User:JHyunlee/sandbox

Historical thought of the Goryeo Dynasty
First of all, it is notable that the activities in the field of history and literature in this era are much more diverse and active than in the previous era. And these activities were possible from a deeper understanding of Chinese characters. In this era, Idu(吏讀), which can be seen in Silla's Hyangga literature, or Hangeul after the Joseon Dynasty, was not used as a means of expressing the idea, and almost all of the activities by Chinese characters are the main characters of the era. The overall characteristic of historical and literary thought of this era lies in gradually becoming aware of the independence of the nation from Chinese-centered thinking at first. This change inevitably occurred due to the development of Korean society and the change of the domestic situation.

First of all, in terms of historical history, in Goryeo, the compilation of the Annals of Kings(實錄) has been implemented since the beginning. In addition to the compilation project, other librarians(史書) were frequently compiled and published. Among them, Kim Bu-sik's  (volume 50), compiled in the 23rd year of King Injong (1145), is the longest history of the Korean history books currently handed down. However, this  has been criticized for largely reflecting Kim Bu-sik's flunkyism(事大主義). Korea can deal with Chinese-centered historical narratives everywhere through actual articles in the  As a result, it should be evaluated that the national independence is lacking. However, what should be noted in Korea is whether such a history(史觀) was made up of the faults of the editors of the . Korea should grasp the spirit of the times before blaming Kim Bu-sik. In other words, until then, ideologically, the deep influence of Chinese culture and the Chinese way of thinking were a general trend throughout Korean society. Therefore, the historical thought(史學思想) shown in  is also the product of this situation of the times.

Subsequently, as the situation of the times changed, there was a great change in historical thought. In Korea, a specific example can be seen in Ilyeon(一然)'s  compiled during the reign of King Chungryeol (1274-1308). By this time, the conditions of the times had already changed significantly. The Song(宋) Dynasty, founded by the Han(漢) people, was destroyed, and instead, the Mongols, the northern people, emerged as the rulers of the continent, wielding considerable influence on the political and ideological fields of the Goryeo Dynasty. It was only here that the Han people(漢)-centered history emerged from the thinking centered on Korean culture. The national consciousness to protect the Korean people in the face of the military and political oppression of Mongolia appeared in the description of history. For example, the Dangun myth(檀君神話) shown in the beginning of  was also a result of efforts to find national independence. At the same time, when the culture of the Korean people, which had blossomed brilliantly, was trampled on by the uncivilized northern people and fell into the cultural dark world, Asia's most civilized country had no other than the national pride of Goryeo(高麗).

This ideological trend is generally seen in the history(史學) and literature sectors of the late Goryeo Dynasty. For example, the changes in the spirit of the times can be seen through the writings of Lee Seung-hyu(李承休)'s  and Lee Gyu-bo(李奎報)'s . In the historical field of this era, numerous books such as , , and  were published, but it is regrettable that it is not possible to examine the specific historical thought(史學思想) because it is not currently handed down.

Historical thought of the Early Joseon Period
The historical ideas of the early Joseon Dynasty appear specifically in the priesthood(編史意識). Along with the compilation of the Annals of the Dynasty, Gwanchan(官撰) and Sachan(私撰), including the compilation of , appeared prominently from the standpoint of national history. Various historical books were compiled as the national consciousness(國史意識) grew after the national crisis caused by the invasion of Khitan and Mongolia during the Goryeo Dynasty. In the Joseon Dynasty, with the growth of cultural consciousness and the stimulation of Chinese historical books, awareness of national history grew significantly, and each royal generation published , , , <Dongguk Tonggam(東國通鑑)>, <Dongguk Yeoji Seungram(東國輿地勝覽)>, <Haedongseong Clan(海東姓氏錄)>.In particular, <Dongguk Tonggam> has great significance as a national history book.

