Preface and Acknowledgements I am not a historian or a scholar of the humanities. I am a medical doctor, born and educated in Seoul in the late twentieth century, and now living within a rich global network of mentors and friends while pursuing medical research in the twenty-first. This book is written in gratitude to those who broadened my perspective beyond Korea-centric pride in our own history and culture. I enjoyed writing with a certain independence from academic convention. To professional historians, the views expressed here may appear unorthodox or out of step with standard textbooks of Korean history. A word of caution: students preparing for university entrance examinations or corporate recruitment tests in Korea may do well not to take this author’s side. Throughout, I have aimed at an approach that draws Korea’s history into the larger current of world events, rather than treating it in isolation. Some of the theories advanced here, for example, the claim of a Spanish origin behind the Japanese invasion of Korea in 1592, may strike readers as bold, perhaps even reckless. I may not have escaped the bias of my sources, but I have tried to balance them and present a fair account. My research was neither systematic nor exhaustive, relying heavily on personal memoirs and biographies. Yet I have neither invented nor falsified anything to support preconceived hypotheses. What I offer is an empirical perspective shaped by a physician’s training: Korea, and in particular the Joseon Kingdom of the nineteenth century, appears as a gravely ill patient suffering from an inherited disease. The illness was Confucianism. This book might be read as a kind of clinical record, or even an autopsy report of the Joseon Kingdom in its decline. Like many patients, the kingdom’s fatal conditions were largely self-inflicted. Again and again, its leaders made the wrong choices, disregarded advice, and aggravated their own deterioration. Confucianism was both the ideology and distortion, shaping society in ways both constructive and destructive. I will not attempt to summarize Confucianism here; the literature on the subject is already vast. For the reader’s orientation, however, it can be said briefly that Confucianism was an ancient system of autocracy and ambiguity in East Asia. Though Confucius lived in the fifth century BCE, contemporary with Socrates, he himself looked back nostalgically five centuries further to a world resembling Egypt under the Pharaohs. Korean Confucianists from the tenth century onward fabricated reasons why their society should adhere to the purest form of Confucianism, even as China itself drifted. In Korea, loyalty to Confucian hierarchy hardened into rigidity, stifling creativity and productivity. Two of its most disastrous effects were the suppression of Hangul in official documents until the end of the dynasty, and the persecution of Catholics in the nineteenth century. The dynasty’s collapse displayed, like a full-color atlas of pathology, Confucianism’s malignancy. Tragically, the system was not dismantled by Korea’s own democratic revolution, but by Japanese conquest. Viewing Confucianism as a disease also helps to explain the ascent of modern Japan. Since the American fleet under Commodore Perry landed in Yokohama in 1853, Japan faced repeated choices between tradition and modernization. In the end, it was a modified Confucianism that underpinned Imperial Japan and alienated it from other democratic powers, with ordinary Japanese themselves becoming victims of its distortions, even as their government pursued aggressive expansionist policies on neighboring peoples. For Koreans under Japanese rule from 1905 to 1945, the continuity of authoritarianism rooted in Confucianism was obvious. It is no surprise that after liberation, no one wanted to restore Korea’s dynastic heritage. The twentieth century was Korea’s greatest era. Industrialization and democratization advanced together. People became healthier, taller, and freer. Korea is now among the safest in the world, even while formally still at war. Every positive change followed de-Confucianization: abolition of hereditary privilege, establishment of gender equality, and religious freedom. Modern education accelerated mechanization and living standards. Korea achieved all this without civil war, religious conflict, generational strife, or separatist rebellion. The Korean War, historians agree, was an externally imposed event, planned and directed from Moscow. Why then raise Confucianism again? Because these achievements apply only to the South. North Korea remains a Confucian dynasty in disguise, disturbingly similar to Joseon. When reunification comes, South Koreans will face urgent questions: how to uproot the Confucian mindset in the North, and how to rehabilitate what is sound. Recent Korean politics, especially the turmoil surrounding Yoon Seok-yeol’s troubled presidency, have stirred sharp debate both at home and abroad. What may appear to be a sudden crisis is better seen as part of a longer pattern, where old traditions and ideas still have enormous bearing on public life. This book examines those deeper roots, showing how Confucian customs have shaped Korea’s politics and held back change. Still, there have been important steps forward: in 1948, Korea wisely granted voting rights to all men and women. This work is not a professional academic project supported by a research team. Comprehensive citation of books and databases lay beyond my reach. I relied heavily on travel, visiting sites in Korea and Japan, and on public resources such as Wikipedia. Its multilingual articles, in English, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, French, and Russian, proved especially valuable for their differences in nuance, which often revealed more than the similarities. I drew carefully on Japanese publications, aware of distortions, as I did with Korean ones. Nationalism must not corrupt history. Digital access to Korea’s historical archives has been indispensable. What was once available only in classical Chinese hardcopy is now searchable, bilingual, and even multilingual: ㆍNational Institute of Korean History: https://www.history.go.kr/ ㆍKorea Heritage Service: https://www.heritage.go.kr/ ㆍNational Museum of Korea: https://www.museum.go.kr/ I owe an immeasurable debt to mentors and colleagues. The presence of Professor Emanuel Pastreich, former long-term resident of Seoul now living in Tokyo, encouraged me: if an American can master classical Korean texts, why should a Korean not attempt to write modern history in English? Steven Brunton, whose broad cultural view and guidance in revision helped me give clearer form to the manuscript. Dr. Susan Pitman-Lowenthal has been a constant partner in dialogue across Seoul, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Zurich, New York, and Boston, helping me shape the very purpose of this project. I am grateful as well to friends in Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Austria, Poland, and Russia, for their continuous inspiration and encouragement. I hold especially dear my memory of the late Professor Akaza Hideyuki of the University of Tokyo, who treated me like both a student and son. Wisdom ignores borders. For physicians, research aims at understanding disease within the individual patient. Cure is often impossible, but early recognition and intervention can save lives. If readers agree that Korean history is not unique, but part of the larger human chronicle, and that its lessons can apply elsewhere, then this work has achieved its purpose. The old disease may resurface; we must remain vigilant. Sang-Yoon Lee Seoul, 2024-2025

