2016, Vol., No.100

The most valuable Treasure

Kim,JaeChang | 2016, (100) | pp.1~10 | number of Cited : 0

PDF

Research Trend and Prospect of the Na-Tang Wa

Yi Sanghun | 2016, (100) | pp.11~38 | number of Cited : 9

PDF

Gyeongsang - do During Mongol Invasion of Korea

YOON, YONGHYUK | 2016, (100) | pp.39~66 | number of Cited : 6

PDF

Retrospect and Prospect of Studies on the Imjin War

KyeoungLok Kim | 2016, (100) | pp.67~118 | number of Cited : 22

PDF

The point of this paper is retrospect of studies on the Imjin War(壬辰倭亂) and prospect. Studies on the Imjin War conducted in Korea, China and Japan have made progress in many aspects, but the hard truth is the three countries have different perspectives on the same historic event. So, This paper will arrange a product of history’s study in Korea, China and Japan. The formation runs thus. Before the war: Background, causes and so on, course of the war : strategy, battle, navy, admiral Yi Sun-shin(李舜臣), send a Ming army(明軍派兵), righteous armies(義兵), monk soldiers(僧兵), logistics(軍需), Negotiations and truce(講和交涉), society·economy(社會·經濟) and so on, postwar : hangwae(降倭), Joseon captives(被虜人), cultural exchange(文化交流), person(人物), woman(女性), textbook(敎科書), literature(文學), recognition and description of future generations and so on, research trend of history in China and Japan, and I wish to suggest the direction of research. The 1592-98 Imjin War was sixteenth century Asia's biggest international conflict and a war that set the tone for relations between the three major combatants, Korea, China and Japan. It seems to be geopolitical destiny that the people living on the Korean Peninsula for several centuries had to endure the tragedy of war again and again. The brutality of the Japanese invasion, at the end of the 16th century, not only sowed the seeds of bitter resentment and hostility toward the Japanese, but also made the memory of war grow deep roots in the consciousness of the Korean people. Korea's studies of the war, on the other hand, have been focused on a mental perspective such as how to overcome the war, roles of army raised in the name of justice and key figures, and effects of the war on Korea. Taking into both of the two different perspectives account should be the way studies on the Imjin War are conducted. To this end, researching and studies on many aspects are required. These aspects should include the following; First, Korea's studies have to collect, classify, and statistical readjustment at original documents and monuments in Imjin War historical materials. Second, the war should be looked into from history of international relations, East Asia's perspective to understand that the warcaused conflicts of cultures and brought changes as well as it took place when cultures were exchanged through the seas. Third, objective terms need to be defined for the studies depending on the view of whether to see it as an invasion of Japanese raiders or a war between two countries. Fourth, Korea's studies need access political and diplomatic history. Fifth, Korea's further studies are needed to determine unification and multiculturalism and have to overcome the limitations of national history. Sixth, That should correct interpretation and understanding of the times and historical material. Furthermore, <Military history(軍史)> have to collecting paper and supporting academic activity in military history's aspect.

The Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War: A Perspective of Korean Studies on International War Occurred in the Korean Peninsula

Suh Young-hee | 2016, (100) | pp.119~146 | number of Cited : 5

PDF

The Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War became the center of interest in the international academia, in that they resulted in the colonization of the Korean Peninsula, and brought about upheaval in the dynamics of imperial powers as well as in international situation in Northeast Asia. Meanwhile, interests and research achievements in Korean Studies are inactive compared to international academia, although they occurred in the Korean Peninsula and had an enormous impact on the fate of the Korean Peninsula. Because Korea was not the belligerent country for two wars, there was lack of interest in the whole story for the outbreak of war and the decision-making process for war, and the Korean Peninsula was viewed as the target in the war between imperial powers, and tended to be perceived as dependent variable. However, I believe that more intensive research is needed for the attitudes and policy-making of Korean government and political powers about the progress of war, military movement, residents' damages, and social economy in the damaged district. Recent research trends in Korean Studies on The Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War include research on the outbreak of the war from the perspective of international politics or political and diplomatic history, research from the perspective of the history of war or the military history, and research on the context of social history showing the misery and damage of war from individual experiences. In case of research on the Sino-Japanese War, a fundamental shift in viewpoint is needed from that Chosun escaped from the tributary state of the Qing Empire by the Japanese victory to that it triggered the establishment of the Great Han Empire and the declaration of sovereign independence. Research method is required to grasp the whole aspect in relation to the progress of Donghak Peasant War and Kabo Reform. The Russo-Japanese War was characteristic of an international war, in that the target of war was extended from the Korean Peninsula to Manchuria, where the interests of imperial powers were centered on. From the perspective of military history, the battles in the Korean Peninsula were very limited. Nonetheless, we need to pay more attention in further study, in that each and all forces in the Great Han Empire were involved in the war directly or indirectly, and took sides with either Japan or Russia, which showed the pioneering mode in national political cleavage under the rule of Japanese imperialism.