The influence of Chinese historical books on the compilation of national history books was significant. This is well represented in the preface of <Dongguk Tonggam>. After the founding of the country, the three kings(三王) succeeded, <Goryosa(高麗史)> and <Goryosa Jeolyo(高麗史節要)> were carried out by striving for literary power. King Sejo paid attention to the celebration and told his subjects, "Although there is a ritual in the east, there is no sense of long-length comparable to <Jachi Tonggam(資治通鑑)>, and Lee Geuk-don's preface, which corrected history, clearly shows the sense of Korean history compilation. In addition, Seo Geo-jeong's article on <Dongguk Tonggam> also cited examples of <Tonggam>, <Tonggam Gangmok(通鑑綱目)> by Joo-hee(朱憙), <Tonggam Jeolyo(通鑑節要)> by Kang Yong(江鎔), and <Tonggam Jeolyo(通鑑節要)> by Yoo Seom(劉剡), and the history of the Korean country is also a Danggun like a dangyo(唐堯). During the reign of King Taejo, "Han Go-jo(漢高祖) collected the books of the Jin(秦) Dynasty, and Dang Tae-jong bought a Su Dyanasty(隋)'s book to compile various historical books, and in the case of <Dongguk Tonggam>, Beomrye(凡例) copied <Jachi Tonggam> Seo Geo-jeong also revealed almost the same content in an article posted in <Samguksajeolyo(三國史節要)>.

Among Chinese librarians, there was a great interest in <Jachi Tonggam> regardless of the top and bottom. Kang Yong(江鎔)'s <Tonggam Jeolyo> which is said to be a concentration of pain> has been widely read. Choi Hang(崔恒), who had a great contribution to his studies during the reign of King Sejo, even emphasized, "The sense of pain is the end of history and should be known first." Tonggam was compiled with instructive intentions, meaning that it was bright like a model(龜鑑) in Chido(治道), and the instructive intention played a strong role in the compilation of various librarians in the early Joseon Dynasty. In an article posted by Jeong In-ji after finishing <Goryeo-sa>, he said that the king's examination of the rise and fall in the past was to admonish the future, so he made <Goryeo-sa>. King Sejo pointed out that the crown prince's education was a national ambassador, and then ordered Yang Seong-ji(梁誠之) to take an extensive look at the Annals of the King and the History of the King in order to teach the crown prince. In addition, Seo Geo-jeong(徐居正)'s words that the rise and fall in the past should show the good and bad points as they are can be well understood from the attitude of the king or those who have held the important position of history compilation. In the early days of the founding of the country, it can be seen that Kwon Geun edited history from a strict, instructive, and subjective position to reward the righteousness and eradicate the Chamran even when he edited <Dongguk Saryack> based on Kim Bu-sik's <The Chronicles of the Three States>.

One of the reasons why historical ideas have been strongly emphasized since the foundation of the Joseon Dynasty is that Confucian policies(編史意識) have strengthened, boosting the four winds(士風), and emphasizing orthodoxy(正統論), resulting in strong historical consciousness following various librarians' compilation. There was a reflection on the fact that Korean people are familiar with Chinese history but are not familiar with Korean history. Seo Geo-jeong argued that even if he was a cultured person or a Confucian scholar, he did not know much about Korean history until the competition during the reign of King Seongjong, so <Dongguk Tonggam> should be created to enlighten. and pointed out that despite his long history, he did not have a history book(史書). In particular, Seo Geo-jeong's remark that he should know the history of Korea, since he was born in Korea, is a good indication of Korea's sense of compilation of history.

Indeed, after the founding of the Joseon Dynasty, as the historical consciousness of national history was emphasized, the sense of priesthood was also strong. Therefore, special books such as <The Annals of the Dynasty> and various Tongsa and Period History in Pyeonnyeon style and Gangmok style(綱目體), <The Historical Byeongyo>, <Haedongseong Seerok>, and <Dongguk Yeoji Seunram> were also compiled. With this heightened awareness of librarian compilation, history education became important and began to show enthusiasm for national history compilation and education. As part of strengthening national history education in the 9th year of King Sejo's reign, Yang Seong-ji selected 20 Yemun Gyeomgwan(藝文兼官) and divided them into four parts, some of them into <Juyeok(周易)>, <Economic Enlightenment(易學啓蒙)>, <Seongri Daejeon(性理大全)>, part two of <Chunchu(春秋)>, <Jwajeon(左傳)>, <Hojeon(胡傳)>, <Sagi(史記)>,<Jeonhansuh(前漢書)>, The third part was in charge of <Tonggamgangmok>, <Tonggamjeolpyeon>,  <Songwonjeolyo(宋元節要)>, and the fourth part was in charge of <Samguksagi>, <Dongguk History(東國史略)>, and <Goryeo Jeonsa(高麗全史)>, regardless of field, 4 books(四書), <Sijeon(詩傳)>,<Suhjeon(書傳)> <Yegi(禮記)> were specially made to be familiar, and let's go on the 15th day. Therefore, not only Chinese history but also Korean history strongly insisted on working hard in the same way. This strengthening of national history compilation consciousness and education also recorded the contents of Gojoseon, such as Dangun mythology, in <Sejong Silokjiriji> or <Dongguk Tonggam>, to strengthen national history and develop historical narrative. After the Imjin War and the Byungja War, as Western forces approached and knowledge of the new world came through the Qing Dynasty, the tendency to emphasize national history became more pronounced in the sense that practical scholars should emerge and know about Korea.

