Where the Past and Future Meet

Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange · Lee Sae-ra · Ewha Womans University

Introduction

On December 27th, under exceptionally clear skies, the second day of the Sarangbang 9th cohort's study tour in Japan began. During the long journey of over two hours, I was so excited about seeing Nagoya Castle, which I had prepared a presentation on for the past semester, and the Nagoya Castle Ruins Museum, also known as the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange, that I couldn't sleep.

Nagoya Castle was built by Toyotomi Hideyoshi for the invasion of Joseon. It was chosen for its shortest distance to Busan, its ria coastline which could hide ships, its deep waters capable of anchoring large vessels, and its protection from the north wind. Nagoya Castle is known to have taken about one year and six months to build. Notably, it was considered Toyotomi Hideyoshi's strategic base at the time, featuring a tea room for tea ceremonies and a stage for Noh, a traditional Japanese theater. (Yoo Hong-joon 2013, 264-266) However, after the Imjin War ended, the castle was demolished by Tokugawa Ieyasu, who succeeded to power.

Photo 1. The way to the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange 2. Where the Past and Future Meet_Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange

This Nagoya Castle was rebuilt in 1976, stemming from the discovery of a folding screen depicting Nagoya Castle in 1968. Saga Prefecture did not stop at rebuilding Nagoya Castle; it decided to construct the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange there. According to Saga Prefecture, the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange aims to promote exchange and friendship between Korea and Japan, and it exhibits records of the long history of exchange between the Korean Peninsula and Japan from prehistoric times to the present.

The recovery of relations between Japan and Korea is not solely the goal of Saga Prefecture. Considering the mutual interests of both countries, the restoration of bilateral relations would be mutually beneficial in terms of economy, domestic politics, and international politics. For example, if Korea and Japan were to implement an FTA, it is projected that their real GDP would grow by 9.11% and 10.45% respectively. (Kim Sung-chul 2005, 63) Furthermore, research suggests that if East Asia develops into a system of international cooperation, not only economic benefits but also Asia's influence in international relations would increase dramatically. (Kim Heung-jong 2013, 8)

However, despite these potential benefits, relations between Korea and Japan show no signs of improvement. The Korea-Japan FTA is still under working-level negotiations in the form of a Korea-China-Japan FTA, and the Northeast Asian Union has not progressed beyond potential discussions. So why have we still not been able to restore relations with Japan? And how can we restore them? I sought to find the answer to these questions in the perceptions of Im Kwang, an envoy to Japan in 1636.

Im Kwang and the 1636 Envoy Mission

The name Im Kwang may sound unfamiliar even to those familiar with Korean history. I, too, had never heard of him before becoming interested in the 1636 envoy mission. Im Kwang was the leader of the 1636 envoy mission and lived a life of intense dedication. Born in 1579, Im Kwang passed the civil service examination in the second year of King Injo's reign and served in various positions, including director of the Pungjeo Warehouse and supervisor of the Hongmungwan. After returning from Japan, he served as the assistant tutor to Crown Prince Sohyeon, who was in Shenyang, Qing China, due to the aftermath of the Second Manchu Invasion of Korea, and passed away there.

A record that well illustrates his character is an epitaph written by Kim Sang-heon, which states: "His character was noble and upright, and he did not tolerate the faults of others, so everyone feared him when in his company. When faced with a task, he would first follow the natural course, as if splitting bamboo, so people could not take away his integrity. Consequently, he rarely encountered disagreement wherever he went." (King Sejong Memorial Society 1999, 257) From this, we can infer that Im Kwang was a man of upright and unyielding character, possessed of profound scholarship and prioritizing adherence to principles.

Im Kwang's 1636 envoy mission can be seen as analogous to our current situation. While it was natural for Joseon and Japan to restore relations based on their mutual interests, Joseon, devastated by the Imjin War, and Japan, which believed itself superior to Joseon after the war, had not yet resolved their personal animosities. According to Dongju Lee Yong-hee, the Korea-Japan relationship at the time falls into the middle period of the Joseon Dynasty, the third phase. During this period, Joseon's perception of Japan was characterized by a long memory of Japanese invasion, fear of Japanese military power, and a strong awareness of Japan's naval strength. More importantly, Joseon concluded that the Imjin War was an unjust invasion without justification and considered Japan an enemy. Starting from this relationship, Joseon viewed Japan's non-cultural (non-Confucian) aspects as ignorant and barbaric, deepening their animosity. (Lee Yong-hee 1970, 9)

Im Kwang's Perceptions of Japan as Seen in the Byongja Ilbon Ilgi (Diary of the Joseon Envoy to Japan during the Byongja Year)

These characteristics are also reflected in Im Kwang's perceptions of Japan. The primary source for Im Kwang's perceptions of Japan at the time is the Byongja Ilbon Ilgi, a record of the 1636 envoy mission. The National Culture Promotion Institute translated it into Korean in 2008, making it more accessible. Im Kwang's perceptions of Japan, as recorded in the Byongja Ilbon Ilgi, can be summarized as: a country of extravagance, a rude and barbaric country, and a country with a disorganized military.

