The Formation and Transformation of the Awareness of a Common Cultural Identity in 19Th Century Chosŏn*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
International Journal of Korean History (Vol.16 No.1, Feb. 2011) 81 The Formation and Transformation of the Awareness of a Common Cultural Identity in 19th Century Chosŏn* Cho Sung-san (Cho Sŏngsan)** Introduction The origins of the term tongwen (同文, same characters; K. tongmun) can be traced back to the phrase, “Now throughout the nation, the carriages have all the same axle-widths, all writings are written with the same characters, and all conducts are regulated with the same ethics” found in Chapter 28 of the Zhongyong (中庸, The Doctrine of the Mean).1 While Zhu Xi(1130-1200) explained that this phrase referred to the ‘unification of the world (天下統一)’,2 Emperor Qin Shi Huang (秦始皇), the first emperor of China, used the term ‘tongwen tonggui (同文同軌, same characters and same wheels)’ following his unification of China.3 Thereafter, this term, which was widely used within the Chinese-character cultural sphere or what can be referred to as the Sinosphere in East Asia, was understood to mean a sort of common cultural identity. This was of course closely related to the great influence exercised by China. This study deals with 19th century East Asia, and more specifically the period in which the long-germinating awareness of a common cultural identity (同文意識, tongmun ŭisik) was given concrete form. ** This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST)(KRF-2007-361-AL0013). ** HK research professor, Research Institute of Korean Studies, Korea University 82 The Formation and Transformation of the Awareness of ~ One important aspect that must be considered in conjunction with the cultural phenomena that emerged in East Asia during the 19th century is the active literary exchanges that took place between Chosŏn, Qing, and Japan. These three countries exchanged thoughts through the writing system known as Chinese characters (漢字) which they shared. While such literary exchanges took place during previous eras as well, those that took place during the 19th century were much more significant both in quantitative and qualitative terms. Thus the awareness of a common cultural identity can be regarded as the perception of a common cultural zone possessed by all three of these countries. This newly formed awareness of a Chinese-character cultural sphere can be better comprehended through an analysis of what kind of intellectual exchanges existed, as well as of what kind of cultural identity people sought to construct through such exchanges. In other words, by pinpointing the characteristics of the awareness of a common cultural identity which existed in East Asia during the 19th century, this study seeks to examine the common civilizational consciousness shared by these three countries. The analysis of the conditions that surrounded this common cultural identity can also provide an effective means to delve into the issue of the common problem awareness that formed in these countries during this period. While a few studies have dealt with the matter of the awareness of a common cultural identity directly, 4 many studies have in fact only brushed the surface when it comes to this awareness during the 19th century. In other words, numerous studies regarding the exchanges between Qing and Chosŏn intellectuals have been accumulated. 5 In addition, it is necessary to pay attention to the phrase, ‘awareness of the contemporary era’ (並世 意識, pyŏngse ŭisik) found in existing studies. This can be construed as the perceptions possessed by the East Asian intellectuals who lived through the contemporary era.6 Building on the results of existing studies, this study seeks to define the specific awareness of a cultural community which was formed through literary exchanges as the awareness of a common cultural identity, and traces Cho Sung-san 83 back the origin, development and transformation of this awareness of a common cultural identity. This study is expected to provide effective vantage points from which to explain the specific cultural phenomenon that emerged during the 19th century. The origin of the awareness of a common cultural identity The near impossibility of developing a common phonetic rendering of Chinese characters served to further heighten the importance of developing visual uniformity. As a result, a common understanding of the meaning of Chinese characters was developed despite the fact that they could be read in many different manners. This proved to be an important element in terms of the establishment of a unified ruling structure in China. To this end, such exchanges based on visual rather than audible language proved to be an effective means of communication not only during the ancient era, but also during the medieval era in which it became impossible to unify the various languages that were spoken. The Chinese dialects were so disparate that they could almost be regarded as different languages rather than simple linguistic variations.7 As such, visual language played an important role in helping the ruling class to control China as a unitary state. 