거란의 ‘고려사신의례(高麗使臣儀禮)’ 구성과 의미

이바른(Lee, Ba-reun) 한국역사연구회 2015 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.98

Examined in this article are general protocols observed by the Khitan(Liao) government in greeting Goryeo envoys(“高麗使臣儀禮”). They are documented [in scattered fashion] inside the “Courtesy Section(禮志)” of Liaoshi(遼史: History of Liao). Also examined are three more articles, which also described certain protocols to be observed in greeting Goryeo emissaries, recorded in the Chapter of ‘Guest Greeting.’ There are total of seven articles in the former record, which depict protocols not only for regular envoys but also for irregular ones. Examination of them reveal certain characteristics of certain envoys in certain time periods. We can see that rules for greeting foreign emissaries were modified from time to time, to fit the nature of the occasion. Three articles in the latter record, 「Ib’hyeon-eui」, 「Gog’yeon-eui」 and 「Josa-eui」, contain court rules concerning visiting Goryeo emissaries. Each of them showed a basic format, composed of a process from ‘Entrance’ to ‘Banquet’ to ‘Exit.’ We can also see that the original Khitan quality, most vividly displayed in the North/South Division of its own government, is also reflected in the ritual’s progression. Compared to 「Jo’hyeon-eui」 and 「Josa-eui」, which contained rules for greeting the Tangut emissaries, rules meant for the Goryeo emissaries show clear acknowledgement of the identity of the emissary, exact depiction of the time they were visiting, and a very much detailed description of the process. These rules would have been officially established around the time of Goryeo King Hyeonjong’s reign. And they must have been Khitan’s primary set of rules to recognize Goryeo and its envoys. They should have served as a criteria for the Khitan government’s greeting of envoys from other countries(except for Sung) as well.

4세기 말~5세기 초엽 ‘백제왕(百濟王)’호의 책봉 배경과 ‘도독백제제군사(都督百濟諸軍事)’호의 의의

백길남(白佶楠) 한국역사연구회 2020 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.115

To nearby tribute-providing entities, Dongjin(Eastern Jin) bestowed “Inner ranks(內臣官爵)” such as ‘Dodok’ and ‘Jujasa’ in a symbolic gesture, posing as an empire with an emperor. Acknowledgement of kingships for respective kingdoms was frowned upon. Then in 383, when Dongjin’s loss of the Central Plains became evident and permanent after the conclusion of the Bisu(淝水) battle, the Dongjin court began recognizing foreign kings and Northern leaders as kings within their own kingdoms, starting with Baekje in 386. This signifies the Dongjin government’s acknowledgment of the new international situation in which several political entities were indeed entitled to their own kingdoms, and a new policy to pursue an identity as a ‘Jiangnan(江南, under the Yangtze river) State,’ which emerged in China at the end of the Dongjin and early Song period. To Dongjin, Baekje was an entity separated from the Seojin(Western Jin) realm, as located thousands of Ri units out of the Liaodung region, and a part of an Eastern Barbaric tribe[“東夷, Dong’ih”] called ‘Samhan(三韓).’ Taking advantage of its own regional remoteness, and Dongjin’s limited knowledge of the Korean peninsula’s geography and ethnic nature, Baekje was able to issue certain official communiques designed to propagate its own political and diplomatic agendas. Exploiting Dongjin’s own isolated condition, Baekje unilaterally spreaded a series of diplomatic propaganda, such as “Caring for its own small league of states(‘Gyeom Je-Soguk, 兼諸小國’)” and “Campaigning in the Liaoshi region(‘Ya g’yu Yoseo, 略有遼西’).” Included in the ‘Gyeom Je-Sogu k’ propaganda was an insinuation of the fact that Baekje was the representative entity of all Samhan in general. This move actually served its purpose as emphasis on that particular notion led to Baekje being recognized in 372 as an independent kingdom for the first time in Dongjin’s history of recognizing foreign entities as such. Meanwhile, the ‘Ya g’yu Yose o’ propaganda signalled the possibility of Baekje mounting military operations beyond the boundaries of Liaodung, the region of ‘Eastern barbarians,’ and in the Liaoshi region which belonged to the Western Jin. This led to Baekje receiving the Dodok title -which had only been allowed to regions and tribes within the Western Jin territory- for the first time as an entity outside such realm. In other words, included in the title of ‘Dodok Baekje Jegunsa(Baekje king, as the Dodok leader of its troops)’ were notions that both viewed Baekje as supposedly under Dongjin’s (nominal) influence and also on its own at the same time.

