http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 최자영(Che, Ja-Young) (검색결과 43 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
베네치아 지배 하 강제 징병에 항거한 자킨토스섬 민중-시민의 봉기(1628) -에프타니사(7개 섬)와 로마, 콘스탄티노플 등 주변 세력들과의 관계를 중심으로-
최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 한국서양사학회 2013 서양사론 Vol.0 No.119
At the beginning of the 17th Century when the Venetian maritime empire was more or less suffering, as trade shifted from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic, a people`s rebellion broke out in Zakynthos (August 17, 1628). Venice`s economic decline led to a weakness of military power, and in Zakynthos the conscription of citizens was forced by Venetian officials on the spot, to spare the cost of mercenary soldiers. The people`s rebellion in Zakynthos lasted just one day. This type of rebellion had not been seen before nor would it be seen again. It could be defined as a resistance not so much against the colonial domination of Venetia itself, as against the abuse of authority committed by Venetian resident officials in Zakynthos. These officials coerced people to be taken into the military against normal conventions. There were different positions held by the two differing authorities, Venetia itself and its officials in the colony. Venetian resident officials in Zakynthos inflicted punishment on the agitators of the people`s rebellion, but the Metropolis discharged them in 1637 by the decision of the court. Venetian domination was not autocratic but made a compromise with the aboriginal conventions so as not to disturb the status quo. The aboriginal self-government was embodied in the religious hierarchy of priests. The resistance of aborigines against the infringement of conventional autonomy did not invariably refer to the Venetian domination or the autocracy of its officials in the colony. There were also conflicts among regions: those occurring between Zakynthos and Kephalonia, as well as those between different social classes. In the people`s rebellion of 1628 some of the upper class citizens (polites) collaborated more or less with the lower class people, but the former were in discord with the latter who supported Nikodimos II Metaxas, the bishop (episcopos) of Kephalonia and Zakynthos. Moreover, Ephtanisa (seven islands) including Zakynthos was in contact with and influenced by not only Venetia, but also Rome, Korinth and Constantinople. For example, in Zakynthos and Kephalonia, there coexisted bishops who were appointed by the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, bishops (episcopos, metropolites) appointed by the patriarchs of Constantinople, and bishops or priests appointed by the aborigines. As there were multi-dimensional relationships, the independence from or resistance against Venetia did not have absolute meaning. In these circumstances, Venetian authority made efforts to settle the discord among regions, or different social classes in a community, without rapid alteration of existing conventions as much as possible.
-
-
고르틴 법을 통해 본 고대 그리스 여성의 재산권 -크레타 섬과 그리스 본토의 사회체제 비교에 관한 일고-
최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 한국서양사학회 2010 서양사론 Vol.0 No.107
According to the Law of Gortyn (VIII 21ff.), the `daughter-heiress in the state of no son heir (patroiokos=epikleros)` has the right of inheritance but is to marry the privileged in-law of the same tribe. This essay discusses the woman who gets to the status of `daughter-heiress` after her father or brother has already made her marry someone. It is said in the Law of Gortyn that, even if her husband would like to maintain the marriage against her wishes, despite having offspring from their marriage, she can take her share according to provisions and marry someone from her tribe (pyla=phyle). But if there is no offspring, she is to take all things and marry `the privileged in-law (epiballontes).` Zietelmann suggested that, when `daughter-heiress` in the state of no son heir wants to maintain the existing marriage, the right of succession of the privileged in-law is to be revoked. And Willets insisted that, in case she leaves the husband but there is her offspring begotten from him, the person with whom the `daughter-heiress` should `share according to provisions` could not be the former or new husband, but her offspring from him. That is, according to Willets, she should divide the property of her native family with her children begotten from her former husband. In Gortyn or anywhere else in Greece, however, there were no laws which proved that the children had some preferential right of succession for the property of their mother`s family, with the exception of their mother`s dowry. On the contrary, the