Talk:History of Korea/Archive 1

message: This page doesn't explain exactly how it was that korea ceased to have any sort of monarchy. Could someone fix that?
I have move the stuff from the Korea article here and summarized the history there. Kokiri 21:22, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  old comments 

message: A major problem about this NPOV issue is that Japanese themselves don't know about the cruelties. I'll list them out.
*Koreans were not promoted to higher jobs -even very famous ones (i.e. Dr. Woo Jang-choon, who was a worldwide renowned agricultural scientist). It was a rare case for Koreans to be handed an important and prestigious poisition, and even if it was the case, the Korean had to be very apt in adulation to the senior Japanese. Source: pg. 15 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Various extremities of tortures (i.e. repeated drowning of the person, beating, scorching with molten iron, and electrifying) and lab tests (i.e. experiments to build a death ray, which resulted in microwave, killed tons of Koreans; biological weapons, etc.).
:Sources:
:Here's an example. http://www.lit.osaka-cu.ac.jp/~tsuchiya/gyoseki/presentation/TRT5.html
:A Japanese site, by the way.
:Here's a Wikipedia article about Unit 731.
*Japanese police did not permit Koreans to gather and discuss, in fear that Koreans would plot a rebellion. Source: pg. 19 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*A special Japanese police designated to watch Koreans (현병경찰) forced Koreans to participate in road constructions, and forced Korean farmers to plant only certain crops profitable for the market. If Koreans planted another crop, the police went into the field and destroyed the work. This caused Korean farmers to plant only commercially valuable crops, and could not plant crops essential for food and survival. Therefore, many Koreans were forced to abandon their lands. (This same police division also gave penalities (i.e. fine) for having 4 fly splatters instead of 3.)
Source: pg. 23, 48-49 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Japanese road constructions and railroads cut through Korean farmlands and properties. Source: pg. 27 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Koreans segregated in education (mentioned below). Source: pg. 28 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Koreans who attempted to teach from Korean point of view, and to teach Korean nationalism were arrested. Source: pg. 31-33 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Required registration of the land, and losses of land for Korean farmers (mentioned below) forced many to move into the cities and seek jobs. The Korean lands lost (made illegal, according to the law) were redistributed to the Japanese. Source: pg. 37-40 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Those Japanese who became landlords (due to the policy mentioned above) were able to force Korean rice to be cheaper. Against this argument, the Japanese historians rather portray how Japanese rice couldn't sell because the Korean rice was cheap, even when Koreans' hard work became cheap labor. Source: pg. 43 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Koreans who participated in independence movement protests were massacred. 
Source: pg. 105-125 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*There was a town SUSPECTED of helping the Independence Army, and the Japanese army recruited all Koreans in the village into a church. And then, they locked the church & began to shoot away. A wounded Korean woman implored the soldiers to spare her baby, and the Japanese soldier stabbed the baby and shot the woman. Source: pg. 128-131 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #13 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi I (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Japanese teachers for Korean students wielded swords. Only under the new Japanese policy of '문화 통치' did the teachers stop wearing them. pg. 13 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #14 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi II (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*In 1928, the Japanse government (in Korea) forced Korean farmers to buy Scholar Tree roots. Koreans protested, especially because they had suffered from a recent drought. A Korean organization called "Sin-gan-hwae" helped the farmers from being forced to purchase. This same organization helped Korean fishermen from suffering from heavy losses from the Japanese fishermen. Yet, in 1929, the Japanese government arrested the members of this organization. pg. 72-74 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #14 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi II (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
*Koreans were forced to work under cheap labor such as mining and factories that produced cotton clothes, and suffered from mistreatments. pg. 86-91 Noon-eu-ro Bo-nen Han-gook Yuk-sa #14 Min-jok Soo-nan-gi II (눈으로 보는 한국역사 #13 민족 수난기 I) by Jang Pyung-soon (장평순). (C) 1998 Joong-ang Gyo-yook Yun-goo-won., Ltd. (중앙교육연구원 (주))
(Wikimachine 22:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your first sentence shows that a Korean could grant political asylum under Japan,could get married with a Japanese,and could receive a scholarship from the Japanese government to achieve the higer education. That's the evidence that even Koreans could open the door to success if the endevour was realised.How many Japanese students could receive scholarships from the government? And the following sentences do not have persuasiveness.Not only are the pages of the documents shown,it is required to present the details of the "cruelties" or "mistreatments" you would like to claim here.For example,the Tsuchiya document lacks the concrete description of "the biological experimentation with the Koreans".If such a document on the net were a reliable source or evidence of the Japanese cruelties, it's easier for the Koreans to re-create the history to impose the expiation upon the Japanese.(That will be the Koreans' aim.)PS.You are required to learn what a sumurai is. The description on Woo Jang-choon tells your uneducated character. --Trilozengy 05:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Japanese "Cruelties" or "Mistreatments"

