在歷史上，韓國很弱嗎？
Why has Korea historically been a weak state
譯文簡介
網(wǎng)友：韓國并非一直是一個歷史上弱小的國家。事實上，韓國曾經(jīng)是一個極其強(qiáng)大的國家。
正文翻譯
Ah L?m
Korea has not always been a historically weak state. In fact, Korea used to be an incredibly powerful state.
During King Gwanggaeto the Great (391–413 AD), the Korean kingdom of Goguryeo was arguably the most powerful kingdom in Northeast Asia. At that time, China fell into division of multiple kingdoms, with northern China constantly getting raped by the five Hu tribes. King Gwanggaeto defeated the xianbei (who were the most powerful nomads of northern China at that time) state of Later Yan, and repulsed Japanese pirate invasions from the south.
Korean kingdom of Goguryeo at its height
Fast forward two to three hundred years later. Goguryeo managed to repel multiple invasions from Sui Yangdi, and then later Tang Taizong. Only during Tang Gaozong’s reign did Goguryeo finally fell to Tang. In other words, it took one entire Chinese dynasty (Sui), plus one of the greatest conqueror in Chinese history (Tang Taizong), plus numerous attempts from Gaozong, plus another Korean ally Silla, before the Chinese were finally able to defeat Goguryeo. This is not a weak kingdom by any means; I think there is enough evidence to suggest that Korea (specifically Goguryeo) was the most powerful country in Northeast Asia for several periods of time within the first thousand years after Jesus.
Then, when we jump ahead to the Mongol invasions, it took the Mongols 6 (six!) invasions and close to thirty years of war before Korea finally surrendered (and even then, Korea wasn’t entirely absorbed into Yuan… more like a quasi-state). The only other country that gave the Mongols this much grief was China, and considering that Korea is much smaller than China, I think Korea overall did a better job of fighting off the Mongols than the Chinese did.
I think Korea didn’t start to wane until the start of the Joseon dynasty (1392 and onwards). I don’t know that much about Korean history from this point on, but I know that the Joseon dynasty began to embrace Confucianism and shunned its traditional military culture (the same thing happened to China). For example, other than Yi Sun-Shin, the Koreans did a terrible job at war during the Japanese invasions of 1592. I’ve read history books that said that Korea at that time thought Japan, which was ruled by warriors (the samurais), to be a barbaric country. Korea pride itself on being a civilized country because it was ruled by aristocrats and scholars, just like Ming China was. If you look at Ming, which was also ruled by Confucianism, it was very much the same way as Korea was (shunning the military, embracing the scholars).
This is why Ming, in contrast to Han and Tang (two previous Han Chinese empires), was not very expansionist. It would take the Manchus, a warlike tribe in the northeast, to conquer China before China became expansionist again. But guess what happened after the Manchus conquered China and expanded the Chinese territory? They accepted the Confucian culture, and as a result, lost their warrior culture, which was partly responsible for its decline and falling victim to Western and Japanese invasions.
So I think what happened in the past few hundred years that made Korea seemed weaker than its other two neighbors is the culture of valuing scholars over all other professions.
韓國并非一直是一個歷史上弱小的國家。事實上，韓國曾經(jīng)是一個極其強(qiáng)大的國家。
在廣開土大王（391—413年）統(tǒng)治時期，高句麗王國無疑是東北亞地區(qū)最強(qiáng)大的王國。當(dāng)時，中國陷入分裂，北方被五胡部落不斷侵?jǐn)_。廣開土大王擊敗了當(dāng)時中國北方最強(qiáng)大的游牧民族——鮮卑族建立的后燕政權(quán)，并擊退了來自南方的日本海盜入侵。
高句麗王國在其鼎盛時期，表現(xiàn)出了強(qiáng)大的軍事力量。快進(jìn)兩三百年后，高句麗成功抵御了隋煬帝的多次入侵，后來又擊退了唐太宗的進(jìn)攻。直到唐高宗時期，高句麗才最終被唐朝聯(lián)合新羅擊敗。換句話說，擊敗高句麗，不僅需要一個完整的中國王朝（隋朝），還需要中國歷史上最偉大的征服者之一（唐太宗）、唐高宗的多次嘗試，以及另一個朝鮮半島的盟友——新羅的協(xié)助。這絕不是一個弱小的國家。我認(rèn)為有足夠的證據(jù)表明，在公元后第一個千年期間，韓國（特別是高句麗）在東北亞地區(qū)曾是幾個時期內(nèi)最強(qiáng)大的國家。
再往后看，蒙古入侵時，朝鮮半島的抵抗也極為頑強(qiáng)。蒙古人對朝鮮半島發(fā)動了6次入侵，經(jīng)過近三十年的戰(zhàn)爭，朝鮮半島才最終投降（即便如此，朝鮮半島也并未被完全納入元朝，更像是一個半獨立的國家）。除了中國之外，沒有其他任何國家能讓蒙古人如此費力?？紤]到朝鮮半島的面積遠(yuǎn)小于中國，我認(rèn)為朝鮮半島在抵御蒙古入侵方面比中國做得更好。
我認(rèn)為，朝鮮半島的國力開始衰退是在朝鮮王朝（1392年及之后）開始的時候。我對朝鮮王朝之后的歷史不太了解，但我知道朝鮮王朝開始奉行儒家思想，摒棄了傳統(tǒng)的軍事文化（中國也發(fā)生了類似的情況）。例如，在1592年日本入侵朝鮮半島期間，除了李舜臣之外，朝鮮半島在戰(zhàn)爭中的表現(xiàn)非常糟糕。我讀過的歷史書籍提到，當(dāng)時的朝鮮半島認(rèn)為由武士（即日本的武士階層）統(tǒng)治的日本是一個野蠻的國家。 朝鮮半島自視為一個文明的國家，因為它是由貴族和學(xué)者統(tǒng)治的，就像明朝的中國一樣。如果你觀察明朝，它與漢朝和唐朝（前兩個漢族帝國）不同，明朝并非一個擴(kuò)張性的王朝。它需要東北的滿族——一個尚武的部落來征服中國，中國才重新變得具有擴(kuò)張性。 然而，當(dāng)滿族征服中國并擴(kuò)大了中國領(lǐng)土之后，他們接受了儒家文化，結(jié)果失去了自己的武士文化，這也是其衰落并最終淪為西方和日本入侵目標(biāo)的部分原因。
因此，我認(rèn)為在過去幾百年中，韓國看起來比其他兩個鄰國更弱，是因為它奉行了重文輕武的文化傳統(tǒng)。
：
Bill Chen
Korean terrain is difficult and mountainous. Its latitude also makes the climate very harsh. Easy to defend if you’re already there… not so easy to invade.
I suspect the supply lines are very hard to replenish.
Same reasons for Vietnam’s much vaunted strength in repulsing the Chinese.
