문헌의 출간 현황으로 살펴본 17~19세기 후반 서양의 한국 연구 －「언더우드 목록」의 수록 문헌을 중심으로－

Abstract

This study examines the various contexts in which information and knowledge about Korea were produced and circulated in the West between the 17th and 19th centuries. The analysis is primarily concerned with the publication flow of literature, given that, at least until the late 20th century, the acquisition and transmission of information and knowledge were largely conducted through published literature. The status of published literature serves as an indicator of the demand for relevant knowledge, particularly in terms of the extent to which it is being translated and republished. The timing of publication, authorship, and content of the literature can also provide insight into the specific triggers or contexts that sparked interest in Korea. Consequently, the Western literature on Korea in this study was employed primarily as a source of data to illustrate trends and flows, rather than as a basis for textual analysis. The bibliographic information of the literature was collated from “A Partial Bibliography of Occidental Literature on Korea, From Early Times to 1930”, which is purported to contain the largest corpus of Western literature on Korea, and the period of analysis is from the 16th century to 1880. As relations between Korea and the West become more frequent, it is to be expected that Western literature will be translated into Korean, and that Korean perceptions will be influenced accordingly. However, the objective of this study is to elucidate the diversity of actors and contexts that have contributed to this phenomenon, which is often taken for granted. As with the West's perception of the external world, the East was viewed as a monolithic entity. However, this was not an accurate representation of the East as a whole. Similarly, the West and its perception of Korea as a subject were shaped by an othered gaze. It is evident that the expansion of Western political, military, and commercial interests in East Asia in the late 19th century constituted a significant driving force behind the quest for Korea. Nevertheless, it would be fallacious to posit that all activities that yielded knowledge about Korea were inherently driven by imperialist aspirations. The process by which the exploration of Korea, which occurred in a multitude of contexts, came to be addressed within the realm of institutionalised scholarship cannot be adequately explained by reducing it to imperialism or orientalism. Ultimately, a comprehensive understanding of the “Plurality of Korean studies” will emerge when a detailed and nuanced examination of the actors, ideas, environments, and institutions that have shaped Korean perceptions is conducted.