Centric Thinking in History and Multiperspective Understanding

Contemporary historical studies have changed in terms of both their quantity and quality in a 'fashionable' way. Particularly in the 1980s and 1990s, global historiography has undergone a tremendous transformation, in turn influencing the writing of 'regional' national histories. Beyond the bounds of a single nation,transnational entanglements are noticeable as a fundamental way of life. The proposition that there is no single, major center of history cannot be easily refuted,because history as such shows that there are multiple, co-existent centers of history. In an era of globalism and globalization earlier, centric means of historical thinking, whether they be Eurocentric, Sinocentric, or other versions thereof are not acceptable, and cannot be taken for granted. With a flourishing variety of methods and theories, efforts of historians to pursue objective fact-finding as a traditional goal has seriously deteriorated. When it comes to domestic scholarship, historical knowledge since 1960's has changed to a significant degree, and has changed as much as in overseas historiography. But it may be admitted that Korean historians lacked creative thinking and productive outcomes of their efforts, despite strenuous attempts to the contrary. The primary objective of this article is to examine the main trends in contemporary historical scholarship, both overseas and domestic, particularly since the 1960's, and to point out hopeful directions that Korean historiography should develop in the years to come.