• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.57-79
• /
• 2001

[Go-Choseon], the first volume of Samgukyusa, is composed of two parts, the part of myth and that of history. There are very similar divinities between Hwanwoong in the myth of Dangun and YanDi-ShenNong of China: the solar divinity essential for survival of mankind and agriculture, the agriculture divinity said to have taught fanning, the medicine divinity said to have taught the characteristics of herbs and how to prevent diseases, the cultural hero who delivered civilization, and son on. During the transition from the age of myth to the age of history, the roles of gods had changed from the creation of the world to civilization and rule. The roles of Hwanwoong and YanDi-ShenNong were civilization and it was related with their divinities. Hence, regardless of a little difference, the myth of Hwanwoong and that of YanDi-ShenNong were created at the same stage of spiritual and material civilizations of Korea and China. This paper looks at the essence of [Wiseo] and the age of Hwanwoong through historical records. In my opinion, [Wiseo] is not a chinese history' book. The record, "According to [Wiseo] there had been Dangun-Wanggum 2,000 years ago" indicates the time [Wiseo] was written. 'Wi' means Wlman-choseon. Going back about 2,000 years from Wiman-choseon, the historical dates of the establishment of [Go-Choseon] almost dovetails to the age of King 'lao. So, there is a possibility that [Wiseo] is a history book of Wiman-Choseon dynasty which was written to prove the legitimacy of the dynasty by showing it succeeded to the Dangilll-Choseon dynasty. The sentences, "governed the country for 1,500 years" and "conferred Gija the position of king of Choseon" are very important records showing the age of the establishment of Dangun-Choseon. Gija came to Choseon in B.C 1122 when Yin replaced Zhou in the Choinese Continent. From the fact that Dangun had governed Choseon, we could reason out that Go-Choseon was established in B.C. 2622 that is much eariler than the era of king Yao, and that corresponds 'With the era of HuangDi(B.C 2698-2358). Hence, the era of Hwanwoong, the father-god of Dangun, might be later than B.G 3000 which conforms to the era of YanDi-ShenNong(B.C 3218-2600). Therefore, this paper contends lhat Hwanwoong and YanDi-ShenNong played the role of civilization in the same era [Go-Choseon], the first volume of Samgukusa is philologically very valuable material for research on the origin of Korean nation and its ancient history.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.47-55
• /
• 1984

To study the risk factors associated with maternal HBsAg carrier and the effects of maternal HBs antigenemia on the neonatal health, sera of 729 pergnant women admitted to the Keimyung University Hospital for delivery during the period of February 1-May 30. 1982 were tested for HBsAg by RPHA method and for anti-HBs by PHA method. Among them 43 women (5.9%) had HBsAg and 246 women (33.7%) had anti-HBs giving an infection rate of 39.6%. The interview data for 43 HBsAg positive mothers and randomly selected 210 HBsAg negative mothers showed a statistically significant association between acupuncture history and HBsAg positive rate (p<0.005) which suggest that acupuncture might have contributed significantly to the propagation of viral hepatitis in Korea. The living standard of HBsAg positive mothers was generally lower than that of HBsAg negative mothers which supports the hypothesis that environmental factors are associated with viral hepatitis B infection. None of the 43 neonates born to HBsAg positive mothers had HBsAg in their cord blood. Three months after birth, 35 out of 43 infants were retested and only one infant became HBsAg positive. At six months of age, 32 out of 35 infants were retested and none of them were HBsAg positive except the same infant who was positive at three months. Among 20 control infants of HBsAg negative mothers, all of them were HBsAg negative at three and six months follow-up. These findings are not consistent with the supposition that perinatal infection is a main route of viral hepatitis B transmission in south-east Asia including Korea. HBsAg positive mothers had significantly higher rate of premature delivery (27.9%) than HBsAg negative mothers (11.7%) (p<0.05). Also, the low birthweight incidence rate was higher among HBsAg positive mothers (23.3%) than negative mothers (14.1%) but this was not statistically significant (P=0.16). The premature rupture of membrane was more frequent among HBsAg positive mothers (25.5%) than negative mothers (11.1%) (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the stillbirth rate and incidence of congenital anomalies between HBsAg positive and negative groups. It was not clarified in this study due to small sample size whether higher incidence of premature delivery and premature rupture of membranes among HBsAg positive mothers was due to HBs antigenemia per so or their lower living standard than HBsAg negative mothers.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.62
• /
• pp.231-262
• /
• 2016

