¹ Moore, Wilbert E., Economy and Society, New York, 1962, p. 9.Google Scholar

² For a fuller description see Lee, Sangbeck, Hankuk-sa (The History of Korea), Seoul, 1962, pp. 303–24.Google Scholar

³ Although ideally the yangban elites were excluded from farming, we should not ignore their role in agriculture as landowners. The term ‘farming’ is used here in a narrower sense, namely manual labour involved in land cultivation. Basically, management of land fell to the yangban elites.

⁴ There were also seven occupational roles which were legally stipulated as inferior work and assigned to commoners. These included servants in administration offices, sailors engaged in transportation of tax tributes, beacon-tenders, palacetomb guards, and so on. These roles, however, were regarded as temporary occupations and most individuals engaged in them were also farmers.

⁵ But the nobi is not exactly an occupational category such as ‘butcher’. Being a slave his work was dictated by the master who legally owned him.

⁶ For example, not all the yangban elites could achieve the upper levels of administrative positions which were almost exclusively confined to the yangban status.

⁷ Lee, , op. cit., p. 268.Google Scholar

⁸ Perhaps the only part of the traditional world of work where there was some rational orientation in recruitment was the army. However, the military officials at the top level were almost exclusively drawn from civil officials. For productive work covered by commoner's occupation the process of training never became institutionalized. It never was a problem. Although farming was regarded as the backbone of the economy, the government of the Yi-dynasty made little effort to develop agriculture. One of the major criticisms made by those silhakpa (knowledge for practical purpose) scholars in the eighteenth century was directed to the lack of governmental concern with agricultural development involving the improvement of farming methods, farm equipment, and the extension of irrigation systems. In fact, one silhakpa scholar Pak Chi-won severely criticized the indifference of orthodox Confucian scholars to farming and he himself compiled a book on the subject of agricultural improvement.

⁹ Arii, Tomonori, ‘Yi-cho Choki no yoyaku’ ('Statutory Labour in the Early Period of Yi-dynasty), Chōsen gakuhō (Korean Studies), 30 and 31 (01 and 04, 1964), pp. 62–106 and 58–101.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Kim, Sukhyung, Chōsen hōken jidai nōmin no kaikyū kōsei (The Class Structure of the Peasant in the Feudal Period of Korea), Tokyo, 1960 (Japanese translation), p. 166.Google Scholar

¹¹ Chang, Yunshik, ‘Population in Early Modernization’ (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), Princeton University, 1966, Chapter 2.Google Scholar

¹² See below, p. 168.

¹³ Moore, , op. cit., p. 12.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Ibid., p. 13.

¹⁵ Chun, Kwanwoo, ‘Hankuk toji chedosa, ha’ (‘The History of Korean Landholding System’), in Koryo Dehakkyo Minjok Munwha Yunkuso, (Institute of EthnoCultural Studies, Koryo University), Hankuk munwha sa daekye, II (An Outline of Cultural History of Korea, Vol. II), Seoul, 1965, p. 1397.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Yakyong, Chung, Kyungsae Yupyo (Ideal Management of the World),Google Scholar quoted in Moritani, K., 'Kurai no chōsen nōgyo shakai ni tsuite “no kenkyū no tameni”, (‘Studies of Traditional Korean Society’)Google Scholar in Gakkai, Keijō Teikoku Daigaku Hōmun, Chōsen shakai keizaishi kenkyū (Studies of the Social and Economic History of Korea), p. 506.Google Scholar

¹⁷ In the early period of the dynasty no land was allocated to the central administrative organization as its financial resources were secured from the land tax and tributes in kind. Later, this was reversed. See, Chun, Kwanwoo, op. cit., p. 1400.Google Scholar

¹⁸ At first land in this category was resumed upon the death of the recipient. Later, because of a shortage of land to pay civil servants, estates lapsed at the bureaucrats retirement. This had the effect of increasing rents, often above the legal limits, in order to provide a sufficient livelihood for a civil servant after he retired.

¹⁹ Headed by such giant firms as the Fuji Industrial Company and later the Oriental Development Company.

²⁰ Lee, Hoon K., Land Utilization and Rural Economy in Korea, Chicago, 1936, Chapter 12.Google Scholar

²¹ Munkyu Park, ‘Noson shakai bunkano kitento shiteno tochi chōsa jōkyō ni tsuite’ (‘On the Origin Land Survey as the Origin of the Differentiation of Rural Society’) in Hōgakkai, Keijō Teikoku, Chōsen shakai keizai shi kenkyū (Researches into Korean Social and Economic History), Tokyo, 1933, pp. 525–9.Google Scholar See also, Suzuki, Takeo, op. cit., pp. 72–3,Google Scholar and Chungshik, , In, Chōsen no nogyō kikō (The Agricultural Organization in Korea), Tokyo, 1940, pp. 51–68.Google Scholar

²² Farm households were divided into six categories: (a) landlord; (b) owner; (c) part-owners; (d) tenant; (e) tenant and squatter; and (f) squatter.

²³ Hoshino, T., Economic History of Chosen (Korea), Seoul, 1920, p. 51Google Scholar and Shikata, , op. cit., pp. 44–65.Google Scholar

²⁴ On the development of market system in Korea see Mun, Chungchang, Chōsen no hijō (Markets in Korea), Tokyo, 1941,Google Scholar and Shikata, Hiroshi, ‘Shijō'u tsūjite mitaru Chōsen no keizai’ (‘The Korean Economy viewed Through the Market’), in Hōgakkai, Keijō Teikoku Daigaku, Chōsen no keizai (The Korean Economy), Tokyo, 1929, pp. 1–286.Google Scholar

²⁵ Seoul, Inchon, Pusan, Pyungyang, Shinuiju, Wonsan, and Taeku.

