A New History of Parhae [Illustrated] 9004214844, 9789004214842

Citation preview

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

A New History of Parhae ‰ By

Northeast Asian History Foundation Seoul

English translation by JOHN B. DUNCAN University of California, Los Angeles

LEIDEN & BOSTON 2012 The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

This book is printed on acid-free paper by CPI Antony Rowe, Chippenham, UK Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Parhae ui yoksa wa munhwa. English. A new history of Parhae / by Northeast Asian History Foundation (Seoul); English translation by John Duncan. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-21484-2 (hardback: alk. paper) 1. Bohai/Parhae (Kingdom)--Civilization. 2. Bohai/Parhae (Kingdom)--History. I. Duncan, John B., 1945- II. Tongbuga Yoksa Chaedan (Korea) III. Title. DS793.P59P365413 2012 951’.8017--dc23 2011034956

ISBN 978 90 04 21484 2 © Original Korean language edition 2005, 2007 by Northeast Asian History Foundation, Seoul © English translation 2012 John Duncan Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhof Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Contents ‰

Translator’s Introduction On the Occasion of the Republication of A New History of Parhae Preface List of Figures List of Tables Part One: The Establishment and Growth of Parhae 1. The Founding and Naming of Parhae Lim Sang-sun (Im Sangsoˇ n) 2. The Ethnic Composition of Parhae’s Population Han Ciu-cheol (Han Kyuch’oˇ l) Part Two: Aspects of Parhae’s History 3. The Territory of Parhae Kim Jin-kwang (Kim Chin’gwang) 4. The System of Local Administration in Parhae Kim Dong-Woo (Kim Tongu) 5. The Fall of Parhae: A Temporal and Spatial Approach ˇ Kim Eun Gug (KimUn’guk) 6. The Movement to Revive Parhae Lim Sang-sun Part Three: Parhae’s Relations with Its Neighbors 7. Enduring Window between North and South: Parhae and Silla Kim Eun Gug 8. Parhae’s War with Tang China: Background and Significance Kim Jong-bok (Kim Chongbok) 9. Exchanges between Parhae and Japan Ku Nan Hee (Ku Nanhui) ˇ 10.Parhae as an East Asian Maritime Power Yun Jae-Woon (Yun Chaeun)

vii xiii xv xvii xix 1 5 15 25 29 39 53 62 71 75 86 97 109

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

vi

CONTENTS

Part Four: Aspects of the Culture of Parhae 11. Parhae’s Burial Culture Yun Jae-Woon 12. Clothing in Parhae Jeon Hyun-sil (Choˇ n Hyoˇ nsil) 13. Parhae’s Architectural Culture Lee Byeong Gun (Yi Pyoˇ nggoˇ n)

119 123 132 150

Part Five: Parhae as Seen from Various Countries 14. Chinese Perceptions of Parhae Yun Jae-Woon 15. Perceptions of Parhae in North Korea, Japan, and Russia Park Jin Suk (Pak Chinsuk)

167

180

Appendices Timeline of Parhae History Lineage Chart of Parhae Kings References

193 195 197

Index

201

171

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Translator’s Introduction ‰

RECENT YEARS HAVE witnessed the eruption of repeated and often vitriolic controversies over issues of historical interpretation among the nations of Northeast Asia: China, Japan, Korea, and at times even Russia. Some of these controversies, which are often collectively referred to as the “history wars,” involve twentieth-century events, such as the comfort women or the rape of Nanjing, and others have to do with territorial disputes, such as those over the Tokto (Dokdo)/Takeshima islets between Korea and Japan, the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands between Japan and China or the Kuril/Hoppo Islands between Russia and Japan. But among the most heated flare-ups has been that between China and Korea over the historical ownership of ancient kingdoms, Old Chosoˇ n (Old Joseon; Ch. Chaoxian; ?-108 BCE), Koguryoˇ (Goguryeo; Ch. Gaogouli; first century BCE-668 CE) and Parhae (Balhae; Ch. Bohai 699–926 CE) whose domains straddled the modern borders between China and Korea. In fact, the recent battles over these kingdoms began with Parhae and only later expanded to include Old Chosoˇ n and Koguryoˇ . The chapters in this book examine the case of Parhae. A major reason for the uncertainty and controversy over Parhae is the lack of historical source materials. There are no primary sources for Parhae aside from a few diplomatic documents preserved in Japan. Furthermore, unlike most other historical East Asian states, there is no standard or dynastic history (正史 Ch. chengshi; K. choˇ ngsa) for Parhae. Most of the information we have about Parhae, aside from archaeological evidence, comes from Chinese, Korean, and Japanese dynastic histories. The information from those sources, however, is limited and fragmentary, leaving room for a wide range of interpretations. Yet another problem lies in the nature of the dynastic histories themselves. The compilation of histories is an old tradition in East Asia, dating back at least to the second century BCE in China and to the eighth or ninth centuries CE, if not earlier, in Korean and Japan. Those histories were essentially about dynasties—about emperors and kings and the political elites who served them, and not about what we now understand as nations. But they nonetheless made certain claims about historical and cultural belonging. The Shiji (Records of

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

viii

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

the Grand Historian) of China, the first standard history, not only embraced a large number of political entities scattered across time and space as part of the Han dynasty historical heritage, but it also excluded others whom it categorized as barbarian outsiders and described in a special section of the biographies. Later dynastic histories followed the same practice, from the Hanshu (History of Han) of the first century CE down to the Mingshi (History of Ming) of the seventeenth century (the last standard dynastic history), sometimes offering contradictory accounts of the barbarian outsiders. While the histories of Korea and Japan did not feature special biographic sections for foreign entities, it is quite clear who they considered to be among their respective historical predecessors and whom they considered outsiders. What, then of Parhae? Was it included or excluded by the compilers of various countries’ dynastic histories? There is, of course, no dynastic history for Russia or for the Tungusic tribes now living in Russian territory. Although the Japanese histories depicted Parhae trade missions as tributary envoys, there was almost no mention of Parhae except in connection with those trade missions. The Chinese dynastic histories of that era, the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) and the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) both treated Parhae as an alien other, lumping it together with other barbarian entities outside its northeastern borders. None of the subsequent Chinese dynastic histories ever included Parhae as part of the Chinese historical heritage. The oldest extant Korean history, the Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms), which was compiled during the twelfth century, treated Silla, Paekche (Baekche), Koguryoˇ , and later (or unified) Silla (Silla from 668 to 935) as predecessors to the Koryoˇ , but left Parhae out. Thus Parhae was excluded from the dynastic histories of all its neighbors. There is no evidence that Parhae was treated otherwise in unofficial histories or other literati writings in Japan, China, or Korea until the eighteenth century when a small number of Chosoˇ n (Joseon) dynasty literati, whose interest in the Manchurian region apparently was stimulated by the Manchu invasions of Korea and conquest of Ming China in the mid-seventeenth century, began to write about Parhae. Their leading member, Yu Tukkong ˇ (Yu Deukgong), argued that Parhae was a Korean kingdom and that the two hundred-plus years when Parhae and Silla co-existed should be called the “Period of Northern and Southern Kingdoms.” Yu’s arguments, however, did not find a foothold in mainstream late Chosoˇ n literati consciousness. It was not until the beginning of the twentieth century that the question of the historical ownership of Parhae became a contested issue. Russian scholars contended that it belonged to the history of the Tungusic peoples and thus, by extension, to Russia, for two reasons: one, the vast majority of Tungusic peoples live inside Russia’s Siberian territory; and two, a large portion of Russia’s Maritime Province had been part of Parhae’s territory. In Korea, the famed

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

TRANSLATOR’S INTRODUCTION

ix

historian and nationalist activist Sin Ch’aeho (Sin Chaeho) brought renewed attention to the Manchurian region through his arguments that Manchuria was the historic homeland of the Korean nation and his condemnation of the compiler of the Samguk sagi for failing to include Parhae in his history of Korea. In Japan, historians were using earlier Japanese histories depicting Parhae trade missions as tributary embassies to claim that Parhae had been a dependency of Japan. Dreams of territorial aggrandizement lay behind all of these historical claims to Parhae. The Russians had been moving south into Manchuria from the late nineteenth century while the Japanese were nursing their own imperialist ambitions in the area. Tensions between Russia and Japan over control of Korea and Manchuria eventually erupted into the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05. The Japanese eventually realized their dream of conquering Manchuria in 1931, setting up the puppet state of Manchukuo which lasted until the end of World War II in 1945. To the south, Sin Ch’aeho and other Koreans were making irredentist arguments about Manchuria even though their country, having been made a Japanese protectorate in 1905 and a colony in 1910, was hardly in a position to act on those demands. The only state in Northeast Asia that was not attempting to lay claim to Parhae in the early twentieth century was China. That was because the final Chinese dynasty, the Qing, was a Manchu dynasty. To Chinese reformers hoping to modernize and strengthen their country, the Qing was a foreign conquest dynasty that was holding China back. The Manchus had to be overthrown if China were to regain its rightful place in the world. Thus anti-Manchu sentiment swept through China, developing into an exclusivist Han Chinese ethno-nationalism that simply was not interested in such non-Han entities as Parhae. Even after exclusivist Han nationalism gave way by the 1930s to visions of a multi-ethnic Chinese nation, Chinese scholars and officials paid relatively little attention to Parhae. Interest in Parhae ebbed in the decades following the close of World War II. Japan’s defeat brought to an end its interest in the Manchurian region. Russia and China were both busy trying to reconstruct after the damage inflicted on them by German and Japanese invaders and were also committed to developing and maintaining an international socialist brotherhood. And Korea found itself in a war that left both north and south Korea devastated. That is not to say that scholars in some countries, particularly Russia and North Korea, were not doing some work on Parhae, but rather to say that controversies over the historical ownership of Parhae did not resurface in those decades. By the 1970s, however, interest in Parhae began to grow, most notably in South Korea where a military dictatorship was promoting nationalism in an effort to gain legitimacy for itself, as well as to attain its economic and long-term political goals. Cadets at the South Korean military academy at T’aenˇung (Taeneung) trained with the slogan “Reunify the national land, recover the lost land,” the lost land an unmistakable reference to Manchuria. Ordinary educated

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

x

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Koreans came to believe without question that Manchuria is Korean land (“Manju nˇun uri ttang”), and there even appeared a pop song titled “Dreaming of Parhae.” It was in this context that so-called “non-academic” historians in south Korea began to issue calls for the incorporation of Parhae into Korean history, calls that were given sensationalizing coverage by the media. By the 1990s, many—but certainly not all—academic historians had chosen to do just that, using Yu Tˇukkong’s eighteenth-century characterization of the eighth, ninth, and early tenth centuries in Korea as the period of northern and southern kingdoms. This coincides with the position taken by north Korean scholars since the early 1960s. By the late 1970s, Chinese scholars—perhaps reacting to the arguments of north Korean scholars to the explosion of popular and academic interest in Parhae in south Korea, or both—began to engage in the study of Parhae with an eye to establishing Chinese ownership of Parhae’s history. Interest in the study of Parhae waned in the 1990s, but was given new impetus by the Northeast Project in the 2000s. Most of the excitement generated by the Northeast Project has focused on the question of the historical ownership of Koguryoˇ because that was not only a brand new claim by the Chinese but it was also a direct affront to the Korean sense of identity. But the Northeast Project is much broader than just Koguryoˇ and includes both Old Chosoˇ n and Parhae. Whether it is Koguryoˇ , Old Chosoˇ n, or Parhae, the Chinese position is basically the same. One, China is, and always has been, a multi-ethnic nation. Two, all the territory now within the borders of the Peoples’ Republic of China is, and always has been, Chinese territory. Chinese scholarship on Koguryoˇ , Old Chosoˇ n, and Parhae starts from and seeks to substantiate those premises. In the case of Parhae/Bohai, the Chinese argument goes something like this. The people who founded Bohai were Mohe (K. Malgal), not Koreans; the Mohe were the ancestors of the Manchus who founded China’s last dynasty; the Bohai state was a border regime that belonged to the Tang; and Bohai’s culture was a mixture of Mohe and Tang elements. The Korean response is that the founders of Parhae were Koreans from Koguryoˇ ; Parhae was an independent state that pursued its own autonomous domestic and foreign policies and even fought a war against the Tang to preserve its independence; and Parhae’s culture contained significant Koguryoˇ elements. To many Western readers, arguments revolving around questions of historical ethnicity may seem ahistorical projections of modern national identities back into the past in the wake of the deconstruction of nation and nationalism as peculiarly modern novelties, as proposed by such scholars as Benedict Anderson, Ernst Gellner, and Eric Hobsbawm. To be sure, nationalist passions in East Asia are at this time much stronger than they are in the West. But we must also recognize that certain features of East Asian history suggest that something akin to the modern Western nation had already formed prior to arrival of Western notions of nation and nationalism. One is the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

TRANSLATOR’S INTRODUCTION

xi

enduring nature of the state tradition in East Asia (Korea, for example, was under unified rule for at least 1,000 years before it was colonized by Japan in 1910 and subsequently divided in 1945); another is the practice of producing dynastic histories that, as noted above, had the effect of defining who belonged and who did not to China, Japan, or Korea. It seems clear to me, as a specialist in pre-modern Korean history, that Koryoˇ and Chosoˇ n era Korean elites, if not the common people, had a sense of belonging to a distinct socio-political and cultural collectivity that transcended individual dynasties or kingdoms. Furthermore, they often defined that collectivity in terms of descent from ancient tribal/ethnic groups such as the Samhan (the Three Han of southern Korea in the early centuries of the current era: Mahan, Pyoˇ nhan [Byeonhan], and Chinhan [Jinhan]). The chapters in this volume, which cover a broad range of issues including Parhae’s political history, territory, international relations, trade with its neighbors, and culture, explore all of this and more, including Russian and Japanese claims about Parhae. But the main thrust here is the critical examination of Chinese assertions about Parhae and the demonstration of political, ethnic, and cultural links between Koguryoˇ and Parhae. The research done on all sides in recent decades has brought to light considerable new evidence, particularly archaeological data. Nonetheless, that data, too, is still fragmentary and is often used to make nationalistic interpretations. The authors in this volume all recognize the problematic nature of nationalist narratives as applied to the history of Parhae, but they themselves are still embedded to some extent in a Korea-centered approach. The authors also recognize the problems with the source materials but still advance some speculative interpretations. Indeed, when historians are working with such limited sources, often any interpretation at all can appear contrived. Nonetheless, it seems to me that, taken as a whole, the interpretations advanced by these authors are more sustainable than many of those advanced by Chinese scholars. It is my hope that this volume will stimulate greater interest in the history of Parhae and beyond to a more general history of the Manchurian region in early times. John B. Duncan UCLA

NOTE ABOUT ROMANIZATION Questions of Romanization are always difficult, and particularly so in this book. We have chosen to use the McCune-Reischauer system for Romanization of Korean language terms because that is the system most widely used by scholars and libraries in the West. We have, however, decided to provide the Revised Romanization of names and other important terms in parentheses or brackets at first appearance in order to enable readers to cross-reference the increasing number of materials

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

xii

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

that have been published in Korea using the Revised Romanization system. Exceptions are the names of North Korean scholars, since North Korea uses a system similar to the McCune-Reischauer system, and the bibliography, since Western scholars seeking those references in their libraries will need to use McCune-Reischauer. We have also chosen to provide Chinese pronunciations (in Pinyin) of selected words, both modern place names and historical terms, to allow readers to cross-reference English-language scholarship on China.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

On the Occasion of the Republication of A New History of Parhae ‰

The Northeast Asia History Foundation was established in September 2006, at which time it absorbed the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation which had been established in 2004 in order to counter China’s Northeast Project. The Northeast Asia History Foundation also succeeded to the various research products of the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation. During its two-and-a-half years, the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation conducted comprehensive research into the history of Northeast Asia centered on Koguryoˇ , producing over eighty books ranging from scholarly works for professional historians to general books explaining the history for the general population. Even though those books were distributed to domestic and foreign research institutes, educational institutions, and government agencies where they were used as materials for research, because they were published for private distribution there were limits to the extent to which they could be utilized by scholars and general readers. The Northeast Asia History Foundation has selected for republication those the books published by the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation that are judged to be in most urgent need of wider distribution. The Northeast Asia History Foundation considers it an honor to be able to publish once again the outstanding research done by the Koguryoˇ History Foundation and will also do its best to build on that research to product even better research. I wish to express my profound respect for all the authors who devoted themselves to the research and writing of these books and for the efforts of President Kim Jung-bae who led the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation. It is my sincere hope that these books will meet the needs of the readers who have interests in Northeast Asian history. Kim Yongdeok President Northeast Asia History Foundation November 2007

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Preface ‰

Parhae (Ch. Bohai; 698–926) was founded in 698, just 30 years after the fall of Koguryoˇ (first century BCE-668 CE). Parhae developed rapidly, as reflected in a diplomatic letter sent to Japan in 727 by Parhae’s King Mu (r. 719–737) claiming “we have recovered the old lands of Koguryoˇ and have continued the old customs of Puyoˇ ” (Buyeo; Ch. Fuyu).1 Among the main factors behind the rapid growth of this new kingdom were the leadership of its founder, Tae Choyoˇ ng (Dae Joyeong), and its incorporation of large numbers of economically and culturally sophisticated old Koguryoˇ subjects who played major roles in expanding the new state. Parhae subsequently succeeded in resolving its difficult relations with China’s Tang dynasty and went on to take the place once held by Koguryoˇ as the strongest state in Northeast Asia. Parhae occupies a particularly important place in Korean history as the successor to Old Chosoˇ n and Koguyroˇ in the north and as the counterpart to Silla in the south. Parhae was the last state to be established in the Manchuria region by the Yemaek (Ch. Huimo).2 After the fall of Parhae, Manchuria (now the three northeastern provinces of China) became a forgotten part of Korean history until Korean rice farmers began to move into the area in the second half of the nineteenth century. Parhae, which had once been known as the “flourishing kingdom of the east” because of its proud history and culture, occupied a huge territory that included what are today China’s Liaoning, Heilong, and Jilin provinces, Russia’s Maritime Province, and the northern part of the Korean Peninsula. Parhae’s old territory has now, for the most part, become the lands of other peoples so that it is difficult for us even to travel there. For that reason, Parhae has receded from the consciousness of most Koreans, becoming just a forgotten past. Nonetheless, it is a fact that Parhae is an important part of Korea’s history when we consider such issues as the composition of its people, its position as the successor to Koguryoˇ , and its culture. The Korean history textbooks currently in use in schools do depict a Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period with Silla3 as the southern kingdom and Parhae as the northern kingdom, devoting considerable discussion to Parhae. Nonetheless, most people show little interest in the history of Parhae, in part because it is hard for them to visit the lands THE KINGDOM OF

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

xvi

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

that once belonged to Parhae. But it is also because we have not had enough scholars working on Parhae, with the consequence that the survey histories on Parhae that have been published in Korea leave much to be desired. Thus the Koguryoˇ Research Foundation has decided to publish this book, with its focus on several central themes of Parhae history and culture. We have chosen to present the findings of Parhae specialists in language and format that will be more accessible to the general reader in the hope that this book will promote interest in, and revive our citizens’ memory of, the history and culture of Parhae. It is our hope that our readers will support this endeavor and will give us valuable comments and criticisms so that we will be able to publish a revised version in the future. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the authors who took time out of their busy schedules to write the various chapters in this book, and to all of those who helped us to publish it. Kim Jung-bae President Northeast Asian History Foundation

NOTES 1

2

3

Puyoˇ (?-494) was an ancient kingdom located in central and southern Manchuria that was eventually absorbed by Koguryoˇ at the end of the fifth century. The foundation legends of both Koguryoˇ and Paekche relate that the founders of those two kingdoms were migrants from Puyoˇ . The Yemaek are widely considered by historians in Korea to be one of the two major ethnic groups (the other being the Three Han of central and southern Korea) that eventually formed the Korean ethnic nation. Silla (trad. dates BCE 57–935) was one of the Three Kingdoms of early Korea. It arose during the early centuries CE in southeastern Korea. Silla, in alliance with China’s Tang dynasty, defeated the southwestern Korean kingdom of Paekche in 660 and Koguryoˇ in 668. Silla subsequently ruled the southern two-thirds of the Korean Peninsula up to the early tenth century.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

List of Figures ‰

Figures 1.1 and 1.2: Sections of Jiu Tangshu & Xin Tangshu Figure 1.3: Tongmosan Figure 1.4: Chengshanzi Mountain Fortress Figure 3.1: Map of Parhae’s Territory Figure 4.1: Parhae’s Territorial Expansion Figure 5.1: Monument at the Site of Parhae’s Northern Capital Figure 5.2: Parhae Stone Lamp Figure 6.1: Genealogy of the Yoˇ ngsun T’ae (Yeongsun Tae), Descendents of Parhae Refugees Figure 6.2 Hypocausts Used by Parhae Refugees Figure 7.1: South Wall of Ch’oˇ nghae Fortress Figure 7.2: Tile-Walled Remains of Kraskino Fortress Figure 7.3: Charcoal Unearthed from Tile-walled Remains at the Kraskino site Figure 8.1: Map Showing Dengzhou and Doushan Figure 8.2, View of Doushan Figure 8.3, Artistic Recreation of the Attack on Dengzhou Figure 9.1: Example of replica wooden raft – 1997 Figure 9.2: Main Routes between Parhae and Japan Figure 9.3: Posyeta Bay (Parhae envoys sailed to Japan from here in the winter, taking advantage of seasonal northwest winds Figure 9.4: The site of Baliencheng (Parhae’s Eastern Capital) as seen from the western wall. Major excavations are under way in preparation for registering Baliencheng as a world heritage site, but access is prohibited. Figure 9.5: Marker at Baliencheng explaining that Baliencheng had been the Parhae capital and that it was a key location for communication between Tang and Japan Figure 10.1: View of Dengzhou fortress in Shandong Figure 10.2: View of Fukura Port Figure 10.3: Kraskino fortress site (map) Figure 10.4: Kraskino fortress site Figure 11.1: Construction of Princess Choˇ nghye’s Tomb Figure 11.2: View of Liudingshan Tomb Complex Figure 11.3: Entrance to Princess Choˇ nghye’s Tomb Figure 11.4: Diagram of Princess Choˇ nghyo’s Tomb

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

xviii

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 11.5: Mural from the Eastern Wall of the Main Chamber of Choˇ nghyo’sTomb Figure 11.6: Tomb Number 12 of the Kungsim Tomb Complex in Hoeryoˇ ng County, North Hamgyoˇ ng Province Figure 12.1: Presumed Korean Envoys in the Afrasiab Wall Painting Figure 12.2: Presumed Korean Persons in the Mural from Li Xian’s Tomb Figure 12.3: Parhae-Style Putou Figure 12.4: Official Garb of Musician (left) and Eunuch (right) Figure 12.5: Guard with Hemp Headgear Figure 12.6: Bird Leather Boot Figure 12.7: Hemp Cord Shoes from Astana Figure 12.8: Decorated Belt from Henandun Figure 12.9: Decorated Belt from Henandun Figure 12.10: Figure Wearing Belt from Princess Choˇ nghyo’s Tomb Figure 12.11: Belt from Shoshoin Figure 12.12: Two Bronze Statues of Women Figure 12.13: Tricolor Female Figure Figure 12.14: Ikat Fabric from Shoshoin Figure 12.15, Dyed Fabric Figure 12.16: Fish Skin Clothing Figure 12.17: Sea Leopard Clothing Figure 12.18: U-shaped Hairpins Figure 12.19: Earring Figure 12.20: Necklace Figure 12.21: Bracelet Figure 13.1: Sites of first and second palace buildings of the Northern Capital Figure 13.2: Octagonal Pavilion in Northern Capital Palace Figure 13.3: Diagram of the first monastery site Figure 13.4: Demon Design Roof Tile Unearthed at the Northern Capital Figure 13.5: Diagram of the Western Residence Site Figure 13.6: Twenty-Four Stone Remains at Haiqingxiang, Dunhua City, Jilin Province Figure 13.7: Stone Lantern at the Second Monastery, Northern Capital Figure 13.8: View of Lingguang Pagoda, Changbai Prefecture, Jilin Province Figure 13.9: Column Base Decoration Figure 13.10: Parhae End Cap Tile Figure 14.1: Parhae hypocaust remains at Kraskino in Russia’s Maritime Province

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

List of Tables ‰

Table 4.1: Organization of Parhae’s Local Administration Table 4.2: First Records for Parhae’s Province-District-County System Table 4.3: Official Titles and the System of Local Rule Table 9.1: Gifts Given to Parhae Envoys

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PART ONE

THE ESTABLISHMENT AND GROWTH OF PARHAE THE FOUNDING AND NAMING OF PARHAE THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF PARHAE’S POPULATION

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Signs, one in Chinese and one in Korean, say “Site of Old Liudingshan Tombs.”

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

1

The Founding and Naming of Parhae Lim Sang-sun (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

simply a relic of the past. It is also a window through which we can observe contemporary East Asia. The history of Parhae attracts attention from South and North Korea, from China, from Russia, and even from Japan, and as such occupies a unique position in the history of Korea. Despite such interest, we can hardly say that we have achieved a solid international understanding of the history of Parhae. That is because the researchers of Parhae history in each country have tended to reflect their country’s interests and thus have been less than fully objective in the pursuit of their research. There was an intense debate between Chinese and Korean scholars over the historical ownership of Parhae (Ch. Bohai) back in the 1980s. Recently there has been much controversy between Korea and China over Koguryoˇ (Ch. Gaogouli). The argument over Koguryoˇ can be seen as an extension of the debate over Parhae. The issue over which Korean and Chinese historians are most sharply divided is the question of the historical ownership of Parhae. The issues here swirl around the questions of which kingdom, which ethnic group, and whose culture constituted the origins of Parhae and of how the people of Parhae saw themselves. These are not simply questions about a remote past but rather are important and sensitive issues between Korea and China today. Koreans generally know that Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) was the founder of Parhae. But students in South and North Korea, students in China, and students in Japan all have different understandings of Tae Choyoˇ ng’s origins. In other words, even though students throughout

PARHAE IS NOT

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

6

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Northeast Asia all have learned about Parhae, what they learn varies because of the differences in the ways that history textbooks are written in each country. Students in both South and North Korea learn that Tae Choyoˇ ng was a man of Koguryoˇ origins. South Korea’s Kodˇung hakkyo kuksa (High School Korean History Textbook) describes Tae Choyoˇ ng as a Koguryoˇ general. North Korea’s Chosoˇ n ryoˇ ksa (History of Korea; used in the first year of secondary school) depicts Tae Choyoˇ ng as a Koguryoˇ aristocrat and general. By contrast, Chinese history textbooks uniformly say that Tae Choyoˇ ng was of Malgal (Ch. Mohe) origins, describing him as a “leader of the Songmal (Ch. Sumo) Malgal tribe” who lived in the area of the Songhua and Heilong rivers. On the other hand, Japanese textbooks treat Tae Choyoˇ ng in two different ways. Some history textbooks state that he was of Koguryoˇ origins, describing him as “a surviving member of the old Koguryoˇ royal family who established Parhae”; others describe him as “a member of the Tungusic Malgal people.” One reason for the differences among the ways in which the historians of each country depict Tae Choy oˇ ng can be found in the contradictory nature of the source materials. For example, the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang), a tenth century history of China’s Tang dynasty that is also a major source for Parhae history, says that Tae Choy oˇ ng “belonged to a branch of the Kogury oˇ people (Kogury oˇ py oˇ lchong; byeoljong),” while the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang), a later history of the Tang, states that Tae was a “member of the Malgal who attached himself to Kogury oˇ .” The way in which historians in each country select and use source materials that are most favorable to their national interests is one factor behind the continuing controversies over the history of Parhae.

THE BACKGROUND TO THE FOUNDING OF PARHAE After the Fall of Koguryˇ o

Immediately after the combined forces of Tang and Silla destroyed Koguryoˇ in 668, the Tang established its Andong Protectorate General in P’yoˇ ngyang in order to control the old territory of Koguryoˇ . The Tang also forced over 28,000 influential Koguryoˇ households to relocate to China in 669 as part of its effort to prevent Koguryoˇ resistance to its rule. It seems likely that these influential households were members of the upper strata of Koguryoˇ society living in and around P’yoˇ ngyang, the city which had been the Koguryoˇ capital. The Tang dispersed these refugees who had been forced from Koguryoˇ in various locations throughout the empire. Members of the Koguryoˇ royal family were relocated to the area of the Tang capital, while others were sent to places far from Koguryoˇ , including locales south of the Yangzi River and such other places as Huihua, Hubei, Honan, Siquan, and Gansu.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FOUNDING AND NAMING OF PARHAE

7

Figures 1.1 and 1.2: Sections of Jiu Tangshu & Xin Tangshu

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

8

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

The Koguryoˇ people remaining in old Koguryoˇ territory resisted Tang rule and began an active movement to restore Koguryoˇ . In 670, An Sˇung (An Seung) launched an effort to revive Koguryoˇ together with Koˇ m Mojam (Geom Mojam), but after a rift developed, An killed Koˇ m and fled to Silla where he was given the title of King Podoˇ k (Bodeok) in 674. The old Koguryoˇ lands south of P’yoˇ ngyang (Pyeongyang) and in the Yesong River basin were where major battles were fought between Silla and Tang during the SillaTang war (668–676). Many of the residents of these areas favored Silla and eventually were incorporated into the Kyoˇ ngju (Gyeongju)based kingdom. Active movements to revive Koguryoˇ also arose in the Liaodong region. According to the Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms; a twelfth century Korean history dealing with Koguryoˇ , Silla, and Paekche), in 669—one year after the fall of the Koguryoˇ capital—only three of the Koguryoˇ fortresses north of the Amnok (Ch. Yalu) had been conquered by the Tang, eleven others had surrendered, and another seven had been abandoned, but eleven were still fighting. This tells us that a substantial portion of Koguryoˇ ’s old territory remained beyond Tang control even after the fall of P’yoˇ ngyang. In the third month of 670, the Silla official Soˇ l Oyu (Seol Oyu) and the Koguryoˇ general Ko Yoˇ nmu (Go Yeonmu) together led forces of 10,000 each across the Amnok River. In the fourth month of that year, their combined forces engaged a force of Tang and Malgal soldiers at a place named Kaedongyang (Ch. Kaidongyang) and won a huge victory, killing countless numbers of the enemy. There was also a fierce battle in 671 between forces seeking to revive Koguryoˇ and forces of the Tang at Anshi Fortress, an area now known as Haicheng in Liaoning Province. This resistance from Silla and from Koguryoˇ remnants eventually led the Tang to pull its Andong Protectorate General back from P’yoˇ ngyang to the Liaodong region in 676, but the Tang still found the old lands of Koguryoˇ difficult to rule. In hopes of quelling Koguryoˇ resistance and controlling the Liaodong region more effectively, the Tang brought Pojang (Bojang), the last king of Koguryoˇ , back from the Tang capital at Changan to Liaodong, where he was appointed Governor of Liaodong and King of Chosoˇ n.1 At the same time, the Tang also brought back to Liaodong many of the Koguryoˇ people that it had dispersed in various regions throughout China as part of its effort to establish order and strengthen its rule in the area. Contrary to the Tang’s expectations, however, Pojang communicated secretly with the Malgal and sought to launch a movement to revive Koguryoˇ . This led the Tang to send Pojang and other Koguryoˇ elements back into exile within China proper. In 685, the year after Pojang died in exile, the Tang made his grandson Ko Powoˇ n (Go Bowon) the “King of Chosoˇ n Commandery.” In 698, the Tang gave him another appointment as “General of the Left Yingyang Division and Loyal King” as part of their effort to establish control over the Liaodong region. In 699, before Ko Powoˇ n could even arrive in

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FOUNDING AND NAMING OF PARHAE

9

Liaodong to assume his new duties, the Tang appointed Pojang’s son Ko Toˇ ngmu (Go Deongmu) as Governor of the newly downgraded Andong Protectorate. Despite these desperate efforts, the Liaodong region was already slipping beyond the grasp of the Tang. While Koguryoˇ remnants continued to resist the Tang, the 696 rebellion by the Qidan Li Jinzhong plunged the Yingzhou area into chaos and the Liaodong region was subsequently cut off from the Tang by the rise of the Qidan and another barbarian people known as the Hai so that the Tang was unable to exert any sort of control over the region around the time that Parhae was established in 698. Escape from Yingzhou

The Koguryoˇ remnants and the Malgal that had been forcibly relocated to the Yingzhou area after the fall of Koguryoˇ were subordinated as separate groups to the Tang as a kind of frontier entity. Yingzhou was a relatively dry region located in the upper reaches of the Daling River west of the Liao River in the area now known as Chaoyang. It was an important military and political center that had been used since the fifth century by various dynasties located in northern China to control the northeast, including the Liaodong region. Remnants of the many kingdoms and other groups that had been subjugated by the Tang in the seventh century were forcibly relocated to Yingzhou where each was subordinated to the Tang as frontier dependencies. In addition to the Koguryoˇ people who were living there, it seems certain that the Koguryoˇ people who were forcibly relocated following the fall of P’yoˇ ngyang passed through Yingzhou on their way to the Tang. It also seems certain that King Pojang and his son and grandson always passed through Yingzhou when they were sent forth and recalled by the Tang. Tae Choyoˇ ng and his group were among those Koguryoˇ remnants living in Yingzhou. The Jiu Tangshu tells that Tae Choyoˇ ng took his family with him when he moved to Yingzhou. There were many Koguryoˇ groups living in Yingzhou and it is believed that Tae Choyoˇ ng took Koguryoˇ groups with him when he made his escape. In the fifth month of 696, the Qidan leader Li Jinzhong joined with Son Wanying to obtain support from the Tujue,2 arose in rebellion, killed the governor, and occupied Yingzhou. In the seventh month, Li proclaimed himself Wuxiang ho han (khan), and attacked in all directions, rapidly winning victory after victory. Within ten days, his forces swelled to several tens of thousands. After Li’s death in the ninth month, Son took over and continued to resist the Tang until the sixth month of 697. Once Yingzhou was plunged into crisis, the various groups of people who had been forcibly relocated there by the Tang had the chance to decide their own fate. Some of the Koguryoˇ remnants in Yingzhou chose to stay there or even to join the Tang military. The family of Yi Choˇ nggi (Yi Jeonggi; Ch. Li Zhengji), a Koguryoˇ man who was active in the Tang forces in Shandong, provides a good

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

10

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

example of this type. Others chose to escape from Yingzhou and cast off the fetters of Tang rule, including such men as Tae Choyoˇ ng and the Malgal Koˇ lsabiu (Geolsabiu).

THE FOUNDING OF PARHAE: THE PROCESS AND THE PEOPLE The Process of the Founding of Parhae

The Jiu Tangshu and the Xin Tangshu, the two Chinese histories that contain the most important records about Parhae, relate the following about the founding of the new kingdom. After the fall of Koguryoˇ , Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang (Geolgeoljungsang; or alternatively, Tae Choyoˇ ng),3 who was a member of a Koguryoˇ branch, and his family were forcibly relocated to Yingzhou in the Liaoxi region. While living there, Tae Choyoˇ ng (or Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang) and the Malgal Koˇ lsabiu took advantage of the rebellion raised by the Qidan Li Jinzhong in the fifth month of 696 to escape eastward from Yingzhou, taking with them the people whom they controlled, along with other groups of Koguryoˇ people. Tae Choyoˇ ng and his followers reached Yanjun fortress 180 li4 east of Yingzhou, then passed by Ruluoshouzhuo and crossed the Liao River. They passed north of Liaoyang and Wushun, where the Andong and Liaodong protectorates were then located, and settled initially in what had been some of the old lands of Koguryoˇ in Liaodong. After the death of Li Jinzhong, the Tang sought to appease Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang and Koˇ lsabiu by forgiving them and bestowing on each of them letters of investiture as the Duke of Jinguo and the Duke of Xuguo, respectively. Koˇ lsabiu rejected the Tang offer, and the Tang empress Wu ordered Li Kaigu to suppress him. Li was successful in killing Koˇ lsabiu late in 697 but he encountered decisive resistance from the Koguryoˇ groups. After Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang succumbed to illness, Tae Choyoˇ ng engaged Li’s forces in battle but was defeated and escaped with his remaining forces to an area east of Tianmen Pass, believed to be somewhere between the modern-day Huifa River and the Hun River. Li, seeking to maintain the initiative, pursued Tae across Tianmen Pass where Tae Choyoˇ ng rallied his forces and the remaining Malgal forces of Koˇ lsabiu to repulse Li. After the Qidan and the Hai allied themselves with the Tujue and cut off communications, the Tang could not mount an expedition into the Liaodong region. Tae Choyoˇ ng took his followers further to the east and occupied the old lands of Koguryoˇ around T’aebaek (Taebaek) Mountain, built a fort at Tongmosan (Dongmosan; Ch. Tongmushan), and settled in to live there. Tae Choyoˇ ng’s courage and military leadership attracted many Malgal and Koguryoˇ remnants to join him. Tae established a new kingdom called Chin (Jin) and proclaimed himself king in 698.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FOUNDING AND NAMING OF PARHAE

11

Figure 1.3: Tongmosan

The People Who Participated in the Founding of Parhae

The founding of Parhae took place over a large region from Yingzhou in the Liaoxi region to the Liaodong region and Tongmosan. It took place in a time frame that began with the fall of Koguryoˇ and continued to 698. And it took place with the participation of various Koguryoˇ and Malgal groups. Those groups who participated in the founding can be broken down into three types: those who escaped from Yingzhou and moved east; those who joined after the battle east of Tianmen Pass; and those who came in right after the founding in 698. Those who escaped from Yingzhou comprised three different elements. One was the Koguryoˇ branch group, another the Malgal group of Kolsabiu, ˇ and the third was of other Koguryoˇ remnants. The Koryoˇ branch group was part of the large number of Koguryoˇ people who were forcibly relocated by the Tang to locales inside Chinese territory. But the branch group that settled in Yingzhou, Kolsabiu’s ˇ Malgal group was, according to Ch’oe Ch’iwon’s ˇ (Choe Chiwon) memorial thanking the Tang court for not allowing Parhae emissaries to sit higher than Silla emissaries, originally a humble and small group of Malgal belonging to the Songmal tribe who were moved inside Tang along with Koguryoˇ elements. They were forced to move along with the Koguryoˇ remnants because they had been deeply involved in the wars against the Tang and thus were considered a potential threat. The third group, the other Koguryoˇ remnants, probably comprised survivors of the fall of Koguryoˇ who were moved to Yingzhou but had no organization or leaders. These three elements are those people who first fled from Yingzhou,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

12

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

who initially settled in old Koguryoˇ territory in Liaodong, who fought in the losing battle against Li Kaigu and in the second winning battle east of Tianmen Pass in which they repulsed Li’s forces. After Tae Choyong ˇ and Kolsabiu ˇ had put together something resembling a state in the northern reaches of Liaodong, the Tang recognized their power and awarded the titles Duke of Jinguo and Duke of Xuguo to Kolg ˇ oljungsang ˇ and Kolsabiu. ˇ It seems likely that the peoples under their control at the time of the issuance of these letters of investiture probably included not only those who initially left Yingzhou with them, but also other groups from Liaoxi and Liaodong who joined them later. However, after Koˇ lsabiu refused the Tang letter of investiture, Empress Wu—who was anxious to restore Tang’s rule—ordered Li Kaigu to pacify the region. Li first attacked Koˇ lsabiu’s group and killed Koˇ lsabiu, while also attacking Tae Choyoˇ ng. When Li pursued Tae Choyoˇ ng across Tianmen Pass, Tae put together a force made up of Koguryoˇ remnants and Malgal groups to inflict a major defeat on Li. This means that at the time when Tae Choyoˇ ng attempted to settle for the second time, he was leading what was in effect an alliance between Koguryoˇ and Malgal elements. The Koguryoˇ elements included both those who escaped from Yingzhou and various others who joined in along the way, while the Malgal elements were centered on the remaining forces of Koˇ lsabiu and included others who also joined in after the group left Yingzhou. After Tae Choyoˇ ng defeated Li Kaigu at Tianmen Pass, he led his followers further east to build a fort and settle at Tongmosan, which is believed to be Chengshanzi (K. Soˇ ngsanja) mountain fortress near the modern city of Dunhua in

Figure 1.4: Chengshanzi Mountain Fortress: a (bottom center) highest observation point; b (far left) west gate; c (to right of west gate) drill area; d (right-hand side area with many boxes) barracks; e (upper right hand edge) east gate.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FOUNDING AND NAMING OF PARHAE

13

Jilin Province. This was in 698, the year that Tae Choyoˇ ng established his new Chin kingdom and proclaimed himself king. After founding his kingdom, Tae Choyoˇ ng continued to lead his forces bravely, with the result that various new Malgal and Koguryoˇ remnants continued to submit to him. The groups that joined at this time included people who had been living in northeastern Manchuria as well as new people who had come in from elsewhere. Ch’oe Ch’iwoˇ n’s description, in the aforementioned memorial to the Tang court, of the groups that joined Tae Choyoˇ ng at this time is worthy of note. Ch’oe described them as “Koguryoˇ remnants and Mulgil (Ch. Wuji),” terms that indicate that they were primarily Koguryoˇ remnants living in the T’aebaek Mountain area and Malgal from the Songmal tribe living in the area of the Songmal River. Parhae subsequently established relations with the Tujue, a development that grew out of a shared need to resist their common enemy, the Tang. Parhae also sent an envoy to Silla in 700 to inform the southern kingdom of its establishment and to open relations. Near the beginning of the eighth century, the Tang changed its policy to one of recognition and reconciliation toward Parhae. This change arose out of the Tang’s concern over the Qidan, Hai, and Tujue who were creating disturbances in the Liaoxi region and its new awareness of the importance of Parhae. Parhae, in turn, needed to avoid military conflict with the Tang and thus sought to maintain good relations.

THE FOUNDERS AND THE NAME OF THE KINGDOM Persons who figured importantly in the process of the founding of Parhae included Tae Choyoˇ ng, Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang, and Koˇ lsabiu. During the period from the escape from Yingzhou to the first battle with Li Kaigu, the Tang regarded Koˇ lsabiu as its first target of pacification. After the death of Koˇ lsabiu, however, Tae Choyoˇ ng emerged as the commander of both Koguryoˇ and Malgal elements and was the central figure in the founding of Parhae in both name and fact. The Xin Tangshu described the relationship between Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang and Tae Choyoˇ ng as that of father and son. Whether this is true is not clear. It seems likely that Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsang may have commanded Koguryoˇ remnants during the time from the escape from Yingzhou to the battle with Li Kaigu, but there is no doubt that it was Tae Choyoˇ ng who was the central force behind the founding of Parhae. On the other hand, there is a need to examine the question of the name of the new kingdom. The Xin Tangshu states that in 713 the Tang sent an envoy named Cui Xin with letters of investiture naming Tae Choyoˇ ng as General of the Left Yao Division, King of Parhae Prefecture, and Governor of Huganzhou, and that from that time on Tae abandoned the term Malgal in favor of Parhae. This is the basis on which Chinese scholars argue that Malgal was the earlier name of Parhae, that it was changed to Parhae in 713, and that Parhae was a

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

14

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

kingdom established by the Malgal. However, in the Xin Tangshu it is the Chinese who were using the terms Malgal and Parhae. At that time, the people of Parhae used neither Malgal nor Parhae. They used the term Chin to refer to their kingdom. When Tae Choyoˇ ng first established his kingdom at Tongmosan in 698, he referred to himself as the King of Chin’guk (Chin’guk wang), a strong indication that the first name of the kingdom was Chin. Other names used by the people of Parhae included Koryoˇ (Goryeo) or Koguryoˇ . In 727, when Parhae sent its first envoy to Japan, the documents he carried said that Parhae had “recovered the old lands of Koguryoˇ and continued the old customs of Puyoˇ (Ch. Fuyu),” thus mentioning both Koguryoˇ and Puyoˇ . Also, in a 758 diplomatic document carried by a mission to Japan led by Yang Sˇunggyoˇ ng (Yang Seunggyeong), Parhae’s King Mun (r. 737–793) referred to himself as the “king of Koryoˇ .” The Japanese also referred to Kim Mun as the “king of Koryoˇ ” in a diplomatic document they sent to Parhae the following year. The terms “Koryoˇ ” and “king of Koryoˇ ” appear with some frequency in Japanese records for some time thereafter. Chinese scholars do not recognize the validity of the use of Koryoˇ and Koguryoˇ on the grounds that the source materials are unreliable diplomatic documents, but they cannot deny the actual usage of Koryoˇ and Koguryoˇ in those documents. At any rate, those diplomatic documents tell us that the people of Parhae either used those terms as temporary expedients or perhaps they may have even thought of themselves successors to Koguryoˇ . Most records about Parhae were left behind by people in neighboring countries. Even those are sparse. That means that we have to attach significance to these documents in which the people of Parhae referred to themselves as Koryoˇ or Koguryoˇ and in which their respondents, the Japanese, used the identical terms. Until new records indicating otherwise come to light, it seems difficult to deny that the people of early Parhae, particularly during the time of King Mun, called their kingdom “Koryoˇ .”

NOTES 1

2 3

4

Chosoˇ n was a kingdom that existed in southern Manchuria and northern Korea from approximately the fifth or sixth century BCE until it was destroyed by China’s Han dynasty late in the second century BCE. It was later referred to as “Old Chosoˇ n” in order to distinguish it from the Chosoˇ n dynasty that ruled Korea from 1392 to 1910. A Turkic people residing north of China and west of Koguryoˇ . Translator’s note: There is some controversy over the relationship between Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsan and Tae Choyoˇ ng; some scholars hold that they are two different names for the same person, but most believe that Koˇ lgoˇ ljungsan was the father of Tae Choyoˇ ng. One li equals approximately 1/3 mile.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

2

The Ethnic Composition of Parhae’s Population Han Ciu-cheol (Kyˇ ongsˇ ong University)

‰

WHAT KIND OF people were the residents of Parhae (Ch. Bohai; 698–926)? Were they the people of old Koguryoˇ (first century BCE668 CE), or were they Malgal (Ch. Mohe), a people without any connection to Koguryoˇ ? The generally accepted view has been that Parhae’s ruling class was made up of Koguryoˇ descendents while the lower classes were Malgal. If, however, the vast majority of the population were Malgal who had nothing to do with Koguryoˇ , then it would be only right to say that Parhae was a Malgal kingdom. It would be hardly appropriate to contend that Parhae was a kingdom of Koguryoˇ people if they only constituted a minority ruling class. Simply put, the people of Parhae were the old people of Kogury oˇ who continued to reside in the area during the 30 years between the fall of Kogury oˇ and the founding of Parhae. There were some people known as Malgal residing in the area, but the Malgal were not a distinct ethnic group but rather Kogury oˇ subjects who lived in border regions to which Malgal was applied as a pejorative name. When we talk about the ethnic composition of Parhae, it is important to consider whom the people of Parhae thought to be their forebears. The issue is whether the people of Parhae thought of themselves as descendents of Koguryoˇ or as descents of the Malgal. It is, of course, unlikely that the people of that time had the same kind of consciousness of state or nation as we have today, but there seems to be no reason to doubt that the dynasty itself had some sense of succession from an earlier entity or entities. The key issue

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

16

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

to understanding the ethnic composition of Parhae is to shed light on the Malgal. The conventional view among scholars of Korean history, as is reflected in middle- and high-school history textbooks, is that the ruling class of Parhae were persons of Kogury oˇ origins and that those over whom they ruled were the Malgal, a people whose ethnic origins were different from Kogury oˇ . Of course, Chinese and Russian scholars argue that the entire population was Malgal and they reject the idea that the ruling class was from Kogury oˇ . But even if we attach some significance to the idea that the ruling class was composed of old Kogury oˇ people, if the vast majority of the population were Malgal, then we would have to say that the history of Parhae was Malgal or Manchurian history. The reality, however, is that both the ruling class and the general population of Parhae were old Koguryoˇ people. That the ruling class of Parhae was made up of Koguryoˇ elements was revealed as early as 1955 by the Japanese scholar Shiratori Kurakichi. Shiratori based his argument on Parhae diplomatic documents contained in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, continued, from 697–791) which contain such statements as “Parhae has recovered the old lands of Koguryoˇ ,” and the Parhae king describing himself as the “King of Koguryoˇ Tae Hˇummu (Dae Heummu).” Shiratori also noted that 26 of the 85 emissaries dispatched to Japan by Parhae bore the typical Koguryoˇ surname of Ko (Go), and that the Japanese referred to Parhae as Koryoˇ or Koguryoˇ . The North Korean scholar Pak Sihyoˇ ng and the Japanese scholar Mikami Tsugio subsequently supported Shiratori’s view which has now become the standard interpretation in Korea and Japan. But scholars who follow this interpretation also generally subscribe to the view that the ordinary people of Parhae were Malgal. The one major exception has been the North Koreans who have argued since 1990 that the majority of the common people of Parhae were of Koguryoˇ origins. Their argument, even while recognizing the presence of Malgal elements, proceeds from the common sense proposition that since Parhae arose in the old territory of Koguryoˇ most of its residents must have been Koguryoˇ descendents. Chinese scholars, however, contend that the even the ruling class of Parhae was composed of Malgal and that the Malgal were of different origins from the Koguryoˇ people. Their position is based on the record in the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) that describes Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) as belonging to the Songmal Malgal (Ch. Sumo Mohe). Korean scholars, on the other hand, rely on the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang), the history compiled closest in time (940–945) to the fall of Parhae, which states that Tae Choyoˇ ng belonged to a branch of the Koguryoˇ people. Even the Xin Tangshu states that Tae had been politically subordinate to Koguryoˇ . The difference between the two Tang histories is the ethnicity of

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF PARHAE’S POPULATION

17

Tae Choyoˇ ng. In this situation, the biggest question is just who the Malgal were. If we regard Kogury oˇ as a multi-ethnic state that included Malgal elements, then there should be some mention of the Malgal in such internal sources as the King Kwanggaet’o (Gwanggaeto; r. 391–413) stele that was erected during the reign of King Changsu (r. 413–491). But there is nothing in the stele that can be construed to refer to the Malgal. The term Malgal first appears in Chinese sources, but it also appears in Korea’s Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms; compiled in the twelth century) in reference to events occurring as early as 37 BCE during the reign of Kogury oˇ ’s King Tongmy oˇ ng (Dongmyeong; r. 37 BCE-19 BCE) and Paekche’s1 King Onjo (r. 18 BCE-28 CE), presenting us with a confusing picture.

