Founder of Ching(淸 Chung/Qing) empire
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Alternative History
Forum Discription: Discussion of Unorthodox Historical Theories & Approaches
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24548
Printed Date: 17-Apr-2024 at 17:54 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Founder of Ching(淸 Chung/Qing) empire
Posted By: Chiwoo
Subject: Founder of Ching(淸 Chung/Qing) empire
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2008 at 15:21
Picture of Aisingioro Nurhachi, founder of Ching (Chung/Qing)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt5H-f6DAR0 - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E3YrHlS9OjE - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E3YrHlS9OjE
|
Replies:
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:06
First of all, this empire is primarily known as Qing. It was a Manchu dynasty of China and not Korean. Please don't confuse the forum members by this very extravagant and bizarre interpretation of the historical facts. Not every great person in the East Asian history was Korean.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:21
As a decendent of Manchu Plain Red Banner, i strongly object this kind of Korean chauvenism. We are manchu and we have absolutely nothing to do with the Koreans whatsoever, you have no rights to decide what/who we are. So please post your stupid comment somewhere else, and i would very much like to see him banned from AE.
|
Posted By: Chiwoo
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:24
Originally posted by Sarmat12
First of all, this empire is primarily known as Qing. It was a Manchu dynasty of China and not Korean. Please don't confuse the forum members by this very extravagant and bizarre interpretation of the historical facts. Not every great person in the East Asian history was Korean. |
You don't know the truth.
If you were not Korean nor the People of Qing how could you know the relationship between the two people.
have you studied Qing history with its own history books, not by Han chinese nor Western scholars?
By the way, Chung is Korean sound for Qing.
You claim Chung is dynasty of manchu. Right. I didn't deny it was dynasty of Manchu.
Manchu deserve to celebrate Qing dynasty too.
And if you value Chung dynasty as part of manchu you shoud call it Ching, not Qing.
Qing : han chinese sound. Ching : manchurian sound.
Only i hope you don't remove this post.
|
Posted By: Chiwoo
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:26
Originally posted by Siege Tower
As a decendent of Manchu Plain Red Banner, i strongly object this kind of Korean chauvenism. We are manchu and we have absolutely nothing to do with the Koreans whatsoever, you have no rights to decide what/who we are. So please post your stupid comment somewhere else, and i would very much like to see him banned from AE. |
have you studied your own history by your own people with your own books, not by Han Chinese teachers with Han-chinese version of books.
I am sorry for all the manchu who deny their origin.
Your claiming your history started from Kim (Jin) dynasty make you you were Barbarians with no origin.
We don't care about today's Manchu and we are not relating Koreans to Manchu.
We respect only one truth that Kim Nurhachi is Koryeo man, anctually a Shilla royal family member, ant the dynasties were built by Koguryeo and Balhae people.
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:34
Mind you that you are not the first one i ve met with such absurd theory, but what's unique about your stupid theory is that you considered Qing the so call "Post-Shilla", and i find that very insulting.
have you studied Qing history with its own history books, not by Han chinese nor Western scholars?
many of the scholars in my banners as well as many other banners, were involved in organizing the history of Qing so i find it quiet absurd to question the validity of it, and yes, i consider my self as a semi-expert on Qing history.
You don't know the truth
Okay, enlighten me with your so called "truth".
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:41
Your claiming your history started from Kim (Jin) dynasty make you you were Barbarians with no origin.
Mind you that the language we Manchus speaking is of Tungusic origin as opposed to Korean's Altaic origin, so i don t know why you would even bother to make connecting between the Korean pronounciation and the Chinese pernounciation.
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 00:48
Chiwoo, do you think that relying on Korean ethnocentric historical sources makes you knowledge "better" ? It just makes it very biased.
And I think the opinion of a Manchu person i.e. Siege Tower about your "theory" is very representative here.
Let Manchus alone they don't want to be Koreans.
Also this forum's official language is English and this dynasty is primarily known as "Qing" for English speakers. Nobody will undersand what you mean by Chung, unless he can read Chinese characters.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: Chiwoo
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 01:05
Originally posted by Siege Tower
Your claiming your history started from Kim (Jin) dynasty make you you were Barbarians with no origin.
