Korea a chinese vassal state

[sunami chun]

hello everybody, i´ve been watching all the discussions in this forum and as an Yi Soon Shin fan, korean descendent who lives in Brazil and majored in Social Studies i was amazed with the informations i read about chosun society and other topics. Before coming to participate i´ve decided to study a little more and i´ve read many titles such as namjung ilgi and stephen turnbull´s samurai invasions to korea to talk with you guys since i´ve gone thru my adolescence hating korean things and now getting prouder and prouder of my backgrounds and history. there are many topics that arose my will to discuss with some of you guys specially about politics and history and the latest book i´ve got is about chosun court and ilustrates all the rituals and social aspects of the chosunese court and its influence in daily korean life since everything to art, food and education came primarily form the court . My question is that in this book Chosun king´s were mere vassals of Chinese Ming and when emperial envoys from ming came to korea they where given the place of the chosun king who had to subject him to imperial notifications. Since Taejo who usurped the throne from Koryo, chosunese korea has been in this situation of vassal kingdom. I believe that this survival project towards ming´s submission only brought disgrace to korea and that the feeling of safeness and protectness only brought misery and despair and built a week chosun society that could only be proud of its model confucian state status what worst and subevolved societies like the mongols and manchus in that time managed to do by their own and even conquer china (i remembered a phrase about swiss society "that in 100 years of peace they only developed the swiss watch"). Do you feel the same towards these question that for me seems like the biggest issue why korea is not recognized by chinese and also japanese politics of its cultural independence. and eventhough i´m very nationalist (runs in my blood) it is somehow the worst stain in our history a stain that Yi´s dynasty gave to Korea? I really would like to know your opinions....

[florel]

Hi, sunami chun. Welcome to join us.

Well, I read your posting and I have a question. Who is the author of your book on Chosun dynasty and what is the title ? I think the writer evidently confounds the asian tribute systems with the european feudal lord-vassal system.

The asian tribute systems established a kind of diplomatic and economic international relationship of China with other countries. EVERY Asian countries (including Japan) wishing to trade with China should be included in this systems.

This is very well written explication on the Tribute System of China.

Did China Have A Tribute System? written by John E. Wills, Jr., University of Southern California.


And I also think the author of your book has a historical viewpoint imposed by the Japanese colonialists. (If he or she intended to write the book from a natioanlistic viewpoint, it's really odd.)
In political domain, for example, the colonialists have insisted that the downfall of Chosun dynasty was due to the corrupt neo-confucians and their internal political conflicts. Of course, there were corrupt ones like Yun Du-Su (the evil minister in our drama). But all of the confucians were not corrupt idiots. During the Imjin War, these confucian scholars became militia leaders (ex. Gwak Jae-Woo, Kim Myun, Choe Kyung-Hoe, Cho Huhn, Ko Kyung-Myung, Chung In-Hong, Yi Jung-Am, etc.) and they fought for their country against the invaders even though they were not professional military warriors.

How can we judge Chosun as the "worst and subevolved society" ? On the contrary, it had very flourished and rich society before the Imjin War. And not so bad until the 18th century except huge international war periods. We should note the fact that before the 19th century, Chosun, different from Koryo dynasty, rarely suffered from peasants' or slaves' revolts (except the activities of "bandits" led by Im Kuk-Jung or by Jang Gil-San). Most of revolts dated before this date were political ones led by aristocrats.

The real misery of Chosun started when the Westerners monopolized the political power and their clans had influences on the puppet kings using their exclusive matrimonial relations with the royal family during the 19th century.

[sunami chun]

Hi Florel, thanks for your coments....the text that you recommended is indeed enlightening since i didn´t know that many other asian states were given the status of vassal states primarily to become a business partner with China and i guess it wouldn´t be wise not to do so before the opium war for economic survival purpose (everything is survival in the end?)....even the portuguese right?! but it seems that Chosunese court took it more seriously than only a business protocol, as we see on the tv show when ming envoys are very arrogant towards the ministers and even the king, but in this book it shows that this kind of behaviour was constantly imposed on Chosun, and if not a very cult person on confucian doctrine, history and politics would never understand this kind of submission to another as business opportunities, but i slightely touch were you want me to go with this text and it make the stain less apparent....by the way the name of the book is:

Joseon Royal Court Culture: Ceremonial and Daily Life

Author: Shin, Myung-ho
Translator: Timothy V. Atkinson
Publisher: Dolbegae Publishers

About the fact that chosun never had a revolution, again this is an information that i didn´t know, I can agree with you that chosun due to its early unification and peace time was able to flourish many cultural and scientific improvements, but also the political burocratic system was no match for the recently unified feudal military lords of japan that had been fighting for 300 years on the imjim wars that followed and crushed chosun´s society and this is one of the grievancies i have toward yi´s dinasty (never attacked always defended and was sacked so many times, poor korea!)....I´ve never said that chosun was the worst and subevolved but it gratly lacked of total vision beyond its territories and ming china, being the only state that paid tribute to china in northeastern asia (i´m seeing like the text from will´s that paying tribut was an economic privilege and not political submission) it seems that it in anycase it blinded chosun society and made a filial state towards china and an arrogant state towards japan and the Iai´s (manchus) as we could see in the first episodes when Yi soon Shin serves in the northern borders. I mean i agree with you that internal affairs was very good with the Yi´s dinasty, but arrogant and very short sited on foreign affairs, a copy of the tributary system model that tang, ming and qing china had towards its subjects. The reason why i want to discuss this early history questions is because nevertheless china nowadays looks as if having the same attitude and despite many people in this board don´t agree with chinese imperialism (some people even say that we will miss american imperialism very much in the future) it seems that china is a succesfull europe, many different societies, and cultures unified in one country...what do you guys think about it, could ever be Korea part of China? even Japan? Does history ends on democracy? and its borders are limited forever?
I don´t want to raise a heartened discussion but is the first time i can talk to with people on the subject i have most interest korean history and politcs since my korean is so poor

[sunami chun]

sunami said:

Hi Florel, thanks for your coments....the text that you recommended is indeed enlightening since i didn´t know that many other asian states were given the status of vassal states primarily to become a business partner with China and i guess it wouldn´t be wise not to do so before the opium war for economic survival purpose (everything is survival in the end?)....even the portuguese right?! but it seems that Chosunese court took it more seriously than only a business protocol, as we see on the tv show when ming envoys are very arrogant towards the ministers and even the king, but in this book it shows that this kind of behaviour was constantly imposed on Chosun, and if not a very cult person on confucian doctrine, history and politics would never understand this kind of submission to another as business opportunities, but i slightely touch were you want me to go with this text and it make the stain less apparent....by the way the name of the book is:

Joseon Royal Court Culture: Ceremonial and Daily Life

Author: Shin, Myung-ho
Translator: Timothy V. Atkinson
Publisher: Dolbegae Publishers

About the fact that chosun never had a revolution, again this is an information that i didn´t know, I can agree with you that chosun due to its early unification and peace time was able to flourish many cultural and scientific improvements, but also the political burocratic system was no match for the recently unified feudal military lords of japan that had been fighting for 300 years on the imjim wars that followed and crushed chosun´s society and this is one of the grievancies i have toward yi´s dinasty (never attacked always defended and was sacked so many times, poor korea!)....I´ve never said that chosun was the worst and subevolved but it gratly lacked of total vision beyond its territories and ming china, being the only state that paid tribute to china in northeastern asia (i´m seeing like the text from will´s that paying tribut was an economic privilege and not political submission) it seems that it in anycase it blinded chosun society and made a filial state towards china and an arrogant state towards japan and the Iai´s (manchus) as we could see in the first episodes when Yi soon Shin serves in the northern borders. I mean i agree with you that internal affairs was very good with the Yi´s dinasty, but arrogant and very short sited on foreign affairs, a copy of the tributary system model that tang, ming and qing china had towards its subjects. The reason why i want to discuss this early history questions is because nevertheless china nowadays looks as if having the same attitude and despite many people in this board don´t agree with chinese imperialism (some people even say that we will miss american imperialism very much in the future) it seems that china is a succesfull europe, many different societies, and cultures unified in one country...what do you guys think about it, could ever be Korea part of China? even Japan? Does history ends on democracy? and its borders are limited forever?
I don´t want to raise a heartened discussion but is the first time i can talk to with people on the subject i have most interest korean history and politcs since my korean is so poor

I have a funny thing to tell you guys... my mother went to korea and she was able to see the set where yi soon shin was being shot...the episode was when won gyun becomes tongjessa and was having a meeting with his staff...she got a signature from kim myong min (yi soon shin´s role actor) and the funny thing is that he signed on the book namjung ilgi y mother bought yi soon shin´s name and not his real name but after he signed his real name, also the actor who plays song hui rip signed it...I don´t have a scanner but if i can i will put in the forum to you guys to see it....

