Is he spamming?   http://twitter.com/#!/Chosonninja

This entry is specially for KSJoshWhite

While I was reading comments posted by KSJoshWhite, I noticed Korean MA instructors are doing Anti-Japan propagations to students.
What surprised me was he thought there was a war between Japan and Korea before annexation.
If he has done a little bit of research, it's easy to find out what really happened.

This is a famous caricature drawn by French illustrator Bigot in 1887, the title is Une partie de pêche-A party of fishing.







Korea is a fish on the center, Japanese, Russian and Chinese are fishing.
At the time, Korea was actually China's subject country so China didn't have to fish Korea and Korean ruling class was very loyal to China.
However since Europe's invasion to Asia, China was much weakened.(ex.Opium War)
In Korea, there were Pro-China group and Pro-Japan group.
Kim Ok-gyun, a Pro-Japan activist, he wanted to modernize Korea like Japan's Meiji Restoration.
In 1884, He and his comrades toppled the corrupted governmet(Gapsin Coup) with a support of Japanese while China was busy to against France.(Sino–French War)
As a result of the war, China lost territory(Vietnam). So now China didn't want to lose anymore territory - Korean peninsula.
China sent troops, killed the activists and the Japanese.
Kim Ok-gyun was survived but later assassinated in Shanghai his body was sent to Korea for "Slow slicing".







China and Japan agreed to withdraw troops from Korea. But they both promised that they would infom each other when sending troops to Korea.(Convention of Tientsin)
In 1894, thousands of Korean peasants rose up against the government.(Donghak Peasant Revolution)
The Korean court called for help to China, China sent troops to supress the rebels and Japan sent troops to protect Japanese residents.

During Gapsin Coup, Japanese residents in Korea were raped and massacred by Koreans and Chinese. Korea paid 110000 yen compensation-Treaty of Seoul 1885.
The picture is a part of the treaty 漢城条約, the marked part indicates the compensation for the victims family.






The conflict became Sino-Japan War.






During the war, the Korean peasant rebels rose up against Japanese but was defeated by coalition forces of the Japanese and the Joseon Korean military.

Embassy telegraph
"A few Corean soldiers accompanied Japanese troops by special orders of the King of Korea. Some fled but most of them fought with great bravery."



Japan won the war, Korea became indipendent country.(Shimonoseki Treaty 1895)

Indipendence gate.








Japan used "Enlightenment Party" members for reform however corrupted Min family didn't want any change, they approached to Russia.(They just replaced China to Russia, this is traditional Korean Sadaejuui-serving-the-Great-ism)

The main reason why Japan wanted Korea to be modernized was fear of Russia.
Japan wanted Korea to be strong enough to block Russia's expansion.
But they were trying to give Korea away to Russia, the Japanese counselor Miura Goro assassinated King Kojong's wife Minbi.(There are some other conspiracy theories.)
Then some angry Korean people stood up against Japan.
This time, they were neo-Confucianists not Joseon Korean military.
King Kojong was hiding in Russian Embassy at the time which gave Russia a power over Korea.
Meanwhile, China was divided by France, Britain, Germany and Russia.
Historical Map of Imperialism in Asia 1840-1914
Japan had demanded Russia to back off from Manchu, Russia offered Japan to divide Korea in 2 and share each other instead.
But Russia was constructing fort near the border of Korea, Japan decided to go war.(Russo-Japan War 1904)








Japan immidiately occupied Seoul, Korea became under Japan's protectorate state substantially.
After Japan won the war, Japan made a treaty between Japan and America.(Taft–Katsura Agreement)
America recognized Japan to occupy Korea in exchange of  Japan recognized America to occupy Phillippines.
In 1905, The second Japan-Korea treaty. Korea became Japan's protected country officially.

There were Anti-Japan guerilla attacks in some places since 1907.
The number of people who involved guerilla attacks in 1908 were about 70000, Japanese troops in Korea at the time was around 2000~3000 but the Japanese defeated all the attacks.
The Korean attacks were far from organized military tactics.
(It proves Korea didn't have militaristic culture unlike the Hwarang nationalists insist.)

In 1906, King Kojong begged the president of America to announce the treaty was void but was ignored.
In 1907, King Kojong sent emissaries to the second Hague Peace Convention but they were ignored.
In 1909, a Korean shot and killed Ito Hirobumi the first Japanese Resident-General of Korea in Halbin.






That resulted Japan to break down the guerrillas completelly, and annexed Korea finally.
Ironically Ito Hirobumi used to oppose annexation of Korea.
It is unhappy thing but that was the way in the Imperialism era.

Meanwhile, a new Pro-Japan group was born, it's called Iljinhoe by Enlightenment Party.