Mind you that the language we Manchus speaking is of Tungusic origin as opposed to Korean's Altaic origin, so i don t know why you would even bother to make connecting between the Korean pronounciation and the Chinese pernounciation.
|
??
I just said "Chung" Korean sound for "Qing" and "Ching" is Manchu sound for "Qing"
Don't you call Qing "Ching" in your own language? If not I was wrong but every Manchu seemed to understand what I meant when I call it "Ching"
I say again, I am not trying to link you Manchus to today's Koreans .
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 01:21
Dear Chiwoo.
Your posts actually made me more curious about you than the subject at hand. So I looked up your personal profile and you've listed yourself as 71 year old male. I'm assuming you are Korean, so in that case, 'Halahbeoji, Annyunghaseyo?'.
Even though South Korea is one of the most internet hooked nation in the world, I would assume it's not usual for a 71 year old to write about Chinese in English on a history internet forum. So if you are really who you say you are(which I have no evidence to think otherwise), I have much respect for you whether what you are saying is right or wrong.
I've met many Koreans claiming similar theories in internet, several in this site alone. Sometimes I suspect they are not even Koreans at all but other nationalities trying to make Koreans look bad by claiming something ridiculous and very nationalistic. But I'm not gonna claim all those are fake. I think some of them genuinely believe what they are claiming. As a Korean myself, I sometimes want to believe what they are claiming. But just because I want to believe in something doesn't make it true. And it's sure a hard sell for other people.
I somehow believe that you are 71 year old Korean man and you've read some history books about China or in Chinese writing since that is pretty common for older educated Korean men. And I do believe you have something valid to say, possibly something to teach us. I hope. But you are doing it with a 40 sec Youtube clip, semantics on Qing and Chung, and accusing other respected forumers of ignorance. I suppose if you met a Japanese guy with 40 sec Youtube clip, semantics on few similar Korean and Japanese words and told you that you don't know much because you haven't read certain Japanese history books while he's claiming Ancient Shilla was actually a Japanese kingdom or a vassel? You wouldn't give him much time to convey his theory, would you? Even if what you are claiming is right you are not going to convince too many people that way. All you do is isolating yourself.
Edit.
Whoops, Sorry I prematurely posted this post. I'm not quite done yet.
If you really believe in what you claim, and you think it's something we all should learn from you. You must present it in more serious scholastic manner. This is more true if what you are claiming is further away from the mainstream view. You are asking people to be open minded beyond their belief. You must be willing to be open minded yourself. Even if what you are saying is true based on what you've read, surely you couldn't have read everything on the subject. So please, compose yourself show us the wisdom of old Korean man.
I apologize if I was disrespectful to in anyway. I've been in U.S. too long. Otherwise, welcome to the forum and hope we can share some knowledge, not just pride.
Sincerely
King Kang
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 01:31
Picture of Kim Nurhachi, founder of Post-Shilla Empire
i think it is very clear that you are trying to say that Manchus are Koreans.
I just said "Chung" Korean sound for "Qing" and "Ching" is Manchu sound for "Qing"
Don't you call Qing "Ching" in your own language? If not I was
wrong but every Manchu seemed to understand what I meant when I call it
"Ching"
That is indeed correct, but i failed to see why it is so important, chances are that the Korean pronounciation was originated from the Manchu pronounciation.
|
Posted By: Chiwoo
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 01:49
Originally posted by Siege Tower
Picture of Kim Nurhachi, founder of Post-Shilla Empire
i think it is very clear that you are trying to say that Manchus are Koreans.
I just said "Chung" Korean sound for "Qing" and "Ching" is Manchu sound for "Qing"
Don't you call Qing "Ching" in your own language? If not I was wrong but every Manchu seemed to understand what I meant when I call it "Ching"
That is indeed correct, but i failed to see why it is so important, chances are that the Korean pronounciation was originated from the Manchu pronounciation.
|
Ok then, I will edit my post.
You don't want to hear this from any Korean but actually according to Korean records from Joseon dynasty, both royal courts conversed with each other without a interpreter.
