Skip to content
한국과학사학회지, 제39권 제2호 (2017), 371-376

Shin Dongwon 신동원, Dongui bogam gwa Dongasia uihaksa 동의 보감과 동아시아 의학사 (Dongui bogam and the History of Medicine in East Asia: How a Compilation Led to a Universal Synthesis of Medical Knowledge). Paju: Deulnyeok, 2015.

by SUH Soyoung
Atachment
첨부파일 '1'
Extra Form

Shin Dongwon 신동원, Dongui bogam gwa Dongasia uihaksa동의보감과동아시아의학사(Dongui bogamand the History of Medicine in East Asia: How a Compilation Led to a Universal Synthesis of Medical Knowledge). Paju: Deulnyeok, 2015. 480 pp.

SUH Soyoung (Dartmouth College, Soyoung.Suh@dartmouth.edu)



How did Heo Jun’s 許浚(1539-1615)Dongui bogam東醫寶鑑(Treasured Collections of Eastern Medicine, 1613) become a success? Shin Dongwon opens Dongui bogam gwa Dongasia uihaksaby highlighting the exceptional circulation of Dongui bogamin East Asia. By 1949, twenty-seven woodblocks of Dongui bogamhad been found. Since then, eight additional versions have been discovered, in China alone, the most recent discovery having been in 2013. Two versions were published in Japan prior to the nineteenth century, and since then, two more editions have been found. Further, twelve versions havebeen published in Taiwan (p. 15). According to Shin, among all of the medical texts published in China, only seventeen—including Sun Simiao’s 孙思邈(c. 581-682) Qianjin fang千金方(Supplement to the Formulas of a Thousand Gold Worth, c. late seventh century), Li Chan’s 李梃(active 1573-1619) Yixue ruwen醫學入門(Introduction to Medicine, c. 1575), and Gong Tingxian’s 龔廷賢(active 1577-1593) Wanbing huichun萬病回春(Return to Spring from Ten Thousand Illnesses, c. late sixteenth century)—have been published more than twenty times (p. 355). Given that new texts originated mostly in Ming/Qing China and made their way to Joseon Korea rather than the reverse, the success of Dongui bogamis indeed a remarkable exception. What motivated this scholarly project, and in what ways did Dongui bogamappeal to various audiences across geographical and cultural boundaries?


Shin responds to these questions by placing Heo within Joseon Korea’s (1392-1910) intellectual and social context. The growing confidence among Joseon elites in accommodating Chinese medical texts eventually led to the voluminous project known as Dongui bogam. Shin points out that during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Koreans selectively published at least eighty kinds of Chinese medical texts, in addition to sixty of their own (p. 79). More to the point, Dongui bogamfollowed the dynasty’s earlier compilations, namely, Hyangyak jipseongbang鄕藥集成方(Standard Prescriptions of Local Botanicals, 1433) and Uibang yuchui醫方類聚(Classified Compilation of Medical Prescriptions, 1477), which were intended to express the dynasty’s cultural competence and pride. While explaining the common attributes among these state projects, Shin highlights the exceptional features of Dongui bogam.

In part one, Shin details Heo’s biography. Heo is portrayed primarily as an exceptional scholar-physician who was well connected to the clan network of the yangban兩班(aristocrat) society. Through an analysis of Yu Huichun’s柳希春(1513-1577) Miam ilgi眉巖日記(Diary of Miam), Shin demonstrates that Heo began his career at the Royal Clinic without taking an official examination. Heo’s special connection with King Seonjo (r. 1567-1608) also contributed to the former’s exceptional achievement. Korean history features many physicians known for their medical prowess, or for being a favorite of the king. But, it was rather uncommon to see exceptional scholarly talent, medical skill, and royal support all at once.


