About 1 year ago the Chinese government officially made the claim that Koguryo was Chinese, or was ran by Chinese, a claim which has North an South Korea up in arms.

The Chinese have a tendency to dominate all history around them, I have even heard that they claim Gengis Kahn was a Chinese.

In any event there are 2 questions I have:

Is there any validity to this claim?

Also, if there is no valid claim, why would China make such a claim?

I feel that, and this is not unique, China is making a defacto claim upon North Korea incase it ever collapses.

I have another question which has nothing to do with this. Is it true that until Japan took over Choson, that Choson actually owned a small province north of the Yalu river? During the Imjin war Katos division briefly crossed the Yalu and to me knowledge it wasn’t to fight Ming, or even attack Ming but to fight Jurchens.

1st reply¡é

They say that all theirs to see. Tibet, Old chosun-koguryeo-Barhae, mongol, Dolkwol...etc

last time, A chinese scholar said that even the shilla also China.

there are also mad people who said the History of Korea is 9,000years in Korea with Hwandankoki.(and they say the Korea qonquer the siberia, Mesopotamia)

they are same level.......alike however not all chinese people say like that.

2nd reply¡é

What is the Yalu river? I don't hear the name.

Chinese character in Korean pronunciation can't write the 'lu'

I do not mean to go off topic too much, but wasnt old Choson ran by the Chinese?

Yes,  this is what I am getting at. The territory he crossed into, was it Korean? I heard that it was the Japanese who gave this province to China once they annexed Korea.

Conan the destroyer. Do you know the Northeast process promoted by Chinese party?

distrotion of History by china  in present. They are entrying Old chosun-Koguryeo-Barhae into Chinese History.

Last time, They promoted the Westsouth process to entry the Tibet history.

And Gubook Janggoong.

Gando was Korean territory. Look the Baekdusan Jyungkyebi(boundery stone) built in 1712.

Japan and Qing had Gando treaty in 1909 in theirs own way.

------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------

I don't think so reclaim the Gando......Already around 100 years passed. statue of limitation also remain only 4 years in international law. If the reclaim Gando now, It isn't differnt with Jude in palestine. but I'd like to you don't miss the historical fact.

read the newspaper today morning, Korean minstry of diplomacy decided Gando policy very suspicious because big stick of China.

They are all the stupid people in Goverment.

Oh, I didn't look before Imjin war. Sorry for that.

Gubook Janggoon. I read your post interesting.

I can't understand all the words because my poor English.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Gubook Janggoon Originally posted by Conan the destroyer China has never claimed Koguryo was Han Chinese. They claim that it was the kingdom of an ethnic minority of China. This is true. I don't think anyone has ever confused Goguryeo as an ethnic Han nation, except that very confused individual who voted as such on the poll. This is where the problem lies. China claims that Goguryeo was an ethnic minority who took its orders from the Tang and Sui courts.  This not only negates any "Korean" aspect about Goguryeo it is pure fallacy.  If Goguryeo was taking orders from China why would the Sui dynasty have to invade Goguryeo four times and the Tang have to send one of their greatest generals Su Dingfang to subjugate the nation? Proponents of the PRC's side often inject here that Goguryeo was a tributary of the middle kingdom.  So it was, but so were countless other nations such as Baekje and Shilla.  They then say Goguryeo can be considered a part of Chinese history because part of its former territory is now PRC territory.  Fair enough.  There's nothing wrong with teaching local history if you give due credit to the peoples you are teaching about.  But you shouldn't be putting up signs like this at the same time.  http://imageshack.us"> That say things like "Gao Gou Li Ren Bin Fei Chao Xian Ren" of "The people of Goguryeo don't have any relation to Koreans" Now granted The Korean camp doesn't have much meaningful stuff to say either. I've argued for a long time about this on the Korean side ever since the whole controversy started.  I've learned a lot since then and I've realized that a lot of the stuff we, Koreans, say is crap.  There are a few things that do mean something though. 1.  History-Goguryeo is recorded in the old histories of Korea as being part of the history of the area.  The Samguk Yusa and the Samguk Sagi both record Goguryeo as being one of the three kingdoms of Korea along with Baekje and Shilla.  Chinese records always label them as barbarians and not a part of China or any Chinese dynasty. 2.  Succession-Succession is as important in Korea as it is in China.  The closest thing that we have to a Chinese entity claiming Goguryeo as an ancestor state is when the Tang dynasty installed a member of the old Goguryeo royal family as king/governer of the now subjugated Goguryeo and giving him the title of "King of Chaoxian".  This though is short lived because of the king's constant rebellions.  On the other hand, there are two permanent states which do claim that Goguryeo was their ancestor state:  Barhae and Goryeo.  Barhae actively pushed itself as Goguryeo sucessor even taking the names of Goryeo and Goguryeo sometimes in its diplomatic ventures.  Goryeo was founded as the the sucessor of Goguryeo plain and simple.  Khitan invasions would eventually destory Barhae leaving Goryeo as the sole sucessor to Goguryeo. Those two reasons, IMHO, are the strongest reasons Goguryeo should be and is considered a part of Korean history.  The fact that they happened in antiquity doesn't hurt either.  By occurring in the past, it gave time for Goguryeo to become solidified as a part of Goryeo history and therefore a part of Joseon's history.  That's my take on it.  Hope that helped.