[florel]

sunami said:

I´ve never said that chosun was the worst and subevolved but it gratly lacked of total vision beyond its territories and ming china, being the only state that paid tribute to china in northeastern asia (i´m seeing like the text from will´s that paying tribut was an economic privilege and not political submission) it seems that it in anycase it blinded chosun society and made a filial state towards china and an arrogant state towards japan and the Iai´s (manchus) as we could see in the first episodes when Yi soon Shin serves in the northern borders. I mean i agree with you that internal affairs was very good with the Yi´s dinasty, but arrogant and very short sited on foreign affairs, a copy of the tributary system model that tang, ming and qing china had towards its subjects.

Oh, sunami chun, you're right. You didn't say Chosun was the "worst and subevolved" country. Sorry for misreading your previous comment. I'm a little bit tired today.

I agree with you that Chosun was not very good at diplomatic stuffs. Even today Koreans prove that they are very bad diplomats (both in North and in South Koreas). LOL


And thanks for the book info. As I'm living in Europe, I don't have much recent infos concerning Korea. I asked you about the book in order to better understand it and its author. The writer is a specialist of Chosun royal palace culture and his book is a best-seller in Korea. (I didn't know him, of course.) It seems that he is nor nationalist neither influenced by colonialists. (I have to apologize to him for my harsh comments which were off the point of what he said.) He seems to be just... anti-confucian. LOL



I also don't like some confucian legacies because the sclerosed confucianism in the end of Chosun period had negative influences on Korean society, especially imposing a low social status on women. (It was not the case before the Imjin War period.)


By the way, I heard that the attitude of Chosun royal court toward Ming Empire was different before and after the Imjin War. In early Chosun period, there were some slight political tentions between Ming and Chosun courts. But after the Imjin War, the Chosunese were seriously considered Ming as a great savior of Chosun. (Very different viewpoint from modern Koreans. ) And it's interesting to note that this attitude was intentionally imposed by the king and, especially, by the Westerners for political purposes. Our ass king Sunjo, who didn't like Admiral YSS, tried to diminish his accomplishments by exalting Ming's generals and the Westerners criticized Prince Gwanghae, supported by the Northerners, under the pretext that his pro-Manchu diplomatic policy was a treacherous act toward Ming Empire.



One interesting comment....

sunami said:

in 100 years of peace they only developed the swiss watch

In fact, Swiss is one of the richest countries in Europe. We should not underestimate the power of Swiss watch. ;D

And did you say that "china is a succesful europe" ? I think it's a different case. Europe is not ONE country. It's a continent composed by many different independant countries. I'm often astonished when my French friends show despising attitudes toward Brits and when I found how the Polish people deeply hate the German.


I eagerly hope that your mom would buy a new scanner for you. ;D

[JPh]

My opinion is a little different. About Chosun's tributary state with China, it was exactly the reason why Koreans were not absorbed into being a Han Chinese, speaking Chinese. Korea is landlocked, not as fortunate as Japan where the seas acted as their buffer from countless invasions. But look at the such great warring states of north Asia - the Mongols, the Khitans, the Jurchens, the Manchus, etc who fought the Chinese. In the end, they all got absorbed either culturally or militarily by the Chinese whos population outnumber everyone's by far. Early in history, Korean states were able to beat back massive Chinese invasions of Tang and Sui invasions. But I doubt that Korea would have been able to withstand centuries of conflict with China. By adopting Chinese culture, their customs, and their learned ways, the Chinese left the Koreans alone to form their own rule and culture. The old saying goes, if you can't beat them, join them.

