Balhae controversies

During the mid-Joseon dynasty, Park Ji-won denied the fact that the Han Dynasty's territories extended south of the Yalu, and criticized Kim Bu-sik for excluding Balhae (Bohai in Chinese) in Manchuria from the history of Korea, arguing that Balhae were "descendants" of Goguryeo.[4] Yi Gyu-gyeong argued that the exclusion of Balhae from Korean history was "a grave error" since "it occupied a vast area".[5] In the Joseon's later years, however, increasing numbers of Korean historians included Balhae into Korean history, despite acknowledging that the state's founders were the Mohe people, who could not be considered Korean.[6] In the 18th century, the divide was such that the scholars Seongho Yi Ik and An Chŏngbok adamantly refused to consider Balhae part of Korean history, while Sin Kyŏngjun and Yu Deuk-gong fully incorporated it. One century later, Han Ch'iyun and Han Chinsŏ (한진서) would include Balhae as equal in Korean history to such uncontroversially Korean dynasties like Silla.[7] Shin Chaeho criticized the Samguk Sagi for excluding Balhae and the Buyeo kingdom (Chinese: Fuyu, another Manchurian state) from Korean history.[8] He interpreted Balhae's defeat by the Khitan-led Liao dynasty as having caused "half of our ancestor Dangun's ancient lands... loss for over nine hundred years".[9] North Korean scholars—and more recently some in the South—have recently tried to incorporate Balhae history as an integral part of Korean history by challenging the view of Unified Silla as the unification of Korea. According to this narrative, Goryeo was the first unification of Korea, since Balhae still existed while occupying former Goguryeo territory north of the Korean peninsula.[10][11]

Korean scholars have generally regarded Balhae as an extension of or successor to the Goguryeo kingdom (37 B.C. - 668 A.D.) ever since the publication of Jewang ungi in the 1290s.[12] The 18th century, during the Joseon, was a period in which Korean scholars began a renewed interest in Balhae. The Qing dynasty and Joseon dynasty negotiated and demarcated the Sino-Korean border along the Yalu and Tumen rivers in 1712. Jang Ji-yeon (1762–1836), journalist, writer of nationalist tracts, and organizer of nationalist societies, published articles arguing that had Joseon officials considered Balhae as part of their historical territory, they would not have been as eager to "give up" lands north of the rivers.

Yu Deuk-gong in his 18th-century work Balhaego, an investigation of Balhae, argued that Balhae should be included as part of Korean history, and that doing so would justify territorial claims on Manchuria. Korean historian Shin Chae-ho, writing about Jiandao in the early 20th century, bemoaned that for centuries, Korean people in their "hearts and eyes considered only the land south of the Yalu River as their home" and that "half of our ancestor Dangun's ancient lands have been lost for over nine hundred years." Sin criticized Kim Busik, author of the Samguk Sagi, for excluding Balhae from his historical work and claiming that Silla had achieved unification of Korea.[13] Inspired by ideas of Social Darwinism, Sin wrote:

How intimate is the connection between Korea and Manchuria? When the Korean race obtains Manchuria, the Korean race is strong and prosperous. When another race obtains Manchuria, the Korean race is inferior and recedes. Moreover, when in the possession of another race, if that race is the northern race, then Korea enters that northern race's sphere of power. If an eastern race obtains Manchuria, then Korea enters that race's sphere of power. Alas! This is an iron rule that has not changed for four thousand years.[14]

Neither Silla nor the later Goryeo wrote an official history for Balhae, and some modern scholars argue that had they done so, Koreans might have had a stronger claim to Balhae's history and territory.[15]

Song Ki-ho believes that Mohe were Tungusic people who had been assimilated into Goguryeo and Balhae, thereby making Mohe part of Korean history. Jang Guk-jong argued that Mohe tribes in Balhae were not Mohe but part of Goguryeo's provincial population.[16]

The Old Book of Tang says that "Da Zuorong of the Bohai-Mohe, was originally from a division of Goguryeo" (渤海靺鞨大祚榮者，本高麗別種也.).[17]

The People's Republic of China is accused of limiting Korean archaeologists access to historical sites located within Liaoning and Jilin. Starting from 1994, increasing numbers of South Korean tourists began to visit archaeological sites in China and often engaged in nationalistic displays. This was aggravated by a series of tomb robberies and vandalism at several of these archaeological sites between 1995 and 2000.[29] South Korean archeologist Song Ki-ho, a noted professor at Seoul National University who has published several papers criticizing the Chinese government's interpretation of Bohai 's history, made several visits to China in the 1990s, 2000, 2003, and 2004, examining several historical sites and museums. However, he found himself restricted by limitations on note-taking and photography and was even ejected from several sites by museum employees.[30][31] North Korea has restricted independent archaeologists from its historical sites, many of which may be Bohai -related, since at least the early 1960s.