THE MALGAL IN CHINESE HISTORIES AND THE SAMGUK SAGI Compiling records of neighboring peoples was a feature of Chinese histories, but we must keep in mind that those records were made from a Chinese perspective. The Chinese included in their histories records of the Malgal and their putative ancestors, the Suksin (Ch. ˇ Sushen) and the Umnu (Eumnu; Ch. Yilu). Unlike the cases of the ˇ Suksin, theUmnu, or the Mulgil (Ch. Wuji), however, the Chinese recorded the Malgal as having seven tribes. That means that the area where the Malgal lived included not only the Suksin and the ˇ mnu, but also such unrelated peoples as the Puy oˇ (Ch. Fuyu), U and Okch oˇ (Okjeo; Ch. Woju) who belonged to the Yemaek (Ch. Huimo). According to China’s Suishu (History of the Sui Dynasty [581–618]; compiled 636), the Malgal comprised seven tribes: the Songmal (Ch. Sumo), the Paektol (Baekdol; Ch. Bodo), the An’goˇ goˇ l (Angeogeol; Ch. Anchegu), the Puryoˇ l (Buryeol; Ch. Funie), the Hosil (Ch. Haoshih), the Huksu ˇ (Heuksu; Ch. Heishu), and the Paeksan (Baeksan; Ch. Baishan). However, the ancestors of ˇ the Malgal, the Suksin, the Umnu, and even their immediate ancestors the Mulgil, are all recorded as having consisted of one single tribe each. There are no other instances of any ethnic group beside the Malgal being recorded as divided into multiple tribes, except for the Nuzhen (Jurchen) descendents of the Malgal who are depicted as having 30 fortresses. The defining characteristic of the Malgal as recorded in Chinese histories is precisely that they were depicted as being spread over a large territory and as including multiple ethnic groups. Another feature is that the ethnicity of the seven Malgal tribes is not clearly specified. The standard explanation of the ethnic origins of the Malgal is that their ancestors were known as the Suksin during the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

18

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

ˇ Qin dynasty (221–206 BCE), the Umnu during the Han era (206 BCE-220 CE), the Mulgil during the Later (Northern) Wei period (386–534), before finally becoming the Malgal during the Sui and Tang (618–907) dynasties—in other words, the Malgal are depicted as descending from a single ethnic group that was known by different names at different times. There are, however, problems with the standard explanation. We can confirm from several sources that the ˇ purported Suksin and Umnu ancestors of the Malgal actually constituted two separate and different ethnic groups. Furthermore, among the seven Malgal tribes, there were the Songmal and Paeksan tribes of Yemaek peoples belonging to Koguryoˇ , as well as other tribes, such as the Hˇuksu, who were pure Tungusic peoples unrelated to Koguryoˇ . One feature of the Samguk sagi is that unlike the Chinese histories, it uses the term Malgal from the time of Koguryoˇ ’s King Tongmyoˇ ng (37 BCE) up to 921 CE during the time of Silla’s King Kyoˇ ngmyoˇ ng (Gyeongmyeong; r. 917–924.).2 The Chinese histories did not begin to use the term Malgal with any regularity until the compilation of the Suishu in the early seventh century. The first time the term Malgal appears in Chinese sources was a record dated to 563 in the Beiweishu (History of the Northern Wei). But the Samguk sagi mentions the Malgal over a time span beginning from the Former (Western) Han dynasty (220 BCE-9 CE) and extending down to the Later Liang (907–923) of the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period of the tenth century. Another feature of the Malgal in the Samguk sagi that varies from the Chinese histories is in the vast majority of times they are mentioned as military subordinates of Nangnang (Ch. Lelang) or Koguryoˇ who were active in the Imjin River basin and the Han River basin, spatially far removed from where they were located by Chinese historians. 3 It goes without saying that the Samguk sagi’s (History of the Three Kingdoms) Koguyroˇ Annals also contain records of the Malgal that concur with the way they were perceived in the Chinese histories. The Samguk sagi states that in 598, Koguryoˇ ’s King Yoˇ ngyang (Yeongyang; r. 589–617) “led over 10,000 Malgal troops in an attack on Yingzhou but was repulsed by the Yingzhou commander Wei Zhong.” Similar records showing Malgal forces in the service of Koguryoˇ can be found in entries for the years 612, 643, 644, and 654. These late-sixth- and seventh-century Samguk sagi records match with entries found in the Suishu, the Zizhi tongjian (Comprehensive Mirror to Aid in Government), and the Xin Tangshu. These entries appear to be about the “real” Malgal, unlike the earlier Samguk sagi records. Given the disparities between the Samguk sagi and the Chinese histories, one wonders who the Malgal really were. Many historians in Korea believe that the Malgal were of the same Yemaek origins as Koguryoˇ . Unlike the way the Chinese sources treated the “seven Malgal tribes” as an ethnic entity, we can see that the Samguk sagi appears to have

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF PARHAE’S POPULATION

19

used the term Malgal as a political designation for people who lived in the border regions of Koguryoˇ , Nangnang, and Silla.

MALGAL AS A PEJORATIVE TERM USED BY THE TANG FOR ETHNIC GROUPS IN THE NORTHEAST It is also important to consider whether the people who lived in the territories designated as Malgal lands actually referred to themselves as Malgal or if Malgal was a term that was applied to them unilaterally by the Chinese. Did the ethnic group that resided in the Malgal territories of Manchuria really refer to itself by different names at ˇ different times—as Suksin during the Qin, as Umnu during the Han, and Mulgil during the Later Wei, and as Malgal during the Sui and Tang? It is difficult to understand how an ethnic group located on China’s northeastern frontier would change its name each time there was a dynastic change in China. It seems far more likely that these name changes reflect incorrect information held by the recorders of Chinese histories. The term Malgal undoubtedly arose from the name of some place or some group of people, but it was not a name that arose out of some ethnic or dynastic consciousness among the residents of that region. During the Koguryoˇ /Sui-Tang era, there was no dynasty or state in that area that could have styled itself the Malgal. In the absence of any documentary evidence about how those people actually referred to themselves, we have to conclude that the term Malgal was applied unilaterally to the residents of that area by others who lived a considerable distance away. Of course, Koguryoˇ and the Tang referred to them as the Malgal. But that was a pejorative used by Koguryoˇ and the Tang for those people and not the name they used for themselves. Of course, since Koguryoˇ and Tang referred to them as Malgal, the people living in such frontier regions as the Songhua River and Mount Paektu (Baekdu) may have introduced themselves as Malgal, but it was not a term they used for themselves among themselves. If we expand our consideration to the Parhae era, if they were descendents of the Malgal, they should have presented themselves as such. But there is no instance in either Chinese or Japanese records in which the people of Parhae referred to themselves as “Malgal.” There is yet another reason for believing that the term Malgal was used as a pejorative for people of various ethnic backgrounds. That is because the region to which the term was applied was way too large. That is because it was used not only for the areas where their putative ˇ ancestors, the Suksin and Umnu, lived, but also for the areas where the Yemaek and Puyoˇ , who are understood to have been of totally different ethnic origins, lived. Furthermore, the use of such modifiers as Songmal, Paektol, Hˇuksu, and Paeksan is additional evidence that the term “Malgal” was one applied by outsiders. The use of Malgal in the BCE era by the Samguk sagi also should be seen in the same light.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

20

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Even so, we cannot simply conclude that there was no basis for the unilateral use of the term Malgal by the Chinese. The Beishi (History of the Northern Dynasties, compiled in 659) uses the term Mulgil as antecedent to the Malgal; it is possible that the term Mulgil first referred to certain small clan groups residing in the northeast and, with the passage of time, came later to be used by the Chinese to refer to all the non-Chinese peoples in that region. In other words, the original specific use of the term Malgal was quite different from the subsequent general use of the term to refer to all of the peoples living in China’s northeastern border region. It seems more likely that the people referred to as “Malgal” actually referred to themselves by such locally specific terms as “people of the Songhua River” or “people of Paeksan,” but the Tang Chinese recorded them as Songmal Malgal or Paeksan Malgal. At any rate, the way in which the Chinese sources refer to the residents of this large region as “Songmal Malgal” or “Paeksan Malgal” is in itself evidence that the term “Malgal” was a generic designation. Thus it is meaningless to understand the term Malgal as referring to some sort of unitary ethnic entity; rather it is more important to strive to grasp each of the seven Malgal tribes as distinct historical entities. That means the majority of the people referred to as Malgal, except the Huksu ˇ Malgal,4 were Koguryoˇ people.

ˇ AND THE MALGAL IN POLITICAL KOGURYO AND MILITARY AFFAIRS The Malgal with the closest relations with Koguryoˇ were the Paeksan and Songmal Malgal who later became central elements in the founding of Parhae. The Paeksan Malgal, who were recorded as “new subordinates” or as “subordinates” to Koguryoˇ were historically members of the same Yemaek ethnic group as Koguryoˇ and constituted a border entity under Koguryoˇ rule. This is confirmed by the fact that Koguryoˇ kings frequently made royal tours to Ch’aeksoˇ ng (modern Hunchun), a locale that is known to have been the main area where the Paeksan Malgal resided. But the case of the Songmal Malgal is somewhat different in that even though they lived in an area under Koguryoˇ control and at times were subordinate to and cooperated with Koguryoˇ , at other times they rebelled against or exhibited hostile attitudes toward Koguryoˇ . The fact that the Malgal who are thought to have belonged to the Paeksan and Songmal tribes served in Koguryoˇ ’s military can be confirmed in such instances as the battle with the Tang at Anshi Fortress. This is an important point, but at the same time we must recall that whereas the people of Koguryoˇ were generally treated leniently by the Tang after their defeat in 668, the so-called Malgal suffered the tragic fate of being buried alive. The Tang’s harsh treatment of the “Malgal” is evidence of the important role they played in Koguryoˇ ’s

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF PARHAE’S POPULATION

21

military. In particular, the fact that the former Koguryoˇ king Pojang was discovered communicating with the “Malgal” in an effort to restore Koguryoˇ shows how close relations were between Koguryoˇ and the so-called Malgal. The Malgal were not always faithful subjects of Koguryoˇ . At times they fell under the influence of the Tujue and the Xueyantou,5 and at times some of them joined with the Tang to fight against Koguryoˇ . The case of Toljigye (Ch. Tudiji), who submitted to the Tang and his son, Li Jinxing, who was also known to be loyal to the Tang, is a well known example. But regardless of whether the Malgal submitted to or rebelled against Koguryoˇ , they were part of Koguryoˇ . Any dynasty has frontier elements that oppose or rebel against it. This is a universal phenomenon that reflects the political conflicts, the processes of conciliation and alienation, between central powers and local aristocrats. It may also be problematic to regard unfriendly relations or insubordination between two groups as evidence of ethnic difference. One can think of hostility on the part of the Malgal toward Koguryoˇ as stemming from ethnic differences, but subordination and opposition between center and region cannot be seen as inter-ethnic relations in this case. That is because not only did the Malgal and Koguryoˇ share the same ethnic origins, but they also shared much linguistically and culturally. From time to time, regional leaders identified as Malgal had political and economic contacts with China and Japan. These can be seen as efforts on the part of semi-autonomous local suryoˇ ng (leaders or chiefs) to profit their locales. There is no instance of these local Malgal suryoˇ ng referring to groups as a state. The only possible exception might be the Huksu ˇ Malgal, who conducted external relations from a quasi-state standpoint, most closely with the Tang. The close alliance between the Tang and the Huksu ˇ Malgal led Parhae to go to war against China on one occasion. But even in the case of the Huksu ˇ Malgal, there is no evidence that they ever referred to themselves as a state. They were occasionally referred to as the Huksu ˇ country (kuk; Ch. guo) but such vague reference can hardly be seen as evidence that they had established a state. The Huksu ˇ Malgal eventually became subordinate to Parhae as part of its frontier forces, but probably continued to enjoy semi-autonomous status. Despite the way in which Koguryoˇ and the Malgal can be seen as ruler and ruled, that does not mean that they should be regarded as two distinct ethnic groups. The primary reasons for why they were depicted that way were the distance in space and time between them and the Chinese historians, and the Sino-centric view the Chinese had toward border peoples. Another reason is because pre-modern histories were dynastic-centered and city-centered histories. In other words, the Chinese historians who compiled the records about the Malgal viewed people in cities as the rulers and people in the countryside as the ruled. For example, in the Samguk sagi, Silla was

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

22

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

often used as another term for Kyoˇ ngju (the Silla capital) as seen in entries that use the term “Silla person” (Silla in) when distinguishing between someone from Kyoˇ ngju and someone from another part of the kingdom. Such usage was probably also prevalent in Koguryoˇ , with persons from the capital city of P’yoˇ ngyang referred to as Koguryoˇ persons. Thus the term “kingdom person” (kugin; Ch. guoren) should be understood as a person from the capital. Records for Parhae refer to the ruling class as “kingdom persons.” At any rate, it is quite dangerous to use dynasty-centered histories uncritically when discussing the Malgal. It is also problematic to consider the city-based ruling class and the rural-based ruled people as constituting different ethnic groups or different states because of cultural differences between the two. While the Kogury oˇ ruling class in P’y oˇ ngyang accepted Chinese culture and enjoyed an aristocratic lifestyle, their countrymen in the border regions were less influenced by China and still continued to live according to the indigenous culture. But this kind of culture difference is not sufficient to declare that the two groups constituted different ethnic groups or belonged to different kingdoms. One source that would appear to support the idea that the Malgal and the Koguryoˇ were distinct ethnic groups is Japan’s Ruiju kokushi (A Collection of the Histories of Japan). This source says “everywhere there were villages and those villages were all Malgal settlements. There are many Malgal among the commoners but there are few literati (sain; Ch. shiren).” This source is used to argue that the Parhae population was composed of Malgal and literati. However, some versions of the Ruiju kokushi use the term “natives” (t’oin; Ch. turen) instead of “literati” and most scholars have relied on this to argue for ethnic distinctions between Malgal and Koguryoˇ (native) elements in Parhae.6 It seems more likely that the proper reading is literati (sain), which to the Japanese would have meant the ruling class because the term native (t’oin) has a strong connotation of being ruled.

ˇ CUSTOMS, LANGUAGE, AND THE USE OF KOGURYO ONDOL BY THE PEOPLE OF PARHAE We can also confirm that the people of Parhae were Koguryoˇ people through their language, customs, and culture. We have no detailed materials regarding the language and customs of Parhae. But the Jiu Tangshu states that the customs of Parhae were the same as those of Koguryoˇ . By customs, the Chinese historians were referring to such things as coming of age, marriage, funerals, and memorial rites for ancestors—rituals that clearly express continuities in blood and territory. Although the Jiu Tangshu does not mention the issue of language, it is likely that language was included in the concept of customs. Furthermore, there is no record anywhere comparing or contrasting

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF PARHAE’S POPULATION

23

the languages of Koguryoˇ and the Malgal or Parhae and the Malgal; this suggests that there was probably no linguistic difference between the two. Simply put, the Malgal language and customs were the same as those of Koguryoˇ and Parhae. The weakness of the argument tracing the Malgal back to the ˇ Suksin and the Umnu is confirmed by etymology. Rather, it appears more rational to trace the linguist roots of the Malgal to Korean. In Korean, the terms Malgal and Mulgil can be seen as having common origin, but the Chinese terms Mohe and Wuji have no etymological affinity. Thus it makes better sense to look for the origins of the Malgal language in Korean, which still contains many elements of the Koguryoˇ language. Etymologically speaking, we can say that the Koguryoˇ aspects of the Malgal are even clearer. The very name of the state, Parhae, can be seen as coming from the “maek” of Yemaek. Just as Yemaek Chosoˇ n was also called Pal Chosoˇ n, Maekhae could have become Parhae. When we compare those cultural elements that are most resistant to change, we can again confirm that the people of Parhae were Koguryoˇ people. Looking first at tombs, we find that the Koguryoˇ ruling class used stone lined tombs, stone chambers, and stone coffins while the commoners buried their dead in earth-mound tombs. Earth-mound tombs are known to have been prevalent among the Malgal. This, however, would have been the tombs of the Malgal as the ruled classes of Koguryoˇ , not of Malgal as a distinct ethnicity. Looking next at housing, we know that the people of Parhae used the ondol (hypocaust) system of heating that first appeared in Koguryoˇ . Evidence of a more highly developed ondol system can be found in numerous places, including the sites of Parhae royal palaces. In sum, the people of Parhae occupied most of the lands of old Koguryoˇ . They were of the same ethnic origins as the people of Koguryoˇ . Furthermore, the people of Parhae continued to use and further developed the language, customs, and culture of Koguryoˇ .

NOTES 1

2

Paekche (trad. dates 18 BCE-660 CE) was one of the kingdoms of the Three Kingdoms era. It appears to have arisen in the early centuries CE and was located in the southwestern part of Korea. Translator’s note. Jonathan Best has recently published his A History of the Early Korean Kingdom of Paekche: Together with an Annotated Translation of The Paekche Annals of the Samguk sagi (Cambridge, MA: Harvard East Asia Center, 2007) in which he argues convincingly that events recorded in the Paekche Annals of the Samguk sagi were, like the Nihon shoki of Japan, systematically re-dated into earlier times by multiples of the 60 year Chinese zodiac in order to make historical events fit with the legendary dates of the founding of the Three Kingdoms. Best’s analysis casts serious doubt on the dating in the Samguk sagi but does not negate the spatial aspect of this argument.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

24

3

4

5

6

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Nangang was one of the four commanderies established by the Han Dynasty in 108 BCE in the territories once controlled by Old Chosoˇ n. Nangnang was located in the region of the modern city of P’yoˇ ngyang and lasted until it was conquered by Koguryoˇ in 313 CE. Translator’s note: The Huksu ˇ Malgal are generally considered to be the forebears of the Nuzhen (Jurchen) who founded the Jin dynasty (1115–1234) in Manchuria and later founded the Later Jin/Qing dynasty in the seventeenth century. The Tujue and the Xueyantou were Turkic peoples who resided north of China and west of Koguryoˇ . Translator’s note: The characters for sain (士人) and t’oin (土人) are quite similar and easily miswritten.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PART TWO

ASPECTS OF PARHAE’S HISTORY THE TERRITORY OF PARHAE THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION IN PARHAE THE FALL OF PARHAE: A TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL APPROACH THE MOVEMENT TO REVIVE PARHAE

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

3

The Territory of Parhae Kim Jin-kwang (Academy of Korean Studies)

‰

its territory is essential for the understanding of Parhae. Parhae was the state founded by Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) in 698 at Tongmosan, in what is now Dunhua City of China’s Jilin Province, and lasted for 228 years until it was defeated by the Qidan in 926. However, because Parhae’s demise came about so suddenly, it slipped quickly into the mists of history. We have no dynastic history of Parhae and few other source materials, making it quite difficult to study Parhae. In this situation, an understanding of Parhae’s territorial domain is all the more important. Changes in Parhae’s territory can be roughly divided into three periods: the reign of King Ko (Tae Choyoˇ ng, r. 698–719), the reigns of King Mu (r. 719–737) and King Mun (r. 737–793), and King Soˇ n (r. 818–830). This chapter will examine the changes in Parhae’s territory based on what scholars have uncovered to date. After the demise of Koguryoˇ in 668, the Tang established its Andong Protectorate General, where it stationed 20,000 troops to rule over the people of the now vanquished Koguryoˇ while also forcibly relocating 28,000 prominent Koguryoˇ households into the Tang interior in order to prevent a possible movement to restore Koguryoˇ . Contrary to the intentions of the Tang, however, Koguryoˇ resistance grew stronger as seen in the rebellion of Koˇ m Mojam and An Sung. ˇ In order to cut off any further anti-Tang activities in the old territory of Koguryoˇ , the Tang appointed King Pojang (the last Koguryoˇ king, r. 642–668) as governor of Liaodong, but Pojang himself linked up with Koguryoˇ remnants to plot a revival of the kingdom. This event shows that even as the Tang was attempting to strengthen its control over the Liaodong region, the influence of old Koguryoˇ elements remained undiminished.

AN UNDERSTANDING OF

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

30

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

The Tang subsequently downgraded its Andong ProtectorateGeneral in Liaodong to ordinary protectorate status and appointed King Pojang’s son Ko Toˇ ngmu as governor to rule the region, but the protectorate’s area of authority was limited only to Youzhou.1 This chain of events indicates that the Tang policy towards the northeastern region had changed to a somewhat passive, defensive-oriented approach and shows the limits of Tang control over the Liaodong region. On the other hand, in 698, Lin Jinzhong and Son Wanying arose in rebellion against the tyranny of the Yingzhou governor, Zhao Wenhui. This provided the opportunity for Tae Choyoˇ ng, who had been forced to move there by the Tang, to escape from Yingzhou, move to Tongmosan in old Koguryoˇ territory, and establish a new state that became known as Parhae. Tae Choyoˇ ng’s march from Yingzhou to Tongmosan was hardly an easy trip. Although Tae was successful in defeating Li Kaigu at the battle of Tianmen Pass and in establishing his new state, the Tang remained determined to crush him so that he was constantly exposed to the threat of military action. This threat had much influence on Tae’s decision to locate his capital at Tongmosan in the Mudan River valley. Preparing for possible attack by the Tang, Tae Choyoˇ ng sent an envoy to the Tujue and received a return visit by a Tujue official. Tae also opened relations with Silla and received an honorary fifth-grade rank from the Silla king. After the Qidan uprising of Li Jinzhong, however, the Tujue began to put pressure on the Liaoxi region so that Tang was unable to intervene deeply in the northeastern region. After the death of Empress Wu and the resumption of the emperorship by Zhongzong (r. 684–709) in 705, the Tang sent an envoy to Tae Choyoˇ ng, recognizing his kingdom and initiating a policy of reconciliation. In 713 the Tang sent a mid-ranking military official named Cui Xin as envoy with letters of investiture naming Tae Choyoˇ ng as King of Parhae Prefecture, and Governor of Huganzhou. From this time forth, Tae Choyoˇ ng used Parhae as the official name of his kingdom, trade opened between Parhae and the Tang, and Parhae sent frequent embassies to the Tang. The rise of Parhae as a new political entity in the old territory of Koguryoˇ and the withdrawal of the Andong Protectorate, through which the Tang attempted to rule the non-Chinese peoples in the region, brought about a change in the Tang’s policy toward Northeast Asia. Whereas we can find frequent references in Chinese sources from 698 to Parhae as a collection of rebels, Parhae’s continued growth and expansion and its attainment of political stability led to Tae Choyoˇ ng receiving the title of the King of Parhae Commandery from the Tang in 703 and 713, meaning that Parhae’s stature had risen and that it was now recognized as a state. This change in Tang policy tells us that the Tang’s influence over the old Koguryoˇ territory in the Liaodong region had weakened, a fact that was very important for the subsequent growth of Parhae.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE TERRITORY OF PARHAE

31

After having attained a degree of external security by establishing relations with the Tang, the Tujue, and Silla, Tae Choyoˇ ng turned his attention to expanding his domain to include the old lands of Koguryoˇ . The main thrust of territorial expansion at this time was recovering control over the Malgal who mostly lived in old Koguryoˇ territory. Among the Malgal who came under Parhae control at the time were such tribes as the Paektol, the Angoˇ goˇ l, and the Hosil that had been scattered or weakened after the demise of Koguryoˇ . The Songmal tribe of Koˇ lsabiu participated in the founding of Parhae and the new kingdom was established in the territory of the Paeksan tribe, so it is thought that the remnants of those two Malgal tribes had already come under Tae Choyoˇ ng by 698. Thus we can say that Parhae’s territory at this time extended roughly from the area of Xingkai Lake (near modern Mishan) where the Woˇ rhui ˇ (Ch. Yuexi) Malgal lived in the east, along a line from Xingkai Lake to Jidong in the northeast where they faced the Huksu ˇ Malgal, to Silla and Niha on the south, and to the Qidan in the northwest. However, such Malgal groups as the Huksu ˇ and Puryoˇ l and the new Malgal Ch’oˇ lli (Cheolli) and Woˇ rhui ˇ (Weorhui) groups that first appeared after the demise of Koguryoˇ living in the middle and lower reaches of the Songhua River and the lower reaches of the Heilong River lay outside Parhae’s sphere of control, engaging in such autonomous activities as sending tributary envoys to the Tang. According to the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang), Parhae was located “2,000 li east of Yingzhou, bordered Silla on the south, and the Woˇ rhui ˇ and Huksu ˇ Malgal on the northeast, and its territory was 2,000 li on all four sides.” After the death of King Ko (Go; Tae Choyoˇ ng) in 719, his successor Kim Mu (Tae Muye [Dae Muye], r. 719–737) established his own reign title (Inan; Ch. Renan. Benevolent Peace), expanded the state apparatus, and devoted himself to continuing his father’s effort of expanding the kingdom’s control over neighboring areas. Some sense of King Mu’s success can be gleaned from a 727 diplomatic document sent to Japan in which he claimed, “we have recovered the old lands of Koguryoˇ and continued the old customs of Puyoˇ .” King Mu’s early eighth century territorial expansion can be largely divided into two areas: in the north against the Huksu ˇ Malgal and in the southwest against the Liaodong region. In 726 the Tang, which had formally recognized Parhae in 716, attempted to contain Parhae’s northern expansion by bringing the Huksu ˇ Malgal under its influence. The Tang conferred on their leader the title of Master of Huksu ˇ and dispatched a Tang provincial official. Parhae now found itself in danger of attack from both front and rear. If the kingdom accepted this situation, it was likely that other Malgal tribes under its control would also defect to the Tang. King Mu responded to this threat to his young kingdom by carrying out a campaign to subdue the Huksu ˇ Malgal and by sending Parhae’s first envoy to Japan in the next year, 727, to open up trade and establish

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

32

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

friendly relations. Although this suggests that King Mu attained his goals in his subjugation of the Huksu ˇ Malgal, these measures also created a tense situation with the Tang. King Mu, having gained confidence from his successful campaign against the Huksu ˇ Malgal, now sought to expand his territory in the Liaodong area. Liaodong was where many Koguryoˇ remnants resided after the fall of Koguryoˇ and where King Pojang, who had been sent there by the Tang as governor in 676, attempted to restore Koguryoˇ . Liaodong, with its 1,000 li wall, had been an important strategic location for Koguryoˇ in its confrontation with the Tang and it also had a natural barrier in the Liao River. Thus Liaodong was seen by Parhae as a region that was vital to its military defense. As discussed in chapter one of this volume, the resistance of Koguryoˇ remnants and pressure from the founding forces of Parhae led to the downgrading of the Liaodong Protectorate General and eventually to its relocation to Liaoxi after it was restored as a protectorate general in 699. During the 80 years prior to its disestablishment as a result of the An Lushan Rebellion in 755, the Andong General Protectorate was relocated 13 times. After it was moved to Liaoxi at the time of the founding of Parhae, it exercised no control over the Liaodong region. King Mu was quite unhappy with the measures the Tang took during the process of his campaign against the Huksu ˇ Malgal. He eventually gave concrete expression of his unhappiness in 732, when he dispatched naval forces led by Chang Munhyu (Jang Munhyu) to attack the Tang at Dengzhou and at Madaoshan near Shanhaiguan. Parhae was able to launch these attacks because Liaodong had already come under its control and provided an operational base for Chang’s forces. The Parhae naval forces are believed to have left from the Amnok (Yalu) River and passed by Liaodong on their way to Dengzhou, a route that indicates that Parhae had already established control over Liaodong following the expulsion of the Liaodong Protectorate General to Liaoxi. Parhae had two major communication routes that passed through the Liaodong region. One was known as the Yingzhou route, the other as the tribute route. The Yingzhou route led from the Yongch’oˇ n (Yongcheon) Province of the Northern Capital (Sanggyoˇ ng; Sanggyeong) through Changnyoˇ ng (Jangnyeong) Province to Yingzhou, while the tribute route was a maritime course that followed the Amnok River down to modern-day Dandong, from where it went along the coast line to the Liaodong Peninsula and then by the Miaodao Archipelago before arriving at Dengzhou in Tang. Since coastal navigation was the norm in that time, it is difficult to imagine that Parhae’s naval forces could have attacked Dengzhou unless Parhae had already established its control over such Liaodong locales as Dalian and Lushun. In particular, the way in which stopover points on coastal maritime routes were stressed by the famed Tang scholarofficial and geographer Jia Dan in the Monograph on Geography

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE TERRITORY OF PARHAE

33

in the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) suggests that Parhae must have had control over the Liaodong region in order to mount a sea campaign against the Tang. King Mu also expanded Parhae’s territory to the east, across what is known today as Laoye Pass to the Suifen River basin and the area of modern-day Kraskino in the Russian Maritime Province, where he established Yoˇ m (Yeom) District. This became the point of departure for the communication route to Japan. That means that at least by 727, when King Mu sent his envoy to Japan, this area had come under Parhae’s control. Parhae had an urgent need to establish relations with Japan in order to counter the threats from the Tang and Silla. Thus the opening of the route to Japan indicates that Parhae had expanded its territory to the Suifen River basin and what is now the southern Maritime Province by the early years of King Mu’s reign. In addition, King Mu also attacked Silla. Volume eight of the Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms) relates that in the third year after King Mu took the throne, “Silla mobilized 2,000 men from Hasulla ˇ (Haseulla) Province (modern Kangnung; ˇ Gangneung) to build a wall along the northern border.” This tells us that Silla was building defensive fortifications along the border in order to prepare for hostilities with Parhae. Once relations with the Tang had improved and the threat from Silla had lessened, the next Parhae ruler, King Mun (r. 737–793) began to pressure those Malgal tribes who had been linked with the Tang and Silla and had not yet been subjugated by Parhae. Such Malgal groups as the Ch’oˇ lli, the Puryoˇ l, the Woˇ rhui, ˇ and the Huksu ˇ had maintained tributary relations with the Tang and acted independently of Parhae in the early eighth century and, in fact, formed a direct cause for the war with the Tang. We have no records providing concrete information about Parhae’s offensive against these tribes, but we do know that the Ch’oˇ lli stopped sending tribute to the Tang in 740, and the Puryoˇ l and Woˇ rhui ˇ stopped in 741. The only subsequent tributary contact between these tribes and the Tang came once in 802, when the Woˇ rhui ˇ sent tribute, and once in 841 when both the Ch’oˇ lli and the Puryoˇ l each sent one tributary mission. It seems likely, therefore, that these tribes came under Parhae’s control in the mid-seventh century. Thus Parhae’s control extended all the way to the lower reaches of the Songhua River during the early reign of King Mun in the mid-eighth century, marking the completion of the first phase of the kingdom’s policy of territorial expansion. Parhae then underwent a period of internal strife from the time of its fifth ruler (Tae Woˇ nui ˇ [Dae Wonui], r. 793–794), who was deposed, to the time of its ninth ruler, King Kan (Gan; r. 817–818). Parhae didn’t begin expanding its territory again until the reign of King Soˇ n in the first half of the ninth century. Having attained international security after the wars with the Tang and Silla, King Mun turned his attention to domestic affairs. During his years on the throne, King Mun did much to set up the institutional

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

34

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

and cultural framework of Parhae. Although Parhae did not have a regular system of local administration at the beginning, at least by King Mu’s time territorial expansion and the resultant need to rule newly conquered areas meant that it was necessary to develop some sort of local administrative system. King Mu established a series of capitals, provinces, districts, and counties, including Kuguk (Guguk; the original capital), the Northern Capital, the Eastern Capital, the Central Capital, Namhae Province, Puyoˇ Province, Amnok Province, Yakhol District, Mokchoˇ (Mokjeo) District, and Hyont’o (Hyeonto) District. King Mu moved his court a number of times, from Kuguk to the Central Capital, the Northern Capital, the Eastern Capital, and back again to the Northern Capital, thereby putting in place the kingdom’s five-capital system. Under each of the five capitals, he set up provinces, districts, and counties to handle local administration. As is related by the Xin Tangshu, Parhae began to set up central and local governmental institutions from the beginning of the kingdom, but it was King Mun who set up most of those offices. Parhae’s administrative divisions included five capitals, 15 provinces, and 62 districts. The five-capital system was designed to create a centralized system of rule that linked the center with the regions through major regional cities. Furthermore, governors (todok; dodok) and intendents (chasa; jasa) were dispatched to the various capitals, provinces, and districts. This was intended to create a unitary but also pluralistic system of rule in which Confucian students who had studied in the Tang, government officials who had served in the Tang imperial guard and thus had gained knowledge of the Tang system, and local magistrates all participated. It is well known that the creation of local units of administration and the establishment of communication routes were designed to link the center and the regions and to open up routes to other countries. This enabled Parhae, through its 228 years, to develop its own unique historical, cultural and political features while also gaining access to the advanced culture of the Central Plain (China) to create a distinctive culture and history. The establishment of the five-capital system and the implementation of the province-district-county system also meant that Parhae was able to attain a centralized political structure and enhance the power of its kingship. With the solidification of the bureaucratic system and the strengthening of the royal power in the second half of the eighth century, King Mun seems to have thought of himself as like an emperor and indeed in the diplomatic message sent to Japan in 771, he referred to himself as the “Grandson of Heaven.” The central bureaucracy, the system of local government, and the layout of its cities all resembled the Tang, at least in their external appearances. This suggests that Parhae had a unitary system of rule. Parhae achieved the foundation for its reputation as the “flourishing kingdom of the east” through the efforts of its first three kings, Ko, Mu, and Mun. Its territory extended from the East Sea (Sea of Japan) on the east and southeast,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE TERRITORY OF PARHAE

35

to Niha and the Taedong (Daedong) River on the south, to the Liao River on the southwest, to the Qidan on the west, to Laha on the northwest and northeast, and to the Sanjiang plain on the northeast. During the 26 years from the reign of King Mun’s successor through the reign of King Kan (r. 817–818), Parhae underwent a period of internal political conflict among various social groups and among members of the royal family over succession issues. This internal chaos was reflected in Parhae’s relations with its neighbors. The Tang’s attitude toward Parhae changed, as seen in the downgrading of the title Tang gave to Parhae’s rulers from “King of Parhae Kingdom” to “King of Parhae Commandery.” This period also saw a decline in the number of Parhae men who studied in Tang and who passed the Tang civil service examination, falling below Silla in that regard. Parhae’s political prestige, which had been so strong earlier, was now in decline. King S oˇ n (Seon; r. 818–830), who overcame these internal difficulties to take the throne in 818, took a number of measures to reverse Parhae’s decline. He strove to restore the power of the throne, proclaiming a new reign title, “Rising Strong” (K oˇ nhuˇ ng [Geonheung]; Ch. Jianxing), and using the reign of King Mun as a model for his rule. He also strengthened control over such northern groups as the Huˇ ksu Malgal who had attempted to assert their independence during the years of chaos, and he reestablished control over the territory that had been under Parhae’s control in earlier years. His successes in this regard are revealed in records that state “King S oˇ n, Tae Insu (Dae Insu), had merit in subjugating the various settlements by the northern sea and expanding his kingdom’s territory,” and, “King S oˇ n pacified Silla on the south while conquering various settlements in the north where he established commanderies (kun; Ch. jun).” During his reign, King Soˇ n subjugated the Huksu ˇ Malgal living north of Lake Xingkai, as well as the Uru and the Woˇ rhui ˇ Malgal. Those peoples had previously been under Parhae’s control during the reigns of kings Mu and Mun but had recovered some degree of independence and sent tribute to the Tang during the years of internal conflict in Parhae. When these peoples were brought back into the fold by King Soˇ n, Parhae then controlled the areas north and east of Xingkai Lake stretching all the way to sea. These efforts led to Parhae being once again recognized as the hegemonic power in Northeast Asia and it was at this time the Parhae was known as the “flourishing kingdom of the east” among the Chinese. The reigns of the next two kings, Tae Ijin (Dae Ijin; r. 830–858) and Tae Koˇ nhwang (Dae Geonhwang; r. 858–870), were stable and there was no change in the territory under Parhae’s control. But during the reigns of the following two rulers, Tae Hyoˇ nsoˇ k (Dae Hyeonseok; r. 870–901) and Tae Wihae (Dae Wihae; r. 901–926), internal conflict intensified and the Huksu ˇ Malgal tribes revolted, so that Parhae began to decline. An 886 entry in the Samguk sagi states

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

36

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

that Silla’s northern defense command reported that the northern barbarians of Poroguk (believed to have been located in modern-day South Hamgyoˇ ng [Hamgyeong] Province) and the Huksu ˇ had set up a wooden sign saying that they wanted to establish peaceful relations with Silla. This was an indication that the Huksu ˇ Malgal had gained independence from Parhae and thus that the Sanjiang Plain was no longer under Parhae’s control. Also, the Liaoshi (History of Liao) Monograph on Geography records that at about the same time, Parhae changed the status of Yongha, Hoenong, Killi, and Samno from district to prefecture, a move that can be interpreted as a reform measure taken by the throne in an effort to arrest Parhae’s decline. Such efforts were to no avail. In 926 Parhae was vanquished by the newly rising Qidan. To summarize, the changes in Parhae’s territorial domain can be divided into three periods. The first period was the time of Tae Choyoˇ ng, from his escape from Yingzhou to his establishment of a kingdom at Tongmosan. The second period began with the expansionist second king, Mu, and lasted through the early years of the third king, Mun, a time that was before the An Lushan Rebellion in Tang. The third period was the reign of King Soˇ n, who endeavored to reclaim lands that had been lost during the years of internal conflict in the second half of the eighth century. The first period constitutes the years of the rule of King Ko (Tae Choyoˇ ng), from the time he fled from Yingzhou and established his new kingdom at Tongmosan in the old territory of Koguryoˇ . This period was characterized by two things. One was defensive measures against the Tang which refused to recognize the founding of the new kingdom and which was determined to prevent the rise of new forces in the region. The other was the effort to recover the lost lands of Koguryoˇ . The major goals of the attempts to recover old Koguryoˇ territory focused on expanding into the area of the seven Malgal tribes and the Liaodong region. There are no source materials giving concrete information about the process of expansion into those areas, but there is circumstantial evidence to indicate that neighboring Malgal groups either participated in the founding of Parhae or became targets of expansion after the founding of the kingdom. The evidence includes the fact that such Malgal groups as the Paektol, the An’goˇ goˇ l, and the Hosil were already incorporated at the time of the founding and records indicate that Koˇ lsabiu’s Songmal group helped Tae Choyoˇ ng establish his new kingdom. At the same time, Tae Choyoˇ ng also targeted the Liaodong region. He established the Yingzhou route linking Tongmosan and Yingzhou as one of Parhae’s major communication routes and attempted to expand his power in that region. This was where the Tang established its Andong Protectorate General to control non-Chinese peoples, but because of its inability to rule the area, it was soon relocated to Liaodong and was downgraded to an ordinary protectorate in 699, right after Parhae was established. It was re-established as a protectorate general in 705,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE TERRITORY OF PARHAE

37

the year that King Ko (Tae Choyoˇ ng) received letters of investiture, but it exercised control only over the Liaoxi region. Thus even though Parhae did not establish firm control over Liaodong under King Ko, we can easily see that as a result of the establishment of Parhae and the expansion of its power, the Tang’s ability to exercise control over Northeast Asia was diminished. The second period was that of King Ko’s immediate successors, King Mu and King Mun. The two main expansionist thrusts of this period were the Huˇ ksu Malgal and Liaodong. First, King Mu strove to bring Liaodong under his control, with the result that he was able to greatly expand the amount of old Kogury oˇ territory under Parhae’s dominion. Having gained confidence from that endeavor, King Mu next sought to establish control over the Huˇ ksu Malgal after Tang attempted to use the Huˇ ksu Malgal to constrain Parhae, entering into armed conflict with the Tang at the same time. Furthermore, King Mu expanded northeast to Posyeta Bay, the point of departure for the communication route to Japan, thus extending Parhae’s territory to both the southwest and the northeast. Parhae’s subjugation of the Huˇ ksu Malgal and the military measures it took against the great Tang empire were expressions of the confidence Parhae enjoyed after reclaiming control over all the old lands of Kogury oˇ . Under King Mun, Parhae began to put pressure on the various Malgal tribes to its rear, which it had not yet subjugated. Such groups as the Ch’oˇ lli, the Puryoˇ l, the Woˇ rhui, ˇ and the Huksu ˇ had displayed signs of independence in the early eighth century, engaging in frequent tributary exchanges with the Tang and became a direct reason for the war between Parhae and the Tang. The absence of any more records showing tributary missions from the Ch’oˇ lli after 740 and from the Woˇ rhui ˇ and the Puryoˇ l after 741 indicates that by the mid-eighth century, those groups had come under Parhae’s control. Thus by that time Parhae’s territory extended as far as the lower reaches of the Songhua River, marking the end of the initial phase of Parhae’s territorial expansion. The third period was the reign of the tenth monarch, King Soˇ n (Tae Insu). King Soˇ n carried out the subjugation of that portion of the Malgal, including Huksu, ˇ who lived north of Xingkai Lake. Those were peoples who had earlier been under Parhae’s control but broke away during the decades of chaos from the fourth though the ninth kings. This period was characterized by the recovery of the lands that had been gained by the first three kings and then lost during the years of internal conflict and by re-strengthening of Parhae’s ruling authority. Parhae’s initial expansion under King Ko was reflected in the Jiu Tangshu as “2,000 li east of Yingzhou, bordered Silla on the south, and the Woˇ rhui ˇ and Huksu ˇ Malgal on the northeast, and its territory was 2,000 li on all four sides,” whereas its expansion under King Mu and King Mu and again under King Soˇ n was recorded in the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

38

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 3.1: Map of Parhae’s Territory. The four locations on the bottom half are (left to right) Western Capital, Central Capital, Southern Capital, and Eastern Capital. The one location in the upper half is the Northern Capital.

Xin Tangshu which describes Parhae as having “territory of 5,000 li that extends 2,000 li east from Yingzhou and borders Silla and Niha on the south, the ocean on the east, and the Qidan” (on the northwest). In summary, during the reigns of its first three kings, Parhae gained control over a huge stretch of land, reaching beyond present-day Kraskino on Posyeta Bay to the Ussuri River and the Sikhote Mountains on the east, extending to the Qidan on the northwest, including the old Koguryoˇ lands in Liaodong on the west where it bordered the Tang, to Niha on Woˇ nsan Bay in the south where it bordered Silla, and the various Malgal tribes, including the Huksu, ˇ on the north.

NOTES 1

Youzhou is believed to have been located somewhere in the general region of modern Beijing.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

4

The System of Local Administration in Parhae Kim Tong-Woo (Ch’unch’ˇ on National Museum)

‰

THE ORGANIZATION OF PARHAE’S LOCAL ADMINISTRATION AFTER TAE CHOYO ˇ NG

(r. 698–719) established Parhae at Tongmosan (Chengshanzi mountain fortress in modern Dunhua, Jilin Province) in 698, 30 years after the demise of Kogury oˇ , the kingdom greatly expanded its power to the extent that it was known in the Tang as the “flourishing kingdom of the east.” Its territory included the northern part of the Korean Peninsula, China’s three northeastern provinces (Jilin, Liaoning, and Heilongjiang), and the Maritime Province of Russia. The Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) describes Parhae’s territory as “over 5,000 li in all four directions,” and the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) describes Parhae’s territory as “3,120 li from east to west and 2,000 li from north to south,” while recording Silla’s territory as “1,000 li from east to west and 2,000 li from north to south.” Even a simple comparison of these records suggests that Parhae controlled territory twice that of Kogury oˇ and four or five times that of Silla, making it the largest territorial state in Korean history. Within that large territory resided both Kogury oˇ remnants and various groups of Malgal. This situation must have compelled Parhae to develop a system of local administration early on in order to maintain its control over such a large area populated by such disparate elements. The Xin Tangshu tells us that Parhae’s local administration was made up of five capitals, fifteen provinces, and sixty-two districts. Under the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

40

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

districts were some one hundred plus counties; thus Parhae had a three-tiered system of local governance: provinces, districts, and counties. The five capitals, the Northern Capital, the Central Capital, the Eastern Capital, the Southern Capital, and the Western Capital, were situated in important locales as political, economic, and military centers through which the kingdom sought to rule its lands and people effectively. There are several hypotheses about the exact locations of the five capitals, but generally speaking most scholars think that the Northern Capital was located in modernday Ningan, Heilongjiang Province; the Central Capital in Helong, Jilin Province; the Eastern Capital in Hunchun, Jilin Province; the Southern Capital in Pukch’ oˇ ng (Bukcheong), Hamgy oˇ ng (Hamgyeong) Province; and the Western Capital in Linjiang, Jilin Province. Parhae had five major communication routes that linked the kingdom with the outside world: the tribute and the Yingzhou routes to the Tang; the Silla route; the Japan route; and the Qidan route. The tribute route went by land from the Northern Capital to the Western Capital, from where it went by water on the Amnok

Table 4.1: Organization of Parhae’s Local Administration Capital

Province(s)

Districts

Region

Upper Central

Yongch’on ˇ Hyond ˇ ok ˇ

Old Suksin Territory

Eastern

Yongwon ˇ

Southern WesternAmnok

Namhae

Yong, Ho, Pal No, Hyon, ˇ Ch’ol, ˇ T’ang, Yong, ˇ Huˇng Kyoˇ ng, Yoˇ ng, Mok, Ha Ok, Chong, ˇ Ch’o Sin, Hwan, P’ung, Chong ˇ Ha, Ha Pu, Son ˇ Mak, Ko Chong, ˇ Pan An, Kyong ˇ Hwa, Ik, Kon ˇ I, Mong, T’a, Huˇk, Pi Kwang, Pun, P’o, ˇ i, Kwi Hae, U Tal, Wol, ˇ Hoe, Ki, Pu, Mi, Pok, Sa, Chi Yong, ˇ Mi, Mo, Sang

Changnyong ˇ Puyoˇ Makhil Chongni ˇ Anbyon ˇ Solbin Tongp’yong ˇ Cholli ˇ Hoewon ˇ Anwon ˇ

Old Yemaek Territory Old Okchoˇ Territory Old Koguryoˇ Territory

Old Puyoˇ Territory ˇ mnu Territory Old U Old Solbin Territory Old Puryol ˇ Territory Old Cholli ˇ Territory Old Worhoe ˇ Territory

* There were three districts, Yong, ˇ Tong, and Sok, that were not subordinate to provinces and reported directly to the center. * The Xin Tangshu said that Parhae had 62 districts but gave the names of only 60.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

41

River and the Gulf of Parhae (Bohai) to the Shandong Peninsula, while the Yingzhou route went by land to Yingzhou in northeastern Tang. The Japan route went from the Northern Capital through the Eastern Capital to modern-day Kraskino south of Vladivostok and then across the sea to Japan. The Silla route went from the Eastern Capital through the Southern Capital and on to Silla, while the Qidan route passed through Eastern Puyoˇ (Fuyu) to Qidan territory. In addition, there was the “sable road” from the Parhae capital to Siberia, which was used for fur trading. This network of routes not only linked Parhae with neighboring countries and peoples, but also contributed to the effective rule of the kingdom. The five capitals were located at key points on these five routes. It is believed that the five capitals were mostly established during the reign of King Mun (r. 737–793). The main capital was moved four times: once by King Mu (r. 719–737) from Kuguk to the Central Capital; twice by King Mun from the Central Capital to the Northern Capital and then to the Eastern Capital; and one last time by King Soˇ n from the Eastern Capital back to the Northern Capital. Since King Mun had his main capital in three different locations, it is believed that the five-capital system was put in place during his reign, if not earlier. The system of local administration described in the Xin Tangshu dates from the reign of the tenth Parhae ruler, King Soˇ n, and it is unlikely that the particular organizational structure existed from the beginning. It is more probable that Parhae developed its system of local governance as it expanded its territory over the years. This makes it necessary to examine the process of territorial expansion in order to get a reliable picture of Parhae’s system of local administration.