Historical thought of the Late Joseon Period
A series of advanced scholars in the late Joseon Dynasty struggled to resolve various contradictions in realistic political and social systems. It is not that there were no advanced thinkers in the previous era, but it was not as motivated as this period. In any case, some of these thinkers in the late Joseon Dynasty sought to solve it while they were in government, and some sought their own ways while living in rural. However, under the conditions of this era, there could be no idea that violated Confucian ideology(儒敎理念). The standard for resolving certain contradictions has always been Confucian. Since the 18th century, when the influence of Western studies and a new perception of Cheongjomunmul were embedded, it was not necessarily based on Confucianism, but most of the ideas could not leave the Confucian ideology. Therefore, the desire of the real Gwangjeong-new ideal state and society began with criticism of reality in accordance with the Confucian ideal world. And this criticism of reality has often sought rationality from a historical perspective.

If pre-modern history is autonomous, and its significance can be found, the historical consciousness of the late Joseon Dynasty was also autonomous. Reality is not always satisfactory. Moreover, this was even more so in the position of trying to achieve the madness by facing the contradiction. Historical research is always critical by today's scientific methodology. Even if you understand the trend of the times positively, it begins with criticism of the facts inherent in it. Moreover, the historical perspective of the late Joseon Dynasty could not leave this criticism. In addition, a series of advanced scholars in the late Joseon Dynasty described above were independent. It was also called rediscovery of the self, and it tried to solve all problems from an independent perspective. It stands straight from the conventional side attitude. With this idea, the perception of the country's history and geography has been renewed.

In Korea, historical consciousness occurred a lot during the period of national awakening. Whether the concept of nation is established or not at this time occurred at an independent time when the self was strongly recognized, even if it was a separate matter. This example can be found in the mid-Goryeo period, which wore bedding for the northern people, in the early Joseon period, which was the period of establishment of the physical system, and in the mid-Joseon period, which received bedding from two immigrants from the north and south. Moreover, not to mention intellectual thinkers before and after the 18th century, who were struggling to resolve realistic contradictions before and after the enlightenment, it was also urgent. Of course, this sense of history can be one of the characteristics of the times. Therefore, in some periods of the above-described examples, historical books that can represent the sense of history came out. The late Joseon Dynasty was no exception.

First of all, famous historians who compiled famous historical books are Ahn Jung-bok(東史綱目)>의 안정복(安鼎福) of <Dongsa Gangmok(東史綱目)>, Lee Geung-ik(李肯翊) of <Yeongnyeosil Gisul(燃藜室記述)>, and Han Chi-yoon(韓致奫) of <Haedong Yeoksa(海東繹史)>. In addition, as scholars around them, famous scholars who influenced them or influenced them included Lee Ik(李瀷), Lim Sang-deok(林象德), Yoon Seong-sang(尹衡聖), Lee Deok-mu(李德懋), Cho Gyeong-nam(趙慶男), Yoo Deuk-gong(柳得恭), Hong Yang-ho(洪良浩), Hong Seok-ju(洪奭周), and Jeong Yak-yong(丁若鏞). Most of the so-called Silhak-Party(實學派) in the late Joseon Dynasty can be said to be historical parties, and they studied history not by simple autonomous historical views, but to face and criticize reality with past history. It was not a passive historical awareness, but an active historicalist position. At the same time, they tried to objectively examine history. Han Chi-yoon's Haedong History, which wanted to project Korean history only with Chinese or Japanese data, was the same in Ahn Jung-bok's <Buddha Gangmok>, which established an independent Korean history system, and Lee Geung-ik's <Yeongyeosil Gisul>, which did not write a single line of his opinion. It wasn't just that. So did the scholars before and after them. History must have value as science.

