WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions /

2013 WHC

Page  Page 2 of 11:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next »  
Author Solivagant
Registered
#16 | Posted: 25 Sep 2011 14:16 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Further to the above I have re-discovered this report on what happened to the DPRK soccer team!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/7918468/North-Korean-footba ll-team-shamed-in-six-hour-public-inquiry-over-World-Cup.html

So I hope the WHC accepts Kaesong when it comes forward again - it would be terrible to think of all those who had worked towards its inscription being paraded and accused of "failing in the revolutionary struggle" - or worse!

Mind you the England manager faces similar opprobrium when he (regularly!) fails and I think some newspapers would like to go further!!

Author winterkjm
Registered
#17 | Posted: 27 Sep 2011 15:25 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Concerning North Korea's likely nomination for 2013, but going somewhat off topic.

*Analyzing the North Korean regimes view on world heritage and future effects unification may have on Korea's world heritage program.

I hope Korea unifies soon for a multitude of reasons. One benifit (besides the obvious ones) would be the archeological research that would be done in North Korea. There are 10 WHS in South Korea and 1 in North Korea, this is not because there are no cultural or natural sites of worth in the North. There are two reasons, first, because the regime cannot afford to carry out mutiple massive archeological and/or restoration projects similar to South Korea, and more importantly they would not carry out massive projects when they see little benifit to the regime. North Korea has made certain aspects of their heritage a priority, particularly Goguryeo history in and around Pyongyang.

The Goryeo dynasty emerged as a dynasty following in the tradition of Goguryeo, indeed many of the aristocracy of Goryeo were made up of descendants of Gogryeo and Balhae. This explains North Korea's persistance in their attempt to inscribe the Historic Monuments and Sites in Kaesong (Goryeo capital) However, much of the other history has been ignored particularly Joseon and Silla sites whose capitals were both in South Korea.

Another important dynasty that does have some remains in the far north regions of North Korea is the Balhae dynasty. Remains of the Balhae kingdom, also a proclaimed succesor of Goguryeo have been found in China and Russia as well.

China (located in Jilin province)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Tombs_at_Longtou_Mountain

Joint Excavation Russia and South Korea
Russia (located in Primorsky Krai)
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/art/2011/03/148_32837.html

http://www.medievalarchives.com/2010/09/21/russian-and-south-korean-archeologists-une arth-two-rooms-of-palace-of-balhae-kingdom

Russia (located in Krashino)
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2011/03/198_52671.html

North Korea views Goguyeo strictly as their history, and Balhae and Goryeo as a continuation of that kingdom. Therefore, North Korea's lack of WHS could partially be attributed to its narrow inclusion of history to that of these 3 kingdoms. North Korea's tentative list only includes natural sites or historical sites directly related to the Goguryeo and or Goryeo dynasties. (Joseon or Silla are never mentioned) During Unified Silla all of North Korea was part of the dynasty, moreover the same is true during the Joseon dynasty. There are many historic sites and archeological remains that are not known well (or at all) by the international community based solely on the inaccesibility of North Korea.

Author Solivagant
Registered
#18 | Posted: 28 Sep 2011 05:56 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Hi winterkjm
Interesting to be reminded of the "Korean" background to parts of the Russian Far East. One of my more esoteric "travel interests" is to try to understand how "all" of the World's frontiers came about!!

Now Russia of course has a 20 mile frontier with DPRK acquired by the Treaty of Peking in 1859 when China gave in on the Ussuri frontier further north. There was a major incident in 1939 when the Japanese tried to take some of this land from the Soviets on the basis that the Treaty of Beijing had been misinterpreted and/or that frontier markers had been moved - but were repulsed.

As far as I know only China ceded land to Russia (not Korea) so presumably this must have been the de facto/de jure "frontier" between China and Korea at the time. But do you know how and when this had become the former Sino-Korean frontier??

I have just been reading Isabella Bird's "Korea and her Neighbours" describing her visit to Korea before/during and after the Japanese invasion during the Sino-Japanese war which resulted of course in Korea gaining complete "independence" from Chinese suzerainty (even if it later led to Japanese colonisation of Korea, without it it is possible I guess that Korea could have found itself in the same position today as Tibet and Sinkiang, neither which managed to fully escape Chinese control before the 1949 revolution - unlike Outer Mongolia!). Have you read it?? It is available as an e-book. I wasn't aware just how subservient to China Korea was right up until 1895.

So - how and when did the northern/North Eastern frontier between China and Korea get established along the Yalu/Tumen rivers?