succession right of the privileged in-law of her native tribe was too absolute to be revoked in any case. Even when the daughter-heiress or her husband who has become adopted son succeeds property, and it is never transferred to her husband`s other family. It should be noted here, in my opinion, that in case the daughter-heiress leaves her existing husband, to marry the privileged in-law or someone else from her native tribe, no matter if her former husband is alive or dead, and if there are children from him or not, she has the right to take her dowry as well as a portion of her work such as woven clothes via her own labor from her former husband`s. In Gortyn as well as in the general Greek world such as Athens and Sparta, the common property of family and the private ownership of women seem to exist respectively as an independent category. For example, the dowry the woman brought to the husband was excluded from the common ownership of her native family as well as that of the husband. Furthermore, in Gortyn, the woman`s ownership of property was independent not only from that of her husband, but also that of her children. In Sparta, the situation was the same. Anyway, however, no matter who had the ownership of property, the community of a family could enjoy the products from every kind of estate including the woman`s dowry. On the other hand, in Athens, even if the father who had no son to inherit could bequeath at liberal will, property ownership still remained in his family. In the case of an adopted son, he did not have the right of bequeathing at will. Especially, in order to understand properly the succession laws of the ancient Greece, it should be noted that private ownership used to exist in the undivided state where numerous members were concerned, and that it could revert again back to the wider category of familial community. In the preference of order or the quantity of inheritance, the male is preferred to female, but neither of both gender, it seems, has the preference over the common ownership of a family or tribe. In Athens the man who marries `daughter-heiress` does not necessarily have to be one of the same tribes, and in Sparta, too, one could bequeath to whomever he wants. In Gortyn, however, the privileged in-law of the same tribe has the preference of marriage with the `daughter-heiress,` and just when none from the same tribe wants to marry her, the `daughter-heiress`, having all the right of ownership, is permitted to marry one out of the tribe. This difference concerning daughter-heiress between Athens and Sparta on the one hand, and Gortyn on the other, proves that Athens and Sparta were of a more open and active society than Gortyn in the 5th C. B.C. when the laws of Gortyn were applicable. It seems, however, that even in the ancient Athens, the common ownership of family still steadfastly was maintained.
-
-
최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 한국서양사학회 2014 서양사론 Vol.0 No.123
Hybris (arrogance) and the states potentially caused by hybris, phthonos (zealousy or envy), and ate (disaster) or nemesis (punishment), in Herodotus frequently are attributed to Xerxes. And hybris does not refer to the monarchic domination itself, but the ambition for an excessive scale of territory. A king`s conquest used to result in a temporary increase of military power, and the power of Persia was almost irresistible, many times greater than the target of its conquest. Once the conquest was completed and the king`s sovereignty recognized, however, his rule pretended to follow conventional usage. And the ruled under the king were regarded as ‘king`s slaves,’ who were dominated not necessarily under the oppression and control of standing army. Thucydides hybris, however, refers to the Athenians as a community. And the target of Athenian`s conquest was not slaves, and the military might of the Athenian rivals was a close match for the Athenians. So the Athenian militaristic hegemony could be sustained only by superiority of military power, irrelevant to any traditional custom. In this kind of balance of power, human errors or insolence could bring about fatal disasters much more in war time than in peace, as human mistakes bear more risk in the situation of war. And, different from the Persian king`s ambition for a larger territory, the principle, ‘rule of power’ as a natural law, applicable even to a small area such as Melos, irrelevant of territorial extent. The punishment in Herodotos was inflicted by deity against the hybris committed by individuals, but in Thucydides by Tyche (Fortune) which alters situations unexpectedly and causes disaster to a community, irrelevant of whether one commits hybris or not.
