I was studying the history of Gunpowder and its weaponization and happened to step by this forum. Seems like the whole thread has been trolled and going off-topic with a single post from China/Japanese wikipedia. I lived in Korea for half of my life and another half in US. I've learned 'history' from Korean elementary school and junior high school, but I have never, ever heard - from school or from people - that anything on that ridiculous list is invented by Koreans. They are all treated and taught as Chinese or Japanese culture. I'm pretty sure that wikipedia page is made by each country's anti-Korean nationalists. But as a Korean, I have no idea who has claimed such thing. I think if I said, 'Korean is God and made Earth', someone would add that on the list. It has no source, no reliability and looks extremely ridiculous even to Korean's PoV.
Things I've heard that Koreans invented first, are MLRS(Hwacha) and Ironclad(Turtle ship). And I've also heard that Koreans have used the gunpowder as weaponry before China, but it's not claimed by official Korean historical records. However, in the book of 'SamgukYusa'(Historical record of 3 nations of Korea before they were all conquered by Goguryuh) it has been recorded that Shinla used rockets back in AD661. But I think the problem is that there is no documented record handed down by Shinla so Koreans can't make a good claim that they have started it. So it's only been told in Korea that Koreans used it much earlier, but can't claim it.
Have to agree with my fellow countryman here. We do not claim all these ridiculous things, but one thing that boggles Korean historians is the ambiguity of Korean history itself.
We claim ourselves as being a mix of Alatic/Turkic/Mongolic and Chinese roots (many Koreans resent this fact, but yes, the Chinese evidently have connections with us; various Chinese dynasties used to occupy lands in the Korean peninsula during periods of time in history, woudlnt be surprised if migration occured), with our Manchurian roots and cultural taking precedence over the others, as in Gojoseon.
Now, here's the problem: there are no records of Gojosoen historical documents; the only soruces we have today are from Chinese sources. And then later on, a major point of irritance in both Chinese and Korean history is that many places were ruled and conquered by different peoples, which complicates matters. A good example of this is China's Western Xia Kingdon, which was a kingdom made by one of the Tuoba, who were Xianbei in origin, whom in turn were nomadic tribes originating from Mongolia. Gojoseon likewise was conquered and ruled by a Chinese ruler called Wiman, whose kingdom until the rise of the Han Dynasty of China and the setting of the Four Commanderies in the Peninsula. Then the country split into two: in the Manchurain North, Buyeo, Okjeo, and Korean tribes claimed themselves to be the heirs of Gojoseon, while in the South, the Jin Kingdom claimed itself as the remnant of the once-existent nation.
Now all of this is from scant records, Chinese annuals and Samgukyusa (annuals from the Three Kingdoms Period of Korea); we can not be sure of the complete validity of the existence of the kingdoms. But the same goes for the Chinese Xia and Shang Dynasties.
The second thing is regarding Korean territory. How large was it? Were the Koreans as spread out as some historians claim to be? Well, if one looks at the book of Wei, and I think Book of Qi, it records that Baekjae one of the three kingdoms of Korea, located in today's Jeolla Province, once occupied Liaoxi, the Western half of China's Liaoning Province. Historians suspect that this was occupied by Baekjae as a commandery by the Baekjae in cooperation with Goguryeo, who occupied the Liaodong, in an attempt to act as a buffer between the chaos in the China at that time due to North nomadic incursions to the Chinese Plains and the Korean heartland.
There are even stories of Goguryeo's Gwanggaeto the Great conquering Rouran, which was a Ughyur/Mongolic nation located in modernday inner Mongolia and Xinjiang; but again, this has only scant historical evidence, and definitely not enough to claim the land as Korean. At best, it was just a temporary occupation of the land; no mass migration to these so-called occupied lands occured.
Another problem arises with the relationship between Yamato and Baekjae; it has been recorded that the two kingdoms were very close and that later on, when the kingdom was annihilated by Tang-Shilla forces, members of the Baekjae court were offred refuge in Japan and tried to regain the strength to recliam Baekjae. Although it failed, this brings questions as to who was the vassal and who was the overlord in this relationship; I suspect the relationship was where Japan was the 'so-called' lesser partner and Bakjae being the so-called 'major partner'. Early Japanese records show apaprent influences of Baekjae art and culture,whilst this is not evident in Baekjae culture; it seems that Baekjae was not as infleunced as much by Japan.
As to Korea's so-called later accomplistments in history, I can only say they are prosponderous and based on a few misread wordings from CHinese historical annual by Korean nationalist historians.
Now the interesting point for me is that I believe that if Goguryeo had conqured the peninsula and further occupied Liaoning Province, this would definitely have had Korea included in the Chinese sphere of history. If one observes the similarities between Chinese states and Korean states in the Warring States period, one can see that although the Chinese regarded Koreans as Eastern barbarians, there were many similarities between Korean states and Chinese states. Both desired the mandate of heaven, which was coveted by many states in East Asia, regardless of ethinicity, so that they could have nominal overlordship of all the other states. Kind of like the Japanese Tenno having nominal overlordship of all of Japan as a demi-god whilst in all reality being under control of different daimyos.
If the Chinese cultural notion of the Greater China iedology is to be given any credit at all(note: this is the cultural argument made by Chinese historians with regards to the Chinese nation as it is now, as well as its multiethnic policy), then Goguryeo would have defo been included in this if it had not been destroyed by Tang and Shilla. In this perspective, the Tang did us a favor by vanquishing Goguryeo, for it secured Korea's independence.
-------------------------------------------
The reason for Koreans saying that the Qing Dynasty's Jurchen/Manchu elite were actually were due to Manchu/Jurchen records which wrote that Jurchen/Manchu and Balhae were once one family. Now this is a serious point of debate. Did the Jurchens say that Balhae was actually Jurchen/Manchu?
Chinese historians use this to argue that Balhae was founded by a Malgal prince called Daejoyung, whose kingdom Balhae corresponded to modern day Manchuria, and whose people consisted of Malgal, Korean/Goguryeo, and Jurchen tribes. * Note: Malgal is always referred to as Jurchen.
Korean historians claim that Daejoyung was a Korean general whose father, also a former Goguryeo general, set up Balhae as successor state to Goguryeo. Korean historians claim that the kingdom was ruled by Korean elite and the majority were Malgal.
Now, regardless of the exact identity of Daejoyung being Korean/Malgal, the problem is the implications. If Daejoyung was Korean, then the Jurchen records could be meant to read that Jurchens were referring to Koreans as being of one common ancestor. If Daejoyung was Malgal, then it would mean Balhae was actually a Chinese state. Hence the beginning of an endless debate concerning the identity of Balhae and so on. This is the exact problem that Korean history has - we've been so close with the Northern nomadic tribes who became Chinese in culture later on that its hard to distinguish between the two - and due to constant wars, Korean historical records has always been scarce.