Korean Racial Movement in Russia and Yoo Jin-ryoul

Park, Hwan | 2016, (100) | pp.147~188 | number of Cited : 1

PDF

Yoo Jin-ryoul, whose Russian name is Yugai Nikolai Petrovich, attracts attention as a publisher of Daedong-Kongbo and Daeyang-Bo, which represent Korean press in the Maritime Province in Russia in the Late Period of Joseon. Yoo Jin-ryoul was born in Gyeongheung in North Hamgyeong Province, Korea, in 1875. He moved to Russia and lived in Agimi, which is a border area. According to remaining records in Korea, Yoo Jin-ryoul seems to have worked as a Russian interpreter in Joseon from the early stage. It is interesting that Yoo Jin-ryoul submitted several times to The Independent, published by the Independence Club, in Vladivostok. You can see the status of Yoo Jin-ryoul back then from lots of writings of his that were published seven times on the front page of The Indenpendence. As well, he is also estimated to have been a figure deeply interested in enlightenment, autonomy, civil rights, etc. pursued by the Independence Club. It is estimated that Yoo Jin-ryoul came to be involved in Daedong-Kongbo because of closeness to Choi Jai-hyung as Haejo Shinmun was discontinued and Choi Jai-hyung acquired Daedong-Kongbo. When Haejo Shinmun was discontinued, Yoo Jin-ryoul initiated with 35 others including Cha Seok-bo and Mun Chang-beom to develop fundraising for reissuance of the newspaper. He held a general meeting of stockholders at Daedong-Kongbo Company, and was elected a publisher when executives were selected. Daedong-Kongbo, for which Yoo Jin-ryoul was a pubilsher, is known to be related to the movement of Ahn Jung-keun in a certain way. Ahn Jung-keun developed activities of an army raised in the cause of justice in Russia, and was a member of Dong-eui-hoe whose chairman was Choi Jai-hyung, the president at Daedong-Kongbo Company. The group for assassination of Ito Hiro-bumi was organized on 10 October 1909 when Yoo Jin-ryoul, Jung Jae-kwan, Lee Kang, Yoon Il-byung, Jeong Soon-man, Woo Duk-soon, etc. gathered in the office of Daedong-Kongbo Company. In conclusion, Yoo Jin-ryoul was a Korean with the nationality of Russia and the thought for enlightenment. He is estimated to have recognized that education was important for Joseon to be enlightened and civilized and to have contributed to the development of Korean press in Russia as a part of that. That is, he can be viewed as a Korean modern racial movement activist with the nationality of Russia who have recognized that the enlightening movement for the Joseon people was desperately necessary more than anything else.

Contemporary Historiography on the Second World War

Nam Gyun Kim | 2016, (100) | pp.189~228 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