Author winterkjm
Registered
#19 | Posted: 28 Sep 2011 08:44 | Edited by: winterkjm 
I am aware of Isabella Bird and her account of Korea, I have only read parts of her book. Very interesting account, her western interpretation of East Asia was very influential. Unfortunately she arrived in Korea in a time of absolute crisis. By 1898 Japan had nearly seized control of the country. Japan's wish of Korea breaking all ties to China and declaring itself independent had already occured in 1897. For Japan to annex Korea it needed Korea to break all historic ties to China. Nevertheless, Korea's ties to the Qing were tenous and fragile from their inception in 1644, I will come back to this point.

Since many foreigners only arrived in Korea at this time of crisis there were numerous misinterpretations of Korea that last even to this day. Such as Korea has "always" been the "shrimp between the two whales". Another common misconception is that Korea is a blend of Chinese and Japanese culture/civilization. Korea certainly has been heavily influenced from ancient China, less so from Japan. During the 1890's Korea was in a desperate situation, King Gojong sought assisance from Russia, China, and even the United States in its attempt to keep Japan at bay. Gojong sent Homer Herbert an American missionary and friend to the US on his behalf. (check the Homer Herbert connection) So at the end Gojong also asked the Qing to protect/assist them from the Japanese, as (Ming) China had during times of peril, such as the Imjin War. He tried to claim greater allegiance to (Qing) China than had ever existed to prevent Japan from taking control of the country.

Korea has pretty much always been independent of China, for much of the their history Korea was considered an enlightened neighbor whose King only had to acknowledge the Chinese Emperor as the "Son of Heaven" and offer tribute. Ming China and Joseon were particularly close, I would argue more so than any other Korean and Chinese dynasty. The Ming came to great aid to Joseon during the Imjin war when Joseon was threatened by Hideoyoshi's invasion. However, this relationship completely changed when the Ming Dynasty ended in the early/mid 17th century. To Joseon the Qing were barbarians who usurped the great civilization. Joseon viewed Qing (China) as uprooting the entire East Asian world. Joseon now only saw themselves as the bastion of that civilization, and looked only inward. Not long after the Ming collapsed (even with some support by Joseon troops) the Qing sought to re-establish the tributary system to an even greater extent than Ming China. This led to war as the Joseon dynasty would not accept Qing as a legitimate succesor, which led to a Qing army being sent to force Joseon to accept this relationship (which eventually did occur). For really the first time around 1644 Korea was now forced to accept a strong unwelcomed foreign influence, though Korea was still laregly independent. Check the history of Namhansanseong fortress, which is very central to this period. Qing laid seige to Nahansanseong for over a month in order to force the Korean King to submit.

For Korea, following the Imjin War and Manchu invasions began the long decline of the Joseon dynasty. Though there was still somewhat of a Joseon enlightenment later, the decline eventually led to the crisis during King Gojong's reign and Japanese colonization. Before these two major crisis in the early 17th century the old order of East Asia was very much well-established. China as the eldest brother, Korea as the middle brother, and Japan as the youngest brother. Before this time Korea's influence on Japan was far greather than any influence Japan held in Korea. In fact, Korea still often wrongly refered to the Japanese as barbarians and/or pirates. This came as a suprise to samurai invading Korea in the late 16th century who now saw themselves as the superior civilization.

I don't think a situation similar to Tibet would have occured in Korea. If you look at any Qing dynasty maps Tibet is a part of China, even if the Tibetans do not accept it. Qing maps nor Korean ones ever included Korea as part of China, this would be a transgression of the world order as they saw themselves. China throughout its history saw Korea as a ally, tributary nation, protectorate, a liability, a threat, etc but never really as part of the same nation. Particularly the Ming saw Korea as having a perhaps more established confucian system than even China, with Joseon scholars and aristocracy heavily focused on Confucian principles in governance.

Moving on from the history and approaching your question. "So - how and when did the northern/North Eastern frontier between China and Korea get established?"

Well during the Joseon dynasty the Yalu river was the well-established border between China. For the Northeast frontier the Tuman River was the border. From what I looked up there were only minor changes of the original Joseon border from the Empire of Korea period to the end of the Korean War. Most of these changes, like you mentioned were attempted by Japan.