[sunami chun]

no problem Florel, i'm also a bit excited about participating in this board, i've just fell in love with it and was pretty anxious to show off a little what i have learned , but i really would like to hear donilpark's opinion also about these subjects since he has a very strong position about korea...and i kinda love and hate it , but i guess it was all discussed before and i'm just out of timing....anyway i can't let myself become so serious and not enjoy friendly conversations with people who have such a good vision and culture about korea not being in korea..like myself and has so few people to talk about it wherever they are....i'm really glad to be participating of this board and really pleased to meet you Florel....

[svetlana]

JPh said:

But look at the such great warring states of north Asia - the Mongols, the Khitans, the Jurchens, the Manchus, etc who fought the Chinese. In the end, they all got absorbed either culturally or militarily by the Chinese whos population outnumber everyone's

you have an excellent point there

[sunami chun]

One interesting fact about china is that it always absorbed the cultural legacy of its conqueror and in the end made it itself with few controverse, there is a saying that is something like "when one thinks he will conquer china he will see that he has been conquered", i'm not a sinologist, but i think they have created a culture of acceptance rather than segregationist (Brazil's intelectual's highly regard this view about portuguese colonization and the prejudice here is not wide open and segregationist as in anglo saxon culture). Another reason that i highly regard this cultural point of view is that in Brazil there was a spetacular movement called the modernists that self proclaimed antropofagists (i dont know if this term exists in english) what means since brazil is a new country it has to eat and regurgitate indigenous, african and european cultures aspects so we can become on nation and one culture wth its own private legacy. And i think china has been accomplishing it for centuries with nice foundations such as religious and cultural tolerance (of course i mean it before the comunist revolution and several cleaning wars either but in an acceptable manner). Indeed i cannot compare chinese history to european but somehow it seems that this acceptance culture kind of tied thousands of dialects, histories and people in one country for peace and of course power purposes and couldn't happen in europe for its highly segregationist culture.
If Korea was able to keep its own identity i guess it is something remarkable but accepting china as a confederation of several nations and races and because of it, only too strong to fight would loosen its enmity towards china and i guess chosun kings tought this way, my point of view is certainly highly controversial for koreans, i guess, but it wouldnt be less humiliating becoming chinese than being a vassal state who had to cede his place to others when they came to your house (i'm sorry i really hated to see korea bowing to ming envoys and asking for help as street beggars)....about japanese they really had the natural protection, but if korea was not so full of prejudice towards its people and its culture when korea was superior in culture to japan than maybe they wouldn't look so jealously (japanese educated people knows that korea was the cultural matrix of japan, and they highly regard korean culture) and wish for so many korean and chineses achievements, maybe this human and not political acts would not in anyway diminish the will of some greedy powerfull people to conquer korea or any other nation but it would certainly make a lots of difference for common people in the treatment towards each others and mybe some of this people would reach political chairs...since what east asian culture has been doing is to teach biased history that only arises the prejudices towards each other....

please don't condemn me, if i'm wrong correct me...

[meowmeow]

interesting disucssion here.

Bo might need this discussion into tangent board though.
Please use Yi soon-shin tangent board for this kind of topic.

If I may chime in this discussion relating to Yi soon-shin, you guys can elaborate discussion with Prince Gwang-hae.

If chosun's later kings were half as smart like gwang-hae, lee dynasty would have been survived and respected like Thai royals.

[donilpark]

One interesting fact about china is that it always absorbed the cultural legacy of its conqueror and in the end made it itself with few controverse

Funny thing is, people automatically assume that whatever state the Chinese people is in now and think that's the 'Han' Chinese.
Not really.
What's the image of a Chinese in your mind? What comes to your mind when I say 'traditional Chinese costume'?
I daresay that what comes to your mind must be that of a Manchu or any one of many nations that controlled the 'land-now-called-Zhongguo'.
It's not Chinese absorbing them. It's the Chinese being shaped by them.
If you look at it closely, the Chinese are the people who were under the dominion of some other peoples for most of its history.
However, it successfully incorporated into its own the history and heritage of the peoples who ruled them.
I was doing a somewhat heated discussion in another topic, but you see this very process going on right now in our times, with China's Northeast Asian Project and it's attempt at incorporating Koguryo history as a part of Chinese history. If this project succeeds and a few generations pass, then it will become an immutable fact. Koguryo will have been a 'Chinese dynasty'. Just like Tibet is.
So, it would be like this.
France and Germany wage war with each other. France takes over Germany completely. If 100 years later, if Germany gains independance and the two are seperate nations, the war would be recorded as just a war. If Germany did not gain independance and stayed merged with France, then this war would be recorded as a civil war or unification war, since now the French and German have no distinction between them and now the two are one.
Now, it's not a big step further to imaine that one day in a possible future where the mention of the word 'Chinese traditional costume' would bring an image of Hanbok to your mind.
Simply put, it's not that Mongolians who conquered the Chinese got absorbed into them by wearing Chinese clothings. The Mongolians were still wearing their own clothings, but it would be labled 'Chinese costume' later, retroactively.
Again, I'm afraid I'm not making myself clear. What I'm trying to say is that 'absorbing' does not mean that the Chinese were able to make Mongolians adopt Chinese ways. It just means that the Chinese were successful in labeling Mongolian ways as 'Chinese'

