A New History of Korea (Han'guksa sillon)

Lee Ki-baik; transl. by Edward W. Wagner and Edward J. Shultz

Seoul, Korea: Ilchokak Publishers, 1984; Pages: xxii, 474

This widely acclaimed survey history of Korea has been published simultaneously by Harvard University Press, where the author's name is under the alternative spelling of Yi Ki-baek. If there is one very confusing and frustrating thing about Korean history, it is the relative paucity of family names. It appears as if every other Korean is Kim, Lee (Yi), or Park. Add to this the alternative English spellings and we have a veritable Babel on our hands.

This brings me to the major shortcoming of professor Lee's book: it is a general survey that is clearly intended for readers who are somewhat familiar with Korean history. As such, it is really not a very good introduction to the subjects. There is a wealth of material here but without some solid grounding, most of it appears cursory and speculative, at least for the periods prior to the 19th century. Many conclusions are simply asserted, obviously relying on results published in previous research. Without the evidence, and even without a reference to said research, it is hard to take in some of the claims. Also, without much prior exposure to the historiography of Korea, I cannot properly evaluate the "New" in the title of the book. That is, it is not immediately clear what bone Prof. Lee has to pick with other historians in this field. The fact that the translators chose to omit two crucial chapters of the 1976 edition does not help either.

Despite the frequent digressions into discussions of cultural and artistic events and topics, Prof. Lee's history is mostly political. His main thrust is toward depicting Korean history as a long process of development of political authority, where Korean national identity is found in the creation and changes within the governing elite and the locus of power. This perhaps endows the history with more continuity than is warranted, especially considering the frequent foreign invasions, the internal strife toward unification of the peninsula that rarely produced a stable country in the region, and the curious lack of military power for most of the period.

The book opens with a largely speculative (due to unavailability of archaeological evidence) account of prehistoric times and traces the development of walled-town states and the later confederated kingdoms. With Chapter 3, history begins in earnest as the author delves in the exciting period of the Three Kingdoms (Koguryô, Paekche, and Silla). The fascinating history of the smallest (Silla) unifying the peninsula while the two others squabble among themselves is, unfortunately, mostly glossed over. Following the rise of the local gentry in opposition to the central authority of the true-bone aristocracy, Silla began a process of disintegration, exacerbated by peasant uprisings. Chapters 5 and 6 describe the founding of Koryô and the unification by the new kingdom. As common for the period, state power and authority quickly devolved to the military, which lasted until the Mongol invasions. Of course, the wealthy families found their modus vivendi with the Yüan dynasty, much to the chagrin of the emerging reform-minded literati class. Chapter 9 traces the important creation of the Yangban society in Chosôn and the establishment of the bureaucratic state. Very little is said of the extremely interesting period of the Japanese invasions by Hideyoshi in 1592. Chapters 12 and 13 follow the problems with the Yangban status system, and the outbreak of popular uprisings, mostly due to worsening economic circumstances resulting from misallocation of resources arising out of political corruption and abuse of the system. The brief period of enlightenment, however, is brought to an abrupt halt by the Japanese imperialists, or so it is told in Prof. Lee's account.

The rest of the book is (mostly) about the evils of the Japanese annexation and exploitation. So much is true, but one still wonders about the bias in the narrative. Hardly anything good is ascribed to Japanese influence, which is seen as the modernization forced by a conqueror for the benefit of the homeland. That colonial take is probably correct, but one cannot help but be impressed by the weakness of the Korean state at the turn of the 20th century. If there is anyone to blame about the fate of its people, it must be the government itself, which was more afraid to arm its citizens than to succumb to foreign rule. The parallel with China here is startling.

Although well-written (and acceptably translated), this book is not a good introduction to the fascinating history of Korea. Attempting to cover too much in such a limited space invariably reduces the amount of supporting material that is frequently necessary to establish continuity or even illustrate points of interest. There is a profusion of names, places, and dates (with all the confusion resulting from the last names) and I was helpless in my efforts to put everything in context. The sections on art and culture are mostly superfluous because they do not add to the political and economic narrative, which is the main part of the book, and are tantalizingly short to provide any insight into the subject matter they treat. The writing style is also overly formal, without any personal touches (usually found in works by British historians, who are the best), which further make for dry reading. I will certainly be looking for an alternative to this history, although it does provide a good overview for further reading.

September 5, 2001.

@BOOK{
    TITLE     = {A New History of Korea},
    AUTHOR    = {Ki-baik Lee},
    YEAR      = {1984},
    PUBLISHER = {Ilchokak Publishers},
    ADDRESS   = {Seoul, Korea},
    ISBN      = {89-337-0204-0},
    NOTE      = {Trans. Edward W. Wagner and Edward J. Shultz; index, bibliography Pp. xxii, 474}
}