-
비잔티움 제국의 군사조직과 사회구조의 변화 -테마제도의 변천을 중심으로-
최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 한국서양사학회 2009 서양사론 Vol.0 No.103
Much part of the soldiers of thema (themata) in the Byzantine Empire is regarded to be indigenous, supported by their families, most of them being farmers, not necessarily however. They were called for duty whenever in need, returning home in winter and peace of time. The thema refered to army itself first, then to the area where the army stationed, and last to administrative area. The usage of thema for administrative area following the designation of army appeared in the 670s first time in the sources, while the words, `stratos` as well as `strateuma` was much more generally used for meaning army. The theses around themata are about when they came into existence, whether the recruitment of soldiers is related to holdings of land or alledged `military land`, etc. This essay do not concern with the origin of thema system, but just with the relation between the soldiers of thema and land holdings over the 7th to the 10th century, what political and sociological meanings a series of agricultural laws enacted in the 10th century have, and what meaning of historical context the fiscalization of military service has, The question about which of the two, person or land, military service was imposed upon could not be easily answered, as it did not follow to a uniformed norm but depended largely on confronted situations. Generally, active military service in person was more preferred by the Empire until the 9th century than later, and in the 10th and 11th centuries the fiscalization of military service got more intensified. As time passed on, the generals (strategos) as well as the soldiers of thema gradually lost significance and gave in to administrative bureaucrats and the mercenaries more mobile and more aggressive. With the development of thema system, the Empire enlarged the object of imposing military duty in person and in property. And this process has a close connection with intensifing governmental control and tax collection of the Empire, the tax referring to land (jugatio) as well as poll tax (capitatio) and household (kapnikon). A previlege of being exempted from a kind of particular tax was to be awarded to the common farmer, as he recorded in the military duty. The dissemination of military service to the peasant society coincides with the strengthening political power of the Empire itself, and the bureaucracy of thema and its breaking into parts. This process kept going on over the 7th to the 11th, 12th centuries. Moreover, the criminal laws of the Empire got inforced and more atrocious, too. Thus, the transition of the form of military service and the system of land holdings and taxation influenced not simply to military system, but generally to the governmental system of the Empire which permeated into the lowest stratum of society of farmers as well as the sphere of church. In short, the expansion of the military and then the administrative structure of thema made an opportunity of intensifing the subordination of farmers and ecclesiastical society to the military-administrative system of the Byzantine Empire.
-
Che Jayoung(최자영) 한국서양고대역사문화학회 2010 서양고대사연구 Vol.26 No.-
기원전 5세기 페르시아 전쟁, 펠로포네소스 전쟁 등을 기회로 하여 지중해 세계에는 군사조직의 비중이 증가하게 되었다. 군국주의의 팽배는 다음 차례 로마의 패권의 성장에 기여하게 된다. 포에니 전쟁에서 로마가 카르타고를 제압한 것이 그 결정적 계기가 되었으며, 지중해는 로마의 패권에 기초하여 의무, 법, 질서, 나아가서는 획일적 기독교가 지배적인 사회로 발돋움하게 된다. 로마가 지중해의 패권을 장악하기 전, 지중해의 상권을 장악한 것으로 알려진 카르타고??페니키아 인과 그리스 인의 이해관계는 획일적인 민족성으로 구분 대립한 것이 아니었다. 오히려 소규모 도시(폴리스)로 나뉘어져 있던 이들은 구체적인 경제적 이해관계 혹은 정치체제 및 이념으로 대립했다. 그런 가운데 그리스 인과 카르타고??페니키아 인들은 복잡한 이합집산의 양상을 연출하였다. 한 지역의 도시 공동체가 언제나 하나의 단일한 종족으로만 구성되었다고 규정하기도 어려우며, 서로 간에 자연스럽게 혼혈이 이루어졌다. 이런 현상이 가장 명백하게 노정되는 것이 로마의 패권이 성립되기 전의 시켈리아와 그 주변 지역이다. 로마 패권의 성장은 종족적으로 로마 인의 지중해 팽창을 의미하는 것이 아니라, 로마가 주도하는 군국주의(imperium)의 사회적 확산, 또 그에 기초한 사회적 불평등의 확산을 뜻하는 것이라면, 그 전의 지중해 사회는 군사적 조직이 사회에서 갖는 비중이 상대적으로 적은 만큼 덜 획일적이었던 것으로 규정할 수 있겠다. 이런 사회에서는 소규모의 갈등이 개진된 것이 사실이나, 그 대신 교류와 평화가 차지하는 비중이 상대적으로 더 크다는 점도 간과할 수 없겠다. 다시 말하면, 포에니 전쟁(264~146 B.C.)으로 로마가 지중해의 패자로 등장하기 전의 지중해는 여러 종족과 도시들이 서로 교류하고 갈등하는 장이 되었으며, 다핵성, 다양성, 자유의 가치관이 후대보다 더 강했던 것이라 하겠다. 군사조직에 기초한 로마의 지중해 통일은 현실화되었으나, 그것을 필연적인 역사의 흐름으로 보기 어렵다. 카르타고와 로마의 패권 다툼에서 로마가 아니라 카르타고가 승리했더라면, 로마 대신 카르타고의 패권이 지중해에 등장하게 되는 것이 아니다. 오히려 카르타고가 가지고 있었던 소규모 도시국가, 시민이 갖는 자유의 원리가 여전히 획일적 군국주의, 의무, 법, 질서를 대신하여 지중해 세계에 존속했을 것이라고 생각할 수 있겠다.
-
KCI연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
