Asia as method in education studies: a defiant research imagination

importing the civil service examination system from China in 958. This section ends with the introduction of Neo-Confucianism during the transition from Koryŏ to early Chosŏn. Part II begins to introduce the case studies of Andong and Namwŏn to show the “localisation” of the descent groups. Part III explains the application process of newly learned Confucian rituals to local kin groups and how these local elites responded in times of state crisis during the Imjin War (1592–98) and the Manchu Invasions (1627 and 1636–37). Part IV discusses how factionalism affected the relationship between centre and periphery in the seventeenth century and how it influenced the sajok to turn to “local” and to build their “lineage organisation” into maturity. Part V examines the survival strategies of landed elites in times of challenges from newly empowered groups such as secondary sons (sŏja or sŏŏl) and local functionaries (hyangni) due to the shifting socioeconomic environment in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Overall, the author provides an engaging narrative by highlighting the indigenous kinship practices of Korea, including agnatic kinsmen (munjung), local bureaus (yuhyangso), affines, nonagnates, secondary sons, women’s genealogical importance, and the landed elites’ possession of slaves. Although the book is impressive in its detailed analysis and extensive use of primary sources, there are two points that left me puzzled after reading the book. First, the author’s usage of “ideology” is unclear when explaining the practice of kinship. Based on the analysis of kinship practice in Andong and Namwŏn, the book seems to demonstrate the institutional history of the kinship system based on Neo-Confucianism. If it is “kinship ideology” and not the system, the author needs to explain more clearly how that is different from the “Neo-Confucian ideology” she so eloquently argued in her previous book. Second, the author emphasises the importance of “the social”, and states “By putting the social ahead of the political, the indigenous kinship ideology created an elite that ruled on the basis of birth and descent, giving it extraordinary permanence through time and space” (p. 408). No one could argue its importance, but it seems an overstatement to claim that “the social” preceded all other factors in maintaining the hereditary status system. As far as the elite status is concerned, Deuchler makes the indisputable claim that the “native kinship ideology” produced the descent groups that continued to hold elite power and privilege throughout the Chosŏn dynasty. Anyone reading the book will be impressed with Deuchler’s breadth of knowledge, meticulous research, extensive use of primary sources, and detailed analysis of case studies. Since the book covers from Silla to late Chosŏn, one could use it in multiple ways for teaching purposes by assigning different chapters depending on what time period is being covered. The book definitely appeals to a broad audience of scholars and students interested in premodern Korean history, kinship, genealogy, social status and locality. Like her previous book, Under the Ancestors’ Eyes is truly another masterpiece and essential to anyone studying premodern Korean history.