First, from the moment Im Kwang departed Busan and arrived at Sazunoura, west of Tsushima, to his meeting with the lord of Tsushima and his excursion to Mount Ikko, he pointed out that Japan was excessively extravagant. This perception is particularly evident in the section describing the envoy's trip to Mount Ikko. Upon seeing the Buddhist temples on Mount Ikko, Im Kwang wrote:

[...] The tiles on the ridges and eaves were all decorated with gold.

Upon reaching the stone gate, it resembled our Hongmun Gate,

with two pillars, each about two or three arm spans in circumference,

and shaped into eight angles. The crossbeam above was also made of stone,

not exceeding five jang in height and not more than three bays in width. [...]

Whether the mythical birds, the ran-sai and phoenix, were cast in bronze or made of wood, I cannot tell, but all were gilded to enhance their luster. 2. Where the Past and Future Meet_Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange

It is unknown whether it was made of wood, but it was gilded to enhance its luster. 2. Where the Past and Future Meet_Korea-Japan Exchange Museum

Furthermore, the windows and doors were all adorned with gold and silver,

and the screens and curtains were all decorated with pearls, to an extent that the extreme extravagance could not be fully recorded [...]. Heaven surely dislikes impurity; if the conduct is like this, how can it last long? (National Culture Promotion Institute 2008,

83-84)

He points out Japan's extravagance, which is disproportionate to its status, and simultaneously expresses his animosity towards it. However, Im Kwang's criticism is not entirely justified. At the time, Japan had gained immense economic benefits from the Imjin War, including the appropriation of Korean paintings, treasures, and potters, making it a very wealthy and extravagant nation. Moreover, it is possible that the perceived extravagance was merely a cultural difference, as Japanese culture, unlike Joseon's adherence to Confucianism, favored vibrant colors like gold and red in its Buddhist traditions.

(Miyake Hitoshi 1996, 211)

83-84)

Photo 2. The arrival point of the Joseon envoy encountered in Shimonoseki.

The perception of Japan as rude and barbaric also stems partly from cultural differences. According to Dongju, Joseon at the time experienced a phenomenon of admiring Chinese culture, a sort of "sunflower effect," which led to a tendency to perceive anything dissimilar to Chinese culture as inferior. (Lee Yong-hee 1970, 15-16) Im Kwang, influenced by this sunflower effect, viewed Japan's Buddhist colors as barbaric and considered the Kanpaku's pride in them not only shameful but also an act of foolishness and ignorance that was beyond reproach to boast about to the envoy of a neighboring country. (National Culture Promotion Institute 2008, 85)

While his impression of Buddhism as a Confucian scholar is understandable, the assertion that Japan is intellectually inferior needs correction. According to Miyake Hitoshi's "Joseon Tongsinsa and Japan (1996)," Hayashi Razan, a prominent scholar of the time, welcomed the Joseon envoy mission not because Japan was intellectually inferior, but because he could share knowledge as an equal scholar. He explained that he requested writings from the Joseon envoy not because Japan was intellectually inferior, but as a matter of etiquette when receiving foreign envoys.

Upon returning to Joseon after the envoy mission, Im Kwang reported to King Injo about Japan's military strength, stating, "The Kanpaku does not focus on military affairs, and the practice of firing cannons has been completely abolished, so people are startled and bewildered when they hear the sound of cannons." (Annals of King Injo 1994, 257) This impression of the Japanese military by Im Kwang contrasts with records from earlier and later envoy missions. It appears to reflect Im Kwang's mindset, possibly anticipating a retaliation against Japan that might have occurred had the Second Manchu Invasion of Korea not happened. According to the 1607 envoy records, Japan "valued martial prowess, focused on advancing, and constantly trained, so that in case of war, a million soldiers could be dispatched immediately." (Miyake Hitoshi 1996, 224)

Lessons from Im Kwang

What role did Im Kwang's perceptions play in bilateral relations? And what lessons does this story offer us today? Firstly, Im Kwang's perceptions do not reflect a realistic assessment of Japan at the time. However, the Joseon government at the time had no choice but to make diplomatic decisions based on the perceptions of the envoys. Consequently, decisions were made based on flawed perceptions.

There is an anecdote that illustrates this point. In fact, the 1636 envoy mission is known as the "ill-fated envoy mission" due to its tragic destiny. The primary mission of the 1636 envoy was to re-establish relations with Japan, which was fundamentally influenced by the establishment of Japan's decentralized values. (Ha Woo-bong 2011, 37) Therefore, Im Kwang's mission was tasked with creating a relationship that, in some respects, was humiliating and contrary to Joseon's values, such as promising to send separate letters and gifts to Japanese generals and Noh performers, and agreeing to use Japanese era names in Japan's reply.