Shin’s description of Heo’s royal connections further testifies to the emerging demand for medical innovation among the Joseon elites. Shin argues that the elites aimed to create a reliable body of knowledge with which to bring about actual clinical innovation. The intention was to rejuvenate the tired bodies of the Koreans, who had suffered inhumanly in the war with Japan (1592-1598), through a well-reasoned synthesis of the existing repertoire of medicine. Shin also explains how the authorship shifted from a group of scholarly physicians to Heo, leaving him solely responsible for its completion. Thus, in part one, Shin articulates the intellectual and social environment from which Heo’sDongui bogamcame about. Elaborating on the intellectual nexus of the medical corpus, Shin portrays the pinnacle of Korean medicine as being primarily an appreciation of the history of ideas.


In part two, Shin analyzes the organizational rationale of Dongui bogam. Overall, more than two hundred kinds of medical texts were examined by Heo. Given the number of medical texts that are frequently referenced, Heorelied substantially on the Song, Yuan, and Ming texts, which were written by many currents of scholarly physicians (xuepai學派). Compared to these original texts, Heo’s prose reflected his own rendering and style. Shin underlines the fact that Heo’s composition went beyond a mere cut-and-paste, showcasing a nuanced synthesis carried out with expert judgement. Heo’s selection, omission, and elaboration of medical texts finds resonance with what Fabien Simonis identifies as “deliberate syncretism”or “eclecticism by design,”which characterizes the zhezhongstyle of intertextuality in Ming medical texts.[1]


Of particular note is Shin’s analysis of Heo’s paragraph composition, editorial rationale, spacing, and visualization, in chapter 8, which I found most intriguing. Shin explains that 2,870 sub–categories (semok細目) were succinctly classified into 105 major categories (mun門); these major categories were further organized into five major sections (pyeon編). This structure was intended to enable readers to find easily the relevant information pertaining to their own clinical problems. The effective organization of Dongui bogamstands out even in comparison with well-known Chinese encyclopedic compilations, such as Gong Tingxian’s (active 1577-1593) Gujin yijian古今醫鑑(A Mirror of Medicine of All Times, c. 1589) (p. 256). Moreover, Shin argues that the 4,747 prescriptions discussed in Dongui bogamwere indeed likely to alleviate patients’conditions. Obviously, while we are unable to trace the clinical efficacy of those prescriptions historically, based on a reading of various primary sources, Shin appears to demonstrate persuasively that Heo’s skillful use of jeomigo猪尾膏and yongnoegoja龍腦膏子actually had positive clinical outcomes (p. 262).


In part three, Shin explores the legacy of Heo’s Dongui bogamin Korea and beyond. Shin aptly discusses the intellectual conservatism that governed sixteenth-century Joseon Korea. The core of Heo’s synthesis, therefore, lies in ensuring Joseon Korea’s correct position in navigating the sage’s authoritative textual heritage. Shin also discusses the dissimilar reception of Dongui bogamby Chinese and Japanese physicians. The Chinese welcomed Heo’s synthesis of the medical classics, whereas the Japanese focused mostly on the decoctions (tangyak湯藥) of Dongui bogaminvestigating Korean materia medica. As a result, Japan’s inclination toward cold damage disorders and pragmatism contrasted with China’s overall positive response to Dongui bogam. Some Japanese physicians criticized Heo’s inclination toward Ming medicine. In the epilogue, Yeo In-sok compares Dongui bogamwith The Canon of Medicineby Avicenna (980-1037), aiming to place Dongui bogamwithin a wider world of medicine.


Shin’s monograph is rigorously researched and well-organized. Just as Heo’s encyclopedic compilation in the early seventeenth century was all-inclusive and effectively edited, so is Shin’s ambitious analysis of Heo’s Dongui bogam. Through decades of research, Shin carefully contextualizes Heo’s Dongui bogamin Joseon Korea. Beyond an analysis of medical governance, Shin’s monograph serves as an intriguing introduction to Joseon’s intellectual and cultural history. Much as Heopresented his own perspective through rational organization and nuanced prose, Shin’s main argument is nuanced and well-documented. Shin clearly presents his argument that Heo’s “Eastern”medicine achieves a successful synthesis in both the intellectual and clinical senses. His synthesis reflects an attempt to view the entirety of the medical world from the perspective of one corner of the East (namely, Joseon Korea). Moreover, up to the nineteenth century, Joseon Korea was overwhelmed by the elaborate framework of “Eastern”medicine.