The problem is it's true Koguryeo are not Korean, not Chinese, but later on 90% of people become Chinese and 10% become Korean, if Chinese claim that Koguryeo is ethic group of Chinese border, I think Koreans should claim that also. Xian-Bei were also be known as an ancient ethic monority on the Chinese border later on become Chinese, and lots of example for that.

I don't agree think that "Koguryeo was Korea's. so GIVE US BACK ours Manchu 'n people of Koguryeo was!!" -_-

But the time of Koguryeo period. China also claim Koguryeo like Tang's minority or territroy even then. Only I'd like to criticize is this.

Succeeding of ethinic get accomplished in China more than Korea clearly. However people of Koguryeo could not refuge in those days.(maybe also now?)

People was pulled along to Tang by force about 150,000. Now the Manchu is China's territory. There were not nation which keep alive Korea's in North. Succeeding of ethnic never accomplished of theirs own accord. I don't have deny mind, but I'd like to you know these.

thanks for reading.(BTW How can I pull others words like that?)

well, Manchu were already Chinese territory in Ming dynasty.

in Tang dynasty Tang never claim Koguyeo as Tang territory, but Korguyeo does take some territories from Tang dynasty. Tang never clamed Koguyeo as Tang's monority, where you get that from?

Wher I get that from?

The chinsese scholar in Eastnorth project. all the says like that.

If I rude, Sorry for that Gubook Janggoon and Trukic10.

As I'm not good at Enlish, I can't express my thought well.

But I'd like to you think whole after see only one side.

Originally posted by Gubook Janggoon http://imageshack.us"> That say things like "Gao Gou Li Ren Bin Fei Chao Xian Ren" of "The people of Goguryeo don't have any relation to Koreans"

the title says Koguryo-people are absolutely not Choson people

and somewhere in that text it says Koguryo has its roots in Shang dynasty

this is too stupid to even get angry

In my personal opinion, Koguryo is Korean.  Ask the people above me.

Intellectually speaking, it's a good question. 

Like if we ask a Koguryeo-ean whether he is chinese or korean, he'd be like "WTF.  I'm someone who lives in here."  It's that simple. 

But the catch is that if he had to choose between China and Korea, he'd most likely side with Korea.  Because Koryo dynasty was made to honor Koguryo, which got toppeled by Choson, which formed korea.  China, however, is a mixed culture of many different ethnicities, with Han being the dominant and the one represented.  In other words, it's a new idea.  It's not completely Han because China assumes the status of other ethnicities and embraces their own culture, different from Han, as theirs.  So the choice for the Koguryo-ean is a country who followed the ways of Koguryo, or a mixed Koguryo-Han-Sui-Tang-ethnic minority idea.  I'm pretty sure Koguryo people would not side with a country whose ancestry includes a rival state of them.

Goguryeo! Goguryeo again!

After I visited SK, actually I have become to understand why Korean care this matter so much.  That is a indispensable part of your national pride. To be honest, I feel Korean sometime are too sentimentalist when they are talking about history, especially those history that they think to be their national pride. For example, when our guide told me about Tangun, she said " in 2031 BC (don't remember very clear) ... and then a mythical story about how the god let a bear, the fictionary ancestor of Korea became human and bore Tangun. "  Though common enough, every nation have their own mythology about their ancestor, it was my first time to hear that someone treats a myth as chronicle.  I don't know whether it was her own idea. However, if she really learnt it from school or some educational books, then it is not strange to me why some Korean's views on Gorguryo issue are so radical.

