2005, Vol., No.3

Journal of Manchurian Studies 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.33

pISSN : 1738-3668
https://journal.kci.go.kr/manchuria

It must be essential for Korea to research into the history of Baeksan-Huksoo region north of the Korean peninsula, because her ancestors founded a nation for the first time and since then, had long managed the territory. The Chinese had described the history of our ancient nations in this territory in such chapters edited at the back of their histories as ’Eastern Barbarians’ Biographies' or 'Strange Territory', and since the 10th century, they had classified this territory into 'foreign countries'. Recently, however, they have included the histories of Koguryo and Balhae in those of their own history, calling these Korean nations 'their local governments'. For us Koreans, it must be a big problem how to cope with such a historical invasion from China. Therefore, it is deemed necessary to identify the problems of our researches into our history and set a desirable direction for our researches. The first problem is poor collection and sorting of the historical data as well as poor re searches into them. So, it is pre-requisite to collect the historical data dispersed in and out of Korea and sort them systematically to research into them. The second problem involves poor theories about the historical development of our nomadic and hunting age. The fact that we accept the theories suggested by the Western historians during early and mid-19th century without doubting them proves that we have not much endeavored to research into this turf of history. Third, it is necessary to research into the natural environment of this territory or the past nomadic and hunting areas. Since personality and industrial activities vary depending on weather or climate conditions, it is very important to research into the natural environment from a historical viewpoint. Fourth, it is also required of us to research into languages, custom, habits and religions of the people living in this territory. since this territory has long been influenced by its natives, Chinese and Koreans. Lastly, we face the following challenges for a desirable research into our history about the northern territory; (1) We need to correct the Chinese historical data in reference to our data. For example, 'History of Koiyo' may be a wealth of rich Historical data useful to complement the Chinese official History. (2) A cooperative researchers encompassing relevant disciplines is required. Namely, not only historians but also other professionals should cooperate with each other to solve our historical problems. (3) It is essential to carefully review the past excavation reports and pending excavation spots. (4) It is deemed necessary to record the testimonies from the aged people living in this territory, their legends and local languages and thereby, reinforce our historic database. (5) It may well be useful to collect in time the information about the researches into this territory being conducted by local people and foreigners to be informed of the research trends.

The Bronze Age in Southern Manchuria began 24th century BCE. When the Bronze Age culture was first discovered there, scholars often tried to connect it with the Chinese culture or interpreted it as the culture of the Inner Asian people who came under the deep influence of the Chinese. However, with accumulation of new archaeological data, a new interpretation has become possible, and one must recognize it as a unique Manchurian culture. Ancient texts and myths suggest that the Old Chosdn of Korea should be considered as the subject of the Bronze Age culture in Manchuria. In other words, the Bronze Age culture in southern Manchuria had played a sig-nificant role in formation of Korean nation and history. The Korean academic circle should pay a close attention to the issue of the Bronze Age culture and ethnicity in Southern Manchuria.

Before the Mongol Yuan period, Northeast Asian interstate relations were governed by a treaty system based on the principle of reciprocity among a number of legitimate and equal regimes. While the Manchurian conquest dynasties confronted the Chinese Song states, Korean Koryo and Tangut Xia states functioned as balancers in the Northeast Asian military balance of power. Each state asserted its own ethnocentric world-view in the Northeast Asian multistate system, and the diplomatic formalities of investitures and tributes were not signs of submission, but peace and accommodation. Chinese historians have employed the tribute system to reinforce their territorial and historiographical claims over non-Han ethnic groups. However, the official theory of interstate relations with the Chinese state at the center was nothing more than a myth perpetuated to justify the rule of Chinese rulers to their subjects. The Chinese attempt to impose contemporary political boundaries on the past is a case of blatant presentism that reads history backwards by applying today’s social and political standards and conditions to the past. Today’s boundaries of China are of recent creation, and the term zhongguo (Central Kingdom) must be taken as a subjective and geopolitical desig-nation.