PARHAE’S TERRITORIAL EXPANSION Parhae continuously expanded its territory in the years following its establishment. According to the sources, the reigns of the first three kings saw continued growth in the amount of land under Parhae’s control. There was little expansion during the so-called period of internal conflict from the fourth through the ninth rulers; if anything, there was some contraction and some loss of territory. The tenth ruler, King Soˇ n, again expanded Parhae’s territory so that it reached 5,000 li on all four sides. As soon as Tae Choyoˇ ng established his new kingdom, Koguryoˇ remnants and Malgal scattered throughout Manchuria began to gather at Tongmosan. Tae Choyoˇ ng strove to attain both domestic and international stability: internally by laying down the foundations for rule, and externally by communicating with Silla, the Tang and the Tujue. This made it possible for him to develop the power of his kingdom. In addition, the Tang was preoccupied with the Tujue

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

42

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

at the time so that Parhae was able to subjugate surrounding areas without any particular external interference. The second ruler, Tae Muye, was able to marshal strong military forces and expand Parhae’s territory greatly as suggested by his posthumous title (Mu wang; Martial King). The Xin Tangshu says “King Mu greatly expanded the kingdom’s territory after he took the throne; all the barbarians of the northeast were fearful and submitted themselves to him.” In a diplomatic document sent to Japan in 727, he claimed that he had “taken control over various countries, subjugated various dependencies, recovered the old territory of Koguryoˇ , and continued the customs of Puyoˇ .” The Japanese Ruiju kokushi (A Collection of the Histories of Japan), which describes the situation in early Parhae, states that Parhae’s territory extended 2,000 li in all four directions. If we take a closer look at early Parhae territorial expansion, it seems likely that the new kingdom first established control over old Koguryoˇ lands close to Tongmosan. This would include the old Puyoˇ lands in the Songhua River basin, the Koguryoˇ lands around the Amnok and Hun rivers. The former became Parhae’s Puyoˇ Province while the latter became Amnok Province and Changnyoˇ ng Province. Parhae also expanded into the northern Korean Peninsula down to a line extending across the peninsula from Woˇ nsan to the Taedong River. In 721 Silla mobilized men of Hasulla ˇ (modern Kangnung) ˇ to build a wall along its northern border, and a diplomatic message of 735 from the Tang to Silla asked Silla to prepare defensive works against Parhae along the Taedong River. When Parhae attacked Dengzhou (in modern Shandong) in 732, the Tang requested Silla to attack Parhae from the south, indicating that Silla and Parhae were either sharing a border or at least in close proximity to each other. The lands Parhae occupied in northern Korea were the old Yemaek territories that had become Parhae’s Yongwoˇ n (Yangwon) Province and the old Okchoˇ lands had become Parhae’s Namhae Province. It is not clear exactly where the northeastern barbarians mentioned in the Xin Tangshu lived. Considering, however, that King Mu sent forces to subjugate the Huksu ˇ Malgal in 726, it seems likely that Parhae’s territory bordered on Huksu ˇ Malgal territory. The Huksu ˇ lived throughout the low reaches of the Heilong River. Since this was prior to the establishment of the Northern Capital and the time when the main capital was either at the old capital (modern Dunhua) or the Central Capital (near modern Yanji), in which case the northeast would have been the old Suksin territories of the general region of the Northern Capital, so we can surmise that that region was also probably under Parhae’s control at that time. The next monarch, King Mun, continued to subjugate the Malgal, incorporating the Ch’oˇ lli, Puryoˇ l, Woˇ rhui, ˇ and Uru into Parhae. He established Ch’oˇ lli Province in the area of the Ch’oˇ lli (where the Songhua and Mudan Rivers converge near Ilan in modern Heilongjiang Province); Tongnyoˇ ng (Dongnyeong) Province in the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

43

area of the Puryoˇ l (west of Xingkai Lake in modern Jilin Province); and Hoewoˇ n (Hoewon) Province in the area of the Woˇ rhui ˇ (near Tongjiang in the northern reaches of modern Heilongjiang Province). The Ch’oˇ lli Malgal had been sending tribute to the Tang starting in 714, but no record of them sending tribute can be found after 741 except for one instance in 841. They did resume sending tribute after Parhae’s demise in the early tenth century. From this, we can surmise that the Ch’oˇ lli came under Parhae’s control in the mid-eighth century. The Puryoˇ l Malgal, who also had been sending tribute from 714, ceased sending tribute after 742 except for one instance in 841, and the Woˇ rhui ˇ Malgal also had only one instance (in 802) of sending tribute to the Tang after 742. Thus it seems likely that those three Malgal groups had been incorporated into Parhae’s Ch’oˇ lli, Tongnyoˇ ng, and Hoewoˇ n Provinces in the 740s. The area ˇ where the Uru Malgal lived was the old territory of the Umnu in the southern part of Russia’s Maritime Province; Parhae established Anbyoˇ n (Anbyeon) and Choˇ ngni (Jeongni) provinces there. Yoˇ bugu (Yeobugu), who went to the Tang as an envoy in 798 was chief of the Uhuru (Uru) dependency and governor. It does appear that Parhae may have lost control of some territory during the so-called period of internal conflict that set in after King Mun’s reign. This is suggested by the diplomatic document sent to Japan by the sixth ruler, King Kang (Tae Sungnin [Dae Sungnin], r. 794–809) that said, “Discipline in the court is now like that of old and our territory has been restored to what it had been earlier.” Considering that the Woˇ rhui ˇ and Uru, who had been brought under Parhae control during King Mun’s reign, sent tribute to the Tang independently in 802, it seems likely that some areas had slipped beyond Parhae’s control. With the ascension to the throne of King Soˇ n, the descendent of Tae Choyoˇ ng’s younger brother Tae Yabal (Dae Yabal), Parhae once again began to expand its territory. One region that was newly acquired at that time was the “tribes north of the sea” and northern parts of Silla’s lands. “North of the sea” means the areas north of Xingkai Lake; it appears to refer to Anwoˇ n Province and the lands of the Huksu ˇ Malgal. King Soˇ n also advanced into Liaodong in the area of Liaoyang. According to the Liaoshi (History of Liao), during the Tang’s Yuanhua era (806–819), King Soˇ n conquered Silla to the south and various tribes to the north where he established prefectures. It seems probable that the lands of Silla referred to here were north of the Taedong River. That region had already been incorporated into Parhae during the reign of King Mu; King Soˇ n was reestablishing Parhae’s control. It is believed that Silla’s mobilization of 10,000 men from districts and prefectures north of Hansan (modern Seoul) to build a 300-li wall in 826 was done in order to defend against Parhae, probably in response to King Soˇ n’s advance into that region. The Monograph on Geography of the Xin Tangshu suggests that Parhae must have advanced to a line between Fushun in Liaodong

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

44

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 4.1: Parhae’s Territorial Expansion 1) Kings Ko and Mu (red); 2) After King Mun (blue); 3) After King Soˇ n (black)

and Pakchakku near Dandong on the Amnok River across from Sinuiju ˇ (Sinuiju) during the reign of King Mun. This port was a good base for venturing out into the Yellow Sea. Although there is still much controversy, it seems possible that Parhae expanded its territory into the Liaodong Peninsula after King Son’s reign. There are historical sources and epigraphic evidence that Parhae ruled the Liaodong Peninsula. Furthermore, before the Qidan launched their final assault against Parhae, they first advanced into the Liaodong Peninsula where in 924 they were forced to retreat. This seems proof positive that Parhae itself had established a presence in the Liaodong Peninsula. Thus Parhae had attained its largest size of “5,000 li on all four sides,” bordering on Silla along a line from W oˇ nsan Bay to the Taedong River on the south, stretching to the ocean on the east where it reached all the way up into present-day Russian Maritime Province, and extending on the north to the junction of the Heilong and Songhua Rivers where it confronted the Huˇ ksu Malgal, and reaching on the west to the junction of the Nan and Songhua Rivers and from there down along the Liao River where it faced the Qidan and the Tang. Eventually in 924 Parhae lost control of Liaodong to the Qidan, after which some of the Malgal broke away and Parhae finally came to an end at the hands of the Qidan invaders in 926.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

45

Table 4.2: First Records for Parhae’s Province-District-County System Unit

Record

Year

Source

Province

Namhae Province, T’oho Port Soˇ Yodok, ˇ Governor, Yakhol District Wang Mun’gu, Assistant County Magistrate

777

Shoku Nihon shoki vol. 34, Emperor Konin, Hoki 8th year Shoku Nihon shoki vol 13, Emperor Shobu, Tenpei 11th year Shoku Nihon shoki vol 19, Emperor Ninmyo, Kasho 2nd year

District County

739 849

THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARHAE’S SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION A state such as Parhae that engaged in rapid expansion of its territory from its inception must have paid particular attention to local governance in order to manage its broad lands and to rule its people effectively. Furthermore, because Parhae was facing a threat to its survival from the Tang from the very time of its founding, the establishment of a system of local administration was key to its survival. Thus Parhae must have set up a system of local administration early on, and as discussed in the previous section, must have continued to expand and develop its system of local governance as it expanded its territorial reach. The Xin Tangshu says that Parhae set up five capitals, fifteen provinces, and sixty-two districts to rule local areas. Parhae also established over 100 counties under its districts to attain a provincedistrict-county administrative hierarchy. There is, however, no record that tells us just when this system was put in place. Table 4.2 lists the earliest dates recorded for the province-district-county hierarchy that was the center of Parhae’s system of local control. The dates in Table 4.2 indicate that Parhae’s province-district-county system was beginning to take shape at least as early as 739 under King Mun. Yakhol, Mokcho, ˇ and Hyont’o ˇ are district names that do not appear in the list of sixty provided by the Xin Tangshu and have two character names unlike the others, which have single character names. This tells us that there were changes in the system of local administration from the time of its inception early in the kingdom’s history and its completion at the time of King Son. ˇ It seems reasonable to conclude that the governor of Yakhol District recorded in 739 had probably already been established during the reign of the previous ruler, King Mu. In this regard, the section on Parhae’s history in volume 139 of the Ruiju kokushi is noteworthy: “The kingdom of Parhae is in the old territory of Koguryoˇ . In the seventh year of emperor Tenmu (668), the Koguryoˇ Ko royal family was destroyed by the Tang. Later, in the second year of emperor Tenji (698) Tae Choyoˇ ng

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

46

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

established Parhae and received letters of investiture from the Tang in 713. Parhae’s area is 2,000 li on all four sides and it has no offices or postal stations in its districts and counties. Everywhere there are villages and those villages are all Malgal settlements. There are many Malgal among the commoners but there are few literati (sain; Ch. shiren). Parhae employs indigenous people as local leaders. The largest towns (ch’on; [chon]) have governors (todok; Ch. dudu) and the second largest intendents (chasa; Ch. cishi ). The commoners (paeksoˇ ng; [baekseong]; Ch. baixing; J. hyakujou) underneath them are all called suryoˇ ng (suryeong; Ch. shouling). The soil is very cold and not suitable for paddies. Many of Parhae’s people are literate.”

This record is believed to have been based on a report from a Japanese emissary who visited Parhae early in the kingdom’s early years and on information obtained from Silla and Tang. In 720, Japan sent Morukimi Nokurao and five others to the Malgal regions of Parhae to survey customs, and also sent an envoy to Parhae in 728 in response to a 727 emissary from Parhae. “2,000 li in all four directions” is a description of Parhae’s early territorial extent, and the statement that there were no postal stations probably reflects the situation at the time when Parhae was just beginning to set up its local administration. These Japanese visited Parhae during the reign of King Mu and their comments suggest that some sort of basic system of local administration had already been put in place at that time. It is likely that the system was further developed under King Mun who focused on developing civil institutions during his time on the throne. The statement that Parhae had “no offices or postal stations in its districts and counties” can also be interpreted to read that Parhae had “no districts, counties, offices or postal stations.” If the former reading implies that the district-county system was still in the early stages of implementation, the latter means that the district-county system had yet to be implemented. By the time described in the Ruiju kokushi, however, Parhae had already put into place its five capital system as seen in the relocation of the main capital to the Central and Northern capitals. Furthermore, the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, continued, from 697–791) mentions Yakhol District in 739. Thus the interpretation that Parhae “had no districts, counties, offices or postal stations” is difficult to sustain and we have to follow the first interpretation that Parhae was in the early stages of setting up its system of local administration. The statement that the largest local towns had governors (of provinces) and the second largest had intendents (of districts) can be taken to mean that Parhae at that time had only two levels of local administration: provinces and districts. But the statement that “all commoners are called suryoˇ ng” seems problematic. If, instead, we read it to say, “the commoners all called the lower level chiefs suryoˇ ng,” it seems possible that Parhae had a three-tiered system of local administration: governors in provinces, intendents in districts, and suryoˇ ng in counties.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

47

Table 4.3 lists all of the known records of Parhae persons holding offices in local administration. Local administrative titles show up in the offices held by emissaries sent to Japan during the reign of King Mun. This began with Soˇ Yodoˇ k (Seo Yodeok), the governor of Yakhol District in 738 and included Yang Sunggy ˇ oˇ ng, intendent of Mokchoˇ District in 758 and Ko Namsin (Go Namsin) as intendent of Hyoˇ nt’o District in 759. These were local power men of Koguryoˇ descent who held posts in Parhae’s local administration, and Yang Sunggy ˇ oˇ ng held a concurrent appointment in the central government as a mid-level official in the Board of War. Yang’s case suggests that the regional officials of this time were probably appointed from among members of the central bureaucracy. Mokchoˇ District was known as Mokchoˇ fortress during Koguryoˇ times while Hyoˇ nt’o District, known as Hyoˇ nt’o fortress during Koguryoˇ times, probably originated from the Xuandu Commandery established by China’s Han dynasty after it conquered Old Chosoˇ n. The similarity in characters and pronunciation between Yakhol District and the Kach’ong (Gacheong) District of Koguryoˇ that, as recorded in the Xin Tangshu Monograph on Geography, surrendered to the Tang and the fact that many of the Koguryoˇ fortresses recorded in the Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms) had “hol” as part of their names, suggests that Yakhol District, too, was probably an old Koguryoˇ fortress. Thus all three of these locales appear to have been closely linked to Koguryoˇ in earlier times. If we look at the names of provinces and districts that appear in Table 4.2 and Table 4.3, we see that Namhae Province, which was established in King Mun’s reign, also appears in the list of administrative organizations of King Soˇ n’s reign shown in Table 4.1, but that Yakhol District, Mokchoˇ District, and Hyoˇ nt’o District do not. This indicates that those local administrative organizations having two character names were changed to one-character names sometime after King Mun’s reign, and this can be seen as showing change over time in the system of local administration. This suggests that the system of local administration not only expanded as Parhae’s territory grew, but that it also underwent institutional refinement. That Parhae initially used such Koguryoˇ place names as Hyoˇ nt’o tells us that Parhae followed the Koguryoˇ system of local administration. In later years, Koguryoˇ had a fortress and town system of local administration in which the largest fortresses were headed by Moksal, a term equivalent to governor, and the next level of fortresses were headed by Ch’oˇ ryoguˇ nji (Cheoryogeunji), a term equivalent to intendent; these local officials were all dispatched from the center. The “largest towns” and the “second largest towns” of Parhae mentioned in the Ruiju kokushi can be equated to the fortresses and towns of Koguryoˇ . Governor Amilgo went to Japan as an envoy during the reign of King Kan in 795 while Yoˇ bugu went in 798 as the chief of the Uru dependency and as governor of either Anbyoˇ n Province or Choˇ ngni Province. Yoˇ gubu was probably appointed governor as the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

48

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

head (major leader) of a Malgal dependency while Amilgo’s name also suggests that he was of Malgal origins. On the other hand, “Military Commissioner” (amnyoˇ ngsa [amnyeongsa]; Ch. yalingshi) Ko Panp’il (Go Banpil) was the head of the delegation to Japan of 779 who was charged with supervising the Ch’oˇ lli Malgal who went with him. The “Malgal Military Commissioner” Yang Kilbok led a tribute mission to the Tang on which he was said to have been accompanied by Huksu, ˇ Woˇ rhui, ˇ Uru, and Ch’oˇ lli Malgal. These examples indicate that such military commissioners were men given temporary appointments for delegations sent to foreign countries, and thus were probably not local administrative officials. Rather it appears that the Malgal who had been incorporated into Parhae or, in the case of the Huksu, ˇ were subjugated by Parhae were not allowed to conduct independent missions to foreign countries and could only do so under the supervision of centrally appointed military commissioners. Thus even in the case like that of Yoˇ bugu, where a Malgal suryoˇ ng was appointed as governor, he would have been under the periodic supervision of military commissioners. Yoˇ ngnyoˇ ng (Yeongnyeong) County was the head county of Yong District in Yongch’oˇ n Province. At the time Yoˇ ngnyoˇ ng County magistrate (hyoˇ nsung ˇ [hyeonseung] Ch. xiancheng)1 Wang Mun’gu went to Japan he also held a mid-level post in the Secretariat of State Affairs. In other words, Wang, as an official of one of the three most important organs of the central government, was also dispatched as a county level official. Yoˇ ngnyoˇ ng County was located close to the main capital (the Northern Capital), so there must have been some special circumstance behind his appointment as magistrate. At any rate, it seems quite certain that at least in the early ninth century, Parhae had a well-developed province-district-county system of local administration. Ch’oˇ lchu (Cheolju), where Wi Kyun was intendent in 926, had administrative authority over Wisoˇ ng (Wiseong) County, a place that was known for producing iron during the Koguryoˇ period. Table 4.3: Official Titles and the System of Local Rule Year Name 739 758 759 779 792 795 798 848 926

Office

Origins

Soˇ Yodok ˇ General, Governor of Yakhol District Yang Suˇnggyong ˇ General, Field Intendent of Mokchoˇ District, and Mid-rank official of the Board of War Ko Namsin General, Intendent of Hyont’o ˇ District and Flag Bearer Ko Panp’il Military Commissioner Yang Kilbok Malgal Military Commissioner Amilgo Governor Yobugu ˇ Head of Uru Malgal, Governor Wang Mun’gu Magistrate, Yongny ˇ ong ˇ County Wi Kyun Intendent of Ch’olchu ˇ District

Koguryoˇ Koguryoˇ Koguryoˇ Koguryoˇ Koguryoˇ Malgal Malgal Koguryoˇ Koguryoˇ

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

49

This review of the development of Parhae’s system of local administration has revealed several things. One, in the early eighth century, Parhae seems to have had an incomplete system that continued Kogury oˇ ’s arrangements, as seen in the way that Parhae’s province-district system was influenced by Kogury oˇ ’s fortress-town system (the stage seen in the Ruiju kokushi). During the reigns of King Mu and King Mun, when the Ch’ oˇ lli, Pury oˇ l, W oˇ rhuˇ i, and Uru Malgal were incorporated into Parhae and the Huˇ ksu Malgal were brought under Parhae’s influence, Parhae abandoned the old Kogury oˇ system and changed the names of each province and district to a new Parhae style. However, in newly subjugated areas distant from the political center, Parhae appointed local strongmen (such as Y oˇ bugu) to local administrative positions during the mid- and late eighth century. One of the reasons why the completion of Parhae’s system of local administration was delayed was probably the period of internal conflict that followed the death of King Mun. The final stage was attained during the mid-ninth century when Parhae was known as the “flourishing kingdom of the east,” when Parhae dispatched its own officials to reincorporated and newly incorporated areas and developed a full three-tiered province-district-county (governor-intendent-magistrate) system.

PARHAE’S SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION ˇ AND THE SURYONG Parhae gained control over broad stretches of territory from the beginning of the eighth century and set up a system of local administration to rule the inhabitants; by the middle of the ninth century, Parhae had completed a three-tiered province-districtcounty (governor, intendent, magistrate) system of local governance. Below that, however, at the village level, there were local strongmen known as suryoˇ ng through which Parhae actually controlled the populace. The source materials show various aspects of the suryoˇ ng in the administration of the Parhae state. There were cases such as that of Yoˇ bugu where suryoˇ ng were appointed as governors and were engaged in diplomatic activities with the Tang and Japan. Up through the reigns of King Mu and King Mun, the magistrates sent to the Tang were either heads of or held high positions within the embassies. However, the suryoˇ ng sent to Japan in the late Parhae period were low-level envoys who did not hold regular bureaucratic offices and who appear to have engaged mostly in trade while in Japan. The reason for this kind of change in the status of the suryoˇ ng is because they were not officials posted from the center but rather were local strongmen.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

50

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

As local strongmen, the suryoˇ ng occupied a very important position in Parhae society. During the first nine reigns from the beginning of the eighth century down to the end of the ninth century, Parhae’s rulers were anxious to gain stability and security and thus sought to muster support from local strongmen by offering them high political positions. After Parhae’s system of rule was well established during King Soˇ n’s reign in the early tenth century, the suryoˇ ng lost status and thus appeared as low-level envoys. Furthermore, with the completion of the three-tiered province-district-county system of local administration in the mid-ninth century, it was inevitable that the suryoˇ ng would have suffered a relative loss of prestige. The suryoˇ ng who traveled to Japan were accorded very low status in the diplomatic documents sent by Parhae, ranking just above oarsmen. There were no more instances such as that of Yoˇ bugu in which a suryoˇ ng was appointed as a local administrative official. Instead, Parhae implemented a system of ruling the populace that was structured thus: provincial governor, district intendent, county magistrate, village suryoˇ ng, and commoners. There are almost no materials that tell us of the roles played by the suryoˇ ng in the evolution of Parhae’s system of local administration. Thus I will first consider the case of the nomadic peoples to the north of China, and then look at the role played by the suryoˇ ng in the groups to which they belonged and which formed the bases of their power. Early on, the leaders of the settlements of nomadic peoples were called “big men” (taein [daein]; Ch. daren) until the Sui-Tang era when they began to be called suryoˇ ng. Among the Chinese of the Han dynasty era, “big men” were understood to be “men with much power” or “men who were ethical and capable.” That the Chinese called nomadic chiefs “big men” indicates that they were perceived to have such qualities, at least to some degree. In other words, the “big men” had the ability to deal with outside forces and to control internal conflicts that was necessary for the survival of their tribes. The suryoˇ ng of Parhae were certainly such men because the survival of their groups was directly related to their abilities. The character and appearance of a suryoˇ ng was a reflection of the group to which he belonged. Thus a suryoˇ ng necessarily had to resist external pressure brought upon him and his group. It was inevitable that as Parhae began to strengthen its rule and particularly to develop a centralized system of local administration that local suryoˇ ng would resist. In order to overcome such resistance, Parhae incorporated the suryoˇ ng into its unitary province-district-county system of local rule. One of the missions sent to Japan in later years included no fewer than 65 suryoˇ ng. This can be seen as a good example of the extent to which Parhae was able to control and manage local suryoˇ ng through its system of local administration. Those suryoˇ ng took with them such local products at sable and tiger fur and ginseng, which they traded for textiles which were hard

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

51

to produce in the areas where they lived. Official records indicate that one day’s government sanctioned trading amounted to 400,000 yang (Ch. liang; J. ryo); if we take into consideration the unofficial trading that must have gone on on the side, the suryoˇ ng must have gained tremendous profits. Parhae used such opportunities to make profits in the trade with Japan in order to compensate the suryoˇ ng for the loss of power they experienced from being brought under the kingdom’s strong system of local administration. By the ninth century, the suryoˇ ng, who had been incorporated into Parhae’s system of local rule, played various roles under the supervision of the magistrates, mediating between the common people and the central government. Later Silla appointed local strongmen as village heads of the administrative villages, which they managed under the supervision of officials sent out from the capital. These village chiefs supported the centrally appointed official while carrying out administrative duties in two or three natural villages. They mediated the penetration of central power into the villages by collecting taxes and mobilizing residents as labor for various projects such as building fortresses. We can assume that Parhae’s suryoˇ ng fulfilled the same kind of roles as Silla’s village chiefs. Parhae was able to establish a system of rule strong enough eventually to downgrade the status of the suryoˇ ng within its unitary province-district-county administrative system and thus came to be known as “the flourishing country in the east.” Nonetheless, as Parhae began to lose its ability to rule near the kingdom’s end, these local suryoˇ ng started to break away from Parhae. Japanese scholars argue that the suryoˇ ng were local chiefs, that Parhae reorganized its state by winning them over and that Parhae carried out a system of indirect rule through the local suryoˇ ng in what they term was the “suryoˇ ng system.” According to this line of argument, the suryoˇ ng were the chiefs of the Malgal tribes residing in Parhae whose traditional right to rule was recognized by Parhae; they controlled the people living in their settlements, received appointments to central government positions, and served as emissaries to foreign countries. Parhae had a unitary system of local administration; however, that system was not strong enough to overcome the exclusive power of the suryoˇ ng and break up the groups over which the suryoˇ ng presided. Parhae did use the suryoˇ ng as intermediaries who assisted centrally appointed officials and handled routine administrative work to maintain its system of local administration, but the argument that Parhae maintained a dual system with the Malgal that led to the dissolution of Parhae and its conquest by the Qidan is overstated. The way in which the suryoˇ ng broke away from Parhae in its final years was no different from the way that village chiefs broke away from Silla and set themselves up as independent local strongmen in the waning years of that kingdom. Furthermore, Parhae did not have a dual system like that of the Liao, which had a Northern Administration based on tribal

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

52

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

customs for the Qidan and the Tujue and a Southern Administration based on the Chinese commandery-county system for Chinese and Parhae people.

NOTES 1

Translator’s note: In Tang China, a xiancheng was an assistant county magistrate. Here, the author seems to interpret the term to mean magistrate in the Parhae system.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

5

The Fall of Parhae: A Temporal and Spatial Approach Kim Eun Gug (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

EAST ASIAN NATION-CENTERED HISTORIES AND THE QUESTION OF PARHAE’S HISTORICAL POSITION PARHAE EXHIBITED ITS greatness as the strongest kingdom in Northeast Asia from 698 to 926. Founded by King Ko (Tae Choyoˇ ng, r. 698–719) and continuing through fifteen kings for 229 years, Parhae stood dominant as a central state in East Asia to the extent that it was even praised as the “flourishing kingdom of the east.” Koreans have thought of Parhae as the successor to Koguryoˇ , as the kingdom that perpetuated Korean history in the north for 229 years. Parhae is important from the Korean perspective as the last Korean state to have controlled the northern region and the Korean state that possessed the largest territory. Thus Koreans have considered it only natural that Parhae and Silla together should be called the Northern and Southern Kingdoms. This view, however, has recently been derided as being romanticized. Because Parhae’s territory covered northern Korea as well as the northeastern region of modern China and the Maritime Province of modern Russia, different understandings of Parhae have emerged. The Chinese have long considered Parhae (Bohai) to have been a border feudal regime of the Tang while the Russians view Parhae as the first state of the Maritime Province region. The Russians contend that Parhae was separate from and independent of the Tang and that it rightly belongs within Russian history. Late nineteenth and early twentieth century Japan, on the other hand, looked at Parhae from the perspec-

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

54

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

tive of its imperialist ambitions to control both Korea and Manchuria. Japan’s expansion gave it the opportunity to conduct systematic research into the Manchurian region and Japan dealt with Parhae within the context of Parhae’s diplomatic relations with what is now known as Japan. That was a project as far-reaching as China’s current Northeastern Project and its effects still loom large even today. On the other hand, when we consider the Korean case, where people have thought that the history of Parhae is unquestionably part of the history of Korea, we find a strange difference between North Korea and South Korea. Both sides speak of Northern and Southern Kingdoms, but they are not necessarily talking from identical points of view. When scholars in South Korea discuss routes that can link Parhae with the rest of Korea, all they can talk about is Silla, the Later Three Kingdoms, and Koryoˇ . In the case of Silla, all they have are a few records that mention the Silla route and the exchange of envoys. There is no record of exchange between Parhae and the Later Three Kingdoms and, in the case of Koryoˇ , all they have are records of Parhae refugees coming in during Koryoˇ ’s process of reunifying the Later Three Kingdoms. Seen from the nationcentered historical perspectives of East Asia, South Korean scholars are in the most unfavorable situation to do research on Parhae. In the case of North Korea, one of Parhae’s five capitals, the Southern Capital was located in its territory and it has Parhae-related remains and artifacts. The problem is that China is now pursuing a project based on its nation-centered view of history that seeks to incorporate its northeastern region into a Chinese historical community from the time of Old Chosoˇ n down to modern times. The conventional Chinese view of Parhae’s history can be said to have provided the basic framework for China’s Northeast Project. Thus research on Parhae is no longer limited to Korean historians. This calls for a reconsideration of how Parhae’s history is to be correctly understood. If we limit ourselves simply to the question of to which nation’s history Parhae belongs, then it will take us that much longer to arrive at a true understanding of the historical significance of Parhae.

UNDERSTANDING THE FALL OF PARHAE The fall of Parhae over 1,000 years ago is a historical fact. Nonetheless, when we look into this historical event, we discover that there is much that we do not know. The year 2006 marked the passage of 1,080 years since the demise of Parhae. The history of Parhae, as a great power in East Asia that was known as the “flourishing kingdom of the east,” still has particular significance even today. Parhae was a historical bridge and a historical crossroad. Thus Parhae’s historical position continues to become more significant. Seen from Korean history, Parhae was both an intermediary and a

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FALL OF PARHAE

55

buffer zone between Korea on the one side and the northern nomads and the Chinese on the other. That is not to say that Parhae was not a part of the history of Korea or another nation. The identity of Parhae as a kingdom was one of being a successor to Koguryoˇ : it was founded by Koguryoˇ remnants who developed their kingdom by strengthening ties with other peoples. The peoples who participated in the founding of Parhae were peoples who had had close relations with each other since Koguryoˇ times. The Tang’s continued policy of expansion eventually led to insurrection by some of the peoples who fell under Tang control after the downfall of Koguryoˇ . The histories imply that the founding of Parhae came about as the consequence of the Qidan’s struggle against the Tang. But Parhae, which was founded only 30 years after the demise of Koguryoˇ , was the offspring of Koguryoˇ . After the fall of their kingdom, Koguryoˇ remnants gathered their spirit, their culture, and their intelligence in one place to establish the kingdom known as Parhae. Parhae lasted from the end of the seventh century to the early tenth century. When thinking about history, some important things we can easily overlook, even while recognizing their importance, are records and interpretations. If records are taken as written with weight attached to the recorder and the facts he recorded, then interpretation is a spectrum-like process that is based on records but tries to grasp the significance behind the records and the intentions of the recorder.

THE FALL OF PARHAE AS SEEN IN THE RECORDS Parhae, founded in 698, came to its end in the first month of 926. But simply knowing when the kingdom was founded and when it ended is not enough to understand the full reality of Parhae’s history. It is not sufficient to explain the fall of Parhae as the outcome of one incident that happened in one moment in 926. If we look only at the records, the moment of Parhae’s demise was the surrender of the last king. Qidan forces surrounded the main Parhae capital at the Northern Capital in the first month of 926. The king put on mourning clothes, led sheep out of the gates and surrendered, along with his officials, to the Qidan lord. [Bringing sheep was a sign of surrender.] The nomadic Qidan first united various tribes and began to develop into what became known as the Liao empire during the time of Yelu Abaoji. The posthumous name of the last Parhae king who surrendered to Abaoji is not known. There are instances where the posthumous names of kings are not recorded and the kings are known only by their real life names. The founder of Parhae, Tae Choyoˇ ng, was such a case, but we know that the people of Parhae used the posthumous title of King Ko for Tae Choyoˇ ng. And Parhae kings from King Ko on all had posthumous names and used their own reign titles. This shows that Parhae was conscious of developing its own independent history.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

56

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

The real-life name of the last Parhae king, fifteenth in the line, was Tae Insoˇ n (Dae Inseon). Parhae came to an end twenty some years after he took the throne. The Liaoshi (History of Liao) biography for Yelu Yuzhi records that “Qidan Taizi moved at a time when Parhae was divided and won without fighting.” Taking this statement at face value, research on the fall of Parhae has concluded that Parhae came to an ingnominious end because it was riven by internal discord at a time when it faced a major Qidan offensive. The so-called “selfdestruction” hypothesis still exerts great influence even today. But there is no evidence to back this up—it is nothing but a speculative hypothesis. One basis for the “self-destruction” hypothesis is that the Koryoˇ sa records that after 925 large numbers of Parhae subjects, particularly high officials and military leaders, sought refuge in Koryoˇ . This is seen as evidence that right before Parhae fell, there was severe inter-

Figure 5.1: Monument at the Site of Parhae’s Northern Capital

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FALL OF PARHAE

57

nal conflict that alienated many people, some of whom went into exile in Koryoˇ , and that Parhae came to an end in the face of a sudden large-scale attack by the Qidan. But we must realize that the influx of Parhae people seeking refuge was not limited to just the reign of Koryoˇ ’s first king—rather it continued for nearly 200 years until the reign of Yejong in the early twelfth century. Furthermore, we must keep in mind that the Liaoshi was a history that was written from the point of view of the victors. Parhae lost twice: once in the war and once again in the records. Recently this view of internal conflict as the cause for Parhae’s demise has been linked by the mass media with a volcanic eruption of Mount Paektu (Baekdu; Ch. Changbaishan). The source of this notion was in Japan, but it has recently been refuted by Japanese scholars, so it seems odd that the Korean media would be breathing life back into it. There is no record anywhere of such an eruption and the volcanic rocks found in the area of Yongch’oˇ n Province of Parhae’s Northern Capital all date from prehistoric times. There are many other views of Parhae’s fall, but most of them are based on the record found in the Liaoshi and tend to reinforce the internal conflict explanation. Thus the responsibility for Parhae’s demise is to be found in the people of Parhae, especially its high officials and its last king. The fall of Parhae has been attributed to the corruption, weakness, and division of Parhae society in a formula that equates Parhae’s end with internal conflict. It is now time for us to look at the end of Parhae from a different point of view. That is, it should be viewed, to the extent we can with the limited source materials we have, from the perspective of the people of Parhae. We can see that Parhae’s last king, Tae Insoˇ n, launched vigorous diplomatic activities during the time when the Qidan were expanding their power. He sent emissaries to Silla and Koryoˇ , to states in China’s Central Plain, and to Japan, and also exchanged emissaries with the Qidan. There are records that he sought to establish friendly relations with Silla and other states, a sign that he was trying to take measures to deal with a Qidan offensive. But East Asia was in chaos in the early tenth century and there was no state that was in a position to respond to Parhae’s overtures. Archaeological remains indicate that Parhae maintained its traditional defensive works up until the end. That the Qidan was nonetheless able to defeat Parhae was probably because the Qidan had a good grasp of Parhae’s traditional military forces. Thus the Qidan focused their offensive on Parhae’s major military stronghold in Liaodong. Liaodong, whose strategic importance still stands out today, was the key military location in Northeast Asia at that time. The Liaodong xingbuzhi tells that the Qidan were only able to occupy Liaodong after decades of bloody fighting with Parhae. Once the Qidan had taken control of that strategic bridgehead, they were in a position that would allow them to launch an offensive against Parhae without much difficulty.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

58

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

There are only two records that deal directly with battles between the Qidan and Parhae. One is about a battle at Puy oˇ fortress (in the area of modern-day Changchun and Nongan) on Parhae’s western border. The other was the siege of Parhae’s Northern Capital. Once the Qidan had taken control of the bridgehead of Liaodong, they launched their attack against Parhae’s Northern Capital. The Qidan, who had a good knowledge of Parhae’s military forces and bases, made effective use of surprise attack tactics to defeat the final

Figure 5.2: Parhae Stone Lamp

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FALL OF PARHAE

59

Parhae defensive force of 30,000 men led by Nosang and surround the Northern Capital. Although the Parhae king had requested to be allowed to surrender, when the Qidan forces entered the capital to disarm the defenders, the king and the populace inside the walls resisted. In the end, the capital was taken by Qidan forces. The surrender of the king and the final fall of the Northern Capital are what we term the demise of Parhae. But there is more to the story. We must not overlook Nosang and his force of 30,000 who sought to defend the Northern Capital to the end. The men who fought with Nosang, whose full name is not known to us, and those who resisted inside the capital alongside the king tell us of the spirit of the ordinary people of Parhae. To summarize what has been covered so far, we cannot ascribe the fall of Parhae to some sort of internal division or chaos alone. The interpretation that attributes Parhae’s demise to internal conflict is mere supposition. It is now time for a Parhae-centered view of the end of that kingdom. We can approach this through the defensive system that Parhae maintained all the way to the end and through the efforts, both domestic and diplomatic, that Parhae’s last king mounted in the face of the threat from the Qidan, even though no neighboring state was in a position to respond to Parhae’s request for assistance. At the same time, we need to have a multi-faceted understanding of Parhae’s demise in order to enable us to understand the movement to restore Parhae that arose throughout old Parhae territory even after the royal line had come to an end.

1080 YEARS AFTER THE FALL OF PARHAE What kind of answer can we give to the question of whether the fall of Parhae was a simple historical accident or a necessary historical consequence? All we can find in the mirror of history are some records and relics, and those are far from sufficient to enable us to grasp the facts. There are many aspects of the demise of Parhae, including the cause, the background, and the consequences that cannot be illuminated by historical records alone. If records are so important, why should this be the case? Why can we not approach the records of Parhae’s end with faith in their reliability? In the history of any state, its fall is as important as its founding. This can be considered in the same sense as the life of a human being: birth, growth, and death. In the case of Parhae, however, even though we are able to deal with its founding and its growth with some detail, its demise is still hidden behind a veil. Thus we frequently see expressions such as “Parhae is a puzzle,” or “Parhae is a fantasy land.” In fact, there are surprisingly few records about the fall of Parhae. The people who destroyed Parhae were the Qidan. The Qidan carried out resistance to the Tang at the time of Parhae’s founding and had much influence on neighboring peoples, including providing

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

60

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

one spark for the movement that led to the founding of Parhae. At the beginning of the tenth century, the Qidan unified their divided people and declared themselves to be a state while developing a balance of power with the Central Plain on their south and Parhae on their east. Now, in the year 2006, 1080 years after the fall of Parhae, China is contending that Parhae is part of its history, making such claims in scholarly articles and books and even in inscriptions on monuments. China is also making intense preparations and inspections in order to have Parhae’s Northern Capital listed as a world cultural heritage site. In concert with this, China is also striving to remove Koguryoˇ and Parhae, which was the successor to Koguryoˇ and its traditions, from Korean history. The significance of the fall of Parhae for Korean history is that it meant the loss of the last barrier in the north. Parhae was located in the homeland and continued the traditions of its predecessors in Old Chosoˇ n, Puyoˇ , and Koguryoˇ . Parhae’s fall left the Korean Peninsula without a buffer against the northern peoples who were subsequently able to strike directly into Korea.

RAISING THE INTERNATIONAL STATURE OF PARHAE Parhae fulfilled the role, in name and in fact, of an axis of international networks in the history of Korea. Parhae had a world mindset that was the envy of the peoples of East Asia at that time. Parhae, which was established as a revival of Koguryoˇ under the name of Chin’guk, demands that those of us living in this region today recall its position and its mindset. Rather than settling for a negative view of history that sees the Korean historical stage as shrinking, we must accept the current reality and build upon it a larger sense of history. At times we forget that we have another history in the north, while at other times we get caught up in nostalgic longing for that history. This situation seems to be the result of the fact that Parhae did not occupy a solid place in our history after its demise in the tenth century. The reason why we Koreans are now focusing on Parhae is not to try to recover Parhae’s old lands as our own territory. And it is also not because we are indulging in some sort of ethnocentric thinking that Parhae’s remains and relics belong only to us. We must guard against such tendencies, but we also should not turn away from Parhae. That is because Parhae’s history is not the property of any one nation. Parhae was able to win praise as the “flourishing country in the east” because it was an important axis for various kinds of interchange among the countries and peoples of Northeast Asia. Parhae was able to take maximum advantage of its geographic openness to develop and manage various routes to foreign lands. Although Parhae cut off the Tang’s persistent aggression and contacts for a time after the kingdom’s founding, before long it began to accept and digest

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE FALL OF PARHAE

61

Tang culture as its own. These efforts led to the Tang recognizing Parhae as an independent kingdom, after which Parhae participated actively in the Tang-centered world order of East Asia. Parhae, which fulfilled the role of an international axis from the seventh through the tenth centuries, had a genuine world mindset. It did not limit itself to simply being the successor to Koguryoˇ but opened up routes to neighboring countries and carried out active diplomatic activities to elevate its position in the East Asian world of its time.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

6

The Movement to Restore Parhae Lim Sang-sun (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

ˇ THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARHAE AND KORYO THE FIRST ATTEMPTS at negotiations between Parhae and Koryo ˇ began in 923. In the third month of that year, the Qidan conquered Haihusun, beheaded over 300 of that group, and brought the Hai under subjugation. Hoping to get out from under increasing pressure from the Qidan, Parhae entered into mutual assistance agreements with neighboring states, including not only Silla but also Koryoˇ . This appears to have happened sometime between the third month of 923 and the fifth month of 924. Thus when large numbers of Parhae people sought refuge in Koryoˇ about the time of Parhae’s demise, they did so not only because Parhae and Koryoˇ shared a sense of common identity as successors to Koguryoˇ , but also because of the influence of the mutual assistance pact that had been agreed upon between the two countries. After Wang Koˇ n (Wang Geon) established his new kingdom, he departed from the policy of Kungye (Gungye), whom he had deposed in 918, and began to emphasize that his state was the successor to Koguryoˇ . He called his kingdom Koryoˇ 1 and actively expressed his wish to recover the lost lands of Koguryoˇ . Within this context, it is interesting to note that the Zizhi tongjian mentions that Koryoˇ and Parhae had entered into marital relations. Some scholars have taken the statements by Wang Koˇ n that “a marriage exists between us and Parhae” and that “Parhae is the land of our relatives” as empty formal language, but others have accepted those statements as reflecting reality. The latter have argued that the large scale influx of Parhae

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE MOVEMENT TO RESTORE PARHAE

63

refugees after the fall of that kingdom and the joint hostility toward the Qidan shared by both Parhae and Koryoˇ is evidence that marital relations had indeed been formed between the two kingdoms. There is no record that directly attests to a marital relationship between Tae Kwanghyoˇ n (Dae Gwanghyeon), the crown prince of Parhae, and Wang Koˇ n, but such an arrangement would not be hard to imagine given the way that Wang Koˇ n entered into so many politically strategic marriages involving consorts and princesses. It is known that Wang Koˇ n entered into political marriages with families of substantial military strength during years before he reunified the Later Three Kingdoms. He also sought to bolster his own relatively humble status as the son of an undistinguished provincial family by marrying with daughters of aristocratic families, as seen in his marriage to the eldest princess of Silla’s last king after Silla surrendered to Koryoˇ . Tae Kwanghyoˇ n, as crown prince of Parhae, was certainly in a position to fulfill Wang Koˇ n’s ambitions in this regard. Tae Kwanghyoˇ n did seek refuge in Koryoˇ after the demise of Parhae, but he brought with him many officials and several tens of thousands of followers when he came, so he would have offered both social prestige and military power to Wang Koˇ n. Considering that many of Wang Koˇ n’s consorts came from less advantageous backgrounds than that of Tae Kwanghyoˇ n, it seems highly likely that he did seek a marital alliance with Tae. If it was a marriage between Wang Koˇ n’s daughter and Tae Kwanghyoˇ n, it probably took place in the latter half of 926, the year that Tae came into Koryoˇ , whereas if it was a marriage between Wang Koˇ n and Tae Kwanghyoˇ n’s daughter, it may have happened at a later time. According to the Koryosa, a Parhae general named Sin Toˇ k (Sin Deok) also came in the ninth month of 925 in the company of 500 persons. The Koryosa gives a total of 120,000 refugees coming into Koryoˇ from Parhae during the 191 years from 925 through 1116.

Figure 6.1: Genealogy of the Yoˇ ngsun T’ae (Yeongsun Tae), Descendents of Parhae Refugees

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

64

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figur 6.2: Hypocausts Used by Parhae Refugees

Since the population of early Koryoˇ is estimated to have been somewhere around 2.1 million people, refugees from Parhae and their descendents must have accounted for somewhere between two to six percent of Koryoˇ ’s inhabitants. Koryoˇ was the place that accepted the largest number of Parhae refugees after the fall of Parhae. There may

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE MOVEMENT TO RESTORE PARHAE

65

have been more than indicated in the records, perhaps as many as a few hundred thousand refugees in Koryoˇ . The acceptance of so many people from Parhae endows Koryoˇ ’s reunification of Korea with even greater significance for the history of the Korean nation. Considering that Koryoˇ received large numbers of Parhae refugees after the fall of Parhae and after various movements to restore Parhae, we can surmise that the refugees chose Koryoˇ because of a sense of ethnic affinity.