Not that i am here to bother any Qing dynasty descendants.
I just guess that many of Manchu people are so sensitive when Koreans celebrate Qing empire as part of Korean history.
We both deserve to celebrate the Empire as it is history of us both, Korean and Manchu.
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 02:33
You don't want to hear this from any Korean but actually according to
Korean records from Joseon dynasty, both royal courts conversed with
each other without a interpreter.
I honestly have never heard of that, but i guess it's very much possible for the two different cultures who spoke two entirely different languages and have different writings, to communicate using Chinese, which to my understanding, was very familiar to both cultures.
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 03:32
Originally posted by Chiwoo
You don't want to hear this from any Korean but actually according to Korean records from Joseon dynasty, both royal courts conversed with each other without a interpreter.
|
Apparently, they conversed in Chinese, the language which had the official status at both courts.
Originally posted by Chiwoo
Not that i am here to bother any Qing dynasty descendants.
I just guess that many of Manchu people are so sensitive when Koreans celebrate Qing empire as part of Korean history.
We both deserve to celebrate the Empire as it is history of us both, Korean and Manchu. |
I recently watched a Korean historical fiction movie "Heaven's soldiers." Which in fact is very Korean.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Soldiers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Soldiers
It clearly shows how Koreans view their "brothers" Manchus. In the movie, Jurchens (i.e. Manchu's ancestors) are blood thursty, primitive savages whose only desire is to kill and loot poor Koreans with whom they apparently have nothing in common (the dialogues in Jurchen language are given with Korean subtitles BTW ).
It seems to me that very few people if any in Korea can seriously think of "celebrating Qing empire as part of Korean history."
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: Chiwoo
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 05:32
Originally posted by Sarmat12
Originally posted by Chiwoo
You don't want to hear this from any Korean but actually according to Korean records from Joseon dynasty, both royal courts conversed with each other without a interpreter.
|
Apparently, they conversed in Chinese, the language which had the official status at both courts.
Originally posted by Chiwoo
Not that i am here to bother any Qing dynasty descendants.
I just guess that many of Manchu people are so sensitive when Koreans celebrate Qing empire as part of Korean history.
We both deserve to celebrate the Empire as it is history of us both, Korean and Manchu. |
I recently watched a Korean historical fiction movie "Heaven's soldiers." Which in fact is very Korean.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Soldiers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Soldiers
It clearly shows how Koreans view their "brothers" Manchus. In the movie, Jurchens (i.e. Manchu's ancestors) are blood thursty, primitive savages whose only desire is to kill and loot poor Koreans with whom they apparently have nothing in common (the dialogues in Jurchen language are given with Korean subtitles BTW ).
It seems to me that very few people if any in Korea can seriously think of "celebrating Qing empire as part of Korean history."
|
It seemed to be true that Joseon used to describe Jurchen brutal. At that time the two people already lived separately from each other and felt kind of hostility toward each other.
But as you in history and even in modern days (between South Korea and North Korea), that thing always happens among the same peoples.
The important thing is the historical fact that the founder of the two Empires were built by direct discendants of Shilla and the people in the dynasties were descendants of Koguryeo and Balhae.
"Jurchen" is not even the ancient term. The term generated after the fall of Koguryeo and Balhae, and the northern people, during Koguryeo, were called "Horse tribe", which became part of Jurchen .
Between Qing and Josen there were a few times of battles at the beginning of establishing Kim and Qing dynasty but the Emperors were still worshiping Joseon as their mother country.
If you met any descendant of Qing royal family you would learn what the relationship was like between the two dynasties during the era of Joseon and Qing. Koreans value Kim and Qing as precious as any other Korean dynasty.
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 05:51
I doubt that Joseon court spoke Chinese either, well not without interpreters. I would assume most of communication was done through convoys and official letters which would have been undoubtedly in Chinese letters.
'Heaven's Soldiers'. Interesting movie nonetheless. But I did notice they portrayed the Manchus(Jurchens) as savage barbarians. Traditionally Koreans call Manchus or nomadic tribes from northern borders in general as 'O Rang Kae' which has similar connotation. I'm sorry. I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just stating what I see as historical/cultural fact.
