Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- ljwrites:research:unforgotten_sisters:start [2025/04/02 16:28] – Elaborated dubious claims, integrated with Cheomseongdae claims ljwrites
+++ ljwrites:research:unforgotten_sisters:start [2025/04/02 23:15] (current) – Minor edits, more on Cheomseongdae records ljwrites
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
   * Method of observation from Cheomseongdae
-The problem with most of these claims are, at base, that they are not found in historical records of Seondeok and Cheomseongdae found mainly in the *Samguk Sagi* (三國史記, History of the Three Kingdoms) and *Samguk Yusa* (三國遺事, Stories from the Three Kingdoms).
+The problem with most of these claims are, at base, that they are not found in the known historical records from books such as the *Samguk Sagi* (三國史記, History of the Three Kingdoms) and *Samguk Yusa* (三國遺事, Stories from the Three Kingdoms).
 Some of the problems are elaborated in more detail below:
-## Claimed year of birth
+### Claimed year of birth
-Seondeok's years of rule and death are recorded (r. 632-647, d. 647), but no birth year is found on record.
+Seondeok's years of rule and death are in the known historical record (r. 632-647, d. 647), but her birth year is not.
-Yet the Cosmos Magazine article states: "She was born in 610 CE," while the Seondeok chapter of *Unforgotten Sisters* makes two conflicting claims in marking her birth year correctly in the title as unknown and then, just a few lines down near the beginning of the text, claiming her birth year as 610 AD.
+Yet the Cosmos Magazine article states that "She was born in 610 CE," while the Seondeok chapter of *Unforgotten Sisters* makes two conflicting claims in marking her birth year correctly in the title as unknown and then, just a few lines down near the beginning of the text, claiming her birth year as 610 AD.
-## Peony seed anecdote
+### Peony seed anecdote
 The Cosmos Magazine article states:
@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 As far as I know, however, no historical record on Cheomseongdae goes into this level of detail about the background of its construction. The first record on Cheomseongdae is the following line in the *Samguk Yusa:*
-> 別記云是王代鍊石築瞻星臺 (A separate record states that it was in the King's [Seondeok's] time that stone was shaped to build Cheomseongdae.)
+> 別記云是王代鍊石築瞻星臺 (A separate record states that it was in this King[ Seondeok]'s time that stone was shaped to build Cheomseongdae.)
 - 三國遺事 記異卷第一 善德王知幾三事 (Stories from the Three Kingdoms, Extraordinary Events Book 1, Three Episodes of King Seondeok's Foreknowledge) [Hangul translation](https://db.history.go.kr/ancient/level.do?levelId=sy_001r_0020_0330_0010) / [Scan of original record](https://db.history.go.kr/common/imageViewer.do?levelId=sy_001r_0020_0010_0010)
+Later records do not go into much more detail than the year of construction, either.
+There is some disagreement between records on when it was built, but they generally agree it was during Seondeok's time.
 ### The method of observation from Cheomseongdae
@@ Line 61: / Line 64: @@
 > According to the historical accounts, when astronomers were observing in Sonduk’s tower, they laid on their back and watched the celestial objects through four domes on the top, arranged in a square and oriented towards the four cardinal points.
-This would be remarkable if true because there is no such historical account to my knowledge, and to the knowledge of many scholars over the centuries who have speculated on how the Cheomseongdae was used for observation of the heavens.
+This would be remarkable if true because there is no such historical account to my knowledge, and to the knowledge of many scholars over the centuries who have speculated on how the Cheomseongdae was used for observation.
-In fact there is dispute in the Korean historical and archaeological communities over whether the building was used for astronomical observation at all, though I do not expect most outside a very specific niche of expertise to know about this disagreement.
+In fact there is dispute in the Korean historical and archaeological communities over whether the building was used for astronomical observation at all, though I do not expect most outside a very specific niche of expertise to know about this controversy.
-If Bernardi can present a historical record in support of this assertion, of course, it would be a remarkable find.