message: There are many delicate issues at hand in this article, but I think the entire section "Chinese commanderies", particularly the last two sentences quoted below, could use some clarification. I do not wish to add to a debate about sinocentricity, so I submit this as a new section.
"Without the commanderies, the influence of Chinese culture on Korea would not have been so strong (note the Korean's Confucian tradition!). Sadly, many nationalist Korean historians try to dispute these facts."
The exclamation mark, and perhaps the entire content within the brackets seems unncessary.
The word "sadly" is not NPOV. I think it would help to furnish some more evidence of the facts being disputed, along with evidence that they are being disputed at all.
A minor grammar point, IMHO "Korean's" should be replaced with "Koreans'" or "Korean people's". Lxrhee 08:19, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese commanderies 

message: Isn't there something obiviously wrong with asserting that archological evidence points to a 700,000 year human presence in Korea. Haven't homo sapien sapien been around for only around 160,000 to 200,000 years?
:Judging by what is currently written at Human evolution, the humans in question here are not H.s.s. but Homo erectus... however, I'm not at all sure about that.
:I have added a reference for the 700,000 claim, with some clarification -- Byeon (1999), the only source I have handy, doesn't seem to put a great deal of stock in this date, preferring 500-600,000.  
:I'd be grateful if someone can find an English-language source. There has been at least one book published on the Korean Paleolithic, and no doubt quite a few journal articles as well...-- Visviva 04:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  700,000 years human presence in Korea 

message: i'm not sure what exactly you're objecting to, but i've consulted these references for the consensus views: the encyclopedias available through Daum, Naver, Empas, 야후, and KoreanDB, Lib of Congress Met Museum, & other sources depending on the topic. please provide sources for what you want to add, or ask about specific problems you see, so we can discuss the references. thanks. Appleby 06:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sydneyphoenix's edits 

message: Sez who?  Not the source currently given in the footnote. -- Visviva 13:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A million years? 

message: User:Visviva has worked hard to create a brand new Portal:Korea. Please take a look & contribute if you can. I think the new Template:Korea topics has the potential to be a more useful reference tool than categories or lists, if editors continue to expand and update it. It's also a good reminder for help & requests on ye olde notice board. Hopefully, this will help revive some activity all around. Appleby 21:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  new [[Portal:Korea]] 

message: according to WP:NPOV, the majority view should be referenced to "commonly accepted reference texts." i can't find any english reference texts that discuss this detail, but the most reputable korean-language encyclopedias clearly show the korean scholarship consensus.    the theory that gija joseon was a separate entity adjacent gojoseon is described, if at all, as a minority view.  describes in detail that the consensus today is that gija was likely a real figure in chinese history, but his connection to ancient joseon was a later embellishment. given treatments like , it seems to me we need less on gija joseon in this summary article, and more on the details of various current theories in the gija joseon article. of course, if there are english sources that indicate that the current scholarly consensus is something else, i'd love to see them. Appleby 18:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  gija edits 

message: breathejustice, can you provide some links to reputable sources (i can read korean if necessary) that say gojoseon consisted of an earlier samhan? that's news to me, & i've tried to do some reading on the subject, although i'm certainly no expert. is that an interpretation based on Hwandan Gogi? thanks. Appleby 17:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  gojoseon & samhan 