Gubook,you posted a photo about the Chinese extremists. I would also like to post one I took in SK. In fact, I don't know exactly what the words that were painted on this Korean tourist bus mean. Judging from the picture and the map, I reckon they are about Gorguryo and possibly unfriendly to Chinese. Could you translate for us? Thanks!

The big title says Korean History Festival.

Some of the smaller script is hard to read.  :l 

I imagine that this is run by extremist though, because of the fact that they're adding Gando into the map of Korea although there might be a reason for this.  :l

The one distinction that I'm going to draw between your picture and mine is that.

1.  Your picture depicts a private organization.  A group of tourists who hold a particular point of view.

2.  My picture depicts a sign at/or describing one of the Goguryeo sites set up by the PRC.

To me, however, their distintions are:

Your photo demonstrate the different views on a historical issue between Chinese and Korean, which is a common and unharmful thing if it were not politicalized and limited to pure academic argument.

On the other side, what shows in my photo, especially the map, which comes to my notice that actually it is not a historical map of Gorguryo,  is utterly a bad violation against the current international law. It exposes some Korean's ambition  on Chinese land. I don't think it is right to advertise such extremist hysteria. Imagine how the Korean would feel if you saw a Japanese map including Korea into the territory of Japan?

Actually oodog, that extra chunk of land belonged to the Chosun dyansty... From what I have read the Japanese ceded it to China when they annexed Korea in 1910.

Koguryo lands were more extensive than the one shown on the map, they at their height included some of Mongolia.

I don't know who told you the land belonged to Chosun dynasty.

As I know,it belonged to China. By the end of the Chosun

dynasty, thousands of poors of korea went there for a better

life,as the land was much fertile than their owns.

The emperors of Qing took Manchuria as their native land, so they

forbad other people went there. The forbiddance made there a vast

unmanned territory.  For this sake,the Koreans soon become the

majority in population in that area. But this does not mean the

area belonged to Korea in history.

It's not wise for some Korean parliament  members and newspaper

to make a fuss about the so-called Gendo problem.

As I recall it, the Gando/Gendo conflict was resolved as part of Qing only after in 1909 Japan and Qing signed the Gando treatise, giving Japan the right to construct railways in return.  And in that treatise, Choson was excluded.   

Before that, there were like several attempts to define the boundaries between those two countries.  I think the first one, or one of the first was this stella called Mokguk (ÙÏкÔô) that was found in 1712 after an incident where 5 chinese were killed around the region.  I don't remember how the geographical boundaries were like around that time, so I won't make claims now.

So after the Japanese withdrawal, NK and China had another agreement, w/o SKn consent, in 1962, ðÈñéÜ«Í£ðÉå³ (Whatever that is), setting the boundaries between the two countries, that gave Gando to China.  But even that treatise is not registered to the UN.

My point is that the problem is more complicated that "this is Korean" or "this is Chinese," because like, 4 countries are all involved in this issue and they all made things worse. 

So yeah, don't just go like "hey, it's chinese because it's our land now."

It's true that Koreans immigrated to that region, especially after Japanese colonization, becaues of land being fertile and it being Qing dynasty's birth ground, but that's not the whole story.

The same way some Chinese media and government tries to make a fuss about this Koguryo being Chinese ethnic minority.

I agree with your point,demon,it's more complicated than "this is ours"

or "this is yours". In fact, I can offer more detailed historical background

infromation about the Gando problem to you,but sadly,all of them are in

Chinese language.I think you can do the same thing too.  We all tend to

believe the facts provided by our own side.

You're a nice guy.I'm not here to quarrel with you for Gando or Goguryo

But when one of your neighbors always claim in newspaper one room of

your house was his,you will feel uncomfortable too.

You do not know China. Our media seldom make fuss about Kogryo,partly

because  they are not aware of the importance of koguryo,partly because

our government banned such reports. The government leaders did not wish

unpleasant thing appear between the media community of the two countries.

BTW£¬I have read The Record of Three Kingdoms through the link you

provided , I even bought one book. If I'm here to argue now, I can quote

some content of the book to sustain my viewpoint But I'm not here to

quarrel.  The best policy for me at present is to keep silence.  

