• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.179-210
• /
• 2017

By redefining the concept of history, my colleagues and I have reformed our department in terms of curriculum and faculty members. This paper is a report of some of the conclusions that we have obtained from this procedure. Despite a long relationship, two disciplines do not seem to match or complement each other in the Korean education system. We believe that this is due to the fact that the Department of Korean History has focused on "national history (NH)." By conferring a privilege on NH, persons, families, societies, regions, and others were removed from NH. To make matters worse, a biased view that history is just an interpretation has prevailed, and the empiricism of history was weakened, which brought about an indifference in keeping records and archives. In East Asia, "history" means both modern history and archives. The concern about the authenticity of records did not come from H. Jenkinson or L. Duranti, and not even from the electronic environment or the Public Records Act of 1998. Key concepts such as records, documents-archives, manuscripts, authenticity, compilation-appraisal, arrangement, and description are different from their signifiant but are same or similar to their $signifi{\acute{e}}$. In case of "provenance" and "original order," they are used in education and practice in the traditional archives. History includes the recording, archiving, and the story or historiography of an event. In this context, the Department of Korean History should contain a more archives-oriented curriculum and select an archival-trained faculty. On the other hand, the department has accumulated long-term experience with appraisal and description of records; thus, archival science should absorb the criticism of the material. History will be shaken without the help of archives, while archives will lose their root without history. We are at the point in which we need to be reminded why we want to be a historian or an archivist, and for this, the more colleagues, the better.

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.152
• /
• pp.12-12
• /
• 1994

사학사는 역사서술의 역사이자 역사적 사유의 역사이기도 하다. 그런 점에서 사학사에 대한 연구는 인간지성의 전개과정에 대한 고찰이다. "한국의 역사가와 역사학"은 한국지성사 이해의 길라잡이다. 그러나 세계정신사적 스펙트럼에서 우리 역사인식의 고유한 특성.수준을 규명하는 데 미흡하다. 이 책은 그것을 뒷날의 연구자들에게 위임한다.

• The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics
• /
• v.29 no.6
• /
• pp.1007-1023
• /
• 2016

This paper explores the conditions and potential of newly designed and tried methodology of big data analysis that apply to Korean history subject matter. In order to advance them, we need to pay more attention to quantitative analysis methodologies over pre-existing qualitative analysis. To obtain our new challenge, I propose 'digital history' methods along with associated disciplines such as linguistics and computer science, data science and statistics, and visualization techniques. As one example, I apply interdisciplinary convergence approaches to the principle and mechanism of elite reproduction during the Korean medieval age. I propose how to compensate for a lack of historical material by applying a semi-supervised learning method, how to create a database that utilizes text-mining techniques, how to analyze quantitative data with statistical methods, and how to indicate analytical outcomes with intuitive visualization.

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.6
• /
• pp.15-15
• /
• 1987

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.87
• /
• pp.10-11
• /
• 1991

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.342
• /
• pp.54-55
• /
• 2004

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.9
• /
• pp.210-233
• /
• 2004

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.237-242
• /
• 2012

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.220
• /
• pp.14-15
• /
• 1997

한우근.이두현.황수영.진홍섭.이병선.지명관씨 등 역사학.언어학.미술사학.민속학 각계의 1세대격인 원로들이 노익장을 과시하며 책을 펴냈다. 고희와 팔순을 넘긴 이들 지식인의 일관성 있는 연구작업은 젊은 후학들에게 자극을 준다.

• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.77-94
• /
• 2011

In this article, the author introduces the paradigm shift in archival studies that occurs in north America. Although the dominant paradigm in the archival studies-the positivism paradigm-greatly contributed to build modern archives in Europe and north America, during last decades, new ideas and technologies led the archival communities to re-identify their social roles and powers and to adopt new values of archives and archivist. This essay argues that this changes is essential to our future and we understand the nature of the changes from the broader interdisciplinary perspective of archives studies, information studies, and history.