我不懂韩文，只好用英文发了这一篇Are these from the real Korean textbook?，问一下到底这些图是怎么回事。
…pretty much the same accusation that is commonly made about the Chinese Government and their attempts to reinterpret or revise historical fact to suit their own political purposes.
I wonder just where this sort of nonsense is going to go since it is undoubtedly indirectly sponsored by the Chinese Government or, rather I wonder if there is going to be a Chinese Dokdo in the future.
The Marmot在little bridge上的留言回答得更详细，
There are historians in Korea that make claims such as these—one of the books is by the former vice-chancelor of Daejeon National University, while the others are by historian Oh Jae-seong—but such claims are not widely accepted within the Korean historical community (as the Korean consulate in Shanghai explained when those maps first became news in China in May of last year). In fact, Koreans are much more concerned with what many consider to be creative map-making in Chinese textbooks (both in the PRC and the ROC)—see here and here.
The above books are not Korean textbooks. If it’s an official textbook, it has the title “교과서”.
Anyway, it is sure to be eccentric people, including Koreans. I’m Korean and don’t know the territory images.
The map is from a book published by some marginal extremist group of ultra-nationalist amateur historians. Very few people in Korea (and nearly nobody in the professional community) would consider their wild claims seriously. Needless to say, nothing like it is to be found in Korean textbooks. There are some nationalist distortions in the textbooks, but on much, much smaller scale.
The second image, a book with a yellow cover, is of a book published in 2002 by a retired history professor. The poor-quality color maps (notice that the northern Japanese island of Hokkaido seems to be missing) may have been created by the author, Professor Lim. All of the other black-and-white images http://bbs.news.163.com/mil/968958,52.html ) circulating around Chinese websites are from several books or maps published by the same author, historian Oh Jaesung. The materials were published many years ago, not recently, and one of the images looks doctored.
They are NOT textbooks and the maps and views of history published in these books is scoffed at by mainstream historians …
教科书的真伪问题解决了，但Won Joon Choe先生在讨论中提出了一个很让人深思的问题，
Dr. Lankov and Sonagi,
As a Korean citizen who is unusually attached to his patria in this rootless age of ours, I appreciate that you two are doing a yeoman’s work in defending the sanity of the contemporary Korean historical consciousness. Nor am I surprised by your attempt to inject some perspective here, for you two are both among the most balanced and rational commenters in the Korean Blogsophere–where rationality is often an orphan. But I cannot in good conscience agree with the seeming thrust of your message.
Namely, I object to your seeming effort to simply dismiss these outrageous Korean historical claims on China as rantings of a lunatic fringe. There is a point at which a well-meaning defense transmogrifies into an unreflective apology that refuses to believe that Rome is indeed burning. May I be as bold as to even say, to reverse Burke’s elegant formula, sometimes our helper is our adversary? For instance, speaking from my own intellectual background in political philosophy, the one-sided apology of Nietzsche as purely an aesthete to counter the fascist accusations by Walter Kauffman (or the attempt to portray Leo Strauss as an ordinary “liberal” rather than the father of neoconservatism by his legion of defenders) have distorted Nietzsche as much as corrected pernicious misperceptions of him.
（Won Joon Choe先生在上面两段文字里说，Dr. Lankov和Sonagi是韩语博客圈里少数理性的人。他理解他们的好意，但他们把那几个韩国历史学家的观点评论为极端分子的狂嚎（rantings of a lunatic fringe），并对他们不屑一顾，这却有可能不利于大家对问题的理解。）
And likewise, the fact of the matter is this: There is a serious disconnect between the South Korean public historical consciousness and what most impartial scholars posit as Korean history. Moreover, much of that disconnect does involve the size and power of ancient Korean kingdoms of Gojoseon or Koguryo. While it is true that no textbook (as far as I know) claim that the Chinese heartland used to be Korean, such a belief is ubiquitous in the popular culture. I have certainly encountered numerous Korean students living abroad who believe it and blame Chinese chroniclers and their Korean sycophants for distorting the true Korean history.
In fact, as I have written elsewhere, such a view is the standard view among Korean television historical dramas. In “Yeon Gaesomun,” perhaps the most anticipated and costliest Korean historical drama of all-time, it is explicitly said that China was Korean land in the time of Gojoseon. And in the context of the drama, this is advanced as a historical fact, not fiction. Likewise, in an upcoming drama about Dangun, the putative mythic founder of Gojoseon, Dangun’s territory supposedly spanned from Tibet to Sakhalin. And online Korean historical fora are absolutely replete with a similar historical understanding.
So we do have a serious problem in the South Korean historical consciousness or imagination. And we don’t need Hegel nor Kojeve to tell us that, at least in East Asia, history often commingles with reality to produce an ugly brew between nations. So I propose that we talk about addressing this problem rather than intoning that it doesn’t exist.
Won Joon Choe先生这一大篇文字很有“众人皆醉我独醒”的味道。我很佩服他的清醒与深刻。