Iljinhoe gate.






While some people were against the Japanese, some people were disenamored with the Korean leaders who were taking yangban style political faction feud.
Korean leaders were divided in Pro-Japan, Pro-China, Pro-Russia, Pro-America and Pro-Joseon court and playing power games.
The people who were sick of the leaders joined Iljinhoe, hoped to reform Korea by Japan's support.
The number of Iljinhoe members recorded in 1910 was about 140000.(Iljinhoe official announce was 1 million at most.)
That was remarkable number.

Gregory Henderson wrote that this was Korea’s first modern political organization, uniting leaders and led and mobilizing the masses. That generalization is a bit of a stretch, but so is the subsequent attempt by nationalist historians to pretend that the Ilchinhoe’s members were few, with each one devoted to selling Korea to Japan.
He also wrote the Koreans who wanted to reform Korea didn't count on China and Russia(China and Russia were anti-reform). America was not interested in Korea at all, only Japan was positively promoting Meiji restoration style reform. No wonder why they counted on Japan and Japan helped them.

That's the digestive explanation of how Korea was annexed to Japan.
You may wonder why Korean people didn't unite for the country.
Because Yangban the ruling class of Korea were corrurpted and hated by lower class people.


Yangban and Kisaeng.

Researchers of Joseon Korea history say North Korea is exaclly like Joseon Korea.(So now you understand why many people didn't support the court.)

And,
If Korea had elite Ninjas like Chosonninja say, had richest military culture and history  in the world like Hwarangdo say,  they didn't have to depend on foreign powers all the time, Korea was suppose to have been independent since the three Kingdoms period.


Addition
CONFERENCE: "A Reconsideration of the Japanese Annexation of Korea from the Historical and International Law Perspectives"

David McCann

On November 15-17, 2001, the Korea Institute hosted a conference, the third of a series of meetings, on "A Reconsideration of the Japanese Annexation of Korea from the Historical and International Law Perspectives." The Asia Center and the Reischauer Center for Japanese Studies provided generous logistical and other support.

The project had several matters to consider. First were the claims and counterclaims regarding the actual legality of the annexation itself. New documentary discoveries suggest that the agreement of annexation was reached under duress; that the Korean rule, Kojong, did in fact protest the annexation; and that agreements reached prior to the 1910 annexation were similarly flawed. International law might now reach a finding, on this basis, that all of the events and actions during the 1910-1945 occupation of Korea were illegal, and Japan therefore does owe some form of compensation, if not an apology, for what happened. But according to James Crawford, of the Lauterpacht Research Centre for International Law, judgments must be reached according to the practices in effect at the time. There seemed, in the end, to be little ground for agreement regarding the issue of the legality of the annexation. Despite M.I.T. Professor John Dower’s moving exhortation, the conference participants did not pursue the issuance of a statement regarding the annexation and the aftermath.

Professor John Van Dyke, of the University of Hawaii, gave a paper on the current claims and counter-claims regarding the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands. The example was most instructive, and suggested that continuing negotiations between Korean and Japan, as between Hawaii and the United States, should be pursued.

Anthony Carty, University of Derby, offered archival materials from British government files of letters and reports from Korea during the period just before, during, and after the annexation. British embassy officials seemed to have reached the conclusion that the Japanese take-over was a fait accompli, and that there was little or nothing in the form of popular or other noticeable protest against it at the time. Professor Carty’s paper suggested to this observer, at least, that it would be worth the effort to pursue the issue of Korean popular feelings about the annexation, rather than continuing to worry the bone of official government records and archival materials.

The papers and materials from the conference will be published through a website at Seoul National University through Professor Yi Tae-jin’s good offices. What, then, had been accomplished? Perhaps most simply and significantly, scholars from Japan and Korea, and from both the Republic of Korea and the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, had engaged in productive discussions over the year-long course of the meetings, and that other such meetings and exchanges offered promise, on this and other issues. Even on such relatively well studied topics as this one, there are documentary materials yet to be discovered, assessed, and brought into the scholarly discourse; and there are many different types of materials, such as records of popular opinion as reflected in the British embassy records, that could be pursued as well. We might also reflect again on John Dower's call for reflections and statements from the scholarly academic community on subjects having political implications.

らばQさんより

ニンジャコスプレで勝手に近所をパトロールするおっさんの話。
ちなみに日本刀の持ち歩きはイギリスでは禁止になったので、この人の刀は発泡スチロールだそうです。
しかしよく通報されないもんだね。

Annals of Joseon Dynasty
1480-6-11
The people were not accustomed to use of sword or spear, defended from the enemy only by archery.