高句麗의 勢力圈 遼東에 對한 地政學的 考察

李起東(LEE Ki Dong),朴京哲(토론자) 고구려발해학회 2005 고구려발해연구 Vol.21 No.-

Koguryo had continually advanced to west since the founding state, and eventually ejected the Chinese commanderies named Liaodong-chun and Hsunto-chun by King Gwanggaeto in early 5th century. So Koguryo conquered all of Liaodong Territory. Yet after Koguryo had satisfied with this strategic success, and then shifted her capital from Tung-kou(Jian) - a tributary to the Yalu River - to Pyongyang on a Southern area. Because Koguryo aimed to suppress two growing countries on the south of Korean Peninsular, Baekje and Silla. Thereafter, Koguryo had very successfully struggled against the Chinese invaders at her western frontier beside the Liao River until her min by the attack of Tang and Silla in 668. However, in geo-political aspects, the defence of Liaodong without possession of Liaoshi Territory on the west side of Liao River was essentially impossible. It is well known story that the Kung-sun warlords were ruined by Wei(Tsao) Dynasty in early 3rd century and that the Manchurian warlord Zhang Tso-lin strived to get Jehol Province in 1920s. Koguryo kept struggling against the Chinese invaders at the many strong mountain-fortresses. However, because of this strategy for defence, Koguryo was finally ruined by the attack of Tang.

고조선 중심지의 위치 문제에 대한 쟁점과 과제

송호정(Song, Ho-jung) 한국역사연구회 2015 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.98

The most important thing that should be considered in Go-Joseon studies is the possibility that the territory of Go-Joseon could have shifted as time went on, that the feature of the Go-Joseon realm could have had different shapes in different periods. The history of Go-Joseon shows two phases: the Bronze culture era when the Go-Joseon people still used Bipa-shaped bronze daggers, and the Iron culture era when Go-Joseon achieved the status of a ‘State.’ From this, we can easily see the importance of acknowledging the fact that there should have been ‘periodic changes’ in the Go-Joseon realm, when we try to approach its history from an academic viewpoint. In the early phases of the Ancient period, borderlines were not that distinctive as they are today. Between states and political entities, incredibly large areas remained unpopulated. Go-Joseon’s western border area in particular is believed to have been more than fluid. And there were various tribes living in the vicinity. So, trying to dictate the Daedong-gang river area as the (Western) border of Go-Joseon, or arguing that Go-Joseon’s realm engulfed the entire Manchu region as well as the Northern part of the Korean peninsula, the “entire time” from beginning to end, is simply unrealistic. Scholars and the public should refrain from considering ‘regional deployment of tribes’ or the ‘range of [their] cultural influences’ as indicators of parameters for an actual political territory. Perceiving the entire realm that shared the Bipa-shaped bronze dagger culture directly as the political territory of Go-Joseon is nothing but an academically inappropriate misconception. The Daedong-gang river in the Pyeong’yang region should not be excluded from the early-stage realm of Go-Joseon, while including not only the Liaodung(遼東) region but also the Liaoshi(遼西) region in Go-Joseon’s supposed realm of influence is simply without sufficient empirical basis.

17-20세기 러시아 만주학 연구의 시작과 전개과정 -북경교회사절단을 중심으로

강인욱 ( Kang In Uk ) 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 2016 民族文化硏究 Vol.73 No.-

본고에서는 북경교회사절단을 중심으로 만주학의 연구를 일괄하고 그 전후 러시아의 만주족 연구에 대한 학사적 검토를 했다. 본고에서 살펴본 바와 같이 지난 300여 년 간의 러시아 동방학연구는 세계에서 유례를 찾을 수 없을 정도로 독특하고 중요하다. 한문 중심의 중국사가 아니라 그들과 외교관계를 맺은 청나라에 대한 체계적인 이해에서 출발했기 때문에 세계 어느 나라보다 빨리 만주어 연구에 돌입했고, 그 이해 수준도 매우 높았다. 즉, 극동의 소수민족 중 하나로 인식되는 대부분의 만주연구와 달리 러시아에서는 청나라와 국경을 접하는 첨예한 외교관계 속에서 발달되었으며, 한문의 보조수단으로서가 아니라 정식 외교언어로 만주어가 연구되었다는 점에서 그 의의가 매우 크다. 18-20세기 초반 사이에 제정러시아의 북경교회사절단 및 그들이 양성한 학자들의 의해서 상당수의 만주는 물론 중국 전반에 관한 역사와 언어가 번역되어서 러시아 동방학의 기초를 수립했다. 이후 제정러시아의 동방학은 20세기 이후 고고, 역사 등으로 확대되어서 독특한 러시아 동방학의 전통은 물론, 구 사회주의권의 동방학 형성에 결정적 기여를 했다. 이와 같이 조선이 나선정벌로 대표되는 러시아의 극동 진출은 북경교회 사절단으로 이어졌고, 러시아는 물론 사회주의권의 만주학을 발달시키는 데에 결정적인 기여를 했다. 이러한 중요성에 비해서 북경교회 사절단의 역할은 국내에 거의 알려져 있지 않은 바, 본고에서는 북경교회 사절단의 주요한 업적을 소개하고, 그들이 20세기 이후 러시아의 만주학 연구에서 차지하는 위치를 살펴보았다. In this study, author analyses the beginning of Manchu study in Russia from 18th century to the early 20th cen. BCE. It is worthwhile to notice that Sino-Russian borderline conflict and diplomatic relation with dynasty Qing promoted the development of manchu study in Russia. After the Albazin ostrog was stormed by Qing troops in 1685, some of Cossacks moved to China and relocated to Dongzhimen of Beijing. In spite of relocation, these Albazinian strongly withheld their own belief. Since 1713 year, Russia sent Russian Orthodox Church Missionary to Beijing to serve Albazinian. Contrast to catholic missionaries in China. Russian Missionary in Beijing didn`t engage in evangel to chinese and most of time they spent in translating manchu language to russian and occupied in researching chinese history and culture. Like this, manchu language was not regarded as a secondary, but official language for Russia. Until the Boxer Rebellion of 1898-1900, Russian Orthodox Missionary functioned as main source of manchu(=Jurchen) study in Russia. Although most of manuscript still remained unpublished, archive materials widely used during Soviet Era. Recently Larichev V.E. had been edited and published `Liaoshi(History of Liao Dynasty)`, `Jinshi(History of Jin Dynasty), `Yuanshi(History of Yuan Dynasty) and etc.. Furthermore, archaeological researches on Jurchen was also motivated by this Manchu study of Russian Orthodox Church Missionary. Ducher of upper basin of Amur river and Jurchen culture of lower basin of Amur river are identified as material remains of Jurchens(=manchus).