ˇ NGAN’GUK LATER PARHAE AND CHO After Parhae was vanquished, its remnants actively pushed forth movements to restore the dynasty. During the first 100 years after the conquest by the Qidan, there were several restorationist movements, including Later Parhae, Choˇ ngan’guk (Jeonganguk), Hungyoguk ˇ (Heungyoguk), and Tae Parhaeguk (Dae Balhaeguk). Later Parhae

After the Qidan conquered Parhae, they established there an entity known as Donglanguo but they moved Donglanguo west to Liaoyang in 927, after which Later Parhae was established. Later Parhae first appears in the records with the dispatch of an envoy known as Ko Yoˇ ngsa (Go Yeongsa) to the Later Tang in 929. Later Parhae ˇ appears to have lasted until 1003 when its Urya regime fell to an attack from the Qidan. Later Parhae’s Tae line did not last long before it was replaced by ˇ the O line of the Urya. In effect, the Tae dynasty of Parhae and early Later Parhae was replaced by the O dynasty of Later Parhae. Later Parhae was engaged in active diplomatic exchanges with China’s Five Dynasties. In 929 Ko Yoˇ ngsa went to the Later Tang where he submitted tribute of local products and received the title of Taizi xima from Emperor Mingzong. In 931, Soˇ ng Kangmun (Seong Kangmun) went to the Later Tang, and Later Parhae sent another tribute envoy in 932. In 935 Yoˇ l Chudo (Yeol Judo), Governor of Namhae Province, presented tribute and received an honorary appointment as Superintendent of the Board of Public Works, while O Chehyoˇ n (O Jehyeon), who accompanied Yoˇ l, received an honorary appointment to a lower level post. The last record of relations between Later Parhae and China dates to 954, when the Parhae local strongman Ch’oe Osa (Choe Osa) and 30 other persons submitted themselves to the Later Zhou. After that time, Later Parhae appears to have focused its attention on domestic issues and relations with the Qidan. In 975, Later Parhae, in conjunction with a general of Parhae origins known as Yoˇ np’a, launched a military campaign to recover Parhae’s old Puyoˇ Province. Later Parhae also dispatched a force of 7,000 men to assist in a battle in the Huife River basin located in

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

66

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

what had been Parhae’s Changnyoˇ ng Province while also absorbing some of the forces of Choˇ ngan’guk in 979. Chˇ ongan’guk

Parhae remnants also launched a restoration movement in the area of the Amnok River, which had belonged to Parhae’s Amnok Province of the Western Capital and established a kingdom known as Choˇ ngan’guk in resistance to the Qidan. There are different ideas about the dating of the founding of Choˇ ngan’guk: 935–936, 937, and 970. The biographies of the Songshi have a separate entry for Choˇ ngan’guk. According to the Songshi, Choˇ ngan’guk was a kingdom of the Mahan people. After the Qidan conquered Parhae, their chief gathered up the remaining people, established a kingdom on the western borders, proclaimed his own reign title and named his kingdom Choˇ ngan’guk. In 970, the Choˇ ngan’guk king Yoˇ l Manhwa sent documents and tribute via a Nuzhen envoy. During the Taiping xingguo era of the Song (976–984), emperor Taizong sent a message to Choˇ ngan’guk trying to enlist that kingdom in a military campaign against the Qidan; Choˇ ngan’guk, which had been hoping for a chance to take revenge against the Qidan, responded positively. In 981, the Choˇ ngan’guk king O Hyoˇ nmyoˇ ng (O Hyeonmyeong) sent a message via a Nuzhen envoy indicating a willingness to cooperate in a Song effort to subjugate the Qidan. In 989, a Choˇ ngan’guk prince sent horses via a Nuzhen envoy and in 991, another prince known as T’aewoˇ n (Taewon) also sent a message to the Song via a Nuzhen envoy. Those were the last recorded contacts between Choˇ ngan’guk and the Song. Similar information can also be found in the Wenxian tongkao. There appears to have been a change of ruling houses in Choˇ ngan’guk, given that the first king was Yoˇ l Manhwa (Yeol Manhwa) and a latter king was O Hyoˇ nmyoˇ ng. O Hyoˇ nmyoˇ ng proclaimed that Choˇ ngan’guk was made up of Parhae remnants who occupied the old lands of Koguryoˇ , thereby evidencing a sense that his kingdom was a successor to both Koguryoˇ and Parhae. Also, his reign title of “Restoring the Origin” (Woˇ nhung ˇ [Wonheung]; Ch. Yuanxing) indicates that he saw his kingdom as a restoration of Parhae. Choˇ ngan’guk, which was resisting the Qidan threat on its west, engaged in active diplomatic exchanges with the Song in the south, a dynasty that was also locked in a hostile relationship with the Qidan. It was indirect contact carried out through Nuzhen envoys, but it reveals the willingness of the two countries to cooperate against their common enemy. Choˇ ngan’guk probably came to an end around the time that the Qidan emperor Shengzong subjugated the Nuzhen in 985, although there is the possibility that it may have lasted somewhat longer. There was the message sent by a Choˇ ngan’guk prince in 991 and

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE MOVEMENT TO RESTORE PARHAE

67

there is a record in the Koryosa stating that Choˇ ngan’guk refugees entered Koryoˇ in 1018. The Qidan Liao dynasty appears to have decided to conquer Choˇ ngan’guk partly in preparation for a campaign against Koryoˇ and partly because of the kingdom’s collaboration with the Song against the Qidan. ˇ NGYOGUK AND TAE PARHAEGUK HU Hˇ ungyoguk

Another Parhae restoration movement arose after the fall of Choˇ ngan’guk. That was the establishment of Hˇungyoguk in 1029 by Tae Yoˇ llim (Dae Yeollim). Tae Yoˇ llim, who was said to have been either the seventh or eleventh generation descendent of Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719), held a military post in the Liao’s Eastern Capital administration. At that time, although the region was suffering from poor harvests, the Liao enforced a monopoly on salt and liquor while also levying excessive taxes on trade. Those measures caused hardships for the Parhae remnants, produced an intensification of antiLiao sentiment, and became the direct cause for Tae Yoˇ llim to rise in rebellion against the Qidan. This must, however, also be understood within the context of continuing anti-Qidan feelings and repeated efforts to restore Parhae among the people of the region. Tae Yoˇ llim based himself in Liaoyang Province, where many Parhae remnants were living, and also brought together Parhae remnants in neighboring regions. He imprisoned the Liao Eastern Capital governor, Xiao Xiaoxian, and his wife Princess Nanyang in the Eastern Capital and killed such Liao officials as Superintendent of the Board of Taxation Han Shaoxun, his Assistant Superintendent Wang Jia, and the Sijie Supreme Military Commander Xiao Pode, after which he proclaimed the founding of Hungyoguk ˇ and chose the reign title “Heavenly Felicitation” (Ch’on’gyoˇ ng [Cheongyeong]; Ch. Tianjing. Given as Ch’oˇ nhung ˇ [Cheonheung, Heavenly Rising] in the Koryoˇ sa). But Tae Yoˇ llim encountered difficulties from the outset. By 1029, most of Parhae’s old territory had already been brought back under Qidan control and the Parhae remnants had already lost much of their sense of identity as descendents of Parhae. Tae was hoping to get a positive response from the Nuzhen. He also hoped to launch a joint campaign with Koryoˇ against the Qidan, sending Ko Kildoˇ k (Go Gildeok) to Koryoˇ to announce the founding of his kingdom and to seek assistance. The Koryoˇ court was divided over the issue of providing aid to Tae Yoˇ lllim. Superintendent of the Board of Punishments Kwak Woˇ n proposed that Koryoˇ use the founding of Hungyoguk ˇ as an opportunity to drive out the Qidan forces that had crossed east of the Amnok River. Although Chancellor Ch’oe Sawi (Choe Sawi), along with Soˇ Nul (Seo Nul) and Kim Maeng, opposed

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

68

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Kwak’s proposal, the Koryoˇ did carry out a campaign against Poju ˇ (Boju) fortress (modernUiju; Uiju). That campaign failed and Koryoˇ , now preoccupied with preparing defenses against a Qidan attack, did not respond to further entreaties from Hungyoguk ˇ in the first, seventh, and ninth months of 1030. Early in the tenth month of 1029, Liao forces led by Xiao Xiaomu, Governor of the Southern Capital, set siege to Liaoyang fortress where Tae Yoˇ llim was holed up. Tae and his supporters held out for almost a year before they were betrayed by Yang Sangse. The fortress fell around the twenty-fifth day of the eighth month of 1030 and Tae Yoˇ llim was taken captive. Thus yet another attempt to resist the Qidan and restore Parhae by Parhae remnants, one coming more than 100 years after the demise of Parhae, came to an end. In the aftermath, when the Qidan forcibly relocated many Parhae remnants to the central area of the Liao empire, many sought refuge in Koryoˇ . The Koryoˇ sa records that 740 Parhae remnants came into Koryoˇ between 1030 and 1033. Koyok’s Movement to Restore Parhae

Efforts to restore Parhae were still being made more than 200 years after Parhae’s fall. In the second month of 1115, a man of Parhae descent known as Koyok (Goyok) raised anti-Qidan forces in Yaozhou and called himself “great king.” Beyond that, however, all we know is that Koyok’s regime was based in Yaozhou, located in the upper reaches of the Shira Muren River in the Qidan heartland and that there were significant numbers of Parhae remnants in that region. There were 4,000 Parhae households in Changnak (Jangnak) County, including 1,000 households of iron workers, as well as the “miscellaneous households” in Anmin County which had been established by Taizong to administer Parhae people. Koyok was able to beat back two attempts by the Qidan to subjugate him before he fell victim to a Qidan ruse and was taken captive, thus bringing his restoration movement to an end. The Tae Parhaeguk of Ko Yˇ ongch’ang

In the first month of 1116, the year after Koyok’s failed uprising, Parhae remnants in the Liaoyang region led by Ko Yoˇ ngch’ang (Go Yeongchang) arose in resistance to the Qidan and established a kingdom known as Tae Parhaeguk. Ko Yoˇ ngch’ang was an official in the service of the Liao who commanded a force of 2–3,000 Parhae cavalry against the Nuzhen before taking up the standard of reviving Parhae. After witnessing the severe ethnic discrimination and even murder suffered by Parhae remnants at the hands of the Qidan, Ko decided to punish Xiao Baoxian, the Qidan governor of the Eastern Capital. Ko used the anti-Qidan sentiments of the Parhae people

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

THE MOVEMENT TO RESTORE PARHAE

69

to mobilize them to his cause, raising 8,000 men from neighboring areas within 10 days. He then occupied Liaoyang, declared himself emperor, called his state Tae Parhaeguk, and proclaimed his own reign title. Tae Parhaeguk received sufficient support from Parhae remnants to be able to attack 50 of the 79 districts under the control of the Eastern Capital. Ko Yoˇ ngch’ang sent an envoy to Agudo, emperor of the Nuzhen asking for assistance and suggesting a joint attack against the Qidan. When the Qidan demanded that Ko abandon his title of emperor and surrender, Ko refused. At the same time, Ko also demanded that the Nuzhen Jin release the Parhae remnants detained there. This brought an attack from the Jin who took the Eastern Capital. Ko escaped to Changsongdao with 5,000 of his soldiers but was soon captured and executed by the Jin. Records show that the Tae Parhaeguk forces that took refuge at Changsongdao were known as “cloud units” or “ocean units.” Changsongdao was a port located on the route Parhae had used to send tribute to the Tang and was where no small numbers of Parhae people had been engaged in maritime trade activities. Thus it comes as no surprise that the remaining forces of Tae Parhaeguk sought refuge there. There is no record of direct contact between Tae Parhaeguk and Koryoˇ , but there was an incident in which Koryoˇ emissaries to the Liao were detained by Ko Yoˇ ngch’ang. The Koryoˇ emissaries were forced to offer congratulations to Ko for establishing his state. There is no evidence to indicate that Ko Yoˇ ngch’ang made any request of assistance to Koryoˇ . Nonetheless, as seen in the name of Ko’s kingdom, there was still—200 years after its demise—a sense among people in the region that they were descendents of Parhae. Tae Parhaeguk was the last known attempt to restore Parhae.

NOTES 1

Koryoˇ was an abbreviated form of Koguryoˇ and was widely used by the people of Koguryoˇ themselves during that kingdom’s middle and late centuries.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PART THREE

PARHAE’S RELATIONS WITH ITS NEIGHBORS ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH: PARHAE AND SILLA PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA: BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN PARHAE AS AN EAST ASIAN MARITIME POWER

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

7

An Enduring Window between North and South: Parhae and Silla Kim Eun Gug (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

ˇ NG AND SILLA TAE CHOYO External Contacts during the Reign of King Ko (Tae Choyˇ ong) IF WE ADOPT a Parhae-centered view of the background to the founding

of that kingdom, we note the leadership of Tae Choyoˇ ng (King Ko, r. 698–719) and the fact that he was able to take advantage of the human and material resources of the Koguryoˇ remnants who provided the foundation for Tae’s achievement. But there is another view that emphasizes the situation in the Tang and how changes in Tang foreign policy made possible the founding of Parhae. According to this view, the Tang was forced to adopt a passive policy towards the northeast because of the pressure it was getting from the Tujue. Parhae was able to overcome its early limitations once it received letters of investiture from the Tang and was able to develop into a powerful kingdom under the patronage of that Chinese dynasty. This view is typical of conventional Tang-centered understandings of Parhae history. In order to offer a reconsideration of this Tangcentered view of Parhae’s foundation and development, this section will examine the foreign relations of Parhae during the reign of its founding king, Tae Choyoˇ ng. As noted in earlier chapters, we do not have an abundance of records about King Ko, but we are able to see evidence of King Ko’s multifaceted diplomatic activities in the records that are extant. Scholars generally argue that Parhae saw great territorial growth under its second ruler, King Mu (r. 719–737). But this would not

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

76

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

have been possible if there had not been some degree of institutional development and territorial expansion under the first king. Thus we need to have a better understanding of local administration and territorial expansion during Tae Choy oˇ ng’s reign. For the most part, scholars recognize the possibility of territorial expansion under King Ko, but that is based on the assumption that there were no powers capable of restraining Parhae at that time. However, considering that Parhae was engaged in active exchanges with neighboring countries during King Ko’s reign, we might be better advised to focus on his activities in that arena. One illuminating example is that Silla’s King Hyoso (r. 692–701) bestowed an official position on Tae Choy oˇ ng. The Tang was constantly on guard against and attempted to constrain the new kingdom of Parhae, with the result that Parhae made efforts to open relations with other neighboring countries. The dispatch of an envoy to Silla and the acceptance of an official appointment from the Silla king can be seen as one aspect of Parhae’s efforts to establish relations with other countries. The relatively low (fifth-grade) rank of this appointment shows that Silla had a sense of superiority over Parhae, so we have to assume that the initiative for opening relations came not from Silla but from Parhae. Although this affair is found only in Silla records, it does suggest that Parhae was seizing the initiative in the conduct of foreign relations. Although the Tang sent an emissary to Parhae in 705, thus recognizing the existence of that kingdom, relations between the Tang and Parhae were cut off by threats from the Tujue and the Qidan. In this situation, Parhae sent emissaries to the Tujue and also to the Tang, two countries standing in opposition to each other. This, too, is an indication of the efforts made by Tae Choyoˇ ng in foreign relations. From the point of view of the Tang, it had failed in its effort to establish proper and full relations with Parhae, leaving it in a difficult situation. This was reflected in the continuous efforts by the Tang to establish relations with Parhae. The Tang efforts finally bore fruit in 713. That was King Ko’s sixteenth year on the throne. It seems likely that Parhae had been busy unifying Kogury oˇ remnants and increasing the amount of land under its control. By this time, Parhae had already established contact with Silla to the south and with the Tang, as well as with other countries. We can say that Parhae’s process of conquering its surrounding territories began under King Ko and was largely completed under King Mu and King Mun (r. 737–793). The development of Parhae’s relations with other countries in those early years was driven by King Ko’s efforts to take advantage of what was a fluid international situation in Northeast Asia. One thing worthy of attention in this regard is that the Tang gave King Mu, Tae Choy oˇ ng’s son and successor, the title of “King of Kyeru Commandery.” Kyeru (Gyeru) was the name that was used to denote old Kogury oˇ territory and its appearance here

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

77

indicates that the Tang recognized Parhae as the successor to Kogury oˇ . Relations with Silla: First Exchanges

Tae Choyoˇ ng established Parhae in 698. The first name he gave to his kingdom was Chin, using a Chinese character that means “to resound.” The name Parhae, by which the kingdom subsequently came to be known, was probably first used by the Tang as a diplomatic move to recognize the stature of Tae Choyoˇ ng’s new state. The chronological tables of various kinds of history books in Korea use posthumous names for the rulers of all other states except Parhae. Even though deceased Parhae kings all had posthumous names, those are omitted from the chronological tables that give only personal names for Parhae rulers. In order to attain a proper understanding of Chin/Parhae, we should start by using the kings’ posthumous names. For example, the posthumous name of the first king of Chin/Parhae was King Ko. Looking at the kingdom as a whole, it had 15 kings and lasted 229 years, so it certainly did not have a short history and we should use the posthumous names of its kings, just as we do for the rulers of all other kingdoms and dynasties. King Ko was the one who prepared the foundation for the new kingdom. Immediately after founding his kingdom, he entered into active exchanges with other neighboring countries. Even before he had established his kingdom at the place known as Tongmosan, he had to repulse the pursuing Tang forces at Tianmen Pass. While preparing to found his kingdom and also readying his forces to defend against another Tang attack, King Ko grasped the situation in adjacent territories and entered into friendly relations with the Tujue who were threatening the Tang. In the end, this led the Tang to recognize King Ko’s new kingdom as seen in the so-called “letters of investiture” that bestowed on King Ko the title “King of Parhae Commandery.” We need to consider Chin/Parhae-Silla relations within the context of the evolution of Chin/Parhae-Tang relations. In 700, shortly after founding his kingdom, King Ko sent an envoy to Silla announcing that he had established the kingdom of Chin, at which time Silla’s King Hyoso bestowed on King Ko a fifth-grade honorary position. Although this was not the highest rank, it was not a low rank. There are two things we should think about in regard to this honorary position. One, Silla had reunified the Three Kingdoms and was developing its own Silla-centered network of international relations, whereas Chin/Parhae was a brand new kingdom; thus the bestowal of a fifth-rank position was an expression of Silla’s confidence. Two, such an amiable exchange would have been unimaginable if Silla and Chin/Parhae were in a hostile relationship. This exchange should be seen as the beginning of the formation of a framework of friendly

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

78

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

relations. In other words, it marked the opening of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms period.

EXPANSION UNDER KING MU AND SILLA After King Ko died in 719, his son, Tae Muye or King Mu, succeeded to the throne. King Mu did much to elevate Parhae’s international stature. One of the most concrete aspects of Parhae’s development of exchanges with neighboring states can be found in its communication routes. About these routes, the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) says: “The Japan route went via the seacoast southeast of Yoˇ ngwoˇ n, the Silla route through Namhae, the tribute route by the Amnok River, the Yingzhou route through Yingzhou, and the Qidan route through Puyoˇ .” Parhae implemented a political system and institutions appropriate to its territorial expansion and cultural diversity. The creation of the five capitals, 15 provinces, and 62 districts constituted, along with the various communication routes, a distinctive feature of Parhae’s culture. In particular, the Japan route and the Silla route allow us a glimpse of Parhae’s maritime culture. The exchange of envoys and goods over the Japan route is a reflection of Parhae’s flourishing maritime activities. There are various arguments over where the port of departure for the Japan route may have been, but many historians believe it to have been Baliancheng (K. P’allyoˇ nsoˇ ng [Pallyeongseong]), under the administration of Yongwoˇ n Province, in modernday Hunchun, China. The port of arrival in Japan is believed to have been either Dewa-kuni or Noto-kuni. However, recent excavations in the Maritime Province of Russia have drawn attention to modernday Posyet, also near Hunchun. During this time, Parhae had more frequent contact with Japan than did Silla. Parhae sent 34 missions to Japan while Japan dispatched 13 to Parhae. Parhae’s first envoy to Japan was sent by King Mu in 727; the mission was made up of 24 men, including the Yoˇ ngwoˇ n general Ko Inui ˇ and Ko Chedoˇ k. They encountered heavy seas on their voyage, with only eight men surviving the trip. Why, then, did Parhae risk such a dangerous trip? We can find an answer in the diplomatic document King Mu sent with the mission. First, when we consider the claim that Parhae had recovered the old lands of Koguryoˇ and continued the customs of Puyoˇ while taking note of the state tradition of Japan, we can say that Parhae was seeking recognition from Japan in return for its recognition of that country. Second, even though Japan lay across a dangerous sea, Parhae’s effort to open relations with Japan was part of its overall policy of emphasizing exchanges with neighboring states. Third, the fact that Parhae sent 300 sable furs suggests that Parhae was expressing a desire for continued friendly relations. There is a strong tendency to interpret the 727 mission to Japan as part of an effort to contain Silla, placing the mission within the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

79

context of a hostile standoff between Parhae and Silla. When we consider the contents of King Mu’s diplomatic letter, however, we have to see this mission as typical of Parhae’s foreign policy efforts. In other words, Parhae’s goal on this mission was to establish itself as a member of the Northeast Asian community of states. Parhae continued to send envoys to Japan until 919. Among the bamboo slip inscriptions found in the remains of the residence of Prince Nagaya (684–749) in Nara can be found mention of a Parhae envoy and trading activities believed to refer to the 727 mission from Parhae to Japan. Furthermore, there has been a recent publication on the excavation of materials relating to a Parhae man by the name of Yi Kwanghyoˇ n (Yi Kwanghyeon), who appears to have been active in linking Parhae to neighboring states across both the East Sea (Sea of Japan) on the east and the Yellow Sea on the west. In addition to the Japan route, the Silla route was also important and provides another window into Parhae’s maritime culture. The Silla route began at the Eastern Capital located at the center of Yongwoˇ n Province, came down along the coast past what is modern-day Hamgyoˇ ng Province. This route, which also passed through Parhae’s Southern Capital, was established for the purpose of conducting trade with Silla. Since the 1980s large numbers of archaeological sites related to Parhae have been excavated in North Korea; among those sites, the fortress at Pukch’oˇ ng (Bukcheong) and the monastery site at Omae-ri in the city of Sinp’o (Sinpo) were locales engaged in the trade between Parhae and Silla. The route led from Pukch’oˇ ng, which was Parhae’s Southern Capital, down along the coast to the Yonghung ˇ River; across the river was Silla’s Choˇ njoˇ ng (Jeonjeong) Prefecture. Niha, which was on the border between Parhae and Silla, was also located on the Yonghung ˇ (Yongheung) River, probably at what is now Yoˇ n’gokch’oˇ n (Yeongokcheon) in modern Kangwoˇ n Province. The Silla route was important as the window through which Parhae and Silla conducted relations with each other, relations that were sometimes friendly and sometimes hostile.

CHANG MUNHU (JANG MUNHU), COMMANDER OF FORCES ATTACKING THE TANG King Mu, Parhae’s second ruler, adopted the reign title of “Benevolent Peace” as soon as he took the throne. Building on the foundations laid down by King Ko, he pursued a policy of territorial expansion and elevated the position of Parhae. It was inevitable that King Mu’s policies would bring about conflict with the Tang. This erupted in the 732 expedition against the Tang city of Dengzhou. Records of this expedition can be found in both the Xin Tangshu and the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang), and can be divided into four parts. First was that the Huksu ˇ Malgal, who had been incorporated into Parhae’s sphere of power, had sent tribute missions

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

80

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

to the Tang without getting permission from Parhae. Second was that King Mu sent his younger brother, Tae Munye, at the head of an armed force to chastise the Huksu ˇ Malgal. Third was that Tae Munye went against the king’s orders and exiled himself in the Tang; when King Mu demanded Tae Munye’s return, the Tang refused. Fourth, even though the Tang suffered damage, including the death of the Dengzhou intendent, as a result of Parhae’s attack, it steadfastly refused to send Tae Munye back; instead the Tang incited Silla to attack Parhae. Conventional interpretations of this incident suggest that this was a simple case of brief military conflict between Parhae and the Tang. But those interpretations do not take into consideration the fact the records were compiled from the Tang’s point of view, so it is quite probable that the records understate the scale of the attack and the extent of damage suffered by the Tang. Indeed, the Tang records describe Chang Munhyu, the Parhae general who led the attack against Dengzhou, as a “pirate.” The Tang was the “superpower” of East Asia at that time, so the fact that a kingdom like Parhae dared to launch an attack against the Tang was a very significant turn of events. Parhae had sufficient grounds to launch an attack against Dengzhou. First was the location of Dengzhou at the center of maritime trade routes in East Asia; capturing Dengzhou would have been a major achievement for Parhae. Dengzhou was a locale where both Silla and Parhae envoys stayed, so it had a Silla office and a Parhae office. In particular, the people of Silla formed residential areas called “Silla pang [bang]” centered on the Silla offices. For Parhae, Dengzhou was more than just a place for a few of its merchants to trade. Thus when the Huksu ˇ Malgal sought to establish direct exchange with the Tang, they may very well have been trying to get around Parhae’s dominance of the Dengzhou trade. Conventional interpretations regard the Tang’s inciting of Silla to attack Parhae as reflective of Tang’s attempt to keep its northern and eastern neighbors divided. It might be more appropriate, however, to think that Silla’s attack on Parhae may have been an attempt to ensure its dominant position in the Dengzhou trade. According to the Daoliji written by Jia Dan, Dengzhou was the Tang terminus of the northern route that led to China from Silla’s Tangsoˇ ng (Dangseong) past the mouth of the Amnok River. Thus we need to consider whether the conventional interpretations, which minimize the attack on Dengzhou and stress confrontation between Silla and Parhae, may not be distorting the trading system of Northeast Asia at that time. Parhae’s attack against Dengzhou in 732 was an indication that Parhae was aware of the importance of Dengzhou as a trade center. This meant that King Mu was pursuing a policy of expansion by sea as well as by land. That Parhae could attack Dengzhou within 30-some years of its establishment suggests that Parhae had a surprising degree of

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

81

Figure 7.1: Trees growing on remains of South Wall of Ch’oˇ nghae Fortress

maritime prowess, with naval vessels that could cross the sea as well as merchant vessels that could carry out trade activities. The frequent military clashes Parhae had with its neighbors from the very beginning of the kingdom indicate that Parhae had substantial military strength. We get a sense of the extent to which the forces of Parhae armed themselves from the bows, arrows, swords, armor, shields and other artifacts unearthed from Parhae archaeological sites in recent years.

PARHAE AND SILLA DURING AND AFTER THE REIGN OF KING MUN Parhae’s third ruler, King Mun, took the throne in 737 and died in 793. During the nearly 60 years that he presided over the kingdom, he did much to enhance the level of Parhae’s cultural development. He has been assessed as a ruler who elevated Parhae’s position less through military action than through peaceful exchanges with neighboring

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

82

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

countries. In particular, he sought to establish friendly relations with the Tang from the beginning of his reign, importing various aspects of the Tang’s advanced culture while strengthening extant channels of exchange with such other neighbors as Japan and Silla. First, he sought to overcome the awkward relations with the Tang after the Dengzhou campaign, actively pursuing a policy of friendly relations. One result of those efforts was that he received an elevated honorary title from the Tang: instead of the former “King of Parhae Commandery,” he was given the title of “King of the State of Parhae.” Even though such so-called “letters of investiture” were unilateral gestures on the part of the Tang, this indicates that the Tang now formally recognized Parhae as a full-fledged kingdom, over 40 years after it was first established by King Ko. Parhae was now in a position to deal with Silla on an equal footing. Parhae’s development reached its apex during the reigns of the tenth ruler King Soˇ n (Tae Insu) and his successor, the eleventh ruler Tae Ijin, when it was praised as the “flourishing kingdom of the east.” King Soˇ n ascended to the throne in 818. During his reign the kingdom continued to develop, with the whole country being ruled through five capitals, 15 provinces, and 62 districts. The five capitals were the Northern Capital, the Central Capital, the Eastern Capital, the Southern Capital and the Western Capital. The 15 provinces were established throughout the entire kingdom, and each province administered several districts. The establishment of the Southern Capital reveals the most about Parhae’s relations with Silla. The Southern Capital was in what is now North Korea; most scholars believe that it was probably located at Ch’oˇ nghae (Cheonghae) fortress. The previously mentioned records about the Silla route and records concerning Silla’s dispatch of envoys to Parhae show that the Southern Capital was the center of exchange between Parhae and Silla. During the years that King Soˇ n occupied the throne, Parhae engaged in active trade with its neighbors and grew into a large empire controlling a vast territory. King Soˇ n’s reign title was “Rising Strong” (K. Koˇ nhung; ˇ Ch. Jianxing), which revealed his ambition to attain a restoration of Parhae’s earlier glory. Exchanges with Japan were particularly active—to the extent that Japan requested that the exchange of envoys be limited to once every twelve years. The most impressive Parhae remains that were found in Russia’s Maritime Province is the fortress at Kraskino. The remains at Kraskino have been excavated by a joint South Korean and Russian team since the 1990s. According to the report published by the Northeast Asian History Foundation on the 2004 excavation of the Parhae remains at Kraskino, this fortress remained active as a political and trade center of Northeast Asia from the early years of Parhae until even after the demise of that kingdom, as revealed by radiocarbon dating of charcoal found in the remains of buildings there. This has allowed us to confirm that Kraskino was a center for the dispatch of envoys and merchants to Japan and Silla.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

83

Figure 7.2: Tile-Walled Remains of Kraskino Fortress

SILLA AND PARHAE, PARHAE AND SILLA Korea had only a brief moment of joy after the end of Japanese colonial rule in 1945 before it was divided between North Korea and South Korea in 1948. The Korean War (1950–53) not only brought much death and destruction, but it also produced lasting hostility between north and south that has served to perpetuate the division of the nation. In particular, the 1960s witnessed a further strengthening of the mutual antagonism between the two sides as each sought to strengthen and maintain its own system. Quite naturally, North Korea has emphasized a P’yoˇ ngyang-centered historical line of succession from Old Chosoˇ n to Koguryoˇ , Parhae, and Koryoˇ that seeks historical legitimacy in the northern area. On the other hand, the Republic of Korea in the south has sought to construct its own regime stability and prestige by stressing a southern-centered line of succession from Silla to Koryoˇ and Chosoˇ n as a model for eventual reunification. Thus while there are some commonalities in the way in which North Korean and South Korean historians view Parhae, we can also find some interesting differences in the ways the two sides look at Parhae. Koreans are accustomed to the concept that Silla and Parhae together formed a “Northern and Southern Kingdoms” period in Korean history—indeed it is accepted as natural and appropriate.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

84

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 7.3: Charcoal Unearthed from Tile-walled Remains at the Kraskino site

Nonetheless, this concept needs to be upgraded several levels if it is to serve as a useful tool for understanding Parhae. We have already seen how each country interprets Parhae’s historical nature according to its own nation-centered perspective. We also noted how we can no longer expect research on Parhae to be conducted following the Korean lead. Of course, the history of Parhae has been linked with questions of territorial nationalism in the twentieth century, but the more urgent issue is the concern that we have been negligent in establishing our own, more focused view of Parhae history. What that means is that we have not given Parhae a proper evaluation during the 1,000 years since that kingdom’s demise. We have the national responsibility to develop a response to China’s Northeast Project and its claims that Koguryoˇ and Parhae belong to Chinese history. Rather than trying to uncover something new, we need to reconsider extant arguments, determine which among them are useful, and then strengthen them. One of those arguments is precisely the “Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period.” One problem with this concept has been that northern and southern have simply been understood as geographic designations. Lately historians in China and Japan have contended that the “Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period” is inappropriate, while even some historians in Korea have concurred with that contention and have been arguing that Parhae should be considered less important in the history of Korea.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

ENDURING WINDOW BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

85

This is a consequence of the fact that we have not engaged in continuous efforts to develop the concept of the “Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period.” Whereas scholars of North Korea, whose capital is in the old northern center of P’yoˇ ngyang, present their regime as a successor to Parhae, some scholars in South Korea have emphasized the hostile opposition between Parhae and Silla to develop a Silla-centered view of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms. In effect, these scholars, both north and south, are taking a smattering of evidence about conflict between Parhae and Silla to read into the history of 1,000 years ago the kind of antagonistic division that now exists between North Korea and South Korea. Could Yu Tukkong, ˇ the eighteenth-century historian who drew our attention to Parhae, possibly have imagined the Northern and Southern Kingdoms as the kind of national division that we have today? Yu was seeking to bring Parhae back into the history of Korea. But now, 200 years later, we are not able to follow the viewpoint of Yu Tukkong. ˇ It is time for us to develop a new appreciation for Yu’s vision, to overcome the sharply antagonistic divisions between North Korean and South Korean views of history, and to come up with a reinterpretation of the concept of a “Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period.”

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

8

Parhae’s War with Tang China: Background and Significance Kim Jong-bok (Sungkyunkwan University)

‰

TWO PRESUPPOSITIONS FOR UNDERSTANDING PARHAE’S ATTACK ON DENGZHOU PARHAE’S ATTACK ON Dengzhou in 732 was a rare instance in Korean history in which a Korean state struck first. Generally this attack has been understood as a response by Parhae to a crisis that arose when the Huˇ ksu Malgal aligned themselves with the Tang out of concern about Parhae’s expansionism. But the Parhae of that time had received letters of investiture from the Tang and it was not an easy thing for Parhae, which was militarily far weaker than the Tang, to undertake such an attack. Furthermore, the Tang demanded that Silla participate in the war and in return granted recognition of Silla’s control of the territory south of the Taedong River. Since both the Huˇ ksu Malgal and Silla were involved, it is necessary to look at this attack on Dengzhou from the larger perspective of East Asian international relations. On one hand, right before Parhae launched its attack, it and the Tang were at odds over the issue of the punishment of Tae Munye, the younger brother of Parhae’s King Mu (r. 719–737). Tae Munye opposed King Mu’s plan to subjugate the Huˇ ksu Malgal and sought refuge in the Tang. If we keep in mind that Parhae had not yet fully established its system of rule at this time, we can suppose that the reasons why Tae Munye went into exile had to do not only with King Mu’s foreign policy but also with internal political issues. That is because throughout history many

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA

87

countries have sought to overcome internal problems through external wars.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS BETWEEN TANG AND PARHAE After the fall of Koguryoˇ , large numbers of Koguryoˇ refugees were forcibly relocated into the interior areas of the Tang. Some of them were living in Yingzhou (modern Chaoyang in Liaoning Province) together with Malgal who had been under Koguryoˇ control. Yingzhou was a center of Tang power in the northeast where significant numbers of Qidan were also residing. The Tang was using various ethnic groups as dependencies that were settled in groups but kept separated so they could not attain political unity. These groups were under the control of officials dispatched by the Tang. In the fifth month of 696, the Qidan, under the leadership of Li Jinzhong and Son Wanying, revolted against the harsh rule of the Tang. This was the outbreak of the so-called Li Jinzhong rebellion. Li and his forces quickly occupied Yingzhou and extended their forces as far as the Hebei region. The Tang, unable to put down Li’s rebellion on its own, turned to the Tujue for assistance. Although the rebellion largely came to an end with the death of Son Wanying in 697, it continued to reverberate throughout the region until 700. This meant the effective loss of control by the Tang over the peoples of the northeastern region. In the midst of this, Koguryoˇ and Malgal remnants living in the Yingzhou area gathered their forces under the leadership of Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) and moved to the Liaodong area. In 698 Tae Choyoˇ ng was able defeat Tang forces sent to subjugate him at Tianmen Pass. At the same time, the Tang’s Andong Protectorate General was downgraded to the Andong Protectorate with charge only over the Liaodong region. After the victory at Tianmen Pass, Tae Choyoˇ ng moved east and established a kingdom at Tongmosan, titling himself the king of the country of Chin. This tells us that Tae initially called his kingdom Chin. The establishment of relations between Chin and the Tang came in 713 when the Tang gave Tae Choyoˇ ng letters of investiture and the title “King of Parhae Commandery.” The Tang did not call Tae’s kingdom Chin; rather the Tang first referred to it as the Parhae Malgal (Bohai Mohe) before later shortening the name to Parhae. Of course, it was probably some time later before Tae Choyoˇ ng and his descendents started to use the name Parhae. Thus we should probably use the name Chin for Tae’s kingdom at least up until the time he died in 713, but this chapter will use Parhae throughout to avoid confusion. The Tang still desired to subjugate Parhae even after its defeat at Tianmen Pass, but was unable to do so because the Qidan had attached themselves to the Tujue, thereby cutting off the route

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

88

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

between the Tang and Parhae. Because the Tang refused to recognize Parhae, the new kingdom immediately opened relations with the Tujue who were in opposition to the Tang. Parhae also sent an envoy to Silla because at that time Silla still had not reestablished full relations with the Tang in the aftermath of the Silla-Tang war of 668–676. Silla bestowed a fifth grade honorary rank on Tae Choy oˇ ng. In this manner, Parhae was able to secure external security and unify the forces that had been dispersed after the fall of Koguryoˇ while expanding the territory under its control. The Tang, on the other hand, faced the urgent task of restoring control over the Yingzhou area after suppressing the Li Jinzhong rebellion. That the Tang dispatched Zhang Xingji to “console” Parhae meant the abandonment of its policy of subjugating Parhae and signified the effective opening of relations between the two countries. This change in the attitude of the Tang is understood to have come about from the Tang’s desire to use the rapidly growing Parhae to counter the power of the Qidan. No longer faced with a threat from the Tang, Tae Choyoˇ ng sent his son to the Tang as a hostage. All that was now left for the two countries to open official relations was the formality of receiving letters of investiture from the Tang. However, because the Tujue and the Qidan continued to attack the Tang’s border regions, the formal opening of relations was delayed. The Tang was finally able to establish relations with Parhae in 713, but only after first making peace with the Tujue. But the Tang had launched attacks against the Qidan and the Hai the previous year only to meet defeat and suffer counterattacks. That suggests that the Tang felt an even greater need of Parhae in order to drive back the Qidan and recover Yingzhou. On the other hand, Parhae had already dispatched an envoy to the Tang in 711. That was because Parhae needed to be proactive in a situation of changing international relations.

ˇ KSU MALGAL TIES BETWEEN THE TANG AND THE HU The external security Parhae attained after establishing relations with the Tang enabled it to pursue the expansion of its borders, primarily into areas that had once been part of Koguryoˇ . Operating from his center at Tongmosan, Tae Choyoˇ ng incorporated much of Koguryoˇ ’s old lands (the region of the Amnok and Hun rivers) into his new kingdom except for the Liaodong region under the control of Tang’s Andong Protectorate General and the region around P’yoˇ ngyang that had become a kind of military buffer zone after the end of the Silla-Tang war. Tae Choyoˇ ng was succeeded on the throne by Tae Muye, whose posthumous name of King Mu (the martial king) reflects the way in which he aggressively expanded Parhae’s territory.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA

89

The way in which Silla began to take a more positive approach to its relations with the Tang after the ascension of King Soˇ ngdoˇ k (Seongdeok) in 712 was related, at least in part, to its concerns over Parhae’s activities. In 721, Silla mobilized 2,000 men in Hasulla ˇ to build a long wall across its northern border. This wall is believed to have been in modern-day Yoˇ nghung ˇ County of South Hamgyoˇ ng Province and thus to have been constructed as a countermeasure to Parhae’s territorial expansion. Parhae pushed to the north and brought the Huksu ˇ Malgal under its sway. There were several Malgal groups to the north of Parhae, including the Puryoˇ l, the Woˇ rhui, ˇ the Ch’oˇ lli, and the Huksu. ˇ The natural environment of Parhae and the Malgal tribes was one of abundant forests but insufficient agricultural land. Thus the inhabitants there made their livelihoods partly by farming and partly by hunting, while having to rely on contact with outside peoples to get some necessities. That was one major reason why Parhae and the Malgal actively sought to establish relations with the Tang. However, the Malgal tribes had to pass through Parhae to get to the Tang and there were many occasions when they were accompanied by Parhae envoys. This situation enabled Parhae to exert considerable influence over the Malgal. Whereas the Puryoˇ l, Woˇ rhui, ˇ and Ch’oˇ lli made contact with the Tang in 714, the Huksu ˇ first made contact with the Tang in 722. Unlike the other Malgal tribes who were dispersed after the fall of Koguryoˇ , the Huksu ˇ Malgal, who lived in the lower Songhua River basin, were able to maintain themselves as an autonomous entity. Thus the Huksu ˇ were brought under Parhae’s influence later than the other Malgal tribes. In 725 the head of Tang’s Andong Protectorate recommended that the Tang make a dependency of the Huksu ˇ and dispatch a Tang official there. This recommendation was acted on in 726. This was not simply a one-sided move on the part of the Tang; rather it was done with the cooperation of the Huksu ˇ Malgal who were rebelling against Parhae’s extension of its power. But why did the Tang decide to focus on the Huksu ˇ Malgal at this time? In the early eighth century, the Tang was locked in confrontation with the Tujue to the north and was engaged in fierce fighting in the northeast with the Qidan who were subordinated to the Tujue. By entering into relations with Parhae, the Tang hoped to stabilize the Liaodong area and to contain the Qidan who would then be sandwiched between the Tang and Parhae. However, after the Tujue began to weaken during the reign of Mocho Khan (691–716), the Qidan surrendered to the Tang in 716, thus enabling the Tang to recover Yingzhou. But when the Tujue began to overcome internal divisions and recover their strength under Bilge Khan (r. 716–733), the Qidan once again subordinated themselves to the Tujue. In the ninth month of 720, the Tang sent an envoy to Parhae suggesting a campaign against the Qidan but Parhae did not respond. This was because although Parhae had established relations with the Tang, it also

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

90

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

still had relations with the Tujue. The autonomous attitude of Parhae can be seen in the fact that King Mu gave the posthumous title of King Ko (r. 698–719) to Tae Choyong ˇ and also established his own reign title even after receiving letters of investiture from the Tang. From the point of view of the Tang, Parhae had failed to live up to its obligations as an external subject of the empire and thus needed to be contained. The fact that the Andong governor who suggested making a dependency of the Huksu ˇ Malgal was the same general who was captured during a campaign against the Qidan in 720 makes this seem even more probable.

DIVISIONS AMONG THE PARHAE LEADERSHIP OVER ˇ KSU MALGAL SUBJUGATION OF THE HU Before contacting the Tang, the Huˇ ksu Malgal first got in touch with the Tujue, asking them for a todun. A todun was a post given by the Tujue to people who had subordinated themselves. In this process, the Huˇ ksu had first notified Parhae and were accompanied by a Parhae envoy on their trip to the Tujue. In other words, Parhae exercised the same influence over the Huˇ ksu as it did over other Malgal tribes when they contacted the Tang. Even so, the Huˇ ksu Malgal eventually made independent contact with the Tang because the Tujue failed to provide protection against Parhae’s expansion. Because Parhae had been excluded from the process of the establishment of contact between the Huˇ ksu and the Tang, King Mu was concerned that his kingdom would be caught in a two front war with the Huˇ ksu and the Tang. Furthermore, the Tang’s establishment of contact with the Huˇ ksu implied the extension of Tang influence over the other Malgal tribes under Parhae’s control. This was a grave threat to Parhae which had developed by subjugating the neighboring Malgal tribes. Thus King Mu felt the urgent need to bring the Huˇ ksu Malgal under his control. However, not all the ruling class in Parhae agreed with King Mu because they felt that a conquest of the Huˇ ksu would inevitably bring war with the Tang. Among those worried about war with the Tang was King Mu’s younger brother Tae Munye. He argued that if such a powerful kingdom as Kogury oˇ had been unable to withstand the Tang, then the much weaker Parhae would certainly not be able to do any better. Tae Munye had earlier spent some time in the Tang as a member of the imperial guard, giving him a good idea of the power of that Chinese dynasty. Thus he was anxious to avoid bringing about a war with the Tang and was opposed to attacking the Huˇ ksu Malgal. If we assume that this was not simply a difference of opinion between King Mu and his younger brother, then we can also surmise that the Parhae ruling class was probably divided between hardliners

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA

91

and moderates headed respectively by King Mu and Tae Munye. The reason why King Mu chose a hard line toward the Tang was because the Tang was still in confrontation with the Tujue while Parhae had maintained its relations with the Tujue and the Qidan even after opening relations with the Tang.

TAE MUNYE’S EXILE AND THE DIPLOMATIC WAR BETWEEN TANG AND PARHAE The split among Parhae’s leadership over foreign policy seems to have been resolved when King Mu launched his campaign against the Huksu ˇ in 726, appointing Tae Munye as the commander of the campaign. When Tae Munye reached the border, however, he sent the king a memorial asking him to reconsider the campaign against the Huksu. ˇ Incensed at having the commander in the field raising arguments against the campaign, King Mu dispatched his cousin Tae Irha (Dae Ilha) to command his forces and recalled Tae Munye. Aware that the recall meant he would be punished, Tae Munye immediately fled to the Tang. Tae Irha subjugated the Huksu, ˇ with the result that not only the Huksu ˇ but all other Malgal tribes as well also ceased contacts with the Tang. As his forces were conquering the Huksu, ˇ King Mu also demanded the return of Tae Munye from the Tang. Of course, the Tang, pleased with the split among Parhae’s leaders, refused King Mu’s demand. In order to deflect King Mu’s demand for the return and the punishment of Tae Munye, the Tang falsely reported to Parhae that Tae Munye had been sent into internal exile inside the Tang. However, the Tang’s duplicity soon came to light and King Mu protested once again to the Tang. The Tang then punished the official responsible for leaking the secret and sent Tae Munye into internal exile. Thus the Tang was put on the defensive by Parhae’s insistent demands. The attitude of the Tang changed in a diplomatic message sent in the seventh month of 732. The Tang argued for a cessation of the demands for the punishment of Tae Munye on the grounds that brotherly affection would not allow it and suggested that it would take military action if Parhae continued to make such unreasonable demands. What enabled the Tang to adopt such a hard line? Here we need to focus on two events that happened in 728. One was the Tang’s establishment of ties with the Huksu ˇ Malgal; the other was the death of King Mu’s son Tae Torihaeng (Dae Dorihaeng) while he was serving in the imperial guard. As soon as the Huksu ˇ Malgal sent an envoy in the first month of 728, the Tang bestowed the Chinese style name of Li Xiancheng along with the titles of general and commissioner upon the Huksu ˇ chief and placed the Huksu ˇ under the administrative control of the governor of Youzhou. The way in which the Tang linked up with the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

92

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Huksu ˇ just two years after Parhae had subjugated that Malgal tribe left Parhae facing a serious external crisis. On the other hand, Tae Torihaeng, who had been given the title of the King of Kyeru Commandery by the Tang and was in line to succeed to the Parhae throne, died in the fourth month of 728. The sudden death of a crown prince usually suggests the potential for conflict over succession to the throne. That requires us to consider that the confrontation between King Mu and Tae Munye may have been over internal issues as well as over external policy. This confrontation arose at a time when Parhae had been in existence for only 30 years. King Mu himself had been among those who founded the new kingdom, which suggests that his royal authority was probably not that secure. It seems likely that, in a situation where the principle of father to son succession to the throne had not yet been established, Tae Munye, who had also participated in the founding of the kingdom, was in a position to stake his own claim.

Figure 8.1: Map Showing Dengzhou (red dot on Shandong Peninsula) and Doushan (red triangle north of Dengzhou across the Gulf of Bohai)

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA

93

If so, then it is likely that the stress that had been building between King Mu and Tae Munye exploded into the open once the two of them adopted different positions towards foreign policy. Tae Munye’s decision of 726 to seek exile in the Tang may have been the result of losing out in the struggle for power. After the death of King Mu’s son Tae Torihaeng in the Tang in 728, Tae Munye may have had the right to succeed to the throne. Furthermore, Tae Munye was enjoying the support of the Tang. The Tang’s threat to use force against Parhae may have been a threat to replace King Mu with Tae Munye. In such a situation, King Mu had no choice but to strongly demand for punishment of Tae Munye in order to prevent division among the Parhae ruling class and secure his authority as king.

PARHAE’S ATTACK ON DENGZHOU The establishment of ties between the Tang and the Huksu ˇ Malgal created an external crisis for Parhae that intensified the internal discord within Parhae’s ruling circles over the issue of succession. King Mu overcame these internal and external difficulties by launching an attack on Dengzhou. Dengzhou (modern-day Penglai in Shandong) had served as the base for the Han dynasty to stage its campaign against Old Chosoˇ n and for the Sui and the Tang to attack Koguryoˇ . Also the Tang had used Dengzhou as a base for a naval campaign against Liaodong at the time of Lin Jinzhong’s rebellion in 697. Since the Tang and Parhae did not share a border in the early 730s, Dengzhou was the logical choice for Parhae to make a preemptive strike in the face of the growing military threat from the Tang. In the ninth month of 732, the Parhae naval forces led by Chang Munhyu crossed the sea to make a surprise attack on Dengzhou during which they succeeded in killing the Dengzhou intendent. Having been on the receiving end of an unexpected assault, the Tang eventually sent forth forces to subjugate Parhae in the following year of 733. In the first month of 733, the Tang had Tae Munye raise forces in Youzhou (modern-day Beijing) for an attack against Parhae while bringing Silla into the conflict in order to attack Parhae from two sides. But Silla lost over half its force due to the bitterly cold winter weather and the rugged terrain and suffered a miserable defeat. Since there are no records detailing Tae Munye’s attack, we can assume that his venture also failed. Tae Munye’s acceptance of field command over the Tang forces sent to subjugate Parhae constituted an even bigger betrayal than his exile to the Tang. Thus King Mu attempted to eliminate Tae Munye by using assassins in China. After the attempted assassination failed, Parhae launched another attack against the Tang at Madoushan (near modern-day Qinhuangdao in Hebei). Parhae’s hardline policy toward the Tang was formed in the circumstances of confrontation between the Tang and the Tujue/Qidan. As the result of internal

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

94

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

political conflict, the Qidan, along with the Hai, had submitted themselves to the Tujue and had begun their own attacks against the Tang in 730. In particular, the Qidan attacked Tang forces at a place

Figure 8.2: View of Doushan

Figure 8.3: Artistic Recreation of the Attack on Dengzhou

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S WAR WITH TANG CHINA

95

known as Doushan, which is believed to have been the same locale as Madoushan. This indicates that Parhae’s attack at Madoushan was probably carried out in concert with the Qidan. In fact, the report written by the Tang forces after they attained victory in the field over the Qidan in the fourth month of 734 stated that the Qidan had been in league with the Tujue and Parhae. Also, in the ninth month of that year, the Tang relocated its forces to the river mouth at Dengzhou in anticipation of another attack from Parhae.

AFTER THE WAR In the wake of Parhae’s attack on Dengzhou, contact between the Huksu ˇ Malgal and the Tang was cut off until 741. On the domestic front, King Mu strove to eliminate the moderate group that had been led by Tae Munye and to strengthen his power as king. The fact that Tae Munye had led Tang forces against Parhae must have provided King Mu with a good excuse to purge those forces that had supported Tae Munye and thereby to strengthen the authority of the throne. The Tujue who had supported Parhae began to weaken in 734, leading to the Qidan and the Hai submitting themselves to the Tang. Furthermore, Silla also attempted another attack on Parhae at this time. In the face of such unfavorable developments in the international situation, Parhae was no longer in a position to sustain a hard line policy toward the Tang. The detente between Parhae and the Tang can be seen in a number of developments. When in 736 the Tujue sent an envoy to Parhae seeking assistance in a plan to subjugate the Qidan and the Hai, Parhae detained the Tujue envoy and reported the situation to the Tang. Also, Parhae repatriated Tang prisoners of war and the Tang returned a Parhae envoy that it had detained. On the other hand, it was widely known that Silla had received recognition of its control over the lands south of the Taedong River from the Tang in return for its participation in the war against Parhae. Although relations between Parhae and Silla had been friendly at the time that Parhae was first established, Silla, in response to its northern neighbor’s expansionist policy, later built a defensive wall along its northern border. Parhae’s dispatch of an envoy to Japan in 727 probably was motivated in part by a desire to contain Silla. Thus the latent hostility between the two kingdoms came to the surface when Silla attacked Parhae and Silla gradually began to think of Parhae as an alien entity. Behind this lay a clash between Silla’s view that it had unified the Three Han and Parhae’s view of itself as the successor to Koguryoˇ . Although Silla boasted that it had unified the Three Kingdoms after its victory in the Silla-Tang war, in fact Silla was unable to establish control over most of Koguryoˇ ’s old territory and had taken in only a portion of the Koguryoˇ refugees. Thus the rise of Parhae as a kingdom that portrayed itself as the successor to Koguryoˇ revealed the emptiness of Silla’s claim to have unified the Three Kingdoms. In the end,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

96

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Silla was able to maintain its claim as unifier by treating Parhae as a country of backwards Malgal. Such thinking was, of course, limited to Silla’s True Bone ruling class. Despite subsequent exchanges between Silla and Parhae, the rejectionist view of the True Bone elites toward Parhae continued into the medieval period after Parhae had fallen and the history of the Korean people was confined to the Korean Peninsula. This is one of the main reasons why it was not until the end of the medieval period that a new awareness of Parhae could arise in Korea as seen, for example, in Yu Tukkong’s ˇ view of Parhae and Silla as constituting the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Korea.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

9

Exchanges between Parhae and Japan Ku Nan Hee (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

ENVOYS WHO CROSSED THE OCEAN the afternoon on December 31, 1997, a wooden raft fifteen meters long and five meters wide set sail from Vladivostok headed for Japan (Figure 9.1). Although it reached the coastal seas of Japan on January 23 of 1998, it ran into foul weather and the men who crewed the raft died without being able to reach their goal. On January 19, 2005, another wooden raft set forth for Japan from Posyet in Russia’s Maritime Province. However, on January 20, when the raft began to drift in the East Sea and once it began to break up in heavy seas, the crew abandoned their attempt to reach Japan and put into the Port of Tonghae in Kangwoˇ n Province.