1592-10-13
There is no swordman in our country.










1594-7-11
The Japanese deserters are good at sword and spear.
Any sword art has not been succeeded from ancient time in our country.
We should make a unit lern sword/spear arts from the Japanese.









1592-2-10
A prisoner returned from enemy's site.
She was able to learn how to make gunpowder.








1593-3-11
King said
"Hurry to master matchlock gun making. We aren't still able to make gunpowder.  Don't kill the Japanese who know how to do it.
Have them teach us."






1593-6-16
The 2 Japanese deserters, one knows how to make gunpowder , one knows how to make matchlock gun.
Give them higher rank and send one to Yongbyong for making gunpowder,
send one to iron mining town for making guns.






1594-2-20
They gathered all the matchlock guns that they got yeasterday,
sent them to General for training soldiers.








Muye Tobo Dongji 1790

Archery was the only martial art practiced by Korean soldiers.










There's no spear or sword art.

On the video "A historian analyzes Korean drama Hwang Jini" the historian said
"Choson(Korea) didn't have wheel."

The source was Korean scholar 鄭東愈 Chung Dong-yu 1744―1808） wrote 「嘗謂朝鮮之俗有至拙者三至難者二 無針拙一 不知養羊拙二 無車拙三 "There are 3 things what Choson don't have, needle, sheep, and wheel"」 on 晝永編 in 1805.

Some Korean said it's a hoax, the book didn't exist.
Here is the proof the book existed.
Google Books
And I found pictures of actual texts.

【原文】

嘗謂朝鮮之俗有至拙者三至難者二
拙者天下萬國之所無也
難者亦天下萬國之所不能有也
It has been said that Choson lacks 3 things, having difficulty with 2 things.
No other countries have the problems.
 

我國無針
必貿燕市
若燕貿不通雖有布帛無縫衣之道
拙一也
We do not have needle.
If we didn't import them from China, we weren't able to saw.
That's the first lacking.

六畜首称牛羊而我國則養牛不知養羊
拙二也
6 livestock included cow and sheep.
We have cows but no sheep.
That's the second lacking.

黄帝以来陸行用車水行用舟者何地不然而我國有舟無車
拙三也
Since Yellow Emperor's period, people have used wheel on the land, boat on the sea.
We have boat but no wheel.
That's the third lacking.

豈非萬國之所無乎
No other countries have the same lackings.

士夫婦女之無再?之俗于今四百餘年擧國同然
難一也
It's been 400 years that scholar-bureaucrats and women never re-marry nationwide.
That's the first difficulty.

士夫之族系明白其内外十世祖為五百一十二而遡考皆知
難二也
Scholar-bureaucrats have to clarify 10 generations of ancestors of both father and mother side total 512 relatives.
Tha's the second difficulty.

豈非萬國之所不能有者乎
No other countries have the difficulties.

Nowadays Hwarang [花郎] is respected by the Korean as a symbol of Korean spirit. They say:

    Silla developed its Hwarang (Flower of Youth Corps), a voluntary military organization. The Hwarang members were trained as a group in the arts of war, literary taste and community life, partly through pilgrimages. The educational objectives were:

       1. loyalty to the monarch
       2. filial piety to parents
       3. amicability among friends
       4. no retreat in war
       5. aversion to unnecessary killing

    These objectives were postulated by the famous monk Won-gwang, who consolidated Buddhist-Confucian virtues in the education of Silla youths. This movement became popular and the corps contributed to the strength of the Silla Kingdom.

Korea.net: History: The Three Kingdoms

Koreans believe it blindly, but it is no more than a fiction. Hwarang was not a training group of warriors, and the five disciplines they mentioned above, Sesok-ogye [世俗五戒], had nothing to do with Hwarang.

Hwarang [花郎] stands for "Flower Boy(s)." (Korea.net's translation is misleading.) It sounds sissy and fairy not only in English but also for people using Chinese characters. Why they were qualified as "flowery," although the Korean believe it was a group of elite warriors? It seems much more natural for a warrior to be qualified as "fierce" or "tough." Furthermore, when we liken men to flowers, we use another hwa (83EF) instead of hwa (82B1). Hwa (82B1) is usually used for women. So the name of Hwarang is closely associated with gay.

There are scarce historical data about Hwarang. No text written during Silla era survives. Main resources are three books: Samguk Sagi (1145), Haedong Goseungjeon (1215), and Samguk Yusa (1284). I recommend you to read these books in the original. (English translations are often inaccurate) You will be surprised how rarely Hwarang is mentioned.