Preface and Acknowledgements ㆍ 7 Chapter 1 Joseon: An Unprecedented Confucian State ㆍ 17 Joseon, or Korea: Naming the Korean Nation ㆍ 18 The Question of the Korean Language: An Introduction for Foreigners ㆍ 22 Joseon: Korea’s Shameful Heritage ㆍ 28 Korea: The Most Thoroughly Confucian Country ㆍ 31 Western Views of Joseon: The Yangban Elite ㆍ 32 Who Were the Yangban? A Thousand Years of Evolution ㆍ 37 Did the Korean Empire Die Naturally or Was It Murdered? ㆍ 39 Chapter 2 Three Attempts to Enlighten Korea from Within ㆍ 47 First Attempt: Hangul as a Confucian Tool of King Sejong ㆍ 48 Failure of Reform: The Deliberate Maintenance of a Literacy Divide ㆍ 54 Literacy Divide Within the Ruling Class: A Hypothesis ㆍ 55 Second Attempt: Yangban Converts to Christianity ㆍ 56 Yangban Efforts to Teach Christianity in Hangul ㆍ 58 Failure: Thought Police and the Limits of Reform ㆍ 59 Translating the Bible into Korean ㆍ 61 Source of Literacy Divide: A Theory Under Field Testing ㆍ 62 Third and Last Attempt: Publishing Popular Opinion in Hangul ㆍ 64 Why Confucian Reform Proved So Difficult in Korea ㆍ 68 Chapter 3 Japanese Influences and Korea’s Entanglement with Japan ㆍ 71 From Rising Sun to Rogue State ㆍ 72 Rationale for Binding Korea and Japan after 1868 ㆍ 74 Japan’s Troubled Encounter with Christianity ㆍ 77 Korea and Japan: Comparing Tokugawa Bakufu and Joseon ㆍ 81 Japan’s Nineteenth-Century Educational Revolution ㆍ 85 Japanese Obsession with Imperial Universities ㆍ 92 Japan’s Constitutional Struggles in the Modern Era ㆍ 94 The Politics of Subtraction ㆍ 95 Ito Hirobumi and Emperor Meiji: Architects of Modern Japan ㆍ 98 Ito’s Second European Journey to Study Constitutions ㆍ 101 Prime Minister Ito: Unelected Authority ㆍ 103 Emperor Meiji and the Constitution ㆍ 105 Lessons from Italy and Germany: Reform by Compromise ㆍ 106 The Emperor’s Infallibility ㆍ 110 The Constitution of the Empire of Japan of 1889 ㆍ 112 Emperor Meiji’s Responsibility in History ㆍ 119 The 1890 Rescript on Education ㆍ 123 State Shinto: A Fusion of Doctrines ㆍ 127 Zhou Was an Ancient State, But Its Life Was New 周雖舊邦 其命維新 ㆍ 128 Fukuzawa Yukichi: From Confucianism to Liberalism to Imperialism ㆍ 132 Nationalizing Western Civilization: Japan’s Quantum Leap ㆍ 138 Fukuzawa’s Negative Legacy ㆍ 139 Pan-Asianism: An Idea Before Its Time ㆍ 140 Japanese Racism as a Counter-Reaction ㆍ 143 Education and the State Examination System ㆍ 149 Japan’s Rise and Fall Through the Lens of Confucian Ideology ㆍ 155 Confucianism for