Non-massacre of Wang clan

By Mark Peterson

That's an odd title! The point I want to address is the mistaken idea common in Korean society that the establishment of the Joseon Kingdom was a revolutionary action accompanied by wholesale social change and the emergence of a radical new elite. Baloney. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, the transition of dynastic houses from Goryeo to Joseon could not have been any less revolutionary!

That's an odd title! The point I want to address is the mistaken idea common in Korean society that the establishment of the Joseon Kingdom was a revolutionary action accompanied by wholesale social change and the emergence of a radical new elite. Baloney. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, the transition of dynastic houses from Goryeo to Joseon could not have been any less revolutionary!

This issue has come across my desk several times in recent months when I write, or make videos, about the peaceful and stable history of Korea. When I point out that the dynastic transfer from Gaya to Silla, from Silla to Goryeo, from Goryeo to Joseon, was relatively peaceful, and that the aristocracy continued in each case from one kingdom to the next, and that this is evidence of Korea's peaceful and stable history, there often appears on my computer screen the protest that the Wang clan was annihilated. And this is purported evidence, not only of a violent revolution, but of a wholesale new start of the Joseon Kingdom.

I view this issue quite differently. The Wang clan was NOT annihilated. And the new kingdom was basically a continuation of the old one. The use of Confucianism that gradually became transitional in the new dynasty had already taken hold in the Goryeo Kingdom, and it took three centuries in Joseon before the final acceptance of Confucian social change that resulted in the creation of the male-dominated, patrilineal society of late Joseon.

The "revolution" of 1388 to 1392 was not much of a revolution. First of all, when Yi Seong-gye turned around at Wihwado and marched his army back to Gaeseong to take over the government, the fighting lasted one afternoon! Contrast this with most changes of kingdom that take years, or decades, of warfare, one class against another, one faction against another, one region against another. Not in Korea.

For four years, behind the scenes, General Yi prepared to take over. Who was killed? Choe Yeong, who sent him to fight the Ming Dynasty, Jeong Mong-ju, who refused on principle, and then one faction of the Wang clan. Not all the Wang clan? No ― there were even two men named Wang who were listed as founders of the dynasty, put on the list of "merit subjects" and rewarded with land and slaves for helping General Yi.

Why then, when I present my argument that the Goryeo-Joseon transition was largely peaceful, do some people respond, almost as if they are screaming, that the transition was not peaceful and the evidence given is the annihilation of the Wang clan. Why is this exaggeration of violence so important to those who subscribe to the idea that the Joseon Kingdom was a revolutionary stage in the development of Korean history?

To those who subscribe to this idea, the "stage" of development fits into their developmental scheme of history and of Korea as a valid country. But the problem is, fitting Korea into an evolutionary development in this way is only important if one has accepted the Japanese theory of history with the stages that emphasize Japan's superiority.

The Japanese historians saw Japanese history on a higher evolutionary scale than Korea's because of Japan's identity with European history, particularly the concept of feudalism. Feudalism was a stage of development that, according to their theory, led to a capitalism stage and Japan saw itself as "on schedule" ― on par with European nations ― whereas Korea was underdeveloped. The relative strength of Japan and Korea's economy in the 20th century, underscored the interpretation ― Korea was underdeveloped. Japan was superior.

Unfortunately, many Korean historians bought into the concept, and wrote of Korea from an underdeveloped point of view. And to show Korea was making progress in the evolutionary development of history, there was a need to make the Goryeo-Joseon transition into a revolutionary stage of development.

Thus, the ideas that the transition was a revolution and a movement into a higher stage. In other countries, changes of kingdoms involve years, decades of fighting, an upheaval of the social order from top to bottom. But in spite of the desire to formulate the founding of the Joseon Kingdom in those terms, the facts did not support it.

Unfortunately, for many historians, if the facts don't fit the theory, you doctor the facts. That is what has happened with the "annihilation of the Wang clan." It is re-writing the facts to fit the theory.

In reality only a fraction of the Wangs were killed. And no other clan or faction was massacred. The aristocracy, as a whole, continued on into the Joseon period. As mentioned above, two of the Wang clan were recognized as important figures in assisting in the founding of the new kingdom.

And later, 10 Wangs passed the Joseon high civil service exam (munkwa), 37 passed the secondary exams (sama, saengwon, jinsa), eight passed military exams, and one even passed the medical exam. And today, there are 25,000 living members of the Wang clan in the South, and surely a large number in the North.

The annihilation of the Wang clan is an exaggerated and false reading of the otherwise peaceful and stable history of Korea.

Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.