🌐 TiStory Long-Form Blog Version: Colonial Shadows in Korean Studies

🌐 TiStory Long-Form Blog Version

Colonial Shadows in Korean Studies

How Japanese Colonial Historiography Reached American Universities

(Civic Commentary & Historical Reflection)


---

1. Introduction: A Whisper from the Lecture Hall

In September 2025, a quiet yet shocking revelation emerged from an American university:
a Korean history course was using a textbook steeped in Japanese colonial historiography.
The book, A History of Korea: An Episodic Narrative by Hwang Kyung-moon (Palgrave MacMillan, 2010),
is listed as a required text in several universities across the United States.

The same book exists in Korean translation under the title 맥락으로 읽는 새로운 한국사,
and has even been translated into Turkish and Bulgarian — a sign of its global academic reach.

But what if the very “history of Korea” being taught abroad
is built upon an outdated, colonial framework designed to minimize Korea’s past?


---

2. The Core of the Distortion: Erasing Gojoseon

The most striking issue is the textbook’s denial of Gojoseon —
the earliest Korean kingdom founded by Dangun Wanggeom in 2333 BCE.
Instead, it begins Korean history with the Han Commanderies established by China in 108 BCE.

This shift is not an innocent academic interpretation.
It stems directly from Japan’s Joseon History Compilation Committee (朝鮮史編修會),
which redefined Korean history to serve imperial narratives:
to depict Korea as a peripheral, dependent, and derivative culture.


---

3. The Logic of Subordination — “Dependency Theory”

The book claims that early Koreans developed only through “influences from China.”
This echoes the colonial argument that Koreans lacked the capacity for self-generated civilization.
It denies the archaeological and linguistic evidence of indigenous cultural evolution —
a claim long refuted by modern excavations in Liaodong and the Korean Peninsula.


---

4. Distorting the Samguk Sagi

By treating the early chapters of Samguk Sagi and Samguk Yusa as “myth,”
the textbook erases nearly four centuries of ancient state formation.
It places Baekje’s emergence in the 4th century CE,
despite carbon-dated evidence showing Baekje’s Pungnaptoseong fortress
originated in the 2nd century BCE.

The intent is clear: to shorten Korean antiquity
and to subordinate its chronology under continental empires.


---

5. Geography Shrunk — The Lelang Commandery Fallacy

Perhaps the most persistent colonial legacy lies in the maps.
The textbook places Lelang Commandery in Pyongyang,
following Japanese historian Ikeuchi Hiroshi’s model.
However, Chinese sources (Shiji, Hanshu, Hou Hanshu, Sanguozhi)
consistently describe Lelang as located in Liaodong, far west of the Korean Peninsula.

This false geography reduces Korea’s ancient frontier,
turning a once-independent civilization into a colonial appendage.


---

6. After Liberation: The Shadow Persists

The tragedy deepens when we realize that post-liberation Korean academia
retained many of these colonial frameworks.
Scholars trained under colonial historians like Tsuda Sōkichi, Imanishi Ryū, and Ikeuchi Hiroshi
continued teaching these views as “orthodox history.”
Through textbooks, lectures, and university curricula,
the colonial lens survived — invisible but pervasive.


---

7. When the West Learns a Colonial Korea

As English-language textbooks became “standards” in global academia,
colonial interpretations of Korean history spread unnoticed.
Thus, American and European students learn a Korea
whose origins and borders were rewritten by imperial design.

In an era where K-pop, K-drama, and K-culture have captured the world’s attention,
this discrepancy is both ironic and tragic:
the world loves Korean culture but learns Japan’s version of Korean history.


---

8. The Civic Response — Building the K-History Movement

The time has come for citizens, historians, and educators
to reclaim the narrative.

Actions to take:

Audit and challenge colonial-era biases in Korean history materials.

Create new bilingual educational resources that represent Korea’s authentic voice.

Engage global academia with translated research grounded in Korean scholarship.


A nation that reclaims its history reclaims its future.


---

9. Conclusion: History Is Sovereignty

True liberation is not only political — it is intellectual.
To decolonize history is to restore the spiritual sovereignty of a people.
When Koreans write their own history in their own words,
they affirm who they are and what they have endured.

> “True independence is not achieved through weapons,
but through the liberation of history and language.”



That, ultimately, is the essence of the K-History Movement —
a call for truth, dignity, and the rewriting of memory.


---

Tags:
#CoreaHistory #CoreeHistory #CauliHistory #DecolonizeKHistory #단군조선 #식민사관청산 #한국사바로세우기 #역사시민운동 #KHistoryMovement

Source: HGR News+ — 박종민 기자, 2025.10.22