Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T13:28:38.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Outline History of Korean Confucianism: Part I: The Early Period and Yi Factionalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Key P. Yang  and
Gregory Henderson
Get access

Extract

The Confucian system of thought, society, and government has a long JL history in Korea. Knowledge of some of its forms can be traced in the earliest days of our real knowledge of the peninsula. For many centuries, its influence on Korea was continuous but not pervasive. With the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, however, its influence on government and society began to be decisive and, especially from the sixteenth century on, it dominated almost completely the thought and philosophy of the peninsula, continuing to do so until the opening of the present century. So closely were Confucianism and Korea intertwined during this latter long period, that Korean history cannot be understood without Confucianism while the study of Confucianism itself will be greatly enriched by resort to its Korean experience.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , November 1958 , pp. 81 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The thesis that Lolang was a Han colony has been almost universally accepted in China, Japan, and elsewhere. Some Korean scholars have opposed this view, claiming that Han influence was merely cultural. For arguments see: Chŏng In-bo, ”Chŏngmu-ron” [“An Hypothesis to Correct the False”], Chosŏn-sa yŏngu [Studies in Korean History](Seoul, 1946), II, 371-377; and Sin Ch'ae-ho, Chosŏn-sa yŏngu-ch'o [Some Studies in Korean History](Seoul: Yŏnhak-sa, 1946).

The authors wish to acknowledge their gratitude to a number of Korean and American scholars in the Korean field but especially to Professor Yi Pyeng Do, Dean of the Graduate School, Seoul National University and revered historian of Korea, and Mr. Warren W. Smith, Jr. of Caracas, Venezuela, for particularly extensive and helpful corrections and comments. Mistakes in fact and interpretation are the authors' alone. We are acutely conscious that these are probably many and can only hope that this modest beginning will encourage others to go further in the broad fields here so briefly touched on.

2 Umehara Sueji and Fujita Ryōsaku, Chōsen kobunka sōkan [Survey of Ancient Korean Culture](Kyoto, 1948), XI, PI. 8, beautifully illustrates and describes the painted basket.

3 Conversation with Kim Wŏn-yong of Seoul National Museum, 1956. See also Sekino Tadashi, Rakurō gun jidai no iseki (Tokyo, 1925), PI. 215.

4 Nihon shoki, 10 (Ōjin Tennō) cited in Chōsen-shi, Nihon shiryō (Seoul, 1932), I, No. 2, p. 56; Kojiki, 2, on Ōjin Tennō, cited pp. 57-58. Yi Pyeng Do suggests 365 for the Nihon shokf date, Sansom in Japan, A Short Cultural History, p. 66, places it in 405. The Tōyō rekjishi daijiten under ”Senjimon,” moreover suggests that in its present form, the Ch'ien-tzu-wen could not have been written before 502 and, if introduced to Korea or Japan at all before that date, must have been so in a previous and no longer existent version.

5 Kim T'ae-jun, Chosŏn hanmun haksa [History of Chinese Literature in Korea](Seoul, 1931), p. 18 cites the San-kuo-chih and the Chin-shu in support of this theory.

6 Samguk sagi [The History of the Three Kingdoms], Korea's earliest surviving history, by Kim Pu-sik (1075–1151), Ch. 18, Sec. 6.

7 Suematsu Yasukazu, Shiragi shi no shomondai [Various Problems in the History of Silla](Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko, 1954), Part 5, pp. 207 ff., makes a careful study of this date and concludes that it may be as late as 520.

8 Hyŏn Sang-yun, Chosŏn yuhak-sa [History of Korean Confucianism](Seoul, 1949), pp. 67-68. See also Samguk sagi, Ch. 8, Sec. 8.

9 Yen Keng-wang, ”Hsin-lo liu T'ang hsüeh sheng yu seng t'u” [”Silla Students and Buddhist Priests Studying in T'ang China”], in Tung Tso-pin, Chung-Han wen-hua lun-chi [Studies in Sino-Korean Cultural Relations](Taipei, 1955), I, 67-98.