I'm sure that Ming and Qing considered each other as foreigners. It is only after the fact that Ming and Qing are both considered 'Chinese dynasties'. Ming Chinese themselves did not consider Qing as a Chinese dynasty. They regarded Qing as Manchu barbarians. They didn't think waging war with Qing was a unification war. They thought it was fighting a foreign invasion. But now, by the simplest act of labeling Qing as a 'Chinese dynasty', it doesn't matter who won any more, because both Ming and Qing are 'Chinese dynasties' now. It was just a unification war. The Chinese 'Zhonghua' never lost to any foreign race, because whoever conquers China is also Chinese. Both balck and white on the chessboard are my gamepieces. If black wins, I win. If white wins, I win once again.
That's the way China's national identity works.

If Korea could successfully conquer China now and keep it that way for many ages, then Ming, Qing, Yuen, Qin, Liao, so on and on could all be labled 'Korean dynasties'. (that i, IF Korea did the same thing that China is doing now. But it's not in Korea's character to usurp the identity of other peoples)
And this time, it will be Korea that never lost to foreign powers in its history. It would be Korea that absorbed other peoples.
And suppose after that, Vietnam conquers Korea. The Ming, Qing, Yuen, Qin, Liao, Chosun, Koryo, Shilla will all be labeled 'Vietnamese dynasties' this time.
Do you see what I mean? I went a bit extreme to illustrate my point clearly. Our perception of the present shapes the history. If that present condition changes, the history changes along with it.

P.S. Now that I've written all this, it seems like this is very similar to what sunami chun said. Only that I look at it in a negative way.

[kinoeugene]

meowmeow said:

If chosun's later kings were half as smart like gwang-hae, lee dynasty would have been survived and respected like Thai royals.

I agree with you, meowmeow.
I think Gwang-hae-gun was a very realistic and practical person. It may be because he suffered under the war for 7 years as a Se-Ja.
When he became a king, chinese Ming was getting weak and Machuria people, Ching, was getting strong.
Gwang-hae-gun knew the importance of diplomatic policy than any others. He managed the relationship between those two of strong powers very cleverly.
After Gwang-hae-gun was defeated in the chosun's internal power game, chinses Ching invaded chosun blaming chosun's impolite - ByungJa HoRan. It means the failure of chosun's diplomatic policy.
Because of the two of wars, ImJin and ByungJa, chosun dynasty was getting weaker and weaker even though there were great kings like Hyo-Jong, Young-Jo and Jeong-Jo.

[donilpark]

kinoeugene, what are you agreeing with?
meowmeow was saying that the incompetance of later kings led to Chosun's downfall, but you're saying that it was Imjin and Byungja wars which left Chosun in a weekened state that led to its eventual downfall, despite the fact that there were great, competant kings like Hyo-Jong, Young-Jo and Jeong-Jo.
As I understand it, what you're saying is the opposite of what meowmeow said.

[meowmeow]

Young-jo and Jung-jo period was the last period which josun flourished after im-jin war. A lot of people say if jung-jo could have ruled 20 years longer, late jo-sun's history would have been different.

After Jung-jo, there was not much power for king.

Power belonged to confucian clan such as Andong-kim.

