[KS] By train from Seoul to Incheon--what's in a name?

[gkl1 at columbia.edu]

Joshua Van Lieu is correct in insisting that <Seoul> means
"capital" and therefore was applied to Seoul from the moment it
became the capital in 1395. Before that, although we have no
vernacular texts to show it, Kaes^ong was <Seoul>, and before that
Ky^ongju was <Seoul> for Silla. In fact <Seoul> is an evolved form
of <S^orab^ol> "Iron (or Metal) City," the Silla name of Ky^ongju,
where <S^ora> --the ancestor
of modern <soe>, "iron"-- is combined with p^ol, the Silla word for
"city."
    While <Seoul> means capital and has always been the conventional
and most common name for the city, it was never the formal name.
That was Hans^ong, which in essence comes from the name of the
river and the northern and southern mountains of the same name. As
an administrative city, Silla called it Hansanju. Kory^o named it
Yangju (Yang = "willow")m and toward the end of the dynasty called
it <Hanyang> (yang = yinyang yang-- north side of a river, south
side of a mountain). Chos^on called it Hanyangbu, and changed the
name to Hans^ong early on.
   As for Inch'^on and Chemulp'o, the latter was the name of the
port, which was on the coast; the former was the name of the
district, where the magistrate rukled, which was inland. The names
are not equal.

Gari Ledyard

Quoting sumnom at u.washington.edu:

>
> In addressing this issue, it might be helpful to think of
> "gyeong" and "gyeongseong" not as place names but as the generic
> noun "capital" or "capital city." I did a brief on-line search of
> Joseon government documents and came up with thousands of
> references to "gyeongseong" spanning the entire dynasty. I read
> only a handful but they all referred to the capital city of the
> Joseon state.
>
> If we move beyond the confines of the Joseon period, the Hanguk
> hanja'eo sajeon contains several pages of "gyeong" entries
> (1:223-232) referring to the people and institutions of the
> Silla, Goryeo, and Joseon capitals.
>
> Unless I am missing something, I think it would be quite a
> stretch to suggest that the use of "gyeong" or "gyeongseong" to
> refer to the Joseon capital began in the late nineteenth century
> as a result of Japanese influence.
>
>
> Joshua Van Lieu
>
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Min Suh Son wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Just to add a note to the comments below.  I'm actually doing
> dissertation
> > research on the introduction of the streetcar system to Seoul
> during this
> > period and come across mention of the railroad quite frequently
> in my
> > readings.
> >
> > Just a cursory look through my notes shows that so far the
> earliest
> > reference to the railroad (at least that I've come across so
> far) is in the
> > Cheguk sinmun (1898/12/29).  It refers to the railroad in the
> Korean
> > vernacular phrase "Ky^ongbu kan ch'^olto r^ul Ilbon e h^orak
> hago..." which
> > I translate as the Seoul-Pusan line that was conceded to Japan.
> >
> > This is also true for the Hwangsong sinmun (started in 1898).
> The earliest
> > reference I have found dates to 1899/1/13 where the railroad is
> referred to
> > in Chinese characters as "Ky^ong-In ch'^olto" using the
> character for
> > "capital".
> >
> > I have not come across any mention of "Hans^ong" to refer to
> the railroad
> > and have assumed that Koreans also commonly used the character
> "ky^ong" for
> > Seoul.  What I don't know for sure is if this practice was
> influenced by the
> > Japanese nomenclature after the railroad concessions were given
> very early
> > on to Japan (Seoul-Pusan in 1896 and Seoul-Inchon in 1898
> transferred from
> > the US).
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> > Min Suh Son
> > UCLA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  _____
> >
> > From: Koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws
> > [mailto:Koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws] On Behalf Of Paul
> Shepherd
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:50 PM
> > To: Koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws
> > Subject: Re: [KS] By train from Seoul to Incheon--what's in a
> name?
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Stefan,
> >
> > The word Gyeongin comes from the planned connection of
> Gyeongseong station
> > (1900) and Incheon.
> >
> > The original line work planned by J. R. Morse failed in 1897
> due to lack of
> > capital, but a Japanese run company called (in Korean) Gyeongin
> Cheoldo
> > Hoesa (Kyo^ngin Ch'o^lto) undertook to complete the project in
> 1899.
> >
> > Interestingly, Kyeongsong station was so named in July, 1900, a
> name which
> > it had until 1905 (changed temporarily to Namdaemun Station).
> It would
> > indeed be interesting to look at the primary documents in
> relation to the
> > establishment of Gyeongsong station, and why that name was
> given.
> >
> > Also, the station was renamed Namdaemun Station in 1905.
> >
> > There is a bit of history about the Gyeonginseon line on
> www.naver.com in
> > the dictionary.
> >
> > I included the relevant part in Korean below.
> >
> > ±æÀÌ 31km. 1896³â(°íÁ¾ 33) 3¿ù 29ÀÏ
> <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=66608>
> > ¹Ì±¹ÀÎ J.R.¸ð½º°¡ Çѱ¹ Á¤ºÎ·ÎºÎÅÍ ºÎ¼³±ÇÀ» ¾ò¾î, 1897³â 3¿ù
> 29ÀÏ ÀÎõ
> > ¿ì°¢Çö(éÚÊÇúÖ)¿¡¼­ °ø»ç¿¡ Âø¼öÇÏ¿´À¸³ª ÀڱݺÎÁ·À¸·Î Áß´ÜÇÏ¿´´Ù.
> ±× ÈÄ
> > ÀϺ»ÀÎÀÌ °æ¿µÇÏ´Â °æÀÎöµµÈ¸»ç(ÌÈìÒôÑÔ³üåÞä)°¡ ºÎ¼³±ÇÀ»
> ÀμöÇÏ¿© 1899³â
> > 4¿ùºÎÅÍ ´Ù½Ã °ø»ç¸¦ ½ÃÀÛ, ±× ÇØ 9¿ù 18ÀÏ
> > <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=137494> Á¦¹°Æ÷(ð­ÚªøÝ:ÀÎõ)¡­
> > <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=38331> ³ë·®Áø(ÒÎÕÙòÐ) »çÀÌÀÇ
> 33.2km¸¦
> > °³ÅëÇÏ¿´´Ù. 1900³â 7¿ù 5ÀÏ
> <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=185632>
> > ÇÑ°­Ã¶±³°¡ ÁØ°øµÇÀÚ, °°Àº ÇØ 7¿ù 8ÀÏ ³ë·®Áø¡­¼­¿ï(´ç½ÃÀÇ
> ¼­¿ï¿ªÀº
> > <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=49034> ¼­´ë¹®À¸·Î ÇöÀçÀÇ
> > <http://100.naver.com/100.php?id=720208> ÀÌÈ­¿©°í ÀÚ¸®) »çÀÌ°¡
> °³ÅëµÇ¾î
> > ¼­¿ï¡­ÀÎõÀÌ ¿ÏÀü ¿¬°áµÇ¾ú´Ù.
> >
> > This Naver article refers to a "Seoul Station" existing in
> 1900, but that is
> > a factually incorrect part of the article.
> >
> > It is hard not to draw the inference that the name Gyeongin
> does not have
> > something to do with the Japanese managed construction project,
> and also the
> > plans for the original name of Seoul Station. I look forward to
> further
> > light being shed by other scholars on the details of that
> Japanese company
> > (Gyeongin Choldo) and also the naming of Gyeongseong Station in
> 1900.
> >
> > Warm regards,
> >
> > Paul Shepherd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ===============================================
> >
> > Paul Shepherd
> >
> > Ph.D Candidate
> >
> > Graduate School of The College of Law, Seoul National
> University
> >
> > Mobile: (ROK) 010-7217-7675
> >
> > ===============================================
> >
> >
> >  _____
> >
> > From: "Stefan Ewing" <sa_ewing at hotmail.com>
> > Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> <Koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
> > To: Koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws
> > Subject: [KS] By train from Seoul to Incheon--what's in a name?
> > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:46:56 -0800
> >> 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_seoul2/7/120
> > 3339_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=ht
> > tp://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
> >> Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN?Premium right now and
> get
> >> the first two months FREE*.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>