AT TWO IN

Figure 9.1: Example of replica wooden raft – 1997.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

98

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Why did these men persist in the attempt to cross the East Sea by raft from the Maritime Province to Japan in the face of such great difficulties? We can get a sense of their motives from the names they gave to their rafts. The 1997 raft was called “Parhae 1300” while the 2005 raft was named “Parhae 2005.” It should be obvious that these men were trying to recreate the spirit of the Parhae envoys who traveled back and forth across the East Sea to Japan 1,300 years ago. Parhae sent 34 official missions to Japan, while Japan dispatched 13 to Parhae. As we can surmise from the experiences of the above noted rafts, it was not easy for these envoys to cross the ocean. The records of those missions are replete with shipwrecks and incidents of drifting. Considering the difficulties of the voyage and the fact that Parhae’s history was a relatively brief 229 years, we can say that the total of 47 missions between the two countries represented a history of very active exchange. Indeed, there are many tales about the major events that changed the circumstances behind the exchanges between the two countries. Nonetheless, most people know very little about the history of exchanges between Parhae and Japan. Parhae did not leave behind its own histories and the only records we have are those in Japanese sources. To make matters worse, early modern Japanese scholarship on this issue emphasized that “Parhae was a weak kingdom that was forced to have contact with Japan despite the difficulties in crossing the sea in order to overcome its domestic and external difficulties,” with the result that scholars chose to pay little attention to the exchanges between Parhae and Japan. However, there has to have been interactions on both sides for this kind of sustained exchange to have developed. Furthermore, because the needs of each side changed from time to time as internal and external situations developed, it is impossible to understand this history from one fact or from one side’s point of view. Let us now examine, one by one, the traces of evidence that will allow us to understand the realities of the exchanges between Parhae and Japan.

SOME MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT THE EARLY EXCHANGES Relations between Parhae and Japan began with the 727 dispatch of the Parhae envoy Ko Inui ˇ to Japan. Political and military considerations were of greatest importance at that time. That was because of a chain of important political developments, including the unification of the Three Kingdoms by Silla, the founding of Parhae, and the subsequent confrontation between Parhae and the Tang. However, there has been a tendency to over-exaggerate confrontation and tension in the international situation as it related to contact between Parhae and Japan. This has been a stumbling block to understanding the history of Parhae-Japan relations as well as to understanding the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN

99

Figure 9.2: Main Routes between Parhae and Japan. Parhae is on the bottom and Japan on the top. The dot on the bottom left is Kraskino and the bottom right is Parhae’s Southern Capital; the dot on the top left is Fukura and the top right is Dazaifu.

Figure 9.3: Posyeta Bay (Parhae envoys sailed to Japan from here in the winter, taking advantage of seasonal northwest winds

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

100

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

history of Parhae itself. As mentioned earlier, historians in Japan have contended that Parhae was diplomatically isolated and thus put its main efforts into developing a close relationship with Japan in order to overcome that isolation, thereby diminishing the position of Parhae in Northeast Asia. Those historians typically rely on the socalled “plan to attack Silla” to buttress their arguments. Thus how one understands the “plan to attack Silla” and the way one sees the early contacts form an important starting point for understanding the history of relations between Parhae and Japan. The “plan to attack Silla” was given that name by Japanese scholars looking at military movements recorded in the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, continued, from 697–791). That is, they argued that Parhae and Japan entered into an alliance for the purpose of attacking Silla and that Parhae had taken the initiative to form such a close relationship with Japan in order to escape from its position of inferiority in the standoff with Tang and Silla. At one time, Korean historians, reacting against the Japanese interpretation, contended that Parhae in fact was striving to become the hegemonic power in Northeast Asia and thus made a detailed plan to attack Silla that included persuading Japan to cooperate in its venture. This argument is based on the fact that Parhae envoys made frequent trips to Japan between 759 and 763. The contention is that Parhae initially approached Japan with the plan to attack Silla and that the subsequent missions were sent to work out the details. If we look more closely, however, we see that the Parhae missions of that time all came at the request of Japan. Yang Suˇ nggy oˇ ng went to Japan with Onoda Mori, Ko Namsin with Uchikura Tsunejen, and Wang Sinbok with Komano Oyama. Furthermore, the Parhae envoys were extremely well treated while in Japan and were accompanied by Japanese on their way back to Parhae. Japan was primary initiator of the conduct of exchange with Parhae at that time, a fact that tells us that Japan must have had some urgent need for contact with Parhae. What, then, were the domestic circumstances behind Japan’s attitude toward Parhae? Those circumstances lay in Fujiwara Nakamaro’s (706–764) need to overcome a crisis besetting him during his tenure as chief minister. Nakamoro attempted to legitimize his rule by hosting the visits of foreign emissaries. A detailed explanation of this would require consideration of ancient Japan’s system of staffing the bureaucracy with imperial relatives, but this brief introduction of the situation should suffice for the purposes of this chapter. On the other hand, Parhae was willing to provide Japan with various kinds of information in the hope of making Japan a reliable background force for itself. This included helping Japan establish contact with the Tang and enabling Japan’s envoys (the kento-shi) to get safely to the Tang, but the biggest item for Japan at that time was information on the rebellion of An Lushan (755–753)

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN

101

which had such great influence on conditions on the continent. The information Parhae provided to Japan at that time was of two types. One was that the rebels were very strong; the other was that when the rebels came to Parhae for assistance, Parhae skillfully deflected their requests. Parhae’s intention was to bind Japan more closely to itself by giving Japan a sense of crisis regarding the situation on the continent and by depicting itself as fully capable of handling the crisis. Japan, which had already suffered a defeat at the hands of combined Tang and Silla forces at Paekch’ oˇ n’gang in the seventh century, was much concerned about the effects the unstable situation on the continent might have on itself. When he received reports of the rebellion, Fujiwara Nakamoro described An Lushan as a cunning mad dog and fomented a sense of crisis that the situation might reach all the way to Japan. Also, in order to accelerate the internal process of reorganizing the Japanese military, Nakamoro made an attack on Silla a top priority. At the same time, he also sought Parhae’s help in transporting to the Tang cattle bones needed to make armaments. As Parhae had anticipated, the Japanese court reacted eagerly to the information it provided and decided that its relations with Parhae were of utmost importance. On the other hand, Parhae, which had succeeded in conveying to Japan a sense of crisis about the situation on the continent and a belief in Parhae’s ability to handle the situation, also went on to implant among the Japanese a heightened sense of its position in Northeast Asia. This was precisely the period when Parhae referred to itself as “Koryoˇ ” in its dealings with Japan. Parhae made it clear that it occupied the old lands of Koguryoˇ and that it was the successor to that old kingdom, thereby displaying for Japan its external autonomy and its confidence in its power. The way in which relations between the two countries were formed provided a foundation for Parhae to pursue a stable foreign policy strategy. Thus the so-called “plan to attack Silla” was nothing more than a scenario dreamed up by Japan in order to stabilize its government after receiving information about the crisis on the continent. By accurately grasping the situation in Japan and providing appropriate information about the situation on the continent, Parhae was able to make Japan anxious to maintain relations and thus to obtain for itself favorable conditions for the conduct of early exchanges. There is another interesting item among the records of those early relations. When a mission led by Yi Chinmong (Yi Jinmong) visited Japan in 740, the Japanese court had them sit in on the morning court session of the first day of the new year. The record says that the Parhae envoy stood next to a language student from Silla. It seems unlikely that someone sent to Japan to learn the Japanese language would be accorded the honor of standing next to a diplomatic envoy at court. It seems more probable that the Silla language student

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

102

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

was there to interpret for the Parhae envoy. If so, we can infer that the people of Parhae and the people of Silla spoke the same language. Now that Chinese scholars are repeatedly contending that Parhae was nothing more than a border regime of the Tang empire, this record indicating that Parhae and Silla used the same language can be seen as providing further evidence that Parhae belongs to Korean history.

CONFLICTS LARGE AND SMALL RESOLVED PARHAE’S WAY Parhae, which developed its relations with Japan on the basis of the favorable conditions formed at the outset, subsequently continued to proclaim its solid international stature while guiding the relations. This caused periodic conflicts with Japan. Although Parhae occasionally accepted Japan’s demands, for the most part it was able to resolve those conflicts in accord with its own interests. A mission of 771 led by Il Manbok was not only huge, with 325 members, but Parhae’s diplomatic document to Japan emphasized that Parhae was the “grandson of Heaven” and described the relationship between Parhae and Japan as being like that of father-inlaw and son-in-law, thus provoking discord from the Japanese. The situation was resolved for the moment when Il Manbok temporized that he was unaware of the contents of the document. However, the diplomatic document carried by O Subul on the next mission to Japan described the two countries as being like elder and younger brother, once again creating a problem. Japan did not go along smoothly as Parhae had anticipated, but at the very least those documents transmitted to Japan Parhae’s image of itself as occupying a solid position in the international order. There were no subsequent incidents in which diplomatic documents caused discord but that does not necessarily mean than Parhae lowered its diplomatic stature in response to Japan’s demands. That is because although such minor tensions arose one after another, they were all resolved on Parhae’s terms. Another source of discord between Parhae and Japan was the question of the point of arrival for Parhae’s envoys. From the time of O Subul’s mission, Japan demanded that Parhae come not by the northern route but come by Chukushi instead. The only time Parhae complied with that demand was on the mission led by Sa Tomong in 777. After that, Parhae continued to use the northern route and went directly to the Heian capital. There were a few occasions when Parhae’s envoys were denied entrance to the capital but those were just momentary delays. In reality the Japanese court acceded to Parhae’s use of the northern route and established a Parhae house in the Noto Peninsula area. According to recent archaeological findings, cattle and horse remains of the type used in Japan to ward off diseases brought by foreigners have been unearthed at the Noto site,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN

103

Figure 9.4: The site of Baliencheng (Parhae’s Eastern Capital) as seen from the western wall.

Figure 9.5: Marker at Baliencheng explaining that Baliencheng had been the Parhae capital and that it was a key location for communication between Tang and Japan.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

104

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

suggesting that Parhae envoys may have made regular use of the Parhae house at that location. In addition, there was strife over the question of limiting the number of visits by Parhae envoys. Japan sent an envoy to Parhae suggesting that missions be limited to once every twelve years, leading to a series of several negotiations between the two countries. In the end, the Japanese decided not to limit visits by Parhae envoys. Japan presented its own proposals regarding its relations with Parhae, but eventually those issues were all resolved in Parhae’s favor. In other words, Japan was not in a position to weaken its relationship with Parhae and risk cutting of exchanges with the kingdom. That can be seen as telling us that its relations with Parhae brought significant benefits to Japan. What, then, were the benefits Japan derived from Parhae? Major excavations are under way in preparation for registering Baliencheng as a world heritage site, but access is prohibited.

THE POPULARITY OF PARHAE FURS IN JAPAN Japan’s greatest interest in its exchanges with Parhae was focused on the valuable goods brought by the Parhae missions. This was a source of much profit to Parhae. In particular, Parhae furs enjoyed sensational popularity among the Japanese aristocracy. The goods taken to Japan by the first Parhae envoy, Ko Ched oˇ k, included 300 sable pelts. From that time on, every Parhae mission to Japan included furs as an important category among its trade items. The furs included sable, bear, and tiger. In the beginning, the furs were taken as ceremonial gifts. Over time, however, Parhae furs became widely known in Japanese society, spurring incredible demand for them among aristocrats. Although there is no one record that specifies the extent of that demand, there are a number of records that hint at how large it was. The Yengishiki (a tenth century ritual manual) specified that sable fur could be worn only by persons of the senior fourth grade or higher who held office in the Taishokan. That indicates that the use of sable was restricted only to the highest levels of Japanese society. But if we think a little more deeply, we can realize that this kind of restriction means that the popularity of furs among the aristocrats was causing problems in Japanese society. Despite these restrictions applied at the court, the demand for furs as luxury items continued to grow among the aristocrats. There is the following interesting episode regarding furs. In the year 920 a reception was held for a Parhae envoy at Furakuen. It was the monsoon season so the weather was very warm and sticky. The envoy from Parhae, Pae Ku (Bae Gu), wore armor trimmed with fur in a manner befitting an envoy from a country that exported furs. But Pae Ku was thrown for a loss by the clothing worn by the Japanese

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN

105

prince Shigeakira. Shigeakira showed up for the reception dressed in eight of the most expensive black sable furs. It is difficult to imagine why anyone would wear eight furs in such muggy weather except to show off what he had purchased. This instance gives us some idea of the popularity of fur at that time. In return for those expensive commodities that were in such high demand, the Parhae emissaries must have taken away with them many goods of substantial value. It is not easy for us to gauge the value added profit of the furs, but we can get some idea from the items given to the Parhae envoys by the Japanese. The following table shows the goods received by several chief envoys from Parhae. Judging from this, we can imagine that huge amounts of commodities must have been taken back to Parhae by some of the larger delegations. Table 9.1 Gifts Given to Parhae Envoys Envoy/ Goods

Spun Silk

Yang Sunggy ˇ oˇ ng

40 bolts

Ko Namsoˇ n (Go Namseon)

Rough Silk

30 bolts

Silk Thread

Brown Silk

Colored Silk

200 balls

300 4 bolts bunches

Other

Special Items

White hemp 30 bolts

Raw silk 10,000 bunches

200 balls

White hemp 30 bolts

200 balls

White hemp 30 bolts

Il Manbok

30 bolts

Sa Tomong (Sa Domong)

70 bolts

70 bolts

200 balls

500 bunches

Gold 100 liang Silver 100 liang Gold lacquer 1 jar Canellia oil 1 jar Quartz prayer beads 4 chains

Yoˇ Choˇ ngnim (Yeo Jeongnim)

20 bolts

20 bolts

100 balls

200 bunches

Betel nut palm fans 4

Tae Changt’ae (Dae Jangtae)

30 bolts

30 bolts

200 balls

300 bunches

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

106

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

This situation prompted Fujiwara Otsugu to charge at the time of visits by Ko Choˇ ngt’ae (Go Jeongtae) in 823 and Ko Sungjo ˇ (Go Seungjo) in 826 that Parhae envoys were nothing but merchants and to argue for limiting their visits. But this kind of critical opinion was unable to overcome the Japanese aristocrats’ desire to buy goods from Parhae. Not long after Otsugu raised the issue of limiting the number of visits by Parhae missions, measures were promulgated allowing the direct purchase of goods from Parhae envoys. For example, there are records saying that “the Kurazukasa (a palace office responsible for goods and gifts given to the court) exchanged goods and valuables with visitors from Parhae,” “the people of the various markets are allowed to engage in individual transactions with envoys,” and “trade with Parhae envoys was authorized in the capital.” These entries appear in the Nihon sandai jitsuroku at around the time that Yang Soˇ nghyoˇ n led a mission in 872. They show that not only the court but also aristocrats were purchasing goods directly from Parhae envoys. It also seems reasonable to assume that the appearance of these records at that time constituted official recognition by the court of what had already become an everyday reality. We can easily imagine the eagerness of the Japanese aristocrats to acquire goods from Parhae. The records show that in addition to furs, the items brought by Parhae envoys to trade in Japan included various sea products, ginseng, honey and other things. We cannot overlook the likelihood that there were also many other items not included in the records. Recently many pottery shards have been unearthed in Parhae remains in the Maritime Province as well as in remains along Japan’s western coast. Some scholars have declared those shards to be of Parhae origins, so we can suppose that pottery may have also been among the goods taken from Parhae to Japan but we will need to wait for further archaeological data before we can be sure.

EXCHANGES WITH PARHAE AND THE BROADENING OF JAPANESE CULTURE Relations between the two countries were not limited to the simple pursuit of political and economic profit; through various kinds of culture interchange the people of the two countries attained friendship and rapport and also expanded their cultural horizons. Receptions were routinely given when Parhae envoys visited Japan. The receptions generally began with a music recital; on those occasions when Parhae missions included musicians, they played Parhae music for the Japanese audience. In 740, the mission led by Yi Chinmong played Parhae music amid much interest from the Japanese. At about the same time, a Japanese man named Uchio traveled to Parhae to learn music. There is no record of Uchio’s activities after his return to Japan but Parhae music subsequently was given a position in the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN

107

Japanese court as part of the local music section. Considering that three pieces of Parhae music were contained in the Jinji yoroku, a collection of musical annotations for the Japanese zither, we can assume that Parhae music had found a place for itself in the court music of Japan. In addition, there were performances by Japanese female dancers at the receptions. When Yang Sunggy ˇ oˇ ng returned to Parhae in 759, he took with him 11 female dancers (who were later sent on to the Tang) and in 883, Pae Choˇ ng was treated to a grand reception that included a performance by 148 female dancers. Japan appears to have given particular attention to receptions at that time. A record from the second month of 883 indicates that 107 Linyu musicians were ordered to practice at Daianji in preparation for a performance before the Parhae envoy, with their food being paid for by taxes collected by the Yamato court. The exchange of poetry in Chinese can be said to have been the apex of cultural interchange between the literati of the two countries. Literary giants such as Yang T’aesa (Yang Taesa), Wang Hyoryom ˇ (Wang Hyoryeom), and Pae Chong ˇ (Bae Jeong) went along on missions to Japan, where they interacted with such noted Japanese literary figures as Sugawa Michizane, Oe Asatsune, and Shimada Tadaomi. The poems exchanged among those men are contained in such early Japanese anthologies as the Kanke bunso, the Bunka shureishu, and the Koya zappitsushu and thus provide good materials for the study of Parhae literature. Shimada Tadaomi was so impressed with Pae Chong’s ˇ poetry that he exclaimed that Pae had “seven-step talent” (meaning that he would write a poem in the time it took to walk seven steps). There are also poems that exude trust and friendship between the two countries. For example, Wang Hyoryoˇ m, in response to the warm treatment he received, wrote, “The trees have bloomed beautifully in the spring. The blossoms appear to be laughing but I hear no sound. The owner cuts branches of flowers for me everyday; I wonder if he has any more flowers to give.” When Pae Choˇ ng was getting ready to leave in 895, Sugawara Michizane wrote a farewell poem for him that said, “You have given me poems like pearls; I give to you tears like pearls.” There are also stories of sad circumstances among the literati of that time. One such story is that of Wang Hyoryoˇ m and the Japanese monk Kukai. The two men had earlier become friends in the Tang, when Kukai was there as an envoy from Japan and Wang was there as a student. Later when Wang went to Japan as an envoy, he sent a letter and a poem to Kukai as soon as he landed. Kukai sent a response to Wang, but it reached the Japanese capital after Wang had already left. Having left the capital, Wang made an initial attempt at the return voyage but had to turn back. While he was preparing for his next attempt at Echizen, he came down with smallpox and died. We are told that when Kukai later heard the news, he was greatly saddened.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

108

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

One other item from Parhae that exerted great influence on Japanese culture was the Xuanming Calendar. This combined both the lunar and solar calendars and calculated the length of one year to be 365.2446 days. It was brought to Japan by the Parhae envoy O Hyosin in 859, some 37 years after Parhae had gotten it from the Tang. Parhae continued to use it for the next 71 years, but it continued to be used in Japan for 823 years, up until the Tokugawa adopted the Zhenxiang calendar in 1684.

VIEWPOINTS ON THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES Relations with Parhae were very important to Japan because Parhae provided indirect contact with the Tang and also facilitated the travel by Japanese envoys to the Tang. When Parhae envoys departed from Japan, the Japanese asked them to accompany Japanese students to the Tang, to make contact with Japanese students already there, to make sure that envoys to the Tang who had gone adrift were returned safely to Japan, and also to send Japanese envoys along on the return trip. In other words, Japan relied on Parhae to act as an important intermediary in its relations with the Tang. This was even more important after Japan discontinued sending envoys to the Tang in 894. On the other hand, Parhae sought to achieve effective control over local Malgal suryoˇ ng by including them in missions sent to Japan. Although there were occasional instances of friction between the two countries, relations between the two countries were mutually beneficial and thus continued for a long time. Here we can say that Parhae’s outstanding diplomatic skills formed a major contributing factor. Parhae carefully managed relations in a skillful manner that avoided irritating the Japanese while inducing them to follow a path advantageous to Parhae. Can we not say that the underlying foundation that enabled Parhae to deploy these skills in its diplomacy was the friendship and rapport that was built up through contacts between the two countries? It seems that we should be able to take lessons from Parhae’s diplomacy in our efforts to cope today with the rapidly changing world of globalization that now demands various types of exchanges and diplomatic skills.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

10

Parhae as an East Asian Maritime Power Yun Jae-Woon (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

RECENTLY A TELEVISION drama called “Haesin” (Sea God) became quite popular. This drama is based on the activities of Chang Pogo (Jang Bogo), the “King of the Seas” who based himself in what is now Wan Island (Wando) in South Choˇ lla (Jeolla) Province where he controlled the triangular trade among the Tang, Korea, and Japan. But very few people in Korea know of the maritime activities and trade conducted by Parhae at the same time, even though Parhae was the Northern Kingdom of Korea’s Northern and Southern Kingdoms period. Chang Pogo’s activities were largely confined to China’s Shandong Peninsula, Japan’s Kyushu Island, and the southwestern coast of Korea. In other words he was active in the Yellow Sea and the Southern Sea (the waters between Korea and Japan). Parhae, by contrast, was active not only in the Yellow Sea but also in the Bay of Bohai and even in the East Sea thus covering almost all the ocean waters of Northeast Asia, but there is almost no one who is aware of that fact. Why and how did Parhae develop such an active maritime role?

THE TANG’S ECONOMIC SYSTEM AND TRIBUTARY TRADE Before inquiring into Parhae’s maritime activities, we must first look into the trade situation of all of East Asia. Trade in East Asia was closely linked with the Tang’s economic system. That was because the Tang was the most advanced country and the largest importer of the time. The Silk Road that had linked East and West since the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

110

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

dawn of history reached its greatest glory in the later Tang era. This was based, more than anything else, on the economic prosperity of the Tang. To begin with, the Tang era saw an increase in agricultural productivity. More land was brought under cultivation through reclamation projects, irrigation works were expanded, and the introduction of new crops came together to enhance agricultural productivity. The resultant greater economic vitality in the villages led to the production of local special products and agricultural surpluses which provided the base for the development of commerce. The growth of commerce in turn brought a series of economic changes, including the growth of cities. These changes soon made it evident that the old land-based Silk Road was no longer able to meet the growing demand for products from the West. A revolutionary transformation known as the maritime Silk Road was developed in order to meet the demand. Growth in agricultural productivity began with improvements in farming implements. The use of animal traction and the appearance of smaller implements enabled deep plowing. This was accompanied by the development of irrigation facilities to greatly increase productivity. A more sophisticated system of crop rotation, along with improved fertilizers and planting methods made double cropping possible. Furthermore, there was diversification in crop types and the propagation of new varieties, especially rice, meant even greater production. Such growth in agricultural productivity necessarily brought social changes. One important aspect was the commodification of excess agricultural production. At the same time, the appearance of secondary occupations also gave greater vitality to the rural economy and led to the rise of commerce. There was also the investment of indirect social capital in facilities for the vitalization of the economy, including improvements in the system of postal stations and canals. A uniform currency was established with the minting of the Kaiyuan tongbao coin, and uniform standards of weights and measures were put in place. The land tax-local tribute-corvee tax system also incorporated the peasants into the distributive economy. Furthermore there was the rise of professional merchants as an important social group and wealthy merchants were even able to enter the bureaucracy. That marked a major change in Chinese society. The development of commerce was accompanied by urbanization. The old cities, which had been administrative and political centers where officials and landlords resided gradually transformed into centers of commercial activity. With the expansion of a distributive economy, regional cities became bases for the collection and distribution of agricultural products and for the diffusion of commodities from remote areas into surrounding farming villages. The growth of domestic productivity in China formed the backdrop for the expansion of international trade during the Tang era. Much of

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE AS AN EAST ASIAN MARITIME POWER

111

the international trade of this time, and particularly in the first half of the Tang, came in the form of tribute trade. Tribute trade was a kind of official trade in that imports and exports were controlled by the state. There were two major reasons why China engaged in tribute trade. One was the idea of Chinese superiority; the other was related to the effort to provide security for the Chinese state. China was a large empire that shared its long borders with various other ethnic groups so that Chinese states always had to concern themselves about their relations with these many neighboring peoples. The Chinese sought to use tributary relations to demonstrate to themselves and their supposedly barbarian neighbors the superiority of Chinese civilization and to induce their neighbors into maintaining peaceful relations by offering them certain benefits of Chinese material culture. The tribute system began in partial fashion during the Qin and Han dynasties, became a regular feature of Chinese institutions during the Northern and Southern dynasties era, and developed further during the Sui-Tang period. Formal foreign trade between China and its neighbors took place through the exchange of tribute from the rulers of foreign states and “gifts” from the Chinese emperors. Thus the sending of envoys with tribute was a kind of maritime trade and the maritime tribute ships can be considered as trading vessels. Once China’s neighbors became aware of the political and economic benefits they could gain from entering into tributary relations with China, they sought to send more frequent missions. Whereas early tributary trade was largely limited to China’s immediate neighbors, by the mid-Tang period it had expanded to include India and even as far as some parts of the Middle East. This kind of official trade between the Korean Peninsula and China began during the Korean Three Kingdoms era when Koguryoˇ , Paekche, and Silla began sending tribute missions. Chinese states regarded tributary exchanges as the proper form for trade with its neighbors and sought to prohibit private trading. Through tributary relations, the states neighboring China were able to gain access to China’s advanced culture and also to gain sanction of the positions of their kings and aristocrats who were able to monopolize the profits gained from tributary trade. At the same time, the Chinese were also able to meet demands for products from outside their borders. These were the factors that enabled the development of tributary trade. Despite the political and economic benefits Chinese and nonChinese elites derived from the official tribute trade, the growth of the agricultural economy and the resultant development of commerce gradually transformed the system of international trade. The growth in commerce that came about in the mid- and late Tang as a consequence of advances in agricultural technology led to growth in the rural economy, which in turn meant a greater demand for consumer goods. The inability of the official tribute trade system to meet those demands meant a decline in tribute trade and growth in private trade.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

112

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

FORMS AND TYPES OF TRADE The foreign trade of Korean’s Northern and Southern Kingdoms period can be divided into two forms, depending on who was doing the trading: official trade and private trade. Official trade can further be subdivided into that which occurred as part of the tribute and letters of investiture process and that which took place at state-sanctioned markets on the borders. The tribute trade has already been treated above, so here the focus will be on the state-sanctioned border markets where trading activities were conducted apart from formal tribute trade. Trade in those markets took place in locales designated by the Chinese emperor under the supervision of the Chinese officials in charge of administering those areas. Generally, items that were traded there included such goods as horses, cattle, and camels. One example we can find is the trade that took place between Parhae and the Ziqing military district of the Tang. This was known as the so-called “silk and horse trade” in which Parhae received silk and other fabrics from China in return for horses. In addition to officially sanctioned trade, there were the private trade activities of merchants, the incidental trade conducted on the side by members of official embassies, and the trading done by maritime forces. The incidental trade of embassy members developed as a natural byproduct of the tribute system; in other words, it can be seen as simply an expansion of tribute trade, as something that embassy members engaged in after they had completed their official duties. In this way, the growth in tribute trade was directly linked to growth in private trade. A second form of private trade was that carried out by local strongmen. One representative figure of this form was Chang Pogo. In the case of Parhae, we can cite the local suryoˇ ng as similar types. A third form was made up of private merchants. This group included Chang Ch’un (Jang Chun) of Silla who appears in the Samguk yusa (Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms, thirteenth c.) or, in the case of Parhae, the private trader Yi Kwanghyoˇ n, as well as the merchants who appear in the diary of Enin (a Japanese monk who visited China in the ninth century) or in Japan’s Rokkokushi (Six National Histories).

EXCHANGES BETWEEN PARHAE AND TANG Parhae was born in the midst of struggle with the Tang. Although it eventually established diplomatic relations with the Tang in 713 and subsequently with Japan in 727, it was difficult for Parhae to maintain constant contact with those countries. This is believed to have been true because of the conflict that arose in King Mu’s reign (719–737) between Parhae and Tang due to the Huksu ˇ Malgal issue and because King Mu’s primary interest in establishing relations with Japan came out of military strategic considerations. Thus it

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE AS AN EAST ASIAN MARITIME POWER

113

was difficult for Parhae to maintain steady trade relations with its neighbors at that time. As part of his effort to establish a system of civil governance, King Mun (r. 737–793) actively introduced Chinese culture and institutions. This was reflected in his frequent dispatch of envoys to the Tang. During his 57 years on the throne, he dispatched over 61 missions to the Tang, sometimes sending as many as four or five in one year. On the other hand, the efforts initiated by kings Ko and Mu to bring the Malgal under control reached culmination under King Mun with the subjugation of the Puryoˇ l, Ch’oˇ lli, and Woˇ rhui ˇ Malgal. Further subjugation of the Malgal was resumed under King Soˇ n (r. 818–830). The early subjugation of the Malgal that was completed in 740 did not, however, mean the dissolution of the Malgal tribes and the total incorporation of the Malgal people. Rather Parhae is believed to have employed a system of indirect rule through the Malgal suryoˇ ng. Thus, when Parhae’s control weakened during the years between 802 and 841, there were instances when the Malgal independently sent tribute to the Tang. We can say that Parhae brought in the Malgal while in a situation of confrontation with the Tang and pursuing its diplomatic initiatives with China and Japan. Parhae’s control over the Malgal included the establishment of the kingdom’s monopoly over their previously autonomous external trade activities. This is probably the reason why there are fewer records of local entities engaging in foreign trade activities for Parhae than for Silla. In other words, the local Malgal suryoˇ ng were brought under the Parhae kings by 740 and then were subsequently included along with Parhae officials on missions to the Tang or Japan. It is believed that the Silla route connecting Parhae with Silla was established sometime during the early reign of King Mun. However, when we consider that during this period Parhae was pushing to the south near Silla’s border and Silla was taking measures to defend against Parhae’s expansion, it seems likely that exchanges between the two kingdoms were probably not particularly active. Contact became more frequent after the mid-eighth century. Silla had earlier established the Yoˇ nghung ˇ Bay area as its northern border and in 675 established Kwan and Kwanch’oˇ l fortresses to manage and control exchanges. After Parhae advanced south into the northeastern Korean Peninsula in the early eighth century, Silla responded by building a long defensive wall in 721. Eventually, however, Silla built the T’anhang gate in the wall during the reign of King Kyoˇ ngdoˇ k (Gyeongdeok; r. 742–765) while Parhae itself established the Southern Capital on the Silla route in order to manage and control traffic. These developments made possible the management of trade between the two kingdoms. Now let us turn to the development of trade during the period from late in King Mun’s reign to the ascension of King Soˇ n. Parhae’s main capital was located in the Northern Capital and the Eastern Capital during the later years of King Mun. The rebellion of An Lushan (755–763) was an important development for Parhae’s trade in that

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

114

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

the rebellion brought the weakening of the Tang’s control over the provinces, which in turn led to the rise of provincial military districts. One item of particular interest was the rise of the old Koguryoˇ Yi (Ch. Li) family of Yi Choˇ nggi, Yi Nap, Yi Sago, and Yi Sado. They established control over the Shandong Peninsula, an area conveniently located for maritime trade with Silla. As a military district with extraterritorial powers, the Yi family ruled over Shandong as a small kingdom within the Tang for three generations spanning 55 years. As heads of the Pinglu Zhiqing military district, the Yis received the title of “Pinglu Zhiqing Governor, Overseer of Maritime Transport, and Pacifier of Parhae and Silla.” This is the kind of title the Tang gave out to border dependencies on whom it relied to control affairs with neighboring states. Simply put, it meant that the Pinglu Zhiqing military district was responsible for all affairs relating to Parhae and Silla. On the other hand, the fact that the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) biography of Li Zhengji (Yi Choˇ nggi) states that fine horses continued to come into the Pinglu Zhiqing military district indicates that the district had close relations with Parhae. It is noteworthy that horses were brought into a military district that was in confrontation with the Tang, especially considering that Parhae did not respond to Xu Guidao’s request for cavalry forces at the time of the An Lushan rebellion. Recently, some scholars have contended that the Sogdians played the main role in trading in Yi Choˇ nggi’s military district.

Figure 10.1: View of Dengzhou fortress in Shandong

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE AS AN EAST ASIAN MARITIME POWER

115

Parhae carried out continuous internal reforms to enhance its power and it also carried out effective diplomatic activities with the Tang and its military districts with the result that Parhae came to occupy a higher position than Silla in the international order of the time. This is thought to have been because the Tang, anxious to win over Parhae because of the kingdom’s close relations with the Pinglu Zhiqing military district, continuously gave honorary titles to Parhae’s kings. Thus during the years from 765 to 819 when the Yi family controlled the Pinglu Zhiqing military district in the Shandong Peninsula, Parhae was able to use its successes in diplomacy with the Tang and the military district to elevate itself over Silla in the spheres of politics and trade. This is revealed in the number of envoys sent from Parhae to the Tang and in the silk-horse trade of the Zhiqing military district. Parhae’s superiority over Silla in trade with China lasted at least until the end of the Zhiqing military district in 819 or perhaps as late as the establishment of Ch’oˇ nghae-jin (Cheonghae-jin)1 by Chang Pogo in 828.

CONTACT BETWEEN PARHAE AND JAPAN Records show frequent contact between Parhae and Japan, with 34 missions from Parhae to Japan and 13 from Japan to Parhae. Conventional interpretations have argued, based on the fact that military officials headed Parhae missions, that the early contacts between Parhae and Japan during the reign of King Mu and the first half of the reign of King Mun were primarily political and military in nature. However, the appointment of military officials as heads of these missions at a time when Parhae’s political and administrative institutions were still taking shape can be seen as a measure to ensure the kingdom’s trading, political, and cultural interests. During the period of internal conflict in Parhae from late in King Mun’s reign through the reign of King Kan (762–818), there appears to have been a major change in Parhae’s relations with Japan. There was a prolonged period of political turmoil from the time of the death of King Mun in 792 until the ascension of King Soˇ n in 818. None of the six kings who occupied the Parhae throne during those 25 years ruled for more than a few years. The combination of instability in Parhae and a passive attitude on the part of Japan meant that contact between the two states was not very active. Nonetheless, the 804 establishment of the Parhae house by Japan tells us that relations with Japan were maintained. The subsequent expansion of Parhae houses from the Noto Peninsula to such locales as Enzen, Kaga, Izumo, and Nagato as bases for Parhae’s diplomatic activity suggests that relations between the two countries were growing closer and that the foundations for that growth were laid down during the years of internal strife in Parhae.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

116

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 10.2: View of Fukura Port

Figure 10.3: Kraskino fortress site

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE AS AN EAST ASIAN MARITIME POWER

117

Figure 10.4: Kraskino fortress site

The reign of King Soˇ n, who carried out active institutional reforms and external conquests, constituted an age of revival, or even a golden age, for Parhae. A feature of this period as compared to earlier times is that the size of Parhae delegations and the ranks of the leading envoys became fixed as did the participation of the accompanying Malgal suryoˇ ng who had been subjugated by King Soˇ n. This was an indication of the clear economic nature of the missions of this time. We can see three forms of trade here. One was the official trade between the two courts conducted by the envoys; another was the private trade carried out by members of the missions at the Parhae houses; and the third was private trade carried out by local suryoˇ ng. Unlike the case of Silla, we do not see private merchants from Parhae engaged in foreign trade; instead the envoys themselves carried out private trade with Japan. Whereas the people of Silla conducted their trading activities with the region of northern Kyushu where commerce flourished from early times, Parhae conducted its trading activities most in the Heian capital so it was important for people from Parhae to have official status in order to enter the Japanese capital city.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PARHAE’S MARITIME ACTIVITIES It is believe that Parhae established its trading network during the first half of the reign of King Mun a period of active foreign trade that came on the heels of the improvement of relations with the Tang and the setting up of its political institutions, the setting up of an

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

118

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

internal trade system after subjugating the Malgal, and the opening of relations with Silla after setting up the Silla route. Parhae was able to attain a higher international political and trading position than Silla by adopting a neutral stance at the time of the An Lushan rebellion and by skillfully carrying out diplomatic relations with the Tang central regime and the Zhiqing military district led by Yi Choˇ nggi of Koguryoˇ descent. This is evidenced by the number of envoys sent to the Tang and the silk-horse trade at the Zhiqing military district. King Soˇ n, who overcame the period of internal conflict to take the throne in the early ninth century, laid down the foundations for the resurgence of Parhae though institutional reform and vigorous conquest activities. One result was the completion of the local administration system of five capitals, 15 provinces, and 62 districts. This inevitably brought about a diminishment of the political power of the local suryoˇ ng whom Parhae effectively controlled through participation in overseas trading activities. Among the ways Parhae did this was to allow the local suryoˇ ng to engage in the collection and transportation of trade goods. These policies enabled Parhae to maintain continuous and effective control over the Malgal. It appears that Tae Ijin, who followed King Soˇ n on the Parhae throne, attempted a major reshuffling of the people in charge of politics and diplomacy in 828 in order to counter Silla’s effort to dominate the maritime trade of Northeast Asia through its base at Ch’oˇ nghae-jin. We can see this in the large scale participation of the king’s brothers and sons in domestic politics and the leading roles they played in diplomacy at that time. Eventually Tae Ijin was able to take advantage of the weakening of Silla’s relations with Japan following the death of Chang Pogo to restore the triangular trade between Parhae, Japan, and the Tang and thus to maintain Parhae’s international political position as the “flourishing kingdom in the east,” a term that came into use in the Tang during the reigns of Tae Ijin (eleventh king, r. 831–857), Tae Koˇ nhwang (twelth king, r. 857–871), and Tae Hyoˇ nsoˇ k (thirteenth king, r. 871–894). The prosperity Parhae attained during this era was the foundation for its active trade with the Tang from then up until right before Parhae’s demise. This active trade of Parhae with China, together with the trade conducted by Silla’s government and merchants, left behind huge footprints in East Asia in the eighth and ninth centuries. We can also say that it had great historical significance in laying down the foundations for the later development of trade in the Liao and Jin dynasties.

NOTES 1

Ch’oˇ nghae-jin was the base on Wan Island from which Chang Pogo was able to dominate the triangle trade among Silla, Japan, and the Tang.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PART FOUR

ASPECTS OF THE CULTURE OF PARHAE PARHAE’S BURIAL CULTURE CLOTHING IN PARHAE PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

11

Parhae’s Burial Culture Yun Jae-Woon (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

Parhae’s tumulus tombs have been found in the kingdom’s original capital at what is now the city of Dunhua in China’s Jilin Province, as well as around the Northern Capital, Xigucheng (K. Soˇ gosoˇ ng) and Baliancheng. Also, tombs have been investigated in other areas away from the centers of power, including Tonghua of modern Jilin Province which was under the administration of the Western Capital, North Korea’s Hamgyoˇ ng Province which was under the Southern Capital, the Suifen River basin, and the Maritime Province of Russia. Nearly 2,000 tombs in 50 locales have been discovered in China, of which over 150 have been excavated. North Koreans began intensive investigations of Parhae tumulus tombs in the 1980s and as many as 2,000 tombs have been confirmed in over 20 locations, of which over 100 have been excavated. In Russia, fewer than 10 tombs in 2–3 locales have been discovered as scholars there have focused less on tombs than on fortress, residential, and monastery remains. One of the most important tumulus tomb complexes is that found at Liudingshan in Dunhua City, where over 80 tombs have been found and 32 have been excavated. Of particular note is the 1949 discovery of the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghye (Jeonghye), which confirmed that this was the locale where Parhae’s early royalty and aristocracy were buried. The tomb of Princess Choˇ nghye is of particular significance. It is among the second complex of tombs where the tomb chamber was built after first leveling a slight slope. It is a single coffin-room stonechambered tomb with earthen mound made up of a coffin room, a long corridor leading to the coffin room, and an approach. The coffin

LARGE NUMBERS OF

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

124

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 11.1: Construction of Princess Choˇ nghye’s Tomb

Figure 11.2: View of Liudingshan Tomb Complex

room is somewhat rectangular, with a length of 280–294 centimeters and a width of 260–284 centimeters. The height is 260 centimeters from the floor to the highest point in the ceiling. The walls were constructed of basalt and tend to curve inwards towards the top. The ceiling is a flat stone slab supported by upright stones. The walls originally had plaster but that has now fallen away. The floor is made of rectangular stones covered by charcoal and sand. The corridor leading to the coffin room is in the middle of the southern wall; it is 174 centimeters in length, 110 centimeters in width, and 140 centimeters high and has a flat ceiling made of a stone slab.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S BURIAL CULTURE

125

Figure 11.3: Entrance to Princess Choˇ nghye’s Tomb

Next is the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo (Jeonghyo), discovered in 1980 in the Lungtoushan tomb complex near Xigucheng. The 10 tombs here have also been shown to be those of Parhae royalty and aristocrats. The complex is located on Lungtou Mountain in the Korean Autonomous Prefecture (Helong Prefecture) of Jilin Province. Lungtou Mountain stretches from north to south and has a ridge stretching to the west from a slightly curved area near the middle of the mountain. The tomb complex is near the end of that ridge, facing south. The tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo lies on an axis of 170 degrees northwest and was built using bricks and rock slabs. The tomb is of a five-part style: an approach; a tomb entrance; a corridor leading to the coffin room; the coffin room; and a pagoda. The pagoda body, however, has already collapsed, leaving only the base. The tomb’s north-south length is 15 meters and its east-west width is seven meters. The tomb was damaged long ago. Relics from the tomb include the tombstone, a wall painting design sample, pottery shards, gilt bronze ornaments, and a bronze hat decoration. A total of 31 human bones, male and female, were also unearthed. Five of those bones were female and the remaining

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

126

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 11.4: Diagram of Princess Choˇ nghyo’s Tomb

Figure 11.5: Mural from the Eastern Wall of the Main Chamber of Chonghyo’s ˇ Tomb. Figures depicted in the mural include soldiers, servants and musicians.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S BURIAL CULTURE

127

26 were male. The female is estimated to have been 156 centimeters tall and the male 161 centimeters. The male’s teeth indicate that he was probably between 25 and 45 years old. Princess Choˇ nghyo died at age 36. Given the estimated age of the male and that the people of Parhae buried husbands and wives together, we can assume that the male bones were those of Choˇ nghyo’s spouse. In 1971, a husband and wife tomb was excavated at Henandungu fortress at Bajiazi in Helong Prefecture. Both of the coffin rooms were rectangular, with a length of 240 centimeters, a width of 140 centimeters, and a current depth of roughly 47 centimeters. The floors were covered with square bricks and the wall with rectangular bricks. The bricks were bluish in color. The square bricks were 35 centimeters on each side with a thickness of 5 centimeters, while the rectangular bricks were 34.5 centimeters long and 15.5 centimeters wide with a thickness of 4.5 centimeters. The ceiling is believed to have been made up of eight large stone slabs. The tomb was covered with earth and was rectangular in shape with a length of 28 meters and a width of 20 meters. Above the tomb were stones similar to foundation stones arrayed in a regular pattern, and some foundation stones were also found at the front of the tomb. There was a grave robber’s tunnel in the front face of the tomb, from which were recovered fragments of glazed wall, suggesting that the tomb had wall paintings. The tumulus tomb complex at Sanxingcun, Sanlingxiang in the area of the Northern Capital is worthy of note. The tomb complex is circumscribed by an earthen wall about 450 meters in length in the shape of the Chinese character for day (日). Three tombs are arranged in a triangular formation in the northern part. Of these, tomb number 1 was investigated during the era of Japanese colonial rule and tomb number 2 was excavated during 1991 and 1992. These are believed to have been mostly royal tombs. Tomb number 1 was built partially underground, facing south, and had an approach, a corridor, and a main chamber. The corridor, which enters into the chamber through the south wall, is four meters long. The long main chamber is made of north-south rectangular basalt stones, carefully worked and closely fitted. There is evidence that the walls were covered with plaster. The main chamber is 3.9 meters long, 2.1 meters wide, and 2.4 meters high. The ceiling is a diagonally supported flat type. Corner stones are arrayed four each in east-west lines on the earthen mound and there are tile shards scattered about, indicating that a building once stood there. Tomb number 2 was also built partially underground and faces south with an approach, a corridor, and a main chamber. The approach is made up of 13 earthen steps, 9.8 meters long and 2 meters wide. The corridor enters into the south wall of the main chamber, is covered with basalt slabs, and is 2.7 meters long. The main chamber is made of seven layers of basalt stones, with a length of 3.9 meters, a width of 3.3 meters, and a height of 2.45 meters. It has a three-level lantern ceiling, while the corridor has a composite

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

128

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

ceiling of parallel and intersecting vault. Bones belonging to a total of 15 persons were unearthed from this tomb and there are paintings of people and flowers on the walls and ceilings of the main chamber and the corridor. The stone-chambered tombs were covered by earthen mounds and the brick tombs are believed to have been those of royalty and high aristocrats. Medium- and small-sized tombs with stone chambers, stone-lined coffins, or stone coffins belonged to persons of lower social status. Among these, the tomb complex at Dinging in Antu Prefecture is believed to have been that of local suryoˇ ng. These tombs, which were excavated in 1990, are located at the foot of Mount Changbai, a spot believed to have been on the route from the Northern Capital to the Tang. Nine of the ten tombs excavated are in a row, with tomb number 10 the exception. Tomb number 10 was a pit tomb, while the other nine were single-room stone tombs. These tombs had an entrance on the south and had no corridors. Some of the tombs had approaches that were single paths. They vary in both size and style. Tombs 1, 2, 3, and 7 are among the larger Parhae tombs, but all have been severely damaged. These tombs were all located near the top of slopes on leveled spaces where the burial chambers were constructed. These tombs all shared the feature of a platform style burial area centered on the burial chamber. Human bones were found in all these tombs except number 6. Some contained only one person, some two people, and some multiple people. Some were primary burials and some were secondary burials, while tomb number 8 contained ashes from cremation and tomb number 9 showed a joint primary burial followed later by cremation. Tomb number 1 had a first and a secondary burial one on top of the other; the primary burial had three coffins laying side by side in an east-west orientation; while the secondary burial had the bones of eight skeletons scattered randomly. Over 100 relics were unearthed from these tombs, including pottery, stone, bronze, iron, silver, agate, and quartz. The pottery relics included 6 jars and 2 bottles; the bronze relics included hair pins, belt hooks and knife sheathes; the iron relics included horse saddles and bits; arrowheads, sword blades, spear tips, and belt hooks. Most of the decorative items came from tomb number 1 and included silver earrings, quartz beads, and agate beads. On the other hand, Parhae-style vertical stone-chamber pit tombs have been excavated at Dahaimeng in Yangtun in Yongji Prefecture and at Laoheshen in Yushu Prefecture. These tombs show strong Malgal traditions and can be seen as the tombs of Malgal who had been incorporated into Parhae. In addition, Parhae tombs have been excavated in Hamgyoˇ ng Province in North Korea and in the Maritime Province of Russia. There are two tomb complexes in Hamgyoˇ ng Province: one at P’yoˇ ngni (Pyeongni) and the other at Kungsim. The P’yoˇ ngni tomb complex is located close to Ch’oˇ nghae fortress where there are over 600 tombs, some from Koguryoˇ and

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S BURIAL CULTURE

129

some from Parhae; some 50 of those tombs have reportedly been excavated. Some of those excavated tombs are dated, some are not; they are stone chamber tombs with earthen mounds. Those with corridors fall into two types: those with corridors in the center and those with corridors on one side. The larger tombs have composite ceilings of parallel and intersecting vaults while others have flat ceilings. The walls are generally made of river rocks and the ceilings are flat rocks. Many of the floors are river gravel. Relics unearthed there include lacquer vessels and porcelain. The Kungsim complex is located in Hoeryoˇ ng (Hoeryeong) County and is made up of over 300 tombs. The surviving tombs are all edged-style stone-chamber tombs with earthen mounds. Five have been excavated. There is evidence that the peaks of these tombs have collapsed and at least one has been confirmed as having been robbed. These tombs were built on leveled areas of slopes and were erected above ground of titanite. These were stone tombs with horizontal entrances and rectangular coffin rooms. In three tombs, the corridors entered into the center of the southern wall while in two others, the corridors were off to one side. The ceilings do tend to rise a bit from the top of each side wall but are flat ceilings using flat rocks, although some show evidence of being composite ceilings of parallel and intersecting vaults. There is nothing of particular note inside the coffin rooms except that three tombs show evidence of fire. The floors were made of clay. Relics unearthed there include a few ceramics, brass rings and brass ornaments, and lacquer vessels, and tomb number 3

Figure 11.6: Tomb Number 12 of the Kungsim Tomb Complex in Hoeryoˇ ng County, North Hamgyoˇ ng Province

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

130

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

contained the bones of three persons, including an infant, all showing signs of having been burned. The Russian Maritime Province tombs are located by rivers and were investigated at the same time as a neighboring monastery site. One of the tombs is described as being a mound about 12 meters wide and 140 centimeters high, while the chamber is said to have been built of basalt. Five tombs have been excavated. Relics unearthed there include fragments of vessel mouths, iron axes, iron arrowheads, gold belt ornaments, stone implements, and many bone fragments discovered while cleaning up the areas around the mounds but the tombs themselves appear to have been robbed and severely damaged. Furthermore, the grave pits have been destroyed and covered by humous soil. However, the investigation determined that the grave pits were rectangular, one having a length of 370 centimeters and a width of 100 centimeters, and was oriented north-south. Items recovered from the grave pit include bone fragments, pottery fragments, and 16 tubular jade beads. Among the other tombs, one appears to have had a relatively large number of relics, while the other three have very few relics. We have no concrete information on their structure or other related aspects. There are also about 200 Parhae tombs in the Kraskino area, one of which was investigated in 1993. It has been confirmed that these were pit tombs. The Kraskino tombs were unique in that they were mounds built above ground with pits in the middle that were made of clay. As we have seen above, Parhae tombs were of three types: earthen, stone, and brick. The earthen tombs were widely used before Parhae was established and continued to be used in the early Parhae era. The stone tombs can be subdivided into three types: stone chambers, stone lined coffins, and stone coffins. The stone chamber tombs covered by earthen mounds were the dominant type in Parhae. The use of stones to build tombs is basically the Koguryoˇ style and the stone-chamber tombs covered by earthen mounds represent a largely unchanged continuation of the late Koguryoˇ tomb style. Representative of this is the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghye. Brick tombs began to be used among some of the royalty from the middle period of Parhae as a result of Tang influence, but the number of brick tombs is few. Representative of these brick tombs are the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo and of Ma Choˇ ktal (Ma Jeokdal). Even the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo shows a mixture of Tang and Koguryoˇ styles with its brick walls and its composite ceiling of parallel and intersecting vault. In addition, grave number 1 of Sanlingtun near the Northern Capital was made of stones cut to resemble bricks. We see cases where single individuals were buried, where two people were buried, and where multiple people were buried. Most of those cases where two people were buried were instances of husband and wife being jointly interred. The burial of multiple people is a feature of Parhae’s burial customs and there are cases where clear distinctions are made between the main person being interred and the other

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S BURIAL CULTURE

131

people who were buried along peripherally, as seen in the tombs at Dachengzi and Dazhutun. Those buried along with the main person numbered as few as one and as many as 16. Those persons included not only blood relatives of the deceased, but also slaves and other persons of servile status who depended on the decedent. This can be seen as a vestige of the old custom of burying family and servants with their deceased master/mistress. The ways in which bones were placed in tombs tell us that the people of Parhae practiced both primary burial and secondary burial. There are also numerous cases where both types can be found in one tomb. In such instances, the secondary burial was probably a supplementary burial of some of the deceased bones. Primary burials usually entailed the use of wooden coffins although there were instances where no coffin was used. In early Parhae, cremation was popular as seen in the Liudingshan tomb complex. The people of Parhae put the body inside the coffin, put the coffin in the tomb, and then set it afire. This custom gradually disappeared in mid- and late Parhae. Also, animal bones are found along with human bones in the tombs at Liudingshan. Those were the bones of horses, cattle, and dogs. This was a practice that was widespread in early Parhae but rarely seen in other countries. There was also the custom of erecting buildings on top of tombs in Parhae. Corner stones have been discovered on top of earthen mounds at tomb number 1 of Sanlingtun and in the Henamtun tomb complex, while large numbers of roof tiles have been found at the Liudingshan complex and the Longtushan complex. After Buddhism became popular, the buildings were replaced by pagodas. Even though neither Princess Choˇ nghyo nor Ma Choˇ ktal was a nun or a monk, pagodas made up of brick were erected on their graves. Chinese scholars contend that this represented a continuation of Malgal tradition, but it rather should be seen as Koguryoˇ tradition. Roof tiles have been frequently found in Koguryoˇ and Paekche tombs and there are also traces of a building on top of the Koguryoˇ General’s Tomb. All of this confirms the links with Koguryoˇ .