韓國地形崎嶇，多山。緯度也導(dǎo)致氣候極為嚴(yán)酷。如果你已經(jīng)在那里，防守很容易……但入侵可沒那么簡單。
我懷疑補(bǔ)給線會非常難以維持。
這也是越南在抵御中國進(jìn)攻時備受稱贊的強(qiáng)大之處。
Dong-Yoon Lee
If we(China, Japan, Vietnam, Korea and Taiwan) make devices to prevent ourselves from ignoring inferior groups’ dignity, East Asia can provide a vast amount of good influence to the world. Because we basically love peace.
如果我們（中國、日本、越南、韓國和臺灣（地區(qū)））能創(chuàng)造一些機(jī)制，讓自己不去忽視弱勢群體的尊嚴(yán)，那么東亞可以為世界帶來極大的正面影響。因為我們本質(zhì)上是熱愛和平的。
Michael Phan
You forget the Thais they also east Asian.the Burmese etc.
你忘了泰國人，他們也是東亞人。還有緬甸人等等。
Michael L. Best
Well done, good sir. I could not have provided a better answer myself.
干得好，先生。我自己都無法給出更好的回答。
Ave Kyo
The murals of Goguryeo depict Chinese gods Nuwa and Fuxi, who are said to have human bodies and snake tails, and are Adam and Eve in Chinese mythology. But Koreans didn’t recognize them at all, and even restored the snake tails into strange skirts. How can they say they are descendants of Goguryeo?
Enlarge the map of Goguryeo he drew and see how big it is. If Goguryeo was a powerful country, then what was the Turkic people?
高句麗的壁畫描繪了中國的神祇女媧和伏羲，據(jù)說他們是人首蛇身，在中國神話中相當(dāng)于亞當(dāng)和夏娃。但韓國人根本沒有認(rèn)出他們，甚至把蛇尾復(fù)原成了奇怪的裙子。他們怎么能說自己是高句麗的后裔？
放大他畫的高句麗地圖，看看有多大。如果高句麗是一個強(qiáng)國，那突厥人又算什么？
Tu Ngo
Thanks for the very informative and interesting answer. However, I don’t totally agree with you on 2 details (of course feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).
Confucianism didn’t necessarily weaken military capability.
Confucianism was strongly embraced in many periods in China such as the Han dynasty, which had a very expansionist behavior.
So maybe it was something else (or some combination other factors) that made Joseon became less focused on militarism.
About the Mogol Empire’s conquests:
While I have much admiration and respect for Korean states of old, there was one country better than both China and Korea in terms of repelling the Mongols. This is Vietnam (Dai Viet at the time), who turned the 3 invasions of the Mongol Empire (and later the Yuan dynasty) into disasters & never surrendered.
謝謝你的回答，非常有見地和趣味性。不過，我在兩個細(xì)節(jié)上不太完全同意你的觀點（當(dāng)然，如果我錯了，請隨時糾正我）。
儒家思想并不一定削弱軍事能力。
儒家思想在中國的許多時期都得到了強(qiáng)烈推崇，例如漢朝，它是一個極具擴(kuò)張性的王朝。漢武帝時期，漢朝通過軍事行動成功擊敗了北方的匈奴，并在西域和南方擴(kuò)張領(lǐng)土。因此，儒家思想與軍事擴(kuò)張并不矛盾，可能是其他因素（或多種因素的組合）導(dǎo)致朝鮮王朝對軍事的重視程度降低。
關(guān)于蒙古帝國的征服：
雖然我非常欽佩和尊重韓國古代歷史，但在抵御蒙古入侵方面，有一個國家的表現(xiàn)甚至超過了中國和朝鮮。這就是越南（當(dāng)時稱為大越）。蒙古帝國（以及后來的元朝）對越南發(fā)動了三次入侵，但這些入侵都以災(zāi)難告終，越南從未投降。
Ah L?m
Sezar'?n Hakk? Sezar'a Fatih'in Hakk? Fatih'e
Nope, Tatar Khaganate was Turkic. It is referred to as the Turco-Mongol in the literature, but this is a mistake. In addition to historical records, DNA studies also proved that Genghis Khan was Turkic. Genghis Khan's Y haplogroup R1b-M343 lol
不，塔塔爾可汗國是突厥的。文獻(xiàn)中將其稱為突厥-蒙古，但這是一個錯誤。除了歷史記錄，DNA研究也證明成吉思汗是突厥人。成吉思汗的Y染色體單倍群是R1b-M343，哈哈。
Kevin Kim
I would agree that Confucian culture likely played a major role in limiting Joseon’s military preparedness. But, overall I would say it goes beyond just the military. Confucian culture was applied in such a strict manner that also made adaptability and proper governance difficult. Previous Korean dynasties had kings that would be more actively engaged with their people and in times of war, lead armies. By the time of King Seonjo and the Imjin War (Japanese invasion of Joseon), the king would have no actual military experience to conduct a war properly and no confidence in their decision making ability to make appropriate judgments (This is why Yi Soon Shin was tortured when he should have been honored for saving the kingdom). Joseon also failed to modernize in the late 1800s which allowed a second Japanese encroachment which ultimately led to the annexation of Korea in 1910.
我同意儒家文化可能在很大程度上限制了朝鮮王朝的軍事準(zhǔn)備。但總體而言，我認(rèn)為這不僅僅是軍事方面的問題。儒家文化被應(yīng)用得如此嚴(yán)格，以至于也使得適應(yīng)性和有效的治理變得困難。以前的朝鮮王朝有國王會更積極地與人民互動，并且在戰(zhàn)爭時期親自領(lǐng)導(dǎo)軍隊。到了朝鮮宣祖和壬辰倭亂（日本入侵朝鮮）時期，國王沒有任何實際的軍事經(jīng)驗來妥善指揮戰(zhàn)爭，也沒有足夠的信心做出適當(dāng)?shù)呐袛啵ㄟ@就是為什么李舜臣在拯救了國家之后反而被折磨）。朝鮮王朝在19世紀(jì)末也未能實現(xiàn)現(xiàn)代化，這使得日本得以再次入侵，最終導(dǎo)致1910年朝鮮被日本吞并。
Ah L?m
Harvey King
Is it accurate to describe Goguryeo a “Korean” culture?
將高句麗描述為“韓國”文化準(zhǔn)確嗎？
Eul Ji
Yes, it is. Korea has ethnical, cultural, historical inheritance of Goguryeo. But after the early 2000s, some Chinese began to claim that Goguryeo was part of China.
是的，準(zhǔn)確。韓國在高句麗方面具有民族、文化和歷史繼承。但在2000年代初之后，一些中國人開始聲稱高句麗是中國的一部分。
Zayne Chu
Please note that the Chinese never claimed that Goguryeo was part of China, which is inaccurate. Usually, we think of it as a regime established by a frontier minority, a civilization that developed independently, much like the Manchu regime that later ruled China. It is only because the Tang Dynasty was more powerful and Goguryeo failed that these histories were incorporated into Chinese history.
