User Tools

Site Tools

You are here: Writeout Wiki » L.J.'s pages » Research » Unforgotten Sisters investigation
ljwrites:research:unforgotten_sisters:start

Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
ljwrites:research:unforgotten_sisters:start [2025/04/07 11:57] – More details in Princess of the Moon and Stars citation, fixed header formatting ljwritesljwrites:research:unforgotten_sisters:start [2025/04/22 16:07] (current) – Moved part of conclusion to body of text ljwrites
Line 32: Line 32:
 Some of the problems are elaborated in more detail below: Some of the problems are elaborated in more detail below:
  
-### Claimed year of birth+### Year of birth
  
 Seondeok's years of rule and death are in the known historical record (r. 632-647, d. 647), but her birth year is not. 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 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. 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.
 +
 +I could not find any source for this claim of 610 CE for the year Seondeok was born, and it seems implausible given the known historical record:
 +For one thing, the Silla-era historical record *Hwarang Segi* (花郞世記) claims Seondeok's father Jinpyeong was born in 567 CE, meaning that having Seondeok in 610 CE would have made him a first-time father at the age of 43.
 +This is not impossible, certainly, but somewhat unlikely.
 +
 +Even if we disregard Jinpyeong's birth year in the *Hwarang Segi,* and there is some reason to do so because its authenticity as a record is in dispute, there are indications in the historical record that lead us to believe Seondeok took the throne as a mature woman in her 40s or even 50s rather than at 22:
 +
 +For one, When she was elevated as her father's successor to the throne she was given the title 聖祖皇姑, which means "Imperial elder lady of the holy bloodline" with 姑 in particular connoting a female elder.
 +
 +> 王薨, 無子, 國人立德曼, 上號聖祖皇姑. (When the king died without a son, the people of the country raised Deokman [Seondeok's name as a princess] to the throne and dedicated to her the title of Imperial Elder Lady of the Holy Bloodline.)
 + 
 +- 三國史記 卷第五 新羅本記第五 善德王 善德王立 (*Samguk Sagi* Book 5: Fifth Record of Silla, King Seondeok, King Seondeok takes the throne) [Hangul translation](https://db.history.go.kr/ancient/level.do?levelId=sg_005r_0020_0010) / [Scan of original record](https://db.history.go.kr/common/imageViewer.do?levelId=sg_005r_0020_0010)
 +
 +For another, in the extremely sexist editorial commentary from the 12th century when the *Samguk Sagi* was put together, the king is described as an elderly woman when she started her reign:
 +
 +> 豈可許姥嫗出閨房, 斷國家之政事乎. (How could they permit an old woman to leave the women's chambers to decide matters of state?)
 + 
 +- 三國史記 卷第五 新羅本記第五 善德王 論曰 (*Samguk Sagi* Book 5: Fifth Record of Silla, King Seondeok, In discussion) [Hangul translation](https://db.history.go.kr/ancient/level.do?levelId=sg_005r_0020_0480) / [Scan of original record](https://db.history.go.kr/common/imageViewer.do?levelId=sg_005r_0020_0480)
 +
 +While, again, this commentary is very misogynistic, the sexism does not require describing a young woman as an old one:
 +Rather, it seems likely that the king would have been berated as a callow and silly girl instead if she had taken the throne as a young woman of 22.((This discussion of Seondeok's age when she became king is drawn from Park Hyun-Sook, *A reconsideration of the formation process and meaning of 'Three affairs that already known by Queen Seondeok' in 「Samguk yusa」*, 韓國史學報 No. 86 (2022) pp. 14-15.))
  
 ### Claimed age of 15 during events ### Claimed age of 15 during events
Line 48: Line 69:
 Her age during those events is another claim which also has no basis in any historical record I could find. Her age during those events is another claim which also has no basis in any historical record I could find.
  
-### Claimed age during peony seed anecdote+### Peony seed anecdote taking place at seven years of age
  
 The Cosmos Magazine article states: The Cosmos Magazine article states:
Line 70: Line 91:
  
 Later records do not go into much more detail than the year of construction, either. Later records do not go into much more detail than the year of construction, either.
-There is some disagreement between later records on when it was built, with 15th century *Sejong Silok Jiriji* (世宗實錄地理志, Geographical Records in the Chronicles of King Sejong) stating it to have been built in 633 CE and the 18th century *Jeungbo Munheon Bigo* (增補文獻備考, Notes on Expanded and Supplemented Texts) claiming 647 CE, but both years fall within Seondeok's years of reign from 632 to 647.+There is some disagreement between later records on when it was built, with the 15th-century *Sejong Silok Jiriji* (世宗實錄地理志, Geographical Records in the Chronicles of King Sejong) stating it to have been built in 633 CE and the 18th-century *Jeungbo Munheon Bigo* (增補文獻備考, Notes on Expanded and Supplemented Texts) claiming 647 CE, but both years fall within Seondeok's years of reign from 632 to 647.
  
 ### The method of observation from Cheomseongdae ### The method of observation from Cheomseongdae
Line 111: Line 132:
  
 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. 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.
 +
 +#### Note on citations in the book
 +
 +Overall *Unforgotten Sisters* suffered from inadequate citations, having only a bibliography for the entire book without pinpoint citations, footnotes, or endnotes. 
 +The vague citations made it difficult to match ideas and information to sources. 
 +Though understandable that a work of popular science would not have the same citation standards as a full academic work, at the very least chapter-level bibliographies would have made for better attribution and sourcing.
  