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

12

Clothing in Parhae Jeon Hyun-sil (Catholic University)

‰

THE CULTURE OF Parhae, established in the late seventh century, shows differences from the culture of the preceding Three Kingdoms era. The culture of the Three Kingdoms was based on Korea’s indigenous traditions and the clothing of that era was no exception. During the era of Parhae and Unified Silla, however, the heterogeneous culture of Tang China was brought in, leading to the rise of a new and different clothing culture. The factors in the formation of Parhae’s clothing culture included not only influence from the Tang, but also elements that Parhae inherited from Koguryoˇ and from the indigenous Malgal peoples who lived in Parhae territory. The clothing culture for men in Parhae had a dual structure made of aspects unique to the region and aspects borrowed from outside: clothing unique to the region was worn by non-elite social groups while clothing from outside was worn by the ruling class. The clothing culture of Parhae formed, along with that of Unified Silla, a key part of Korea’s ancient clothing culture that linked the Three Kingdoms period with the Koryoˇ era.

OFFICIAL ATTIRE Official attire was the clothing worn by civil and military officials when participating in official ceremonies or when attending court and was issued by the state. From the very beginning, Parhae paid close attention to the changing situations among neighboring powers and sought to establish relations with the Tujue, the Tang, Japan, and Silla as part of its efforts to enhance its international stature. Envoys were dispatched to maintain these relations. The dispatch of envoys was a matter of official business, so we can assume that envoys must

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

133

have worn clothing appropriate to their status and mission. Unlike the case of other countries, we do not know when Parhae established a system of official attire. Generally speaking, systems of official attire were determined after the royal authority was established and institutions and organs were set up and developed further during the process of establishing bureaucratic systems and systems of rank. The kingdom of Parhae focused its energies on establishing itself as a state during the four decades of the first two rulers, King Ko (r. 698–719) and King Mu (r. 719–737) and had not yet promulgated a system of official attire. When a new state has been established but has not yet set up its own institutional structure, the general trend is for it to follow the institutions of the state that preceded it. Thus it

Figure 12.1: Presumed Korean Envoys in the Afrasiab Wall Painting

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

134

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 12.2: Presumed Korean Persons in the Mural from Li Xian’s Tomb

is likely that Parhae, as the cultural successor to Koguryoˇ , probably followed Koguryoˇ ’s institutions. The people who played the leading role in Parhae from its foundation to its demise were Koguryoˇ people and, considering that a substantial number of Parhae relics were done in Koguryoˇ styles, it seems reasonable to assume that in its early years Parhae continued Koguryoˇ institutions and culture. Thus early Parhae official clothing probably consisted of a conical cap, a jacket with a stiff collar, and loose pants, continuing the unique Three Kingdoms period tradition of separate tops and bottoms. We can get some sense of the official clothing worn by Koguryoˇ personages from the Afrasiab wall painting of Samarkand which includes persons

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

135

believed to have been envoys from Koguryoˇ , as seen in Figure 12.1, and from the mural in the Tang crown prince Li Xian’s tomb in Figure 12.2. These paintings are dated closer to the time of the founding of Parhae and show figures wearing traditional Korean garb. After King Mun (r. 737–793) took the throne, relations with the Tang improved and Parhae began to engage in active cultural exchanges with China. Parhae began to incorporate Tang elements in its official clothing so that by the second half of Parhae the kingdom’s official attire included the putou (cap; see Figure 12.3) and jacket collars became rounded. The Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) biography on Parhae says that Parhae had nine official grades and that the colors of official attire varied according to grade, using the four colors of purple, red, light red, and green. The Xin Tangshu also says that officials of the top five grades carried fu (wooden tablets used to greet royalty) and fish pouches (used to indicate rank). Also, Parhae continuously sent envoys to the Tang where they received

Figure 12.3: Parhae-Style Putou

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

136

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 12.4: Official Garb of Musician (left) and Eunuch (right)

honorary posts, clothing, and materials from which to make clothing. After 722, Parhae envoys were given posts that ranged from the 3rd to the 5th grade and received, depending on the grade of the post, a purple outer jacket, a gold belt, and a fish pouch or a red outer jacket, a silver belt, and a fish pouch. This coincides largely with the description of Parhae’s official garb in the Parhae biography of the Xin Tangshu as well as with Tang official garb. In other words, we can say that Parhae envoys received Tang official court garb which then became the style for official garb in Parhae. We can confirm the official garb of late Parhae in the figures depicted on the wall paintings in the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo, seen in Figure 12.4.

EVERYDAY CLOTHING Parhae succeeded to and further developed Koguryoˇ culture. With a lifestyle that was centered on horse riding and hunting and with customs that included playing ch’ukkuk (chukguk; Ch. cuju; a kind of football) and polo, the people of Koguryoˇ and Parhae probably wore

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

137

clothes separated between upper and lower garments that would be fitting for an active lifestyle. Male Garments

The men of Parhae wore headgear either of hemp or conical hats with bird feathers, reflecting Koguryoˇ characteristics while wearing separate upper and lower garments in traditional Korean style. Hemp headgear can be seen in the wall painting from Princess Choˇ nghyo’s tomb where a guard is shown wearing red hemp headgear (see Figure 12.5). The Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms, twelth century) contains a record of hemp headgear in Korea. “Regaring Koguryoˇ music, the Tongdian (a Tang source completed in 801) says, ‘Four dancing men wore red colored hemp headgear, bound their hair up in the back in a top knot that looked like a lump of metal, and wore gold earrings. Two dancing men wore yellow jackets, yellow skirts, and orange pants. Two other men wore orange jackets, skirts, and pants and their jacket sleeves were quite long. The dancers wore black buckskin shoes and danced side by side….’ As late as the time of the Tang Empress Wu, there were 25 pieces of music, but only one now remains, and clothing styles too have changed so that we have lost the original look.”

This entry describes the clothing men of Koguryoˇ wore while dancing and it indicates that they used hemp headgear. Although there may be differences in the status or styles of these men and the guard depicted in Princess Chonghyo’s ˇ tomb, it seems likely that in the case of their

Figure 12.5: Guard with Hemp Headgear

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

138

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

headgear there was a link between Koguryoˇ and Parhae. This provides evidence for Parhae as the successor to Koguryo’s ˇ cultural traditions. Conical hats with bird feathers can be seen in the Afrasiab wall paintings and the mural in Crown Prince Li Xian’s tomb. This type of hat was probably worn by aristocrats in the early Parhae era. This kind of hat was one where the traditional Korean conical hat was decorated with bird feathers or bird tails. Records tell that the use of feathers was a means to demark class differences. Over time, however, the decoration changed from natural material to stiff manmade materials such as metal. Official hats were then decorated with feathers or deer ears made of gold or silver. Those later decorations continued to be used to signify aristocratic status. The common people also followed the customs of Koguryoˇ and enjoyed horseriding, hunting, ch’ukkuk and polo. To meet the needs of such an active, military type lifestyle, they would have needed to wear upper garments with narrow sleeves and stiff collars along with pants with narrow legs. Of course there were differences between the clothing worn by commoners and that worn by the ruling class. The ruling class would have worn such clothes underneath their official garb and as ordinary daily wear, but there would have been differences in the size, materials, and colors of clothing. The population of Parhae included not only Koguryoˇ remnants but also Malgal. According to the Malgal biographies of the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) and the Suishu (History of the Sui Dynasty [581–618]; compiled 636), and the Huksu ˇ Malgal biography of the Xin Tangshu, the Malgal men were skilled at using knives and bows, wore clothing made of leather, and similar to Koguryoˇ decorated their hats with pheasant feathers. As a horseriding people of the north, the Malgal would have naturally been absorbed into Parhae’s culture and together with Koguryoˇ remnants formed the foundation of Parhae’s clothing culture.

Figure 12.6: Bird Leather Boot

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

139

We can confirm the footgear worn by Parhae people in the wall paintings of Princess Choˇ nghyo’s tomb. The footgear can be divided into two types: boots and shoes. Generally, people tuck their pants into their boots in order to move about comfortably, but the way in which the boots are tucked into the pants is a unique aspect of the wall paintings of Princess Choˇ nghyo’s tomb. Those boots are thought to be Parhae’s typical Ammo boots. According to the Bohai guozi changbian, “the people of Parhae were skilled at making boots… Made of leather, these boots are known as Ammo boots; the meaning of Ammo is not known, but perhaps it came from the fact that these boots are good for walking at night.” At any rate, we can know that the Ammo boots were a representative Parhae product made of leather and having long necks? In the absence of any such relics from Parhae we cannot be sure, but boots similar to those in the wall paintings dating from the same period as Parhae are preserved in the Shoshoin in Nara, Japan. Dating from the Nara period, these six-piece boots (see Figure 12.6) were of the type that all officials wore as part of their official attire. It seems likely that both Japan and Parhae knew how to make such boots so we can surmise that Parhae’s Ammo boots were similar to the six-piece boots found in the Shoshoin (see Figure 12.6). As for shoes, those are similar to Korea’s straw shoes which reveal the insteps and have differences in function from the boots worn by military men. We think that the style of those shoes was similar to the hemp cord shoes unearthed in Astana (see Figure 12.7). On the one hand, men wore belts with their official attire. There were two types of belts worn by Parhae men. One was a decorated belt, the other a leather belt. The decorated belt was made of cloth or leather and had metal decorations on the external side and had a buckle-like hook that held the belt in place. The decorated belts that have been unearthed from Jilin Province, Heilongjiang Province, Russia’s Maritime Province and North Korea have almost all been made with gilt bronze, bronze, or iron decorations. Two types have been unearthed at Henandun, Helong Prefecture in Jilin Province. One is a leather belt covered in gold with quartz and turquoise embedded in each of the decorative sections, hooks on each end and three slender lines extending down from the middle (see Figure 12.8). The other is one whose leather has decomposed, leaving only a hook and decorations so we cannot know how it looked originally but we can at least get a sense of the decorations on Parhae belts (see Figure 12.9). We can see leather belts on the figures in the wall painting of Princess Ch oˇ nghyo’s tomb. All the figures are wearing the belt in a way that brings up the rounded waist section (see Figure 12.10). This is a shared feature among nomadic peoples and although this belt is similar to the decorated belt, it is made of simpler materials, is thinner and longer and does not have the same ritual function as the decorated belt. A belt that is thought to be similar to Parhae’s leather belts is the one at Japan’s Shoshoin (see Figure 12.11); it is from 124–170

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

140

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 12.7: Hemp Cord Shoes from Astana

Figure 12.8: Decorated Belt from Henandun

Figure 12.9: Decorated Belt from Henandun

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

141

Figure 12.10: Figure Wearing Belt from Princess Cho ˇ nghyo’s Tomb

Figure 12.11: Belt from Shoshoin

centimeters long, about 2.6–3.2 centimeters wide, and is made of black painted leather. Female Garments

Materials that give us a glimpse of Parhae women’s attire include the bronze female statue found in Russia’s Maritime Province and the tri-colored female figure found near Lungtoushan in China’s Jilin Province. The bronze female figure features hair done up in two knots, an upper garment with very wide sleeves covered by an un’gyoˇ n (ungyeon; Ch. yunjuan) silk shawl, and a skirt so long that it would have dragged on the ground (see Figure 12.12). The tricolor female figure features an upper garment with long sleeves that is partially covered by a long skirt; this was a typical style among women of the Tang (see Figure 12.13) and is different from Korea’s traditional manner of covering the top of the skirt with the upper garment. Also, both female figures are wearing shoes that curl up in the front. The long skirts catch on the front of the shoes in a way that must have been designed to make it easier to walk with such long skirts. This shows us points in common between the clothing of Parhae women and that of Tang women. But we can also see portions of women’s attire that was different from that of Tang China. Whereas Tang women generally wore a half-sleeve garment above their blouse and then wore a kind of shawl called the biao, Parhae women wore the un’gyoˇ n instead of the biao, a feature that allows us to see the individuality of the attire of Parhae women. Also, the use of the un’gyoˇ n appears to have begun after the fall of the Tang in 906, making it unique to the late Parhae period.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

142

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 12.12: Two Bronze Statues of Women

CLOTHING MATERIALS The Xin Tangshu lists representative local products of each area. Some examples include rabbits from the T’aebaek Mountains, kelp from the southern sea (of Korea), soybean malt from Ch’aeksoˇ ng (Chaekseong), deer from Puyoˇ , pigs from Makhil, horses from Suifen, hemp from Hyoˇ nju (Hyeonju), raw fiber from Okchoˇ , cloth from Yongju, iron from Wisoˇ ng, rice from Nosoˇ ng (Noseong), and carp from Lake Mit’a (Mita). Some of these items were clothing materials produced in Parhae and were used for the making of clothes or for trade. Parhae’s main clothing materials were of three major types:

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

143

Figure 12.13: Tricolor Female Figure

cloth, leather and fur, and fish skin. Because of Parhae’s geographic location, fur and fish skin were the major materials produced for clothing, as well as major items for Parhae’s active external trade. Parhae’s active engagement in trade made it a dynamic player in the international system of mutual dependence and was a major factor in Parhae’s active import of outside culture and in the development of its clothing culture.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

144

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Textiles

From the Xin Tangshu records about Hyoˇ nju hemp, Okchu cloth, and Yongju cloth, we know that the people of Parhae engaged in weaving. However, because of Parhae’s northern location and cold climate, it would have been difficult to produce a wide variety of fibers; most likely, the main fibers were hemp and tussah (rough brown silk). There was a long history of the production of hemp as a ˇ textile developed in Puyoˇ , among the Umnu, and in Koguryoˇ , so that the quantity and quality of hemp produced in early Parhae were quite high, and a couple of the better fabrics were exported. The cloth from Yongju, which was in Yongch’oˇ n Province of the Northern Capital, was known as chu (Ch. chou). This was a kind of silk fabric woven by the tabby method, the most basic type of weave, and included both rough and fine types of cloth. There is a record saying that in 748 “the Malgal sent an envoy to the Tang who took with him oˇ a chu (eoa ju) and choha chu (joha ju).” These were high quality fabrics and this record indicates that weaving was done in the mid- and lower reaches of the Heilong River which was part of Parhae’s territory. Choha chu was a reddish cloth; before weaving, parts of either the woof or the warp threads were dyed so that after weaving the cloth looks like it is covered by fog. This method is known throughout the world as ikat. Ikat fabric from around the seventh century has been found in Japan’s Horyuji in which the warp threads have been dyed a red-orange color (see Figure 12.14). The oˇ a in oˇ a chu means fish roe in reference to a waterdrop pattern that is produced by tying parts of the fabric around grains or small rocks and dying those parts to produce small round or rectangular spots.

Figure 12.14: Ikat Fabric from Shoshoin

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

145

Figure 12.15: Dyed Fabric

Samples of this kind of fabric have been found in tomb number 85 of the Astana complex in Turfan, Sinjiang (see Figure 12.15) The cloth produced in Okchoˇ and throughout was in modern-day Hamgyoˇ ng Province, a region that was under the administration of Parhae’s Southern Capital, was called myoˇ n (myeon; cotton) in the Xin Tangshu. Given that this is not a region suited for the production of cotton, it seems more likely that the term myoˇ n here referred to rough brown silk. However, the fact that Parhae envoys to Japan brought back rough brown silk indicates that Parhae’s own production of that commodity was insufficient. On the one hand, Yang T’aesa, a Parhae envoy to Japan during the early Heian period wrote a poem titled “The Sound of Tadumi ˇ (fulling clubs) in the Night,” in which he said “I hear the sound of a neighbor woman striking clothes with fulling clubs; it comes and goes with the wind…. I have not heard this sound since I left home, but I hear it tonight in another land.” This tells us that the people of Parhae used fulling clubs, sticks to beat cloth made of natural fiber (except wool) to make it soft and shiny. This indicates that the people of Parhae produced such natural fibers. Leather and Furs

The northern and eastern regions of Parhae were mountainous and densely forested, and were very cold. The Malgal in those areas who were incorporated into Parhae made their livelihoods by hunting and fishing. In such climates, clothing made of fur is worn to ward off the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

146

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

cold, with fur being attached to clothing where it touches the skin so that people can engage in outdoor activities even in severe cold. Records mention various kinds of fur, including sable, bear, and tiger. The people of Parhae used the animals they caught for both food and clothing and also exported furs to the Tang and Japan where they were widely welcomed. Furs made up the bulk of the items Parhae traded with other countries and Parhae’s sable, tiger, and bear pelts were particularly popular among the Japanese aristocrats of the Nara and Heian periods. There is an episode about Parhae furs in Japan. On the twelth day of the fifth month of 919, a Parhae envoy named Pae Ku was invited to a reception in the Heian Palace. He wore armor trimmed with fur in a manner befitting an envoy from a country that exported furs. But Pae Ku was surprised by the clothing worn by the Japanese prince Shigeakira. Shigeakira showed up for the reception dressed in black sable fur. The twelth day of the fifth lunar month is early summer, not a time suited for wearing fur. The reason why Shigeakira showed up wearing so much fur was that he wanted to show off his wealth and position. Luxury demand for fur was so heavy that the Japanese court even issued orders prohibiting fur. That is evidence of how much the upper strata of Japanese society valued Parhae furs.

FISH SKINS Parhae had a coast along the East Sea and had many lakes and rivers, including the Songhua, Heilong, and Ussuri rivers, so it had a highly

Figure 12.16: Fish Skin Clothing

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

147

developed maritime products industry. The fish skins they produced, mostly mullet and kyooˇ (gyoeo), along with sea leopard, were used for both clothing and export. Mullet were found in the lower reaches of rivers along Parhae’s eastern, southern, and western coasts. Leopard skins were very popular for their warmth and their water repellent quality and were caught most only on Parhae’s eastern coast. We are not certain exactly what kyooˇ might have been, but some scholars believe that the term refers to the dog salmon. The Liubian jilue says that “the skin of the dog salmon is a light yellow color and looks like decorated silk; it can be used to make clothing, slippers, or shoes.” The same source goes on to describe the people who made their livelihoods by catching dog salmon as “northern barbarians who wear fish skins.” Even now the tribal peoples who inhabit the Maritime Province and the lower reaches of the Songhua River get food, clothing, shoes and other necessities by hunting sea leopards and sea lions. These materials are also used for tents, sails, and wrapping for goods carried on boats and sleds. Sea leopard leather and fur while warm, were not as warm as some other furs, but their water repellent quality made them useful for summer clothing and shoes.

Figure 12.17: Sea Leopard Clothing

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

148

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

The fish skin clothing seen in Figure 12.16 was made by sewing together several tens of pieces of fish skin. This item was collected in Sakhalin in 1902 and is now on display at the Berlin Museum. It is 50 centimeters long and 95 centimeters in circumference and was wrapped around the waist for warmth by a male riding a dog sled. The sea leopard leather clothing owned by the Leipzig Museum seen in Figure 12.17 is 84.5 centimeters long and 113 centimeters in circumference, has a long strip of fur and dyed fabric extending from the left collar down to the bottom, and has soft sable fur attached at the ends of the sleeves. Parhae’s Imports of Clothing Materials

In return for the leather and fur it exported to Japan and the Tang, Parhae imported various kinds of fabrics. Parhae brought in various kinds of silk fabrics and cotton cloth from the Tang, and various items from Japan, including silks, decorated silks, silk gauze, silk thread, and ramie. Thus Parhae was able to supplement the brown silk and hemp it produced with various fabrics it imported from neighboring countries.

PERSONAL ORNAMENTS We can tell from relics that the people of Parhae used such personal ornaments as hairpins, earrings, necklaces, bracelets, and combs. Hairpins and combs have been found placed by the heads of skeletons, indicating that Parhae women used them as hairpieces. Hairpins in three shapes have been unearthed: straight, Y-shaped, and U-shaped. Particularly large numbers of U-shaped hairpins have been found (see Figure 12.18). Combs were also placed in the hair; a bone comb has been found in the remains of the Ch’oˇ nghae earthen fortress. Earrings were widely used by men and women from the Three Kingdoms period and were made of such materials as gold, silver, and bronze. Earrings were of two types, depending on the width of the circular bead.

Figure 12.18: U-shaped Hairpins

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CLOTHING IN PARHAE

149

The earring in Figure 12.19, unearthed from stone and earth type tomb at Ch’angdoˇ k (Changdeok) number 3, is of the wider type; although it shows no decoration, it probably reflects a continuation of Koguryoˇ styles. Necklaces, such as seen in Figure 12.20, were mostly made by drilling holes in jewels; typical materials included quartz, agate, amber, and jasper (green jade). Simple unadorned rings made of gold, silver, and bronze have been unearthed. Bracelets (see Figure 12.21) were made of gold, silver, or bronze; they have no decorations on their surfaces and were worn either singly or multiply.

Figure 12.19: Earring

Figure 12.20: Necklace

Figure 12.21: Bracelet

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

13

Parhae’s Architectural Culture Lee Byeong Gun (Tongwˇ on College)

‰

CHINA HAS CONDUCTED its “Northeast Project” to incorporate the history of Manchuria, including Koguryoˇ and Parhae, into Chinese history. Various research institutes in Korea are in the process of preparing analyses of related materials and research projects in response to Chinese arguments regarding Old Chosoˇ n, Puyoˇ , Koguryoˇ , and Parhae. The Chinese attitude regarding Parhae is that it was a kingdom that was established and that was destroyed on what is now Chinese territory so therefore it is naturally part of Chinese history. China is now in the midst of investing huge amounts of capital into large-scale projects cleaning up and restoring Koguryoˇ and Parhae remains, including the site of the Parhae Northern Capital, in preparation to apply to UNESCO for recognition as World Cultural Heritage sites. This creates concern that a second “Northeast Project” is underway. Cleaning up the remains is a welcome move. However, the restoration work has been said to ignore indigenous cultural elements and recreate walled cities on models that use Tang and Qing architectural culture. In its culture, Parhae was a kingdom that shared the universal state culture of East Asia but also had its own particularity. In the case of architecture, Parhae adopted some aspects of Chinese walled city systems, but it also used Koguryoˇ elements. It is particularly urgent that concrete and careful investigation be done in order to attain a proper restoration of Parhae’s Northern Capital. To date, most of the research on Parhae has been done by China, North Korea, Russia, and Japan. Even though it has been confirmed through archaeology and investigation of remains that Parhae had its own unique architectural culture, each of these countries had focused only on investigating the relationship between Parhae’s culture and

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

151

its own and have not recognized Parhae’s own distinctive culture. In particular, China contends that Parhae’s culture was the culture of the Songmal Malgal who imitated Chinese culture and formed a regional regime that, like all other entities in Manchuria, was culturally subjugated to China. North Korea, on the other hand, has focused exclusively on comparisons of Parhae’s culture with that of Koguryoˇ and has been preoccupied with establishing that Parhae was the successor to Koguryoˇ . In the case of architecture, North Korea has shown a tendency to interpret Parhae culture in comparison with only the limited area of the Korean Peninsula. Thus this chapter will consider Parhae as an independent state and will seek to establish the identity of Parhae’s architectural culture by considering what Parhae shared with and how Parhae differed from the surrounding countries. This chapter will cover the full range of Parhae’s architecture, including walled cities and palaces, Buddhist monasteries, residences, the twenty-four stone remains, Buddhist stone lanterns and pagodas, and architectural decorations.

THE ARCHITECTURE OF WALLED CITIES AND PALACES Parhae relocated its capital four times during the time from its founding in 698 by Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) to its demise in the twentieth year (926) of its fifteenth king, Tae Insoˇ n (r. 906–926). The first was the relocation from Kuguk (now Dunhua City in Jilin Province) to the Central Capital, Hyoˇ ndoˇ k Province (now Xigucheng, Helong Prefecture, Jilin Province). The second was in 755 from the Central Capital to the Northern Capital, Yongch’oˇ n Province (now Shangjingcheng, Bohaizhen, Ningan City, Heilongjiang Province). The third was in 785 from the Northern Capital to the Eastern Capital, Yongwoˇ n Province (now Baliencheng, Hunchun City, Jilin Province), and the fourth was in 794 from the Eastern Capital back to the Northern Capital. The Northern Capital was Parhae’s main capital for over 150 years of the kingdom’s total 229 years. Thus an investigation of the Northern Capital is the first priority in understanding Parhae’s walled city and palace construction. To date, archaeological investigations of the Northern Capital have been larger in scale than those of other Parhae capitals and they have revealed that the Northern Capital was indeed a proper capital city. The Northern Capital is known to have been second largest, after the Tang’s Changan, among the capital cities of that time and can be considered to have been the representative walled city of Northeast Asia. Of the walled cities of Parhae, those whose excavation can show us features of Parhae architecture include the Kuguk site at Wudongcheng, the Central Capital site at Xigucheng, the Eastern Capital site at Baliencheng, the Western Capital site at Linjiang, the Southern Capital site at Ch’oˇ nghae, and the Northern Capital site. Roughly speaking, we can say that these sites share four major

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

152

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

characteristics. One, they were located in the center of broad, fertile agricultural basins, with rivers on one side and mountains on the other three. Second, they generally had two walls, one inner and one outer, except for the Northern Capital which had an outer wall, an inner wall, and a palace wall. Third, the cities had a square or rectangular layout, a universal feature of Northeast Asian walled cities. Fourth, the walls were usually made of earth. These features show substantial differences with the walled cities of China’s Central Plain or the Korean Peninsula and were the result of Parhae’s particular natural environment. The most representative of Parhae’s palace remains are those of the Northern Capital. The palace walls located in the central part of the city enclosed no fewer than 37 buildings, including the main palace itself which was located at the northernmost end. The largest and most important area inside the palace walls was the central area which had five palace buildings arrayed along a straight line connecting the northern and southern gates, beginning with the first building near the southern gate and proceeding through the second, third, fourth, and fifth buildings. The buildings were connected by side verandas that started from the southern wall, except for the fourth and fifth buildings between which there was no veranda. That suggests that the fifth building was used for different purposes than the other four. Judging from the size of the buildings and the traditional layout of capital cities, the first and second buildings were probably where the business of government was conducted, while the third and fourth buildings were probably the private quarters and sleeping quarters of the king. Evidence for this includes the fact that the first and second building sites were the largest, while the fourth building site has

Figure 13.1: Sites of first and second palace buildings of the Northern Capital

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

153

remains of stones that covered a hypocaust. The fifth building, unlike the others, appears to have been built in a tower style. As one goes in, the area enclosed by the side verandas grows gradually narrower. The width of the open spaces before the first, second, and third palaces shrinks by ratios of 2.5:1.5:1.0 and the depth also decreases by a similar ratio. That is, if the front space before the third palace is 1.0, then front space before the second palace is 1.5, and that before the third palace is 2.5. The way in which the space enclosed by the verandas decreases as one goes in was a method to show that things were growing smaller. In other words, it was an attempt to suggest depth. Elsewhere in Asia, the buildings grow larger as one goes in further, but the Northern Capital displays a unique array of buildings unlike anywhere else in Northeast Asia at that time. Although the overall layout of the city followed the universal Northeast Asian form, the placement of the buildings was unique to Parhae. The Northern Capital’s inner wall was in front of the palace wall and enclosed the Three Chancelleries and the Six Boards as well as the royal garden. Today, the sites of 10 government buildings have been found inside the inner wall, while in the royal garden have been found the sites of two pavilions located on artificial mountains around a man-made lake. On its eastern side, the royal garden had a length of 720 meters and a width of 213 meters. On the northern side were several small gardens set off by brick walls, while on the southern side were the lake and mountains with pavilions and twostory buildings for viewing. The garden sloped down gradually from north to south, with an open front. In the middle of the northern half, there was a large two-story building located in front of a lotus pond. Standing left and right in the lotus pond were two islands

Figure 13.2: Octagonal Pavilion in Northern Capital Palace

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

154

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

with octagonal pavilions. There is evidence that several buildings had been built in the large open space south of the lotus pond. The scale and features of the royal garden befit the capital of a major kingdom.

MONASTERY CONSTRUCTION Large numbers of Parhae Buddhist remains and relics have been discovered, including monastery sites, pagoda sites, and Buddhist statues. Monastery sites discovered to date include 10 sites in and around the Northern Capital, 1 in the Kuguk area, 17 in the Central Capital area, 7 in the Eastern Capital area, 5 in the Maritime Province, 2 in the Hamgyoˇ ng Province area of the Southern Capital, and 3 in other locales for a total of 45. Two of the best known sites are those of the first and ninth monasteries inside the Northern Capital walls, where there have been unearthed large numbers of relics allowing us to know the size and structure of buildings. No Parhae monastery has been excavated in its entirety, leaving us unable to determine with certainty the layout of monasteries. If we consider what we know of the layout from the excavation of the sixth monastery in the Northern Capital, the gate was on the south, with the main building to the north behind a central yard with what are believed to have been side buildings on the left and right. Some 54 meters north of the main building was another building believed to have been a lecture hall. No pagoda site has been discovered yet at the sixth monastery, but we assume there must have been a pagoda in front of the monastery as seen in the first monastery site of Baliancheng. We can probably say that the layout, from south to north, was the gate, the pagoda, the main building, and the lecture hall. Such a layout conforms generally to that found in China’s Central Plains, the Korean Peninsula, and Japan. When Buddhism was first transmitted, monastery buildings were arranged around the pagodas, but from about the mid-sixth century buildings were accorded greater importance and monastery layout became centered on the main building. Such a layout can also be noted in the Northern Capital palace discussed above where the buildings were laid out in a straight line from the gate in the south with various side buildings for each of the main buildings. This type of layout was typical of monasteries in Northeast Asia and its use in the Parhae palace indicates that Parhae probably followed the same monastery layout as other Northeast Asian countries. However, the first and ninth monastery sites show the bell tower and the sutra library being attached to the main building; this was probably a means to reduce the monks’ exposure in the cold climate of Parhae. Looking at the structure of the buildings, larger bases such as that of the first monastery site in the Northern Capital were as large at 50 meters or more while the base at the eighth monastery site was no

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

155

Figure 13.3: Diagram of the first monastery site

more than 14 meters. Generally speaking, the central monasteries were large in scale while those in the provinces were much smaller. The bases were mostly 1.0 to 1.5 meters high, making them much higher than the bases of monastery buildings in China’s Central Plains. The bases were made of fresh earth smoothed out then covered with alternating layers of clay, sand, and stone and topped with a layer of even stones. The top layer was usually of basalt, usually with plain surfaces but some surfaces were plastered. Cornerstones were usually square with one or two engraved round pedestals; depending on the placement of the cornerstone, some had only pedestals but outside cornerstones also had engraved drumheads (K. komagi [gomagi]). Outside cornerstones were placed at a two-degree angle in order to attain a slight inward inclination; going toward the center of the building, the footstones were placed slightly inward in order to prevent curving of the posts. The footstones for the posts supporting the main beams were somewhat larger than the others; this was because the main beam carried most of the weight of the building, but also was done in order to obtain a curved roof effect. There are no posts remaining among the surviving remains, so we have no way of ascertaining their shape. We can, however, draw inference from the form of the stone lantern found at the second monastery (now Xinglong Monastery) of the Northern Capital which displays a convex swelling of the shaft. The convex swelling is slight and is most marked about two-fifth of the way up the shaft, a method quite similar to that found in the Korean Peninsula. With regard to roofs, the two owl’s tail tiles and the eight demon-design roof tiles indicate that the monastery buildings had four sided roofs, eight sided roofs, gable roofs and even sophisticated half-hipped and hipped roofs with sloping sides and no gables.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

156

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 13.4: Demon Design Roof Tile Unearthed at the Northern Capital

RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE Residential remains have been found throughout what had been the territory of Parhae. The list includes such sites as the western residence site, the fourth palace site and the western side separate residence, and the house site near the southern wall inside the palace grounds of the Northern Capital; the second palace site at Baliancheng, the barracks at the Tingyanshan fortress, the house site at Yingyicheng, and the house site at Shuaiwanzicun, Yinganzhen, all in Hunchun; the Duanjie Bohai village site at Duanjiecun in Ningan City, the site in Yingancun of Hunjiang City, the four house sites at Shumicheng, and the four house sites at the Tonggouling mountain fortress, all in Heilongjiang Province; the Kumsan ˇ building site and the first northern building site of the Parhae monastery at Choˇ lgol, Omae-ri, Sinp’o City in Hamgyoˇ ng Province; and house sites found in the Maritime Province. Two of these, the western residence site and the fourth palace site of the Northern Capital, permit us to get a sense of the size and structure of Parhae residences. These Parhae residences have a number of features. First, they are made of three rooms arranged in a straight line. That is, there were bedrooms on each side with a multi-purpose room and kitchen in between. Even now, most residences in Manchuria follow this style. Second, all the residences face south. Third, they are built on high bases. Fourth, outhouses are attached to the main houses; winter temperatures there can reach 25 degrees centigrade below

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

157

Figure 13.5: Diagram of the Western Residence Site

zero, making it a matter of practical necessity to keep the outhouses close. Fifth, they had long ‘L’-shaped flues and large chimneys. The existence of the hypocaust (ondol) is a feature of Parhae architecture that is recognized by scholars in North and South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan. As has been verified at the Koguryoˇ residential site found at Dongtaizi in Jian, Koguryoˇ residential architecture was identical to that of Parhae, including the hypocaust which shows identical construction methods and shapes between Koguryoˇ and Parhae. Parhae residences evolved in ways that suited the environmental features of that region and typical characteristics of Parhae residences are still found in Manchuria even today.

TWENTY-FOUR STONE REMAINS There is a unique type of remain found in Parhae territory which cannot be found for periods before or after Parhae, nor in any other region of the world. This is the arrangement of 24 stones about one meter high in three rows of eight stones each. To date, the locations of 12 of these twenty-four stone remains have been identified. Six have been found on the road from Kuguk to the Northern Capital; four in the area of Dunhua City (Jiangdong, Guandi, Haiqingxiang, Yaodianzi), and two more close to Jingpo Lake. One has been found at Xinglongcun, Baiocaogouzhen, Wangqing Prefecture on the banks of the Gaya River on the road from the Eastern Capital to the Northern Capital.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

158

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Two have been found at traffic centers on the Tuman (Ch. Tumen) River (Map’ae [Mapae] and Soˇ kkoˇ np’yoˇ ng [Seokkeonpyeong]), and three along the eastern coast of Hamgyoˇ ng Province (Songp’yong [Songpeyong], Hoemun-ni, Tonghung-ni ˇ [Dongheung-ni]). There has been much speculation about what these twenty-four stone remains might have been used for, with various scholars coming up with different answers. There are several different arguments. One is that these were places for the temporary keeping of the bodies of deceased royalty. A second is they were buildings where religious rituals were performed. A third is that they were not buildings but symbols that people worshipped. A fourth, considering that they were located on major transportation routes, is that they were post stations. A fifth is they were for buildings commemorating Parhae kings. And a sixth is that they were for granaries. Some of these views are supported by some evidence but most are groundless speculation. These different twenty-four stone remains have some common elements. First, all are located near areas with pleasant scenery. Second, they are located along major Parhae transportation routes. Third, they are located in areas with heavy concentrations of Parhae remains. Fourth, they appear to have been cornerstones about one meter in height of a type used for raised buildings and the gap between the cornerstones is much narrower than in normal buildings. Considering these common features, we can speculate that the they were for buildings that were raised above the ground and that were not the conventional post and beam construction but rather log-cabin type construction in

Figure 13.6: Twenty-Four Stone Remains at Haiqingxiang, Dunhua City, Jilin Province

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

159

which timbers were laid horizontally to make walls. Also, given that all the known remains are of roughly the same structure and size, we can speculate that they were probably built for the same purpose. Even now in Manchuria, nearly every farmhouse has a raised grain storehouse, so it seems likely that these twenty-four stone remains were used to build elevated storehouses. When we consider the raised floor seen in the Koguryoˇ Masiangou tomb, we can see that that tradition was passed on to Parhae and beyond to today in the design of storehouses.

STONE LANTERNS AND PAGODAS As mentioned above, Parhae left behind almost no remains that allow us to understand the kingdom’s architectural culture. It is regrettable that all we have are a few bases and cornerstones. Fortunately, we do have

Figure 13.7: Stone Lantern at the Second Monastery, Northern Capital

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

160

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

the stone lantern at Xinglong Monastery and the Linggwang pagoda to allow us to draw some inferences about Parhae’s architectural culture. The stone lantern at the second monastery, now known as Xinglong Monastery, of the Northern Capital is the only one that survives. It is a huge stone lantern six meters high and made of basalt. It is a complete lantern with a foundation stone, a pedestal base, a shaft, a middle base, a light chamber, and a finial. The octagonal foundation stone supports a lotus flower shaped pedestal base, above which sits a shaft with a slight convex swelling. Above the shaft is a lotus flower shaped middle base on which sits a light chamber with eight windows. Between the eight windows are depicted eight cornerstones with posts that support lintels above which are headpieces which support a bracket system. The eaves have depictions of squared rafters and end tiles are depicted on the ends of each roof section. Only the lower part of the finial remains.

Figure 13.8: View of Lingguang Pagoda, Changbai Prefecture, Jilin Province

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

161

As described above, the Parhae stone lantern recreated the shape of buildings. We can see that Parhae’s architects used nicely finished corner stones and round posts with convex swelling, and even that they had the technological skills to use bracket systems to allow for long eaves. In particular, the round posts with convex swelling show the connections between Parhae’s architecture and that of the Korean Peninsula. The convex swelling of other regions only goes as high as the middle of the post, but that of Parhae and the Korean Peninsula goes two-thirds of the way up the post. Although this lantern is not a building, it is a valuable source for teaching us about Parhae’s architectural culture. Pagodas and pagoda sites have been found in twelve locations throughout the territory that once belonged to Parhae, including the three brick pagoda sites found at Lingguang, at the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo, and of Ma Choˇ ktal. Of these, the only complete pagoda is the one at Lingguang. The Lingguang pagoda is located on the top of a mountain in the Changbai Korean Autonomous Prefecture of Jilin Province. The pagoda is a masonry structure made of brick facing to the south. It is a square five-story pagoda that measures around three meters per side at the base. Below the ground surface at the pagoda site there is a tomb approach, a tomb corridor, and a coffin chamber. The portion that rises above the surface of the ground is the shaft, the roofs, and the finial. The height of the Lingguang pagoda, including the finial, is 12.35 meters. The width of the first-story shaft is 3.3 meters and its height, including the roof, is 4.9 meters for a ratio of 1:1.49. The width of the second-story shaft is 3.0 meters and its height is 1.6 meters for a ratio of 1:0.53; the width of the third-story shaft is 2.6 meters and its height is 1.5 meters for a ratio of 1:0.58; the width of the fourth-story shaft is 2.15 meters and its height, including the roof, is 1.15 meters for a ratio of 1:0.53; and the width of the fifth-story shaft is 1.85 meters and its height is 1.1 meters for a ratio of 1:0.59. The finial is 1.5 meters and the cap is 0.45 meters for a total of 2.1 meters. The Pagoda gradually gets narrower toward the top as each story uses the techniques of sloping inward and giving a realistic sensation. The technique of sloping inward is used to give a sense of stability while the technique of giving realistic sensation is also a method of giving a sense of structural strength and stability in which the height of the pagoda’s stories gradually becomes shorter toward the top. The combination of these two techniques gives the Lingguang pagoda a beautiful form. The Lingguang pagoda was erected over a tomb in which was placed not sari relics but an actual human corpse. Considering that the person buried there was not a Buddhist practitioner but more likely a member of the royal family or aristocracy, the Lingguang pagoda has a distinct character quite unlike the brick pagodas of other areas. Furthermore, judging from the inward slope and the beautiful lines shown by the curved roof eaves, we can see that the people of Parhae had techniques for building pagodas unmatched elsewhere. The Chinese assertion that the Lingguang pagoda was

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

162

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

simply an imitation of Chinese pagodas is without any clear foundation. Also, Korean scholars, while recognizing that Koguryoˇ pagodas are Korean, have totally ignored Parhae’s pagodas. Fortunately there has recently been a string of studies contending that Parhae’s architecture is Korean, but research on pagodas has not expanded north beyond the Silluk ˇ monastery multi-story pagoda of central Korea. Even while recognizing that the Koguryoˇ general’s tomb of the Changchun region of China is Korean, Koran scholars have treated Parhae pagodas as though they had nothing to do with Korea. Korean scholars must now include both the Koguryoˇ brick pagoda at Shenyang and the brick pagodas of Parhae, including the Lingguang pagoda into our architectural tradition and restore the broken links of Korean architectural history.