Samguk Sagi, the oldest history book in Korea, consists of six parts: Silla Bon-gi (Annals of Silla), Goguryeo Bon-gi (Annals of Goguryeo), Baekje Bon-gi (Annals of Baekje), chronological table, Japji (miscellaneous records), and Yeoljeon (biographies). There is only an episode of Hwarang in Silla Bon-gi. It describes the origin of Hwarang briefly. The first term referred to Hwarang is "Wonhwa," and Hwarang was not male at first. The first members of Wonhwa were two women: Nammo and Junjeong. During the years of King Jinheung's reign, they were chosen by the king and soon had about 300 followers. But when Junjeong killed Nammo out of jealousy, Wonhwa was abolished.

Hereupon Samguk Sagi says that the king mustered young boys who looked good, made them wear makeup and decorated beautifully, and called them Hwarang. They were given freedom. Among them excellent persons were chosen and recommended to the court.

Samguk Yusa run the same story and it is more interesting. It says that after abolishing Wonhwa, the king ordered virtuous and superior boys from aristocratic families to be chosen and freshly made them Hwanang (not Hwarang). (*) Hwanang [花娘] stands for "Flower Girl(s)," although they were boys. What this means?

Samguk Sagi quotes Hwarang Segi by Kim Daemun, which says, "Bright ministers and loyal subjects are brought up here, and good generals and brave soldiers are born therefrom." It is clear that Hwarang in itself was not a warrior group. Although some Hwarang members later became good generals and brave soldiers, it is doubtful that they belonged to Hwarang when they rendered distinguished service.

When you read Yeoljeon (biographies) of Samguk Sagi, you will find it describe several Silla people joined Hwarang groups when young. But many of them had nothing to do with military affairs. Furthermore the relationship between each of them and the Hwarang groups is unclear. Although Samguk Sagi mentioned each of them became a Hwarang in youth, it tells nothing more. What did he do when he was a Hwarang? Till when was he a Hwarang member?

Hwarang is often mentioned in connection with Buddhism, which was severely suppressed during the Yi period. This was partly because the author of Samuguk Yusa was a Buddhist monk. Samguk Sagi and Samguk Yusa refer to Sesok-ogye [世俗五戒], which Koreans believe was the set of Hwarang's five disciplines during Silla. Ogye [五戒], the five precepts, are the minimal set of moral restrictions to be observed by Buddhist householder-practitioners. (*) Sesok-ogye was just a variant of Ogye. And according to Samguk Yusa, the famous Buddhist monk Won-gwang taught Sesok-ogye to Kwisan and Chuhang, who later joined the army and won martial glory, but nothing says that they were Hwarang members. (*) Sesok-ogye had nothing to do with Hwarang. "It was a set of norms for every day life of common people," said Prof. Shin Bok Ryong. (*)

Although Koreans do not want to refer to or just do not know it, Hwarang still existed after the collapse of Silla. According to Hunmong Jahoe (1527), the learner's dictionary of Chinese characters by Joe Sejin, Hwarang meant a male shaman during the Yi dynasty. At that time Hwarang were bottom in rank and disrespected.

Because of an inferiority complex toward Japan, South Korea needed something equal to Japanese samurai after the independence from Japan. So Koreans transformed mysterious Hwarang into brave warrior groups in the world of their imaginations. It was a convenient fiction for Koreans because Hwarang were prior to Japanese samurai. Some of them began to believe unquestioningly that samurai was influenced by Silla's Hwarang without foundation. Yes. By doing this they could beat hatred Japanese.

http://www.geocities.ws/neue_strassenbahn/hwarang.html

'Hwarang=Taekwondo' Needs Reinterpretation
Seo Sung Won (The Taekwondo News)(2001/05/23)

"Hwarang is not a group of warriors but of handsome boys. Sesok Oh-Kye (Hwarang's five disciplines during Shilla) had nothing to do with Hwarang, and it was a set of norms for every day life of common people," said Shin Bok Ryong, Konkuk Univ. prof (History of politics and diplomacy). By this theory, he has stirred the Taekwondo society.

Prof. Shin reversed the existing theory by saying in Dong A Il Bo (daily), "Hwarang that has been praised as height of young culture in Korean history, but it is nothing but distortion of history."

His new theory give direct and indirect influences on Taekwondo as well as on the history society. Taekwondo history has generalized the equality 'Hwarang spirit=Taekwondo spirit' and most schools teach that Shilla's Hwarang is the very origin of Taekwondo.

Most Korean instructors including Kim Yong Ho and Moon Dae Won who are active in foreign countries never omit Hwarang in talking about spiritual culture (ethics and morals) of Taekwondo.

