Jump to content

User:Madalibi/History of Korean nationalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Relevant links: New People's Association (Shinminhoe), March 1st Movement, Korean independence movement, Independence Club, Daehan Maeil Sinbo (or Korean Daily News), Doksa Sillon (or New Reading of History), Righteous armies, Korea under Japanese rule, Donghak, Donghak Peasant Revolution, Korean Liberation Army, Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea (founded in Shanghai in 1919), Japan–Korea Treaty of 1905 (Eulsa Treaty), Japan–Korea Treaty of 1910 (annexation treaty)

Historical background

[edit]
A Japanese depiction of the signing of the Ganghwa Treaty (1876) between Meiji Japan and Joseon Korea, which opened Korea to foreign trade.

The late nineteenth century was a time of domestic crises and external threats for Joseon Korea (1392–1897). Starting in the 1860s, a series of rebellions caused by excessive taxation and misgovernment threatened the reigning dynasty, while foreign powers—mostly western countries, but also Meiji Japan—used military force to try to open Korea to trade.[1] The Japan–Korea Treaty of 1876 opened three Korean ports to commerce, and granted Japanese merchants extraterritoriality in these ports.[2] This unequal treaty prompted even more foreign interventions, as it turned Korea into a target of rivalry between imperialist powers.[3] One crucial issue was whether Korea was a sovereign state or a tributary of China.[4] Despite Joseon's status as a tributary of Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644–1911) China––which implied the sending of tribute missions and a ritually inferior position of the Korean king vis-à-vis the Chinese emperor––Korea could dictate both its domestic and foreign policies, creating an ambiguous situation that frustrated western powers.[5] To counter Japanese interventions, King Kojong asked for Chinese advice, and Chinese advised him to stay put. In the Convention of Tientsin (1882), China and Japan agreed not to send troops to Korea. Another revolt in 1884, helped by the Japanese, almost deposed the king, but failed.

Eventually in 1894, the Donghak Peasant Rebellion exploded and once again put the Joseon royal regime in difficulty. King Kojong asked China to send troops to help repress it, but Japan, pretexting that they wanted to protect their interests in the peninsula, sent even more. In July 1894 they seized King Kojong and forced him to establish a cabinet that implemented extensive institutional reforms. One of these reforms consisted in establishing the Bureau of History (Pyeongsaguk 編史局), which would play a role in later historiographical controversies.[6] Japan's attack on Chinese forces a few days later resulted in the Sino-Japanese War, which was fought over who would control the Korean peninsula.[7] The war ended with a resounding Japanese victory confirmed by the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), which forced China to recognize the independence of Joseon Korea. But Korea's escape from the China-centered world order simply cleared the way for Japanese imperialist domination.[8]

Pre-modern precursors

[edit]

Emergence of modern nationalist forms

[edit]

Patriotism and citizenship

[edit]

The ethnic nation (minjok)

[edit]

The role of newspapers

[edit]

Anti-colonialism

[edit]

A new form: the masses (minjung)

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Ebrey, Walthall & Palais 2006, pp. 433 (rebellions starting in 1862) and 437 (military pressure from westen powers and Japan).
  2. ^ Ebrey, Walthall & Palais 2006, p. 438.
  3. ^ Ebrey, Walthall & Palais 2006, p. 438 (the 1876 treaty "opened the door not only to trade but to foreign interference and a world of trouble"); Em 1999, p. 352 ("imperialist rivalry over Korea").
  4. ^ Ebrey, Walthall & Palais 2006, p. 437.
  5. ^ Larsen 2008, pp. 31–32 (tribute missions and ritual inferiority) and 37 ("like the Ming, the Qing virtually never interfered with Korean domestic affairs"; "dependent-yet-autonomous status"); Ebrey, Walthall & Palais 2006, p. 437 ("One of the reasons for the use of violence by the French and Americans was the frustration caused by the ambiguity over who was responsible for the conduct of foreign relations under the tributary system").
  6. ^ Em 1999, p. 344.
  7. ^ Larsen 2008, p. 272.
  8. ^ Schmid 2002, p. 10.

Works cited

[edit]