[sunami chun]

It looks like prince kwanghaegun was a promising future king. He had truly concerns about Chosun and his people besides being very inteligent on diplomatic and foreign affairs, but what i know about him in history is that his mother was killed (poisoned) by the 1st queen (his mother was a consort queen) and suffered lots of intrigues from her so that when he became King he was told all the thruth and became a inescrupulous person and king, arresting the 1st queen and killing many dissidents. He lost supporters and opened the gate for opportunists and palace intrigues what ended in the coup d´état. From what i know in chosun history, all the kings who were not from direct ascendance from the king and the 1st queen never felt safe about its place in the court and always tried to build a political base not to be thrown away, and that was the case of King Sounjo. He was aware of that and he feared so much losing his power that he became a weak ling and could never see the real picture. (this is not from a secure source so maybe it´s mistaken).
The political problem with Chosun for me is that it was never able to evolve the monarchy into parliamentary monarchy or other political structure that was not so centralized and depend so much on a blind king, maybe such as england.....but in the other hand we long before started to use the meritocratic system (public exams) and had many educated and capable bureaucrats. If we only had the oportunity to blend both.....
Do you guys knows about thai royal history, did they as a vassal state suffered similar questions like Chosun?

About China, i agree with Donilpark about having the same opinion but on different sides, but i sustain my point of view based in the fact that when i talk about the culture of assimilation rather than segregation, this by former chinese rulers considered "barbaric" invaders gained in China´s history a place as a ruling dynasty that they should be proud of since they were totally accepted by former chinese people. What i´m trying to say is that although aesthetically the "conquerors" imposed his costumes, haircuts and some traditional aspects, in the whole picture his culture was absorbed by a more powerfull culture that has been feeding from many sources, if we could talk about cultural wars it would be impossible to a less cultured society to conquer china as for military power can lead to victory in arms and is temporary as the sun sets but cultural power can lead to victory of the hearts and lasts forever for truly it creates no shadows, and this is what that phrase "when one thinks he will conquer china, will be conquered..." means. So i believe chosun in a manner took a franchise of chinese culture and was given right to develop it further because they were willing to accept confucionism, a chinese doctrine, and develop it into perfection, and this more than political acts or tributary system saved chosun from being invaded (in this case it is chinese educated people who highly regard koreans and its dedication to confucionism). Philosofically I deeply admire the fact that Chosun took confucionism, and developed it further than chinese ( i think it was an Indian philosopher Tagor who came to korea that said "this is the lighting house of asia...") because a doctrine that believes everyone is good from birth and thru practice one can reach perfection and become virtuous without having so many fantastic images that can lead to misconceptions being practiced for centuries and became deep into the hearts and minds of the koreans. Of course there are bad things like woman lowered status, slavery and cast society that was drawn by wicked scholars but what nation in the world could say we used to practiced from morning to downfall virtuous acts (rites and learnings) and try to become perfect and benevolent beings for 500 years, and this is the base of chosun history for wicked it was politically, socially and disastrous in diplomacy. And despite we see so many koreans who do not share this image, if a nation with this philosophy and culture could breed a remarkable human being like Yi Soon Shin that was worth it all.......(i don´t know if this is only my nationalism blinding me but i didn´t see in any other country´s history someone like him, even in tolkien´s . If i take cultural war as a point of view maybeand only maybe Korea was the only capable culture to dominate China without becoming a mere dynasty.....and we could not forget also only if they could rip themselves from their arrogance that unfortunately is a korean thing also

About the northeastern asian project what i could say is that it seems like if we go thru your point of view Donilpark we will be giving them the oportunity to use exactly the same argumentation, because Goguryo hold that territory for few years and actually that territory has passed in the hands of many different nations so they have the right as much as we do and also the unique goguryo architecture was not so unique since it was originally from someone else and affected elsewhere. Does Italy have rights on all the roads and roman constructions thru out europe? Of course european nations respect roman constructions as roman architectural improvements, and since it is widely known they don´t try to change it as its own, but does it make it italian? It is now a world heritage and should be taken care by the correct institutions that could congregate both sides and this should be the policy of korea towards it from my point of view (i really don´t know what is the korean position, if it´s only to refute whenever they can or actively comdemn it) gathering world public opinion to our side instead of being treated as a quarrel between two countries over ancient stuff. What could we do? Mourn for the loss of this treasures because of our past government blindness i guess. As much as i cannot blame japanese for their invasions in Korea if not only for our on fault.....