Anyway if there were any Koreans who celebrate Qing as part of Korean history, that is news to this Korean. I always thought Joseon always allied herself with Ming in Ming/Qing conflict.
But I do understand there is a tension between involving China's Northeast Historical Project and Korean historians reaction to it. I try to understand from both point of view. I understand PRC's need to centralize all her minority groups as she develops into a global superpower. Whether some of its practices are right or wrong it seems natural to me. I also understand Koreans' reaction to it. That also seems natural to me. Perhaps Kokuryeo issue is the main focal point. But we do have few threads on the issue and though I didn't participate any serious conversation in those threads, I have learned a lot from reading you guys, especially the Charioteer. Whether I agree with him or not I envy his passion for the history of his country.
I can only read few Chinese letters. Since even most of if not all major Korean history records are written in Chinese, I think it is crucial to understand Chinese to attain deeper understanding of what was written originally from both side. One of the main reason I tried to stay away from the arguments.
I also know that China has the most extensive and continuous historical records of herself more than any other nation/culture/civilization. In Korea, many invasions, especially during the Japanese occupation many historical records were destroyed. So when somebody else wants to tweak with their history even if its they are doing it in their own territory, Koreans have very sensitive reaction to it. Once again both positions seem natural to me.
But to say, Qing was part of Korean history or Confucius was Korean or DongYi and Shandong people were Koreans kind of claims seems to tweak their own traditional beliefs/records. Once again as a Korean I would love to see a new discovery or new analysis of existing records that confirms all these fantastic and nationalistic claims. But I have seen one that's convincing enough.
I've read few excerpts from 'HwanDanGogi' in English. I've read few articles and books on Kokuyeo and Balhae(Bohai). I've seen few YouTube videos about Hwankuk or Baedalkuk. And I do think some practices of NE Historical Project are questionable to say the least. But same time I don't think Koreans should react to that by claiming something only they can seem to decipher.
Unless anyone else can present such claims in more intelligently prepared scholastic way, we have seen enough, least I have. Otherwise it's only hurting the relationship between two nations without any scholastic gain for either side. As none history major(though this forum has made me rethinking it), I'm always interested so called pseudo-history. I love when people can overturn the conventional wisdom. But that's not just gonna fall on your lap. It takes that much more work and dedication to swim against the current.
For this Korean, I always consider any Chinese, Manchus, Mongols, SE Asians as my Asian brothers and sisters.
PS. Hey Samart12 have you seen 'The Four Gods'? It's South Korean historic TV drama about Koguryeo and Dangun myth. It's lot more mythical than 'Jumong'. I've watched only few episodes so far. It's entertaining at least, more like 'Lord of the Ring' kinda way. Anyway here is the first segment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Z5i39vSxs - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Z5i39vSxs
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 18:04
Thanks for the introduction King. I'm definetely very interested in watching this movie.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2008 at 23:03
For this Korean, I always consider any Chinese, Manchus, Mongols, SE Asians as my Asian brothers and sisters.
That's the spirit, brother.
I would just like to point out that the Manchus are semi-nomadic, and in fact most of manchu population that settled near Korean were forest dewllers, so i don t the Koreans would refer to the Manchus as Nomadic.
|
Posted By: Pierrewatteau
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 05:32
Anyone who has taken history classes in college would know that the "claims" made in this thread by Chiwoo are mostly baseless and are not supported by mainstream academic views.
However, Chiwoo's statements on these are particularly puzzling and makes no sense at all:
And if you value Chung dynasty as part of manchu you shoud call it Ching, not Qing.
Qing : han chinese sound. Ching : manchurian sound. |
?
