The Prehistory of Korea (review)

BOOK REVIEWS139 a reader who tries to find a tale type without knowing its type number usually has to search through several pages of plot summaries. Given the strengths and limitations inherent in folktale type indexes, Choi has admirably achieved his goal of constructing an index for Korean oral narratives . He has done a fine job of identifying their types, and he has thoroughly researched his sources of folktale texts and Korean classical literature for variants of each type. In sum, he has obviously expended much painstaking effort to produce this volume. The few shortcomings of Choi's work are apparent enough. First, his English is awkward and sometimes hard to comprehend. Second, the Type Index is plagued with an excessive number of typographical errors. Third, though the romanizations of place names follow the ROK Ministry of Education system, other Korean terms are romanized in apparently haphazard fashion. Finally, the Type Index is somewhat out of date. It was originally prepared in 1974 as a dissertation at Tokyo Kyöiku University, and the present edition is an English translation of that dissertation. As a result, none of the folktale collections published after 1974 (and these have been numerous) are included among the sources. But these shortcomings are almost trivial in comparison with Choi's substantial contribution to Korean studies and international folklore scholarship. We all owe him a debt of gratitude for providing us with this important new research tool. Dawnhee Yim Janelli Indiana University The Prehistory ofKorea. By Jeong-Hak Kim. Translated from the Japanese and edited by R. J. Pearson and K. Pearson. Honolulu, Hawaii: The University Press of Hawaii, xxxv, 237 pp. Maps, illustrations , tables, bibliography, index. $17.50 A synthesis of the prehistory of a region can be either mainly descriptive or mainly explanatory, though there will be elements of each in either case. The Prehistory ofKorea leans strongly toward the descriptive. As the thoughtful introduction by Richard Pearson points out, an understanding of Korean prehistory is essential to an understanding of prehistoric events in Japan, Manchuria, and northern China. As a compendium of information on the prehistory of Korea, this work should be, indeed, a welcome addition to the library of anyone interested in the development of East Asian cultures, or in cross-cultural comparisons . It is the first synthesis of Korean prehistory to appear in English, and as such it makes much data available for the first time to those who have no command of Korean or Japanese. Moreover, it draws upon many diverse and obscure sources, quite a few of them from North Korea. The four chapters of the English translation do not comprise the entire Japa- 140NELSON nese original. While it is possible to omit Three Kingdoms archaeology as separate from prehistory, as the translators have done, this leaves a gap of about six hundred years for the Iron Age, a period that was at best protohistoric in Korea. It would have been very valuable to have this translated also. The chapters follow a technological-developmental sequence, and presumably also a temporal one, through "preceramic" and "geometric" periods to the Bronze Age. The Bronze Age is discussed in two chapters. The first of these concentrates on pottery, and the second on metal artifacts. The chapters are of uneven length, reflecting the amount of excavation that actually has been accomplished. The chapter on the Paleolithic, entitled "Preceramic Industries," is very sketchy indeed. It includes only partial information from excavation sites, with no integrative material. The chapter's short introductory section, subtitled "Natural Environment," will be of little help to anyone not already familiar with the geography of the Korean peninsula. The chapter on early ceramics, which Kim calls "Geometric," is more extensive . (The pottery of this period has more often been called chülmun, or "combware ," but Kim finds this designation inappropriate.) The chapter opens with a brief review of early opinions about the relationships of decorated pottery types, followed by regional descriptions of detailed differences in ceramic styles. Descriptions of other artifacts and some descriptions of dwellings are also included. The chapter concludes with a chronology based on a kind of polythetic seriation that hinges on a supposed transition from pointed to...