+If Bernardi can present a historical record in support of her assertion, of course, it would be a remarkable find.
 However, I personally could find no such record myself and could not trace it to any of her cited sources I could access.
@@ Line 75: / Line 78: @@
 This book (hereinafter "*Women of Korea*") was cited in the bibliography of *Unforgotten Sisters* and I read the parts relevant to Seondeok as a possible source for the unusual claims made by Bernardi.
 However, *Women of Korea* does not go beyond the known historical information on Seondeok and I could not find any mention of details unique to *Unforgotten Sisters* such as her passion for astronomy or having a Tang ambassador as a tutor.
-See [[wok_transcript]] for the transcribed contents of these pages.
+See [[wok_transcript]] for the transcribed contents of this book pertaining to Seondeok.
 ### Sŏndŏk: Princess of the Moon and Stars
@@ Line 81: / Line 84: @@
   * Sheri Holman, Sŏndŏk: Princess of the Moon and Stars (2002)
-Not directly cited in *Unforgotten Sisters* and found by independent search, this middle-grade novel (hereinafter "*Princess of the Moon and Stars*") has many striking similarities with the assertions about Seondeok that I could not trace to any historical source.
+Not directly cited in *Unforgotten Sisters* or the Cosmos Magazine article and found by independent search, this middle-grade novel (hereinafter "*Princess of the Moon and Stars*") has many striking similarities with the assertions about Seondeok that I could not trace to any historical source.
 There are even passages with very similar wording.
 See [[poms_comparison]].
-Interestingly, Bernardi's assertion that an astronomer using Cheomseongdae laid on their back and watched the heavens through four domes is one of the few claims that cannot be traced to Holman's *Princess of the Moon and Stars* because Holman states in the epilogue:
+Interestingly, Bernardi's assertion that an astronomer using Cheomseongdae laid on their back and watched the heavens through four domes is one of the few dubious claims that cannot be traced to Holman's *Princess of the Moon and Stars,* with Holman stating in the epilogue:
 > It is almost certain that a wooden platform made the tower even higher, but modern scientists are not absolutely sure as to how the tower was used. It is shrouded in mystery. (p. 161)
@@ Line 94: / Line 97: @@
 ### Other sources
-I have looked through four other sources in the *Unforgotten Sisters* bibliography that might be relevant to Seondeok and that I had library access to, mostly biographical dictionaries of astronomers and scientists.
+I looked through four other sources in the *Unforgotten Sisters* bibliography that might be relevant to Seondeok and that I had library access to, mostly biographical dictionaries of astronomers and scientists.
-I could not find any mention of her, however.
+I could not find any mention of her in these books, however.
+I also looked through all the working links in the Web section of the bibliography and could not find Seondeok mentioned in any of them, either.
 ## Tentative conclusions
-  * Almost all the dubious claims about Seondeok not found in the recorded history appear to be drawn uncited and uncredited from the novel *Princess of the Moon and Stars.*
+  * Almost all the dubious claims about Seondeok not found in the recorded history appear to be drawn uncited and uncredited from the novel *Princess of the Moon and Stars.* Other assertions with unclear factual support need either better sourcing or retraction.
-  * The chapter in *Unforgotten Sisters* and the Cosmos Magazine article should be retracted or corrected to remove the fictional material.
+  * The Seondeok chapter in *Unforgotten Sisters* and the Cosmos Magazine article based on it should be retracted or corrected to remove the fictional material.
-  * If the chapter and article are left as they are, they should be marked or otherwise notified as largely fictional, and Ms. Holman's permission should be sought for the use of details she originated, with appropriate credit. She may also be due some form of apology, acknowledgement, and recompense.
+  * If the chapter and article are left as they are, they should be marked or otherwise notified as largely fictional, and Ms. Holman's permission should be sought for the use, with appropriate credit, of fictional details she originated. She may also be due some form of apology, acknowledgement, and recompense.
-  * There are other assertions with dubious support, such as the purported method of using the Cheomseongdae for observation, that need better sourcing.