<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Hi, Mark,</P>
<P>I think you have raised an important point. And being of European background, and from the central area there, and as such looking from the perspective of of someone who has learned about the struggles in Europe...</P>
<P>To Your question re reactions from the audience. In public lectures I always stress the comparatively peaceful Korean history. And I try to make the audience understand, why Koreans tend to blow up every outside assault on a tiny fishing village to look like a major invasion by pointing out the immense psychological injury dealt by the recent Japanese occupation plus the fact that Korea was liberated from that by foreign forces rather than liberate herself....Quite often, after the talk some Korean in the audience may stand up and run me down in such a fervent manner that at least my point that we are here dealing with psychology rather than historical scholarship get support...</P>
<P>Another point, this time about Koreans never having invaded outside people. Well, go back into the 7tt century and ask anyone from Koguryo or Paekche, or take a look at what was Korea at the time of "unification", then paint the borders of Koryo and go slowly up to the 15th centure: What you find may well be called one major aggressor in the area. It all depends whether you accept the unexpressed notion that Korea always was what it became after it finally had reached today's borders (But then I never found anyone who explained to me when this unity became divided, so 7th century Shilla could unite it again And, actually, at various times historians were proud to outline the military capabilities of the Hwarang, for instance It seems that only during Choson Korea became the peaceful people we like so much...<BR><BR>Anyway, I think, looking at it from te outside askes for alternative perspectives, try your luck, Werner</P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: Mark Peterson <MARK_PETERSON@BYU.EDU>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws
<DIV></DIV>>To: Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: [KS] perspectives on Korean history
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:31:06 -0800
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Dear List Friends,
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I'm writing a little thing about Korean History, and I'm torn
<DIV></DIV>>between
<DIV></DIV>>soft-pedaling my views on a favorite Korean myth and going after it,
<DIV></DIV>>head-on. It's for a popular format, that I've been asked to write,
<DIV></DIV>>so I'm not sure how controversial I should be.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>The issue is this: it drives me nuts to hear oft and o'er the bit
<DIV></DIV>>about how Korea has been invaded so many times. There are so-called
<DIV></DIV>>scholarly studies that document several thousand "invasions" -- some
<DIV></DIV>>number them, 2,386, or whatever.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>My take is, that such a view, though nearly universal, is a product
<DIV></DIV>>of recent, 20th century, events. Looking at the long view, however,
<DIV></DIV>>aside from the Mongols in the 13th century, and the Hideyoshi
<DIV></DIV>>invasion in the late 16th century, you've got a culture of civilian,
<DIV></DIV>>not military dominance, and peace not war -- not a product of
<DIV></DIV>>multiple invasions.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>There was the Manchu Invasion shortly after the Japanese, in the
<DIV></DIV>>early 17th century, but that, by comparison, wasn't much of an
<DIV></DIV>>invasion. The Koreans were so beaten up by the Japanese that they
<DIV></DIV>>could hardly muster much resistance, and unlike the Japanese and
<DIV></DIV>>before that, the Mongol invasion, the Manchu's didn't really want to
<DIV></DIV>>conquer Korea -- they only wanted a diplomatic surrender.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Now, the two major invasions were absolutely horrific; the
<DIV></DIV>>devastation was near total, and the loss of life was tragic. I'm
<DIV></DIV>>not
<DIV></DIV>>playing that down at all.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>But, aside from those invasions, to get thousands of "invasions",
<DIV></DIV>>one
<DIV></DIV>>has to count every penny-ante pirate raid along the coasts. And to
<DIV></DIV>>do that, cheapens the dramatic costs of the true invasions.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>In other words, my take on it is that Korea's history is not so much
<DIV></DIV>>one of multiple, or constant invasions, but one of civilian,
<DIV></DIV>>Confucian culture -- not the culture of the soldier, or the warlord.
<DIV></DIV>>In other words, not the Japanese style "bushido" -- the code of the
<DIV></DIV>>warrior, the samurai. We had no such thing in Korea.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Yet, the myth, held dearly, is that "we" have been invaded,
<DIV></DIV>>stomped-on, beaten, subjugated and down-trodden. And the Chinese
<DIV></DIV>>are
<DIV></DIV>>usually listed as invaders -- well, aside from Han dynasty outposts
<DIV></DIV>>and an alliance with T'ang that led to unification and eventual
<DIV></DIV>>control of the upper third of the peninsula, you don't have any
<DIV></DIV>>Chinese "invasions". Do you want to count Sui and T'ang attempts
<DIV></DIV>>against Koguryo^ in lands north of the peninsula? That's a fair
<DIV></DIV>>stretch, too.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>On the other hand, the point that Korea never invaded anther country
<DIV></DIV>>is the oft-heard counter point. And that, to their credit, is
<DIV></DIV>>strikingly true.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Have any of you aired this kind of view with the general audience in
<DIV></DIV>>Korea. What kind of feed-back or resistance did you encounter.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>People in any culture hate to see their favorite ox gored, favorite
<DIV></DIV>>bubble burst.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Hope to hear from some of you....
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>with best regards,
<DIV></DIV>>Mark
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>