  The two books are very important, I think everyone who want argue with his counterpart about Goguryo should read The Record of Three Kingdoms for at least two times.

I'm reading The History of Kori now. What impress me most was the beginning part of the book,i.e. therecord about the first king ,Wanggun.This part proveded some clues.

last time it was because China's stance changed from 'Korean history' to 'both Chinese and Korean history'

this time because China's stance changed from "both Chinese and Korean history" to "Chinese history and not Korean"

'course, being Chinese, you couldn't know that, since you guys don't care about Korguryo as much as we do..

Hey Hannibal and Demon,

The Gando discussion is very interesting and all, but if you want to discuss it further, please create another thread.  I'd like to keep this topic on discussion, ie Goguryeo.

At least I know the backgroud of the painting in my photo is one of the frestos of Goguryeo period.  On the other hand, I don't think the Yanbian ("Gando" as the Korean call the region) issue has nothing to do with the Goguryo argument. Both on the web and in my conversation with some Korean when I was in SK, I notice some Korean radical  nationalist believe in this logic -- Goguryeo ruled Yanbian (Gando) for almost a millennium. Korea is the rightful successor of Goguryeo. So those lands should be Korea's proper possession.

I know this is only a few extremist's thought. But it is more offensive and dangerous than any academic argument on Goguryeo's ownership.

First, there is no broadly accepted paradigm on judging the ownership of  a vanished civilization like Goguryeo. Even in the historian circle,  no consensus has been made yet. Under such circumstance, the Chinese surely have the right to express their own opinion on Goguryeo history.

In view of pragmatism, of course the Chinese should have better keep silent on the Gogueryeo matter, because whom Goguryo history belongs to means so much to the Korean and so little to Chinese. But should a genuine intellatual give up his academic position only because another nation's collective amour-propre should be take care of? If you ask me, I would say "no". for a historian, that is a matter of moral integrity . I reckon this is the reason why many Chinese scholars disagree their Korean counterpart's view on Goguryo.  I would like to re-paste one of my post in another thread that initiated by you.

Interestingly, the very reason that Goguryeo is thought to be Chinese in China is almost the same with that it is thought to be Korean in Korea. Let¡¯s check it out:

 l         Territory, a part of Goguryeo Kingdom today is ruled by PRC while the other part by NK.

l         Capital, the capital of Goguryeo originally was located in Jilin Province, China, but it was moved to Pyongyang  later.

l         People, after the collapse of the Goguryeo Kingdom, the conqueror, Tang Dynasty forced most of its people to reinhabit in Chinese hinterland, while the rest took refugees in Shilla (right spelling?). Thus, both Chinese and Korean are entitled to claim kindred of the Goguryeo people.

l         Culture, you could hardly tell the Korean culture from Chinese culture in that period. Perhaps the right description is that Goguryeo belonged to the East Asian Confucius Cultural Rim.

The root of Goguryeo is so profoundly mixed between China and Korea that actually you are always justified no matter you declared it Chinese or Korean. What really matters is the position you are at. 

Well written!

Where did you get that information? 

it may be offensive, but it is not dangerous, because it is not academic, and such thought is shunned by Koreans

good that you bring up integrity.
what does it mean to their moral integrity to be producing only results that their employer expects?

and I'm pretty sure in the same thread I said
*territory and capital should not be considered
*majority of people remained to become Balhae rather than move to Tang
*Koguryo culture, although imported much Chinese culture, had a Korean base. there are Chinese imported elements in Koguryo, but no Koguryo import in China. and there are commonality in Koguryo culture with Ancient Choson, Baekje, Koryo, Choson, Republic of Korea, etc
*root of Koguryo is in Ancient Choson, which the PRC does not claim as Chinese(yet). China may be able to claim a _shared_ Koguryo based on the end result, but not based on the roots.(the culture issue comes in the middle, and the people issue comes in at the end, not at the root) and a China-only view should be impossible no matter how you looked at it.

some exist. they made news in Korea for criticizing their government for claiming Koguryo history (and this was back in 'shared Koguryo' claim)

but in this case, the 'Northeast official fixture project' it seems they really set out from the beginning to fix some official stuff.

that makes it more dangerous.

even if the government take ruins of Koguryo walls, cement it up, then put up signs saying 'this is how far the Great Wall reached' the people will innocently believe it.
even if the government put up signs that says Koguryo came from Shang and not Ancient Choson, the people will innocently believe it.

