Jizi

Pre-Qin sources

The earliest known mention of Jizi is in the "Mingyi" 明夷 hexagram of the Book of Change.^[6] According to other ancient Chinese texts like the Book of Documents, the Analects, and the Bamboo Annals, Jizi was a relative of King Zhou, the last ruler of the Shang dynasty, and one of the three wise men of Shang, along with Weizi (微子) and Bi Gan.^[7] Many identify him as Grand Tutor of the king. Jizi was either imprisoned or enslaved for remonstrating against King Zhou's misrule.^[7] (One later version states that he pretended to be mad after Bigan had been killed by King Zhou.)^[8] After Shang was overthrown by the Zhou dynasty in the mid eleventh century BC, Jizi was released by King Wu, to whom he gave advice on how to rule the new polity.^[7]

These texts mention neither Joseon nor Jizi's descendants; they simply describe Jizi as a virtuous man who was trusted by King Wu of Zhou after having been mistreated by the last Shang king.^[7]

Han and later texts

The first texts that make an explicit connection between Jizi and Joseon date from the second century BC, under the Han dynasty.^[9] The earliest known source stating that Jizi went to Joseon is the Shangshu dazhuan (尚書大傳), a commentary on the Book of Documents attributed to Fu Sheng of the second century BC.^[7] In that account, King Wu enfeoffed Jizi as the ruler of Joseon and Jizi became the subject of King Wu.^[10] In a similar story recorded in Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (or Shiji, compiled between 109 and 91 BC), Jizi was enfeoffed by King Wu but did not become his subject.^[9] Sima Qian did not mention Jizi in his section on contemporary Joseon (i.e. northwestern Korea), where Wei Man's kingdom had flourished since about 194 BC until it was conquered by the Han dynasty in 108 BC.^[9] Thus the location of Joseon as in these earlier sources is not clear. Among other Han dynasty sources, the Han shi waizhuan mentions to Jizi but not his migration to Joseon.

The "Monograph on Geography" (Dili zhi 地理志) of the Book of Han (1st century AD) claims that Jizi had taught the people of Joseon agriculture, sericulture, and weaving, as well as proper ceremony.^[11] Jae-hoon Shim interprets the following sentence in that section of the Hanshu as claiming that Jizi also introduced the law of "Eight Prohibitions" (犯禁八條) in Joseon.^[12] The Records of Three Kingdoms (first published in the early fifth century) claims that the descendants of Jizi reigned as kings of Joseon for forty generations until they were overthrown by Wei Man, a man from the state of Yan, in 194 BC.^[13]

According to his commentary to the Shiji, Du Yu (first half of the 3rd century) states that the tomb of Jizi was located in Meng Prefecture of the State of Liang (modern-day Henan). This suggests that the story of Jizi's association with Joseon was not necessarily prevailing although the narrative seen in the Hanshu later became common.^{[citation needed]}

As historian Jae-hoon Shim concludes, only during the Han dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD) did Jizi begin to be associated with Joseon, and only after the Han were his descendants identified as the Joseon royal family.^[9]

Ancient Korean accounts

The first extant Korean text to mention Kija (the Korean pronunciation of Jizi) was Kim Pusik's Samguk sagi (completed in 1145), which claimed that Kija had been enfeoffed in Haedong (海東: Korea) by the Zhou court, but commented that this account was uncertain because of the brevity of the sources.^[14] Only in the thirteenth century did Korean texts start to integrate Kija more fully into Korean history. The Samguk yusa (1281) explained that after being enfeoffed by King Wu of Zhou, Kija replaced Dangun's descendants as the ruler of Joseon, whereas Jewang Ungi (1287) identified Dangun and Kija as the first rulers of former and latter Joseon respectively.^[14] Most premodern Korean historians after that accepted that Kija had replaced another indigenous power (represented by Dangun) in Old Joseon.^[14]

