KJCKorea
Journal Central

This article explores the conceptual history of Silhak (實學) in pre-modern Korea. This study identifies the following as the key contexts for understanding the meaning of Silhak found in pre-modern Korean literature: the acceptance of Neo-Confucianism (道學); the exposition of the classics in the civil service examination (講經); Sage Learning (聖學) for the monarch; substantive governance (實政) and political pragmatism (務實); the practical application of statecraft (經世) and its extension to utility of industry. Through these contexts, the paper reconstructs the specific conceptual environment of pre-modern Silhak. Finally, it attempts a comparative understanding of the pre-modern concept by describing the Silhak of the modern period, following the implementation of new education. Ultimately, the research confirms that the modern conventional viewpoint―which posits an opposition between Dohak and Silhak imposed by the modern academic conceptualization of Silhak―is not present in the historical context where the meaning of Silhak, as a general pre-modern concept, originally emerged.

This study comparatively analyzes Hanseongsunbo (漢城旬報), a newspaper published by the Joseon government in the 1880s, and Saminpilji (士民必 知), a textbook compiled by the American missionary Homer B. Hulbert in the 1890s, to examine the circulation of modern world geographical information during Joseon’s Port-Opening Period. These two works are key sources that reveal the content, level, and developmental trajectory of the world geographical information that the Joseon government sought to establish from the 1880s to the 1890s. The analysis reveals that both sources share a fundamental framework of modern geographical knowledge, including the spherical shape of the Earth, heliocentrism, and the concept of five continents. However, they exhibit distinct differences in the specifics of their delivery. Hanseongsunbo is characterized by an argumentative narrative style that presents vast amounts of new information to persuade the reader. In contrast, Saminpilji treats this knowledge as established common sense and summarizes it concisely. This suggests that the knowledge accumulated during the Hanseongsunbo period laid the foundation for its systematization and diffusion during the Saminpilji period. A fundamental difference is particularly evident in their perspectives on continents and nations. Reflecting the struggles of contemporary Asia, Hanseongsunbo strongly projects the viewpoint of a less powerful nation, expressing a sympathetic perspective on Native Americans and the colonial situation in Africa. Furthermore, it provides an in-depth treatment of a few Western powers directly tied to Joseon’s contemporary diplomatic realities, such as treaty partners and nations involved in the Sino-French War. Saminpilji, in contrast, reflects the perspective of its American author, Hulbert, by ranking the world’s nations based on the standard of “benevolent governance” and emphasizing the American principle of non-interference. It also expands its scope to cover countries worldwide, thereby adopting the format of a more systematic geography textbook. Through this comparison, this study reveals that prior to the systematic geographical information provided by Saminpilji, detailed and in-depth global information had already been circulated via Hanseongsunbo. This is significant as it demonstrates the continuous efforts of the Joseon government during the Port-Opening Period to proactively collect, process, and disseminate global information, thereby independently building a foundation for modern world knowledge.

In the late nineteenth century, a group of translators composed of Western missionaries and Chinese intellectuals produced Taesosinsaramyo, a translation of The 19th Century: A History, originally published in Britain. This translation project required them to bridge the deep conceptual gap between Western political thought and Confucian political philosophy. The translators had to identify resources within the Confucian tradition that could accommodate Western ideas and reorganize them in a coherent manner. Most elements of Western liberalism were omitted, as liberalism shared few meaningful points of contact with Confucian political thought. By contrast, the translators identified affinities between Western democracy and the Confucian idea of minbon (people-oriented governance). Universal suffrage—central to Western democracy—was reframed in minbon terms as a mechanism for reflecting public sentiment and enabling bottom-up communication. Conversely, the minbon concept itself was transformed by incorporating concrete institutional mechanisms and historical practices drawn from democratic systems. The translators also recast the liberalism― absolutism conflict in The 19th Century as a struggle between minbon and anti-minbon forces, and they labeled political systems that realized minbon principles as “democratic.” Their work intertwined democracy with minbon, altering the meaning of democracy as it was received by Confucian intellectuals, while minbon underwent a parallel transformation through its association with specific democratic institutions (such as elections) and political forms (“democracy”).