10 Suematsu, pp. 461-465, and English summary, p. 28.

11 Idu, formerly called hyangch'al, is the phonetic use of Chinese characters to represent native Korean place names, surnames, reign names, and, eventually, auxiliary verbs and connectives. There is some evidence that Sol Ch'ong systematized rather than invented idu since it seems to have been known to Korean scholarly circles in earlier times. Samguk sagi, Ch. 46, does not mention Sŏl Ch'ong as having invented idu. For more detail see Kim Yun-gyŏng”, Hangup munja kŭp ŏhak-sa [History of Korean Letters and Language](Seoul, 1946), pp. 57-78.

12 For text see Chosŏn sŭngmu chehyŏn munsŏn [Anthology of Worlds of Korean Sages](Seoul, 1925). pp. 1-2.

13 According to the Samguk sagi, Ch. 46, Sec. 6.

14 Yen Keng-wang (n. 9) , pp. 70-73.

15 Suematsu, pp. 450-460 cites the inscriptions on the back of a pair of stone Buddhas at Kamsan Temple dated 719 and 720 as showing in the detailed description of the spiritual career of the man who erected them ”how a mixture of Buddhism and Taoism interpenetrated the lives and ideas of the upper classes.”

16 See the biographies of Ch'oe Ch'ung in the Koryŏ-sa and in the Chōsen jimmei jisho (Seoul: Chōsen Sōtoku-fu Chūsū-in, 1937), pp. 1361-62. The Koryŏ school system is partly attributed to Ch'oe Ch'ung who set up some private schools outside the capital which were among the only Confucian-influenced institutions of early Koryŏ. Their influence seems to have been literary rather than philosophic.

17 Biography of An Hyang in the Koryŏ-sa. Keeping the Korean queen in Peking was an important control mechanism established by the Mongols over the Korean kings and their court.

18 Mr. Warren W. Smith, Jr. has kindly referred us to another important source on this period: Yun Yong-gyun, In bungaku-shi ikō [Remaining Manuscripts of the Late Mr. Yun](Seoul: In bungaku-shi ikō shuppan-kai, 1933). Yun does not believe that An Yu brought Chu Hsi's commentaries to Korea though An may have studied them. Yun feels that Pack I-jŏng should be credited with having brought them. Specific material, including dates, on Paek is sparse but he seems to have been a contemporary of An Yu and would have brought Neo-Confucian studies to Korea not much before An is credited with having introduced them. Other general studies of Confucianism which can be recommended for this and other questions are: Youn L. Eulsou, Le Conjucianisme en Corée (Paris: Paul Genthner, 1939); and especially Yi Sang-baek, Chosŏn munhwa-sa yŏngu nongo [Studies on Korean Cultural History](Seoul: Ŭryu Munhwa-sa, 1954).

19 Chōsen jimmei jisho, p. 224.

20 Ko Yu-sŏp, ”Pulgyo ka Koryŏ yesul e kkich'in yŏnghyang ūi il koch'al” [”Studies of Buddhist Influence on Koryô Arts”], Chindan hakpo, VI (Nov. 1937), 57. We are indebted to Mr. Smith for his suggestions on the Koryô-Yi transitional period.

21 Koryŏ-sa, Ch. 81; also Kim Sang-gi, ”Sambyŏlch'o wa kŭ ŭi nan e ch'wi haya” [”On the Three Irregular Levies and their Rebellion”]Chindan hakpo, IX (July 1938), 8; and Yun Yong-gyun, ”Kōrai Kisōki ni okeru Tei Chu-fu ran no soin to sono eikyō,” an article on the rebellion of Chŏng Chung-bu, in In bungaku-shi ikō, above, pp. 147-181.

22 Mr. Smith points out that it is unlikely that the Chŏnggamnok is by Chōng To-jˇn; its real author is unknown. It contains more traces of popular superstition than of scholarly work.

23 Mr. Smith refers us to Yi Man-gyu, Chosŏn kyoyuk-sa [History of Korean Education](Seoul: Ŭryu Munhwa-sa, 1947), I, 125-127.