I just said "Chung" Korean sound for "Qing" and "Ching" is Manchu sound for "Qing"
Don't you call Qing "Ching" in your own language? If not I was wrong but every Manchu seemed to understand what I meant when I call it "Ching" |
LOL, isn't "Ching" and "Qing" pronunced the same way? Moreover, "Ching" is the older (such as Wade-Gile , Postal, Yale..) romanization of this word, and if you flip threw sources from the 19th century and early 20th century, the last dynasty of China was written as "Ching dynasty" in English (see older English-language encyclopedias), while Qing is the modern pinyin romanization. And they both have the same pronunciation in mandarin Chinese. Ching and Qing are simply different ways of romanization, just as there are several different kinds of romanization for Korean language.
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 07:01
I thought Chiwoo meant that Ching is how it's pronounced in Manchu language.
But anyway, the best way to refer to this dynasty is Qing.
It's the same if some Chinese person would say smth. like "let us now discuss the history of Chaoxian."
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: Pierrewatteau
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 07:53
I thought Chiwoo meant that Ching is how it's pronounced in Manchu language.
But anyway, the best way to refer to this dynasty is Qing.
It's the same if some Chinese person would say smth. like "let us now discuss the history of Chaoxian." |
I think Chiwoo didn't do research before posting. "Qing" is pronounced as "Ch'ing" in mandarin, I think any one who knows a bit about linguistics would know that Qing is pinyin romanization while Ching is wade-gile and yale romanization. Qing and Ching are different English romanization of the same sound and character.
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 08:27
Yes, you're right. Ch'ing is just Wade-Giles romanization, but I just thought may be in Manchu language it also sounds the same.
But it's not, in Manchu it looks like this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_Dynasty - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_Dynasty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Daicing_gurun.png"> Daicing gurun
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 08:37
Originally posted by Sarmat12
It's the same if some Chinese person would say smth. like "let us now discuss the history of Chaoxian." |
Good point! Some Koreans would say 'What's Chaoxian?', although Joseon and Chaoxian sounds similar. Most of Koreans can look at the word Beijing in Chinese and know what it means and even tell it means 'North(Northern)' and 'Capitol(City)' by each letters. But they would say Buk Gyung(or Gyeong) which also means Northern Capitol City. I think understanding different pronunciations is important when you compare records from different cultures but it doesn't mean they have different meanings. Once again just semantics.
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 20:13
The thread is moved to a proper subforum.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 20:36
Wow, Chiwoo created whole new subforum almost single handedly. Perhaps the greatest impact made by a newcomer in quit some time? Why do we, Koreans have to stick out like that wherever we go? It can be a good thing or a bad thing, but I see to many times with hotheadedness. I know many Koreans with cool calm collective Confucius scholastic temperments though. Just not in this forum, I guess. Where is Gubook Janggoon these days?
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2008 at 23:04
I think Chiwoo didn't do research before posting. "Qing" is
pronounced as "Ch'ing" in mandarin, I think any one who knows a bit
about linguistics would know that Qing is pinyin romanization while
Ching is wade-gile and yale romanization. Qing and Ching are different
English romanization of the same sound and character.
Oh, no, Chiwoo was talking about the Manchu pronounciation, Ch'ing and Qing may sound exactly the same in English, but there is a difference between the two in chinese pronounciations. I don t personally speak Manchu Language or talk in Manchu accent, but i noticed when my great-grandfather(who speaks Manchu Language) talks about Qing dynasty, he sounded more like Ching, which all the mandarin speakers should know, the Ch- in Ching is retroflex consonant as oppose to Q- in Qing which is alvelo-palatal consonant
|
Posted By: snowybeagle
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 03:37
Originally posted by King Kang of Mu
Where is Gubook Janggoon these days? |
Should in 2nd or 3rd year in an Arts college, somewhere in Boston, IIRC.
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 06:06
Gubook Janggoon? wasn't that the hardline korean nationalist moderator?
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 06:23
He was a good mod.
-------------
|
Posted By: Xu Hua
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 06:58
I don't know any cultural, anthropic, or genetic relation between Tungusic and Silla. They had the same ancestor dozens thousands years ago, far before the national identifications formed.
