True Won Kyun of history (spoiler)

[florel]

dukefanbbd said:

sorry for going off topic here but.....florel, i just luv the way you say things, the sentiment and the wording. always a pleasure.

Oh... I cannot express myself how much I am touched by your compliments, luv. I should pour blood-and-tears endeavor to refine my English and especially to sharpen my humor sens for not disappointing you.



And about our little piggy....

Won Kyun before the Imjin War

- Won Kyun was not famous brave warrior (before or after the Japanese invasion) as the drama depicts him. Shin Rip and Yi Il were famous, but Won Kyun was NEVER.

- The first explicit mention of his name in the Royal Annals is on the issue of his dismissal from the post of Left Cholla Navy Commander. How can we explain this silence if Admiral Won would have been competent officers on the North frontiers as Won's clan insists ? Won Kyun was in the North in 1580's, but he made no notable accomplishment.

-Choi Jae-Sung is too charismatic actor to play Won Kyun. It's misscasting.


PS. Moreshige, where are you ? And where is your history book on Admiral Won ? ;D

[TheBo]

florel said:

...about our little piggy....Won Kyun...

-Choi Jae-Sung is too charismatic actor to play Won Kyun. It's misscasting.

Hah! I agree completely. They should have gotten someone like the guy who plays Chun-su. ;D

Bo

[florel]

thebo said:

Hah! I agree completely. They should have gotten someone like the guy who plays Chun-su. ;D

Bo

Tout a fait, Bo. He is too handsome to be Won Kyun. ;D
I think it's good idea to give Chun-su the role of Admiral Won. ;D ;D ;D

[TheBo]

Although, I must say, Florel, that the guy who plays Won Kyun is doing a pretty good job of representing his character's deterioration. I know he is not historically accurate, but as a purely dramatic character, he's very interesting. He even looks less attractive to me, he seems to have gotten kind of blowzy and sad.

Bo

[florel]

I agree with you, Bo, that the actor of Won Kyun is amazing.
(I like the actor even though I detest Admiral Won. ;D )

I also think that the actors who play Chun-Su, Wakizaka and Hideyoshi are doing great job. But, as you noted, the character of Won Kyun is more dynamic and more complex than other evil figures.

What I'm worrying and interested is the fact that the writers approach him now to the real Admiral Won in history. (Il est tres tres mechant maintenant !) How will they make his fall? I don't know.
I'm worrying because many Korean spectators will not be tolerant to make him a tragical figure. (Pas de tolerance pour des feuilletons historiques ! Ils sont trop serieux. lol) Will the dramatists respond to the spectators' demand to be faithful to history ? Can the dramatists do well their work without contradiction in the character of Won Kyun between history and fiction ?
I'm not as irritated as my compatriots about Won Kyun in the drama even though I often don't like the dramatists' interpretation - or, rather, "creation" - of some historical personages. I never confound drama with history. So I enjoy the drama and study history apart from it.

What I would like to ask the dramatists is... to become "more logical". What annoys me is some illogical dramatic devices in this drama. (I often feel that they have no sense of time and space. lol )

[skinz]

florel said:

I agree with you, Bo, that the actor of

What I'm worrying and interested is the fact that the writers approach him now to the real Admiral Won in history. How will they make his fall?

I smell a tragic downfall in my opinion. Its to late for us, American viewers, to feel any animosity toward the character to Won Kyun. To Koreans he's a worthless character in history but to the casual American who's' watching this drama we're gonna have some feeling when he's gone because of his past "relationship" with YSS in the earlier episodes. If it wasn't for this board I would've believed that everything was true in the drama. There is no info on some of the characters in the U.S. which would make it harder to gather facts.

[moreshige]

skinz said:

florel said:

I agree with you, Bo, that the actor of

What I'm worrying and interested is the fact that the writers approach him now to the real Admiral Won in history. How will they make his fall?

I smell a tragic downfall in my opinion. Its to late for us, American viewers, to feel any animosity toward the character to Won Kyun. To Koreans he's a worthless character in history but to the casual American who's' watching this drama we're gonna have some feeling when he's gone because of his past "relationship" with YSS in the earlier episodes. If it wasn't for this board I would've believed that everything was true in the drama. There is no info on some of the characters in the U.S. which would make it harder to gather facts.

My sentiments are the same about you on Japanese history as well, skinz. Thanks for so much good info! And to Florel, I credit you for my interest in Imjin war and renewed interest in Korean history in general. Twelve years ago back in college I took a course in Japanese history.

Right now as a hobby, if you call it that I'm trying to learn more
on ancient China, Korea and Japan as well as ancient northern tribes. Please let me know if anyone can help me in this with links, books, articles etc.