24 Watanabe Akira, ”Kin'eki shisō” [”Korean Thought”], Chōsen-shi kōza, p. 40.

25 Takahashi Tōru, ”Chōsen jugaku taikan” [”A General Survey of Korean Confucianism”], p. 14, in Chōsen-shi kōza.

26 The Sim ki ip'yŏn was written by Chŏng To-jŏn, but Kwŏn Kŭn elaborated on it and added a commentary.

27 Maema Kōsaku, ”Shoetsu-kō” [”Consideration of Illegitimacy in Korea”], Chōsen gakuhō, No. 5 (Oct. 1953), p. 16. This article by a famous student of Korea stresses the thesis that the philosophical study of Chu Hsi in Korea did not come of age until the middle of the 16th century.

28 Any extensive consideration of Yi factionalism must recognize the great degree to which factionalism was a significant phenomenon in China and Japan to mention only the closely related Far Eastern civilizations. An attempt must someday be made to define the extent to which factionalism was peculiarly a phenomenon of Korean politics rather than a general phenomenon in which most states have shared and share.

29 On Korean factionalism see: Ko Kwŏn-sam, Chosŏn chŏngch'i-sa [History of Korean Politics](Seoul: Ŭryu Munhwa-sa, 1948); and Kawai Hirotami, ”Chōsen ni okeru tōsō no gen'in to sono eikyō” [”The Cause and Influence of Korean Factionalism”], Shigaku zasshi, XXVII, No. 3 (1916), pp. 40-90.

30 W. Theodore de Bary, ”A Reappraisal of Neo-Confucianism,” Studies in Chinese Thought, ed. A. F. Wright (Chicago, 1953), pp. 92-93.

31 de Bary, p. 108, n. 25 quoting E. A. Kracke.

32 David S. Nivison, ”The Problem of Knowledge and Action in Chinese Thought since Wang Yang-ming,” Wright, pp. 112-145.

33 For political schisms before 1575, see Sin Sŏk-ho, ”Kibō shika no yurai ni kansuru ichi kōsatsu” [”A Study on the Persecution of Scholars of 1639”], Seikyū gakusō, No. 20 (May 1935), pp. 1-49.

34 Many scholars have argued about the date 1575 as the first real instance of factionalism. Among those believing that it is, is Yi Kŏn-ch'ang, Tangŭi t'ongnyak [Brief Survey of Factionalism](Seoul, 1948), pp. 1-4. For the 1575 struggle, see also Oda Shōgō, Richō tōsō gaiyō [A General Outline of Yi Dynasty Factionalism] (n.p., n.d.), p. 40.

35 The Kûmje or ”Prohibition Provisions” in the chapter on criminal codes in the Taejŏn hoet'ong, a code of the Yi period, contains a law against visiting in the home of a high official to whom you are not related more closely than the sixth degree on the male side. In studying in the home of Yun, t o whom he was not thus related, Kim may well have broken a law of his time. (For this information, we are indebted to Prof. Yi Kwang-nin, of Yŏnsei University.)

36 Kim Tu-hŏn, ”Chōsen reisoku no kenkyū” [”Studies in Korean Ritualism”], Seiftyū gaktuō, No. 27 (Feb. 1937), pp. 65-66.

37 In the end, the Noron became almost the official state party; even King Kojong (1864—1907) considered himself a member of the Noron. Cf. Hwang Hyōn, Maech'ōn yarok [The Contemporary Records of Maech'ŏn](Seoul: Kuksa P'yŏnch'an Wiwōn-hoe, 1955), pp. 546—547.

38 Oda Shōgō, ”Richō no hōtō o ryakujo shite Tenshū-kyō hakugai ni oyobu” [”On the Relation between Yi Dynasty Factionalism and the Catholic Persecution”], Seifyū gakusō, No. I (Aug. 1930), pp. 1-49. The sons of the concubines of the aristocracy took their mothers', not their fathers', rank in the Yi Dynasty and frequently became technicians (a despised term since it implied living by one's hands), painters, interpreters, medical doctors, and lawyers, etc.

39 Yi Nŭng-hwa, Chosŏn kidok-kyo kŭp oegyo-sa [History of Korean Christianity and Diplomacy](Seoul, 1925), pp. 182, 228.