Shin offers a persuasive interpretation of Heo’s Eastern medicine. I agree with Shin’s view that Heohardly supported any parochialism by elaborating on the Eastern perspective. The “East”in the Korean textual composition of medicine is, as I put it elsewhere, not so much a region, in reality, as an intellectual standpoint in motion. Set as a counterpart to Southern and Northern medical trends, Eastern medicine as a textual label enabled the Korean elites to locate their intellectual/medical standpoints. Shin argues repeatedly that Heodid not intend a Joseon “Koreanization”of medicine. Rather, Shin demonstrates that Heomastered the refined language of learned medicine, struggled to assess the medical world, both synchronically and diachronically, and finally placed his viewpoint within the wider nexus of scholarly medicine.


Shin’s main argument, while convincing, leaves a few questions. According to Shin, Dongui bogambecame the most significant medical text since its publication (p. 322), to the extent that no other innovative works have emerged since then. Referring to Yu Man-ju’s 兪晩柱(1755-1788) comment (p. 328), Shin highlights the argument that there has been no reliable physician (yangui良醫) in Korea since Heo. That became the legacy, an infallible framework for textual composition, or the“paradigm”of scholarly medicine, in the late Joseon period (p. 369). That said, the modalities of Eastern medicine as a textual and clinical framework were clearly defined, without being seriously challenged by Koreans since the seventeenth century. The territory of Eastern medicine was now clearly demarcated.


Medical knowledge as a textual form, however, displays more syncretism than purity. In chapter one, Shin himself highlights the view that between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Chinese medical texts were widely circulated in Joseon Korea, thus facilitating the enthusiastic accommodation and synthesis of Korean elites on their own terms. Post-Heo, Joseon Korea generally became more diverse when it came to circulating texts from China. Some of these texts were translated into vernacular Korean. For instance, scholars have pointed out that more than 120 kinds of Chinese texts relating to Catholicism were circulated in the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in Korea, 111 of which were translated into Korean.


Given texts in motion, it is not entirely an exaggeration to state that Koreans consumed a wider range of medical books, such as respected classics, latest prescriptions, cases, and synthesized versions during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In the epilogue, Yeohighlights the argument that Dongui bogamnever replaced the authority of the medical classics in education and court examination. Yeoproperly underlines that the composition of medical knowledge was intrinsically plural and synthetic in East Asia (p. 387).


The constant making and remaking of medical knowledge ensures the constructive nature of medical authority. The accumulated scholarship has pointed out that Chinese physicians’formation of a “Confucian”identity (ruyi儒醫) paralleled its own competition with and marginalization of other lower-class healers. It is well known that, by the seventeenth century, woodblock printing enabled physicians to contribute to a burgeoning corpus through commentary, case histories, formularies, and monographs on medical specialties. Joseon Korea was not an exception to this trend. Apart from Heo, many currents of scholarly physicians also sought novel syntheses based on real and imagined networks, claimed affiliations with known masters from the past and the present, and elaborated often-conflicting therapeutic strategies. By philosophizing medicine, scholarly physicians pursued epistemological authority. Heo seems to have wholeheartedly embraced this ideal of his time. While recognizing Heo’s “influence,”more attention could have been paid to the constructive nature of the authority of Eastern medicine.


Moreover, Shin could have elaborated on the body envisioned by readers based on Dongui bogam. For instance, Charlotte Furth suggests the “Yellow Emperor’s body”as an interpretative framework through which learned medicine elaborates the tension between the idealized “androgynous”body of classical doctrine and the gendered childbearing body of fuke. The Yellow Emperor’s body primarily differentiated itself from the modern anatomy, such that we often blindly project toward pre-modern experiences of the body.[2] Generations of interpreters have assumed the holistic and cosmological body and devoted themselves to resolving discrepancies. The normative and canonized body was thus morally, intellectually, and clinically authorized. Given Heo’s loyalty to the sage’s authority, can we assume that the body of the Yellow Emperor was further established by Heo’s synthesis? If the Yellow Emperor’s body had been modified in Joseon Korea on the region’s real and imagined characteristics, what terms or metaphors can be used to depict this same, and yet different, body of scholarly medicine? What were the possibilities and limitations of Joseon Korea’s use of the Yellow Emperor’s body to resolve their own clinical problems?