Since modern Korea succeeded directly from Silla, which apparently never ruled Goguryeo nor was it ever ruled in its entirety by Goguryeo, we treat the two as two states. In fact, much of Goguryeo's historical heritage has been lost to history, and we only know that their ruling class used Chinese characters, the same as Silla, Baekje, and Japan, and that Goguryeo's dress and manners, political system, and military system were modeled on those of the Tang Dynasty but had their own national characteristics, which were somewhat different from those of Silla and Tang during the same period, and closer to those of Baekje and Japan. Genetically speaking, its survivors were integrated into China, Korea and Japan at the same time, so you can hardly define modern Korea as having a direct succession with it.
請注意，中國從未聲稱高句麗是中國的一部分，這種說法是不準(zhǔn)確的。通常，我們把高句麗看作是由邊疆少數(shù)民族建立的一個獨立發(fā)展的政權(quán)，就像后來統(tǒng)治中國的滿族政權(quán)一樣。只是因為唐朝更強(qiáng)大，高句麗失敗了，這些歷史才被納入了中國的歷史記載。
由于現(xiàn)代韓國是由新羅直接繼承而來的，而新羅顯然從未統(tǒng)治過高句麗，高句麗也從未完全統(tǒng)治過新羅，所以我們把兩者當(dāng)作兩個不同的國家來看待。事實上，高句麗的很多歷史遺產(chǎn)已經(jīng)丟失在歷史長河中了，我們只知道他們的統(tǒng)治階層使用漢字，這和新羅、百濟(jì)以及日本一樣。高句麗的服飾、禮儀、政治制度和軍事制度都是以唐朝為模板，但也有自己的民族特色，這些特色與同時期的新羅和唐朝有所不同，而更接近于百濟(jì)和日本。從遺傳學(xué)角度看，高句麗的幸存者同時融入了中國、韓國和日本，所以你很難把現(xiàn)代韓國定義為高句麗的直接繼承者。
Eul Ji
You said
“Since modern Korea succeeded directly from Silla,”
No intention to offend you, but that is only how Chinese want to view Korean history. The reality is different.
Actually, Korea succeeded both Silla and Goguryeo, Beakje. A lot of Goguryeo revival forces and its citizens voluntarily moved to silla, not tang.
Goryeo was founded by Goguryeo lineage and accepted numerous Balhae people.
We have the culture, blood and identity of goguryeo.
So it is true that Korea was also directly inherited by Goguryeo, just like Beakje and Silla.
你說：
“由于現(xiàn)代韓國直接繼承了新羅，”
無意冒犯，但這只是中國人如何看待韓國歷史的方式?，F(xiàn)實是不同的。
實際上，韓國繼承了新羅、高句麗和百濟(jì)。許多高句麗復(fù)興力量及其公民自愿遷移到新羅，而不是唐朝。
高麗是由高句麗血統(tǒng)建立的，并接納了許多渤海人。
我們擁有高句麗的文化、血統(tǒng)和身份。
因此，韓國確實也直接繼承了高句麗，就像百濟(jì)和新羅一樣。
??????? ????????
Most of the citizens of Goguryeo moved to China, and no citizens of Goguryeo voluntarily moved to Silla.
Korea also did not directly inherit Goguryeo, and the Joseon Dynasty believed that Goguryeo had no relationship with them.
Judging from modern genetic tests, the ethnic group closest to the Goguryeo people is the Chinese.
Goguryeo may have some relationship with Japan in terms of language.
大多數(shù)高句麗公民遷移到了中國，沒有高句麗公民自愿遷移到新羅。
韓國也沒有直接繼承高句麗，朝鮮王朝認(rèn)為高句麗與他們沒有關(guān)系。
根據(jù)現(xiàn)代基因測試，與高句麗人最接近的民族是中國人。
高句麗在語言方面可能與日本有一些關(guān)系。
Tofu Dofu2
that’s like taking the Koreans that now live in present day Russia/Kazakstan that migrated there due to wars and shit… genetically testing them and stating that they are the closest ethnic group to the Koreans living in North or South Korea…
you realize that many of those people residing in now present day China (but used to be Goguryeo) either moved? hence why there can be a discrepancy for calling them Chinese?
這就像拿那些現(xiàn)在生活在俄羅斯/哈薩克斯坦的韓國人來說，他們是因為戰(zhàn)爭等原因遷移到那里的……對他們進(jìn)行基因測試，然后聲稱他們是最接近生活在朝鮮或韓國的韓民族……
你意識到許多現(xiàn)在居住在中國（但曾經(jīng)是高句麗）的人要么遷移嗎？因此，為什么稱他們?yōu)橹袊藭胁町悾?br />
??????? ????????
There are not even as many differences among Chinese as there are within any group of Europeans.
Goguryeo, except for the royal family, which is the Fuyu people, basically most of the citizens are Han Chinese, because Northeast China and the northern part of the Korean Peninsula have already been home to a large number of Han Chinese as early as BC, and the number is far more than any other ethnic group. South Korea's Our ancestors lived in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula at that time. They did not come into contact with the Buyeo people until the 4th century. However, as early as the 4th century ago, the ancestors of the Koreans did come into contact with the Han Chinese and even mixed with the Han Chinese. This means that the Han Chinese had expanded to the southern part of the Korean Peninsula even before the 4th century.
And according to DNA, Koreans have a number of Han Chinese genes, but the genes of nomadic people are much less. This obviously overturns the idea that Koreans have different nomadic genes, and also shows that Koreans are not the descendants of nomads. To be precise, Koreans are a group composed of Han Chinese, ethnic groups in southern China, Southeast Asians, some indigenous people of the Korean Peninsula, and some nomadic peoples. The closest relatives of Koreans are Japanese.
在中國人之間，甚至沒有歐洲人內(nèi)部的差異那么大。
高句麗的情況是，除了王室是扶余人之外，基本上大部分公民都是漢族人，因為早在公元前，中國東北地區(qū)和朝鮮半島北部就已經(jīng)居住了大量漢族人，數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過其他任何民族。而韓國人的祖先當(dāng)時生活在朝鮮半島南部，直到4世紀(jì)才接觸到扶余人。然而，早在4世紀(jì)之前，韓國人的祖先就已經(jīng)和漢族人接觸甚至融合了。這意味著在4世紀(jì)之前，漢族人就已經(jīng)擴(kuò)展到了朝鮮半島南部。
根據(jù)DNA研究，韓國人有相當(dāng)數(shù)量的漢族基因，但游牧民族的基因卻少得多。這顯然推翻了韓國人有不同游牧基因的觀點，也表明韓國人并非游牧民族的后代。準(zhǔn)確地說，韓國人是由漢族人、中國南方民族、東南亞人、朝鮮半島的原住民以及一些游牧民族組成的群體。韓國人最近的親屬是日本人。
Emmanuel Aburi Amo
Agree with Goguryeo being different Silla. However, I am hesistant to fully embrace your opinion because of following (I am not an expert so would love you hear you opinions on these!) :
Incorporation of Chinese system of government and politics is an inevitable force within East Asian history. Silla, and even Japan, though vary in extent, adopted various concepts and Tang's approach in government. Due to geographic closeness, Goguryeo extensively associated with Chinese culture, directly or indirectly and as battle or trade. Pretty clear why Goguryeo had different government system. Therefore, making distinction with Goguryeo because of this reason seems premature.