『滿洲源流考』 疆域편에 보이는 한국 고대국가의 영역 고찰

조영광(Jo Yeong-Kwang) 한국고대학회 2018 先史와 古代 Vol.- No.58

만주원류고는 청을 건국한 만주족 선조들의 역사를 정리하고 숭상하기 위한 목적으로 편찬 되었다. 그런데 여기에는 부여, 삼한, 신라, 백제, 발해 등 한국 고대국가들이 대거 포함되어 있어 문제의 소지가 있다. 그리고 강역 부문에는 이들의 영역을 보편적인 인식과는 다르게 서술한 부분이 많아 논란이 되고 있다. 만주원류고는 일반적으로 한반도 중남부 지역에 있었다고 여겨지는 삼한, 백제, 신라 등을 만주 지역으로 비정하고 있다. 삼한을 요동 지역으로, 그리고 백제의 영역에는 요서·요동 지역을, 신라의 영역에는 길림 지역을 포함시켰다. 발해의 영역과 관련해서도 적지 않은 문제점을 노출하고 있는데, 우선 패수를 니하와 관련시켜 요양, 해성 일원의 어느 하천으로 비정하고 있다. 그리고 발해 5경 중 중경현덕부, 남경남해부, 동경용원부를 모두 요동으로 비정하고 나머지 부들의 상당수도 요동, 요서 지역에 둠으로써 발해의 역사지리 고증에 큰 혼란을 초래 하였다. 일반적인 견해와 맞지 않는 만주원류고의 이러한 역사지리 인식은 두 가지 측면에서 기인한 것이다. 첫 번째는 두찬인 요사 지리지와 그 계통의 역사지리서 등을 핵심 사료로 활용하고 하였다는 사실 때문이다. 두 번째는 정치적 동기, 즉 만주족 자족의 선양이라는 편찬의 목적이 강하게 작용하였다는 점이다. Manzhouyuanliukao was compiled to organize and honor the history of the Manchu ancestors who built the Qing Dynasty. However, there are problems in the book because it contains many ancient Korean states such as Silla ( 新羅 ) , Baekje ( 百濟 ) , Balhae ( 渤海 ) , etc. And the Jiangyu ( 疆域, Political Boundaries ) section is controversial because there are many different descriptions of the descriptions of territories of Korean ancient countries. Manzhouyuanliukao noted that the Baekje, Silla and other peninsular countries were located in Manchuria. It was said that Samhan ( 三韓 ) was in liaodong area. And Baekje territory included Liaoxi ( 遼西 ) , Liaodong ( 遼東 ) area. The territory of Silla included the Jilin ( 吉林 ) area. There are many problems related to the territory of Balhae. First of all, Paesu ( 浿水 ) is associated with Niha ( 泥河 ) , which means that it is a river near the Liaoyang ( 遼陽 ) , Haicheng ( 海城 ) . And it has caused great confusion in the historical geography of Balhae by having all of the Junggyung ( 中京 ) , Namgyung ( 南京 ) , and Donggyung ( 東京 ) in Balhae 5 capitals as Liaodong area and many of the remaining provinces in Liaodong and Liaoxi area. Manzhouyuanliukao s historical geographical awareness, which does not conform to the custom, is due to two aspects. The first is to use the problematic historical geographies like Liaoshi dilizhi ( 遼史 地理志 ) as the core data. The second is political motivation. And that the purpose of the compilation of the Manchurian to raise their ancestors was strong.