Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-k7rjm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-01T22:33:01.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contested ethnicities and ancient homelands in northeast Chinese archaeology: the case of Koguryo and Puyo archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Yangjin Pak
Yangjin Pak*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, Ch'ungnam National University, Taejon 305–764, Republic of Korea yjpak@hanbat.chungnam.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In many countries of east Asia, archaeological knowledge is frequently used in the construction of ethnic histories, and the discipline of archaeology is often employed to emphasize ethnic and cultural identities (Fawcett 1995; Nelson 1995). It is thus important for archaeological research in this region to understand how archaeological knowledge is used in each country to establish national identity, to promote national solidarity, to delineate various ethnic groups and to proclaim ancestral territories, cultural antiquity and unbroken cultural and ethnic continuity.

Keywords

People's Republic of ChinaNorth KoreaSouth KoreaKoguryoPuyoarchaeology & politics

Information

Type
Special section
Information
Antiquity , Volume 73 , Issue 281 , September 1999 , pp. 613 - 618
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Falkenhausen, L. von. 1995. The regionalist paradigm in Chinese archaeology, in Kohl, & Fawcett, (ed.): 198–217.Google Scholar
Fawcett, C. 1995. Nationalism and postwar Japanese archaeology, in Kohl, & Fawcett, (ed.): 232–46.Google Scholar
Institute of Archaeology. 1996. Shuangtuoziyu Gangshang. Beijing: Science Press. (In Chinese.)Google Scholar
Institute of History. 1979. A comprehensive history of Korea 2: Ancient times. Pyongyang: Science & Encyclopedia Press. (In Korean.)Google Scholar
Institute of History. 1991a. A comprehensive history of Korea 2: Ancient times. Revised edition. Pyongyang: Science & Encyclopedia Press. (In Korean.)Google Scholar
Institute of History. 1991b. A comprehensive history of Korea 3: Medieval times — Koguryo. Revised edition. Pyongyang: Science & Encyclopedia Press. (In Korean.)Google Scholar
Jilin Institute of Cultural Relics & Archaeology. 1987. Yushu Laoheshen. Beijing: Cultural Relics Press. (In Chinese.)Google Scholar
Lee, Chirin & Kang, Insuk. 1976. A study of Koguryo history. P’yongyang, Social Science Press. (In Korean.)Google Scholar
Liu, Jingwen & Pang, Zhiguo. 1986. A discussion of the ethnic attribution of Laoheshen burials in Yushu, Jilin, Beifang Wenwu 1986.1: 22–7. (In Chinese.)Google Scholar
Kohl, P.L. & Fawcett, C.. 1995. Nationalism, politics and the practice of archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Murowchick, R.E. 1997. The state of Sino-foreign collaborative archaeology in China, Orientations 28(6) : 26–33.Google Scholar
Nelson, S.M. 1995. The politics of ethnicity in prehistoric Korea, in Kohl, & Fawcett, (ed.): 218–31.Google Scholar
Pak, Yangjin. 1998. Ethnic attribution and a comparative study of archaeological remains of Puyo and Xianbei, Journal of the Korean Archaeological Society 39: 27–52. (In Korean, with an English abstract.)Google Scholar
Sino-Korean, Team (Cho-Chung Kongdong Kogohak Palguldae). 1966. Excavation report of archaeological remains in northeast China 1963–1965. P’yongyang: Academy of Social Science Press. (In Korean.)Google Scholar