• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.25-38
• /
• 2000

A knowledge classification is based on different types of knowledge system. which depends on classified objects, purposes, times, regions, and scholars. The classified contents. however, do not show any significant difference in any times or regions, though there are differences in representation methods and in arrangement priority of representing knowledge, Knowledge or library classification reflects the structure of a contemporary society and is decided by social philosophy of the time. The basic structure of knowledge system in the past was formed in the ancient time, and since then, it has been continuously developed. In the course of this process, the development of studies has generated other branches of studies, playing a significant role in changing the whole system of studies. This kind of development will continue to occur and many new branches of information will appear. resulting in taking each category of knowledge classification.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.35-59
• /
• 2009

The acupuncture documentary characteristics of the "Chimgugapeulgyeong" can be summarized into 7 parts such as the following. 1. After Imeok(林億)'s revised edition of the "Gapeulgyeong(甲乙經)" was printed during the Song dynasty, there were no reprints during the Southern Song, Geum(金) and Won(元) eras, and the first printed edition that remains today is the 'Uihakyukgyeong edition[醫學六經本]' published by Omyeonhak(吳勉學) during the Mallyeok(萬曆) era of the Myeong(明) dynasty. This publication was put into the "Uitongjeongmaek(醫統正脈)" collection in the 29th year of the Manlleok(萬曆) era(1601). Most of the remaining copies have been restored during the Cheong dynasty at bookstores, and we can see that much was restored because of damage and missing characters. Also, the 'Namgyeokcho edition[藍格抄本]' and 'Yukgyeong edition[六經本]' of the Myeong dynasty do not come from the same original document, which allows the correction of the former in many places. However, this edition was not copied well, so the order of contents is different, and there are many mistakes. The 'Sagojeonseo edition[四庫全書本]' and the 'Gajeong edition[嘉靖本]', which Yeounsu(余云岫) quoted from, coincide with each other, making them worth much reference. So, the "Gapeulgyeong" and 'Yukgyeong edition' should be seen as the original, with the 'Myeongcho edition[明抄本]' as the main revision, and the 'Sago edition[四庫本]' as a reference edition. The so-called 'Chojeongtong edition(鈔正統本)' has many problems and marks of forgery, so therefore cannot be used in revising the "Gapeulgyeong" through comparison. 2. The table of contents[序例] in the front of the current edition was in the original edition and was not added by Imeok. The structure of sentences quoted by medical books before the Song dynasty coincide with this 'table of contents'. The "Gapeulgyeong" of the Song dynasty also coincide with the 'table of contents' but the edition remaining differs much from this 'table of contents' so it was edited or erased by people from future generations, especially after the Song dynasty. 3. The remaining edition of "Gapeulgyeong" consists of at least 4 parts. The original edited by Hwangbomil(皇甫謐), annotations added by medicinal practitioners before the Song dynasty, Imeok's revisionary annotations during the Song dynasty, and annotations after the Song dynasty. 4. Expressions such as 'Somun says[素問曰]' 'Gugwon says[九卷曰]' and explanatory annotations like 'Hae says[解曰]' are old writings from the original text and were not added by someone later. 5. Almost all of the 'Double lined small letter annotations[雙行小字注文]' of the 'Yukgyoeng edition' was by people during the Song dynasty. 6. There are many omitted and wrong letters in the remaining edition and there are also many places where future generations edited and supplemented the text. The table of contents differ greatly from the original text. 7. The medical books that quote "Gapeulgyeong" a lot are "Cheongeumyobang(千金要方)", "Oedaebiyobang(外臺秘要方)", "Seongjaechongrok(聖濟總錄)", "Chimgujasaenggyeong(鍼灸資生經)", "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)", and "Uihakgangmok(醫學綱目)" and such. However, the method used in using the text differs between the medical books, so the quotation from the same book comes from a quotation used by a doctor from a different era in one("Cheongeumyobang"), or the quotation was taken from each medical book("Chimgujasaenggyeong") or the quotation was all taken from another book("Yuyusinseo"). The reason we need to know about this problem properly is because we must use medical books that quote the original text of the "Gapeulgyeong" when we are looking for text that we can use to revise through comparison.