Taekwondo administrating bodies implicitly acknowledge the equality 'Hwarang spirit=Taekwondo spirit.' 「Kukkiwon, 25 years of history」published by Kukkiwon says, "It is desirable that today's Taekwondo men should accept Hwarang spirit as Taekwondo's philosophical mentality."

It was in mid-1970's when they studied history of sports that they related Hwarang to Taekwondo history. While prof. Na Hyun Sung and Jung Chan Mo formed a structure of Taekwondo history, they interpreted Korean history of martial arts as related with Taekwondo. Their interpretation is still dominant.

However, more and more people object to such interpretation in Taekwondo history. Starting a full-fledged talk about history and origin of Taekwondo, they even criticized that the previous description was a far-fetched reasoning.

Vice president of Kukkiwon Lee Jong Woo stressed the relation between Taekwondo and Hwarang to attain national pride and legitimacy, but later expressed that we needed a new perspective now. 'When they said that Hwarang spirit is Taekwondo spirit, they were only turning it to their own advantage.'

Prof. Yang Jin Bang (Yong In Univ. Dpt. Taekwondo) has a similar view.
Prof. Yang said, "I doubt if Taekwondo has fully accepted lots of studies of Hwarang. It is stupid to ask if Hwarang is the spirit of Taekwondo."

"It is problematic to interpret Hwarang as origin of Taekwondo," he continued. "It is necessary to investigate Hwarang spirit from a objective view and to accept it for Taekwondo."

By the way, prof. Oh Noh Gyun (Chung Cheong College) who has persistently studied the relation between Hwarang and Taekwondo said, "Interpretation depends on a view. We need to connect good things of Hwarang to Taekwondo, to make Taekwondo more constructive."










The descriptions about Hwarang in Korean historical records are so limited.
Of course there is no TKD on the records since TKD is a modern martial art based on Karate.
And no mentioning about martial art and Hwarang.
The records say the boys were good at singing and dancing.
Yes Hwarang were mobilized for war but Hwarang weren't the only soldiers so they weren't something like specially trained troop.

Original text(Korean)
[신복룡교수의 한국사 새로보기]화랑과 상무정신
기사입력 2001-04-06 18:43:00

학자는 정직해야 하고 진실을 말할 수 있는 용기가 있어야 한다고 하지만 갈릴레오 이래 많은 학자들은 할 말을 못하고, 안 할 말을 해야 하는 일을 수없이 많이 겪었다. 역사학도 그러한 고민으로부터 자유로울 수 없었다. 한 예가 우리 역사에서 최고의 ‘청년 문화’라고 칭송받는 신라시대 화랑(花郞)에 대한 해석이다. 기존 한국사에서 평가되는 화랑의 모습은 호국의 꽃이었고, 청년 문화에 대한 찬사의 극치였다. 먼저 분명히 해두어야 할 것은 화랑이 그토록 극찬을 받은 지는 지금으로부터 50년이 채 되지 않았다는 사실이다.

화랑을 긍정적으로 평가한 최초의 역사학자는 1920년대 단재 신채호(申采浩)였다. 이어 1930년대 일제 치하 일본 역사학자 미시나 아키히데(三品彰英)와 이케우치 히로시(池內宏)가 화랑을 거론할 때만 해도 그렇게 찬란한 존재가 아니었고 그저 화랑이라는 존재가 있었다는 것을 확인하는 정도였다. 그러다가 한국전쟁이 일어나자 이승만(李承晩) 대통령이 청년의 애국심이 필요하다고 생각하고, 당시 육군본부 정훈감이었으며 나중에 정신문화연구원장을 지낸 역사학자 이선근(李瑄根) 대령에게 한국사에서 청년 문화의 유산을 발굴하라고 지시했다.

