Goguryeo's sense of succession to Mahan.

 I read Jo Beop-jong, A Review of Goguryeo's Mahan Succession Epistemology, and Korean History Research 102 and wrote it in my own way. It may sound absurd, but to put it extremely, history is a "novel that makes sense."-_-;;------------------------------- Goguryeo's investment tends to be explained in connection with "Guidangseo," "Juseo," "Namsa," "Namsa," "Suseo," "Gudangseo," and "Sindangseo." On the other hand, Baekje seems to have a strong tendency to be mentioned in relation to Mahan (or Samhan). Although "Gudangseo" and "Sindangseo" were compiled after the 10th century, it would not be too wrong to assume that Goguryeo was recognized as almost irrelevant to Mahan by Chinese people before at least the 7th century. However, although there are no examples of referring to Goguryeo as Samhan in Suseo, Gudangseo, and Sindangseo, since Songsa, the perception of Hanwigoryeo has been specified. The idea of Goguryeo = Mahan was widespread not only in China, but also in the Unified Silla, the Later Three Kingdoms (excluding Hubaekje), and intellectuals of the Goryeo Dynasty. Choi Chi-won is likely to be the first suspect (?) to spread the theory of "Han-Jeok-Goryeo," but if Choi Chi-won is a groundless hit and run (sorry...)If you had played =), the idea of Goguryeo = Mahan could not have spread so widely to people at the time. Furthermore, given that the idea of responding to Mahan = Goguryeo, Jinjin = Silla, and Byeonhan = Baekje has been passed down since the early Three Kingdoms period, there must have been a plausible basis for linking Goguryeo and Mahan. First, let me quote the coin transfer of Huhanseo, which is frequently used by people, and the article in 69 and 70 of King Taejo of Goguryeo in Volume 15 of Samguksagi. In the fall of the first year of Geongwang, Goguryeo led thousands of cavalry from Mahan and Yemaek to surround Hyeondo Castle. King Buyeo sent his son Wigutae to lead 20,000 people, joined forces with the state military to subdue them, and beheaded about 500 prisoners. In December 1969, King Taejo led 10,000 cavalry of Mahan Yemaek and surrounded Hyeondo Castle. King Buyeo had his son Wigutae lead 20,000 soldiers, and when he joined forces with the soldiers of the Han Dynasty, Goguryeo troops were defeated. Recalling that the existence of the Yemaek people who participated in the battle of Hyeondo Province along with Mahan (not a specific political group...) is parallel, Mahan seems to be more natural than an independent political force that helped Goguryeo at the time. (If Goguryeo and Mahan could have contacted and Goguryeo could have embraced some of them within the ruling forces at this time, Mahan's scope of activity could be traced far north than conventional wisdom, but I think Professor Yoon Nae-hyun's claim to the Daedong River basin is very reasonable.) In other words, "Why did you have this record again?" Even considering that King Gwanggaeto designated his Sumyoho as a family of 220 Hanye, it seems reasonable to interpret Mahan and Yemaek as common nouns or pronouns indicating the history of the major members of Goguryeo. However, there is no clear trace in the epitaph of King Gwanggaeto that the Goguryeo people inherited Mahan, and (Ma) Han appeared only as a member of the state serving the king of Goguryeo, but anyway, it would have been only this much at the time.   However, as Goguryeo's geographical field of view expanded to Pyongyang, Goguryeo people's interest in Pyongyang as "the land of Seonin Wanggeom" and "the old land of Joseon where Nakranggun was installed" gradually emerged, and as mentioned in "Gudangseo", Goguryeo people provided Kagansin=Dangun? In particular, Goguryeo's intellectuals must have known that King Jun, the last king of Joseon, moved and passed down to Samhan, especially Mahan. And the political effects that could be gained by retrospecting their legitimacy to Mahan-Wiman-Reporter (to Dangun?) would have been self-evident. The annual implementation of national rituals for reporters (the Korea War of the New Dangseo) would have been a great mechanism to promote that Goguryeo itself is a civilized country on par with China. (Meanwhile, the motif of Dangun myth in the mural of Jangcheon No. 1 seems to prove to Goguryeo that the Goguryeo people had the notion of Dangun as their founder, and how the Goguryeo people established the relationship between Dangun and the reporter and how they tried to explain it is not yet sufficiently explained. Perhaps it is impossible to prove with the current data.) In short, what Goguryeo tried to inherit was the "orthodoxity" of Mahan, not the "old land" of Mahan. I have never seen an expression that Goguryeo inherited the "highland of Mahan" with my narrow knowledge, and if such a record was found, the story would have changed very much. However, the only thing that inherited Mahan's highlands only for public opinion was the record. The problem seems to be the position of Silla intellectuals who used Goguryeo's Mahan succession consciousness politically and conveniently. In other words, Silla, which established Bodeokguk in the Geumma area after the fall of Goguryeo, would have been able to complicate the ethnic composition of the occupied area by placing Goguryeo's residents on the old land of Baekje, and on the other hand, could have enjoyed the effect of Yi Jai. In order to secure the justification for such a policy, or to embrace Goguryeo residents inside the new state system, the so-called carrot (Hong Dang-mu)-_-;) Policy' would have been needed, and King Silla's grace, which recognizes Goguryeo's Joseon ritual as it is, would have been the best way for ancient people who value ancestral rites. Of course, the ultimate purpose would have been to once again confirm the legitimacy of Samhan Iltong to the residents of the occupied area by "returning" Goguryeo to Mahan's hometown.