Right now I'm stuck on:
Xiongnu,the huns, dong-yi, Turks, Old Choson,Puyo peoples and Japan's Yamato (Kofun mounds). It's hard to pinpoint these Xiongnu peoples because they cover vast stretches of cultures, history and land from the Huns (western Xiongnu) that threatened the Rome empire to the west and the Dong-yi (eastern Xiongnu?) people that shaped Korea, northern China ,Mongolia, Manchuria and even Japan. I've been looking at what appears to be a pro-Chinese site, one korean site and Korean, Chinese and Japanese history books in English. Very interesting stuff btw but very daunting to tackle all at once. If anyone wants to have a discussion let me know because I'm willing to learn and share what I've discovered.

PS. I'm already aware of the controversies such as, did Yamato Wa invade Minama under Jinmu or was it a Korean continental invasion of Japan that became Yamato ? There's a "Japanese" and "Korean" position to this.

Who were the Dong-yi and how do they relate to Xiongnu and the Huns? There are a couple of schools of thought here.

Was Tang gun a Dong-yi person? How do we reconcile the two dates of Old Choson 2333 BC vs 1122 BC when Ki-ja fled or traveled from the Chinese state of Yen (Yan) to establish Old Choson?

When Wiman Choson fell, did refugees also flee to Yamato besides Chinhan? One site claims this based on Chinese records. What was their relationship to Yamato?

What was extent of the legacy of Koguryo ? Why did Kim-Pusik ( circa 11 cen.) believe Koguryo to be a "Korean" state when he wrote the Samguk Sagi?


Man, I hope I find a clearer picture on these questions or else I'll won't be able to go back to Won Kyun anymore. lol

[Skinz Unlogged]

I can help you out with Japan's Yamato clan. I am also trying to get into ancient china but its very complex because of all the different ethnicity in china and invasions.

I'll post some more Ancient info on japan on YSS Tangent board.

[florel]

Moreshige, I should learn from you Antiquity history as I learn Japanese history from Skinz. I don't know well that ancient period. In fact, my real "hobby" concerns Confucian scholars and politicians in the 17th century. ;D ;D

Now I'm interested in Ming Confucians. ;D

[florel]

moreshige said:

What was extent of the legacy of Koguryo ? Why did Kim-Pusik ( circa 11 cen.) believe Koguryo to be a "Korean" state when he wrote the Samguk Sagi?

I guess I can answer this question.

"Koryo" is the etymology of "Korea".
And the name of "Koryo" was derived from "Koguryo".

Gung Ye established "Hu-Koguryo (Post-Koguryo)" and his rival and successor Wang Guhn selected "Koryo" as the name of his kingdom. Both of them considered themselves as (spiritual) descendants of the kingdom of "Koguryo".

[skinz]

Here's some info on the Yamato family of Ancient Japan:


Japan had a queen at on time in mid-third century according to details from Ancient Chinese documents. During that era, Japan consisted of mini-states and was governed by queen Pimiko[Himiko] and was known for her witchcraft.

In 552, the Korean kingdom of Paekche send for help from the Yamato court for troops against Koguryo and Silla. Japan sent 400 infantry troops to aid Paekche but was heavily defeated by Koguryo cavalry. This was to be Japan first encounter with Cavalry warfare.

The ongoing controversy is to be noted on the Yamato buried Mounds. The "Horse-rider theory" is based on the similarities of ancient Korean burial mounds and the Yamato mounds. The theory claims that the first Japanese emperors were from one of the three Kingdom of Korea. (probably Paekche since the relationship between them were the closest) One reason for this assumption is that ancient Korea and China was more advance in warfare than in Japan at that time and the swift superiority of the Yamato family over the Uji or ancient rival clans shows that some outside influences had to play a major role. However, this theory don't sit well with Japanese nationalists and a counter story was issued, which is where the myth of Empress Jingo invasion of Korea originated from.

[moreshige]

skinz said:

Here's some info on the Yamato family of Ancient Japan:


Japan had a queen at on time in mid-third century according to details from Ancient Chinese documents. During that era, Japan consisted of mini-states and was governed by queen Pimiko[Himiko] and was known for her witchcraft.

In 552, the Korean kingdom of Paekche send for help from the Yamato court for troops against Koguryo and Silla. Japan sent 400 infantry troops to aid Paekche but was heavily defeated by Koguryo cavalry. This was to be Japan first encounter with Cavalry warfare.