When you finish reading Isabela Bird's account, I would reccomend Homer Hulbert's accounts of Korea. I think more than any other westerner of the time he understood Korea, and lacked a pronounced bias seen in other Western accounts. He spent over 20 years in Korea, travelled the entire country, wrote and spoke Korean fluently and knew King Gojong on a personal level. He even wrote a newspaper in Korean! He was an advocate of Korea, and spoke out against Japan about the illegal nature of their actions against Korea. It is almost like Homer Hulbert is from another time, it does not seem like he is from the 19th and early 20th century. His understanding of East Asia is so much more advanced then most Westerners who viewed East Asia as "exotic and backward" and were often perplexed by what they observed in Korea and China.

Author winterkjm
Registered
#20 | Posted: 29 Sep 2011 23:07 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Atikaki/Woodland Caribou/Accord First Nations (Pimachiowin Aki) looks to submit their application in 2012 in time for inscription in 2013.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/environmental-scientists-join-bid-to-pro tect-part-of-boreal-forest/article2185825/

Following the earlier article about Red Bay, 2013 might be a strong year for the Canadian World Heritage program.

Red Bay - cultural
Pimachiowin Aki - mixed

Author winterkjm
Registered
#21 | Posted: 11 Oct 2011 14:29 
winterkjm:
Japan
Cultural - Kamakura, Home of the Samurai
Natural - Mt. Fuji


I assumed wrongly that Mt. Fuji is a natural nomination. Actually Japan is seeking to inscribe it as a cultural site.

This latest article discusses Japan's sites being nominated for 2013, and includes details about Mt. Fuji as a cultural nomination.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/perspectives/news/20111011p2a00m0na004000c.html

Author winterkjm
Registered
#22 | Posted: 25 Oct 2011 04:43 
Two Russian nominations for 2013.

"Bulgar will be introduced as a historical-architectural complex. Sviyazhsk will be introduced in the nomination "Culture and nature landscape."

http://eng.tatar-inform.ru/news/2011/05/30/36458/

Author winterkjm
Registered
#23 | Posted: 15 Nov 2011 22:28 
Canada is going all out for their 2013 nomination. Though it seems much of the funding of the site hinges on its bid success or failure.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/33106-25-million-fund-grand-pre

Author elsslots
Admin
#24 | Posted: 16 Dec 2011 11:48 
Teylers Museum in Haarlem (Dutch Tentative List) has been put forward by the Dutch government, aiming at inclusion in 2013.

http://www.parool.nl/parool/nl/22/KUNST/article/detail/3080120/2011/12/16/Teylers-Mus eum-voorgedragen-voor-Werelderfgoedlijst.dhtml

Author elsslots
Admin
#25 | Posted: 18 Dec 2011 03:28 
India might go for the Great Himalayan National Park in 2013, although the news item is not very clear about its status among other potential Indian nominees.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Great-Himalayan-National-Park-may-get-World-heritag e-tag/889083/

Author winterkjm
Registered
#26 | Posted: 3 Jan 2012 06:29 
A good summary of Japan's current plan concerning world heritage.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120101c7.html

Author winterkjm
Registered
#27 | Posted: 18 Jan 2012 23:01 
More info on Canada's mixed nomination for 2013. Collaborating with 5 First Nation Tribes and the provincial government, the nomination is an incredible 4,000 pg document! I think this one is almost guranteed sucess in 2013.

Pimachiowin Aki

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/01/18/mb-unesco-heritage-site-borea l-manitoba.html

Author Khuft
Registered
#28 | Posted: 21 Jan 2012 07:24 
Chauvet Cave and Bourgogne vineyards are to be nominated by France for 2013:

http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2012/01/21/97001-20120121FILWWW00290-unesco-la-grot te-chauvet-proposee.php

Author Durian
Registered
#29 | Posted: 21 Jan 2012 08:23 
Khuft:
Chauvet Cave and Bourgogne vineyards are to be nominated by France for 2013:


Wow! we are gonna see Italian Piedmont and French Champange and Bourgogne vineyards nomination papers try to explain to us how OUV they are in 2012 and 2013. 3 vineyard in just 2-3 years, amazing.

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#30 | Posted: 22 Jan 2012 11:31 
I was just looking at the Burgundy website the other day with a colleague who is big on wine. He liked the idea until I said about St. Emilion, Douro, Tokaj..... that had already been listed. I'm not going to grumble about visiting another lovely set of European vineyards and sampling their output, but I do wonder how many examples the list can handle.

I didn't realise Chauvet was on the T-list, again there are already lots of European caves, but I think this one is a little special. I managed to catch Werner Herzog's 'Cave of Forgotten Dreams' in 3-D last year. It is rather lovely and about the closest most of us will ever get to seeing inside.

Page  Page 2 of 11:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next » 
WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions / 2013 WHC Top

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message

 

 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®