• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.40
• /
• pp.207-241
• /
• 2007

This paper investigates the royal collection of paintings and calligraphy during King Gojong's (高宗) reign (1897~1907) based on the function of the Jipgyeong-dang Hall (緝敬堂), situated at "sleeping realm (寢殿)," Gyeongbok Palace. Using the surviving palace records and art works this study argues that the date of building the hall is approximately confined to the year of 1890. Not being matched with the general opinion that the Jipgyeong-dang Hall was used for the official meeting with envoys, this hall functioned as the main place for royal audience and the storehouse for archives. The role of Gojong as collector and patron was essential not only to the maintenance of the collection but also to the strengthening of royal authority just before the Japanese annexation in 1910. The specific titles of the collection at this hall can be verified through the Catalogue of the Books, Paintings, and Calligraphy Exposed to the Sun at Jipgyeong-dang Hall (緝敬堂曝曬書目) dating to the nineteenth century. The records of the catalogue inform us that more than 1,000 paintings and pieces of calligraphy, inkrubbings from old steles, manuals for painting, and encyclopedia concerning art theories from Korea, China, and Japan were preserved there. The collection of Jipgyeong-dang Hall resulted from Gojong's policy to foster the collection of contemporary Chinese and Japanese art works and various catalogues. Standing behind the Gyeongbok Palace, the Jibok-jae Hall (集玉齋) also preserved the diverse sources of practical learning, as did the Jipgyong-dang Hall for Gojong. The enormous royal collections by Gojong might have been constructed in accordance with the royal artistic taste and the artistic milieu of the late Joseon period. The surviving royal catalogues confirm this assumption as documentary evidence.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.56-85
• /
• 2010

UNESCO World Heritage Programme was introduced following the adoption of Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972 in order to protect cultural and natural heritage with superb value for all mankind. Despite its short history of less than 40 years, it has been evaluated as one of the most successful of the cultural area projects of UNESCO with 890 world heritage registered worldwide. For systematic protection management of World Heritage, UNESCO, through systemization of registration, emphasis on the importance of preservation management plan, institutionalization of monitoring, and operation of World Heritage Fund, has utilized World Heritage Programme not just as a means of listing excellent cultural properties, but as a preservation planning tool, and accordingly, such policies have had a significant influence on the cultural heritage protection legislations of numerous nations. Korea has ratified World Heritage Convention in 1988, and with the registration of the Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty in 2009, it has 9 World Heritage Sites. Twenty years have passed since Korea joined the World Heritage Programme. While World Heritage registration contributed to publicity of the uniqueness and excellence of Korean cultural properties and improvement of Korea's national culture status, it is now time to devise various legislative/systematic improvement means to reconsider the World Heritage registration strategy and establish a systematic preservation management system. While up until now, the Cultural Properties Protection Law has been amended to arrange for basic rules regarding registration and protection of World Heritage Sites, and some local governments have founded bodies exclusive for World Heritage Site management, a more fundamental and macroscopic plan for World Heritage policy improvement must be sought. Projects and programs in each area for reinforcement of World Heritage policy capacity such as: 1) Enactment of a special law for World Heritage Site preservation management; 2) enactment of ordinances for protection of World Heritage Sites per each local government; 3) reinforcement of policies and management functionality of Cultural Heritage Administration and local governments; 4) dramatic increase in the finances of World Heritage Site protection; 5) requirement to establish plan for World Heritage Site preservation protection; 6) increased support for utilization of World Heritage Sites; 7) substantiation and diversification of World Heritage registration; 8) sharing of information and experiences of World Heritage Sites management among local governments; 9) installation of World Heritage Sites integral archive; 10) revitalization of citizen cooperation and resident participation; 11) training specialized resources for World Heritage Sites protection; 12) revitalization of sustainable World Heritage Sites tourism, must be selected and promoted systematically. Regarding how World Heritage Programme should be domestically accepted and developed, the methods for systemization, scientific approach, and specialization of World Heritage policies were suggested per type. In the future, in-depth and specialized researches and studies should follow.