By Mark Peterson
I just returned to the States from a trip to Korea ― my first trip in exactly three years because of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was an eventful and busy trip. I worked on a documentary film about the "miracle battalion" from Utah during the Korean War. I had meet-ups with my YouTube followers and made more videos with them. I attended two conferences on "Sijo" (a Korean traditional poetic form) and the spread of Sijo in America. But the events that kept me busiest were about the publication of my new book on Korean history ― "Views of Korean History by a Frog Outside the Well."
The book is in Korean, so writing about it in an English paper may not be of interest to many of our readers here, but if the Korean edition sells well, the publisher is talking about an English version down the road. The Korean edition is selling well ― in two weeks' time, it's gone into a third printing! That's good news.
One of the enjoyable aspects of publishing a book in the popular market is that of having book signings ― I've published five academic books with typical academic press runs of 1000 copies, but there are not usually book signings for them. This book, however, was written in a conversational style, indeed, with questions given to me by my colleague, Prof. Shin Chaeyong, and with my responses. It was not a footnoted text, but it relies on my years of research and teaching about Korea. And we had book signings in Seoul and Daegu.
None of the "facts" in the book are particularly new. I don't claim any new discoveries. But what I offer is a new approach to facts already well known. And indeed, it is that approach that people have liked about my YouTube channel. And it was the popularity and success of my YouTube channel that led the publishers to approach me about writing the book.
Much of what I wrote, I have touched on in this column over the years. I didn't lift any of the verbiage from the words of this column ― it was all fresh writing ― but many of the ideas in the book have been developed in writing for this column. And I thank the editors of the Korea Times for encouraging me to write the book.
It includes facts that are well-known but I looked at them in an entirely new way and a way that many young scholars are starting to look at as well. For example, it's a simple fact that Korea had long, long dynasties. Joseon lasted 518 years. Goryeo lasted 474 years ― a total of 992 years. And Silla, going back to the mythological past, lasted 992 years. Yes ― 992 is the magic number in Korean history.
The fact that Korea has long dynasties has not been trumpeted as a good thing ― at least not until I started doing it. (Yes, maybe some others have, but…) Most historical writings on the long dynasties have been colored by negative views from the Japanese era where short, "dynamic" dynasties, like the shogunate dynasties of Japan. But I have offered a full-throated rejection of the Japanese era's point of view. I think the long dynasties of Korea are a measure of Korea's "peaceful and stable history" ― another point of view that has not been heralded in Korea.
Coupled with the facts of long dynasties is the fact that Korea never met a short-lived or failed dynasty. Other countries have dynasties that just didn't make it ― 17-year Qin dynasty, the 37-year Sui dynasty, the short-lived Hideyoshi Toyotomi dynasty ― the hugely failed dynasty caused by the losing the 1592 war with the Koreans. Other countries have short-lived dynasties. But not Korea! Even the minor dynasties lived for hundreds of years ― Baekje for 678 years, Buyeo (unclear but) over 600 years, Goguryeo for 705 years, and even "short-lived" Gaya lived for 489 years. Yes, I recognize that some of these dates are problematic, but that is not the issue. The issue is that all these dynasties lasted for hundreds of years, at least, and none of them were "flash in the pan" failed dynasties.
I pointed out that the transition from Gaya to Silla to Goryeo to Joseon was so peaceful that the aristocracy was never destroyed, unlike other countries at the fall of a dynasty. How many Fujiwara, Muromachi, Ashikaga, Oda and Tokugawa can you find in Japan today? But the aristocracy of previous dynasties in Korea ― Kim, Yi, and Pak ― are more than numerous. In fact, Kim-Yi-Pak with ownership of 45 percent of the population, is strong evidence that Korea had peaceful transitions from dynasty to dynasty.
My book argues in several ways that Korea's common narrative of the beaten-up, multiply-invaded, victimized nation is not at all valid. I point out that the centralized state of Korea goes back about 1000 years, when "seonbi," or scholars, were selected to serve in the government. This is in stark contrast to the samurai-driven feudalism of perpetual war in Japan.
Indeed, the selection of officials by the brush, rather than by the sword, argues in graphic terms that the old adage is true ― "the pen is mightier than the sword." And that is the core argument of my new book.
Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is a professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
 |
The book is in Korean, so writing about it in an English paper may not be of interest to many of our readers here, but if the Korean edition sells well, the publisher is talking about an English version down the road. The Korean edition is selling well ― in two weeks' time, it's gone into a third printing! That's good news.
One of the enjoyable aspects of publishing a book in the popular market is that of having book signings ― I've published five academic books with typical academic press runs of 1000 copies, but there are not usually book signings for them. This book, however, was written in a conversational style, indeed, with questions given to me by my colleague, Prof. Shin Chaeyong, and with my responses. It was not a footnoted text, but it relies on my years of research and teaching about Korea. And we had book signings in Seoul and Daegu.
None of the "facts" in the book are particularly new. I don't claim any new discoveries. But what I offer is a new approach to facts already well known. And indeed, it is that approach that people have liked about my YouTube channel. And it was the popularity and success of my YouTube channel that led the publishers to approach me about writing the book.
Much of what I wrote, I have touched on in this column over the years. I didn't lift any of the verbiage from the words of this column ― it was all fresh writing ― but many of the ideas in the book have been developed in writing for this column. And I thank the editors of the Korea Times for encouraging me to write the book.
It includes facts that are well-known but I looked at them in an entirely new way and a way that many young scholars are starting to look at as well. For example, it's a simple fact that Korea had long, long dynasties. Joseon lasted 518 years. Goryeo lasted 474 years ― a total of 992 years. And Silla, going back to the mythological past, lasted 992 years. Yes ― 992 is the magic number in Korean history.
The fact that Korea has long dynasties has not been trumpeted as a good thing ― at least not until I started doing it. (Yes, maybe some others have, but…) Most historical writings on the long dynasties have been colored by negative views from the Japanese era where short, "dynamic" dynasties, like the shogunate dynasties of Japan. But I have offered a full-throated rejection of the Japanese era's point of view. I think the long dynasties of Korea are a measure of Korea's "peaceful and stable history" ― another point of view that has not been heralded in Korea.
Coupled with the facts of long dynasties is the fact that Korea never met a short-lived or failed dynasty. Other countries have dynasties that just didn't make it ― 17-year Qin dynasty, the 37-year Sui dynasty, the short-lived Hideyoshi Toyotomi dynasty ― the hugely failed dynasty caused by the losing the 1592 war with the Koreans. Other countries have short-lived dynasties. But not Korea! Even the minor dynasties lived for hundreds of years ― Baekje for 678 years, Buyeo (unclear but) over 600 years, Goguryeo for 705 years, and even "short-lived" Gaya lived for 489 years. Yes, I recognize that some of these dates are problematic, but that is not the issue. The issue is that all these dynasties lasted for hundreds of years, at least, and none of them were "flash in the pan" failed dynasties.
I pointed out that the transition from Gaya to Silla to Goryeo to Joseon was so peaceful that the aristocracy was never destroyed, unlike other countries at the fall of a dynasty. How many Fujiwara, Muromachi, Ashikaga, Oda and Tokugawa can you find in Japan today? But the aristocracy of previous dynasties in Korea ― Kim, Yi, and Pak ― are more than numerous. In fact, Kim-Yi-Pak with ownership of 45 percent of the population, is strong evidence that Korea had peaceful transitions from dynasty to dynasty.
My book argues in several ways that Korea's common narrative of the beaten-up, multiply-invaded, victimized nation is not at all valid. I point out that the centralized state of Korea goes back about 1000 years, when "seonbi," or scholars, were selected to serve in the government. This is in stark contrast to the samurai-driven feudalism of perpetual war in Japan.
Indeed, the selection of officials by the brush, rather than by the sword, argues in graphic terms that the old adage is true ― "the pen is mightier than the sword." And that is the core argument of my new book.
Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is a professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
![[ANALYSIS] Tesla, BYD's price cuts unnerve LGES, Samsung, SK](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/b1cf8ba68d474cb69352bfe7ea9d14f0.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] How ATEEZ achieved worldwide success](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/c7723b56dde94eb4b260950d368fe8fb.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