²⁶ On the condition of transportation in Korea before the annexation see Hulbert, Homer B., The Passing of Korea, New York, 1906, pp. 252–68.Google Scholar

²⁷ As an index of increased exchanges at public market the government statistics show the amount of commodities exchanged at the market. See below, Section II. See also, Moon, Chungchang, op. cit.Google Scholar

²⁸ Mun, , op. cit., pp. 109–10.Google Scholar

²⁹ Mun, Chungchang, Hankuk nongchon danchesa (The History of Rural Organization in Korea), Seoul, 1961.Google Scholar

³⁰ Shikata, , op. cit., pp. 157–85.Google Scholar

³¹ Up to the 1920's any major plan of colonial agricultural development centred on rice production was avoided because some Japanese landlords were interested in maintaining the high price of rice in Japan. They made every effort to block the import of foreign rice. See, Tobata, Seiichi, Nihon shihon shūgi no kyoseisha (Makers of Japanese Capitalism), Tokyo, 1964, p. 139.Google Scholar

³² Suzuki, Takeo, Chōsen no keizai (The Korean Economy), Tokyo, 1942, p. 64.Google Scholar

³³ Ohkawa, Kazushi and Rosovsky, Henry, ‘The Role of Agriculture in Modern Japanese Economic Development’, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 9, 1, Part II, 10, 1960, p. 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also, Ouchi, Takechi, ‘Chōsen ni okeru beikoku seisan’ (‘Rice Production in Korea’), in Hōgakkai, Keijō Teikoku Daigaku, Chōsen keizai no kenkyū (Studies on Korean Economy), Tokyo, 1938, pp. 5–16Google Scholar and Tobata, Seiichi, ‘The Japanese Rice Control’, in Holland, William L. (ed.), Commodity Control in the Pacific Area, Stanford, 1935, pp. 157–97.Google Scholar

³⁴ The Government-General of Korea, ‘The Land Ameriolation Undertakings in Korea’, (November, 1928), p. 4,Google Scholar cited in Johnston, Bruce F., Japanese Food Management in World War II, Stanford, 1953, p. 52.Google Scholar

³⁵ Ibid., p. 52.

³⁶ Allen, G. C., A Short Economic History of Modern Japan, London, 1962, pp. 61–78.Google Scholar

³⁷ Ohkawa, and Rosovsky, , op. cit., p. 56.Google Scholar

³⁸ Johnston, , op. cit., p. 56.Google Scholar

³⁹ Yanaihara, Hisao, ‘Chōsen-san-mai zoshoku keikaku ni tsuite’ (‘On the Rice Increase Plan in Korea’), Nōgyo keizai kenkyū (Studies of Agricultural Economy), 2, 1, (02 1926), pp. 1–32,Google Scholar and Yukiyama, Kyōsei, ‘Chōsen ni okeru nōgyo jinkō no seikaku’ (‘Characteristics of the Rural Population in Korea’), Jinko mondai kenkyū (Studies of Population Problems), 4, 8 (08, 1943), pp. 1–55.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Johnston, , op. cit., p. 55.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid., p. 56, see also Yanaihara, , op. cit., p. 15.Google Scholar

⁴² Crow, Carl, (ed.), Japan's Dream of World Empire: The Tanaka Memorial, New York, 1942.Google Scholar

⁴³ One of the most ardent intellectual spokesmen for this view, Takeo Suzuki, was then professor of economics at Keijo Imperial University. See his ‘Hokusen route-ron’, (‘On the North-Korean Route’) in Hogakkai, Keijo Tekoku Daigaku, op. cit., pp. 321–62.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Chang, Yunshik, op. cit., Chapter 4.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Ibid., Chapter 4.

⁴⁶ Quoted in Suzuki, Takeo, op. cit., p. 98.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Ojima, Seiichi, Sen, man, chi shinkō keizai (New Industries in Korea, Manchuria and China), Tokyo, 1938, p. 35.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Kawai, Akitake, Chōsen kōgyō no gendankai (Current State of Korean Industry), Seoul, 1944, p. 55;Google ScholarSuzuki, Masabumi, Chōsen keizai no gendankai (Current Stage of Korean Economy), Seoul, 1939, pp. 258–65;Google Scholar and Horie, Hosho, ‘Chōsen Reizai no kindaika nitsuite’ (On the Modernization of Korean Economy) Keizai ronsō, (Economic Review) 56, 5 (05, 1943), pp. 90–100.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Suzuki, Masabumi, op. cit., p. 265.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Industry conducted at the home of the ‘entrepeneur’ and by members of his family usually in their spare time. See, Ito, Seikaku, Chōsen ni okeru katei kōgyo chōsa (Survey of Household Industry in Korea), Seoul, 1937,Google Scholar and also, Grajdanzev, Andrew J., Modern Korea, New York, 1944, pp. 149–52.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Kawai, , op. cit., p. 235.Google Scholar

⁵² Ibid., pp. 235–36. The share of the household industry in the gross value of the total manufacturing industry in 1939 was as follows: 48·9% in the lumber industry; 45·8% in the food industry; 8·8% in machinery and tools; 7·% in the chemical industry; 6·3% in ceramics; and so on. See also, Grajdanzev, , op. cit., pp. 150–2.Google Scholar

⁵³ Kawai, , op. cit., pp. 150–2.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Ibid., p. 254.

⁵⁵ Ibid., p. 254.

⁵⁶ If women are included, the figures become 78% and 73% of the total labour force—a figure difficult to interpret because of the great fall in the number reported in manufacturing. Again changes in census definitions make interpretation of the figures difficult.