[KS] By train from Seoul to Incheon--what's in a name?
sumnom at u.washington.edu
sumnom at u.washington.edu
Wed Jan 25 00:40:45 EST 2006
Here is an interesting account from the Sillok concerning an unlucky tiger's fatal encounter with Taejo. It also provides an example of the usage of "kyongsong":
虎入京城多害人物太祖射殪之
Source: http://sillok.history.go.kr/inspection/inspection.jsp?mTree=0&id=waa_000065&pId=waa_000065
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Stefan Ewing wrote:
> Dear KS list members:
>
> All right, it's my turn to ask a vexing question. The question and its
> motivation are arcane and necessarily long, so my apologies in advance, and
> please feel free to skip this posting entirely.
>
> (For consistency's sake, I'm using McCune-Reischauer for almost all place names
> in this article, both historical and modern. Some names go by different
> renditions today.)
>
> Korea's first railway line was built during the era of foreign concessions, at
> the close of the 19th century. In 1899, a line was opened connecting
> Noryangjin (across the river from the city gates of Hanso^ng--modern-day Seoul)
> with Chemulp'o in Inch'o^n, the forerunner of today's Kyo^ngin Line. (The
> Noryangjin-Kuro stretch is now part of the Kyo^ngbu Line to Pusan, a 6-track
> artery served by everything from the high-speed KTX to lowly,
> packed-to-the-handrails local Line 1 subway trains.)
>
> Historical articles on the early development of Korean railways invariably
> refer to the original 1896 line as the Kyo^nginso^n (so^n = Line;
> http://www.korail.go.kr/2003/100th/year/index1.html) or Kyo^ngin Ch'o^lto
> (Railway; http://webzine.korail.go.kr/20050402/00250.html). If the line was in
> fact so named in 1896--which is not at all clear--this would indicate that the
> characters in the line's name were chosen because the line connects the capital
> (so^ul kyo^ng) with Inch'o^n (o^jil in). The Kyo^ngbu (to Pusan, opened 1905)
> and Kyo^ngu^i Lines (to Sinu^iju, 1906) appear to have been named on a similar
> pattern.
>
> The sticking point is that, up until 1910, Seoul's name was Hanso^ng, and
> thereafter changed by or under the Japanese authorities to Kyo^ngso^ng.
> Long-time Korean practice before and since has been to name many provinces,
> transportation routes, or events by joining together one character from each of
> the two place names involved: thus, Ch'ungch'o^ng-do (Ch'ungju-Ch'o^ngju); the
> Kyo^ngjo^n (Kyo^ngsang-Cho^lla) railway line; the Kuma (Taegu-Masan)
> Expressway; and relevant to the recent discussion, the Puma (Pusan-Masan)
> Uprising(s) (?--cannot find their mention now). Why, then, was the original
> railway called not, say, the Hanin (Hanso^ng-Inch'o^n) Ch'o^lto, but the
> somewhat contrived Kyo^ngin Ch'o^lto?
>
> That Seoul was not officially named as such until one year after liberation in
> 1946 does not preclude the possibility that the word "so^ul" ("capital") was
> used colloquially to refer to the city prior to that time. When streetcars
> first came to the capital in 1898, the operating company--Hanso^ng Cho^ngi
> Hoesa--was referred to in English as the "Seoul Electric Co."
> (http://www.seoul.go.kr/life/life/culture/history_book/picture_seoul2/7/1203339_3020.html
> , 7th photo from top; note Han'gu^l rendition of company's name as "Hansyo^ng
> Tyo^ngu^i Hoesa"). Could the character "kyo^ng" have had some currency as a
> written noun, equivalent to the colloquial name "Seoul"?
>
> It is also possible that the original railway had a different name and that the
> modern name--Kyo^ngin--has only been applied to the line retrospectively by
> later writers. Under this scenario, the Kyo^ngin Line and its pre-1910 younger
> sisters--the Kyo^ngbu and Kyo^ngu^i Lines to Pusan and Sinu^iju
> respectively--would have been so renamed some time after the Japanese
> annexation. In that case, the first character in each line's new name would
> presumably have come from the "kyo^ng" in "Kyo^ngso^ng" (the Japanese "Keijo"),
> Seoul's new name--the same character, but with a different story behind it.
>
> To summarize, my question, then, is this: Was the name "Kyo^ngin" chosen (over,
> say, "Hanin"), because the character kyo^ng denotes "capital," the Korean
> equivalent--Seoul/So^ul--being the colloquial name for Hanso^ng? Are there
> attestations in other (non-rail-related) sources to the use of "kyo^ng" (or
> "Seoul") to refer to the capital during the Choso^n Dynasty? Or is this a
> commentary on non-scholarly historiography, with modern writers retrospectively
> applying an anachronistic name to the railway, the original name lost in the
> mists of time? Or between the railway's concession holder--James R. Morse--and
> the Koreans with whom he worked, was this highly idiosyncractic name the simple
> result?
>
> I hope someone, somewhere on this list can provide some sort of satisfactory
> answer. It would appear that whatever the answer, there's an interesting story
> waiting to emerge!
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Stefan Ewing
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Designer Mail isn't just fun to send, it's fun to receive. Use special
> stationery, fonts and colors.
> http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
> Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN. Premium right now and get the first two
> months FREE*.
>
>
>
More information about the Koreanstudies
mailing list