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 07:12
There in fact were some interesting Korean-Tungusic relations in Bohai
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balhae - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balhae
But definetely it's not enough to build on this the theories AKA Chung-Korean dynasty etc.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2008 at 08:05
Originally posted by Siege Tower
Gubook Janggoon? wasn't that the hardline Korean nationalist moderator? |
I don't know if he was a hardline nationalist or not. That's more subjective opinion and I guess I'm biased because he was Korean. But I tell you what, I learned a lot from the battles Gubook Janggoon and The Charioteer used to have, especially on Koguryeo and NE project. I think Gubook Janggoon did get tired and became little sensitive toward the end. Perhaps one of the reasons he's not around anymore. But I think he did a lot of work for the East Asia subforum and I don't remember him abusing his mod power too much. I guess I just miss learning from great debates in the East Asia forum because I am not capable of creating or participating in one myself. I always appreciate when you guys do though. Thanks.
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2008 at 00:52
Originally posted by King Kang of Mu
Originally posted by Siege Tower
Gubook Janggoon? wasn't that the hardline Korean nationalist moderator? |
I don't know if he was a hardline nationalist or not. That's more subjective opinion and I guess I'm biased because he was Korean. But I tell you what, I learned a lot from the battles Gubook Janggoon and The Charioteer used to have, especially on Koguryeo and NE project. I think Gubook Janggoon did get tired and became little sensitive toward the end. Perhaps one of the reasons he's not around anymore. But I think he did a lot of work for the East Asia subforum and I don't remember him abusing his mod power too much. I guess I just miss learning from great debates in the East Asia forum because I am not capable of creating or participating in one myself. I always appreciate when you guys do though. Thanks. |
Yea, those were the good time. it just seems everyone's gone all the sudden, all the Chinese members went to the Chinese history forum and the Korean members got their own forums too. Flyzone had this mental breakdown(according to one of the Mod, whose name shall remain confidential), and poirot is nowhere to be seen these days.
|
Posted By: poirot
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2008 at 23:08
I am here
------------- AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.� ~ HG Wells
|
Posted By: poirot
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2008 at 23:08
Just taking a lazzee-faireeeee hands off approach :)
------------- AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.� ~ HG Wells
|
Posted By: jiangweibaoye
Date Posted: 10-Jun-2008 at 17:51
Poirot,
Good to hear that you are still around!
Jiangwei
------------- Economic success breeds aggorance.
|
Posted By: jiangweibaoye
Date Posted: 10-Jun-2008 at 18:03
Seige Tower,
Agree, those debates were very good. However, some take disagreement very personally. Some are very passionate (to a fault) about their positions. I think that may be the reason why some are not with us.
Jiangwei
------------- Economic success breeds aggorance.
|
Posted By: poirot
Date Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 06:30
Thank you jiangwei!
As to the origins of Qing, it is actually quite simple.
Ming = bright (element of fire) Qing = clear (element of water)
Water extinguishes fire. Hence why the Manchus renamed their empire from Jin to Qing.
The origin of Jin is also simple:
Liao = Iron Jin = Gold
Gold > Iron
P.S. The Joeson dynasty kept using the calendar of the last Ming emperor well after the demise of the last Ming resistance in Yunan. It is doubtful that the Joeson had "love" for the Manchus.
------------- AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.� ~ HG Wells
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 07:39
Originally posted by poirot
Thank you jiangwei!
As to the origins of Qing, it is actually quite simple.
Ming = bright (element of fire) Qing = clear (element of water)
Water extinguishes fire. Hence why the Manchus renamed their empire from Jin to Qing.
The origin of Jin is also simple:
Liao = Iron Jin = Gold
Gold > Iron
P.S. The Joeson dynasty kept using the calendar of the last Ming emperor well after the demise of the last Ming resistance in Yunan. It is doubtful that the Joeson had "love" for the Manchus.
|
The Joseon dynasty also set itself to be a Confucius court in opposition to the Goryeo court which was overran by some corrupt Buddhist monks at times. I think the Joseon court looked up the Ming court as precedential Confucius court, more like the Eastern Philosopher King way.
In fact the Joseon's founder Taejo Yi Seong Gye was the general who was given 70.000 troop by Goryeo court to fight the Ming in the NW(of Korea) border but he turn the troop around and came back to Kaesung to topple the Goryeo dynasty and found the new dynasty. I mean the guy wanted to be a king foremost, obviously. But also this was the general who would rather topple his own king than fight Ming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taejo_of_Joseon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taejo_of_Joseon
Also in Imjin War, Ming helped Joseon. That's well known.
