<html><head><title>Re: [KS] Three topics - Re: Senyeon-ga; Dan'gun discourse; teaching Budd</title>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<span style=" font-family:'Arial'; font-size: 12pt;">Dear Andrew and all,<br>
I quote one of Jorganson's article a lot, because I like his crispy description of chuch'e, and thus have the details at hand:<br>
<span style=" font-family:'Calibri'; font-size: 9pt; color: #000000;">John Jorganson: “Tan'gun and the Legitimization of a Threatened Dynasty: North Korea's Rediscovery of Tan'gun”, <i>Korea Observer</i> XXVII/2, 1996, pp. 273-306<br>
<span style=" font-family:'Arial'; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000;">I guess that's the one Boudewijn mentioned (if not, please correct).<br>
Best,<br>
Rudiger<br>
<br>
on Dienstag, 08. September 2015 at 11:20 you wrote:<br>
<br>
</span></span></span><table>
<tr>
<td width=2 bgcolor= #0000ff><br>
</td>
<td><span style=" font-family:'times new roman'; font-size: 11pt; color: #1f497d;">Andrew,<br>
<br>
You may already know the article by John Jorgensen who argues in great detail that the Tan’gun myth is a Koryo product, composed under the influence of Buddhism. The bibliographical details you can find in Breuker’s book.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Boudewijn Walraven<br>
<br>
<span style=" font-size: 10pt; color: #000000;"><b>From:</b> Koreanstudies [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces@koreanstudies.com] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Andrew<br>
<b>Sent:</b> maandag 7 september 2015 11:20<br>
<b>To:</b> koreanstudies@koreanstudies.com<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [KS] Three topics - Re: Senyeon-ga; Dan'gun discourse; teaching Buddhist history<br>
<br>
<span style=" font-size: 12pt;">Dear all,<br>
<br>
Three separate topics/questions.<br>
<br>
1) <b><i>Se'nyeon-ga </i>response<br>
<br>
</b>Thank-you kindly for the very useful links.<br>
<br>
I've taken the Han Yong-u (韓永愚) 해재 article on the SNY library site, but couldn't see the Chin Chaegyo article Sem Vermeesch mentions, but certainly I'd be interested.<br>
<br>
At first glance the 歷代世年歌 原本(縮小影印) 외 version also available from the SNU library doesn't seem to be the same as the book version I had photographed, but I should spend some time looking at it before making assumptions!<br>
<br>
<br>
2)<b> Dan'gun<br>
<br>
</b>Because my thesis is a survey of popular historiography focusing on early Korea, much of it discusses treatment of Dan'gun. I've developed some of my own thoughts/observations on this subject and recently drafted a conference paper, a part of which is an attempted response to Breuker's treatment of Dan'gun in his <i>Establishing a Pluralist Society in Medieval Korea</i> (2010); this is meant only in the spirit of developing (or at least revisiting) the discourse, as in all other respects I've found Breuker (2010) - and his other writings on historiography - extremely enlightening and infinitely more sophisticated than anything I am capable of myself.<br>
<br>
In relation to Korean mythography (and my thesis), I have just been reading Gardiner's 1982 Korean Journal articles "The Legends of Koguryŏ" which are essentially annotated translations of the primary sources.<br>
<br>
My question is, are there any classic (or recent) articles of this high quality that discuss the Hwan'ung-Dan'gun myth? I recognize there has been a greater tradition of scholarly interest in the Dongmyeong/Jumong myths (going back to Japanese colonial work such as Shiratori's seminal 1938 article "The Legend of Kin Tung-ming.." in <i>Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko</i>), no doubt in large part because it is much earlier attested mythology; meanwhile Dan'gun has been largely high-jacked by pseudo scholarship and modern nationalist discourse, which I imagine has turned most people off.<br>
<br>
(If anyone might be interested in my draft paper - although it's rather a mess - I would be happy to share it in order to stimulate some discussion and ideas).<br>
<br>
3) <b>Teaching Buddhist history<br>
<br>
</b>This term I am teaching an introductory undergraduate course "Premodern Korean history" which I last prepared and taught two years ago. Whilst I need to revise my notes in general, a point I remember is that I was unsatisfied with the narrative of Korean Buddhist history (or rather lack of). My problem was, the way I taught it, each of the famous monks seem to unify disparate or polarized schools of Buddhist thought at different periods, culminating with Jinul (知訥). No doubt this is a shallow understanding, so my question is how can I improve on this. How can Korean Buddhist history be taught as an interesting narrative? (Recognizing developmental narratives maybe artificial - but still useful), or are there better approaches? Has anyone else encountered similar problems?<br>
<br>
For reference, I mainly rely on Grayson's <i>Korea-A Religious History</i> (2002) which I find works quite well as a general survey on premodern Korean intellectual history (and even Korean history in general); I take a few more details from Buswell's works too.<br>
<br>
sincerely<br>
Andrew Logie<br>
(Helsinki)</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br>
</body></html>