Linguistic history seems to suggest that proto koreanic language was spoken along Southern Manchuria and northern Korean peninsula (exact distribution and shift of speakers and time period is an approximation). Then, the language gradually dispersed to the south, driving proto japonic speakers out of peninsula to the archipelago. I believe there is a record that says, Baekje was able to speak to Silla and Goguryeo without translation but not Silla to Goguryeo, vice and versa. Given that, it may be likely that by the fall of Goguryeo, people of peninsular and south Manchuria spoke same (recognizable) language.
Emergence Goryeo following rise of later Baekje. For people to use previous kingdom that existed centuries ago to justify it's legitimacy may be a indication that locals embraced Goguryeo identity, or at least found themselves to be best fit to continue the legacy due to closeness of geography and historical comtext
關(guān)于高句麗與新羅、百濟(jì)以及現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系，以及高句麗的文化和語言特征，以下是一些基于歷史和學(xué)術(shù)研究的觀點：
1. 高句麗的政治與文化：
高句麗是一個獨立的古代政權(quán)，其政治制度和文化在一定程度上受到了中國的影響，但同時也具有自身的獨特性。高句麗的統(tǒng)治階層使用漢字，其政治制度和禮儀體系在一定程度上模仿了中原王朝，但也有自己的民族特色。這種文化融合是東亞歷史的普遍現(xiàn)象，新羅和日本也在不同程度上吸收了唐朝的政治和文化理念。
2. 語言與民族構(gòu)成
從語言學(xué)角度看，高句麗的語言可能與朝鮮半島南部的原始語言有聯(lián)系，但具體分布和演變過程仍有待研究。有觀點認(rèn)為，高句麗的語言與百濟(jì)和新羅的語言有一定的相似性，但并不完全相同。這種語言的相似性可能反映了朝鮮半島北部和南部之間的文化交流。
3. 高句麗與現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系
現(xiàn)代韓國的歷史繼承主要來自新羅和后來的高麗王朝，而高句麗在地理和文化上與這些政權(quán)有一定的聯(lián)系，但并非直接繼承關(guān)系。高句麗的遺產(chǎn)在一定程度上被后來的朝鮮半島政權(quán)所吸收，但其民族構(gòu)成和文化特征已經(jīng)發(fā)生了很大變化。
4. 高句麗的文化認(rèn)同
高句麗的文化和歷史在朝鮮半島的歷史敘述中占有重要地位，尤其是在地理和文化上與高句麗相近的地區(qū)。例如，后來的高麗王朝可能在一定程度上借鑒了高句麗的歷史遺產(chǎn)來增強(qiáng)自身的合法性。
綜上所述，高句麗是一個具有獨特歷史和文化的古代政權(quán)，其與新羅、百濟(jì)以及現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系是復(fù)雜且多面的。
The Russian Spy
Most of the land in the map above is Chinese.
地圖上的大部分土地是中國的。
Raymond Chow
The modern Koreans are descendants of the three countries in the Korean Peninsula on this map. The Goguryeo is the enemy of the Korean. Interesting!
現(xiàn)代韓國人是這張地圖上朝鮮半島三個國家的后裔。高句麗是韓國人的敵人。有趣！
??????
So, by your logic, German and Chinese states have fought each other for centuries. So is the Shu Dynasty, Bavaria, Saxony, and many others, not part of Chinese and German history?
那么，按照你的邏輯，德國，中國各王國已經(jīng)打了幾個世紀(jì)的仗。那么蜀漢、巴伐利亞、薩克森和許多其他國家，不是中國和德國歷史的一部分嗎？
Goodi Shang
Koguryo was destroyed by the Tang Dynasty. In order to prevent Koguryo from growing again, the Tang Dynasty moved Koguryo to other places. Are you sure you are a descendant of Koguryo? Your ancestors should be xinluo and Baiji. Koguryo is the enemy of Silla. Are you sure you want to worship your ancestors' enemies now? Don't kneel down in front of the enemy and shout their ancestors because Koguryo is strong.
高句麗被唐朝摧毀。為了防止高句麗再次崛起，唐朝將高句麗人遷移到其他地方。你確定你是高句麗的后裔嗎？你的祖先應(yīng)該是新羅和百濟(jì)。高句麗是新羅的敵人。你現(xiàn)在確定要崇拜你祖先的敵人嗎？不要因為高句麗強(qiáng)大就跪在敵人面前喊他們的祖先。
Michael Phan
Wow I thought hans worship their enemies the Mongolian and Manchu
哇，我以為漢人崇拜他們的敵人蒙古人和滿族人。
Simon Dan
The Han Chinese consisted of many races which include Koreans. There is no such a thing as pure blooded Han therefore the definition of Chinese is based on a civilization not on races.
漢人由許多種族組成，包括韓國人。沒有純血統(tǒng)的漢人，因此中國人的定義基于文明而不是種族。
Charles Houghton
認(rèn)賊作父
Otto Appocalyse
The absurdity of South Koreans' enthusiasm for describing Goguryeo as their ancestors is as ridiculous as Charlemagne's ancestor of the Germans. You can't make an ancestor of a country that is not born in present-day South Korea, where most of the country is not in South Korea, and whose scxt is completely different from that of South Korea. The only relationship between your ancestors and Goguryeo is that Goguryeo would periodically go south to plunder you as slaves and export them to the Central Plains Dynasty, and the "Silla Handmaiden" was a very sought-after servant commodity since the Han Dynasty.
韓國人熱情地將高句麗描述為他們的祖先的荒謬程度，就像德國人將查理曼大帝視為祖先一樣可笑。你不能將一個不在現(xiàn)代韓國境內(nèi)出生的國家視為祖先，該國大部分地區(qū)不在韓國境內(nèi)，其文字也與韓國完全不同。你們的祖先與高句麗唯一的關(guān)系是高句麗會定期南下掠奪你們作為奴隸，并將他們出口到中原王朝，而“新羅婢女”自漢朝以來就是一種非常搶手的仆人商品。
Aaron Cho
That makes no sense. Goguryeo is a part of Korean history - there is no debate about this. It's 100% a part of Korean cultural identity. You're confusing ethnic/cultural legacy and modern statehood.
這毫無道理。高句麗是韓國歷史的一部分——這一點無可爭議。它100%是韓國文化認(rèn)同的一部分。你混淆了民族/文化遺產(chǎn)和現(xiàn)代國家地位。
Charles Houghton
我稱之為：承認(rèn)賊是父親;韓國人對那些祖先這樣做有權(quán)利嗎，高句麗，一個古老的中國少數(shù)民族政權(quán)，各種侵略韓國和朝鮮的祖先，實際上被他們承認(rèn)為祖先;真的很有趣
Korea has not always been a historically weak state. In fact, Korea used to be an incredibly powerful state.
