From: yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi)
Subject: Intruction to JOONG GUK-HAN GUK Relationships
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 07:51:50 GMT

I would first like to recap what I've always advocated. I have always been
sick of Caucasian Japan-philes bashing China because someone has insulted
their precious Japan (Dwight Joe, case and point). Even someone who isn't
Chinese (me) realizes that China is the mother civilization of East Asia,
and that, historically, Japan was of lesser significance and advancement
when compared to other East Asian nations. But nevertheless, I can understand
the attraction of Japan to culturists all around the world. To these Japan-
philes, Japan is the perfect society: best education, health, economy,
and the list goes on and on. These Japan-lovers (Japan-philes) are 
throughly amazed by Japan's culture, etc. and would do anything to protect
its reputation, even if it meant bashing/insulting the source of Japanese
culture, China. Many people, I know, are disgusted with these types of people.
To the rational people out there who realize this, don't worry. We know that
many people are still ignorant of the historical aspects of Japan, and that
they are the only ones who are acting as Japan-philes. I am confident that
many people out there, definitely on soc.culture.china and soc.culture.korean,
realize that Japan is third-rate, or atleast not as "precious" as everything
makes her out to be. 

Of course, these views are coming from an historian, not an economist or
businessman. To an economist, yes, Japan is nothing short of third-rate.
But let us act historically, and have our time to bash Japan's history
to repay all of those Japan-philes who have bashed Chinese-cu or Korean-cu.

To some, these views might sound a bit racist, nationalist, or revengeful.
And I answer that they are not. In the general attitude of an unbiased 
historian, I am not racist, and I consider myself a multi-culturist. At
the same time, I am not a nationalist either. I am, and will always be,
an American citizen, loyal to the United States, the country of nations.
But at the same time, I would like to side with the cause of East Asia,
since I am Asian-American. And that cause reflects the bitter tone against
Japan, both historically and currently. Therefore, what some on other
newsgroups would view as biased, nationalistic, or racist, is only a noble
effort to bring out the truth about Japan. 

The truth about Japan is simple: she has been reliant on the cultures of 
China and Korea, and more recently on the Western World (I am observing
from an historian's standpoint, not an average citizen looking outside
today's window). Japan was like Britain in Europe. Britain has been 
dependent on cultural inspiration, for the most part, from France and 
Germany. I can go on and on about how Japan has been reliant on China
culturally, but that is not the main reason why I'm posting. 

Rather, I would like to examine the relationship of China and Korea: father and
oldest son. Yes, Japan was a son of China, but he was the younger, immature,
less wise, and aggressive. 

The relationship between China and Korea goes way farther back than that of
China and Japan, or the that matter, China and any other recognized and 
independent foreign nation (for China has had relations with various nomadic
tribes of Central Asia and the steppe for many years). Korea's vocabulary
is also a history book of the vocabulary of yesterday's Han Chinese dynasties
and some current terms (although some have disappeared in China due to Qing).
So it could be said that current day Korea may reflect Han Chinese culture
of yesteryears to a good degree. More follows.

It could be said that the nation with a culture more closly akin to that 
of ancient Han Chinese culture is Korea. The prestige tied with Chinese 
characters has been recognized by Korean scholars long before any others 
had come to even know of its existence. Korea's use of Chinese characters 
pre-dates that of any other nation, including Japan, for Japan
received its knowledge of Chinese characters from a Korean scribe. So 
therefore, it could be said that present South Korean culture feels close 
to the cultures of Han Chinese dynasties. Of course there are differences, 
but Han Chinese culture of previous dynasties has had a larger impact on 
Korean society more than any other nation. Korea, today, is also probably
the most Confucian nation on Earth (South Korea, that is). The shrines,
universities, and temples of Confucianism still stand today in Seoul and
other cities in all of Korea (but only actively practiced and maintained
in the ROK). These symbols of Confucianism date back many many years to
the time when Taejo (1 Yi)officially declared Korea a Neo-Confucian nation 
adhering to the principles of Chu Hsi. The benefits and glory of Korea's
elaborate and eager adoption of a foreign orthodoxy shined during the reign
of Sejong, a Yi king who strove to make Korea the ideal Confucian state.
I think I can safely say that, because of this eager adoption and the 
cultural revolution in China, Korea is today the most Confucian nation on
Earth. But Korea's cultural kinship with Han Chinese dynasties goes back
farther than when Confucianism became a state cult. During the T'ang dynasty,
the relationship between the Unified Silla kingdom and T'ang China was 
glorious. During this time, East Asia was at its greatest time of prosperity
and peace (arguably reasoned differently from one historian to another).
It is correctly labeled the Pan East Asian Era. Buddhism, trade, the arts, 
and foreign contacts prospered, especially between East Asia and the Middle
East (Persia, Iraq, Sokkarmand, and many Islamic states). Centers of trade
and the arts were Chang'an and KyungJu, the capitals of T'ang and Silla,
respectively. Chang'an was the world's greatest city, KyungJu was the world's
second greatest city. It is evidenced in various cencesus taken over the years
by imperial courts in Chang'an and KyungJu that both cities had atleast over
a million people with city limits extending beyond 10km. KyungJu itself had
an elaborate wood-roofed system of corridors extending for 10km around the
downtown KyungJu limits. And it was said that all of KyongJu's houses had
tiles and were gold-tipped, along with music playing well into the night.
The aristocracy was also said to be living luxuriously. The greatness of 
these two cities prompted the primitive Japanese behind Shotoku to copy
their grid patterns and create their own city of amazement, which later
became Kyoto (a city that Japan-philes adore so much too for the wrong 
reasons). Chang'an not only realized her own greatness, but KyongJu's too.
Thus prompting T'ang China to cast upon Silla and her capital the title of
"Little Tang", the only time any Chinese dynasty has referred to a foreign
nation outside of the Middle Kingdom in a way that reflected kinship with
"outside barbarians". Truly, the Han Chinese at that time didn't consider
Koreans as barbarians. And even before the relationship between Silla and
the Han Chinese dynasty of T'ang got cozy and warm, Han Chinese referred
to Koreans as the most "civilized of barbarians"...referring to the Koguryo,
Paekche and Silla people before unification. Indeed, the Paekche people were
also cozy with the Chinese. But it was only until after the unification of 
Korea by Silla did the relationship get to the point of "big brother-little
twin". It should also be noted that the greatness of East Asia during this
time was unparalleled in the world. For if for perhaps 20 centuries before
the 16th century China was the most advanced, civilized, and richest nation
on Earth, and Han Chinese dynasties before the 16th century called Korea 
a little twin, then it would be obvious that such a conglomeration of 
advancement is unique. So the pan-East Asian era put its stamp in history
books as not only the era of East Asian elightenment, but also Chinese-
Korean partnership and brilliance...a kinship between cultures that
would last up to the 20th century, and perhaps BEYOND?

End of Introductory

I will divide my posts into segments:

a. Early 3 Kingdoms and various HAN Chinese kingdoms, their relationships.
b. Unified Silla Kingdom and T'ang Dynasty/Song Dynasty (again, HAN),
specifics about the relationship between brother and little-twin of brother.
c. Yi and Ming and the era of genuine Confucian solidification within cultures.
d. evaluation, summary, review, and the FUTURE.

I have left out Yuan and Qing for obvious reasons, for Korean culture feels
-- 
    .  .      +---------------------------------+
  --|--|      | Mark Yun Wook Choi              |
   /.\ |      | yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu |
  --|--|      +---------------------------------+  
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china