This article seeks to redefine the Kim Pusik’s 金富軾 (1075-1151) Samguk sagi 三國史記 (Histories of the Three Kingdoms) as a more imaginative and literary text by foregrounding its “supernatural” elements (collectively referred to as “wonder tales”), rather than emphasizing the ‘Confucian’ orientation that has conventionally been prescribed to it. It reviews the extend of incorporation of “wonder tales” into the historiographical content of Samguk sagi and outlines the connections between their literary essence and structural functions. The references to extraordinary are typified and distributed by six groups whose attributes are both contextual and functional: the subject matter itself (what is told, in which circumstances the matter is referred to) and assumed level of its compliance with the norms of Confucian historiographical accountability (trustworthiness). These references are analyzed contextually with illustrative references to the Chinese ‘normative histories’ principles. Then the political and structural functions of mystical motifs in the Histories of the Three Kingdoms are deducted and explained. Finally tentative conclusions are offered on the principles of choice of “wonder stories” for the historical narration in the Samguk sagi and their functions as ‘special historiographical elements’ are discussed.

In Korean studies, the prevailing consensus has long been that Kim Pusik’s 金富軾 (1075-1151) Samguk sagi 三國史記narrative is predominantly Confucian, dry, and rational. However, in the 21st century, this view has been vigorously and successfully challenged by scholars who find profound drama and undeniable literary merit in this chronicle. Following this trend, I analyze the methods of creating archetypes in Kim Busik’s narrative, dividing these archetypes into two categories. Along with the obvious “functional” role models reflecting various Confucian virtues and vices, the Samguk sagi also contains more subtle, “hidden” archetypes rooted in a deep mythological consciousness. The biographies of historical figures reflect motifs of Joseph Campbell’s “Hero’s Journey” and the Transformations of the Hero, while unexpected parallels in the structure and narrative of the adventures of the “protagonists” Kim Yusin 金庾信 and “antagonists” Kungye 弓裔 offer intriguing comparisons. The interplay of “functional” and “Campbellian” archetypes throughout the storyline allows for a better appreciation of the literary talent of Kim Pusik and his predecessors, revealing cosmogonic motifs in the presentation of historical events seemingly uncharacteristic of Confucian historiography, and confirming the deeply syncretic nature of ancient and medieval Korean culture, which persisted until at least the 12th century. It can be surmised that Kim Pusik’s historiography did not reject myth perse, but on the contrary, embraced dramatic mythologization of historical figures that enhanced their significance for the history.

In the face of the failure of both traditional European Sinology/Japanology and North American Area Studies to overcome anachronistic nation-centered methodologies, this article calls for a new East Asian Studies in a globe-spanning and comparative key, as part of the emerging Global Humanities. It illustrates ways to push for a new regionalism in East Asian Studies, in the overall frame of our shared global condition, and aims to empower the concept of the “region” as a unit of human experience and state-building, transcultural encounters and knowledge exchanges, and a zone of proximity and close difference that provides an alternative to essentializing notions of “cultures” or “civilizations” that could be academically incommensurable and incomparable or militarily and socially “clashing.”As a case study the article explores the rise of modern, Western-style literary historiography in East Asia, a process that has so far only been analyzed separately in Japanese, Chinese, and Korean studies and thus not been understood in its historical significance and complexity. The article proposes new tools for understanding the rise of this genre in the context of the emergence of the modern Japanese empire in the region, typologizing literary histories into “idiographic,” “heterographic,” and “xenographic” ones, written, respectively, on the historiographer’s own, a culturally related, or completely foreign literary tradition. Ultimately it aims to illustrate the need for a regionally-focused, globally framed, understanding of East Asia and also to showcase how a new focus on comparative studies of premodern macro-regions can help developed more nuanced methodologies for our understanding of the diversity of human culture.