▼명칭 바뀐후에도 계속 여자▼
이에 따라 이 대령이 ‘화랑도연구’(1954)를 출판했을 때 화랑은 하루 아침에 한국사에서 가장 위대한 청년 문화의 유산으로 부상했다. 그의 주장을 빌리면 이충무공(李忠武公), 개화파, 독립협회, 동학혁명, 3·1운동이 온통 화랑 정신을 빛낸 사람들이나 사건들이었다는 것이다. 화랑의 본래 모습이 과연 그런 것이었을까? 화랑이 당초 여자였다는 것은 학계에서도 다 인정하고 있는 사실이다. 최초의 화랑은 원화(源花)라고 불렸으며, 그들이 하는 일은 추석때 서라벌에서 아낙네들이 모여 패를 갈라 길쌈내기를 하던, 이를테면 부락 축제의 리더 역할이었다. 처음 원화가 된 사람은 남모(南毛)와 준정(俊貞)이라는 두 명의 여자였다. 그러던 것이 부락제가 국가적 행사로 자리를 잡고 규모도 확대됨에 따라 원화는 화랑이란 명칭으로 바뀌었다. 여기에서 주목해야 할 사실은 원화가 화랑으로 바뀌었을 때에도 화랑은 여자였다고 하는 사실이다. 이를 확인하기 위해 ‘사진1’을 보자. 이것은 ‘삼국유사’ 원본 중에서 화랑에 관한 부분을 복사한 것이다. 그런데 여기에는 우리가 교과서에서 배운 것처럼 화랑이 ‘花郞’이 아니라 ‘花娘’으로 기록되어 있다는 사실이다. 이것은 이 문제를 풀어나가는 첫번째의 열쇠가 된다. ‘꽃 같은 여자’라는 말은 있어도 ‘꽃 같은 남자’라는 말은 있을 수 없다는 점에서 화랑은 ‘花娘’이라고 쓰는 것이 옳았다. 이런 점에서 본다면 화랑을 ‘花郞’이라고 표기한 한국의 역사학자들은 ‘삼국유사’도 읽어보지 않은 사람이거나 아니면 의도적으로 문헌을 왜곡했다고 볼 수밖에 없다. 문제는 여기서 그치지 않는다. 신라나 고려 시대 사람들은 ‘花娘’을 어떻게 발음했을까? 우선 ‘사진 2’를 보자. 이 책은 세종대왕이 한글을 창제하신 후 한자를 어떻게 발음해야 하는가를 가르치기 위해 편찬한 ‘동국정운’(東國正韻·국보 142호)으로 여기에는 ‘娘’을 ‘냥’이라고 발음하도록 되어 있다. 뿐만 아니라 조선조 최고의 어문학자였던 최세진(崔世珍)의 ‘훈몽자회’(訓蒙字會·사진3)와 조선조 후기 음운학자 정윤용(鄭允容)의 ‘자류주석’(字類註釋·사진4)에도 ‘娘’은 ‘냥’으로 발음하도록 되어 있다. 그렇다면 花娘은 어떻게 발음되었을까? 신라의 이두는 말할 것도 없고 조선조까지도 그것은 ‘화냥’이었다. ‘화랑’이 아니라 ‘화냥’이었던 것이다. 그 다음 얘기를 더 할 필요가 있겠는가? 현대 어문학의 태두인 양주동(梁柱東)은 필생의 저작인 ‘조선고가(古歌)연구’(1954)를 발간한 후 “내가 죽은 후 1세기 안에는 이 책의 일점일획도 고칠 것이 없을 것”이라고 말하면서 스스로를 국보(國寶)라고 칭했다. 그는 이 책에서 화랑을 언급하면서 ‘화랑이 한때 타락해 화냥의 칭호를 들었다’(372∼374쪽)고 기록했고 이선근도 그렇게 풀이했다. 그러나 그들의 주장은 틀렸다. 화랑은 당초부터 화냥이었지 화랑이 타락해 화냥이 된 것이 아니다. 그후 삼국 중에서 신라에만 특유하게 존재하던 모계 중심 사회가 점차 퇴조를 보이면서 화랑도 남자로 바뀌기 시작했다. 이 때는 이름도 국선(國仙)으로 불렸으며 그 최초의 인물이 설원랑(薛原郞)이었다. 화랑이 여성에서 남성으로 바뀌었다고 해서 그것이 곧 상무(尙武)정신과 같은 남성 문화로 바뀐 것이 아니었다. 화랑의 선발 기준은 여전히 ‘얼굴이 고운 남자’(삼국사기 진흥왕 37년조)였다. 화랑이 진정 무사도였다면 왜 우람한 남자를 뽑지 않고 얼굴이 고운 남자를 뽑았을까? 그것은 모계 사회의 풍습 때문이었다. 정치와 종교가 명확히 구분되지 않던 모계 중심의 부족 사회에서의 여왕은 부락장인 동시에 제주(祭主:무당)였고 의녀(醫女)였다. 따라서 신라의 여왕은 이미 그의 주신(主神)에게 출가한 몸이므로 결혼을 할 수가 없었다. 그렇다고 해서 여왕이 혼자 잠자리에 들 수는 없었고, 그 얼굴 고운 남자들과 잠자리를 함께했다. 신라의 여왕들, 특히 진성여왕과 그 얼굴 고운 남자들 사이에 벌어진 진한 에로티시즘에 관한 얘기는 ‘삼국사기’ 진성여왕편에 소상하게 기록되어 있다. 그렇다면 소위 세속오계(世俗五戒)는 어떻게 되는 것인가? 유감스럽게도 화랑을 다루고 있는 ‘삼국사기’ ‘삼국유사’ ‘해동고승전’의 어디를 봐도 화랑과 세속오계를 관련지어 설명한 곳이 없다. 미시나 아키히데의 저서 ‘신라 화랑의 연구’에는 세속오계라는 단어조차 나오지 않는다. 결국 세속오계란 화랑과 무관한 서민 청년들의 생활 규범이었다. 세속오계가 화랑의 계율이었다는 것은 이선근의 ‘소설’에나 나오는 얘기였을 뿐이다.