The description of facts is not the only thing that is history. Each historical book of the late Joseon Dynasty had its own characteristics. As a representative example, <Dongsa Gangmok> was the Tongsa(通史) of Gangmok style(綱目體), <Yeongyeosil Gisul> was the short history of the end of the article, and <Haedong Yeoksa(海東繹史)> was the Tongsa of Gijeon style(紀傳體). In addition, Lim Sang-deok(林象德)'s <Dongsa Hoegang(東史會綱)> and Yoon Seong-seong's <Joya Cheomjae(朝野僉載)> are Yasa(野史), and Yudeunggong has established a family view due to the history of Balhae(渤海), which was founded by Goguryeo's migrants. in the past. When they studied and compiled history, they did not only recognize the facts as facts, but wanted to find them as the historical facts. If the new academic style of the late Joseon Dynasty is called seeking due diligence or Gujin(求眞), such research methods and spirit can be easily found in them. It is more evident in the opinions of <Goi-pyeon(考異篇)> and <Haedong Yeoksa> in <Dongsa Gangmok>, as well as in the geographical evidence in <Balhaego(渤海考)> by Yoo Deuk-gong. At the same time, their own spirit is working intensely for them. It was intended to systematically understand Korean history and reorganize its system properly. The longitudinal chapter of its history also came from here, and the analysis of histroical facts also originated from here.

The new perception of Korean history they pioneered is not only acceptable from today's point of view, but also enlightened. This is because they dealt with historical research scientifically and objectively. In addition, scholars who directly inherited their research methods and attitudes and raised their spirit were Lee Geon-chang(李建昌), Park Eun-sik(朴殷植), Shin Chae-ho(申采浩), and Jang Ji-yeon(張志淵). In addition, it can be said that Choi Nam-seon(崔南善), Lee Neung-hwa(李能和), and Jeong In-bo(鄭寅普) belong to this group. In this way, historical thought in the late Joseon Dynasty was not only valuable at that time, but also occupies a large proportion in Korean historical history.

Early modern historical thought of Korea
The history of Korea during the opening of the port had two basic characteristics in two ways. One was to break down the feudal social system that had already been dismantled in the internal development of Korean history and form a new modern society. The other was the question of how to maintain national independence in response to the imperialist and colonial advancement of Western capitalist powers or the Japanese invasion of Korea.

Therefore, historical studies of this period needed a sense of history to insight into such historical reality and cope with it. Moreover, in the period from the 1890s to the 1910s, Korean history was studied and described by Japanese government scholars as modern history in that it was being carried out by Japanese invasion of the continent. In Japan, when research on Korean history was being conducted with such aggression, history in Korea had to seek a new dimension in terms of historical consciousness and methodology of historical research. In other words, modern Korean history also needed to break away from traditional historical views and grasp the development of history or objectively.

This request showed a tendency to take into account new methodologies only through the Gwangmu(光武) reform period, and the history of this period was based on Silhak and emphasized as a traditional idea and traditional culture that should inherit and develop Silhak(實學). In this way, in the 5th year of Gwangmu (1901), Kim Taek-young(金澤榮), Hyunchae(玄采), and Jang Ji-yeon(張志淵) published or expanded practical books. In 1905, Eo and Kim Taek-young compiled <Yeoksa-Jipryak(歷史輯略)>, and Jang Ji-yeon was also preparing props on the history of Korean manners and customs.