The peace in the post war world did not last long. The world was immediately trapped into terror of the Cold War between the West and the East. The Cold War situation naturally left a deep ideological impact upon the historical interpretation of the Second World War. In the West, many historians thought the Second World War was an ‘unnecessary war’ because it would not have been inevitable if the Western political leaders had wisely responded to Adolf Hitler’s aggression. The unnecessary war was thought to benefit the Soviet Union, which rose up as a great power and consequently initiated the Cold War. From this perspective, the Western political leaders were criticized for appeasing Hitler to initiate the Second World War and , regarding the reason of the Allies‘ victory, the industrial and economic power of the Western countries, especially the United States, was evaluated as the major factor in defeating the Axis powers. Concerning the issue of war responsibility, the Nazi leaders and Japanese militarists were considered to have fair trials at the war crimes tribunals. With the opening of the archives of Russia and Eastern European countries after the Cold War ended in the 1990s, however, conventional interpretation of the Second World War was strongly challenged. New materials discovered from the archives of the former communist countries provided contradictory evidence against the conventional interpretation about the Second World War. The history of the Second World War was required to be rewritten and reinterpreted. New interpretation of the Second World War in the post-Cold War era verifies the imperial ambition of the Germany ignited by Adolf Hitler as the major cause of the war. Along with Hitler, the historical experience of the First World War and its impact on the European and German societies have also been reevaluated regarding cause of the Second World War. Explaining the Allies’ victory, new interpretations emphasize the role of the Russian military forces in defeating the German forces in the Second World War. The critical turning points in the war were made in the eastern front rather than in the western front or in the Pacific. Because conquering Russia was the major war aim for Hitler, he deployed more forces in the East than in the West. He expected to get an easy victory in Russia. But he faced miserable defeats in the East against the formidable Russian forces, especially in Kursk, Stalingrad, and Moscow. The Allies’ victory was won because of the turning points made in the East. On the issue of the war crimes trials, new interpretations challenge the conventional one. The war crimes trials were not interpreted as effective in cultivating the ethics of responsibility in the defeated societies. The defeated countries did not voluntarily take any ethical responsibility about the war. In addition, more importantly, new interpretations based on recently opened materials show that the Allies also committed war crimes too. Stalin killed several millions of innocent civilians, who had nothing to do with the war, which is as many as Hitler did. Stalin’s massacre of civilians occurred in the regions between Russia and Germany, which were termed “Bloodlands” by Timothy Snyder. The justice of the war crimes tribunals therefore has been seriously questioned. Conclusively speaking, conventional interpretation of the Second World War seems to lose its ground against new interpretations in the post Cold War era. However, it is still very hard to define the decisive trend in the recent historical writings about the Second World War because there are still many various interpretations depending on ideology, race, nation and other factors about the war. As John Keegan predicts, it will not be easy to see a well-balanced interpretation of the Second World War in the near future. Maybe we need to wait another 100 years to read that kind of book.

War in the Interpretation of the War in Korea (1950–53)

Kim Myongsob | 2016, (100) | pp.229~260 | number of Cited : 1

PDF

Why the Vietnam War matters to South Korean Military?

KyuDok Hong | 2016, (100) | pp.261~302 | number of Cited : 3

PDF

The Study on the change of U. S. Congress‘ perspective for the Carter Administration’s U. S. Troops withdrawal policy from the ROK

Kwan Haeng Cho | 2016, (100) | pp.303~332 | number of Cited : 1

PDF

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the change in the perspective of U. S. Congress for the Carter Administration’s U. S. Troops withdrawal policy from the ROK through Korean diplomatic documents. Carter’s U. S. troops withdrawal decision was a unilateral policy by the administration. Without substantial consultation with Congress, Carter administration decided to withdraw U. S. ground forces in South Korea. Carter’s U. S. Troops withdrawal from the ROK was released through the PD-12. After releasing the PD-12, various committees in Congress, including public hearings and testimony, showed that problems are related to the withdrawal of U. S. ground forces. Through the testimony from Major General John K. Singlaub in USFK at the House Armed Services Committee about North Korea Military evaluation on May 25, 1977 in the U. S. Congress, the congress began to have an interest in accurate evaluation of North Korea military. After the testimony of Singlaub, in Congress, the discussions against U. S. Troops withdrawal from the ROK began to be raised. On june 16, 1977, the Senate adopted the Byrd resolutions that had to be performed in consultation with the U. S. Congress on administration's withdrawal policy. After the resolution was submitted, opinion against the withdrawal policy began to expand. After all, Congress initially expressed opposition to the plan for the U. S. Troops withdrawal policy of Carter administration through this resolution. In Conclusion, this study analyzed the change of U. S. congress’ perspective through the testimony of Singlaub in the U. S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee and the Concurrent Resolution of the U. S. Senate about the withdrawal of U. S. troops from Korea. After those processes, U. S. administration had to seek the understanding and cooperation of the U. S. Congress about the withdrawal policy in the subsequent processes.

KJCKorea
Journal Central

military history 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.94

2016, Vol., No.100