then later others will try to correct them, but they'll believe official government handouts more than the one person who actually knows better

of course the debate should be limited to academic field. this isn't an agreement or compromise at all, on part of either of the countries. it is just the two sides making sure both are working with common sense.

the problem is in the Chinese academic project that goes around 'fixing' everything

That's not the logic, according to what Koreans hear.  If that was the case, the entire Manchuria would be claimed.  And let's not have another Goguryeo debate, but focus on this region of interest  (I'll try my best to not link those two)

Gando/Gendo (southern Yanbian- I type Gando because its much easier than Southern Yanbian; it's more specific than Southern Yanbian (you can argue like "how much of the Yanbian are these crazy koreans claiming?") and it fits the description of the conflict) conflict arose during Choson and Qing dynasty, when multiple factors just kick in. 

Partially it was because the Manchus originated from the region; partially because the two countries didn't give much damn about the borderline until then when the two did start to care.  There were Korean farmers living in that area - some who moved before the conflict, and others during/after (Most korean immigration to Manchu occured after Japanese colonization, due to high taxation, however). 

So Qing decided to set up a stella in Baitou(Bekdu) mountain and send topographers to draw boundaries, and all that.  Then there was a quarrel (explained later on in this post)...all the way until Japanese intervened Choson politics, and made the Gando agreement (as mentioned in my earlier post in page 2) that gave Gando to Qing in return for the rights to build railroads in Manchu. 

Then when Japanese lost WWII, it agreed to cede all land dominations to the colonized countries- leaving NK and PRC to deal the issue.  They did, in 1962, without the consent of any other nation (not even to South Korea), or the UN. 

See the problem? 

Here's a picture I've found from a "Gando for Korea" article. 

The red markers indicate the "artificial mud stockades" constructed by Qing to indicate their boundaries with Choson, or what's left of them.  It starts out from the left-top, where "Bekdu-mountain apex stella" is (Baitou Mountain or white headed mountain- historically it was the stella that basically wrote the boundaries), all the way through Amnok river and Tou-moon river.

The Stella mentioned the border to be from "Abrok to Tou-moon."

Abrok(Amnok) river(äåÖàË°) is Yalu river.  In the picture, its the one on the very left that touches the red margin until the margin heads right

Tou-moon river - that's the one opened to interpretations.  In that period, Tou moon river for Choson was the predecessing river for song hwa river.  (In the picture below, tou moon river is the circle in the rightmost part- tou, pronounced "to" with the o as in nope, means dirt.  Topographically speaking, Tou-moon river is a "dried up river," thus the "dirt.")  However, the Qing interpreted Tou-moon as the "Chinese way" (technically its the "Qing" way of saying) of pronouncing du-man river(Ôçػ˰), or the actual NK borderline river along the northern-rightmost region.

But if, and I mean if, the Qing claim is just a fabricated excuse, Gando- the eastern section of the land stretching along tou-moon river- would be part of Choson. 

Since the Japanese Imperialists made an unfair agreement during their height that gave up Gando to Qing (or reaffirmed it or whatever fits you), and since they agreed to surrender all land to the colonized ones after WWII, the Gando problem really is an interesting conflict.  (Well, technically there's the NK and PRC's agreement against SK and UN's consent, which makes the issue more complicated, which can be discussed later on)

That's my view so far.  I'm opened to the Chinese viewpoint about the issue.

Interestingly, the very reason that Goguryeo is thought to be Chinese in China is almost the same with that it is thought to be Korean in Korea. Let¡¯s check it out:

 l         Territory, a part of Goguryeo Kingdom today is ruled by PRC while the other part by NK.

l         Capital, the capital of Goguryeo originally was located in Jilin Province, China, but it was moved to Pyongyang  later.

l         People, after the collapse of the Goguryeo Kingdom, the conqueror, Tang Dynasty forced most of its people to reinhabit in Chinese hinterland, while the rest took refugees in Shilla (right spelling?). Thus, both Chinese and Korean are entitled to claim kindred of the Goguryeo people.

l         Culture, you could hardly tell the Korean culture from Chinese culture in that period. Perhaps the right description is that Goguryeo belonged to the East Asian Confucius Cultural Rim.

The root of Goguryeo is so profoundly mixed between China and Korea that actually you are always justified no matter you declared it Chinese or Korean. What really matters is the position you are at. 

