[KS] Re: Hong Kil-tong in the _Mansong taedongbo_
hong at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU
Tue Feb 29 04:06:27 EST 2000
Milan Hejtmanek wrote:
> --A _Sillok_ passage from 1428 (Sejong 10/10/28) praises the widow of
> Hong Sang-jik
> for her earnestness in mourning. If the rebel captured in 1500 was
> indeed Sang-jik's son,
> then he would have been over 70 years old at the time.
Prof. So^l So^nkyo^ng takes this fact into consideration. He makes a case that
Hong SJ could've been alive up to 1450 by giving a collage of reasons:
1) Oddly enough, 16 years after his supposed death (Sejong 7/22/1444), there are
other records about Hong SJ having lived w/ a kinyo^ Ok Yo^nghyang, etc. Even
much later (Sejo 7/12/1667) Hong SJ's influence as a rebel lingers.
2) Prof. So^ol mentions _Chu^ngbo hadong ichok_ & _Yonsangun Ilgi_ to explain why
Hong SJ's wife Nam could've possibly tried to fake her husband's death as well as
her own. He argues that these are more "truthful" sources than official
_Sillok_, for they have been written by those unaffected by external pressure.
3) Hong SJ was established in South Cho^lla province Changso^ng Ach'isil.
_Chu^ngbo haedong ijo^k_ contains the legend of Hong KT's birth in Ach'isil.
--Also, while both Hong Sang-jik and his son, Hong Iltong, had checkered careers
> was dismissed and exiled for malfeasance; Iltong drank himself to
> death at an official
Sang-jik was from a family that was in power during Koyro^. He had a motive
against the new Chos^on order. The portrayal of Hong IT in _Pilwo^n Chapki_ is
quite supernatural, worthy of being the older brother of Hong KT. It tells about
his proud character & how he could consume extraordinary amount of food, not just
alcohol (2 steamed chickens, 3 brass bowls of fish soup, a plate of raw fish, 40
cups of wine). He's seen as a man who could've accomplished great deed but met
an untimely death. Some of his poems can be interpreted as his lament over his
wrong timing in Choso^n.
The last ideograph of Hong Kiltong as recorded in the the _Sillok_ isn't the
same character as that which appears in both _MTP_ & _Hong KT cho^n_. There's no
info about his background whatsoever in the _Sillok_. Prof. So^l's explanation
for this: Namhyang Hong clan might've wanted to protect itself & the government
also didn't want to reveal that the enigmatic robber was a so^o^l of a yangban.
PS. Will take a break fr all this unless someone has a crucial question which I
can answer individually. It's a good discussion but a woman can't live on it
More information about the Koreanstudies