message: The Wikiproject Korea has just been established! Please come and take a look by following the link on the template at the top of this talk page. The article is severely incomplete and help is needed. If you are interesting in joining please do! thank you. Good friend100 20:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikiproject Korea

message: Anybody who is interested in Joseonsa_Pyeonsuhoe, please edit the article--Hairwizard91 01:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 조선사편수회

message: While reading the article, I was surprised to come across a reference to "butt slapping" under the Joseon heading, linked to a non-existent article on that topic, under the subheading "Consolidation of the Joseon government".  I looked through the history to see if this was a case of recent vandalism, but this language did not appear to be recent.  This reference was part of a passage with several grammatical errors, so I edited it.  The expression "butt slapping" is really inappropriate for an encyclopedia article.  The word "butt" is slang, with a slightly comical feel.  It makes the entire article sound adolescent and questionable.  The more standard term would be "spanking".  Looking at other references online, I found some support for a historical practice of caning (e.g. on the buttocks) as a form of corporal punishment in Korea (whereas spanking or slapping would normally be by hand).  So I have changed the reference to "caning".  If someone wants to revert, please explain why, and please respond to my concerns about inappropriate tone.  Thanks.  Marco polo 16:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: cool, nice edit there. I didn't see that, but I do know that they got spanked in Korea during the Chosun Dynasty. =) Good friend100 21:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "butt slapping", etc. 

message: What Happened to the Military History of Korea Article? Easternknight 21:28, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military History 

message: :Defering to Marco's question, we should create a section on ancient Korean law and types of punishments. "Butt Spanking" should definitely be included. Many Korean dramas depicting Josun often depict people lashed on horizontal crucifixes, getting the life spanked off their butts by boards for whatever crime they committed. There are many branches to this, and I am surprised to have not thought of this earlier. Oyo321 04:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Law 

message: Please attempt to consult and gain consensus with fellow editors before making unilateral changes such as "Unified Silla" to "Later Silla". We are required to reflect the current and or conventional state of historical and archaeological research. This includes periodisation terminology: last time I checked the period after AD 668 is called Unified Silla in English and 통일 신라 in Korean. Unless there has been some kind of overnight blanket change in both the Korean and English literature, the text of this article should refect a recognizable standard of historical terminology and 'Unified Silla' is clearly the recognised standard. Mumun 無文 19:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at Kprideboi's edits again, and I think they are okay but were simply placed in the wrong section. I can see how that might happen because the topic of the first sentence of Unified Silla subsection appears to address the demise of Unified Silla more than anything else. Seems a confusing way to begin description of Unified Silla, especially for unfamiliar editors or readers. Other than being placed in the wrong section, I think Kprideboi's edits are not objectionable and could be placed in the Later Three Kingdoms section.Mumun 無文 15:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  significant changes in historical periodisation terminology in article text 

message: For some reason I usually find very little on this topic but slavery has been a part of Korea for a very long time. Consensus records show a tally of "slaves" and "missing slaves". I thought i'd point this fact out because it seems as if both sides of the slavery topic want it silenced. By both sides I mean the Korean government and the Japanese government. Historically most slaves who ran away ran off to Japan ran off to Tsushima.  142.150.48.151 (talk) 00:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically Slavery existed on every nations; however, there are no real written documentation about slavery in Korea. I'm pretty sure there was some slavery in the past, but this generally don't considered to be part of history. If you do have valid information, you can create new article on this.--Korsentry 00:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing History: Korean on Korean Slavery 