Your prejudice shows how little you know about China. Things in fact are on the contary.

Until just a decade ago, there are no debate on Gorguryo issue at all. Why? Because after the PRC was founded, there is hardly academic freedom. You can say in decades all Chinese scholars were "producing only results that their employer expects". On the other hand,  North Korea has long been the PRC's "Comrade plus brother" .  Any thing that might do harm to the "great friendship and brotherhood" between NK and China would be shunned by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Gorguryo issue for sure would be one of this troblesome stuffs. Therefore, any statements that were different with the NK opinion had been recklessly oppressed.

Today, China is rapidly changing, as what we can see on the press or by your own feeling if you has been to this amazing country. The environment of academic resaerch are much much more free than before. In historian field, the government now seldom interfere with the academic researches.  The debate on Gorguryo issue has becoming active under this circumstance.  It was actually the rebound after a long time depression. But this subject is just a tip of an iceburg if you look at the whole picture. Many scholars now dare to express their own views on many historical subjects, some of which could been deemed as taboo only ten years ago. For example, some historians write books to argue that Li Hongzhang was in fact a patriotist. But Li, the most influential official during the late Qing Dynasy had long been decribed as a big quisling.  Even this final judgement in the text book now are being challenged. The Gorguryo debate is only a drop in the ocean during this period of "Chinese academic renaissance".

As what I said: there is no broadly accepted paradigm with regard to historical research. I respect your view. But that does not mean the Chinese historian's arguement are totally nonsense, though they may make you uncomfortable.

You mentioned the ancient Choson. To my knowledge, this dynasty (or just kind of prehistorical culture?) is something like the Xia Dynasty in Chinese history. So far we don't have enough information to even prove its existence. If you take it as the grounds of your argument, IMHO, it does not sound persuasive enough. BTW, do you really believe Tangun was offspring of a bear?

I don't think so, really.  I am afraid you have underestimated the wisdom of Chinese people and overweighted the importance of the Gorguryo history in minds of Chinese. I bet the reaction of 99% people that saw that signs would be like this: Read it and say " I see" , and then forget it after they wake up next day. The rest 1%, those people like me who is interested in historian stuff will ask" Is that really the case?", and then they will look up this matter on web or in book and have their own opinions.

Who are those "others" you referring to? Whether they means other Chniese historians? Remenber I told you that nearly all Chinese scholars more or less have connection with the government. That comes the problem: if both sides are considered "official", your dixit that "they'll believe official government handouts more than the one person who actually knows better" would go to nowhere.

This is another Korean's assertion. Well, according to the " beauty is in the eye of the beholder" rule when we talking about history,  just leave it along.

At least in Chinese history, once the capital of a dynasty moved to another city (usually due to revolution), even the bloodline of the imperial court continuing, the regime would be regarded as another dynasty. For example, West Jin and East Jin, the former regarded as a independent dynasty, while the latter is treated as a part of the Southern Dynasty. As to Turkey, that's another problem-- religion. You can't just link two unrelated things together to serve as your argument, can you?

Personally, I think Goguryo, Barhae and Buyeo should all be classified as vanished (or lost) civilization. No need to say about their "ownership".  Only my own opinion.

You know, Goguryo was a nation lasted for centuries. In the same period, the central or dominant dynasties in the middle plaint changed for serveral times. The orthodox Confucisian doctrine only prevailed in some highly centralized dynasties, such as the early west Han and early Tang.  But during a certain periods, Buddism and Daoism were even more influential than Confucism. For example, during the Bei Wei Dynasty and in the Southern Dynasty, Buddism was the No. 1 official brief. In the late East Han, Doaism become the challenger of Confucism. In my post, I said "Confusian Cultral Rim of East Asia" not only meant the philosophy itself. We should see it on a broader prospect. It shows the close culture connection between various nations in the region. In this sense, Goguryo for sure was a part of it. However, I won't say "Confusian Cultral Rim of East Asia" = Chinese territory. I don't know much about "Dongmeyongseong". It would be appreciated if you tell me sth about that.

You are right. I never said Goguryo's culture was the same as anyother culture. We even cannot assert that the Tang culture was the same as the Ming culture.  "The same"  is hardly a good word with we doing such comparision. But it wouldn't keep historian from classified kinds of various cultures into a certain category.