As a substitute for the Yellow Emperor’s body, Yi-Li Wu suggests that the “normative medical body of the Yellow Emperor”could be reconfigured, depending on historical specificity. As an alternative, Wu urges us to view difference and normality as two sides of the same coin. She states that this apparent paradox, relating to particularity and universality, has formed the core tenet of Chinese philosophy. “The simultaneity of unity and duality, and indeed the simultaneity of unity and multiplicity”have long governed the changes and continuities in East Asian medicine. Borrowing from terminology in linguistics, she recommends that the “infinitive body”be used instead of the Yellow Emperor’s body. Wu argues for “an infinitive body, one that serves as the basis for all human bodies, to be conjugated into male and female, young and old, robust and delicate, Southern and Northern, depending on circumstance.”[3]Viewed from the existing scholarship, how would Heo’s body of medical synthesis be named? What attributes can we learn from the Eastern interpretation of the Yellow Emperor’s body? Further discussion with the existing Anglophone scholarship could have expanded the communicative sphere of Shin’s monograph.


Despite all this, readers can easily establish the view that the aforementioned discussion testifies to any limitations of the book. Shin’s monograph aptly combines a meticulous analysis, an in-depth reading of primary sources, and a clear writing style. It would be a challenge to translate this exceptional accomplishment into English. Nonetheless, I hope that this ambitious book soon becomes accessible to a wider audience.



[1] Fabien Simonis, “Mad Acts, Mad Speech, and Mad People in Late Imperial Chinese Law and Medicine,” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 2010), 137-142.

[2] Charlotte Furth, A Flourishing Yin: Gender in China’s Medical History, 960-1665 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 19-21.

[3] Yi-Li Wu, Reproducing Women: Medicine, Metaphor, and Childbirth in Late Imperial China(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010), 230-232.