As such, historians of the reform period conducted their research on a practical basis, and the results were shown in two trends: Tongsa(通史) and special research. As Tongsa, Hwang Hyun(黃玹)'s <Maecheon Yarok(梅泉野錄)>, Jeong Gyeo(鄭喬)'s <Daehan Gyenyunsa(大韓季年史)>, and Kim Taek-young's biography <Yeoksa-Jipryak> are representative. These authors' historical consciousness was strong, and they were sympathetic to the reform projects of this period, and showed a national consciousness that strongly resisted imperialist aggression. However, their historical descriptions were still following the traditional chronology, and their historical consciousness did not reach modernity. This point was a limitation and task that the history of this period had to overcome.

These tasks gradually found clues to solve through translation history. From the standpoint of historical history, translation can be found in a series of history activities. He performed <Manguksag(萬國史記)i> and published <Dongguk Sagi(東國史略)>. These historical activities were based on the common view of Sikjachung(識者層) at the time that they should know how to invade in relation to imperialism, and interest in methodologies for historical descriptions is also developing. Hyun-chae lamented that his compilation of chronological history was not systematic, which was evidence that he renewed his perception of methodology.

It was a series of scholars called so-called national historians who succeeded the history of the reform period and solved the problems that could not be solved at that time. Ethnic history was developed by Park Eun-sik and Shin Chae-ho. Park Eun-sik(朴殷植) developed Korean history into modern history by inheriting the history of the Gwangmu Reform period and introducing the methodology of modern history, which was in the 1910s, and "Hanguk Tongsa(韓國痛史)" and "Korean Independence Movement Jihyeolsa(韓國獨立運動之血史)" are his representative books. In these books, he analyzed, criticized, and synthesized the development process of historical facts in terms of causal relations, and revealed the Japanese invasion process in detail through this methodology of modern history. He considered the soul, or spirit, as the key to maintaining the state, and called it the history of the country where the soul of the nation or state is contained. He also said that a country with a strong soul could eventually become independent even if it was temporarily merged into the powers. He believed that the Korean people were strong-spirited people and was confident that Korea would also be liberated in the future. It cannot be overlooked that Park Eun-sik's historical thought and history were consistent with national consciousness and national spirit, and it was also incorporated into the enterprising reform idea that the world's culture should be opened to the world and consumed from an independent standpoint. At the same time, his historical ideas were rich in Confucian colors. Therefore, his reform ideas contained limitations that were bound to have a fault with the historical consciousness of modern Korean history in that regard.

It was Shin Chae-ho who inherited Park Eun-sik's history and overcame the limitations of his historical consciousness and theoretically completed modern Korean history. As in the case of Park Eun-sik, his historical consciousness was thorough in the struggle against imperialism, and his national consciousness was strong. His historical research was a struggle for independence in itself. It is a fact in the 1920s that Shin Chae-ho paid attention to history and completed modern Korean history, which is well illustrated in <Chosun Sangos(朝鮮上古史)a>, and other fragmentary research activities. He recognized the nature of history as a "struggle between Ah(我) and Via(非我)." Here, <Ah> or <Via> should be inherited in time and its influence should be spread socially. In addition, the struggle was such a struggle that if the spiritual sense of subjectivity for "Ah" was not established or if the environment of "Via" was not complied with, it would be defeated. In particular, the contradiction between "Ah" and "Via" within society is regarded as an opportunity for social development. His essential understanding of history is that he tried to develop history and grasp the causal relationship of historical facts in social phenomena, and he understood that such struggles and new cultures were created by finding various egos of subjectivity and internally grasping various historical realities of each era in mutual contradictions. It is thought that Shin Chae-ho's attitude of recognizing history was basically the same as that in modern European history.

Thus, from the standpoint of such historical awareness, we tried to reorganize Korean history. As part of such efforts, he criticized conventional histroical books(史書) and recalled the importance of the three major elements of history composition, such as time(時), earth(地), and human(人), which were lacking in these histroical books. He also criticized these librarians for neglecting to read historical materials, for failing to evaluate historical facts because they were based on the historical description methods of Confucius' <Chunchu(春秋)> or <Gangmok(綱目)> by Zhu Xi(朱子), and for neglecting national trends in the subject of history. Since the achievements of Korean history at that time were in this state, he argued that Korean history should be reorganized by criticizing historical materials and improving the method and perception of historical and historical narratives.

