When it comes to discussing fetal movement of the modern history of Korea, the judgment criteria of most existing studies have been based on the characteristics of the modern history of the western countries. At the same time, the modern history of Korea played a role for a tool of the resistance against the Japanese invasion and have been understood as same with the process that the nationalism history has been complete. Meanwhile, recently, attempts are emerging that the modern history is newly understood in the characteristics of the universal modern history that the nationalism prejudice has been removed. Also, there are some attempts to shed new light on the modern history through a positive reinterpretation on the relationship with recognition of the traditional history or Confucian idea. And, there are other attempts to re-investigate the value of the isolated traditional history itself. Those all attempts can be said as approaches to newly understand the modern history for the existing history of the nationalism.
However, there is something that both those two new realization and the existing main recognition do not focus on; what effect does the appearance of the new modern historical subjects have on the establishment of the modern historical studies? This study was to be prepared in order to restructure the modern historical recognition of Korea, focused on new modern historical subjects.
In the meantime, this study is an attempt to find the root of 'the historical recognition of the modernism' and 'the history of colonialism.' Of course, this attempt is a new issue because the term used in this study has yet been accustomed to be applied as a scientific term.
New arguments in this study are three as follows. First, the social changes after the late Chosun Dynasty established new modern historical subjects, and such changes were reflected as historical recognition at the variety sector including a positive school(實學). That is why, it is the first conclusion that the fetal movement of the modern Koran history should be recognized to be expanded to the late Chosun Dynasty. Second, since the western civilization rushed into Korea before autonomous modernization or historical recognition had not been established, two historical recognitions were established in the modernization of Korea; the one was not the road to modernization based on succession of autonomous modernization or tradition but the history of the modernism that underlined an absolute superiority of the western civilization, and the other was the nationalism history against the said prejudice. Third, the nationalism history contained the two elements, modernization and anti-invasion and post-colonialism simultaneously. The former was combined with the historical recognition of the modernism to change into the right nationalism, and the latter was combined with the public that emerged as a new modern subject after the late Chosun of the 1920s to show populism and post-colonialism. The nationalism of the modern history became the root of such an ambivalent post-colonialism history.
This study ended in making a critical review of the existing arguments and would be detailed through the current texts in the future. In addition, it is expected to be supplemented through review on more explicit definition of concept and the process of the modern history.