Notes

Preface 1 I borrow these terms from Bourdieu, In Other Words, 60. General Introduction 1 Major arguments of this debate are summarized in Han’guk sahoe palchŏn saron, passim. 2 Cannadine, Aspects of Aristocracy, 1. 3 Deuchler, The Confucian Transformation of Korea. 4 Bourdieu, Distinction, chap. 5. 5 Tilly, Durable Inequality, 6–8. 6 For examples, Sejong sillok 13.28a (1421); 117.14a–b (1447); Sejong sillok, like all Sillok cited in this volume, is in Chosŏn wangjo sillok. 7 Choksok was an often-used term. For examples, see Sejong sillok 47.8b–9a, 10a (1430). 8 For examples, see ibid., 50.19b (1430); Sejo sillok 46.32b (1468). The household registration law in the Kyŏngguk taejŏn exempted rankless individuals (sŏin) from recording their “four ancestors”— a sure indication that most commoners lacked such information. Kyŏngguk taejŏn, 327. 9 The argument that there were no legal barriers barring commoners from taking the examinations has often been advanced and does not need to be repeated here. According to theKyŏngguk taejŏn, four categories of people were legally barred from the civil service examinations: criminals, the sons of corrupt officials, the sons and grandsons of twice-married or wayward women, and the descendants of secondary sons. Ibid., 207–8. 10 Sejo sillok 43.66b–67a (1467). The petitioner was Ryang Sŏng-ji, the inspector general at that time. 11 For an exhaustive analysis of these terms, see Song June-ho, Chosŏn sahoesa yŏn’gu, 217–31. For the disputations over these terms between Han Yŏng-u and Yi Sŏng-mu, see Han Yŏng-u, Chosŏn sidae sinbunsa yŏn’gu. 12 Some scholars object to calling the Korean nobi “slaves” and like to differentiate between nobi (male and female slaves), nongno (agricultural slave), and noye (slave-like dependent). All three categories are, however, technically slaves because they were chattel property and their labor was extracted by coercion. For definitions of slavery, see Watson, Asian and African Systems of Slavery. 13 See Yi Yŏng-hun, “Han’guksa e issŏsŏ nobije,” 365. 14 Kija (n.d.) was, according to the Classic of Documents, enfeoffed by the founder of the Zhou dynasty, King Wu (accession in 1122), as the feudal lord of Chosŏn. When he moved to Korea, he reportedly devised a penal code of eight laws—a feat usually regarded as a civilizatory measure. 15 It seems to be a generally confirmed view that slavery started on a large scale with prisoners of war taken during military conflicts or plundering expeditions. See Brockmeyer, Antike Skla- verei, 94. 440 Notes to pages 5–7

16 At times of national crises such as the Imjin War at the end of the sixteenth century, slaves were recruited into special military units (sog’o’gun), and those who excelled in military exploits were usually manumitted. See Palais, Confucian Statecraft, 226–28. 17 The strictures applied to both male and female slaves. 18 Koryŏsa 85.43a. 19 This law seems to have been enacted in reaction to King Kwangjong’s Slave Review Act of 956 that aimed to break the economic power of the dynastic merit subjects by releasing their slaves. This act was greatly resented because, by giving slaves the opportunity for upward mobility, it not only threatened to blur the dividing line between elite and nonelite; it also deprived slave owners of their slaves. For the opposition of Ch’oe Sŭng-no (927–89), expressed in his memorial of 982, see Ch’oe Sŭng-no sangsŏmun, 157–62. 20 I borrow the term “matrifilial” from Fortes, Kinship and the Social Order, chap. 8, “Filiation Reconsidered.” Unfortunately, in his Confucian Statecraft Palais erroneously termed the law “matrilineal.” The law, however, is neither concerned with the continuation of a “line” nor has it to do with matrilineality. 21 For a summary of the various earlier interpretations, see Yang Yŏng-jo, “Koryŏ sidae ch’ŏnja sumobŏp,” 1–35. Hong Sŭng-gi advocated the view that the law of 1039 assigned property rights. See his Koryŏ sidae nobi yŏn’gu, 20–22. Sudō Yoshiyuki explained it with uxorilocal residence of the husband. See his “Kōrai makki yori Chōsen shoki ni itaru nuhi,” 263–64. Uxorilocal residence, however, was the result, not the cause, of this rule. 22 See, for example, T’aejong sillok 27.1b–2a, 48b (1414). 23 The Kyŏngguk taejŏn chuhae of 1555, 326–27, stated: “To public or private slaves who die without offspring, the law of collaterals sason[ ] is not applicable.” 24 Orlando Patterson maintained that one of the fundamental features of slavery was that the slave could not, in law, be a proprietor. See Patterson, Slavery and Social Death, 182–83. 25 Koryŏsa 85.41a. The law is undated. 26 This was instated by Koryŏ King Ch’ungnyŏl (r. 1274–1308) to counteract Mongol pressure to give a child of mixed marriage automatically commoner status. Ibid., 31.31a–33a, 85.43b–44a. The Mongol emperor Shizi (Khubilai Khan), Ch’ungnyŏl’s father-in-law, had granted Korea the right to pursue its own customs. Ibid., 108.5b–6a. 27 For an example, see ibid., 39.37b–38a. 28 For a discussion of the legal wrangle over mixed marriages, see Chi Sŭng-jong, Chosŏn ch’ŏn’gi nobi, 10–33. 29 Myŏngjong sillok 14.38b (1553). 30 People such as shamans, butchers, tanners, and wicker workers were base because of their occupa- tions, but they were not slaves. Nevertheless treated as outcasts (paekchŏng), they were confined to special settlements. See Passin, “The Paekchŏng of Korea.” 31 Yi Sik, “Ki Myosin samun sa,” in T’aektang-jip 12.6b–8a. 32 See Hwang, Beyond Birth. 33 The Koryŏ formula of “one-in-three-sons” samjŏng( ilcha) was apparently still honored, according to which one son in a three-son household was allowed to take the miscellaneous exams (chapkwa). The descendants of higher, lower, and miscellaneous examination graduates were then exempt from hyangni duties, but presumably rarely entered office. For early legislature, see Yŏkchu Kyŏngguk taejŏn, vol. 2, Chusŏk-p’yŏn, 203; Kyŏngguk taejŏn, 165; Kyŏngguk taejŏn chuhae, 320–22. 34 Kyŏngguk taejŏn, 231. On official duty, the hyangni had to wear a simple cap (pokkŏn), and off- duty, a square hat made of black lacquered bamboo. This was legislated by T’aejong in 1416. 35 Chungjong sillok 15.25a–b (1512); Taejŏn songnok 11. The Ministry of Rites argued that if the hyangni were given a three-year mourning period, they would take this as a pretext to shun their duties. If, however, a hyangni sincerely wished to mourn for three years, the magistrate, upon verifying such sincerity, was allowed to grant it. 36 A secondary son with a commoner mother was a commoner at birth, while one with a slave mother was born a slave.