 ### Sŏndŏk: Princess of the Moon and Stars ### Sŏndŏk: Princess of the Moon and Stars
Line 139: Line 166:
 #### Two dubious claims contradicted by Princess of the Moon and Stars #### Two dubious claims contradicted by Princess of the Moon and Stars
  
-Despite the extensive parallels between most of  dubious claims and Holman's novel, two such claims cannot be traced to the novel and are directly contradicted by it, either in the fictional body of the work or the historical notes in the epilogue.+Despite the extensive parallels between most of the dubious Seondeok/Cheomseongdae claims and Holman's novel, two such claims cannot be traced to the novel and are directly contradicted by it, either in the fictional body of the work or the historical notes in the epilogue.
  
-##### Claimed year of birth+##### Year of birth
  
-At the start of *Princess of the Moon and Stars,* the princess is 14 years old in the 16th year of her father Jinpyeong's reign (p. 8; year of the entry on p. 6--it states "16th day of King Chinp'yŏng" in the second dateline after the day of the month, but this is almost certainly a typographical error because the second lines of all other entry datelines read "16th year of King Chinp'yŏng").  +At the start of *Princess of the Moon and Stars,* the princess is 14 years old in the 16th year of her father Jinpyeong's reign (p. 8; year of the entry on p. 6 reading "16th day of King Chinp'yŏng" in the second dateline after the day and month, but this is almost certainly a typographical error because the second lines of all other entry datelines read "16th year of King Chinp'yŏng").  
-This places her year of birth in the very plausible second year of Jinpyeong's reign (581 CE), directly contradicting Bernardi's claimed birth year of 610 CE for the princess.  +This places her year of birth in the somewhat plausible second year of Jinpyeong's reign (581 CE), depending on his own birth year.  
-As seen in the comparison chart above, however, the claim that events like the beginning of Lin Fang's tutelage took place when she was 15 years old is another close, if not exact, parallel.+581 CE, at any rate, directly contradicts Bernardi's claimed birth year of 610 CE for the princess.  
 +As seen in the comparison chart above, however, despite the disparity in birth years the claim that events like the beginning of Lin Fang's tutelage and solar eclipse prediction took place when she was 15 years old is another close, if not exact, parallel.
  
 ##### Method of observation from Cheomseongdae ##### Method of observation from Cheomseongdae
Line 156: Line 184:
 I am unsure about the strength of the wooden platform hypothesis, but at any rate this directly contradicts Bernardi's account.  I am unsure about the strength of the wooden platform hypothesis, but at any rate this directly contradicts Bernardi's account. 
 Furthermore, the acknowledgement of uncertainty over the specific mode of Cheomseongdae's usage is a much better-supported statement than a claim of historical records documenting a specific method, because no such record exists to the best of my knowledge. Furthermore, the acknowledgement of uncertainty over the specific mode of Cheomseongdae's usage is a much better-supported statement than a claim of historical records documenting a specific method, because no such record exists to the best of my knowledge.
 +
 +### Encyclopedia.com entry and its sources
 +
 +Though not a source directly cited in *Unforgotten Sisters,* the [Encyclopedia.com entry for Sondok](https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/sondok) makes similar claims that parallel lore from *Princess of the Moon and Stars.*
 +Encyclopedia.com's own sources for this, in turn, include a now-defunct Pacific University page authored by Jennie Ngoc Vu discussing how the princess left messages in an ancestral jar for her grandmother.
 +Other pages used as sources for the Encyclopedia.com entry, including [Sondok/Sonduk's entry](http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/heroine7.html) of the Women in World History Curriculum website and [Sondok's page](https://royalwomen.tripod.com/id17.html) of the Women of Royalty website, show possible influences by *Princess of the Moon and Stars* in dating the peony seed anecdote to when she was seven years old and, in the Women of Royalty page, listing events very similar to those in the novel.
 +
 +Judging by the access dates on the online sources, the Encyclopedia.com entry was evidently written in 2004 after the publication of *Princess of the Moon and Stars* and predating *Unforgotten Sisters* by over a decade.
 +It seems plausible that these sources had time to percolate into scholarship as legitimate historical sources at first glance, especially where multiple sources agreed.
  
 ## Findings and conclusions ## Findings and conclusions
Line 176: Line 213:
 ### Tentative conclusions ### Tentative conclusions
  
-  * Almost all the dubious claims about Seondeok not found in the recorded history appear to be drawn uncited and uncredited from Holman's *Princess of the Moon and Stars,* or to have been influenced by it.+  * Unless some alternate non-fiction source can be presented, almost all Bernardi's dubious claims about Seondeok and one about Cheomseongdae appear to originate from Holman's *Princess of the Moon and Stars* or to have been influenced by the novel. Further points in this conclusion proceed on this assumption, which I believe has enough support to stand until and unless Bernardi can present an adequate alternate source.
   * Other assertions with unclear factual support need to be sourced better or retracted.   * Other assertions with unclear factual support need to be sourced better or retracted.
-  * The Seondeok chapter in *Unforgotten Sisters* and the Cosmos Magazine article based on it should be retracted, or heavily corrected to remove the fictional material. +  * The Seondeok chapter in *Unforgotten Sisters* and the Cosmos Magazine article based on it should be retracted or heavily 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, with appropriate credit, of fictional details she originated. She may also be due some form of apology, acknowledgement, and amends.+  * If the chapter and article are left in their current state, 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 amends. 
 +  * Ideally, all live outlets purporting to be non-fictional sources on Seondeok, such as Encyclopedia.com, would be contacted to make corrections. I am focusing specifically on the *Unforgotten Sisters* chapter because it is newer than these other sources and should be held to higher standards in vetting its sources as a publication from a major scholarly/nonfiction publishing house,
ljwrites/research/unforgotten_sisters/start.1743994675.txt.gz · Last modified: 2025/04/07 11:57 by ljwrites