8 In this regard, it would be no exaggeration to say that the unification of China was made possible by Chinese characters. Emperor Qin Shi Huang and Zhu Xi’s claim of the same characters, same wheels, and same ethics (同文·同軌·同倫) as the notion of the unification of the world was closely related to this issue. Viewed from this standpoint, the awareness of a common cultural identity can be regarded as a discourse on unity and oneness. The awareness of a common cultural identity is clearly evidenced in the following cases. During a conversation which he had with the Chinese intellectual Sun Youyi (?-?), Hong Taeyong (1731-1783) stated that while Chosŏn shared a common writing system with China they used different sounds. Sun Youyi answered, “There is no reason to be concerned about 84 The Formation and Transformation of the Awareness of ~ the presence of linguistic differences in every region. Just look at China, although different languages are spoken in the east, west, south and north, the government does not discriminate based on the sound of a language when it selects literati for official positions.”9 Sun Youyi’s claim that the writing system was the main factor involved in the government’s selection of human resources stands as proof positive of the importance which China attached to Chinese characters. As such, the spoken language was not as important as the written language to the intellectuals of East Asia during the medieval era. Of course, the existence of regional differences ensured that this system was not applied in a uniform manner in Chosŏn, Japan, and Vietnam. It is a fact that many regional variations emerged during the process that saw individual countries’ attempt to harmonize the Chinese characters with their own indigenous languages. However, Chosŏn’s geopolitical location inevitably led it to develop a stronger view than was the case in other places of Chinese characters as the predominant written language. Chosŏn’s closer geographical proximity to China than Japan and Vietnam ensured that Chinese culture was actively introduced. This situation in great part explains why Chosŏn’s invention of its own writing system during the reign of King Sejong of Chosŏn came after the Japanese had created their writing system known as Kana (仮名), the Vietnamese had crafted a writing system known as Chữ-nôm (字喃), and the Jurchens and Mongols had developed their own alphabetical systems.10 Chosŏn had of course traditionally boasted its own indigenous writing systems such as Hyangch΄al (鄕札, literally vernacular letters, used to transcribe the Korean language into Hanja ( 漢字, Chinese characters) and Idu (吏讀, Korean phonology system used from the Three Kingdoms Era to Chosŏn). While these systems were similar to the Japanese and Vietnamese writing systems, they were not as fully developed as the latter. The roots of this situation can be traced back to the trend that developed within Chosŏn of seeking to directly seize the meaning of Chinese characters rather than having to rely on incomplete transliterations that were based on indigenous phonological systems. One Cho Sung-san 85 of the reasons why certain segments of society were strongly opposed to the creation of the Hunmin chŏngŭm (訓民正音, literally The Correct Sounds for the Instruction of the People; later came to be known han΄gŭl) during the reign of King Sejong was the very existence of such an awareness of a common cultural identity.11 These in turn can be regarded as the key reasons why Chosŏn constitutes an important element of any discussions on the formation and development of a Chinese character- centered awareness of a common cultural identity in East Asia. As is evidenced by a look at the actions of the Tongmun΄gwan (同文館), the body which was responsible for receiving Chinese envoys, and the Tongmun hwigo (同文彙考), or documents related to diplomatic relations with China, this awareness of a common cultural identity was mainly rooted in a profound respect for the Chinese imperial order, a fact that also lay at the core of the diplomatic concept of sadae (事大, literally ‘serving the great’). This type of awareness is also evident in the writings of many intellectuals. For example, Sin Sukchu (1417-1475) argued that the use of the same characters and wheels would allow Chosŏn to bask in the benevolence of the sacred Son of Heaven (聖天子).12 The collection of poems exchanged between Chosŏn government officials and Ming envoys known as the Hwanghwajip (皇華集) saliently reflects the diplomatic awareness of a common cultural identity which revolved around the concept of sadae. These thoughts were closely related to the perceptions of respect for the unified Chinese empire symbolized by the notion of same characters and same wheels.