The ongoing controversy is to be noted on the Yamato buried Mounds. The "Horse-rider theory" is based on the similarities of ancient Korean burial mounds and the Yamato mounds. The theory claims that the first Japanese emperors were from one of the three Kingdom of Korea. (probably Paekche since the relationship between them were the closest) One reason for this assumption is that ancient Korea and China was more advance in warfare than in Japan at that time and the swift superiority of the Yamato family over the Uji or ancient rival clans shows that some outside influences had to play a major role. However, this theory don't sit well with Japanese nationalists and a counter story was issued, which is where the myth of Empress Jingo invasion of Korea originated from.

Yes, I'm aware of this. In fact, the Japanese used the Jingo "legend" to justify their exploits during the Imjin wars which they based their knowledge from their "history" book, Nihongi. Like the "horse-rider" theory, this is not new controversy because it has been studied for quite some time now by academics.

I just brought it up for my own sake because I studied ancient history over 10 years ago. It fascinated me because this was before the current Japanese Emperor had recently apologized publically to Korea and acknowledged the royal line had Korean origins.

My professor had said that the Japanese government out of their veneration for their royalty, would not open up the royal ancient burial mound (I forget where) for excavation. So there was no way to confirm rumors about Korean origins apart from other archaeological data and Chinese, Korean and Japanese historical records. The problem was that the Japanese records the Nihongi and Kojiki written in 8th cen. were very inconsistent with Chinese and Korean records.

An author by the name of Won tack Hong who wrote a book in 1990? called Paekche of Korea and the Origin of Yamato Japan tackles the inconsistencies and controversies very well. But it's a difficult read. I had a hard time following it because (1.) I wasn't too familiar with Japanese ancient history as well as Korean ancient history (2). my lack of understanding of Chinese characters (3) being unfamiliar with the Samguk Sagi and Samguk Yusa(Korean) the Chinese historical records, and finally the Nihongi and Kokiji.

Okay, as far as these topics are concerned I'm gonna move to the
tangents board before we stray from Won Kyun here.

[moreshige]

florel said:

moreshige said:

What was extent of the legacy of Koguryo ? Why did Kim-Pusik ( circa 11 cen.) believe Koguryo to be a "Korean" state when he wrote the Samguk Sagi?

I guess I can answer this question.

"Koryo" is the etymology of "Korea".
And the name of "Koryo" was derived from "Koguryo".

Gung Ye established "Hu-Koguryo (Post-Koguryo)" and his rival and successor Wang Guhn selected "Koryo" as the name of his kingdom. Both of them considered themselves as (spiritual) descendants of the kingdom of "Koguryo".

Thanks for the specific details to this. I knew that Koryo derived its name from Koguryo which at least suggests that Koryo people believed that Koguryo was "Korean". However, I want to get a better claim because I want to argue against PRC's (people's republic of China) recent claim a couple of years ago.

I know this much. Koguryo was founded by Puyo refugees and integrated with the indigenous Yemaek peoples. Paekche was founded by one of the sons of Koguryo King.

In the study of linguistics of proto-korean languages, Koguryo language was found to be similar to Japanese. I'm not sure if they did a study on Paekche language but I'm betting my money that it's very much related to Japanese as well, given Paekche's close relationship to Japan.


I also speculate that since Unified Silla, Silla language became the
dominant form which is why you don't find many native words (non-sinocized words) in common with modern Korean and modern Japanese. But both Japanese and Korean are of the Ural/Altaic family which means that they share the same grammatical structure. But there is controversy here about classification of these 2 languages within academia.

Imagine if Koguryo or Paekche had unified the peninsula? Then I bet today's Korean language would be more similar with Japanese and there wouldn't be so much controversy within the linguistics people about the Korean and Japanese anomalies. What a thought!

[wangkon]

moreshige,

I've had many conversations about this at www.chinahistoryforum.com. They have a nice search function that will give you all the related posts. It's better to post about that kind of stuff in there then in this forum (as much as I like this forum, it's not the appropriate place to have a conversation about early Korean history).

[moreshige]

wangkon said:

moreshige,

I've had many conversations about this at www.chinahistoryforum.com. They have a nice search function that will give you all the related posts. It's better to post about that kind of stuff in there then in this forum (as much as I like this forum, it's not the appropriate place to have a conversation about early Korean history).

Thanks for the link! Although, I would have to disagree that it's inappropiate for this forum. For this thread, yes...it's inappropiate and I apologize for not curbing my enthusiasm. I'll discuss more on the tangents section.

I'm not sure if I'd want to dicuss the koguryo" controversy" on a chinese history forum just yet though. I'll have to do more in-depth research first.

But I may add again that the Japanese invaders during the Imjin wars did use the Jingo legend as a pretext for invasion.