During Ming vs Qing though, Joseon has pledged to fight in Mings side but they already knew Ming would lose so the king ordered the general to surrender to Qing if the defeat was inevitable to serve the diplomatic duty and secure the future relationship with the new power same time as far as I know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_Hong-rip - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_Hong-rip
Anyway my general understanding is that Joseon was loyal to Ming because they looked up to them but they were loyal to Qing because they had no other choice. Is the Chinese historical perspective similar to this?
PS. Poirot, it's cool that how you compared Ming and Qing with the elements each letter represent. I guess I could have figured that out myself since I know what they mean but never connected it that way.
Hope to see you around more, please!
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 12-Jun-2008 at 15:21
Yes, I think Chinese historical perspective is totally similar in this regard.
BTW, did Manchu participate in Imjin war? I actually encountered 2 opposite sources one which said they did and another that they didn't.
------------- Σαυρομάτης
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 13-Jun-2008 at 05:50
Originally posted by Sarmat12
BTW, did Manchu participate in Imjin war? I actually encountered 2 opposite sources one which said they did and another that they didn't.
|
I've never heard that before but that doesn't say much. So I did any lazy person with little knowledge would do, I looked up Wiki. Wiki listed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jianzhou_Jurchens - Jianzhou Jurchens as belligerents fighting on Joseon and Ming side against Hideyoshi. But I couldn't find when, where or how many soldiers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#Diplomatic_dealings_between_Japan_and_Korea - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#Diplomatic_dealings_between_Japan_and_Korea
So I looked up Jianzhou Jurchens since I'm not familiar with different tribal factions of the Jurchens. And I found out Jianzhou Jurchens were where Nurhaci was from? Wiki says young Nurhaci was a hostage to Ming. And Nurhaci's grandfather http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giocangga - Giocangga , chief of the Beiles of the Sixes, was supposed to help Ming against another Jurchen chieftain Atai but he choose to help Atai against Nikan Wailan. Under Giocangga article, Wiki says Atai was actually Nurhaci 's uncle. But this article on Jianzhou Jurchens says Atai was Wang Gao's son. Does that make Giocangga and Wang Gao brothers or cousins? I'm getting confused now. Anyway Atai lost and Ming abandoned Giocangga and Taksi(father of Nurhaci) and they got killed by Nikan Wailan.
------(from Wiki)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was at this junction that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurhaci - Nurhaci , son of Taksi, appeared on the scene. Taking control of his grandfather's Suksuhu River tribe, he drove Nikan Wailan from the lands of the Jianzhou Jurchens. In 1588 he subjected the Wanggiya tribe and received the submission of the Donggo tribe. The unification of the Jianzhou Jurchens provided the basis for Nurhaci to expand his power throughout southern and central Manchuria, and to create a true http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchu - Manchu state. The very name Manchu (Jurchen: manju) was perhaps an old term for the Jianzhou Jurchens.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So by 1588, Nurhaci was in power, unifying and expanding Jianzhou Jurchens. I don't know exactly when Nurhaci was done unifying all the Jurchens and started to fight against Ming, but he reigned as Khan 1616 and found Later Jin. Wiki dates last year of Ming as 1644.
I guess what interests me here is the timeline. If the Manchus(Jianzhou Jurchens) fought with Ming and Joseon in Imjin War, it had to be under the leadership of the Nurhaci himself since the war was between 1592-1598. Would it be possible that Nurhaci was making deals with Ming to help out in the Imjin war and Ming was letting him fight against other Jurchen tribes? Wouldn't that be the only way Ming and the Manchus could have fought together in same side during the Imjin War. But they might not have fought side to side. They could have fought in different battles.
I'm not sure how far the Japanese troops went up northward but I know one of the main division reached least up to Hamheung city, which is still quite south of the border still but there could have been battles near the border. Maybe Manchus could have been defending the peripheries of their expanding territory, not necessarily fighting with or for Ming and Joseon. I somehow think that is the most probable scenario. I mean all this is just from one evening worth of Wiki research. I'm not claiming anything. I just trying to learn.