During King Gwanggaeto the Great (391–413 AD), the Korean kingdom of Goguryeo was arguably the most powerful kingdom in Northeast Asia. At that time, China fell into division of multiple kingdoms, with northern China constantly getting raped by the five Hu tribes. King Gwanggaeto defeated the xianbei (who were the most powerful nomads of northern China at that time) state of Later Yan, and repulsed Japanese pirate invasions from the south.
Korean kingdom of Goguryeo at its height
Fast forward two to three hundred years later. Goguryeo managed to repel multiple invasions from Sui Yangdi, and then later Tang Taizong. Only during Tang Gaozong’s reign did Goguryeo finally fell to Tang. In other words, it took one entire Chinese dynasty (Sui), plus one of the greatest conqueror in Chinese history (Tang Taizong), plus numerous attempts from Gaozong, plus another Korean ally Silla, before the Chinese were finally able to defeat Goguryeo. This is not a weak kingdom by any means; I think there is enough evidence to suggest that Korea (specifically Goguryeo) was the most powerful country in Northeast Asia for several periods of time within the first thousand years after Jesus.
Then, when we jump ahead to the Mongol invasions, it took the Mongols 6 (six!) invasions and close to thirty years of war before Korea finally surrendered (and even then, Korea wasn’t entirely absorbed into Yuan… more like a quasi-state). The only other country that gave the Mongols this much grief was China, and considering that Korea is much smaller than China, I think Korea overall did a better job of fighting off the Mongols than the Chinese did.
I think Korea didn’t start to wane until the start of the Joseon dynasty (1392 and onwards). I don’t know that much about Korean history from this point on, but I know that the Joseon dynasty began to embrace Confucianism and shunned its traditional military culture (the same thing happened to China). For example, other than Yi Sun-Shin, the Koreans did a terrible job at war during the Japanese invasions of 1592. I’ve read history books that said that Korea at that time thought Japan, which was ruled by warriors (the samurais), to be a barbaric country. Korea pride itself on being a civilized country because it was ruled by aristocrats and scholars, just like Ming China was. If you look at Ming, which was also ruled by Confucianism, it was very much the same way as Korea was (shunning the military, embracing the scholars).
This is why Ming, in contrast to Han and Tang (two previous Han Chinese empires), was not very expansionist. It would take the Manchus, a warlike tribe in the northeast, to conquer China before China became expansionist again. But guess what happened after the Manchus conquered China and expanded the Chinese territory? They accepted the Confucian culture, and as a result, lost their warrior culture, which was partly responsible for its decline and falling victim to Western and Japanese invasions.
So I think what happened in the past few hundred years that made Korea seemed weaker than its other two neighbors is the culture of valuing scholars over all other professions.
韓國并非一直是一個歷史上弱小的國家。事實上，韓國曾經(jīng)是一個極其強(qiáng)大的國家。
在廣開土大王（391—413年）統(tǒng)治時期，高句麗王國無疑是東北亞地區(qū)最強(qiáng)大的王國。當(dāng)時，中國陷入分裂，北方被五胡部落不斷侵?jǐn)_。廣開土大王擊敗了當(dāng)時中國北方最強(qiáng)大的游牧民族——鮮卑族建立的后燕政權(quán)，并擊退了來自南方的日本海盜入侵。
高句麗王國在其鼎盛時期，表現(xiàn)出了強(qiáng)大的軍事力量。快進(jìn)兩三百年后，高句麗成功抵御了隋煬帝的多次入侵，后來又擊退了唐太宗的進(jìn)攻。直到唐高宗時期，高句麗才最終被唐朝聯(lián)合新羅擊敗。換句話說，擊敗高句麗，不僅需要一個完整的中國王朝（隋朝），還需要中國歷史上最偉大的征服者之一（唐太宗）、唐高宗的多次嘗試，以及另一個朝鮮半島的盟友——新羅的協(xié)助。這絕不是一個弱小的國家。我認(rèn)為有足夠的證據(jù)表明，在公元后第一個千年期間，韓國（特別是高句麗）在東北亞地區(qū)曾是幾個時期內(nèi)最強(qiáng)大的國家。
再往后看，蒙古入侵時，朝鮮半島的抵抗也極為頑強(qiáng)。蒙古人對朝鮮半島發(fā)動了6次入侵，經(jīng)過近三十年的戰(zhàn)爭，朝鮮半島才最終投降（即便如此，朝鮮半島也并未被完全納入元朝，更像是一個半獨立的國家）。除了中國之外，沒有其他任何國家能讓蒙古人如此費力?？紤]到朝鮮半島的面積遠(yuǎn)小于中國，我認(rèn)為朝鮮半島在抵御蒙古入侵方面比中國做得更好。
我認(rèn)為，朝鮮半島的國力開始衰退是在朝鮮王朝（1392年及之后）開始的時候。我對朝鮮王朝之后的歷史不太了解，但我知道朝鮮王朝開始奉行儒家思想，摒棄了傳統(tǒng)的軍事文化（中國也發(fā)生了類似的情況）。例如，在1592年日本入侵朝鮮半島期間，除了李舜臣之外，朝鮮半島在戰(zhàn)爭中的表現(xiàn)非常糟糕。我讀過的歷史書籍提到，當(dāng)時的朝鮮半島認(rèn)為由武士（即日本的武士階層）統(tǒng)治的日本是一個野蠻的國家。 朝鮮半島自視為一個文明的國家，因為它是由貴族和學(xué)者統(tǒng)治的，就像明朝的中國一樣。如果你觀察明朝，它與漢朝和唐朝（前兩個漢族帝國）不同，明朝并非一個擴(kuò)張性的王朝。它需要東北的滿族——一個尚武的部落來征服中國，中國才重新變得具有擴(kuò)張性。 然而，當(dāng)滿族征服中國并擴(kuò)大了中國領(lǐng)土之后，他們接受了儒家文化，結(jié)果失去了自己的武士文化，這也是其衰落并最終淪為西方和日本入侵目標(biāo)的部分原因。
因此，我認(rèn)為在過去幾百年中，韓國看起來比其他兩個鄰國更弱，是因為它奉行了重文輕武的文化傳統(tǒng)。
：
Bill Chen
Korean terrain is difficult and mountainous. Its latitude also makes the climate very harsh. Easy to defend if you’re already there… not so easy to invade.
I suspect the supply lines are very hard to replenish.
Same reasons for Vietnam’s much vaunted strength in repulsing the Chinese.
韓國地形崎嶇，多山。緯度也導(dǎo)致氣候極為嚴(yán)酷。如果你已經(jīng)在那里，防守很容易……但入侵可沒那么簡單。
我懷疑補(bǔ)給線會非常難以維持。
這也是越南在抵御中國進(jìn)攻時備受稱贊的強(qiáng)大之處。
Dong-Yoon Lee
If we(China, Japan, Vietnam, Korea and Taiwan) make devices to prevent ourselves from ignoring inferior groups’ dignity, East Asia can provide a vast amount of good influence to the world. Because we basically love peace.