▼고려시대땐 '병역 면제'▼
내가 화랑에 대해 다시 생각해봐야겠다고 결심한 것은 신라 후기가 되면서 화랑이 국선으로 변하고 다시 고려조에 들어오면 국선에게는 ‘병역을 면제해주었다’는 대목을 읽었을 때였다. 그것은 내게 충격적이었다. 당시는 남자들이 이리저리 군대에서 빠지던 시절이었다. 그럼에도 부친이 사망한 부선망(父先亡) 4대 독자로 현역에 복무한 나로서는 병역 면제자 ‘화랑’을 상무 정신의 화신처럼 설명하고 있는 한국 역사학을 도저히 용납할 수가 없었다. 조선조에서 화랑은 엉뚱한 뜻으로 사용됐다. 다시 최세진의 ‘훈몽자회’에 나오는 ‘사진5’를 보자. 그림에 나타나 있는 격(覡)이라는 글자는 오늘날 박수무당을 의미한다. 그런데 조선시대에는 이를 ‘화랑’이라고 풀이했다는 것은 그 당시에 박수무당을 화랑이라고 불렀음을 의미한다. 같은 무당이라고 하더라도 박수(白手)무당은 백수건달(白手乾達)의 의미도 지니고 있다. 한량이라는 말도 여기에서 파생됐다. 망국의 비분강개함을 느끼며 청년들에게 감동을 주기 위해 화랑의 얘기를 꺼낼 수밖에 없었던 신채호를 이해하지 못하는 바는 아니다. 그러나 한국전쟁이라는 폐허 속에서 청년들을 전쟁터로 나가게 하기 위해 화랑을 무사도로 미화한 이선근의 논리는 분명 ‘빗나간 애국심’이었다. 차라리 고구려의 당나라에 대한 끈질긴 항쟁에서 청년의 기백을 찾는 것이 더 온당한 필법이었다. 건국대 교수(정치외교사)

A forbidden land: voyages to the Corea　1880
Ernst Jakob Oppert
Google Books Link
P152
The armament of the Corean soldiers is a very primitive one, and consists of quite antiquated common matchlocks, bows and
arrows, and of single and three-pointed lances.
The bows are made of very strong, tough wood, with strings of twisted hemp, which throw arrows with a two-inch iron point.
The lances with three points look like harpoons, and are of rude make, with wooden or bamboo shafts.
Foreign arms are as yet unknown in the country.

コリアン兵の武器は原始的だ、ほとんど骨董品の火縄銃、弓矢と槍で槍は穂先がひとつのと３つのがある。
弓は丈夫な木でできていて弦はよじった麻、矢じりは２インチ（５センチぐらい）ある。
穂先が３つの槍は銛のようだ、竿は木または竹でできている。
外国の武器はこの国ではまだ知られていない。


The battlements of the numerous forts and batteries which line the banks of the main rivers, are in a complete state of decay,
and the guns with which they have formerly been mounted have been deposited in arsenals.

川沿いの至る場所での戦いでは彼ら（コリア兵）は全く戦意がなく、持っていた銃は武器庫に入れられていた。

When the French landed at Kangwha they found a large number of these guns buried near the town, which, to judge by their
appearance, must have lain there for many years past; curiously enough amongst them several breechloaders were discovered,
made upon a simple but very effective principle.

フランス人が到着したとき、近隣の町には山のような銃が埋められていたが、見た感じ何年もそこにあったような感じだ。いくつかのよくできた元込め銃は発見されたが。

They were charged through a long square hole at the upper part of the breech, which was closed by a well-fitting sliding-piece,
and then fired by a match. In all probability these guns date from the period of the Japanese occupation, and they certainly were
several centuries old.

銃尾の上にスライドするものと四角い穴があってそこから狙いをつけ、マッチで火をつける。
もしかしたらこれらの銃は何世紀も前に日本軍（秀吉）が置いていったものではないだろうか。

Common soldiers hardly ever wear swords, only officers and mandarins of a higher rank are armed with such of Japanese make,
but they are all old and rusty, and it is more than likely that these also were brought into the country by the Japanese, and were
left behind.on their withdrawal.