ARCHITECTURAL ORNAMENTATION Representative of Parhae’s architectural ornamentation are the tiles used to decorate roofs. Roof tiles discovered to date include concave and convex tiles, and decorative demon design tiles and owl’s tail tiles. These can be divided into two types: glazed tiles and unglazed gray tiles. The concave tiles are wide in the front and narrow in the rear. Sizes vary according to buildings. Some have decorative designs on the front, some do not. The convex tiles are of uniform width and have lips on which to place the next tiles on the rear. Also, many end cap tiles with various designs have been found. The sizes and styles

Figure 13.9: Column Base Decoration

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

163

Figure 13.10: Parhae End Cap Tile

of these tiles indicate that they are unlike the tiles of the Chinese Central Plain; rather they appear to have been strongly influenced by Koguryoˇ traditions. The representative design on Parhae tiles is the lotus flower, a type that is different from that of China. The typical decorative tile of Parhae is the ridge-end tile. The ridge-end tile unearthed at the first monastery site in Parhae’s Northern Capital is large, being 97 centimeters long, 87 centimeters high, and 39 centimeters wide. A ridge-end tile unearthed at the ninth monastery site is 91 centimeters long, 91.5 centimeters high, and 36 centimeters wide. The buildings on which these ridge-end tiles were placed must themselves have been quite large and grand. The demondesign tiles used to decorate eaves are much more three-dimensional than those found in other regions. They have protruding angry eyes, large noses, and wide mouths. They are also large, with lengths ranging from 33 to 43 centimeters, heights from 23 to 27 centimeters, and widths from 31 to 37 centimeters. It is said that when the Chinese were repairing the main building of Nanchan Monastery in Shanxi Province, the oldest building in China, they were unable to determine the shape and size of the end cap tiles and so they used the end cap tiles unearthed from Parhae’s Northern Capital as models. This provides affirmation of the high level of technical skills the people of Parhae displayed in making end cap tiles. Nonetheless, China persists in believing that its culture is the most superior and that it influenced the cultures of minority peoples. Such is the reality of the socialist multi-ethnic state based on the notion of the superiority of the Han Chinese in all cultural and artistic spheres.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

164

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR IN PARHAE ARCHITECTURE The excavation of Parhae remains, begun by the Japanese in the 1930s, has been continued by China, North Korea, and Russia each of which occupies a portion of old Parhae territory. Only recently has South Korea been able to participate partially in excavations in Russia’s Maritime Province. Each country with an interest in Parhae’s architecture has interpreted it according to its own position and has committed the blunder of ignoring the uniqueness of Parhae’s architectural culture. The primary elements in shaping a society’s architectural culture are its natural environment and climate, but the cultural heritage of the people who form that society is also important. In other words, architecture has both universal and particular cultural elements. It has been confirmed that all the forms of Parhae architecture were formed by the elements discussed above. Even so, each of the neighboring countries has found elements homogeneous with its own culture which it then cites as evidence of its influence on Parhae and has failed to recognize Parhae’s own distinctive architectural culture. Parhae’s architectural particularity can be found in various ways. The Northern Capital was a walled city built on a plain. But Parhae’s walled cities were not simply plains cities; they invariably included mountain fortresses and thus embraced features of the indigenous cultures of such neighboring entities as Koguryoˇ . Also, the bases of all the walls and buildings of Parhae walled cities were made of basalt which was covered with plaster to smooth out the surfaces. The building of such bases was not a feature of China’s Central Plains. We can say that plastering basalt rocks to make a smooth surface was yet another expressive method of Parhae’s architecture. The corner stones found at Parhae remains include those with carved pedestals and those without pedestals that have decorations at the bases of posts. This was a unique Parhae feature that cannot be found in China or the Korean Peninsula. Pre-Parhae buildings usually have one-dimensional decorations, but Parhae’s buildings have three-dimensional ornamentation. Also, on the foundation below the base, the people of Parhae put L-shaped stones to keep the base from slipping and thus increase the stability of walls and buildings. One of the most particular features of Parhae’s architecture was the hypocaust heating system. This is the item that North Korea counts first among elements of Koguryoˇ influence, as evidence that Parhae was the successor to Koguryoˇ ’s cultural tradition. But the population of Parhae was not made up only of Koguryoˇ remnants but also included Malgal. Furthermore, people in various parts of Manchuria still use a kind of hypocaust. Rather than asserting that the hypocaust was a unique feature of Koguryoˇ and Parhae, it would be a more objective interpretation to see that the hypocaust was used by all the peoples who lived in this region. Universal and particular elements can be found coexisting in all architectural cultures, so no matter how much we may assert that

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PARHAE’S ARCHITECTURAL CULTURE

165

some feature is particular, we must keep in mind that there is always the possibility that the feature is, after all, not unique. There are no remains with identical features with Parhae’s twentyfour stone remains in China’s Central Plain, the Korean Peninsula, or Japan. The twenty-four stone remains are a particular architectural form found only in Parhae. That such a new architectural form existed in Parhae tells us that Parhae had an architectural culture separate from those of the Tang and Koguryoˇ . It also suggests that Parhae developed its own distinct architectural culture. There is no denying that with the passage of time Parhae imported greater amounts of the advanced culture of the Tang dynasty. The pattern of the transmission of architectural culture entails absorbing an advanced culture and modifying it to one’s own particular environment. A proper understanding of Parhae’s culture requires an objective appraisal of both universal and particular elements.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PART FIVE

PARHAE AS SEEN FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES CHINESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE IN NORTH KOREA, JAPAN, AND RUSSIA

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

14

Chinese Perceptions of Parhae Yun Jae-Woon (Northeast Asian History Foundation)

‰

been much attention focused on the histories of Koguryoˇ , Parhae, and Old Chosoˇ n in relation with China’s “Northeast Project” (short for Northeast Borderland History and Chain of Events Research Project). The Northeast Project began to elicit a major reaction from Korean academic circles after it was revealed that Chinese policy-making authorities were behind the contentions that the histories of Parhae, Koguryoˇ , and Old Chosoˇ n, all kingdoms that once existed in part in what is now Chinese territory, belong to the history of China. Ever since China opened up to the outside world in recent years it has regarded the history of Parhae as that of a regional regime of the Tang empire, a view that is based on the current notion of greater China as a “unified multi-ethnic state.” It goes without saying that China regards Koguryoˇ in the same light. However, whereas not all Chinese scholars agree that Koguryoˇ is part of China’s history, they are unanimous in their view that Parhae’s history belongs to China. There has been a tendency among some Chinese historians to recognize that the history of Koguryoˇ after that kingdom moved its capital to P’yoˇ ngyang belongs to the history of Korea. But the goal of the Northeast Project, among both Chinese scholars and Chinese policy-making authorities, has been to incorporate the whole history of Koguryoˇ , including the period after the move to P’yoˇ ngyang, into the history of China. Thus interest in the histories of Koguryoˇ and Parhae among Korean scholars is now much higher than ever before. Chinese research into the history of Parhae (Ch. Bohai) began at the turn of the twentieth century. Among the early Chinese publications on Parhae history are the 1913 Bohai guoji of Huang Weihan and the 1918 Bohai guozi of Tang Yan, but the first really

RECENTLY THERE HAS

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

172

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

substantial research on the history of Parhae on the continent came with the appearance of Jin Yufu’s Bohai guozi changbian in 1934. Jin covered all the documentary materials related to Parhae and compiled annals, royal lineages, and a chronological table while providing a detailed investigation of 135 items based on reference to over 100 documents in his general survey of Parhae history. His work is still used as a guide and a compilation of historical materials for research into Parhae history. Research into Chinese national history is led by the Institute of Nationality Studies and the Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Social Sciences which grew out of the former Central Academy of Sciences (Academia Sinica) and the Beiping (old name for Beijing) Academy of Sciences; prior to the Great Cultural Revolution, the main focus of these institutions was archaeological. Chinese research on Parhae as a history of a Chinese minority ethnic group gained momentum after the end of the Cultural Revolution. There was great interest in the study of Parhae in China from the late 1970s through the early 1980s before interest fell off in the late 1980s. It appears as though Chinese scholars felt that they had completed basic research into the questions of the ownership of Parhae’s history and the origins of the Parhae people. The fifteen research tasks set forth by the Northeast Project in 2003 covered Parhae’s foreign relations and the investigation of the international stature of Parhae remains. The tasks announced in 2004 included the origins of the Parhae people, the actions of Parhae remnants after the fall of the kingdom, and the question of the ownership of Parhae history. The interest in the ownership of Parhae history appears to have been related to China’s efforts to have Parhae remains designated as UNESCO World Cultural Heritage sites. The following sections will examine three representative items of contention regarding Parhae between Korean and Chinese scholars.

THE COMPOSITION OF THE PEOPLE OF PARHAE Chinese scholars have generally set forth two views about the composition of the people of Parhae. One is that they were Malgal (Ch. Mohe); the other is that they constituted a Parhae ethnic group. The Malgal theory has gained support from most Chinese scholars. Jin Xiang notes that such materials as the “Rescript to the King of Silla, Kim Hunggwang,” ˇ written on behalf of the Tang emperor Xuanzong (r. 712–756) by Zhang Jiuling, contained the phrase “Parhae Malgal,” along with the records in the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang) and the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) referring to the “Parhae Malgal” and argues that “Parhae was originally Songmal Malgal (Ch. Sumo Mohe).” He also interprets the statement in the Jiu Tangshu that Tae Choyoˇ ng (r. 698–719) belonged to a branch of the Koguryoˇ as meaning that Tae was originally a Malgal

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CHINESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE

173

who submitted to Koguryoˇ , and the statement in the Xin Tangshu that Parhae’s founder was “originally from the Songmal Malgal, attached himself to Koguryoˇ ; and his surname was Tae (Ch. Da)” to mean that the “founder of Parhae was originally a Songmal Malgal whose surname was Tae and who attached himself to Koguryoˇ .” Jin also contends the statement in the Cefu yuangui that “the Malgal Tae Choyoˇ ng was enfiefed as the King of Parhae Commandery” indicates that “Malgal” was the name of either an ethnic group or a kingdom, while contending that in the situation and time when the Tang was seeking to make the Malgal a dependency, the term Malgal was more probably an ethnic designation than the name of a state. Simply put, he argues that the “Parhae royal family were Malgal.” Also, according to such scholars as Zhu Guochen, Wei Guozhong, and Liu Xiaodong, “Parhae and the Tae family are presumed to have been Malgal, so the bloodlines of the Parhae royal family of Tae Choyoˇ ng were Malgal.” In other words, the term “Koguryoˇ branch” referred only to Tae Choyoˇ ng and his family and not to all the Malgal who had been ruled by Koguryoˇ . “Koguryoˇ branch” meant Malgal like Tae Choyoˇ ng who had become Koguryoˇ -ized or semi-Koguryoˇ -ized. However, the term “branch” means just that: branch or offshoot. It implies that the “branch” is closely related to the main group while also suggesting that there was some difference between the two. The growth of such “branches” means either some division within an ethnic group or residual differences following the union of different ethnic groups. The late Koguryoˇ /early Parhae period has to be seen as one of the union of different ethnic groups rather than the breakdown of pre-existing ethnic groups. Considering the case of Tae Choyoˇ ng in this light, even if we concede that he may have been originally a Songmal Malgal, we have to believe that Tae Choyoˇ ng’s family had belonged to and had been in the service of Koguryoˇ for some time—at least for two generations—and had therefore been detained at Yingzhou with other Koguryoˇ remnants before escaping on their long march to establish a new kingdom. It stands to reason that his group would have already undergone a substantial process of Koguryoˇ -ization so that they could no longer have been homogeneous with the Songmal Malgal that may have been their origin. Furthermore, if we regard Tae Choyoˇ ng to have been a Koguryoˇ person, it is significant that he was termed as being from a “Koguryoˇ branch” when considered in conjunction with such post-668 men as Yi Choˇ nggi (Ch. Li Zhengji), Ko Soˇ nji (Ch. Kao Xianzi; the general who led Tang forces across the Pamirs to confront the Arabs), or Wang Mojung (Ch. Wang Maozhong; a slave renowned for his swordsmanship) who were known as Koguryoˇ descendents. The term “branch” tells that he had some differences with men from the center of Koguryoˇ and suggests that we can regard Tae Choyoˇ ng as a “Koguryoˇ person who lived away from the center in the Sumo River basin.” Next let us examine the arguments of Chinese scholars regarding a putative Parhae ethnicity. Cui Shaohui argues that during the 200

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

174

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

years for the time the Songmal Malgal were subjugated by Koguryoˇ in the late fifth century up until the founding of Parhae, they were assimilated in many ways to Koguryoˇ while still retaining Malgal features. They eventually came to constitute a new ethnic community called the Parhae whose process of formation was closely linked to the process of the founding of the kingdom of Parhae. Son Xiuren and Gan Jiyan, on the other hand, argue that the Parhae ethnic group formed during the 200 years of the Parhae kingdom, centered on a nucleus of the Songmal Malgal and including various other Malgal tribes, the Umnu (Ch. Yilou), the Puyoˇ (Ch. Fuyu) and the residents of the Yemaek (Ch. Huimo) plateau. Son Jinji contends that the Parhae ethnic group was formed from a fusion of Yemaek-related groups such as the Songmal Malgal and Koguryoˇ elements during the 200 years of Parhae. He excludes such northern Malgal groups as the Ch’oˇ lli and the Huksu ˇ whom he contends were never assimilated into Parhae. The Yemaek-related groups included, in addition to the Songmal Malgal, the Puyoˇ , the Okchoˇ , and the Ye, all of whom joined with Koguryoˇ elements and a few Han Chinese to form the new Parhae ethnicity. He also argues that there were significant differences between the culture of the Parhae and the culture of the Wuji line of Malgal. Son Jinji concludes by saying that the majority of the Parhae ethnic group was absorbed into the Han Chinese after the fall of Parhae. Simply put, the theory that there was a Parhae ethnicity is difficult to accept. In the midst of the chaotic events, such as the forced relocation of Parhae people and the rise of Parhae restoration movements, there were separate activities by such non-Parhae elements as Malgal and Nuzhen groups in such locales as Changnyoˇ ng Province, Amnok Province, Namhae Province, and Puyoˇ Province. This shows us that even after over 200 years of Parhae rule, many of these people still existed as Malgal. Thus the Chinese scholars’ arguments that all the people living in Parhae territory were assimilated in one Parhae ethnic group lacks persuasiveness. The view that Parhae was the ethnic successor to Koguryoˇ begins with the common sense observation that Parhae arose in the area where Koguryoˇ people lived. Even if many Koguryoˇ people were relocated elsewhere after the fall of Koguryoˇ in 668, we still must recognize that because Parhae was a kingdom that came into being in old Koguryoˇ territory there can be no doubt that most of its people were of Koguryoˇ origins. There is no basis for saying that they were suddenly replaced by the Malgal or that the Malgal had suddenly begun reproducing at a high rate.

THE INTERNATIONAL STATURE OF PARHAE AS A STATE The basis for the view of Chinese scholars, who contend that Parhae was a border regime of the Tang empire and that Parhae was a Malgal

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CHINESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE

175

kingdom, is in the Xin Tangshu which they believe depicts the founder of Parhae as a Songmal Malgal and the majority of the forces behind the founding of the kingdom as Malgal elements. We have already examined the question of the ethnic origins of the founders of Parhae, so the focus here will be on the question of whether Parhae was a border regime of the Tang. The Chinese scholars advance several arguments here based on their readings of the Xin Tangshu and other sources. One, the kingdom received the name Parhae (Bohai) from the Tang; two, the Tang emperors issued letters of investiture stating that Parhae was located in the Huganzhou Protectorate General and appointed the Parhae kings as governors of that protectorate; three, Parhae was a subordinated district that continuously sent tribute to the Tang; four, just as a Tang official had been sent to oversee the Huksu ˇ Malgal, so a Chief Administrator (Ch. Changshi) was probably dispatched to Parhae; and five, such a famous literary figure as Wen Tingjun described the relationship between Tang and Parhae as being like “a cart and the books that the cart carried.” Let us consider first the name of the kingdom. According to Chinese scholars, the Xin Tangshu states that the kingdom abandoned the name of Malgal and adopted Parhae when the Tang emperor first called the kingdom by that name. However, it seems somewhat of a stretch to assume that the people of the kingdom first started to use Parhae only after the Tang did so. From the very beginning, the people of Parhae called their kingdom either Chin or Parhae; there is no evidence beyond the statement in the Xin Tangshu to show that they called their kingdom Malgal. The use of Malgal and the shift from Malgal to Parhae in Chinese records is simply a reflection of Chinese perceptions, not of Parhae realities. That particular entry should be understood to say that “For the first time, the Tang court formally called Parhae as Parhae rather than referring to it as Malgal.” Let us now consider the question of letters of investiture. Starting with Tae Choyoˇ ng, the kings of Parhae received letters of investiture from the Tang. As is widely known, however, the acceptance of letters of investiture did not make the recipient a regional administration of the Tang. It is a matter of common sense that the receipt of letters of investiture from the Tang did not make such entities as Koguryoˇ , Paekche, Silla, or the Wa dependencies or border administrations of the Tang. The generally accepted understanding of letters of investiture is that they constituted diplomatic recognition. Tribute, too, has long been considered as a form of official trade among the states of East Asia. That is, tribute was a kind of trade and diplomacy that neighboring states had to do in order to gain access to the benefits of the Chinese economy and culture. This understanding makes is difficult to accept the notion that tribute equalled the establishment of political ties between a central government and a border regime. Also, it is difficult to accept the supposition that the Tang sent a Chief Administrator to Parhae as it did at one time to the Huksu ˇ

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

176

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Malgal. The dispatch of a Tang official to the Huksu ˇ Malgal came about in the situation where the Tang and the Huksu ˇ were aligned in opposition to Parhae and probably happened as the result of a request from the Huksu ˇ Malgal for the dispatch of a diplomatic official. Finally, Wen Tingjun’s description of the relationship between the Tang and Parhae as being like “a cart and the books that the cart carried” should be seen as an expression of the friendship between two countries that both shared Chinese literary culture and should not be read as meaning something greater than that. Rather, the way that the Koryoˇ court described Parhae as the “land of our relatives” can be seen as an important example of a claim of real historical affinity.

THE ORIGINS OF PARHAE CULTURE To date, there have been about ten works published in China on the culture of Parhae, almost all of which provide explanations of Parhae’s literature, painting, or sculpture. All of these writings emphasize that Parhae’s culture was a combination of Chinese influence and indigenous Malgal traditions. For example, Li Dianfu concludes that “Parhae formed one part of Tang culture, and any explanations that it had been influenced by some other people’s culture or that it was a continuation of some other country’s culture are all mistaken; Parhae was a district of the Tang that accepted letters of investiture from the Tang emperor, and it was a regional region of the Tang empire; the Songmal (Ch. Sumo) Malgal made up the bulk of the Parhae population and as members of the Tang feudal empire’s multi-ethnic national family, their culture was the product of the joint efforts of the entire Chinese nation.” Wei Cuncheng argues that “The Parhae regime was at the same time an ethnic regime of the Malgal and a regional regime that accepted letters of investiture from the Tang central government; thus there is no doubt that Parhae culture was nothing other than one part of the greater Chinese culture of the Tang era; whenever we speak of Tang culture or ancient Chinese culture, we always include Parhae and it is only by including the culture of Parhae into the culture of the Tang and of China that we can speak of it with greater depth and clarity.” Such arguments either ignore or distort the Koguryoˇ elements in Parhae’s culture. Son Jinji notes that Parhae culture was formed by the fusion of major Chinese influences with Malgal and Koguryoˇ elements. Wei Cuncheng also notes that Parhae culture shows elements of Koguryoˇ influence in such aspects as the combination of mountain and plain fortresses, lotus-design roof tiles, earthen-mound stone-chamber tombs, and four-eared jars. Wei, however, contends that although Koguryoˇ elements were present at the beginning of Parhae, from the time of King Mun (r. 737–793), Parhae accepted Tang culture and he concludes that we cannot say that Parhae

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CHINESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE

177

succeeded to and developed Koguryoˇ culture. Son and Wei at least recognize the presence of some Koguryoˇ elements; other scholars make no references to Koguryoˇ elements. Furthermore, the scholar Li Dianfu engages in distortion by arguing that the only significant element in Parhae culture that was different from China was the building of mountain fortresses; he argues that Parhae’s earthen-mound tombs were markedly different from those of Koguryoˇ . Even though he admits that early Parhae roof tiles were similar to those of Koguryoˇ , he contends that later Parhae roof tiles were like those unearthed at Xian. It appears that these arguments have been advanced in order to defend the Chinese position that Parhae was a Malgal kingdom that existed as a border regime of the Tang. Next, let us review a few examples of how Chinese historians view the question of whether Parhae was the successor to Koguryoˇ ’s cultural tradition. With regard to tombs, Chinese scholars assume that Koguryoˇ and Parhae’s stone chamber tombs were influenced by Chinese but originally came from the Malgal pit tomb. This forced view appears to derive from the desire to see Parhae as a Malgal state; it is probably more rational to see vertical stone-chamber pit tombs as having been used universally by non-elite social groups throughout pre-modern times. The extensive use of bricks in tombs does appear to have some remote connection with Chinese styles; however, the simple fact of the use of bricks does not mean that we can say that the tombs were Han or Tang Chinese styles. We have to consider that people will tend to use bricks in natural environments where there are few stones and much soil. Even though the tomb of Princess Choˇ nghyo used bricks, the overall style of construction, such as the composite ceiling, followed Koguryoˇ models. Chinese scholars, as part of their effort to define the people of Parhae as Malgal, consider the “Malgal pumpkin-shaped jar” to be the representative pottery of Parhae. Such jars have been unearthed from the tomb complex at Liudingshan in Dunhua as well as from remains in Yongch’oˇ n Province of the Northern Capital and other residential areas. However, the same kind of jars have also been unearthed at such Koguryoˇ sites at Hagubi, Poˇ ptong-ni (Beopdongni), Chasoˇ ng (Jaseong) County in North Korea’s Chagang (Jagang) Province and from a Koguryoˇ tomb at the foot of Taesoˇ ng (Daeseong) Mountain. Does that mean, then, that these jars from Koguryoˇ remains should also be called “Malgal pumpkin-shaped jars?” Many of these crude jars have been discovered for both the Koguryoˇ and Parhae periods and can be said to have been used by both the people of Koguryoˇ and the people of Parhae. We should not try to distinguish refined and crude pottery styles along ethnic lines; rather the differences in pottery should be seen as reflecting social and cultural differences between elites and non-elites and between the center and the provinces. The four Parhae residential remains discovered at the famed Tuanjie site in Dongning Prefecture of Heilongjiang Province are

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

178

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Figure 14.1: Parhae hypocaust remains at Kraskino in Russia’s Maritime Province

considered by Chinese scholars to have been Malgal dwellings. Hypocaust (ondol) remains have been found at these sites, but the Chinese scholars make no mention of how the hypocausts show a relation to Koguryoˇ . However, numerous hypocausts have been found in Koguryoˇ remains, as well as in Parhae remains in Yongch’oˇ n Province of the Northern Capital, in Hamgyoˇ ng Province, and at Kraskino in the Russian Maritime Province. Not only does the continued use of hypocausts in Parhae indicate that Parhae’s culture was a continuation of that of Koguryoˇ , but it also can be seen as providing an important indicator of the ethnic composition of Parhae’s populace. Finally, let us consider fortress remains. Two features of Koguryoˇ fortress construction were the “bridle” and the “jar wall.” The “bridle” was a portion of the fortress wall that projected outward from the fortress, enabling early detection of the approach of the enemy and allowing the defenders to attack the enemy from three sides. The “jar wall” was a curved wall surrounding and extending outward from the fortress gate in order to protect the gate from direct attack by the enemy. Another important feature of the construction of Koguryoˇ fortresses was the use of stone. All of these Koguryoˇ features are found in Parhae fortresses. To summarize, Chinese perceptions of Parhae history show the following features. One is that it is closed related to the urgency felt by the current Chinese government to resolve the minority problem through such concepts as “the formation of the Chinese nation” and the “unified multi-ethnic nation.” As a consequence, current Chinese

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

CHINESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE

179

historical perceptions depend less on close examination of historical facts than on supporting the Chinese government’s practical needs, so that conclusions about such questions as who “owns” certain ethnic groups, certain territories, and certain histories are predicated on particular goals. A second is that Parhae was a regional regime of a Chinese minority ethnic group or that Parhae was a regional regime that was controlled by the Tang dynasty. The bases for these claims are that Parhae sent tribute and accepted letters of investiture and that Parhae’s territory was part of the lands administered by Chinese dynasties. A third is that Chinese scholars deny the connections between Old Chosoˇ n and Koguryoˇ , Puyoˇ and Koguryoˇ , Koguryoˇ and Parhae, and Koguryoˇ and Koryoˇ , thereby fundamentally rejecting the Koreans’ understanding of their history as beginning with Old Chosoˇ n and continuing through Puyoˇ , Koguryoˇ , Parhae and Unified Silla to Koryoˇ . The logic behind Chinese perceptions of history can be summarized as “using the old for the present.” In other words, whatever is Chinese territory now has always been part of Chinese history. This kind of presentism is not a proper approach for the study of history. For historians, the task of recovering the original aspects of history lies in illuminating the ways in which history developed.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

15

Perceptions of Parhae in North Korea, Japan, and Russia Park Jin Suk (Ch’ungnam University)

‰

PARHAE WAS THE “flourishing kingdom in the east” that controlled a vast territory including today’s Manchuria, northern Korea, and part of Russia’s Maritime Province. All of the present countries whose territories include land that once belonged to Parhae are pursuing research on Parhae from their own national perspectives. The biggest reason why this is so is because Parhae did not leave behind any records of its own, leaving the field open for each country to advance its own interests in the interpretation of Parhae’s history. For example, China, which now controls the bulk of what had been Parhae’s territory, has long argued on the basis of interpretations of archaeological excavations that Parhae was nothing more than a regional regime of the Tang and that it was thus a part of Chinese history. The Chinese position has been solidified during the recent Northeast Project of 2002–2006 which sought, under official direction, to incorporate the histories of both Kogury oˇ and Parhae into their national history. The Russians, too, have staked a claim to Parhae, arguing on the basis of remains and relics in their Maritime Province that the history of Parhae was that of the Malgal, whom they consider to have been a Russian minority ethnic group. By contrast, scholars in both North and South Korea focus on the point that Parhae was an independent state that was the successor to Kogury oˇ and are making considerable efforts to restore Parhae as part of Korean history. On the other hand, scholars in Japan, a country that has no territorial interests in Parhae, have conducted substantial research on Parhae from a more objective position. This chapter will examine the how scholars in North Korea, Russia,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE IN NORTH KOREA

181

and Japan see Parhae, with a focus on the backgrounds and trends of their research.

NORTH KOREAN PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE’S HISTORY North Korea, which occupies a portion of Parhae’s old territory, began to study Parhae’s history in earnest in the 1960s. Representative of North Korean research at that time was an article by Pak Sihyoˇ ng titled “For the Study of the History of Parhae,” in which he engaged in a detailed inspection of materials from China, Korea, and Japan and showed that Parhae was the successor to Koguryoˇ in terms of its population, territory, autonomy, and, of course, culture. Furthermore, Pak Sihyoˇ ng covered a wide range of issues, including the origins of the Tae lineage, the question of the original name of Chin for the kingdom, the evaluation of such Chinese sources as the Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang) and the Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang), exchanges between Parhae and Silla, the nature of the suryoˇ ng as one stratum of Parhae society, marriage relations between Parhae and Silla, and the period when Tae Kwanghyoˇ n took refuge in Koryoˇ . Pak’s research is given high marks as an effort to marshal evidence for Parhae as part of Korean history. It is also noteworthy that his suggestions for future research directions have formed the official position of North Korean scholars and have had much influence on the establishment of the view that depicts the line of historical succession from Koguryoˇ to Parhae to Koryoˇ . The expanded and revised version of the Chosoˇ n t’ongsa (History of Korea) published in 1962 allocated considerable space to Parhae and also declared Koryoˇ to have been the first unified nation state in Korea. This put Parhae on the same level as Silla in Korean history and showed a clear difference from the Silla-centered view of South Korean scholars. Furthermore, North Korean research on Parhae’s history also made active use of archaeological studies of Parhae remains and relics. Because of the paucity of written records about Parhae, it was necessary to rely to a relatively high degree on archaeological materials. In the 1960s, a joint North Korean-Chinese archaeological excavation team was organized. Between August 1962 and July 1965, this team carried out four excavations of Parhae remains in Manchuria, the results of which were published in a book titled Chungguk tongbuk chibang ui ˇ yujoˇ k palgul pogo (Report on Excavation of Remains in China’s Northeast Region). Chu Yoˇ nghoˇ n, the leading North Korean archaeologist of the 1960s, argued, on the basis of Choˇ ng Yagyong’s (Jeong Yagyong) investigation1 and on materials uncovered by the excavation, that the Odong fortress in Dunhua was the first capital of Parhae and that it was the seat of Hyoˇ ndoˇ k Province of the Central Capital region. Furthermore, after taking into consideration the results of the excavations of the Liudingshan tomb complex and the Eastern Capital remains, he concluded that remains

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

182

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

from tombs, cities, and architecture all showed that Parhae was the successor to Koguryoˇ and that Parhae in turn passed that heritage on to Koryoˇ . Also, Chang Sangnyoˇ l focused on the construction of stone lanterns at the Northern Capital, measured the finial (cap) section to estimate the basic dimensions of Parhae lantern construction and argued that it contained Koguryoˇ elements. He also restored the open pavilion discovered inside the walls of the Eastern Capital. Finally, in 1967, the Archaeology Research Center of the Academy of Social Sciences conducted an investigation of remains related to Old Chosoˇ n on the eastern seacoast at which time scholars determined that the Ch’oˇ nghae earthen fortress belonged to the Parhae period. As seen above the bulk of North Korean research on Parhae in the 1960s focused on remains and relics from various locales in what is now Chinese territory. But the rapidly changing situation in China from the late 1960s made it difficult for North Korean scholars to gain access to new materials in China; that, in combination with North Korea’s new emphasis on self-reliance (chuch’e; juche) led to the cessation of joint projects with Chinese scholars. As a consequence, North Korean scholars began to show interest in Parhae remains inside North Korean territory. But there was little new work in the 1970s and what was published was mostly devoted to expanding on what had already been done in the 1960s, as seen in Chu Yoˇ nghoˇ n’s 1971 book titled Parhae munhwa (The Culture of Parhae) and Chang Sangnyoˇ l’s articles on Parhae architecture. Also, such books as Chosoˇ n kogohak kaeyo (Overview of Korean Archaeology) and Chosoˇ n choˇ nsa (Complete History of Korea) simply repeated what Chu and Chang had already said. In the 1980s, North Korean research on Parhae history gained new momentum. North Korea greatly expanded its scholarly institutions and manpower for the study of Parhae in the second half of the 1980s and attained many new research results. Scholars such as Chang Sangnyoˇ l, Ch’ae Huiguk, ˇ and An Inho focused their efforts on examining the links between Koguryoˇ and Parhae through examinations respectively of Parhae city walls (and especially the walls of the Eastern Capital), the tombs of princesses Choˇ nghye and Choˇ nghyo, and the Yoˇ ngju pagoda that is believed to date from the Parhae period. As described above, at the very least we can recognize that North Korean scholars have made continuous efforts to ensure that the history of Parhae occupies a proper position in the history of the Korean nation. In that respect, we can say that South Korean scholars share the same basic concerns. However, with the firm establishment of the self-reliance ideology as North Korea’s “unitary ideology” in the 1980s, North Korean scholars have displayed a tendency to focus on the issues of Parhae as successor to Koguryoˇ and Koryoˇ as successor to Parhae. It is clear that the arguments made by the North Koreans about the links between Koguryoˇ and Parhae contain important information for establishing the true status of Parhae’s

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE IN NORTH KOREA

183

history, but by being overly committed to that issue, they have often made unreasonable arguments and have neglected the study of other aspects of Parhae. Thus the North Korean acceptance of late Chosoˇ n Practical Learning scholars research on Parhae without first engaging in a critical examination of the sources has become a problem that must be overcome in order to incorporate the history of Parhae firmly into the history of Korea.

JAPANESE PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE Even though Japan has no territorial connections with Parhae, its scholars have shown an interest in Parhae as strong as that shown by scholars of other nations. Japan has some important primary source materials for the study of Parhae, of which the Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan, continued, from 697–791) is the most representative. The Shoku Nihongi contains much material about relations between Parhae and Japan that cannot be found in such Chinese sources as the Jiu Tangshu or the Xin Tangshu. In particular the diplomatic documents exchanged between the two states provide important clues for understanding the question of whether Parhae regarded itself as successor to Koguryoˇ . Hayashi Taisuke was the first to focus on this; in his 1892 Chosenshi (History of Korea), he described Parhae as maintaining ritual in its contacts with Japan and as presenting local products to the Japanese court. By using such a vague term as “local products,” he laid down the foundation for later scholars to view Parhae as a tributary to Japan. In 1893, Yoshida Togo treated Koguryoˇ and Parhae as one and the same in his Nikkan koshidan (Aspects of Ancient Japanese and Korean History). It appears that at least until the 1890s, scholars in Japan considered Parhae as part of Korean history and viewed Parhae in connection with Koguryoˇ . Coming into the first decade of the twentieth century, however, Japanese perceptions of Parhae changed greatly. In an article published in 1906 titled, “Mukashi no Manshu” (Ancient Manchuria), Naga Tsuyo contended that Parhae was not part of Korean history but of Manchurian history and that Parhae was a dependency of Japan. That this change came right after the Russo-Japanese War and the conclusion of the 1905 Portsmouth Treaty when Japan gained concessions in Manchuria indicates that Japanese historians were providing legitimacy for Japanese aggression in Manchuria. This tendency became clearer with the establishment of an investigation office of the South Manchuria Railway Company in 1907. Representative scholars active at that time included Shiratori Kurakichi, Ikeuchi Hiroshi, Matsui Hitoshi, and Tsuda Shokichi. After the investigation office of the South Manchurian Railway was abolished and its work transferred to Tokyo Imperial University in 1914, little new research was done on Parhae history. However, after the 1927 establishment of the Doa Kokogakkai for the purpose of conducting archaeological research in

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

184

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

East Asia, there was a rapid increase in archaeological excavation and scholarly articles on Parhae remains. Research into Parhae’s history gained new momentum in the 1930s after Japan occupied Manchuria and created Manchukuo. The research published during this period suffered from further intensification of efforts to enhance Japanese diplomatic prestige even as it was engaging in aggression on the continent and to support Japan’s hegemonic version of pan-Asianism. After Japan’s defeat in World War II and its loss of Manchuria, there was little interest through the 1960s among Japanese scholars in the history of Parhae. Activities by such scholars as Wada Sei, Mikami Tsugio, Hino Kaisaburo, Nizuma Toshihiki, and Toriyama Kiichi amounted to little more than extensions of what they had been doing during the colonial period. Wada worked on Parhae geography, Mikami on links between Koguryoˇ and Parhae, Hino on Lesser Koguryoˇ and the Malgal, and Nizuma on contacts between Parhae and Japan, while Toriyama expanded the 1915 Bokkai shiko (Examination into the History of Parhae) and published it as Bokkai shi no sai mondai (Problems in Parhae History). By the 1970s, research into Parhae history was being done mostly by the post-war generation, including such noteworthy scholars as Suzuki Yasutami, Ishii Takamasa, Sakayori Masashi, and Hamada Kosaku. Ishii, looking at the issue of Parhae’s sense of self as successor to Koguryoˇ , argued that such an identity was understood differently in Parhae and Japan. Parhae was presenting itself as successor to a powerful and great state of the past whereas Japan saw it as meaning that Parhae was the successor to a former tributary state. But the most significant set of problems researched by Japanese scholars at this time was in illuminating the role that Parhae played in forming interstate relations in Northeast Asia, investigating issues related to the comings and goings of emissaries, merchants, and monks as well as international rituals and diplomatic documents related to the Tang and Parhae. This research went beyond the conventional framework of exchanges between Manchuria and Japan and of Parhae as a tributary to Japan, considering such issues as the influence of Parhae on Japan and Japanese internal needs for contact with Parhae. But even this research went no further than to treat Parhae as an intermediary between Japan and the Tang and failed to consider the fact that Parhae was an important access point for continental civilization. By the 1980s, Japanese scholars were able, on the basis of what had been achieved thus far, to engage in more diversified research efforts on Parhae. Furuhata Toru looked at the early period of relations between Parhae and Japan, while Hamada Kosaku examined Parhae’s position in international relations through investigation of the competition between Parhae and Silla at the Tang court. Such research was important in that it focused on varying aspects of Parhae’s relations with other states and also in that it brought our attention to the antagonistic relations between Parhae and Silla. Suzuki Yasutami worked on the suryoˇ ng, showing that they were

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE IN NORTH KOREA

185

included in diplomatic missions and that they engaged in trade, work that was later continued by Kawakami Yo and Osumi Akihiro. The work of these scholars clarified the influence of the suryoˇ ng in Japanese trade and also pointed out the role that the suryoˇ ng played in strengthening Parhae’s incomplete system of local rule. Strong Japanese interest in the history of Parhae continued into the 1990s. The main trends are as follows. First, there were efforts to understand East Asia from a framework of antagonism between Parhae and Silla and friendship between Parhae and Japan. Lee Sungshi’s work on the Changin kisa (Ch. Changren jishi; Record of a Giant) found in the Silla biography of the Xin Tangshu is representative of this trend, but there were also scholars who were critical of this point of view. Hamada Kosaku, for example, contended that the argument that Parhae and Japan formed a military alliance at the time of the plan to attack Silla is too speculative, while Furuhata Toru focused on the possibility of negotiations between Parhae and Silla. Second, there was a tendency to treat the history of Parhae within the larger East Asian region from a position assuming a Japan-centric view. Although there are some minor differences in points of view, generally these scholars argue that the Japan of that time saw itself as forming a center of civilization, that Japan treated Parhae with the interstate ritual that applied to a dependency, and that Parhae, unlike Silla, accepted such treatment. The evidence cited for this argument included restrictions on the number of embassies, the disputes over the point of arrival, and the authority to open diplomatic documents. In other words, Japan’s interest in Parhae cooled after the collapse of the plan to attack Silla and Japan took these measures in order to limit relations with Parhae to economic exchange only. These arguments, however, seem to place too much emphasis on the idea that it was Japan that played the leading role in relations between Parhae and Japan. On the other hand, there were also scholars who were critical of such Japan-centric points of view. There was an effort to show that the reason for the end of the plan to attack Silla lay in the lessening of a sense of crisis following the subjugation of the An Lushan rebellion. There was also research focusing on such individuals as Kaiyu (Japanese monk who went to the Tang in the late eighth century), Suguwara Michizane (845–903; scholar and political figure), and Han Chaocai (late eighth century Tang envoy) to argue that Parhae formed a bridge between Japan and the Tang. One important new trend that cannot be overlooked is research into ancient cultural exchanges in the East Sea (Sea of Japan) region. Whereas such regional studies in the past have pursued international relations from the point of view of the nation-state, this new tendency seeks to transcend Japanese national borders and to treat exchanges from within a new regional framework and as such is an important new initiative. The discovery of Parhae remains and relics in various locales in Japan such as Hokuriku have lent added impetus to this effort. Scholars doing important work in this area include Kojima Yoshitake, Nishikawa Hiroshi, and Nishitani

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

186

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Tadashi. This type of research that goes beyond textual evidence to approach cultural history using archaeological findings holds great promise for expanding our horizons in the future. We also cannot overlook the fact that survey histories dealing with Parhae were published in the 1990s. Ueda Takashi published two such books in the early 1990s, Nihon-Hokkai koshoshi (History of Relations between Japan and Parhae) and Hokkaishi no kenkyu (Research in Parhae History), in which he provided systematic analyses of historical materials pertaining to various topics in the relations between the two countries. He used historical materials to analyze such detailed issues as the periods of the dispatch of envoys, the schedule of envoys during their stay, points of departure and arrival, the composition of missions, and whether or not ships were provided. More recently, Ishii Takamasa has published a book titled Nihon-Hokkai kankeishi no kenkyu (Research in the History of Relations between Japan and Parhae) and Sakayori Masashi has published his Hokkai to Kodai Nihon (Parhae and Ancient Japan), lending even more energy to the study of Parhae in Japan. As we have seen, Japanese studies of Parhae history show a tendency toward rationalizing a Japan-led diplomatic order, so particular caution is needed when using these studies.

RUSSIAN PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE’S HISTORY The Russians regard Parhae as the first feudal state in the Maritime Province and as a multi-ethnic state. Unlike the Chinese or the Japanese, the Russians stress that Parhae was an independent and autonomous state but their ultimate goal is to incorporate the history of the Maritime Province into the history of Russia. In other words, by depicting Parhae as an independent and autonomous state that belonged to neither Chinese nor Korean history, the Russians are trying to claim Parhae’s history as their own. This is not unrelated to Stalin’s attempt to separate Manchuria from China after World War II and to the territorial disputes that arose between Russia and China in the 1960s. Ultimately, the Russians see a historical progression linking the Malgal, Parhae, and the Nuzhen to the ethnic minorities of the modern Maritime Province, and they see the history of Parhae from within that framework. The Russians have seen the population of Parhae as having been composed of a majority of Malgal, along with Koguryoˇ , Uighur, Tujue, Shiwei, and Sogdian elements. Even though the Koguryoˇ elements had the greatest influence, the Russians contend that the Malgal took the initiative in founding Parhae and thus Parhae cannot be seen as a successor to Koguryoˇ . Such an attitude is no different from that of the Chinese who contend that because Manchuria is now their territory, the histories of Koguryoˇ , Puyoˇ , and Parhae all belong to Chinese history. Although both China and Russia view Parhae as a Malgal state, they disagree sharply on how they relate the

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

PERCEPTIONS OF PARHAE IN NORTH KOREA

187

history of the Malgal to their own countries. Whereas the Russians criticize the Chinese for being “China-centric” and “Asia-centric,” the Chinese criticize the Russians for being “Central Asia-centric” and “hegemonic.” Russian interest in the history of Parhae gained new impetus after the Maritime Province region was incorporated into Russia with the 1860 Treaty of Beijing. But we can say that Russian research into Parhae began in earnest in the 1950s. In 1953, the Soviet Academy of Sciences organized a Far Eastern Archaeology Research team and in 1954 the Academy of Sciences established in Vladivostok branches for the study of Far Eastern history, archaeology, and ethnicity. This brought about a major transformation in Russian studies of Parhae. Representative figures in the study of Parhae from that time are the archaeologist A.P. Okladnikov and his student E.V. Shavkunov. Shavkunov in particular published a series of several reports relating to Parhae, beginning with his “1955–1956 nyoˇ n Yoˇ nhae-ju yaoe chosa kyoˇ lgwa pogosoˇ ” (Report on the Results of Field Investigations in the Maritime Province, 1955–56). The results he obtained from participating in excavations were published in a 1968 book titled Parhaeguk kwa Yoˇ nhae-ju ui ˇ Parhae munhwa yujoˇ k (The State of Parhae and Parhae Cultural Remains in the Maritime Province). This book derived from his 1962 Ph.D. dissertation at Novosibirsk State University and attracts attention as the first systematic treatment of Parhae history. Shavkunov has remained very active, conducting follow up excavations at such locales as the Novogoreevskoye fortress and village site, the Maryannosvskoye fortress site, and the Kikolaevskoye fortress sites I and II in the 1960s and 1970s, the Kraskino fortress site, the Aurovskoye and one other monastery site in the 1980s, while also doing excavations at such new sites as the Konstantinovskoye village site and the Starorechenskoye fortress site. Currently, Russian research on Parhae is being led by the Institute of History, Archaeology, and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East in the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences organized by A.I. Krushanov in July, 1971. Scholars working there include Shavkunov, Alexander Boldin, Alexander Ivliev, and Evgenia Gelman. Most research done on Parhae is published in the name of this institute. Inasmuch as Russian research on Parhae relies almost completely on data from the Maritime Province, it is not without problems of interpretation. There is no comparative research with relics unearthed in Manchuria or North Korea, giving rise to problems of assessment. Thus the use of results from the Maritime Province to argue that Parhae was a Malgal state is difficult to sustain, especially since the Maritime Province was located at considerable distance from the center of Parhae. Also, instead of excavating a site in its entirety, the Russians have chosen to excavate only a few select spots so that we still do not have information on complete sites from that area. Thus current research seems to center more on relics than on

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

188

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

complete site reports. Nonetheless, in circumstances where there is no documentary evidence, we can give high marks to the Russians for their efforts to use archaeological findings to reconstruct Parhae history. Furthermore, we must recognize that with the accumulation of research results since the 1970s, the researchers have become more professional and are now making important contributions to our understanding of new aspects of Parhae history.

NOTES 1

Choˇ ng Yagyong (Tasan; 1762–1836) was a renowned scholar of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries whose voluminous writings included such things as investigations of Korean history and Korean historical geography.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

APPENDICES Timeline of Parhae History Lineage Chart of Parhae Kings References

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Fortress at Dengzhou

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Timeline of Parhae History ‰

698 713

719 726 727 728 732 733 737 738 739 756 758 759 762 764 771

774

776 790 793 793 794 795

Tae Choyoˇ ng (King Ko) founds kingdom at Tongmosan; names state Chin. Tang envoy arrives, gives letters of investiture to Tae Choyoˇ ng as King of Parhae Commandery and his son Tae Muye as King of Kyeru Commandery; kingdom known as Parhae from this time. Tae Choyoˇ ng dies; Tae Muye ascends to throne as King Mu. King Mu orders brother Tae Munye to attack Huksu ˇ Malgal; Tae Munye seeks exile in Tang. Parhae sends Ko Inui ˇ to Japan (first envoy). Crown prince Tae Torihaeng dies in Japan. Parhae attacks the Tang at Dengzhou. Silla attacks Parhae in response to request from the Tang. King Mu dies and is succeeded by his son Tae Hˇummu (King Mun). Parhae obtains copies of Tangli, Sanguozhi, Jinshu, and Sanshiliuguo Chunqqiu from the Tang. Parhae sends Soˇ Yodoˇ k to Japan (second envoy). Parhae moves main capital to Northern Capital to avoid An Lushan rebellion. Parhae sends Yang Sˇunggyoˇ ng to Japan (fourth envoy). Parhae sends Ko Namsin to Japan (fifth envoy). Tang sends letters of investiture specifying king of the “Kingdom of Parhae” rather than “Commandery of Parhae.” Tang envoy Han Chaocai comes to Parhae then proceeds on to Silla. Parhae sends Il Manbok to Japan (seventh envoy). Diplomatic document states that the relationship between the two countries was like that of father-in-law and son-in-law. As part of effort toward restoration, reign title changed from Taehung ˇ (Great Rising) to Poryoˇ k (Valuable Effort); later changed back to Taehung. ˇ Parhae sends Sa Tomong to Japan (ninth envoy). Silla sends Pae Ko as envoy to Parhae. King Mun dies in third month; nephew Tae Woˇ nui ˇ takes throne. Tae Woˇ nui ˇ assassinated; Tae Hwayoˇ (King Soˇ ng) becomes king, moves main capital from Eastern Capital to Northern Capital. King Soˇ ng dies; Tae Sungnin ˇ (King Yoˇ m) becomes king. Parhae sends Yoˇ Choˇ ngnim to Japan (thirteenth envoy).

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

194

798 799 809 812 815 817 818 824 828 830 831 832 834 841 857 859 861 871 925 926

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Japan asks that envoys be sent once every six years; Parhae sends Tae Changt’ae as envoy to Japan. Japan agrees to Parhae demand for no limitations on dispatch of envoys. King Kang dies; son Tae Inyu (King Choˇ ng) ascends to throne. King Choˇ ng dies; younger brother Tae Insoˇ n (King Hui) ˇ takes throne. Wang Hyoryoˇ m (seventeenth envoy), dispatched to Japan in 814, returns. King Hui ˇ dies; younger brother Tae Myoˇ ngch’ung (King Kan) ascends to throne. King Kan dies; succeeded by uncle Tae Insoˇ n (King Soˇ n). Japan asks that envoys be dispatched once every 12 years. Japan prohibits private trade with envoys. King Soˇ n dies; grandson Tae Sungnin ˇ takes throne. Parhae proclaims reign title of Hamhwa (Total Transformation). Tang envoy Wang Zongwu returns from Parhae, presents paintings of Parhae. Tang sends Zhang Jianzhang as envoy; returns to Tang next year. Parhae sends Ha Pogyoˇ n to Japan (twenty-fourth envoy). King Tae Ijin dies; son Tae Hogyoˇ ng becomes king. Parhae envoy O Hyosin takes Xuanming calendar to Japan. Parhae envoy Yi Koˇ joˇ ng (twenty-seventh envoy) takes Sarvadurgatiparis´odhana sutra to Japan. Tae Koˇ nhwang dies; Tae Hyoˇ nsoˇ k accedes to throne. General Sin Toˇ k seeks exile in Koryoˇ with 500 followers; first instance of Parhae subjects seeking refuge in Koryoˇ . Parhae destroyed by Qidan.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Lineage Chart of Parhae Kings ‰

King Ko (698–719) King Mu (719–737) King Mun (737–793) Deposed King (Tae Woˇ nui; ˇ 793) Tae Kwangnim King Soˇ ng (793–794) King Kang (794–809) King Choˇ ng (809–812) King Hui ˇ (812–817) King Kan (818–818) King Soˇ n (fourth generation descendent of King Ko) Tae Sindoˇ k King ? (Tae Ijin; 831–857) King ? (Tae Koˇ nhwang; 857–871) King ? (Tae Hyoˇ nsoˇ k; 871–894) King ? (Tae Wihae; 894–906) Last King (Tae Insoˇ n; 906–926) Note: Temple names are unknown for the last five Parhae kings, plus the fourth (deposed) king.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

References ‰

KOREAN LANGUAGE MATERIALS Jeon Hyun-sil, “Taoe kwan’gye ruˇ l chungsim uro ˇ pon Parhae poksik yoˇ n’gu” (Parhae Male Clothing as Seen in Interstate Relations), Ph.D. dissertation, K’at’ollik (Catholic) University, 2004. Han Ciu-cheol, Parhae uˇ i taeoe kwan’gyesa (Parhae’s Foreign Relations). Seoul: Sinsoˇ woˇ n, 1994. Han Ciu-cheol, “Parhaeguk uˇ i chumin kusoˇ ng” (Ethnic Composition of Parhae’s Population), Han’guk sahakpo 91 (1996). Han Ciu-cheol, Parhaesa uˇ i chonghap choˇk koch’al (Comprehensive Examination of Parhae History). Seoul: Koryoˇ taehakkyo minjok munhwa yoˇ n’guwoˇ n, 2000. Lim Sang-sun, ed. and trans., Parhae koˇnch’uk ui ˇ ihae (Understanding Parhae Architecture). Seoul: Sinsoˇ woˇ n, 1990. Lim Sang-sun, Parhae chibang seryoˇk yoˇn’gu (Studies on Parhae’s Local Powers). Seoul: Sinsoˇ woˇ n, 1999. Lim Sang-sun, “Parhae Yi Kwanghyoˇ n kwa kuˇ uˇ i togyosoˇ koˇ mt’o” (An Investigation of Parhae’s Yi Kwanghyoˇ n and his Office of Public Works), Han’guk kodaesa yoˇn’gu (2000). Kim Jin-kwang, “8-segi Parhae uˇ i yodong chinch’ul” (Parhae’s 8th Century Advance into Liaodong), Samguk sidae yoˇn’gu (2002). Kim Jong-bok, “Parhae choˇ ngch’i seryoˇ k ch’ui yoˇ n’gu” (A Study of the Changes in Parhae’s Political Powers). Ph.D. Dissertation, Sungkyunkwan University, 2002. Kim Jong-bok, “Parhae koˇ n’guk kwajoˇ ng e taehan chae koˇ mt’o” (A Reexamination of the Process of the Founding of Parhae), Han’guk kodaesa yoˇn’gu (2004). Kim Jung-bae (Kim Choˇ ngbae) and Yu Chaisin (Yu Chaesin), eds., Parhaeguk sa (History of Parhae). Seoul: Choˇ nguˇ msa, 1988. Kim Jung-bae and Yu Chaisin, eds., Parhaesa yoˇn’gu (Studies in Parhae History). Seoul: Choˇ nguˇ msa, 1989. Kin Tongu, “Parhae chibang t’ongch’i ch’eje wa suryoˇ ng” (The Suryoˇng and Parhae’s System of Local Administration), Han’guk sahakpo 1 (1996). Kim Eun Gug, “Parhae myoˇ lmang e taehan chae koˇ mt’o” (A Reexamination of the Fall of Parhae), Paeksan hakpo (40) 1992).

