Abstract

Hoguilrok (虎口日錄) and Eungamji (鷹巖誌) are examples of Silki Literature, which is based on the 1592 Battle of Eungam Cave in Pyeongchang. Although both works stem from the same event, they present distinctly different narratives. The divergence in the narrative focus despite their common historical background is an unusual case. This study explores the reasons behind these differences. By examining the chronological relationship and background of their creation, this study clarifies the authors’ respective intentions and highlights the unique narrative characteristics of Eungamji compared to Hoguilrok. Hoguilrok is a diary-style record of Gwon Dumun’s (權斗文) life as a prisoner of war and his eventual escape. The work reflects the loyalty (忠) of Gwon Dumun, the chastity (節) of his concubine Kang Sosa (姜小史), and the filial duty (孝) of his son Gwon Ju(權 ). By contrast, Eungamji is believed to have originated from the observations of Jeong Heochun (鄭虛春), who was a servant who experienced the events. Lee Munju (李文柱), who served as the magistrate of Pyeongchang, later recorded this account and their descendants subsequently refined it into a literary work. In this regard, Hoguilrok can be viewed as a diary that faithfully preserves the virtues of loyalty, filial duty, and chastity, passed down with the interest of Confucian scholars. By contrast, Eungamji appears to have been shaped by the efforts of local residents seeking recognition from the central government for their ancestors’ loyalty. Although both works are silki literature based on the same event, the differing social status and perspectives of the authors has resulted in distinct narrative intentions and content. Hoguilrok can be considered a “narrative of fact” based on Gwon Dumun’s personal experiences, while Eungamji is a “narrative of memory,” which is embellished with literary fiction. The combination of fact and fiction in Eungamji makes the work a unique example of practical literature that warrants special attention.