The Jongmyo Shrine(宗廟) of Zhou dynasty was a king's main building where a diversity of rituals were held, such as 'the assembly ceremony between a king and vassals in the morning', and was also called as Taechim(太寢) Nochim(路寢) Jeongchim(正寢) and others. Before Zhou dynasty, the expressions of Taesil(太室) and Sesil(世室) were used, and especially the term of Taesil(太室) is found in the records of the early period of West Zhou. In "Seogyeong(書經)", not only the term of Nochim(路寢) but also the letter of 'chim(寢)' itself is not found at all, but the letter of 'sil(室)' appeared several times in the chapters of "Haseo(夏書)" "Sangseo(商書)" "Juseo(周書)" except for that of "Wuseo(虞書)". "Jwajowusa(左祖右社)" meaning that 'the Jongmyo Shrine(宗廟) which keeps the late king's mortuary tablet is established in the left, and Sajikdan altar(社稷壇) which enshrines a god of land and grains is established in the right' was first mentioned in the part of 'Janginyeongguk(匠人營國 : a master craftsman builds different national infrastructures, for instance, a palace and roads)' in "Donggwangogonggi(冬官考工記)" of "Jurye(周禮)". In addition, so-called 'Jwamyowusa(左廟右社)', that is, "Sajik(社稷) enshrining the god of land and grains is built in the right('右'), and the Jongmyo Shrine(宗廟) in the left('左'). (右社稷 左宗廟)" was mentioned as one of different duties of a Sojongbaek(小宗伯) in charge of ancestral rites, which was recorded in "Chungwanjongbaek(春官宗伯)" of "Jurye(周禮)". And it seems that had affected the mention of "Jwajowusa(左祖右社)" in "Donggwangogonggi(冬官考工記)" appeared thereafter. Many manners scholars including Jeonghyun(鄭玄) since Han dynasty interpreted 'Jwa(左 : left)' and 'Wu(右 : right)' here as the arrangement relation of left and right of Jongmyo(宗廟) and Sajik(社稷), but when it is interpreted as "helping(右=佑 : to help) to sacrifice to a god of land and grains in Sajik(社稷), and helping(左=佐 : to help) memorial ceremonies in Jongmyo(宗廟)." it can correspond with a 'Jongbaek(宗伯)''s duties. 'Jeonmyohuchim(前廟後寢)' is the term that began from the expression that "what's in front is called as an jongmyo shrine(宗廟) and what's back as a bedroom.(前曰廟 後曰寢)" in Jeonghyun(鄭玄)'s annotation explaining the chapter of "Hagwansama(夏官司馬)" in "Jurye(周禮)" and "Wolryeong(月令)" in "Yegi(禮記)". Chaeong(蔡邕), a figure in the same age as Jeonghyun(鄭玄), used the expression that "a court is placed in the front, and a bedroom in the back(前有朝 後有寢)." In the paper, two hypotheses were discussed about the theory about Jeonmyohuchim(前廟後寢). In one hypothesis, it expressed two facilities within a wall; 'a court in the front to deal with governmental affairs, and a comfortable interior space in the back.' In another hypothesis, it refers to two independent and separate buildings of 'an jongmyo shrine(宗廟) building in the front as the area of governmental meetings, and the residential building in the back as the residence area with family'.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.67
• /
• pp.345-378
• /
• 2017

In the scriptures of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$(春秋)", the expression method of '$Ch{\bar{u}}n-w{\acute{a}}ng-zh{\bar{e}}ng-yu{\grave{e}}$(春王正月 : It's spring. It's the first month regulated by the king.)' was used as Jì-yuè-fǎ(紀月法 : the rules to determine the first month(正月)), the month of winter solstice was regarded as the first month of a year, and three years since then were named as $Ch{\bar{u}}n$(春 : spring). With regard to this "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$"Wáng-lì("春秋"王曆 : the calendar regulated by the king of $Zh{\bar{o}}u$(周) dynasty in "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$"), depending on whether Confucius(孔子) changed and recorded the names of the months and the season or not, there were three different arguments; the theory that 'Confucius changed the names of both the months and the season'(孔子改月 改時說), the view that 'Confucius changed the name of the season, not the names of the months'(孔子不改月 改時說), and then the theory that 'Confucius changed neither the names of the months nor the name of the season'(孔子不改月 不改時) since Song(宋) dynasty. The first view was taken by $Hh{\acute{u}}-{\bar{a}}n-gu{\acute{o}}$(胡安國) and $C{\grave{a}}i-ch{\acute{e}}n$(蔡沈), and the second theory was mentioned by Chéng-yí(程?) and Zhū-zǐ(朱子). The advocates of the third view had become remarkable since Ming(明) dynasty, and one of representatives was Wàng-yáng-míng(王陽明). All of them based their arguments on ancient scriptures and Confucian legal books, and there were cases of taking the same records as the support for different opinions. Confucius' so-called 'Chūn-qiū-bǐ-fǎ(春秋筆法 : the method to describe historical facts by making clear discrimination between right and wrong)' and '$Sh{\grave{u}}-{\acute{e}}r-b{\grave{u}}-zu{\grave{o}}$(述而不作 : the attitude to succeed virtuous men's achievements and only explain and describe them not creating and adding new contents)' could come from thoughts of $Z{\bar{u}}n-w{\acute{a}}ng$(尊王 : to respect the king with the virtues of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and sincerity). Therefore, even though Confucius is assumed to have been the writer of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$(春秋)", whether he actually changed and recorded the names of the months and the season in the calendar used in "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$" is doubtful. These theories on Confucius's intervention in the calendar of "$Ch{\bar{u}}n-qi{\bar{u}}$" hadn't been discussed as conflicting in reality until Tang(唐) dynasty.