如果我們（中國、日本、越南、韓國和臺灣（地區(qū)））能創(chuàng)造一些機(jī)制，讓自己不去忽視弱勢群體的尊嚴(yán)，那么東亞可以為世界帶來極大的正面影響。因為我們本質(zhì)上是熱愛和平的。
Michael Phan
You forget the Thais they also east Asian.the Burmese etc.
你忘了泰國人，他們也是東亞人。還有緬甸人等等。
Michael L. Best
Well done, good sir. I could not have provided a better answer myself.
干得好，先生。我自己都無法給出更好的回答。
Ave Kyo
The murals of Goguryeo depict Chinese gods Nuwa and Fuxi, who are said to have human bodies and snake tails, and are Adam and Eve in Chinese mythology. But Koreans didn’t recognize them at all, and even restored the snake tails into strange skirts. How can they say they are descendants of Goguryeo?
Enlarge the map of Goguryeo he drew and see how big it is. If Goguryeo was a powerful country, then what was the Turkic people?
高句麗的壁畫描繪了中國的神祇女媧和伏羲，據(jù)說他們是人首蛇身，在中國神話中相當(dāng)于亞當(dāng)和夏娃。但韓國人根本沒有認(rèn)出他們，甚至把蛇尾復(fù)原成了奇怪的裙子。他們怎么能說自己是高句麗的后裔？
放大他畫的高句麗地圖，看看有多大。如果高句麗是一個強(qiáng)國，那突厥人又算什么？
Tu Ngo
Thanks for the very informative and interesting answer. However, I don’t totally agree with you on 2 details (of course feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).
Confucianism didn’t necessarily weaken military capability.
Confucianism was strongly embraced in many periods in China such as the Han dynasty, which had a very expansionist behavior.
So maybe it was something else (or some combination other factors) that made Joseon became less focused on militarism.
About the Mogol Empire’s conquests:
While I have much admiration and respect for Korean states of old, there was one country better than both China and Korea in terms of repelling the Mongols. This is Vietnam (Dai Viet at the time), who turned the 3 invasions of the Mongol Empire (and later the Yuan dynasty) into disasters & never surrendered.
謝謝你的回答，非常有見地和趣味性。不過，我在兩個細(xì)節(jié)上不太完全同意你的觀點（當(dāng)然，如果我錯了，請隨時糾正我）。
儒家思想并不一定削弱軍事能力。
儒家思想在中國的許多時期都得到了強(qiáng)烈推崇，例如漢朝，它是一個極具擴(kuò)張性的王朝。漢武帝時期，漢朝通過軍事行動成功擊敗了北方的匈奴，并在西域和南方擴(kuò)張領(lǐng)土。因此，儒家思想與軍事擴(kuò)張并不矛盾，可能是其他因素（或多種因素的組合）導(dǎo)致朝鮮王朝對軍事的重視程度降低。
關(guān)于蒙古帝國的征服：
雖然我非常欽佩和尊重韓國古代歷史，但在抵御蒙古入侵方面，有一個國家的表現(xiàn)甚至超過了中國和朝鮮。這就是越南（當(dāng)時稱為大越）。蒙古帝國（以及后來的元朝）對越南發(fā)動了三次入侵，但這些入侵都以災(zāi)難告終，越南從未投降。
Ah L?m
Sezar'?n Hakk? Sezar'a Fatih'in Hakk? Fatih'e
Nope, Tatar Khaganate was Turkic. It is referred to as the Turco-Mongol in the literature, but this is a mistake. In addition to historical records, DNA studies also proved that Genghis Khan was Turkic. Genghis Khan's Y haplogroup R1b-M343 lol
不，塔塔爾可汗國是突厥的。文獻(xiàn)中將其稱為突厥-蒙古，但這是一個錯誤。除了歷史記錄，DNA研究也證明成吉思汗是突厥人。成吉思汗的Y染色體單倍群是R1b-M343，哈哈。
Kevin Kim
I would agree that Confucian culture likely played a major role in limiting Joseon’s military preparedness. But, overall I would say it goes beyond just the military. Confucian culture was applied in such a strict manner that also made adaptability and proper governance difficult. Previous Korean dynasties had kings that would be more actively engaged with their people and in times of war, lead armies. By the time of King Seonjo and the Imjin War (Japanese invasion of Joseon), the king would have no actual military experience to conduct a war properly and no confidence in their decision making ability to make appropriate judgments (This is why Yi Soon Shin was tortured when he should have been honored for saving the kingdom). Joseon also failed to modernize in the late 1800s which allowed a second Japanese encroachment which ultimately led to the annexation of Korea in 1910.
我同意儒家文化可能在很大程度上限制了朝鮮王朝的軍事準(zhǔn)備。但總體而言，我認(rèn)為這不僅僅是軍事方面的問題。儒家文化被應(yīng)用得如此嚴(yán)格，以至于也使得適應(yīng)性和有效的治理變得困難。以前的朝鮮王朝有國王會更積極地與人民互動，并且在戰(zhàn)爭時期親自領(lǐng)導(dǎo)軍隊。到了朝鮮宣祖和壬辰倭亂（日本入侵朝鮮）時期，國王沒有任何實際的軍事經(jīng)驗來妥善指揮戰(zhàn)爭，也沒有足夠的信心做出適當(dāng)?shù)呐袛啵ㄟ@就是為什么李舜臣在拯救了國家之后反而被折磨）。朝鮮王朝在19世紀(jì)末也未能實現(xiàn)現(xiàn)代化，這使得日本得以再次入侵，最終導(dǎo)致1910年朝鮮被日本吞并。
Ah L?m
Harvey King
Is it accurate to describe Goguryeo a “Korean” culture?
將高句麗描述為“韓國”文化準(zhǔn)確嗎？
Eul Ji
Yes, it is. Korea has ethnical, cultural, historical inheritance of Goguryeo. But after the early 2000s, some Chinese began to claim that Goguryeo was part of China.
是的，準(zhǔn)確。韓國在高句麗方面具有民族、文化和歷史繼承。但在2000年代初之后，一些中國人開始聲稱高句麗是中國的一部分。
Zayne Chu
Please note that the Chinese never claimed that Goguryeo was part of China, which is inaccurate. Usually, we think of it as a regime established by a frontier minority, a civilization that developed independently, much like the Manchu regime that later ruled China. It is only because the Tang Dynasty was more powerful and Goguryeo failed that these histories were incorporated into Chinese history.
