I named the series of historiographies in east asia, which have advocated the independence of former colonies referring to the historical materialism, as ‘post-war historiography’, and understood the historiography of North Korea in the context of them. From the first stage of nation building, North Korea started writing the history of Korea newly to overcome the historiography of colonialism as the theories of stagnation and heteronomy. And North Korea succeeded in establishing the development stage theory of national history by publishing the revised edition of Joseon Tongsa(History of Korea) in 1962. We can consider it as the important achievement of anti-colonialism historiography, which followed in an authentic way the tendency of the post-war historiography of east asia. But if we supposed the world consists of countries which have developed in no relation with others, it would be meaningless to criticize imperialism or colonialism, because there is only competence among ideally equivalent ‘universal subject’. Then the agenda of anti-colonialism also lost its ground. It might be an immanent contradiction of the development stage theory of national history which started as anti-colonialism historiography. The long journey for the universal subject has led to an denial of colonial rule not a criticism on it. As the fact of Han-sa-gun(漢四郡) and Mongol’s rule on Goryeo(高麗) dynasty were denied, Korea was able to appear as a pure subject. As for Japanese rule on Korea, the desire of denying it also surpassed the criticism on it. But, at the same point of denying all the relation and exchange, the subject became solid and the history made a stand. The anti-colonialism historiography converted to the anti-historiography.