I searched the information by keying in "Goguryeo" and "Xinhua" in Chinese. I think you  have misunderstood the meaning of that expression in the news, possibly due to inaccurate translation. I read a lot of news released by Xinhua News Agency with wording as "Zhongguo Gaogouli Wangcheng Yizhi ...". Good translation of this expression should be "the Gorguryo Kindom captial site in China" , not "China's Goguryeo Kingdom site". Because judging from the context, it refers to the sites that is objectively located in PRC, telling from the sites that are situated in NK.

The reason that I wrote "as heck alot" was because I saw a unhealthy tendency among Koreans. They tend to think any debate on Goguryo issues is on political purpose. Then without rhyme or reason, some Korean let their logic jump to NK's maybe collaspe (which itself is a highly hyperthetical thing) and China's would-be "takeover" of the land. They assume that the Chinese discussinon on the Goguryo is a plot in order to find some historical grounds to rule the "post DPRK north Korea".  That is why some Korean can not even accept the possibility that Goguryo debate could be limited within academic field.  Generally speaking, that was another example of the "China Threat" sentiment.  Though I myself don't completely agree with some Chinese historian's view on Goguryo history. But I really cannot tolerate some Korean demonize China by taking use of this issue. I also notise that some western media are making mischief between. That is, truly, a machination.

"Among two armies, equally armed, skilled and able to fight the winner will be the one with the better morale (conditions) and spirit, and with soldiers morally ready to fight. The morale of the Koguryo soldiers was extremely high-this is certified by partisan units in the Chinese rear and the high pathos of soldiers during the battle, by people, who by their own will, left their homes when Uiji Mundok implemented his scorched earth policy.

The main point is that the men of Koguryo had already come to grips with their ethnic self-consciousness, understanding their non-Chinese tradition and culture. Quintessential of this was the cult of Chumong, the legendary founder of the Koguryo kingdom and ideal ruler and hero. The temple of Chumong is mentioned even in Chinese sources. After the wedding of the god with a specially selected bride, faith in the presence of the unseen Chumong so raised the morale of the defenders that the Chinese could take them only by completely destroying them. Both the paintings from the tombs and the legends that many Koreans have heard around the fires are different from the Chinese stories."

don't be looking at that single quote by me.
that line was meant to go in line with some other parts of my post, and mean:
yes, China is different now, but "North East Official Fixture Project" is one of the 'seldom' times that the government interferes/directs, and we can tell just by the name, where it identifies itself as a project that started with a vision to 'fix' 'official' stuff in the North East, not to mention that organizations that actually aren't controlled by the government has been criticizing the said project

the beginning of ancient Choson is still a mystery, but the middle and end of ancient Choson are clearly recorded, and backed by archeology.

I don't know where you got the idea that its entire existence is a question mark

and even if all of Ancient Choson is ignored, it doesn't change anything. Koguryo's root would be id'ed as Buyeo(since it was Buyeo before ancient Choson), and along with all the other points, Shared-view is still difficult, and China-only view is still impossible.

and you don't see a problem with damaging historical ruins or distoritng historical facts in the first place?

or do you really believe Koguryo came from Shang?

and that they really built that wall as part of the Great wall, so they may protect inner China from, say, themselves?

except in this case, the 'fixing' side is official, and the criticizing group that I mentioned is not official.

before you go on any further, please note some things:

Chinese ministry of diplomacy's response to Korean complaint:
"China has no will to distort history, and the N.E.O.F.Project is hard to control because it is done by a regional government"

exposed by Chinese newspaper(ýÙùÁìíÜÃ):
'N.E.O.F.Project was started with direction and approval by Hu Jintao, now president of China.
It is a project that works under direction, approval, and confirmation of top Chinese leaders.
Annual meeting are held by Project experts, and in the 2003 meeting, Ø©ÓÞïá said "Without development and stability of the Chinese frontier regions, there is no development and stability of China"

and I ask why should you be concerned about status of your country in a purely academic historical research project, and would the opposing side really have a chance at becoming just as 'official' as the side that the president takes care of?

Who were they? The "ethnic minorities"? Chinese, Koreans, Manchus, Mongols, or Sianbis? Japanese? Turks, or Russians? Who are they? I think they must have been Mongols or Russians or Europeans or American-Indians!?

DON'T SAY THEY WERE HAN-CHINESE, PLEASE! AND THAT THE CHINESE AT THAT TIME SPOKE IN KOREAN?!!!!!