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

198

A NEW HISTORY OF PARHAE

Kim Eun Gug, “Silla-do ruˇ l t’onghae pon Parhae wa Silla kwan’gye” (Parhae-Silla Relations Seen through the Silla Route), Paeksan hakpo 52 (1992). Koguryoˇ yoˇ n’gu chaedan (Koguryoˇ Research Foundation), ed., Parhaesa charyo chip (Compilation of Materials for Parhae History) 1–2. Seoul: Koguryoˇ Research Foundation, 2004. Koguryoˇ yoˇ n’gu chaedan, ed., Chungguk uˇ i Parhaesa yoˇn’gu tonghyang punsoˇk (Analysis of Chinese Trends in the Research of Parhae History). Seoul: Koguryoˇ Research Foundation, 2004. Ku Nan Hee, “8-segi chungyoˇ p Parhae-Silla-Ilbon uˇ i kwan’gye: Ilbon uˇ i Silla ˇ (Relations between Parhae, Silla, ch’imnyak kyehoek uˇ l chungsim uro” and Japan: Centered on Japan’s Plan to Attack Silla), Hanil kwan’gyesa yoˇn’gu (10) 1999. Ku Nan Hee, “Tae Ilbon oegyo ruˇ l t’onghaesoˇ pon Parhae uˇ i oegyo choˇ llyak” (Parhae’s Diplomatic Policy as Seen in Parhae’s Relations with Japan), Ko Chosoˇn, Koguryoˇ, Parhae palp’yo nonmun chip (Anthology of Articles on Old Chosoˇ n, Koguryoˇ and Parhae). Seoul: Koguryoˇ Research Foundation, 2005. Kuksa p’yoˇ nch’an wiwoˇ nhoe (Committee for Compilation of National History) ed., Han’guksa (History of Korea), vol 10. Kwach’oˇ n: Kuksa p’yoˇ nch’an wiwoˇ nhoe, 1996 . * Lee Byeong Gun (Yi Pyoˇ nggoˇ n), “Parhae 24-kae tol yujoˇ k e kwanhan koˇ nch’ukhak choˇ k yoˇ n’gu” (An Architectural Investigation of Parhae’s Twenty-four Stone Remains). Koˇ n’guk University Ph.D. Dissertation, 2001. Lee Byeong Gun, ed., Parhae koˇnch’uk uˇ i ihae (Understanding Parhae Architecture). Seoul: Paeksan charyowoˇ n, 2003. Park Jin Suk, “Parhae ui tae Ilbon oegyo yoˇ n’gu” (A Study in Parhae’s Japan Diplomacy). Ch’ungnam National University Ph.D. Dissertation, 2001. Park Jin Suk, “Parhae ui chibang chibae wa suryoˇ ng” (The Suryoˇ ng and Parhae’s Control of Local Areas), Kuksagwan nonch’ong (97) 2001. Song Kiho (Song Ki-ho), Parhae ruˇ l ch’ajasoˇ (Finding Parhae). Seoul: Sol, 1993. Song Kiho, Parhae choˇngch’isa yoˇn’gu (Studies in Parhae Political History). Seoul: Ilcho kak, 1995. Song Kiho, Parhae ruˇ l tasi ponda (Another Look at Parhae). Seoul: Tosoˇ ch’ulp’an churyusoˇ ng, 1999. Yun Jae-Woon, “Nambukkuk sidae muyoˇ k yoˇ n’gu” (A Study in Trade during the Northern and Southern Kingdoms Period), Ph.D. Dissertation, Korea University, 2002. Yun Jae-Woon, “Parhae uˇ i wangkwoˇ n kwa tae Chungguk muyoˇ k), (Trade with China and the Parhae Kingship), Paeksan hakpo (68) 2004. English Language Materials Boldin, Vladislav I. “The Bohai Sites in Primorye.” Rossiia i ATR 3 (1994): 85–92. Boldin, V.I. “Archaeological Materials from Bohai Layer of Konstantinovskoye Rural Settlement.” Hoppo Yuurashia gakkai gakuho 11 (1998): XXX–XXX.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

REFERENCES

199

Brodiansky, D.L., V.I. Boldin, I.S. Zhushchikhovskaya, and Yu. G. Nikitin. “Archaeology of Russian Primorye at the Beginning of the 90 [degree].” Mahan-Paekche yoˇn’gu 13 (1993): 105–140. Mikami, Tsugio. “Some Thoughts on the Kingdom of Po-hai: Mainly on the Cultural Relations between Koguryo and Po-hai.” In Proceedings International Symposium Commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Korean Liberation. Seoul: National Academy of Sciences, 1975. Noh, Tae-don. “On the Marriage Customs of the P’ohais and the Jurchens: With a Focus on Levirate.” Seoul Journal of Korean Studies 13 (2000): 113–124. Okladnikov, Aleksei Pavlovich. “The Mo-ho Tribes and the P’o-hai State.” In Henry N. Michael, ed. The Soviet Far East in Antiquity: An Archaeological and Historical Study of the Maritime Region of the U.S.S.R. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965. Shavkunov, Ernest V. “The Sogdians’ Sable Way.” Rossiia i ATR 3 (1994): 78–84. Shavkunov, Ernest V. “Russian Studies on Bohai: A Seventh-Tenth Century Kingdom in Northeast Asia.” Asian Research Trends: A Humanities and Social Sciences Review 6 (1996): 97–105. Song, Ki-ho. “Several Questions in Studies of the History of Palhae.” Korea Journal 30:6 (June 1990): 4–20. Song, Ki-ho. “Current Trends in the Research of Palhae History.” Seoul Journal of Korean Studies 3 (December 1990): 157–174. Song, Ki-ho. “The Dual Status of Parhae: Kingdom and Empire.” Seoul Journal of Korean Studies 12 (1999): 104–123. Song, Ki-ho. “Several Questions in Historical Studies of Palhae.” In Korean National Commission for UNESCO, ed. Korean History: Discovery of Its Characteristics and Developments. Elizabeth, NJ: 2002.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

Index ‰

Administrative hierarchy commoners, 22, 23, 46, 50, 138 county magistrate, 50, 45 district intendent, 50 provincial governor, 50 village suryoˇng, 50 Agudo (emperor of the Nuzhen), 69 Amilgo, Governor, 47, 48 Amnok (Ch. Yalu), 8, 34, 42, 66, 174 Amnok (Yalu) River, 8, 32, 40, 42, 44, 66, 67, 78, 80, 88 An Lushan, 100, 101 Rebellion, 32, 34, 100, 113, 114, 118, 185 An Suˇng (An Seung), 8, 29 An’goˇgoˇl (Angeogeol; Ch. Anchegu), 13, 17 Anbyoˇn (Anbyeon) Province, 40, 43, 47 Andong Protectorate General, 6, 8, 9, 10, 29, 30, 32, 36, 87, 88, 89 Anshi Fortress, 8, 20 Archaeological sites, 23, 56, 60, 79, 81, 84, 102, 103, 104, 116, 117, 130, 150 ff., 161, 163, 172, 177, 178, 187, 188 Architectural culture, 150–65 Barracks, 156 Bell tower, 154 Buddhist remains, 154 Buddhist statues, 154 Column decoration, 162 Cornerstones, 154

Dimensions, 161, 163 End cap tile, 163 Fortress, 156 Houses, 156 Monastery construction, 154–5 Monastery sites, 154 Octagonal pavilion, 153 Ornamentation, 162–3 Pagoda sites, 154 Pagodas, 159–62 Palaces, 151–4 Residential, 156 Roof tile (demon design), 156 Stone lanterns, 159–62 Sutra library, 154 Twenty-four stone remains, 157–9 Village, 156 Walled cities, 151–4 Balhae (Ch. Bohai), vii Baliancheng (K. P’allyoˇnsoˇng; Pallyeongseong), 78, 123, 154, 156 Bamboo slip inscriptions, 79 Beishi (History of the Northern Dynasties), 20 Beiweishu (History of the Northern Wei), 18 “Big men” (taein [daein]; Ch. daren), 50 Bohai guozi changbian, 139, 171, 172 Bohai, 5, 15, 41, 53, 87, 156, 171, 175

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

202

INDEX

Cefu yuanggui, 173 Central Capital (Helong, Jilin Province), 34, 38, 40, 41, 42, 82, 151, 154, 181 Central Plain (China), 34, 57, 60, 152, 154, 155, 163, 164, 165 Ch’aeksoˇng (modern Hunchun), 20, 142 Ch’oe Ch’iwoˇn (Choe Chiwon), 11 Ch’oe Osa (Choe Osa), 65 Ch’oe Sawi (Choe Sawi), Chancellor, 67 Ch’oˇnghae Fortress (South Wall), 81, 82, 128 Ch’oˇnghae-jin, 115, 118 Ch’oˇryoguˇnji (Cheoryogeunji), 47 Chang Munhyu (Jang Munhyu), 32, 79–81, 93 Changbai Korean Autonomous Prefecture, 160, 161 Changchun, 58, 162 Changnak (Jangnak), 68 Changnyoˇng (Jangnyeong) Province, 32, 40, 42, 66, 174 Changsongdao, 69 Changsu, King, 17 Chaoyang, 9, 87 Chengshanzi (K. Soˇngsanja) mountain fortress, 12, 39 Chin (Jin), 10, 13, 14, 77, 87, 175, 181 Chin’guk (Chin’guk wang), King of, 14 Chin’guk, 14, 60 China, 5, 6, 8, 9, 19, 21, 22, 29, 34, 50, 53, 54, 60, 65, 78, 80, 84, 93, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 118, 123, 135, 150, 151, 157, 162, 163, 164, 171 Chinese commandery-county system, 52 Chinese perceptions, 171–9 Beiping (old name for Beijing) Academy of Sciences, 172 Bohai, guiji, 171 Bohai, guozi changbian, 172 Bohai, guozi, 171

Central Academy of Sciences (Academia Sinica), 172 Cui Shaohui, 173 Gan Jiyan, 174 Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Social Sciences, 172 Institute of Nationality Studies, 172 Li Dianfu, 176 Liu Xiaodong, 173 “Malgal pumpkin-shaped jar”, 177 Origins of Parhae culture, 176–9 “Parhae Malgal”, 172 “Rescript to the King of Silla, Kim Huˇnggwang”, 172 Son Jinji, 174 Son Xiuren, 174 “Unified multi-ethnic nation”, 178 Wei Cungcheng, 176 Wei Guozhong, 173 Wen Tingjun, 175 Zhang Jiuling, 172 Zhu Guochen, 173 Chinhan (Jinhan), xi Choˇngni (Jeongni) Province, 40, 43, 47 Choˇnjoˇng (Jeonjeong) Prefecture, 79 Chos oˇn (Joseon), 8, 83 Chosoˇn ryoˇksa (History of Korea), 6 Commanderies (kun; Ch. jun), 35 commoners (paeksoˇng; baekseong; Ch. baixing; J. hyakujou), 46 Cui Xin, 13, 30 Dalian, 32 Daling River, 9 Dandong, 32, 44 Daoliji, 80 Dengzhou fortress, 114 Dengzhou, 32, 42, 79, 80, 82, 86, 92, 93–5, 114 Dewa-kuni, 78 Donglanguo, 65 Doushan, 92, 93, 94, 95 “Dreaming of Parhae”, x

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

Dunhua (Jilin Province), 12, 29, 39, 42, 123, 151, 157, 158, 177, 181 Dynastic history, vii, viii, xi, 29 East Asia, 5, 53, 54, 57, 60, 61, 80, 109, 118, 150, 175, 184, 185 East Sea (Sea of Japan), 34, 79, 97, 98, 109, 185 Eastern Capital (Hunchun, Jilin Province), 34, 38, 40, 41, 67, 68, 69, 79, 82, 103, 113, 151, 154, 157, 181, 182 Eastern Puyoˇ (Fuyu), 41 Envoy to Japan, 14, 31, 33, 78, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 106, 145 Ethnic composition of Parhae, 15–24 Five Dynasties period, 18, 65 Former (Western) Han, 18 Fortresses, 8, 10, 12, 17, 20, 39, 47, 49, 51, 58, 68, 79, 81, 82, 83, 113, 114, 116, 117, 123, 127, 128, 148, 156, 164, 176, 177, 178, 181, 182, 187 Fortress-town system, 49 Gansu, 6 Gaya River, 157 Governors (todok; dodok), 34, 46, 49 “Grandson of Heaven” (King Mu), 34, 102 Great Cultural Revolution, 172 Gulf of Bohai, 92, 109 Gulf of Parhae (Bohai), 41, 92 Hai, 9, 10, 13, 62, 88, 94, 95 Haicheng in Liaoning Province, 8 Haihusun, 62 Han dynasty, 18, 19, 47, 50, 93, 95, 111 Han River, 18 Han Shaoxun (Superintendent of the Board of Taxation), 67 Hansan (modern Seoul), 43 Hanshu (History of Han), viii Hasuˇlla (Haseulla) Province (modern Kangnuˇng; Gangneung), 33, 42, 89

203

“Heavenly Felicitation” (Ch’on’gyoˇng; Cheongyeong; Ch. Tianjing) (reign title of Tae Yoˇllim), 67 Heilong province, xv Heilong River, 6, 31, 42, 44, 144, 146 Heilongjiang, 39, 40, 42, 43, 139, 151, 156, 177 Henandun, Helong Prefecture in Jilin Province, 127, 139, 140 Hoemun-ni, 158 Hoenong, 36 Hoewoˇn (Hoewon) Province (Woˇrhuˇi; near Tongjiang, modern Heilongjiang Province), 43 “Hol”, 47 Honan, 6 Horyuji, 144 Hosil (Ch. Haoshih), 17, 31, 36 Housing, 23 Hubei, 6 Huifa River, 10 Huife River, 65 Huihua, 6 Huˇksu (Heuksu; Ch. Heishu), 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42, 43, 44, 48, 49, 79, 80, 86, 88–90, 90–1, 92, 93, 95, 112, 138, 174, 175, 176 Subjugation by King Mu, 32, 33, 37, 42 Hun River, 10, 42, 88 Hyont’o (Hyeonto) District, 34 Hyoˇnt’o fortress, 47 Hyoso, King (of Silla), 76, 77 Ilan (Heilongjiang Province), 42 Imjin River, 18 Inan (Ch. Renan. Benevolent Peace) (reign title of King Mu), 31 India, 111 Intendents (chasa; jasa), 34, 46, 47, 49 Japan, 5, 14, 16, 21, 33, 34, 37, 40, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 57, 78, 79, 82, 84, 95, 97–108, 112, 113, 115, 117, 118,

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

204

INDEX

132, 139, 145, 146, 148, 150, 154, 157, 165 Relations with, 33 Route to, 33 Japanese perceptions, 180, 183–186 1905 Portsmouth Treaty, 183 Bokkai shi no sai mondai (Problems in Parhae History), 184 Bokkai shiko (Examination into the History of Parhae), 184 Changin kisa (Ch. Changren jishi; Record of a Giant), 185 Chosenshi (History of Korea), 183 Doa Kokogakkai, 183 Furuhata Toru, 184 Hamada Kosaku, 184 Hamada Kosaku, 185 Han Chacai, 185 Hayashi Taisuke, 183 Hino Kaisaburo, 184 Hokkai to Kodai Nihon (Parhae and Ancient Japan), 186 Hokkaishi no kenkyu (Research in Parhae History), 186 Hokuriku, 185 Ikeuchi Hiroshi, 183 Ishii Takamasa, 184 Japan-centric views, 185 Kaiyu, 185 Kawakami Yo, 185 Kojima Yoshitake, 185 Lee Sungshi, 185 Matsui Hitoshi, 183 Mikami Tsugio, 184 “Mukashi no Manshu” (Ancient Manchuria), 183 Naga Tsuyo, 183 Nihon-Hokkai kankeishi no kenkyu (Research in the History of Relations between Japan and Parhae), 186 Nihon-Hokkai koshoshi (History of Relations between Japan and Parhae), 186 Nikkan koshidan (Aspects of Ancient Japanese and Korean History), 183 Nishikawa Hiroshi, 186

Nishitani Tadashi, 186 Nizuma Toshihiki, 184 Osumi Akihiro, 185 Russo-Japanese War, 183 Sakayori Masashi, 184 Sakayori Masashi, 186 Shiratori Kurakichi, 183 South Manchuria Railway Company, 183 Suguwara Michizane, 185 Suzuki Yasutami, 184 Tokyo Imperial University, 183 Toriyama Kiichi, 184 Tsuda Shokichi, 183 Ueda Takashi, 186 Wada Sei, 184 Yoshida Togo, 183 Jia Dan, 32, 80 Jidong, 31 Jilin province, 13, 29, 40, 43, 123, 125, 139, 141, 151, 158, 160, 161 Jingpo Lake, 157 Jinguo, Duke of, 10, 12 Jiu Tangshu (Old History of the Tang), 6, 7, 9, 10, 16, 22, 31, 37, 39, 79, 114, 138, 172, 181, 183 Kach’ong (Gacheong) District, 47 Kaedongyang (Ch. Kaidongyang), 8 Kaiyuan tongbao coin, 110 Kan (Gan), King, 33, 35, 47, 115 Kang, King (Tae Sungnin) (Dae Sungnin)), 43 Kangwoˇn Province, 79, 97 Killi, 36 Kim Maeng, 67 “King of Koguryoˇ Tae Huˇmmu (Dae Heummu)”, 16 “King of Parhae Commandery”, 30, 35, 77, 82, 173 “King of Parhae Kingdom”, 35 “King of the State of Parhae” (title of King Mun), 82 “Kingdom person” (kugin; Ch. guoren), 22

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

Ko (Go), 16, 45 Ko Kildoˇk (Go Gildeok), 67 Ko Namsin (Go Namsin), 47, 48, 100 Ko Panp’il (Go Banpil), “Military Commissioner” (amnyoˇngsa; amnyeongsa; Ch. yalingshi), 48 Ko Powoˇn (Go Bowon) (“King of Chosoˇn Commandery”), 8 Ko Toˇngmu (Go Deongmu), 9, 30 Ko Yoˇngsa (Go Yeongsa), 65 Ko Yoˇnmu (Go Yeonmu) (Koguryoˇ general), 8 Ko, King (Tae Choyoˇng), 29, 31, 36, 37, 53, 55, 75 ff., 82, 90, 133 Koduˇung hakkyo kuksa (High School Korean History Textbook), 6 Koguryoˇ (Goguryeo; Ch. Gaogouli), 5, 6, 8 ff., 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 45, 47, 48, 49, 53, 55, 60, 61, 62, 66, 75, 76, 78, 83, 84, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 95, 101, 111, 114, 118, 128, 130 ff., 144, 149, 150, 151, 157, 159, 162, 163, 164, 165, 171 ff. Koguryoˇ, fall of, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 32, 55, 87, 88, 89, 174 Koˇlgoˇljungsang (Geolgeoljungsang; or alternatively, Tae Choyoˇng), 10, 12, 13 Koˇlsabiu (Geolsabiu), 10, 11, 12, 13, 31, 36 Koˇm Mojam (Geom Mojam), 8, 29 Korean Peninsula, 39, 42, 60, 96, 111, 113, 151, 152, 154, 155, 161, 164, 165 Koryoˇ (Goryeo), 11, 14, 16, 54, 56, 57, 62 ff., 83, 101, 132, 176, 179, 181, 182 Koryoˇ, King of (King Mun), 14 Koryoˇsa, 56, 63, 67, 68 Koyok (Goyok), 68 Kraskino, 33, 38, 41, 82, 83, 84, 116, 117, 130, 178, 187 Kuguk (Guguk; the original capital), 34, 41, 151, 154, 157 Kwak Woˇn (Superintendent of the Board of Punishments), 67

205

Kwan fortress, 113 Kwanch’oˇl fortress, 113 Kwanggaet’o (Gwanggaeto), King, 17 Kyeru (Gyeru), 76, 92 Kyoˇngju (Gyeongju), 8, 22 Laha, 35 Laoye Pass, 33 Later (Northern) Wei period, 18, 19 Later (or unified) Silla, 51, 132, 179 Later Zhou, 65 Leipzig Museum, 148 Li Jinxing (son of Toljigye), 21 Li Jinzhong, 9, 10, 30, 87, 88 Li Kaigu, 10, 12, 13, 30 Li Zhengji (Yi Choˇnggi), 9, 114, 173 Liao River, 9, 10, 32, 35, 44 Liao, 51, 55, 67, 68, 69, 118 Liaoning province, 8, 39, 87 Liaoshi (History of Liao), 43, 56, 57 Monograph on Geography, 36 Liaoxi region, 10, 11, 12, 13, 30, 32, 37 Lin Jingzhong, 30, 93 Lingguang Pagoda, 160, 161, 162 literati (sain; Ch. shiren), 22, 46, 107 Liubian jilue, 147 Lushun, 32 Madaoshan (near Shanhaiguan), 32 Maekhae becoming Parhae, 23 Mahan people, 65 Mahan, xi, 66 Malgal (Ch. Mohe), 6, 8 ff., 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 49, 51, 79, 80, 86, 87, 88–90, 90–1, 92, 93, 95, 96, 108, 112, 113, 117, 118, 128, 131, 132, 138, 144, 145, 151, 164, 172 ff., 180, 184, 186, 187 Malgal, seven tribes of, 17, 18, 20, 36

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

206

INDEX

An’goˇgoˇl (Angeogeol; Ch. Anchegu), 36 Ch’oˇlli (Cheolli), 31, 33, 42, 48, 49, 113, 174 Ethnicity of, 21, 173 Hosil (Ch. Haoshih), 36 Huˇksu (Heuksu; Ch. Heishu), 20, 21, 31, 33, 37, 42, 48, 49, 79, 80, 86, 88–90, 90–1, 112, 138, 174, 176 Paeksan (Baeksan; Ch. Baishan), 20 Paektol (Baekdol; Ch. Bodo), 17, 36 Pejorative use of, 19–20 Puryoˇl (Buryeol; Ch. Funie), 31, 33, 42, 49, 113 Songmal (Ch. Sumo), 6, 17, 20, 151, 173 ff. Uru, 42, 48, 49 Woˇrhuˇi, 31, 33, 42, 48, 113 Manchu, viii, ix Manchukuo, ix, 184 Manchuria, 13, 19, 41, 54, 150, 151, 156, 157, 159, 164, 180, 181, 183, 184, 186, 187 Manchurian, 16, 183 “Manju nuˇn uri ttang”, x Map’ae (Mapae), 158 Maritime Province (Russia), 33, 39, 43, 44, 53, 78, 82, 97, 98, 106, 123, 128, 130, 139, 141, 147, 154, 156, 164, 178, 180, 186, 187 Miaodao Archipelago, 32 Middle East, 111 Mikami Tsugio, 16, 184 Mingshi (History of Ming), viii Mingzong, Emperor, 65 Mohe (K. Malgal), 6, 15, 23, 172 Mokchoˇ (Mokjeo) District, 34, 45, 47, 48 Mokchoˇ fortress, 47 Moksal, 47 Monument at site of Northern Capital, 56 Morukimi Nokurao, 46 Mount Paektu (Baekdu; Ch. Changbaishan), 19, 57

Mu, King, 29, 31 ff., 41 ff., 49, 75, 76, 78–9, 80, 86, 88, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 113, 115, 133 Mu, King, 29, 31 ff., 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 49, 75, 76, 78–9, 80, 86, 88, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 113, 115, 133 Mudan River, 30, 42 Mulgil (Ch. Wuji), 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23 Mun, King, 14, 29, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 76, 81–3, 113, 115, 117, 135, 176 Nagaya, Prince, 79 Namhae Province, 34, 40, 42, 45, 47, 65, 78, 174 Namhae Province, T’oho Port, 45 Nan River, 44 Nanchan monastery, 163 Nangnang (Ch. Lelang), 18, 19 Nanyang, Princess (wife of Xiao Xiaoxian), 67 Nara, 79, 139, 146 Nationalist passions, x Nation-centered view of history, 53–4 “Natives” (t’oin; Ch. turen), 22 Niha, 31, 34, 38, 79 Nihon sandai jitsuroku, 106 Nomadic chiefs, 50 Nongan, 58 North Korea, 5, 6, 54, 79, 82, 83, 85, 123, 128, 139, 150, 151, 164, 177 North Korean perceptions, 180, 181–3 An Inho, 182 Archaeology Research Center of the Academy of Social Sciences, 182 Ch’ae Huˇiguk, 182 Ch’oˇnghae earthen fortress, 182 Chang Sangnyoˇl, 182 Chang Sangnyoˇl, 182 Chang Sangnyoˇl, 182 Choˇng Yagyong (Jeong Yagyong), 181

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

Chosoˇn choˇnsa (Complete History of Korea), 182 Chosoˇn kogohak kaeyo (Overview of Korean Archaeology), 182 Chu Yoˇnghoˇn, 181 Chungguk tongbuk chibanguˇi yujoˇk palgul pogo (Report on Excavation of Remains in China’s Northeast Region), 181 Odong fortress, 181 Parhae munhwa (The Culture of Parhae), 182 Self-reliance (chuch’e; juche), 182 Yoˇngju pagoda, 182 Northeast Asia History Foundation, xiii Northeast Asia, 6, 30, 35, 53, 57, 60, 76, 79, 80, 82, 100, 101, 109, 118, 151, 153, 154, 184 Northeast Borderland History and Chain of Events Research Project, 171 Northeast Project, 54, 84, 150, 171, 172, 180 Northern Capital (Ningan, Heilongjiang Province), 32, 34, 38, 40, 41, 42, 48, 55 ff., 82, 113, 123, 127, 128, 130, 144, 150 ff., 159, 160, 163, 164, 177, 178, 182 Nosang, 59 Noto-kuni, 78 Nuzhen (Jurchen), 17, 66, 67, 68, 69, 174, 186 O Chehyoˇn (O Jehyeon), 65 O dynasty, 65 O Hyoˇnmyoˇng (O Hyeonmyeong), King, 66 Okchoˇ (Okjeo; Ch. Woju), 17, 40, 42, 142, 144, 145, 174 Old Chosoˇn (Old Joseon; Ch. Chaoxian), 47, 54, 60, 83, 93, 150, 171, 179, 182 Old Chosoˇn, 40, 47, 54, 60, 83, 93, 150, 171, 179, 182 Omae-ri, 79, 156 Ondol (hypocaust) system of heating, 22, 23, 157, 178

207

Onjo, King (of Paekche), 17 P’yoˇngyang (Pyeongyang), 6, 8, 9, 22, 83, 85, 88, 171 Paekche (Baekche), viii, 111, 131, 175 Paeksan (Baeksan; Ch. Baishan), 17, 18, 19, 20, 31 “Paeksan Malgal”, 20 Paektol (Baekdol; Ch. Bodo), 17, 19, 31, 36 Pak Sihyoˇng, 16, 181 Pakchakku (near Dandong), 44 Parhae Communication routes, 32, 33, 34, 36, 40, 78 Japan route, 33, 40, 41, 78, 79 Qidan route, 40, 41, 78 Silla route, 40, 41, 54, 78, 79, 82, 113, 118 Tribute and Yingzhou routes to Tang, 32, 36, 40, 41, 78 Emissaries, 11, 16, 46, 47, 51, 57, 100, 105, 184 Fall of, 53–61 First envoy to Japan, 78 Founding and naming, 5–14 Genealogy of descendents of refugees, 63 Historical bridge, 54 Historical crossroad, 54 Ko Chedoˇk, 78 Ko Inuˇi, 78, 98, 104 Movement to restore, 62–9 Records of fall, 55, 59 Refugees, 63 Relations with Silla, 77 Restorationist movements Choˇngan’guk (Jeonganguk), 65 Huˇngyoguk (Heungyoguk), 65 Later Parhae, 65 Tae Parhaeguk (Dae Balhaeguk), 65 Territorial growth, 75 Parhae and Japan, 97–108 Bunka shureishu, 107 Chinese poetry, 107 Chukushi, 102

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

208

INDEX

Daianji, 107 Echizen, 107 Envoys across the sea, 97–8 Female dancers, 107 Fujiwara Nakamaro, 100 Fujiwara Otsugu, 106 Furs, 104 Goods given to Parhae envoys, 105 Betel nut palm fans, 105 Brown silk, 105 Canellia oil, 105 Colored silk, 105 Gold lacquer, 105 Gold, 105 Raw silk, 105 Rough silk, 105 Silk thread, 105 Silver, 105 Spun silk, 105 Il Manbok, 102 Jinji yoroku, 107 Kanke bunso, 107 Kento-shi (Japan’s envoys), 100 Ko Chedoˇk, 104 Ko Choˇngt’ae (Go Jeongtae), 106 Ko Inuˇi, 98 Ko Namsin, 100 Ko Suˇngjo (Go Seungjo), 106 Komano Oyama, 100 Koya zappitsushu, 107 Kukai (Japanese monk), 107 Kurazukasa, 106 Linyu musicians, 107 Noto Peninsula, 102 O Hyosin, 108 Oe Asatsune, 107 Onoda Mori, 100 Pae Choˇng (Bae Jeong), 107 Pae Choˇng, 107 Pae Ku (Bae Gu), 104 “Parhae 1300” raft, 98 “Parhae 2005” raft, 98 Parhae music, 106 Posyeta Bay, 99 Pottery shards, 106 Replica wooden raft, 97

Routes between Parhae and Japan, 99 Sa Tomong, 102 Shigeakira, Prince, 105 Shimada Tadaomi, 107 Sugawa Michizane, 107 Uchikura Tsunejen, 100 Uchio, 106 Wang Hyoryoˇm (Wang Hyoryeom), 107 Wang Sinbok, 100 Xuanming Calendar, 108 Yamato court, 107 Yang Soˇnghyoˇn, 106 Yang Suˇnggyoˇng, 100 Yang T’aesa (Yang Taesa), 107 Yengishiki (a tenth century ritual manual), 104 Yi Chinmong (Yi Jinmong), 101 Zhenxiang calendar, 108 Parhae and Silla, hostile opposition between, 79, 85, 95, 184, 185 Parhae, burial culture, 123–31 Baliancheng, 123 Choˇnghye (Jeonghye), Princess, tomb of, 123–4, 125 Choˇnghyo (Jeonghyo), Princess, tomb of, 125, 126, 130 Dachengzi tombs, 131 Dahaimen (in Yangtun, Yongji Prefecture), pit tombs, 128 Dazhutun tombs, 131 Dinging (in Antu Prefecture) tomb complex, 128 Double burials, 130 Dunhua, 123 Grave pits, 130 Hamgyoˇng Province, 123 Henandungu fortress (at Bajiazi, Helong Prefecture), 127 Kungsim (in Hamgyoˇng Province) tomb complex, 128, 129 Laoheshen (in Yushu Prefecture), pit tombs, 128 Liudingshan tomb complex, 123, 124

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

Lungtou Mountain (in Korean Autonomous Prefecture (Helong Prefecture)), 125 Lungtoushan tomb complex (near Xigucheng), 125 Mount Changbai, 128 Multiple burials, 130 P’yoˇngni (Pyeongni) (in Hamgyoˇng Province) tomb complex, 128 Relics, 130 Bone fragments, 130 Gold belt ornaments, 130 Iron arrowheads, 130 Iron axes, 130 Jade beads, 130 Stone implements, 130 Vessel mouths, 130 Sanxingcun, Sanlingxiang, tomb complex, 127 Single burials, 130 Suifen River, 123 Tombs Animal bones in, 131 Brick, 130 Earthern, 130 Ma Choˇktal (Ma Jeokdal) brick tomb, 130 Stone, 130 Xigucheng (K. Soˇgosoˇng), 123 Parhae, clothing, 132–49 Afrasiab wall painting, 133 Agate, 149 Amber, 149 Ammo boots, 139 Belts, 139, 140 Biao (shawl), 141 Bird leather boot, 138 Bracelets, 148, 149 Bronze, 149 Ch’ukkuk (chukguk; Ch. cuju; a kind of football), 136 Choha chu (joha ju), 144 Chu (Ch. chou), 144 Cloth, 143 Clothing materials, 142–8 Colors of official attire, 135 Combs, 148 Conical hats, 138

209

Earrings, 148, 149 Eunuch, 136 Everyday clothing, 136–42 Female garments, 141–2 Fish pouches, 135 Fish skin, 143, 146–8 Footgear, 139 Fu (wooden tablets), 135 Fur, 143, 145–6 Gold, 149 Guard, 137 Hairpins, 148 Hemp cord shoes, 139, 140 Hemp headgear, 137 Horse riding, 136 Hunting, 136 Hyoˇnju hemp, 144 Ikat, 144 Imports of clothing, 148 Jasper (green jade), 149 Korean envoys, 133 Kyooˇ (gyoeo), 147 Leather, 143, 145–6 Li Xian’s tomb, 134 Male garments, 137–40 Mullet, 147 Musician, 136 Myoˇn (myeon; cotton), 145 Necklaces, 148, 149 ¯ a chu (eoa ju), 144 O Official attire, 132–6 Official hats, 138 Okchu cloth, 144 Personal ornaments, 148–9 Polo, 136 Putou (cap), 135 Quartz, 149 Sea leopard, 147 Sea lion, 147 Silver, 149 Straw shoes, 139 Tussah (rough brown silk), 144 Un’gyoˇn (ungyeon; Ch. yunjuan) silk shawl, 141 Yongju cloth144 Parhae, East Asian maritime power, 109–18

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

210

INDEX

Bay of Bohai, 109 Chang Ch’un (Jang Chun), 112 Chang Pogo (Jang Bogo) (“King of the Seas”), 109 Eastern Sea, 109 Enin, 112 Enzen, 115 Fukura Port, 116 “Haesin” (Sea God), 109 Izumo, 115 Kaga, 115 Kraskino fortress site, 116, 117 Nagato, 115 Official trade, 112 Private trade, 112 Silk-horse trade, 115 Tributary trade, 109 Wan Island (Wando), South Choˇlla (Jeolla) Province, 109 Yi Kwanghyoˇn, 112 Yoˇnghuˇng Bay, 113 Ziqing military district, 112 Parhae, local organization Five capitals, 34, 39, 40, 41, 45, 46, 54, 78, 82, 118 Fifteen provinces, 39, 45 Local administration, 34, 39–52, 76, 118 One hundred plus counties, 40, 45 Sixty-two districts, 39, 45 Sok, 40 Tong, 40 Yoˇng, 40 Parhae, Local products Carp (Lake Mit’a; Mita), 142 Cloth (Yongju), 142 Deer (Puyoˇ), 142 Hemp (Hyoˇnju; Hyeonju), 142 Horses (Suifen), 142 Iron (Wisoˇng), 142 Kelp (southern sea of Korea), 142 Pigs (Makhil), 142 Rabbits (T’aebaek Mountains), 142 Raw fiber (Okchoˇ), 142 Rice (Nosoˇng; Noseong), 142

Soybean malt (Ch’aeksoˇng; Chaekseong), 142 Parhae, war with Tang China, 86– 96 Attack on Dengzhou, 86, 93–5 Bilge Khan, 89 Chang Munhu, 93 Diplomatic relations, 87 Hasuˇlla, 89 Kyeru Commandery, King of (Tae Torihaeng), 92 Li Jingzhong rebellion, 87 Li Xiancheng, 91 Mocho Khan, 89 Tae Irha (Dae Ilha), 91 Tae Torihaeng (Dae Dorihaeng) (son of King Mu), 91 Tang and Huˇksu Malgal ties, 88 Zhang Xingji, 88 Parhae, territory of, 29–38 Administrative divisions, 34 Dynastic history, 29 Forced relocation, 29, 174 Formal recognition by Tang, 13, 31, 175 Map of territory, 38 War with Tang, 11, 33, 37, 86– 96 Penglai, Shandong, 93 Period of Northern and Southern Kingdoms, 83, 84, 85, 109, 112, 132, 134, 148 “Pinglu Zhiqing Governor, Overseer of Maritime Transport, and Pacifier of Parhae and Silla”, 114 Pinglu Zhiqing military district, 114, 115 Podoˇk (Bodeok), King, 8 Pojang (Bojang), King, 8, 9, 21, 29, 30, 32 ˇ iju; Poju (Boju) fortress (modern U Uiju), 68 Political conflict, 21, 35, 94 Poroguk, 36 Posyeta Bay, 37, 38, 99 Pukch’oˇng (Bukcheong), 40, 79 Puryoˇl (Buryeol; Ch. Funie), 17, 31, 33, 37, 40, 42, 43, 49, 89, 113

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

Puyoˇ (Buyeo; Ch. Fuyu), 14, 17, 19, 31, 34, 40, 41, 42, 58, 60, 65, 78, 142, 144, 150, 174, 179, 186 Pyoˇnhan (Byeonhan), xi Qidan Liao dynasty, 67 Qidan Taizi, 56 Qidan, 9, 10, 13, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 38, 40, 41, 44, 51, 52, 55 ff., 76, 78, 87 ff. Qin dynasty, 18, 19, 111 Qing dynasty, ix, 150 Republic of Korea (See “South Korea”.) “Restoring the Origin” (Woˇnhuˇng; Wonheung; Ch. Yuanxing) (reign title of O Hyoˇnmyoˇng), 66 “Reunify the national land, recover the lost land”, ix “Rising Strong” (K. Koˇnhuˇng; Ch. Jianxing) (reign title of, King Soˇn), 82 Rokkokushi (Six National Histories), 112 Royal palaces, 23 Ruiju kokushi (A Collection of the Histories of Japan), 22, 42, 45, 46, 47, 49 Ruluoshouzhuo, 10 Russia, 5, 39, 43, 78, 123, 128, 150, 164, 180 Russian perceptions, 180, 186–8 “1955–1956 nyoˇn Yoˇnhae-ju yaoe chosa kyoˇlgwa pogosoˇ” (Report on the Results of Field Investigations in the Maritime Province, 1955–56), 187 Academy of Sciences, 187 Aurovskoye monastery site, 187 Boldin, Alexander, 187 “Central-Asia centric”, 187 Criticism of China, 187 Far Eastern Archaeology Research team, 187 Gelman, Evgenia, 187

211

“Hegemonic”, 187 Institute of History, Archaeology, and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East, 187 Ivliev, Alexander, 187 Kikolaevskoye fortress sites, 187 Konstantinovskoye village site, 187 Kraskino fortress site, 187 Krushanov, A.I., 187 Maryannosvskoye fortress site, 187 Novogoreevskoye fortress and village site, 187 Okladnikov, A.P., 187 Parhaeguk kwa Yoˇnhae-juuˇi Parhae munhwa yujoˇk (The State of Parhae and Parhae Cultural Remains in the Maritime Province), 187 Soviet Academy of Sciences, 187 Starorechenskoye fortress site, 187 World War II, 186 Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905), ix, 183 Samarkand, 134 Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms), 8, 17, 18, 19, 21, 33, 35, 47, 137 Samguk yusa (Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms), 112 Samno, 36 Shandong, 9, 41, 42, 92, 93, 109, 114, 115 Shiji (Records of the Grand Historian), viii Shira Muren River, 68 Shiratori Kurakichi, 16, 183 Shoku Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan), 16, 45, 46, 100, 183 Shoshoin (Nara, Japan), 139, 141, 144 Siberia, 41 Siberian, viii Sikhote Mountains, 38 Silk Road, 109, 110

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

212

INDEX

Silla, 6, 8, 11, 13, 19, 21, 22, 30, 31, 33, 35 ff., 46, 51, 53, 54, 57, 62, 63, 75–85, 86, 88, 89, 93, 95, 96, 98, 100, 101, 102, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 117, 118, 132, 175, 181, 184, 185 Attack by King Mu, 33 Silla emissaries, 11 Silla-Tang war (668–676), 8, 88, 95 Sin Ch’aeho (Sin Chaeho), ix Sin Toˇk (Sin Deok) (Parhae general), 63 Sinuˇiju (Sinuiju), 44 Siquan, 6 Soˇ Nul (Seo Nul), 67 Soˇ Yodoˇk (Seo Yodeok), Governor, Yakhol District, 45, 47, 48 Soˇkkoˇnp’yoˇng (Seokkeonpyeong), 158 Soˇl Oyu (Seol Oyu), 8 Soˇn, King (Seon) (Tae Insu), 29, 33, 35, 36, 37, 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 50, 82, 113, 115, 117, 118 Reign title “Rising Strong” (Koˇnhuˇng [Geonheung]; Ch. Jianxing), 35, 82 Son Wanying, 9, 30, 87 Songhua River, 6, 19, 20, 31, 33, 37, 42, 44, 89, 146, 147 “Songmal Malgal”, 20 Songmal (Ch. Sumo) Malgal tribe, 6, 11, 13, 16 ff., 31, 36, 151, 172 ff. Songmal River, 13 Songp’yong (Songpeyong), 158 South Hamgyoˇng (Hamgyeong) Province, 36, 89 South Korea, 6, 54, 83, 85, 157, 164, 180 Southern Capital (Pukch’oˇng (Bukcheong), Hamgyoˇng (Hamgyeong) Province), 40, 41, 54, 68, 79, 82, 113, 123, 145, 151 Stone lamp, 58 Stone lantern, 151, 155, 159, 160, 161, 182 Sui and Tang dynasties, 18, 19, 50, 93, 111 Suifen River, 33, 123, 142

Suishu (History of the Sui Dynasty), 17, 18, 138 Suksin (Ch. Sushen), 17, 18, 19, 23, 40, 42 suryoˇng (suryeong; Ch. shouling) (local leaders or chiefs), 21, 46, 48, 49–52, 108, 112, 113, 117, 118, 128, 181, 184, 185 T’aebaek (Taebaek) Mountain, 10, 13, 142 T’aenuˇng (Taeneung), ix T’aewoˇn (Taewon), 66 Tae Choyoˇng (Dae Joyeong), 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 29, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 41, 43, 45, 53, 55, 67, 75–8, 87, 88, 90, 151, 172, 173, 175. (See also “Ko, King”.) Tae Hyoˇnsoˇk (Dae Hyeonseok), 35, 118 Tae Ijin (Dae Ijin), 35, 82, 118 Tae Insu (Dae Insu), 35, 37, 82 Tae Koˇnhwang (Dae Geonhwang), 35, 118 Tae Koˇnhwang, 118 Tae Kwanghyoˇn (Dae Gwanghyeon) (crown prince of Parhae), 63, 181 Tae Munye, 80, 86, 90, 91–3, 95 Tae Wihae (Dae Wihae), 35 Tae Woˇnuˇi (Dae Wonui), 33 Tae Yabal (Dae Yabal), 43 Tae Yoˇllim (Dae Yeollim), 67, 68 Taedong (Daedong) River, 35, 42, 43, 44, 86, 95 Taiping xingguo era of the Song, 66 Taizi xima, 65 Tang dynasty, 6, 8 ff., 18 ff., 29 ff., 53, 55, 59, 61, 69, 75 ff., 82, 86– 96, 98, 100, 101, 102, 103, 107 ff., , 117, 118, 128, 130, 132, 135, 136, 137, 141, 144, 146, 148, 150, 165, 171, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 179, 180, 184, 185 Tangsoˇng (Dangseong), 80 Ten Kingdoms period, 18 Tianmen Pass, 10, 11, 12, 30, 77, 87

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

INDEX

todun, 90 Toljigye (Ch. Tudiji), 21 Tombs, 23, 123, 125, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 182 Brick, 130 Earth-mound, 23, 123, 129, 130, 176, 177 Stone chambers, 23, 129, 130, 176, 177 Stone coffins, 23, 130 Stone lined, 23, 130 Tumulus, 123 Tongdian, 137 Tonghuˇng-ni (Dongheung-ni), 158 Tongmosan (Dongmosan; Ch. Tongmushan), 10, 11, 12, 14, 30, 36, 39, 41, 42, 77, 87, 88 Tongmyoˇng (Dongmyeong), King (of Koguryoˇ), 17, 18 Tongnyoˇng (Dongnyeong) Province (west of Xingkai Lake; modern Jilin Province), 42, 43 towns (ch’on; chon), 46, 47, 49 Trade goods Ginseng, 50, 106 Sable, 41, 50, 78, 104, 105, 146 Tiger fur, 50, 104 True Bone (Silla’s ruling class), 96 Tujue, 9, 10, 13, 21, 30, 31, 42, 52, 75, 76, 77, 87 ff., 132, 186 Tuman (Ch. Tumen) River, 158 Tungusic tribes, viii, 6, 18 ˇ mnu (Eumnu; Ch. Yilu), 17, 18, U 19, 23, 40, 43, 144, 174 UNESCO, 150, 172 Uru, 35, 42, 43, 47, 48, 49 ˇ rya regime, 65 U Ussuri River, 38, 146 Vladivostok, 41, 97, 187 Wang Jia (Assistant Superintendent), 67 Wang Koˇn (Wang Geon), 62, 63 Wang Mun’gu, Assistant County Magistrate, 45, 48 Wenxian tongkao, 66

213

Western Capital (Linjiang, Jilin Province), 38, 40, 66, 82, 123, 151 Wi Kyun, 48 Wisoˇng (Wiseong) County, 48, 142 Woˇnsan Bay, 38, 44 World cultural heritage site, 60, 150, 172 Wu, Empress, 10, 12, 30, 137 Wushun, 10 Wuxiang ho han (khan), 9 Xiao Baoxian, 68 Xiao Pode (Sijie Supreme Military Commander), 67 Xiao Xiaoxian (Liao Eastern Capital governor), 67, 68 Xin Tangshu (New History of the Tang), 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 16, 18, 33, 34, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 78, 79, 135, 136, 138, 142, 144, 145, 172, 173, 175, 181, 183, 185 Monograph on Geography, 32 Xingkai Lake (near modern Mishan), 31, 35, 37, 43 Xinglongcun, 157 Xueyantou, 21 Xuguo, Duke of, 10, 12 Yakhol District, 34, 45, 46, 47, 48 Yang Kilbok, “Malgal Military Commissioner”, 48 Yang Suˇnggyoˇng (Yang Seunggyeong), 14, 47, 48, 100, 105, 107 Yangzi River, 6 Yanji, 42 Yanjun fortress, 10 Yejong, 57 Yellow Sea, 44, 79, 109 Yelu Abaoji, 55 Yemaek (Ch. Huimo), 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 40, 42, 174 Yemaek Chosoˇn (also called Pal Chosoˇn), 23 Yesong River, 8 Yi (Ch. Li) family, 114, 115

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison

214

INDEX

Yi Choˇnggi (Yi Jeonggi; Ch. Li Zhengji), 9, 114, 118, 173 Yi Kwanghyoˇn (Yi Kwanghyeon), 79, 112 Yi Nap, 114 Yi Sado, 114 Yi Sago, 114 Yingzhou, 11, 12, 13, 18, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 78, 87, 88, 89, 173 Escape from, 9–10 Yoˇbugu (Yeobugu), 43, 47, 48, 49, 50 Yoˇl Chudo (Yeol Judo) (Governor of Namhae Province), 65 Yoˇm (Yeom) District, 33 Yongch’oˇn (Yongcheon) Province of the Northern Capital (Sanggyoˇng;

Sanggyeong), 32, 40, 48, 144, 151, 177, 178 Yongha, 36 Yonghuˇng (Yongheung) River, 79 Yoˇngnyoˇng (Yeongnyeong) County, 48 Yongwoˇn (Yangwon) Province, 40, 42, 78, 79, 151 Yoˇngyang (Yeongyang), King (of Koguryoˇ), 18 Yoˇnp’a, 65 Youzhou, 30, 91, 93 Yu Tuˇkkong (Yu Deukgong), 85, 96 Zhongzong, 30 Zizhi tongjian (Comprehensive Mirror to Aid in Government), 18, 62

The Northeast Asian History Foundation - 978-90-04-24299-9 Downloaded from Brill.com 03/01/2024 08:48:17PM via University of Wisconsin-Madison