Industry: a Japanese Invention and its Korean Legacy ㆍ 156 Chapter 4 The Empire of Korea, 1897-1910 ㆍ 161 Reflection from 1899: Queen Min’s Assassination and Seo Jae-pil’s Second Exile ㆍ 162 Daewongun’s Thirty-Five Years of Power ㆍ 166 Father and Son: A Shift in Royal Authority ㆍ 172 The 1899 Rescript on the Promotion of Study ㆍ 173 The Constitution of the Empire of Korea of 1899 ㆍ 178 Horace Newton Allen’s Archives on the Empire of Korea ㆍ 181 The United States: Last Resort of Korean Independence ㆍ 187 Liberal Democrats and the Pro-Japanese Petition for Annexation ㆍ 189 Choe Ik-hyeon: The Last Icon of Confucianism ㆍ 191 The Revival and Limits of Confucianism in Korea ㆍ 193 Education in Korea Before 1910 ㆍ 19 Tragedy of False Hope: Waiting for a Savior from Heaven ㆍ 199 Chapter 5 The Era of Japanese Rule, 1910-1945 ㆍ 203 The Deal Between Two Emperors, 1910 ㆍ 205 The Last Years of The Empire of Korea ㆍ 207 The 1919 Proclamation of Korean Independence ㆍ 215 The Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea ㆍ 222 The Korean Independence Army and the Provisional Government ㆍ 225 Japan’s Responses to Koreans ㆍ 231 Japan’s Bridge for Korean Higher Education ㆍ 235 State Shinto in Colonial Korea ㆍ 238 The Oath of Imperial Subjects in Korea ㆍ 240 Memories of Imperial Japan: Korean Perspectives ㆍ 241 Japan in the Korean Recollection of 1910 to 1945 ㆍ 243 The 1945 Rescript Ending the Greater East Asian War ㆍ 244 Chapter 6 Two Koreas After 1945 ㆍ 251 The 1948 Constitution of The Republic of Korea ㆍ 252 Syngman Rhee: Brilliance and Shadow ㆍ 255 Rhee’s Adopted Son ㆍ 261 The April Revolution of 1960 ㆍ 263 Rhee’s Second Adopted Son ㆍ 264 Democracy Confronts Confucianism ㆍ 265 The Rise of Christianity in South Korea ㆍ 265 Korea as a “New Israel”: A Far-Right Christian View ㆍ 270 Hyeonchungsa and the Korea-Japan Talks ㆍ 271 The 1968 Charter of National Education ㆍ 275 The October Restoration of 1972 ㆍ 277 Memories of President Park Chung Hee ㆍ 281 Park Chung Hee: Korea’s Napoleon ㆍ 282 The Death of President Park ㆍ 285 The Miracle on the Han River: Park’s Positive Legacy ㆍ 286 South Korea in the 1970s vs. Japan in the 1930s ㆍ 291 The Republic of Korea After 1979: Present and Future ㆍ 293 Freedom of Thought and the Lessons of History ㆍ 295 North Korea Before 1945: Christianity and Industry ㆍ 296 Industrialization in the Two Koreas After 1945 ㆍ 298 The 2019 Socialist Constitution of the DPRK ㆍ 300 Guiding the Future from the Lessons of the Past ㆍ 305 Author’s Apologies ㆍ 306