In 1102, during the Goryeo period, King Sukjong built a mausoleum to Kija in a place near Pyongyang that had been identified as Kija's tomb.^[15]Sadang for Kija called Kijasa (箕子祠) was also built in Pyongyang.^[16] The mausoleum was rebuilt in 1324 and was repaired in 1355, but the cult of Kija spread most widely after the establishment of the Joseon Dynasty in 1392. Because Joseon's state ideology was Neo-Confucianism borrowed from China, Joseon intellectuals promoted Kija as a culture hero who had raised Korean civilization to the same level as China.^[17]

From the second half of the sixteenth century to the eighteenth century, Joseon scholars published a number of books on Kija. In 1580, Yun Tusu collated all available material on him and published his research as the Kijaji (箕子志; "Record of Kija").^[17] On the same year, eminent scholar Yi I used Yun's book to compile the Kija Silgi (箕子實記), or True Account of Kija.^[17] Yi praised Kija for introducing agriculture, sericulture, decorum, the well-field system, and the Eight Prohibitions.^[18] Though he emphasized Kija's independence from King Wu of Zhou, Yi believed that Kija's teachings helped Korea to reach the same level of civilization as China.^[19] The cult of Kija also continued as temples which worshiped Kija portraits called Kijayeongjeon (箕子影殿), were built in the 18th century in South Pyongan Province.^[20]

Although Korean scholars became more critical of Kija's role in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, this account of Kija as the "bearer of civilization from China" became widely accepted, so much that by the late Joseon, the worship of Kija "had become an integral part of Korean cultural identity."^[21] Some Korean clans claim to be direct descendants of Kija himself.^[22]

Twentieth century accounts

In the beginning of the twentieth century, Korean historians started to doubt the authenticity of his supposed influence.^[19] Shin Chaeho (1880–1936), a Korean independence nationalistic activist historian during the Japanese occupation, was the first to question the extent of Kija's contributions.^[19] In an essay titled Doksa Sillon ("New Reading of History"; 1908), he argued that Korean history was revolved around Dangun, the legendary founder of the state of Gojoseon.^[24] Shin dismissed Kija's contributions due to his foreign origin.^[25] Shin also argued that Kija had become a vassal of the kings of Buyeo and was only given control of a small territory.^[26]

Other historians such as Choe Nam-seon (1890–1957) and Lee Byeong-do (1896–1989) started to notice discrepancies between pre-Qin Chinese records of Jizi/Kija, and later accounts (both Chinese and Korean) of his role in Joseon.^[27] In 1973, archeologist Kim Cheong-bae (金貞培) denied Chinese influence on Korea because no ancient Chinese bronzes had been found on the peninsula.^[4]

In addition, Ri Chirin, a leading North Korean historian of ancient Korea, argued that the Kija legend had been forged in Han times when the Chinese started to occupy part of Joseon.^[28] Most North Korean scholars have followed Ri in doubting the authenticity of Kija's migration to Joseon.^[29]

Modern Korean accounts

Modern Korean scholars also deny the existence of Kija's involvement in Kija Chosŏn for various reasons.^[30] They point to the Bamboo Annals and the Confucian Analects, which were among the first works to mention Kija, but do not mention his migration to Gojoseon.^[31] However, some Kija enthusiasts suggest that Kija Chosŏn may have coexisted with Dangun, and that Kija Chosŏn was established at the western end of Gojoseon.^[32] This claim is mostly denied by modern Korean historians.

In addition, detractors of the Kija Chosŏn theory also point out that the cultural artifacts found in the region do not appear to have Chinese origins. An example of such an artifact is found in a Gojoseon mandolin-shaped bronze dagger. Its shape and bronze composition are different from similar artifacts found in China being described as "The detachable handle is a key feature for distinguishing Liaoning daggers from other Chinese daggers, which were typically produced in one piece."^[33]

Currently, Korean historians (from both nations) reject the previously held belief of Kija's involvement in Korea and thus many high school textbooks applied these recent studies reevaluating Kija and his influence with him now only being mentioned in a foot note.^[5] Additionally, the 7th edition of the Korean textbooks do not mention Jizi/Kija, making China the only nation to officially support the preceding theory.^{[citation needed]}