Once again we see the state as a source of contention between groups of people.
The term Imna (or Mimana) is one term used to describe the Japanese held territories of the Korean peninsula from the late 100’s to the late 500’s.
The version of this understood in Japan is that the Japanese controlled and ruled over the southern parts of Korea in the distant past. The idea is that Korea was once a part of Japan and this was used to justify several invasions and occupations of Korea by the Japanese Empire.
The territory that was known as Imna was eventually conquered by the Silla Kingdom during the Three kingdoms period in Korea. These three kingdoms were occasionally at war with Japan and when united, were invaded several more times as a united state on the Korean peninsula.
The Korean narrative outright rejects this claim that the Japanese had any right to control Korea or her people.
The problem with Modern State Narratives
The trouble with these two narratives is that they were both created to establish and sustain legitimacy of rule for each state and governing body. The Japanese state has a clear objective when maintaining the idea that Korea was once a Japanese province. They also claim that the emperor and people of Japan share a common ancestry and these two underpin the case for the Japanese State’s rule of Korea. While the Governing body of Korea rejects the idea that Japan has any claim to rule because that would be in direct conflict with the interests of the Korean states.
During the early to mid 20th century, and several other times throughout history the Japanese Imperial House used the idea that the Japanese and Koreans came from common ancestry to establish legitimacy in their Imperial conquest of the Korean Peninsula. They also used a similar logic in their other territorial expansions. And although this idea, (Hakko Ichido) _The eight corners of the world under one roof_ was used to justify a unity between the peoples of the world under the power of the Japanese emperor, it is also a prime example of Empire building propaganda.
But why are these two points so difficult to bring together? If we have one side which pushes a particular narrative hard and the other one which outright rejects it, how are we to understand the historic reality of events?
Well, we need to pick this apart a bit and see who the interested parties are and then the evidence that we have before us.
Three Kingdoms an Empire and a Myriad of City States
The primary antagonists in this situation are the Governments of Japan and of North and South Korea. The states themselves are not people and they have not existed long enough to have had any particular relation to the politics of the early 1st to 6th century. The states of Japan, N. Korea and S. Korea are all products of the 20th century. These are three governments that came about as a result of war and devastation. In the distant past, the people of the Korean peninsula were conquered by the rulers of Silla, Baejke and Goguryeo with remaining territory being controlled more decentralized in the Gaya confederacy. Silla conquered the southern end of the peninsula and eventually the entire peninsula was brought to submit under the rule of a state known as Goryeo. This state was overthrown by Joseon and they in turn were overthrown by the Japanese.
Now the Gaya confederacy as it is sometimes known, was independent from Silla, Baekje and Goguryeo and consisted of many smaller city states that were independent cells that formed the confederacy.
Imna is the collective term that refers to the territories that paid tribute and were identified as being subject to the Yamat Court during the 2nd century to the late 7th century CE. It is highly probable that much of the Gaya Confederacy would have made up the various provinces of Imna but this may not be all. The rulers of provinces of Imna may have also existed within the borders of Baekje and Silla as well as islands off the coast and throughout the Sea of Japan.
Who were the people? Japareans? Korapanese?
The relationship between people in the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago during this period was intermixed. It is well established that large populations of people from the Peninsula moved into the islands during this period and prior. This is not only attested to in the historical records but also in the DNA of Japanese and Korean people. The wealthy people and families of the regions would have had access to and kept in communication with each other whether on the peninsula or in the archipelago. Some of these provinces were likely owned and administered to, by people who lived or had lineage in the Japanese archipelago. The same is true that the provinces of the Japanese archipelago were ruled by people who had ancestry in the Korean Peninsula (Such as the Yamato Clan).
The Decentralized People of Korea and Japan.
Where the propaganda goes a miss is that the Mimana is often misrepresented as a homogenous political entity that was dominated by the Yamato Court while in reality, this is highly unlikely. The power of the Yamato Court could not hold such a tight grip on territory so far away, especially considering that Silla and Baekje could not easily force them into submission given their close proximity.
The Nihongi
The main text that supports the idea of Mimana is the Nihongi, a history of the Imperial House of Japan from its mythical foundation. The text lists several different names for Mimana and more often than not identifies the regions and provinces of Mimana rather than as a homogenous territory.
Each province of Mimana or Imna or Kaya (there are many names for it) had a ruler or governor who was able to negotiate with the Yamato court and because of the great distances between their territories, only needed to offer up tributes and envoys to appease the Yamato Imperial government. The relationships between the rulers of Mimana territories and the Yamato court fluctuated greatly over time. These territories engaged in diplomacy and relation with their neighbors independently from Yamato on many occasions.
To Conclude and to settle Disputes.
Ultimately it was not the power of the Yamato that controlled the people of Mimana but the wave of domination from Silla and Baekje that dominated the people of Mimana.
The authority and legitimacy of Japanese claims of rulership over the Southern Korean Peninsula let alone the Northern half are illegitimate. This may seem as if I am ruling in favor of the Korean kingdoms and states but the modern states of Korea have no more legitimacy to govern the people of the Korean Peninsula than the Japanese do. The people of the Korean Peninsula, like all people, have natural rights to self-ownership and to live and thrive in a world, unbound by the fetters of having others control their lives.
In Credible Discourse 