Anyway, I also read something about Imjin War being one of the events that caused the Fall of Ming and the Rise of Qing. What is the contemporary Chinese view on that? Did Imjin War affected Ming that much? Here is what Wiki says;
-------(from Wiki)-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the human losses, Korea suffered tremendous cultural, economic, and infrastructural damage, including a large reduction in the amount of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arable_land - arable land , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#cite_note-yonhap-7 - [8] destruction and confiscation of significant artworks, artifacts, and historical documents, and abductions of artisans and technicians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#cite_note-prime_minister-10 - [11] The heavy financial burden placed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China - China by the war adversely affected its military capabilities and contributed to the fall of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_Dynasty - Ming Dynasty and the rise of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_Dynasty - Qing Dynasty . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#cite_note-barry21-11 - [12] However, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinocentric - sinocentric tributary system that Ming had defended was restored by Qing, and the normal trade relations between Korea and Japan later continued. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War#cite_note-SWOPE758-9-12 - [13]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be very ironic if indeed Nurhaci fought with/for Ming and Joseon in Imjin War.
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: poirot
Date Posted: 13-Jun-2008 at 06:14
You are correct my friend, the Joeson dynasty had relatively favorable relations with the Ming. Joeson later defected to the Qing because it had no choice, not because of voluntary action as a result of cultural or linguistic ties (like how the Khitan defected to the Mongols).
1. Ming and Joeson were close culturally, therefore I fail to understand why some Korean nationalists would associate Joeson with the Manchu. Perhaps similar to how some Chinese nationalists would associate the PRC with Chinnghis Khan.
The Joeson probably looked down upon the Manchu as "barbarians". During Ming times, Joeson, and perhaps Annam, were considered the "civilized" vassals.
2. The Ming helped Joeson during the Imjin Wars. The Ming commander, Li Rusong, son of Li Chengliang, had Korean blood. Despite some looting certain Ming troops in Korea, the official stance was of a unified front of Ming and Joeson.
3. Joeson profited from its vassalage to the Ming. A condescending Ming emperor always provided more gifts to his vassals than the tributes he received.
If I remember correctly, the Joeson king even secretly organized an expansion of palace troops in an attempt to resist the Manchus.
------------- AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.� ~ HG Wells
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 05:22
EDIT, I accidently double posted this during editing but I can't delete it so I'm just clearing this one. Just look at the one below. I know I'm an idiot.
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
Posted By: King Kang of Mu
Date Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 05:36
Originally posted by poirot
2. The Ming helped Joeson during the Imjin Wars. The Ming commander, Li Rusong, son of Li Chengliang, had Korean blood. Despite some looting certain Ming troops in Korea, the official stance was of a unified front of Ming and Joeson.
|
Wow, I didn't know Li Rusong had Korean blood and also he was a son of Li Chengliang.
Now that's gotta be the same Li Chengliang who abandoned Nurhaci's father Taksi and grandfather Giocangga because he thought they mutinied against his command to support Nikan Wailan and instead helped Atai who was their relative, right? And when they lost Nikan Wailan killed both of them.
Also when they say Nurhaci was the Ming's hostage when he was young, is that mean he was kept under Li Chengliang himself or kept in Beijing?
Also did Nurhaci ever try to take revenge on Li Chengliang or Li Rusong for his father, grandfather and uncle's death? That would make sense.
What a feud between two families for three generations, hah!
Wiki says Li Chengliang had nine sons and five became full generals and the other four became accompanying generals for Ming. One of them was Li Rusong's younger brother Li Rubai who also fought in Imjin War and then fought Nurhaci but lost in Sarhu and killed himself.
So with that information, it would be very hard to imagine that Nurhaci and Li brothers fought in the same side during the Imjin war.
Also wiki says Li Chengliang was a Korean descent but Li Rusong was a Korean and Jurchen descent. Maybe Li chengliang married a Jurchen woman?
------------- http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
|