Since modern Korea succeeded directly from Silla, which apparently never ruled Goguryeo nor was it ever ruled in its entirety by Goguryeo, we treat the two as two states. In fact, much of Goguryeo's historical heritage has been lost to history, and we only know that their ruling class used Chinese characters, the same as Silla, Baekje, and Japan, and that Goguryeo's dress and manners, political system, and military system were modeled on those of the Tang Dynasty but had their own national characteristics, which were somewhat different from those of Silla and Tang during the same period, and closer to those of Baekje and Japan. Genetically speaking, its survivors were integrated into China, Korea and Japan at the same time, so you can hardly define modern Korea as having a direct succession with it.
請注意，中國從未聲稱高句麗是中國的一部分，這種說法是不準(zhǔn)確的。通常，我們把高句麗看作是由邊疆少數(shù)民族建立的一個獨立發(fā)展的政權(quán)，就像后來統(tǒng)治中國的滿族政權(quán)一樣。只是因為唐朝更強(qiáng)大，高句麗失敗了，這些歷史才被納入了中國的歷史記載。
由于現(xiàn)代韓國是由新羅直接繼承而來的，而新羅顯然從未統(tǒng)治過高句麗，高句麗也從未完全統(tǒng)治過新羅，所以我們把兩者當(dāng)作兩個不同的國家來看待。事實上，高句麗的很多歷史遺產(chǎn)已經(jīng)丟失在歷史長河中了，我們只知道他們的統(tǒng)治階層使用漢字，這和新羅、百濟(jì)以及日本一樣。高句麗的服飾、禮儀、政治制度和軍事制度都是以唐朝為模板，但也有自己的民族特色，這些特色與同時期的新羅和唐朝有所不同，而更接近于百濟(jì)和日本。從遺傳學(xué)角度看，高句麗的幸存者同時融入了中國、韓國和日本，所以你很難把現(xiàn)代韓國定義為高句麗的直接繼承者。
Eul Ji
You said
“Since modern Korea succeeded directly from Silla,”
No intention to offend you, but that is only how Chinese want to view Korean history. The reality is different.
Actually, Korea succeeded both Silla and Goguryeo, Beakje. A lot of Goguryeo revival forces and its citizens voluntarily moved to silla, not tang.
Goryeo was founded by Goguryeo lineage and accepted numerous Balhae people.
We have the culture, blood and identity of goguryeo.
So it is true that Korea was also directly inherited by Goguryeo, just like Beakje and Silla.
你說：
“由于現(xiàn)代韓國直接繼承了新羅，”
無意冒犯，但這只是中國人如何看待韓國歷史的方式?，F(xiàn)實是不同的。
實際上，韓國繼承了新羅、高句麗和百濟(jì)。許多高句麗復(fù)興力量及其公民自愿遷移到新羅，而不是唐朝。
高麗是由高句麗血統(tǒng)建立的，并接納了許多渤海人。
我們擁有高句麗的文化、血統(tǒng)和身份。
因此，韓國確實也直接繼承了高句麗，就像百濟(jì)和新羅一樣。
??????? ????????
Most of the citizens of Goguryeo moved to China, and no citizens of Goguryeo voluntarily moved to Silla.
Korea also did not directly inherit Goguryeo, and the Joseon Dynasty believed that Goguryeo had no relationship with them.
Judging from modern genetic tests, the ethnic group closest to the Goguryeo people is the Chinese.
Goguryeo may have some relationship with Japan in terms of language.
大多數(shù)高句麗公民遷移到了中國，沒有高句麗公民自愿遷移到新羅。
韓國也沒有直接繼承高句麗，朝鮮王朝認(rèn)為高句麗與他們沒有關(guān)系。
根據(jù)現(xiàn)代基因測試，與高句麗人最接近的民族是中國人。
高句麗在語言方面可能與日本有一些關(guān)系。
Tofu Dofu2
that’s like taking the Koreans that now live in present day Russia/Kazakstan that migrated there due to wars and shit… genetically testing them and stating that they are the closest ethnic group to the Koreans living in North or South Korea…
you realize that many of those people residing in now present day China (but used to be Goguryeo) either moved? hence why there can be a discrepancy for calling them Chinese?
這就像拿那些現(xiàn)在生活在俄羅斯/哈薩克斯坦的韓國人來說，他們是因為戰(zhàn)爭等原因遷移到那里的……對他們進(jìn)行基因測試，然后聲稱他們是最接近生活在朝鮮或韓國的韓民族……
你意識到許多現(xiàn)在居住在中國（但曾經(jīng)是高句麗）的人要么遷移嗎？因此，為什么稱他們?yōu)橹袊藭胁町悾?br />
??????? ????????
There are not even as many differences among Chinese as there are within any group of Europeans.
Goguryeo, except for the royal family, which is the Fuyu people, basically most of the citizens are Han Chinese, because Northeast China and the northern part of the Korean Peninsula have already been home to a large number of Han Chinese as early as BC, and the number is far more than any other ethnic group. South Korea's Our ancestors lived in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula at that time. They did not come into contact with the Buyeo people until the 4th century. However, as early as the 4th century ago, the ancestors of the Koreans did come into contact with the Han Chinese and even mixed with the Han Chinese. This means that the Han Chinese had expanded to the southern part of the Korean Peninsula even before the 4th century.
And according to DNA, Koreans have a number of Han Chinese genes, but the genes of nomadic people are much less. This obviously overturns the idea that Koreans have different nomadic genes, and also shows that Koreans are not the descendants of nomads. To be precise, Koreans are a group composed of Han Chinese, ethnic groups in southern China, Southeast Asians, some indigenous people of the Korean Peninsula, and some nomadic peoples. The closest relatives of Koreans are Japanese.
在中國人之間，甚至沒有歐洲人內(nèi)部的差異那么大。
高句麗的情況是，除了王室是扶余人之外，基本上大部分公民都是漢族人，因為早在公元前，中國東北地區(qū)和朝鮮半島北部就已經(jīng)居住了大量漢族人，數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過其他任何民族。而韓國人的祖先當(dāng)時生活在朝鮮半島南部，直到4世紀(jì)才接觸到扶余人。然而，早在4世紀(jì)之前，韓國人的祖先就已經(jīng)和漢族人接觸甚至融合了。這意味著在4世紀(jì)之前，漢族人就已經(jīng)擴(kuò)展到了朝鮮半島南部。
根據(jù)DNA研究，韓國人有相當(dāng)數(shù)量的漢族基因，但游牧民族的基因卻少得多。這顯然推翻了韓國人有不同游牧基因的觀點，也表明韓國人并非游牧民族的后代。準(zhǔn)確地說，韓國人是由漢族人、中國南方民族、東南亞人、朝鮮半島的原住民以及一些游牧民族組成的群體。韓國人最近的親屬是日本人。
Emmanuel Aburi Amo
Agree with Goguryeo being different Silla. However, I am hesistant to fully embrace your opinion because of following (I am not an expert so would love you hear you opinions on these!) :
Incorporation of Chinese system of government and politics is an inevitable force within East Asian history. Silla, and even Japan, though vary in extent, adopted various concepts and Tang's approach in government. Due to geographic closeness, Goguryeo extensively associated with Chinese culture, directly or indirectly and as battle or trade. Pretty clear why Goguryeo had different government system. Therefore, making distinction with Goguryeo because of this reason seems premature.
