Re: (Translation) Blood of the Old Kings by Sung-Il Kim

n 18 Oct 2024 16:09:35 -0000, jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote:

In article <6ou4hj5d1sv6bubbgn29aur8vk01tsediv@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:55:22 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:

On 16 Oct 2024 19:26:54 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

>
<snip>

"I wonder where on Earth a Korean author would get the idea of a
relentlessly expansionist, exploitative empire determined to >>replace

<snip>
>
>

Unfortunately, it actually requires knowledge of Geography to
interpret, which may be asking a bit much.  (Nothing can be read of
the image's labels and what the coloring shows is very >>non-conclusive.)

>
The left map appears to be showing various political entities in the
general area of Korea. It might be useful with some Korean historical
movies set a century or two ago.
>
The right map shows Japan and Korea. Close, aren't they?
>
But neither really /implicates/ Japan, as far as I can tell.

>
This, on the other hand..
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanshin-ron
>
in conjunction with
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokushin-ron

>
Those Korean Historical Movies I mentioned above generally involve
Japan invading Korea at various times in the past. As, indeed, does
/Uprising/, which I streamed yesterday on Netflix.
>
My point wasn't that Japan didn't abuse Korea; my point was that the
two maps don't implicate Japan. Something else was needed.

>
One map depicts the Four Commanderies of Han, established by China
in Korea. The other depicts Korea as part of the Japanese Empire.

But it doesn't say so. And it has some very strange numbers on it.
Suffient enlargement shows that these are the dates covered (BCE -75
[I would think -75BC would be CE 75, unless the lack of a year 0
affects this], CE 106). Are we to take it that Jin was not part of
China, at least at this time? Who can say?

This would be a lot earlier than the films I was talking about, BTW.
For one thing, they all have firearms in them, although swords are not
only present but plentiful.

And the second is just "Japan and Korea". The unreadable stuff in red
(by the time I enlarge it so it isn't in 1-pt type any more it is too
blurred for me, at least, to read) may or may not be relevant, who can
say?

If I showed you a map of "The USA and Mexico", would you conclude that
Mexico was occupied by the USA? Didn't think so.

They just aren't enough. Even allowing for the fact that the one on
the left is suggesting China rather than Japan as "the Enemy".
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"