Decision of name of capital after the liberation and discussion of revision in 1950s

Abstract

After the liberation, the US Military Government used Gyeongseong or keijo as the name of Seoul. They decided to use ‘Seoul’ instead of Gyeongseong from September 14, but ‘Seoul-si’, ‘Hanseong-si(漢城市)’ and ‘Gyeongseong-bu’(京城府) were used in mix. At the end of 1945, the council meeting of Gyeongseong-bu decided to write ‘Hanseong-si(漢城市)’ and to read it as ‘Seoul-si’, but the US Military Government refused it that lingered the confusion regarding the name. On August 10, 1946, the US Military Government announced 「Charter of The City of Seoul」 commemorating the 1st anniversary of the liberation. Based on it, Gyeongseong-bu was renamed to Seoul Special Free City under the military government ordinance no. 106 on September 19.BR President Seungman Rhee made a statement on September 16, 1955 suggesting the revision of the name of Seoul because ‘Seoul’ is a common noun indicating the capital city, it is not a proper noun indicating a land name and it is hard for foreigners to pronounce and requesting discussion of its alternative. Classical scholars of the country such as Choi Namseon, Lee Byeongdo, Choi Hyeonbae and Kim Yoongyeong and some people expressed opinion of agreement. As alternatives, ‘Hanyang’ and ‘Hanseong’ were suggested many among old names of Seoul. Korean linguists suggested a Korean name like ‘Hanbeol’. Also ‘Woonam-si’ was suggested with the nickname of the president.BR There were opposing opinions against rename. Lee Huiseung, a Korean linguist, many people and Donga Ilbo expressed opinion of disagreement. While Seoul is a common noun indicating the capital city, as it has been used as a name of a specific region, it must be considered to be converted into a proper noun. And difficult pronunciation for foreigners is not a matter of consideration in deciding the name of the capital city. And, the reason of opposition include that it has been widely used for a long time and well known to overseas, and affection of people was formed. The issue of rename of Seoul came to nothing after 1 year’s discussion.BR The discussion of rename of Seoul was not appropriate in terms of time, and it took place abruptly without a proper context. But, considering the fact that representative classical scholars such as Choi Namseon, Lee Byeongdo and Choi Hyeonbae supported, it was not a simple happening that some close associate with the president attempted to change the name of Seoul to the nickname of the president. In consequence, it demonstrated plainly that the name of the capital city after the liberation was decided without proper discussion process.