KJC Korea
Journal Central

In this paper, the change of the capital city castle defense system by the process of Musin(戊申)-Revolt is examined, along with the unification of the military power for royal authority reinforcement by King Yeongjo and the decentralization issue, which involved a change in the military strategy book. Specifically, in the process of the Musin(戊申)-Revolt, the background of the enforcement of cavalrymen in connection with the city wall defense system was investigated in depth by analyzing the form of the royal forces’ organization for suppressing rebellion and the form of the strategy used at the time. The publishing of the military book is examined, which involved an interrelationship between the royal forces and Ouije(五衛制), the military system that was formerly part of the Joseon Dynasty. For example, in the change of the defense system for the capital city castle Samgunmun(三軍門), the evidence suggests that the transformation led to the establishment of the Yonghoyoung(龍虎營), which was the palace guard for confronting rebellion. Additionally, whether the strong military takeover by Ouije(五衛制) had an effect on the change of the military training in the King Yeongjo period is analyzed with respect to the republishing of 『Jinbup(陣法), 『Byeongjangdosul(兵將圖說), and 『Sogbyeongjangdosul (續兵將圖說). The findings suggest that the settlement of the restoration of the former period in the Joseon Ouije(五衛制) was directly connected to the reinforcement of the cavalry for King Yeongjo.

In this paper, the history of the resistance of the Korean people against Japanese colonial dominance is studied in terms of the history of ideology, and the perspective of those who considered what kind of nation could be constructed after liberation is examined as well. Theorists who represented the national movement deeply thought about what the form of the new state should be and finally suggested the diverse principles of State Establishment after the 8․15 liberation. The concept of the Coalition for New Democracy was a theory of State Establishment proposed by Baek Nam-Woon, who was a middle-left centrist politician and theorist at that time. To reveal his idea of a new form of Chosun to the world, he coined the term the Coalition for New Democracy. Having examined all kinds of existing forms of democracy, including liberal democracy, social democracy, proletarian democracy, Eastern Europe's people's democracy, and Mao Zedong's New Democracy, Baek Nam-Woon clearly declared that all such systems of democracy could not be applied to Chosun. The Coalition for New Democracy was a principle of State Establishment against 「August These」s advocated by Jaegunpa Choson Kongsan-tang(Korean Communist Party). In April of 1946, the Coalition for New Democracy was revealed to the world long after 「August Theses」 was established. The logic was that critical intervention would inevitably be needed, refuting the bourgeois-democratic revolution propagated by 「August Theses」, while Baek Nam- Woon advocated at the same time his principle of State Establishment, which opposed the revolutionary route of the Korean Communist Party. In the proceeding paper, I indicated that the Coalition for New Democracy was entirely different from 「August Theses」 and the other principles of State Establishment; I did not totally describe the differences. Therefore, I have tried to analyze the Coalition for New Democracy in depth in this paper, delving into the other side of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, for which Baek Nam-Woon did not make a distinction. In conclusion, I have pointed out three differences between the Coalition for New Democracy and 「August Theses」. First, the Coalition for New Democracy was based on Marxism, but it did not set up the communist community as an ultimate purpose of state establishment. Second, the Coalition for New Democracy did not prioritize the proletarian originality, and there was not any argument of proletarian hegemony. Third, the Coalition for New Democracy intentionally attempted to construct a classless, united nation-state, accomplishing both national liberation and social liberation simultaneously.

In this paper, we analyzed five volumes of North Korean "World History" textbooks published from the 1950s to the early 2000s. We examined the structure and composition of the textbooks according to the times. Through this, we have learned what kind of changes in the history of the textbooks related to the modern history of the East Asian countries that are close to North Korea such as China, Mongolia and Japan. The characteristics of the five modern North Korean "History of World History" textbooks published from 1954 to 2002 are as follows. First, all the chapters, starting at the beginning or end of the verse, are from the teachings of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il. Secondly, the North Korean history textbook thoroughly describes the system and contents according to the historical development law based on Marx's dialectical materialism, and explains the development process of world history based on the lawfulness of such historical development. Third, to inspire the class struggle consciousness or the revolutionary consciousness, the contents of the textbooks are described as opposed to the ruling class (feudalism rule, landlords, and capitalists) and the pebble class (people, public, etc.). Fourth, it emphasizes the anti-imperialist struggle of the popular masses.

This paper looks at how the story of Ding Zhi Chun Qiu has changed in comparison with the historical background of the Three Kingdoms (三國志). The paper comes to the following three conclusions.: First, Ding Zhi Chun Qiu does stress Liu Bei as a descendant of the Han dynasty. Secondly, Liu Bei is described as an incarnation of humanity and justice, rather than as an example of political betrayal. Third, Liu Bei has been transformed into a supporting player to complement main characters such as Guan Yu and Zhuge Liang.