Particularly important in Shin Chae-ho's historical consciousness is his strong pride in the history and tradition of the Korean people, and a kind of civic modern consciousness to believe in and achieve human freedom and social progress. He also emphasized the nation as the subject of history, and closed up the people in the nation to the front of history, so this is also a vivid convenience of his modern consciousness. His position on Japan is concentrated on the fact that it is the overthrow of invaders by force and the independence of the people. He described it as a revolution by violence. He also harshly criticized the two methods that had been taken so far to build the Japanese Empire: the independence movement by diplomatic strategy and the theory of preparation. However, for him, independence did not mean simply the establishment of the Japanese Empire. At the same time, his independence included the social meaning of reforming the class contradictions and old social systems that had been implied in Korean society until then. Korea's modern history really sprouted from the contradictory relationship of internal social contradictions and struggles against Japan, and through these contradictory contradictions, civic awareness and solid nationalist ideas were formed.

Modern historical thought of Korea
Korean history was growing into modern history by Park Eun-sik(朴殷植) and Shin Chae-ho(申采浩). The historical descriptions and historical consciousness they showed during this period were valuable achievements of Korean history, and they played a role as spiritual pillars in establishing modern Korean history. However, in the 1930s and 1940s, modern Korean history changed and diversified. Around this time, professionally educated historians are produced, and historians who appear with a certain view of history in rapidly changing social ideas can be seen. In addition to ethnic history, which has now grown into a new history on the basis of orthodox history, positivist history and socioeconomic history that tries to systematically systematically systematize the entire history through a certain view of history have emerged.

In the line of national history, Choi Nam-sun, who had a somewhat different position from Shin Chae-ho, played an active role in enlightenment history along with the publication of Korean classics, lost his consistent historical spirit and returned to the encyclopedic knowledge of the Silhak era. Choi Nam-sun's most prominent achievements in understanding Korean literary history are most clearly expressed in his thesis, <Bulham Munhwaron(不咸文化論)>. In addition, there were many historians in the field of national history, but Jeong In-bo(鄭寅普) played a pivotal role among them. It was in the 1930s that he became immersed in full-fledged history research, and the <Study of Joseon History> was published as a decision of the research. As a friend of Jeong In-bo, it was Ahn Jae-hong(安在鴻), who wrote <Joseon SanggosaGam(朝鮮上古史鑑)", and Moon Il-pyeong(文一平) appeared in charge of another aspect of national history at the same time as Jeong In-bo or Ahn Jae-hong, his <Hoamjeonjip(湖岩全集)> shows a new form of popular history and enlightenment.

Son Jin-tae(孫晋泰) and Lee In-young(李仁榮), who were active in the 1940s as figures who succeeded their academic lineage and tried to confront Japanese colonial history. However, despite their academic achievements, there were not many scholars belonging to national history. Of course, as such personnel, their achievements in a short period of time were never small. They made great achievements in protecting the nation and enhancing the national spirit, and established a historical view against Japanese colonial history to systematize Korean history on a solid basis. In addition, their historical consciousness was the best historical consciousness that historians during the Japanese invasion could have, and their historical descriptions also show the scientific nature of modern history. The level of historical narrative and historical awareness that these ethnic historians reached until the 40s was high, and the direction of historical research they were aiming for is still an indicator today. They captured Korean history in relation to world history and showed efforts to conduct research based on various stages of world history development or to introduce it into Korean history and apply it.

Among them, it was a great achievement to apply the theory of social development to the system of Korean history. In short, they tried to establish the subjectivity of Korean history, and were conscious of the harmony of universality and individuality related to world history. Often, the historical description of ethnic history is evaluated as unscientific or petty, but this is not an essential evaluation of ethnic history, but is limited to partial. However, it is necessary to face up to the fact that there are still certain limitations to the positive aspects of ethnic history. It is the fact that Japanese colonial history failed to scientifically overcome the political theory or the theory of batting average that tried to use their colonial policies, and the historical evidence of positivism on the Korean War problem and the historical evidence of colonial history. On the other hand, during this period, unlike national history, empirical historians who learned the method of Ranke history appeared and established a literary and historical school style.