message: Another point I'd thought i'd mention is where the Chinese are coming from. Many Chinese folks especially from China have been adulterated with massive amounts of false history and propaganda. Much of this propaganda supports and upholds the collectivist nature of China in that the main ideology of China today is the cultural superiority of China and the fact that all Asian culture is Chinese. Now this might not mean much on the surface but when it comes to other cultures they get extremely offended by anything that doesn't put China in a superior light. My point is not to censor the Chinese but to bring awareness of the potential, many inadvertent bias they bring when commenting on history.
I'm not sure if Europeans are aware of the nature of the Confucian collectivist society but there is very little personal and/or explicit self esteem in these types of societies. There is only implicit/group self esteem allowed as any explicit self esteem will and does encourage jealousy. This although racist and arguable this is why there is a profoundly strong Asian male stereotype among most of the global community.
My point is simple the Chinese derive self-esteem much like Europeans derive self-esteem from personal achievements, from history and the idea of "China", meaning the greater the glorification of Chinese history the more self-esteem they garner. 142.150.48.151 (talk) 00:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The nature of the Chinese propagandists 

message: I'd like to point out that Korea is currently divided where the North is completely isolated even from the South. That said, there have been historically 3 types of cultures in Korea. Baekche, who are very neo-confucian, Silla who are a mix of confucian believers and non-confucian believers and Koryo who are anti-Confucian. What this means today is that with the country split in half, Silla and Baekche culture is the dominant culture, where many believe Korea is Confucian. This is completely false and although they do not consist of the majority they are indeed a powerful factor in defining what is Korean today. This is what I mean by misrepresentation of Korean culture.
That said, Confucian culture is and always has been about being a collectivist, unity and harmony through filial piety. In Korea we have a structure which resembles filial piety which alot of people try to attribute this to Confucian however this is false. Korean culture is militaristic due to the influences of the Koryo kingdom with its culture of war.
That said, it is absolutely impossible to say that Korean culture is Confucian in ideology when the fact is there was Korean-on-Korean slavery. This goes completely against the notion of being a collectivist society and in modern day south Korea, there are plenty of social norms that prevent the idea of being a collectivist from spreading, for example asking for help is looked down upon heavily. This is where the influence of migrants from the North during the war are seen. 
Historically, Korea has not been Buddhist or Confucianist and there is plenty of documented evidence of the persecution of both. Most confucian believers were from Baekche however in an undivided nation non-Confucian believers have always dominated the land. These confucian believers are usually the ones who become slaves and it is also the reason why Japan is a neo-Confucian country. It is well documented that the origins of the Japanese imperial line are from Baekche, and many famous artists who ran from persecution were from Baekche.142.150.48.151 (talk) 00:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The misrepresentation of Korean culture 

message: The article states : "The Korean language was banned and Koreans were forced to adopt Japanese names.[20] "
I checked the citation 20(and 25). The book by Setsuko Miyata's "Creating Surnames and Changing Given Names", turned out that it does not support the argument. She states "創氏改名 was voluntary, however it was unnatural that 80% of people voluntarily created surnames in 6 month. So, she concludes, somehow, "there must be some peer puressure among people". 
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~korea-su/korea-su/jkorea/nikkan/0311.html
There is a picture of the flyer(with Hangul and Japanese) saying "Aug, 10th is the last CHANCE you can register names! If you want here is the procedure"  .. etc.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/m-kyouiku/net/tokurei.JPG
For more detail:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http://www.ne.jp/asahi/m-kyouiku/net/seminarmizuno.htm
And Korean language never been officialy banned either. Hangul had been taught in schools throught out Korea, even Japanese kids had to learn. There is nothing like banning Korean language or Hangul, although freedom of speech was not there during the war.
I did some research and found a picture of a Korean newspaper "Chosun Ilbo" (March 10th, 1940). I definitely see Hangul there. http://www.joase.org/technote/board/zzz/upimg/1037932683.gif
So, "The Korean language was banned and Koreans were forced to adopt Japanese names" are not only too strong words but also misleading. I'd say it is wrong and should be fixed.
Oh, I forgot to mention there were volunteer Japanese soldiers who kept Korean name and became a major, such as 金錫源 and 洪思翊. 
How do you explain that.
: Actually, 洪思翊 was a general, and was later executed as a war criminal. --TokyoJapan (talk) 22:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  宮田 節子 [Miyata, Setsuko]. "創氏改名" [Creating Surnames and Changing Given Names]