Category
List of Articles
분류 제목
제39권 제1호 [연구논문] 1990년대 한국 PC 게임 산업: PC 게임 개발자들의 도전과 응전 (The Korean PC Game Industry in the 1990s: Challenge and Response of the PC Game Developers) file
남영
2019 33-63
제39권 제1호 [연구논문] 필드 과학, 과학 서비스 그리고 해충 방제: 20세기 초 미국 남부 목화 바구미 대발생을 중심으로 (Field Science, Science Service, and Pest Insect Control: The Cotton Boll Weevil Outbreak in the American South in the Early 20th Century) file
정혜경
2017 1-32
제39권 제1호 [연구논문] 19세기 후반 한역 근대 과학서의 수용과 이용: 지석영의『신학신설』을 중심으로 (A Joseon Intellectual’s Understanding and Use of Modern Western Science Books Translated into Chinese in the Late Nineteenth Century: Ji Seokyeong’s Sinhak sinseol) file
김연희
2017 65-90
제39권 제1호 [연구논문] 정조 대 한강 배다리[舟橋]의 구조에 관한 연구 (The Structure of the Han River Pontoon Bridge in Late Joseon Period) file
김평원
2017 91-124
제39권 제1호 [연구논문] 『성경(星鏡)』에 기록된 항성: 『의상고성속편(儀象考成續編)』성표와의 연관성을 고려한 동정 (An Analysis of the Stars Recorded in Seonggyeong: Comparison with the Star Catalogue in Yixiang kaocheng xubian) file
전준혁
2017 125-194
제39권 제1호 [비평논문] 편집된 논쟁 file
문지호
2017 195-201
제39권 제1호 [서평] 토머스 쿤, 정동욱 옮김, 『코페르니쿠스 혁명』(지만지, 2016), 612쪽 file
강형구
2017 203-208
제39권 제1호 [서평] 토머스 휴즈, 김명진 옮김,『현대 미국의 기원: 발명과 기술적 열정의 한 세기 1870-1970』 (나남, 2017), 1권 433쪽, 2권 409쪽 file
이종민
2017 209-213
제39권 제1호 [서평] 구만옥, 『세종시대의 과학기술』(들녘, 2016), 472쪽
남경욱
2017 215-219
제39권 제2호 [Research Paper] The Status of the Hwaseong seongyeok uigwe in the History of Architectural Knowledge: Documentation, Innovation, Tradition file
Florian PÖLKING
2017 257-291
제39권 제2호 [Research Paper] Making Postcolonial Connections: The Role of a Japanese Research Network in the Emergence of Human Genetics in South Korea, 1941-1968 file
HYUN Jaehwan
2017 293-324
제39권 제2호 [Translation] Science and Ideology: The Rise and Fall of the Bonghan Theory in North Korea in the 1960s file
KIM Geun Bae
2017 325-358
제39권 제2호 [Book Review] Piers J. Hale, Political Descent: Malthus, Mutualism, and the Politics of Evolution in Victorian England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014. file
JUNG Sunguk
2017 359-362
제39권 제2호 [Book Review] Kim Geun Bae 김근배, Han’guk gwahakgisul hyeokmyeongui gujo 한국 과학기술혁명의 구조 (The Structure of Scientific and Technological Revolution in Korea). Paju: Deulnyeok, 2016. file
HONG Sungook
2017 363-369
제39권 제2호 Shin Dongwon 신동원, Dongui bogam gwa Dongasia uihaksa 동의 보감과 동아시아 의학사 (Dongui bogam and the History of Medicine in East Asia: How a Compilation Led to a Universal Synthesis of Medical Knowledge). Paju: Deulnyeok, 2015. file
SUH Soyoung
2017 371-376
제39권 제2호 Guidelines for Manuscripts Written in English file
kjhs
2017 377-380
제39권 제3호 [연구논문] 조선 초 인쇄 기관의 변화와 정착 file
김화선
2017 381-404
제39권 제3호 [연구논문] 조선 후기 역(曆) 계산과 역서(曆書) 간행 작업의 목표: ‘자국력’인가? 중국 수준 역서인가? file
김영식
2017 405-434
제39권 제3호 [연구논문] 숙종 대 관상감의 시헌력 학습: 을유년(1705) 역서 사건과 그에 대한 관상감의 대응을 중심으로 file
김슬기
2017 435-464
제39권 제3호 [연구논문] 병자호란 시기 강화도 함락 당일 염하수로의 조석과 조류 추산 file
변도성, 김효원, 구범진
2017 465-492
제39권 제3호 [비평논문] 과학사의 사회적 이용과 유전학의 사회적 이용 사이에서 file
이두갑
2017 493-499
제39권 제3호 [서평] 브뤼노 라투르, 황희숙 옮김, 젊은 과학의 전선: 테크노사이언스와 행위자-연결망의 구축 (아카넷, 2016), 532쪽 file
성한아
2017 501-504
제39권 제3호 [서평] 오상학, 『한국 전통 지리학사』 (들녘, 2015), 539쪽 file
임종태
2017 505-509
제39권 제3호 학회소식, 회칙, 연구윤리, 논문상, 편집규정, 투고규정 file
한국과학사학회지
2017 511-543
Board Pagination ‹ Prev 1 Next ›
/ 1

Designed by sketchbooks.co.kr / sketchbook5 board skin

나눔글꼴 설치 안내


이 PC에는 나눔글꼴이 설치되어 있지 않습니다.

이 사이트를 나눔글꼴로 보기 위해서는
나눔글꼴을 설치해야 합니다.

설치 취소

Sketchbook5, 스케치북5

Sketchbook5, 스케치북5

Sketchbook5, 스케치북5

Sketchbook5, 스케치북5

Phone +82-2-3703-9341 / Email khssociety@gmail.com
© The Korean History of Science Society 2014

Powered by Xpress Engine / Designed by Sketchbook

sketchbook5, 스케치북5

sketchbook5, 스케치북5

나눔글꼴 설치 안내


이 PC에는 나눔글꼴이 설치되어 있지 않습니다.

이 사이트를 나눔글꼴로 보기 위해서는
나눔글꼴을 설치해야 합니다.

설치 취소