Muyeol of Silla

Charles. Thank you for your comments. I edited the article based upon your recommendation.

Comment by Charles on October 28th, 2009 at 9:40 pm

The remark that Muyeol based his centralized government on a Japanese legal code (ritsuryo) is questionable, since the only centralized Japanese state at the time was the Yamato state/empire, which was closely aligned with Baekje, not Silla. It is unlikely (and the article cites no source to justify this point) that a Silla king would have based his legal code on that of a nation who was a rival to his own nation, nor is it likely that a Yamato legal code (if ritsuryo even existed at the time) would have so impressed the king that he would revise his own nation’s legal code (which was older and had more traditional roots) in favor of a much less respected one. It is recommended that this particular point (that King Muyeol based his legal code on ritsuryo) either be sourced (to a reliable, objective print source, preferably) or removed as unsupported.

Comment by Charles on October 28th, 2009 at 9:44 pm

Indeed, further research would indicate that the pre-modern Japanese legal code of ritsuryo was not codified or written down and collected/centralized until the second half of the 7th century, some time after King Muyeol took the throne and possibly after he died in 661 AD. Therefore it is almost impossible that he could have revitalized and reformed his government using a foreign (indeed, a rival) legal code that did not, for all intents and purposes, exist until after his reign. It is therefore prudent to remove the remark (i.e. that King Muyeol based his government on the Japanese code of ritsuryo), as it is patently false.

Comment by Daryl Jeffries on May 18th, 2011 at 10:58 am

There is an error in the second paragraph of this article. Kim Chunchu did not succeed Queen Seondeok of Silla to become King Muyeol of Silla. He succeeded the her cousin Queen Jindeok in AD 654.

Comment by Jennifer Tanabe on May 31st, 2011 at 4:24 pm

Thank you for pointing out that error. The article has been revised appropriately.

Leave a Reply

return to top