• The Journal of Korean Medical History
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.105-118
• /
• 2004

The four precious results are beard below after thorough study of Jeoneul(錢乙)'s descended piece and main citation reference from Song(宋) era. 1. Jeoneul(錢乙)'s historical period seems that he finished his life in the age of 82, from Cheonseong(天聖) 10years(Year 1032) to Jeonghwa(政和) 3years(Year 1113) in North Song(北宋) era. However, it also seems that his life terminated Seonhwa(宣和)元年in 1119. The title of "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was reflected in "Sagojeonseo(四庫全書)" as "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)", however according to various of previous descended references and citations indicate that "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" is more appropriate than "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)". Furthermore, the name, Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠), who edited the reference "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was appeared as Yeomgyechung(閻孝忠) in many different old references. Thus, even though, Sagogoan(四庫館) and Juhakhae(周學海) looked as Yeomgyechung(閻孝忠), but it seems Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠) in "Songsa(宋史)" Yemunji(藝文志) is more authentic than others. 2. When first edition of "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was published, Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠)'s the first book of "Yeomssisoabangnon(閻氏小兒方論)" and the first chapter of Yugi's "Jeonjungyangjeon(錢仲陽傳)" were attached in one book. Not long after of the first edition, Donggeup(董汲)'s first book of "Soabanjinbigeupbangnon(小兒斑疹備急方論)" and Jeoneul(錢乙)'s additional attachment was added in prescription reference. Among these references which were published in Song era, the original copy which Jinsegeol(陳世傑) published in Chung era in Ganghi(康熙) 58years (Year 1719) was remained and the first edition that Yangsugyeong(楊守敬) collected in Japan was published in "(lbonbangseoji(日本訪書志)" called Seonhwabon(宣和本). 3. Ungjonglip(熊宗立)'s "LyujeungjuseokJeonssisoabanggyeol(類證注釋錢氏小兒方訣)", Seolgi(薛己)'s "Gyojeongjeonssisoayakjeungjikgyeol(校正錢氏小兒藥證直訣)" Muyeongjeon-Chuijinbon(武英殿聚珍本) were followed Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s called Seonhwabon(宣和本) theory, in addition Yubang(劉昉)'s "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)" and "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" quoted from Chosun "Euibangyuchui(醫方類聚)" also followed Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s called Seonhwabon(宣和本) theory. On the other hand, Jinsegeol(陳世傑)'s Gisudangbon(起秀堂本) and reprinted Juhakhaebon(周學海本) belong to parts of Songbokganbon(宋復刊本). 4. In major references and citation materials descended from "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)", Yubang(劉昉)'s "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)" and "Soauisaengchongaminonbang(小兒衛生總微論方)" were cited in Song era and some related parts in "Yeongnakdaejeon(永樂大典)", "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" related sections, Ungjonglip(熊宗立)'s reedited and annotated part of "Lyujeungjuseokjeonssisoabanggyeol(類證注釋錢氏小兒方訣)", Seolgi(薛己)'s proof reading and annotated "Gyojujeonssisoayakjeungjingyeol(校注錢氏小兒藥證直訣)", "Euibangyuchui(醫方類聚)"'s quotation. In Chung(淸)era, Jinsegeol(陳世傑)'s re-published reference, Gisudangbon(起秀堂本), which was simply printed in Song and proof read and republished Juhakhaebon(周學海本), Muyeongjeonchuijinbon(武英殿聚珍本) compiled from "Yeongnakdaejeon(永樂大典)", Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s "Jeonssisoayakjeungjikgyeol(錢氏小兒藥證直訣)" mentioned in "Ilbonbangseoji(日本訪書志)", Jangsui's annotation, "Soayakjeungjikgyeoljeonjeong(小兒藥證直訣箋正)" and Simgeumo(沈金鰲)'s "Yuguaseokmi(幼科釋謎)" which was applied Jeoneul(錢乙)'s theory and prescription.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.337-370
• /
• 2011

The academic circle of the Qing Dynasty has seen a new trend, mostly based on Han-Hak through the event of the publication of "Sagojeyo" and sought a new change in the sector of Spring Autumn-Hak as well. This study is focused on understanding and evaluation of the developmental process of especially the traditional Spring Autumn-Hak view, among some views of "Sagojeyo" by the book. "Sagojeyo" does a critical analysis of Gongyang-Hak and Gokryang-Hak and the interpretation of "Spring Autumn" made by Song-Hak scholars, and which seems a kind of preparatory step to build up a new research methodology for Spring Autumn-Hak. "Sagojeyo" emphasizes the importance of "Jwacijeon" and also points out its weaknesses and strongly demands the acceptance of strengths "Gongyangjeon" and "Gokryangjeon" have in order to compensate such demerits. Even further, it tries to evaluate Spring Autumn-Hak of the Song Dynasty objectively and reasonably as possible with no prejudice. Such analysis attitude made it possible for Spring Autumn-Hak to get a new turning point starting from the publication of "Sagojeyo". The new research methodology that comprehensively judges historical research and fidelity discourse could be one of important achievements discovered in the Han-Hak-centered academic circle in the early Qing Dynasty.