Korea’s technological progress in the Bronze Age brought with it social stratification and the subordination of weaker tribes by stronger tribes.  Tribes became larger and more centralized, eventually bringing about the Three Kingdoms of Paekche, Koguryǒ, and Silla.  The kingdoms were brought together under the Koryǒ monarchy, which transitioned into the Chosǒn.  Becoming the two states of North and South Korea after the end of Japanese occupation. 

 

The kingdoms had their similarities and differences within conflicts and foreign relations.  Even from the early Kingdoms, Korea’s culture and politics has been influenced by China.  The kingdoms developed strict aristocracies, with Buddhism, Confucianism, and later Protestantism for social harmony and governance legitimization.  Governance which became a compromise between meritocracy and aristocracy through examination and privileges.  At times, monarchs became figureheads.  

 

The Korean states maintained their sovereignty through a balance of power between them, and other neighboring states.  But were often a tributary state, a colony of another power such as China, Mongolia, Manchuria, or Japan.  Preserving their identity while being subordinate. 

 

The economic burden of societies tended to be placed on the lower classes, the farmers.  When there was more extraction from farmers, the economy suffered, which sparked rebellions.  The socioeconomic situation improved when the lower classes were not under dire pressure, and were supported by knowledge and innovation.  The political and economic tension persisted into the two states of North and South Korea.  Both had authoritarian regimes, but while North Korea was influenced by Russia to pursue economic self-sufficiency, South Korea was influenced by the United States to pursue economic integration into a global economy.  North Korea’s economy initially fared better than South Korea’s, but South Korea flourished due to globalization, while North Korea suffered through a lack of needed support. 

 

This book can be difficult to read, as a lot of diverse details are provided in quick succession.  There is often a lack of explanations for events other than the details of what happened, with poor transitions between events.  The informational organization when describing contemporaneous Korean states can make it difficult to understand what information effects what state.  The difficulty of reading the book was alleviated when the author was describing shorter time horizons, with fewer political states.

 

As a book on Korea, the author favors interpreting information to favor Korea.  A present but not major bias, is the representation of Korea as more victim and others as perpetrators, while limiting information on Korea’s aggressions.