1893 개성 민란 연구

Abstract

With the exception of the Kaesŏng Uprising of 1893, none of the other uprisings that emerged from the opening of the three ports in 1876 until 1910featured demands related to the landlord system. That being said, the land ownership related demands made by the leaders of the Kaesŏng Uprising were in actuality not intended to overcome the inequality of the land ownership system. Rather, these demands were focused on preventing illegal exploitation of their land by the magistrate. Moreover, the fact that the leadership group of the Kaesŏng Uprising consisted of merchants and former government officials means that the wishes of peasant famers were in all likelihood not reflected in these demands. Even the cases of uprisings led by peasant farmers, such as the Uprising of 1862, did not feature any overt slogans against the landlord system. Moreover, no demands hinting at an out and out opposition to the landlord system are evident in the proposed reform program (p’yejŏng kaehyŏkan) prepared by the leadership behind the large-scale rebellion known as the Tonghak Peasants’ War of 1894. Rather, much like had been the case in the Kaesŏng Uprising, the demands related to the reform of the land system raised by the peasant soldiers were geared towards the solid entrenchment of the private ownership system. Meanwhile, one finds almost no instances in which actual anti-foreign power related demands were raised during the type of collective struggle known as an uprising. While the possibility of Japanese merchants infringing on the interests of Kaesŏng merchants can be understood as the main rationale for the inclusion of Article 15, “Any person who rents out his residence to a Japanese national shall have their home destroyed,” no lingering sense of outright belligerence toward Japanese merchants was recorded. Moreover, no objections to Japanese power were raised during the first Tonghak Peasants Uprising. To this end, it was only during the second uprising that the movement took on an anti-Japanese character,a denouement which was in large part motivated by the Japanese military’s attempt to seize Kyŏngbokkung Palace. As mentioned above, the only popular uprising from 1894 to 1910 other than the Tonghak Peasants’ War in which demands related to land ownership or to an opposition to a foreign power were made was the Kaesŏng Uprising. In addition, a closer look at these demands reveals that they in fact had little to do with out and out opposition to the landlord system or foreign powers. These points have the effect of calling into question the prevailing perception of the people (minjung)during the transition towards the modern era as both the main actors in bringing about reform and the flag-bearers of the efforts to resolve Chosŏn’s feudal and national contradictions.