Chapter 1
Joseon: An Unprecedented Confucian State

Many sovereign states and dynasties have existed throughout Korean history. To understand the current features of Korea (divided into two states with extremely different characteristics and virtually no communication between them), we have to start from the nearest predecessor state: Joseon. Contrary to the teachings of conventional nationalist histories, the Empire of Korea (1897-1910) and the era of Japanese rule (1910-1945) can be combined as the extension of the Joseon dynasty. There is one compelling reason to support this unconventional grouping: whether Koreans were allowed to back a democratic republic would be the proper demarcation in their history. When the Empire of Japan fell in the Second World War, Confucian rule finally ended.

Joseon, or Korea: Naming the Korean Nation

The Joseon Kingdom, built in 1392 after a coup d’?tat of the combined forces of the army, Confucian scholars, and officials overthrew the Goryeo dynasty(918-1392), was a precedent sovereign state of the unified Korean nation until 1897. The name Joseon is still widely used in Japan and China regarding international politics or even in weather forecasts. In 1882, when the Joseon Kingdom first entered into a diplomatic relationship with the United States, it was asserted by Koreans not to be called that, because Korea was actually derived from Goryeo. This reasonable request from the Confucian orthodox viewpoint was not honored by America, and all other Western states continued to use Korea, or Corea (in the case of France, Italy, and Spain) as they had been familiar with that name since the Middle Ages through Arabic and Chinese literature.
Citizens of the Republic of Korea (South Korea) generally do not like to be referred to by the old name, Joseon, because it stirs up unpleasant memories that would be better forgotten. There is a widespread sense of shame about Joseon dynastic history. However, the mood is quite different in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). Its official name in Korean is 조선민주주의인민공화국 (pronounced Joseon Minjujui Inmin Gonghwaguk). In English and other European languages, the appellation “Korea” was frequently, if not exclusively, used both in history and geography. Actually, “Joseon” is rarely used in English literature because it had staunchly prohibited any formal contact with Westerners until 1880. So, allow me to clarify: When Joseon is used in this writing it means a specific state that existed from 1392 until 1897 in the Korean peninsula. The Joseon Kingdom became the Empire of Korea in the latter year, under the same monarch and dynasty, and it was abolished by the Empire of Japan’s annexation in 1910. Accordingly, the Joseon dynasty usually refers to the household of hereditary monarchs of the combined Joseon Kingdom and the Empire of Korea.
This confusion was deliberately maintained because no member of the Korean imperial family was assassinated by or abdicated to the conquering Japanese forces of 1910. Then, the Korean emperor was slightly demoted to the level of king within the Empire of Japan and sovereign governmental power was ceded to the Japanese emperor akin to a private real estate deal. Though the dynasty persisted through heredity, from royal marriage ceremonies to siring offspring, a king without power was nothing more than a hostage. The Japanese colonial authorities tried in vain to present the annexation as peaceful and voluntary, claiming that members of the former Korean imperial family lived as elegantly as their Japanese counterparts. Few Koreans accepted this narrative, because the annexation represented far more than the mere removal of the Korean emperor from the throne.
For thirty-five years, roughly a full generation, the twenty million-strong Korean nation was compelled to become Japanese. The brutal system of Japanization was applied across the board: diplomatically, militarily, legally, economically, linguistically, and religiously. The forceful homogenization of a people with a tradition of independence stretching back millennia was unprecedented in history and destined to fail. Some parallel examples in Europe are Greece and Poland. Japan was not prepared to govern Korea. They did not have solid objectives and coherent plans for governance. During this period, Korea was renamed “Chosen” by Japan, which reflected the Japanese pronunciation of the corresponding Chinese characters. The nuance was intentionally derogatory. This chapter in history helped to fuel Koreans’ general distaste of the word “Joseon.”
As the reader may sense, the Republic of Korea (大韓民國, Daehan Minguk) is the successor state of the Empire of Korea (大韓帝國, Daehan Jeguk). Conveniently, Hanguk (韓國) means either one, depending on the context. Not only was the name of the state inherited, so too was the national flag, first presented in diplomatic relations with the United States. Since the establishment of the 1948 Constitution of the Republic of Korea, the South Korean government has claimed that it is the only legitimate government in the entire Korean peninsula that had ever been known as the Empire of Korea. Now, Japan refers to South Korea as Kankoku (韓國) and North Korea as Kita Chosen (北朝鮮) because the Japanese government acknowledges only the Republic of Korea as the legitimate sovereign state in the Korean peninsula.
In the historical sense, all three words, Han, Joseon, and Korea are qualified to designate land and people living in the Korean peninsula. Actually, the best-known name, Korea, is the youngest. The former words are at least two thousand years old (philological dissertation will be omitted), and the latter has existed for around sixteen hundred years. In the vernacular, the exact name of the Korean nation and its people has been lost to history. All three names were written in Chinese history books, by Chinese imperial historians, using Chinese characters. A deep and proper study of East Asian history and culture necessitates a strong understanding of Chinese characters.

The Question of the Korean Language: An Introduction for Foreigners

Western visitors to Korea in the nineteenth century were most confused when they found that the Chinese spoken language was virtually unintelligible to Koreans. French Roman Catholic priests, who had diligently studied Chinese for years, were frustrated that they had to study Korean vernacular from the start. However, the yangban (Korean nobility), were able to read and write Chinese quite well. Chinese literacy was the emblem of high social status in Joseon. So, it was recommended from such sensitive initial contact that all European missionaries bound for Korea and Korean student candidates for the priesthood should be taught three languages in order to fulfill their assignments: Latin for regular theology courses, literary Chinese for written communication with well-educated Koreans, and Korean vernacular for verbal communication with commoners who were unable to read Chinese characters. French missionaries and Christian yangban both taught languages using the Chinese literary language as the medium.
Though I am quite familiar with numerous Chinese characters, I cannot articulate them using proper Chinese pronunciation. Korean pronunciation of Chinese characters is often so different that I cannot understand even a single word in a Chinese film. Dialectic varieties in China further complicate the matter. It seems that few Koreans, except for merchants in bygone eras, were attentive to this incapability because the primary purpose of studying Chinese was to read books and write diplomatic documents precisely.
The reader will notice that Koreans had lived a dual life in terms of language until the twentieth century. The history of authentic Korean vernacular literature started only in the fifteenth century, while the annals of Chinese literature by Korean authors is traceable to the second century. I will argue tha