[KS] Origin of term "자연부락"?

[Frank Hoffmann]

Adding to Stefan Knoob's notes, Zenshō Eisuke, whom Stefan mentioned, 
used (according to a summary I read) the term 舊洞 里, the "old 
village," in his 3-volume _Chōsen no shūraku_ 朝鮮の聚落 (1933-35). 
And he seems to have used various other terms for the same definition 
of this type of village also. My two points, though, are:

(a) Zenshō, and others following after him, wrote that the 舊洞 里 
consisted of around 50 households on average, and that it included 
usually 2 to 3 natural villages -- clan villages. This is what leads me 
to the second point. 
(b) It seems that there were for centuries TWO parallel "concepts" of 
"village" in Korea (and that these concepts had no parallel in Japanese 
society). If we think of Martina Deuchler's _The Confucian 
Transformation ..._ well-known study with her main argument about how 
Confucianism AND Chinese models of administration and culture were 
introduced to Korea, how that created many parallel structures within 
state and society, rather than just replacing "the old" with the "the 
new" (= Chinese), then we get to a better understanding of what Zenshō 
was discussing (as I understand it from the summary). ... And, for my 
own interests, we sure can apply that very same explanatory model, with 
just a few tweaks and twists, also to the 20th century, e.g. in the art 
world. At the very least it is helpful. But back to villages. THIS 
means the question Tomy Tran asked is, in a way, somewhat of a 
misleading question. That term itself (자연부락) seems in no way of any 
importance, and there were various other terms used dring the colonial 
period that all described the same phenomenon -- in my current 
understanding. (And here I completely agree with Stefan also, as for 
the usage of 자연부락.)
Also, if you look at current publication from South Korea that deal 
with 자연부락, you will find that many deal with *legal* issues -- with 
how a 자연부락 relates to other, official administrative units (and 
thus new divisions of land and households and ownership, rights, and 
responsibilities) that were in place in colonial or post-colonial 
Korea. One country, two or more (partially parallel) systems, 
traditional rights and new rights, etc. ... that's what it is all 
about. 

In order to further clarify my point above, the relation of traditional 
Korea and the introduction of administrative units from CHINA, here a 
longer quote from a 1976 article by Dieter Eikemeier (see: 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4528051) -- and this is about Chosŏn period 
Korea, NOT the colonial period:

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p78_Eikemeier_(1976).jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 150930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20160630/ec8e62ab/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------




Best,
Frank