When it comes to empirical history during the Japanese colonial period, it is reminiscent of the Society of Diagnosis, and there is a good reason for this. The diagnostic society was organized in 1934, and the nature of empirical history can usually be revealed by analyzing the relationship between them and socioeconomic history and national history. First of all, socioeconomic historians recognize <진단학보>, the organ of the diagnostic society, as a development, but are sharply criticizing it. In other words, socioeconomic historians view the diagnostic society as a society that conducts academic activities in the nature of pure history if it is necessary to create and attach words. In short, they criticized empirical history as a research organization without a history. In response, the diagnostic society did not receive active participation from socioeconomic historians, but it also published such criticism as room to tolerate them. However, despite this aspect, the confrontation between the two was tense.

Next is the relationship with ethnic history. Moon Il-pyeong appears on the list of promoters of the diagnostic society, but the fact that the close relationship between the two cannot be said also appears in Jeong In-bo's evaluation of empirical history. Soon, Jeong In-bo was dissatisfied with Japanese scholars who followed Japanese scholars because he tried to find national historical truths that were not told in the current literature, while empirical historians were also unwilling to be satisfied with the history of national historians and did not appreciate their academic achievements. As revealed in the relationship between empirical history and national history and socioeconomic history, it is noteworthy that empirical history was not obsessed with established history, but rather avoided it. They tried to understand the general through specific historical studies. However, it is criticized that there was no view of history in that their generalization work through individual historical facts did not develop to the stage of customs clearance in Korean history or the entire history.

Empirical history also saw that unilateral application of the assumed formula or law was not a scientific method of historical research. They saw that general laws were not discovered only by examining the history of all ethnic groups in the world, and that generality could be extracted from individuals or ethnic groups. However, it is a mistake to think that demonstration is the exclusive property of empirical history, and it is only a basic condition for historical general. Therefore, it is self-evident that proof cannot be history itself. However, empirical historians showed little willingness to think about the general meaning based on individual facts. As a result, countless beads of demonstration rolled around without being sewn, which caused confusion in Korean modern history.

In parallel with Ranke's empirical history, socioeconomic history also developed during this period. Although it is called socioeconomic history, not all historians belonging to it have a consistent personality. From the late 1920s to the 1930s, socialist ideas and labor movements were developing in the wake of the intensifying colonial exploitation and the wave of economic depression, which also affected history. One of the characteristics of historical descriptions in socioeconomic history was that it took the form of a systematic study on the entire socioeconomic system, apart from historical research on individual historical facts. The representative figure was Baek Nam-un(白南雲).

Baek Nam-un's representative writings include <The History of Joseon Socio-Economy> (1933) and <The History of Joseon Feudal Socio-Economy> (1937). He originally planned to complete the vast history of Korean socio-economic affairs. He criticized and rejected national history as a special view along with that of Japanese historians in his criticism of modern history, which he criticized in the study of traditional Korean history. He saw it as distinct from the external specificity and the monolithic law of history, and thought that the basis of history was the monolithic law of history. He believed that only from this point of view can an active solution that does not know despair about the daunting specificity under the Japanese colonial rule. The monolithic law of historical development, which he criticized and accepted as an alternative to colonial and nationalist views, that is, the so-called special view he called, was the formula of materialism. And although it is criticized for applying this formula to Korean history as it is, it was highly praised for attempting to systematize Korean history in light of the development of world history. However, the question is what is the law of development in world history. The world historical development law he argued was based on the development law of European history, which is also well illustrated in his problem of "Asian production style." This problem seems to have been revealed with an Asian empire different from the development laws of Western society in mind, and this point is also applied to Korean history, and it is assumed that Korea refers to the specificity of feudal society, that is, Asian specificity. This is a direct betrayal of his so-called unitary law of development. In the above, it is proved that his historical system is not inductive based on specific research, but one-sided application of the law.

Therefore, the law of world history should be considered from a different angle. It is necessary to recognize that not only one law governs history, but that pluralistic laws are embraced and interpreted with both universality and specificity. In addition, it should not be forgotten that specificity is understood based on the specific historical facts of the people, and that various aspects of history are widely developed when such understanding becomes the comprehensive foundation of the people's perception of history.

Other references
History of Korea

Korean nationalist historiography

공정위, 또다시 '메이플스토리' 확률 조작 관련 넥슨 현장 조사 진행