一般兵は刀をもたず身分の高い将校と中国人？だけが日本製のを持っていたが、全て錆びていて古いのでおそらくそれらも
（秀吉の時代に）日本人が持ち込んで撤退時に置いていったものだろう。

つべでしょっちゅう同じ質問に出くわすことがあるので、コピペ用に「定型文」というカテゴリで補完しておきます。
まず最初はかなりおなじみですが、ウィリアムグリフィスの「朝鮮にサムライなし」などです。こちらからコピペらせてもらいます。

William Elliot Griffis, Corea the Hermit Nation 1894

This is a good specimen of Corean varnish-work carried into history. The rough facts are smoothed over by that well-applied native lacquer, which is said to resemble gold to the eyes. The official gloss has been smeared over more modern events with equal success, and even defeat is turned into golden victory.
これは朝鮮_人による歴史の塗装作業の良い見本である。つらい現実には国産塗料を塗りたくり、黄金に見せかける。さらに後世の事件に対しても、公的な虚飾が巧妙に施され、敗戦すら輝かしい勝利に変えられる。(pp. 150-151)

Cho-sen is represented as a human being, of whom the king is the head, the nobles the body, and the people the legs and feet. The breast and belly are full, while both head and lower limbs are gaunt and shrunken. The nobles not only drain the life-blood of the people by their rapacity, but they curtail the royal prerogative. The nation is suffering from a congestion, verging upon a dropsical condition of over-officialism.
朝鮮は人にたとえられ、王はその頭、貴族は胴、人民は足である。胸と腹は膨れる一方、頭と下肢はやせ細っている。貴族はその強欲で人民の生き血をすするのみならず、王の大権をも侵している。国は充血を起こし、官僚主義の浮腫を患っている。(p. 229)

The vocabulary of torture is sufficiently copious to stamp Cho--sen as still a semi-civilized nation. The inventory of the court and prison comprises iron chains, bamboos for beating the back, a paddle-shaped implement for inflicting blows upon the buttocks, switches for whipping the calves till the flesh is ravelled, ropes for sawing the flesh and bodily organs, manacles, stocks, and boards to strike against the knees and skin-bones.
拷問の豊富さは、朝鮮がいまだに半文明国にとどまっていることを示すに十分である。
法院と監獄の発明品としては、鉄鎖、背中を打つための竹、尻を打ち据えるためのパドル状の器具、肉が裂けるまでふくらはぎを叩くための鞭、肉と内臓を苛むためのロープ、手かせ、杖、そして膝とむこうずねを叩くための板等がある。(p. 234)

After their marriage, the women are inaccessible. They are nearly always confined to their apartments, nor can they even look out in the streets without permission of their lords. So strict is this rule that fathers have on occasions killed their daughters, husbands their wives, and wives have committed suicide when strangers have touched them even with their fingers.
結婚後は、女との接触は不可能である。女はほとんど常に内房に引きこもり、許しを受けずに家の外を覗くことすらできない。隔離があまりに厳しいため、部外者の指が触れたというだけで父は娘を、夫は妻を殺し、妻は自殺することがある。(p. 245)

Corean architecture is in a very primitive condition. The castles, fortifications, temples, monasteries and public buildings cannot approach in magnificence those of Japan or China. The country, though boasting hoary antiquity, has few ruins in stone. The dwellings are tiled or thatched houses, almost invariably one story high. In the smaller towns there are not arranged in regular streets, but scattered here hand there. Even in the cities and capital the streets are narrow and tortuous.
朝鮮の建築はきわめて原始的な状態にある。城郭、要塞、寺院、修道院および公共建築は、日本や中国の壮麗さにまるで及ばない。この国は古い歴史を誇っているのに、石造の遺跡がほとんどない。住居は瓦葺きか藁葺きで、ほとんど例外なく一階建てである。小都市では規則的な通りに配置されておらず、あちこちに散在している。大都市や首都でも、通りは狭くて曲がりくねっている。(p. 262)

about eighty-five per cent of the people can neither read nor write, though the percentage varies greatly with the locality.
約85パーセントの人々は読むことも書くこともできない。ただし地域差は大きい。(p. 444)

Corea has no samurai. She lacks what Japan has always had - a cultured body of men, superbly trained in both mind and body, the soldier and scholar in one, who held to a high ideal of loyalty, patriotism, and sacrifice for country.
朝鮮にはサムライがいない。日本にあって朝鮮に欠けているものは、心身ともによく鍛えられ、兵士であると同時に学者であり、忠誠心と愛国心と自己犠牲の高い理想をかかげる文化的集団である。(p. 450)