Linguistic history seems to suggest that proto koreanic language was spoken along Southern Manchuria and northern Korean peninsula (exact distribution and shift of speakers and time period is an approximation). Then, the language gradually dispersed to the south, driving proto japonic speakers out of peninsula to the archipelago. I believe there is a record that says, Baekje was able to speak to Silla and Goguryeo without translation but not Silla to Goguryeo, vice and versa. Given that, it may be likely that by the fall of Goguryeo, people of peninsular and south Manchuria spoke same (recognizable) language.
Emergence Goryeo following rise of later Baekje. For people to use previous kingdom that existed centuries ago to justify it's legitimacy may be a indication that locals embraced Goguryeo identity, or at least found themselves to be best fit to continue the legacy due to closeness of geography and historical comtext
關(guān)于高句麗與新羅、百濟(jì)以及現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系，以及高句麗的文化和語言特征，以下是一些基于歷史和學(xué)術(shù)研究的觀點：
1. 高句麗的政治與文化：
高句麗是一個獨立的古代政權(quán)，其政治制度和文化在一定程度上受到了中國的影響，但同時也具有自身的獨特性。高句麗的統(tǒng)治階層使用漢字，其政治制度和禮儀體系在一定程度上模仿了中原王朝，但也有自己的民族特色。這種文化融合是東亞歷史的普遍現(xiàn)象，新羅和日本也在不同程度上吸收了唐朝的政治和文化理念。
2. 語言與民族構(gòu)成
從語言學(xué)角度看，高句麗的語言可能與朝鮮半島南部的原始語言有聯(lián)系，但具體分布和演變過程仍有待研究。有觀點認(rèn)為，高句麗的語言與百濟(jì)和新羅的語言有一定的相似性，但并不完全相同。這種語言的相似性可能反映了朝鮮半島北部和南部之間的文化交流。
3. 高句麗與現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系
現(xiàn)代韓國的歷史繼承主要來自新羅和后來的高麗王朝，而高句麗在地理和文化上與這些政權(quán)有一定的聯(lián)系，但并非直接繼承關(guān)系。高句麗的遺產(chǎn)在一定程度上被后來的朝鮮半島政權(quán)所吸收，但其民族構(gòu)成和文化特征已經(jīng)發(fā)生了很大變化。
4. 高句麗的文化認(rèn)同
高句麗的文化和歷史在朝鮮半島的歷史敘述中占有重要地位，尤其是在地理和文化上與高句麗相近的地區(qū)。例如，后來的高麗王朝可能在一定程度上借鑒了高句麗的歷史遺產(chǎn)來增強(qiáng)自身的合法性。
綜上所述，高句麗是一個具有獨特歷史和文化的古代政權(quán)，其與新羅、百濟(jì)以及現(xiàn)代韓國的關(guān)系是復(fù)雜且多面的。
The Russian Spy
Most of the land in the map above is Chinese.
地圖上的大部分土地是中國的。
Raymond Chow
The modern Koreans are descendants of the three countries in the Korean Peninsula on this map. The Goguryeo is the enemy of the Korean. Interesting!
現(xiàn)代韓國人是這張地圖上朝鮮半島三個國家的后裔。高句麗是韓國人的敵人。有趣！
??????
So, by your logic, German and Chinese states have fought each other for centuries. So is the Shu Dynasty, Bavaria, Saxony, and many others, not part of Chinese and German history?
那么，按照你的邏輯，德國，中國各王國已經(jīng)打了幾個世紀(jì)的仗。那么蜀漢、巴伐利亞、薩克森和許多其他國家，不是中國和德國歷史的一部分嗎？
Goodi Shang
Koguryo was destroyed by the Tang Dynasty. In order to prevent Koguryo from growing again, the Tang Dynasty moved Koguryo to other places. Are you sure you are a descendant of Koguryo? Your ancestors should be xinluo and Baiji. Koguryo is the enemy of Silla. Are you sure you want to worship your ancestors' enemies now? Don't kneel down in front of the enemy and shout their ancestors because Koguryo is strong.
高句麗被唐朝摧毀。為了防止高句麗再次崛起，唐朝將高句麗人遷移到其他地方。你確定你是高句麗的后裔嗎？你的祖先應(yīng)該是新羅和百濟(jì)。高句麗是新羅的敵人。你現(xiàn)在確定要崇拜你祖先的敵人嗎？不要因為高句麗強(qiáng)大就跪在敵人面前喊他們的祖先。
Michael Phan
Wow I thought hans worship their enemies the Mongolian and Manchu
哇，我以為漢人崇拜他們的敵人蒙古人和滿族人。
Simon Dan
The Han Chinese consisted of many races which include Koreans. There is no such a thing as pure blooded Han therefore the definition of Chinese is based on a civilization not on races.
漢人由許多種族組成，包括韓國人。沒有純血統(tǒng)的漢人，因此中國人的定義基于文明而不是種族。
Charles Houghton
認(rèn)賊作父
Otto Appocalyse
The absurdity of South Koreans' enthusiasm for describing Goguryeo as their ancestors is as ridiculous as Charlemagne's ancestor of the Germans. You can't make an ancestor of a country that is not born in present-day South Korea, where most of the country is not in South Korea, and whose scxt is completely different from that of South Korea. The only relationship between your ancestors and Goguryeo is that Goguryeo would periodically go south to plunder you as slaves and export them to the Central Plains Dynasty, and the "Silla Handmaiden" was a very sought-after servant commodity since the Han Dynasty.
韓國人熱情地將高句麗描述為他們的祖先的荒謬程度，就像德國人將查理曼大帝視為祖先一樣可笑。你不能將一個不在現(xiàn)代韓國境內(nèi)出生的國家視為祖先，該國大部分地區(qū)不在韓國境內(nèi)，其文字也與韓國完全不同。你們的祖先與高句麗唯一的關(guān)系是高句麗會定期南下掠奪你們作為奴隸，并將他們出口到中原王朝，而“新羅婢女”自漢朝以來就是一種非常搶手的仆人商品。
Aaron Cho
That makes no sense. Goguryeo is a part of Korean history - there is no debate about this. It's 100% a part of Korean cultural identity. You're confusing ethnic/cultural legacy and modern statehood.
這毫無道理。高句麗是韓國歷史的一部分——這一點無可爭議。它100%是韓國文化認(rèn)同的一部分。你混淆了民族/文化遺產(chǎn)和現(xiàn)代國家地位。
Charles Houghton
我稱之為：承認(rèn)賊是父親;韓國人對那些祖先這樣做有權(quán)利嗎，高句麗，一個古老的中國少數(shù)民族政權(quán)，各種侵略韓國和朝鮮的祖先，實際上被他們承認(rèn)為祖先;真的很有趣
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 19 )
收藏
