html

During that period Japan mounted a campaign to push for the "Korea" useage by the American press. Why? For one of Japan's prospective colonies to precede its master in the alphabetical lineup of nations would be unseemly, Japanese imperialists decided.

[yin26]

So you will often see partriotic or learned people still use the Corea spelling. Perhaps I should, too!

[siredgar]

Yes, yes, I have read this Web page before, actually while doing a search about Korean girls, but there is no actual evidence listed there.

I am familiar with the French calling Korea "La Coree", etc and I have also heard about this Japanese campaign to change the spelling of the country, but I have yet to see any hard facts.

I'm looking for something more substantive.

Thanks though.

[yin26]

Hmm, I've read it in more than a few places...but don't have the texts in front of me. Seems like something the Japanese would do, though. It was all part of stamping Korean (Corean) culture off the face of the Earth.

[siredgar]

I don't think I'd start using the spelling "Corea" anyhow. I agree with the poster on the GoldSea Web site.

[siredgar]

"The Cambridge History of Korea, Vol. III" is forthcoming.

Contributors include John Duncan (Director of Korean Studies, UCLA), Charles Armstrong (Asst. Prof., Columbia Univ.), and Fujiya Kawashima (Prof., Bowling Green State Univ.).

[Veracitas]

Re: "Korea" vs. "Corea"

Originally posted by siredgar
Does anyone have good information on the general acceptance of "Korea" over "Corea"? I still haven't gotten a clear verdict on this issue.

I have also heard from good authority (my father, who is a professor in Korea) that the original spelling of Korea was actually Corea, but the name was changed by the Japanese invaders. The French still use the "C" spelling: la corée du sud, la corée du nord. I believe most other countries in Europe (I know Germany does) uses the "K" spelling, though.

[Veracitas]

btw, does anyone know who is working on the Expansion Pack Civs for Korea/Corea??

[Veracitas]

lol, sorry I didn't see the article that yin had posted below. It's pretty interesting, but I think the most interesting part is the Korean response:

Being KOREAN myself, I prefer the K. Here are my thoughts on what I've been reading here. I do not believe that it is beneficial to revert everything back to pre-Japanese occupation standards. That part of history, dark as it is, is still a part of Korean identity. The defense using the Romance Languages and other European languages as a reason to promote the Corea spelling change is JUST PLAIN SILLY! The general population of North and South Korea are the ones who would promote the change, (if even they wanted to change the name at all) and NOT their Korean-American counterparts. Moving on, I am NOT going to change what is part of my identity for the "politically correct" nitpickers of Asian-American descent.
Offended and Outraged KOREAN

Personally, I like "Corea," but then I'm Jeh Me GyeoPo (Corean American). I think he's wrong, though, in that only Coreans in Corea should have authority over the change in name, because this is how we refer to ourselves when dealing with other Asians...nay, people in general.

Here's an idea, why don't we just call Corea what it calls itself: "The Land of the Great Han People." Then I could introduce myself as a "Great Han Person." I'm sure that would go over well, lol