What is even more heartbreaking is that when they returned to Joseon in 1637, Joseon was once again in a precarious state due to the Second Manchu Invasion of Korea. Joseon had to forge new international relations between Qing China and Japan, moving away from its previous world order centered on Ming China. At this juncture, if Im Kwang's perceptions of Japan had been positive, Joseon might have been able to act as a mediator between Qing China and Japan. However, Im Kwang's perceptions instilled in King Injo the belief that Japan was an untrustworthy nation. Consequently, when Qing China demanded that Joseon bring Japanese envoys, King Injo, instead of actively bridging the two nations, showed reluctance, worrying that "if the Japanese knew that Joseon had surrendered to Qing China, they would surely look down on our country." (Miyake Hitoshi 1996, 224)

The current situation between Korea and Japan does not seem very different. Relations have been stagnant since the Japanese colonial period and show no signs of improvement. This is a result of maintaining previous perceptions that should have changed with the shifting geopolitical landscape after the colonial era, coupled with a sustained lack of mutual interest. However, considering the impact of Im Kwang's perceptions on later generations of Joseon, we must strive to avoid repeating such mistakes.

Leaving the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange

Perhaps the most crucial issue is finding the "how." How can we cultivate accurate perceptions of Japan in Korea and of Korea in Japan? I believe the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange offers an answer to this question.

Photo 3. Exterior view of the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange

As I toured the museum with my Sarangbang friends, we discussed how it was perhaps ironic, and perhaps ingenious, to build a museum dedicated to Korea-Japan exchange in Nagoya, the starting point of the Imjin War. It was a discussion about an attempt to end conflict at the very place where it began. I believe this idea reflects the sincere desire of Saga Prefecture to foster friendly relations between Korea and Japan. Considering the significance of Nagoya Castle in Japanese history, the decision to build the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange could not have been easy.

This sincerity is evident elsewhere. The Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange is reportedly the only museum in Japan that uses both the Korean and Japanese names for the Imjin War: 壬辰倭亂 (Imjin Waeran) and 丁酉再亂 (Jeongyu Jaeran). (Jin Hyung-seok 2006, 267) The terms originally used in Japan were 文禄の役 (Bunroku no Eki, Bunroku being the era name of the Japanese emperor at the time, and Eki meaning war) and 慶長の役 (Keichō no Eki, Keichō being the era name, and Eki meaning war). These names only indicate the year the war occurred but not that Japan invaded Joseon. However, by using the Hanja characters as the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange does, it is immediately clear that it was a war in which Japan invaded Joseon.

The museum's effort to present history accurately is also evident in the Korean and Japanese history textbooks displayed at the end of the exhibition. These middle school history textbooks allow Korean and Japanese visitors to observe the differences in their respective textbooks and to confront the past accurately.

On this unusually sunny day, visiting Nagoya Castle Ruins and the Museum of Korea-Japan Exchange, located in a place with enviably beautiful scenery, left me with a good memory that will allow me to view Japan with different perceptions in the future. References Lee Yong-hee. 1970. "The Spiritual History of Korea-Japan Relations: On the Conflict of Border Consciousness."

"Shin Dong-a" August Issue.

National Culture Promotion Institute. 2008. "(National Translation) Sa Haeng Rok Hae Haeng Chong Jae Vol. 5."

Seoul: Academy of Korean Studies.

Fuma Susumu. 2008. "Yeonhangsa wa Tongsinsa" (Korean Envoys and Joseon Envoys). Translated by Jeong Tae-seop. Seoul: Sinseowon. Miyake Hitoshi. 1996. "Joseon Tongsinsa wa Ilbon" (Joseon Envoys and Japan). Translated by Kim Se-min.

Seoul: Ji-seong-saem.

Kim Heung-jong. 2013. "Regional Integration in East Asia: Lessons from

European Integration." Seoul: Korea Institute for International Economic Policy. Kim Sung-chul. 2005. "Korea's National Strategy 2020: Northeast Asian Economic Cooperation."

Seongnam: Sejong Institute.

Ha Woo-bong. 2011. “Diplomacy and Ritual Issues of Joseon Dynasty's Diplomatic Missions to Japan”

<Journal of Joseon Dynasty History> 58

Son Seung-cheol. 2006. 《A Study on Joseon-Japan Relations in the Joseon Dynasty: The Substance and Reality of the Policy of Neighborly Relations》

Seoul: Gyeongin Munhwasa

Yoo Hong-joon. 2013. 《My Journey to Appreciate Cultural Heritage: Japan Volume》. Paju: Changbi. Jin Hyung-seok. 2006. 《Our Culture within Japan》. Seoul: Cheongnyeonjeongsin

China-Japan-Korea FTA Homepage. http://www.fta.go.kr/cnjp/ (Accessed: December 9, 2017). Joseon Diplomatic Missions Cultural Project Homepage. http://www.tongsinsa.com/html/

(Accessed: December 9, 2017)