This study examined the approach of studies relating to the “contact zone”, or boundary, in the ancient history of Korea; the study grasped future tasks and the direction of investigation of this ancient history. There have been previous studies on this contact zone in the ancient history of Korea; some academic articles use the phrase “contact zone” in their titles, while others mention it in their tables of contents or their contents. There are also studies that do not use the term “contact zone” but which regard it in a similar critical way. The contact zone in the ancient history of Korea largely means the boundary between states. The subjects of investigation are addressed with a focus on such problems as the sphere of influence or the border line. Therefore, we focused on areas in which territorial wars occurred in an intensive way among the ancient Three States or on areas in which military conflicts with Chinese dynasties occurred. For the most part, the border was approached as a concept of a military demarcation line related to the belongingness of the territory. But a problem has recently been raised as to boundaries between states in ancient times, and people have begun to take notice of the historical meaning of the borderland. Therefore, some suggest that the border should be reinterpreted as a composite space in which heterogeneous cultures met and fused rather than as an area of military conflicts. The concept of the contact zone has still not been established in the ancient history of Korea. The establishment of what the contact zone actually was should precede attempts to understand it. There is also a need to set the category of the borderland. And based on this understanding, there is a further need to develop a concrete understanding of the function or historical meaning of the ancient border. There is also a need to study the specific actual situation in the contact zone, that is, the contact zone community, and to extend related study to the internal border as well as the external border.

This study's purpose was to investigate the theory of the “contact zone”. Based on the academic understanding of the contact zone, related references were checked to apply to various historical cases. During the Joseon Dynasty period (mainly toward the end) and the colonial era, cultural phenomena such as encounter, conflict, and compromise were selected for examination in the present study. The contact zone, according to M. L. Pratt, refers to relationships with different cultures created by imperial control as well as the spaces of transformation. This zone is the place in which interaction happens between rulers and prisoners. Pratt aimed to pay attention to transculturation, which creates its own culture by using the ruler's culture. In the contact zone, multiplicative phenomena occurred, including every kind of cultural phenomenon. Therefore, this study examined research into the Joseon period as well as modern and contemporary history, choosing the port of Weagwan, the Jeju-do society, and Korean-Chinese society. Weagwan was a trade port of the Joseon era where the Japanese settled and had contact. Thus, it was a place of sociocultural change in the Joseon period, providing a good case in which to study the theory of the contact zone. Voluntary immigration occurred due to such factors as an anti-Japanese movement, poverty, and political immigration in response to the Japanese government in general. Also, in the process of the invasion of the continent by the empire of Japan, the Japanese were implanted, Russians moved in and out, and East Asians as well lived in this area. In the modern and contemporary history of Korea, the best case in which to study the contact zone is Korean-Chinese society. When the People's Republic of China was formed, it established its own sociocultural identity as a country. From the end of the 1980s to the present period, the living culture of Korean-Chinese people as well as the Korean lifestyle have experienced manifold social changes. Jeju-do is also a valuable place in which to study this kind of change from the Joseon period to the modern and contemporary period. Jeju-do is very different from the Korean Peninsula with respect to its geographical feature of being like an island as well as its language and customs. The Joseon Dynasty created a cultural revolution in Jeju-do, as it became a colony and eventually became part of the Republic of Korea. The Korean government promoted its own lifestyle as a standard, while at the same time trying to suppress lifestyles that did not satisfy its own criteria. Jeju-do people not only did not cooperate with this reformation, but they also resisted, trying to retain their its own characteristics. Reforming the lifestyle in Jeju-do was object of the governing power, yet since the 1970s, the Republic of Korea has begun to create Jejo-do tourist attractions. In the final analysis, the theory of the contact zone is a tool by which to analyze the modern imperial society and also to apply to the history of Korea. It has a particularly important meaning in improving the study of the Joseon period as well as the modern and contemporary area of the borderline.

This article proposes the history of contact zone as a resolution to overcome the current historical disputes between nation states about their borders and frontiers. Prof. Mary Louise Pratt has coined the theory of contact zone to describe the cultural interplay and hybridity that would occur in borderlands where different races, nations, and believers live together. Applying her theory to the methodology of historical research opens a new possibility to focus on the history of contact zone itself rather than of a border or frontier of a territorial state. The history of contact zone covers these three broad categories: 1) the contact zone of various races and nations embracing their cultures inside a state; 2) the contact zone between states; 3) a state that is situated in the contact zone between superpowers. As a sound example, I introduce the study of Roman limes of which European scholars from different countries are undertaking together in sharing the concept that the limes was neither a border nor frontier of the empire, but a borderland where the Roman culture was blended equally and evenly with indigenous cultures. Thus, using the term Romanisation to explain the cultural change in the borderlands has become a controversial topic among the scholars, especially the archaeologists of Roman Britain, who prefer acculturation, creolisation, discrepant identity, or globalisation to Romanisation. The history of the Roman empire is indeed the histories of those European countries. I also suggest that the kingdom of Armenia between Rome and Persia as another good example of the history of contact zone that falls into the third category. Given the current international relations strained by the closed nationalism of Russia, China, Japan, and the States, I expect the history of contact zone could reconcile their different and biased views stemmed from their historical background of imperialism.