淸代 江蘇省 江陰縣의 抗淸守城史 정리 양상 ― ‘우리 고장 역사 정리 작업’의 한 사례 ―

이준갑 동양사학회 2022 東洋史學硏究 Vol.161 No.-

This paper is a study that how gentry and literati from Jiangyin county(江陰縣) and nearby areas recorded the battle of Jiangyin county and the victims that occurred during the Ming-Qing transition times in terms of the arrangement of the historical event occurred at our county. In Jiangyin county where the castle fell after an 81-day battle against the Qing dynasty and all 100,000 residents were slaughtered by the Qing army, unusually, gentry and literati from Jiangyin county and nearby areas kept records of anti-Manchu battle at Jiangyin throughout the Qing dynasty. The gentry recognized that it was their mission and responsibility to reveal the loyalty of the Jiangyin people, who lost 100,000 lives while participating in the battle against the Qing dynasty to protect their unwavering principles of man and loyalty to Ming dynasty. Gentry and literati recorded the history of anti-Manchu battle at Jiangyin through their writings. Writings are divided into two areas : a day by day chronological records and biographies of the leaders of the battle. A day by day chronological record recorded the course of the battle of Jiangyin. In it, gentry and literati emphasized hostility toward the Qing army, criticism of the Han Chinese who plundered Jiangyin, the theory of heaven that gave the justification of the anti-Manchu battle at Jiangyin. The gentry and literati emphasized that all the Jiangyin people participated in the anti-Manchu battle. Officials and gentries in Jiangyin also continued to compile the Jiangyinxianzhi(江陰縣志) three times, organizing it’s official position on the history of anti-Manchu battle. In order not to reveal Qing Dynasty's memories of the Battle of Jiangyin, the amount of records of the anti-Manchu battle was greatly reduced in Jiangyinxianzhi(江陰縣志) compiled in 1683. But the Jiangyinxianzhi(江陰縣志) compiled in 1744, contains a wealth of matters related to anti-Manchu battle of Jiangyin. In November of the 40th year of Qianlong(1775), the Emperor Qianlong ordered a commendation by revealing the deeds of the victims during the conquest of Qing. When the Qing Dynasty took the lead in awarding the victims, the number of victims who recorded in the Jiangyinxianzhi(江陰縣志) compiled in 1840 was increased to 130. The commendation was also carried out in the way of the shrine. In the 13th year of Yongzheng(1735), the magistrate of Jiangyin county built a shrine for Chenmingyu(陳明遇) along with shrine for Yanyingyuan(閻應元) at the request of the gentries. In 1775, the two shrines received official approval from the Qing Dynasty. In the 21st year of Jiaqing (1816), the shrine for three person was established, which was combined with Fenghoudun(馮厚敦). In the 7th year of Daogwang (1827), 138 people were enshrined in the shrine for the loyalist and the righteous (忠義祠) with the permission of the emperor. The commendation of the Jiangyin victims was a consistent flow through the arrangement of the historical event occurred at our county Jiangyin. Whether it is a personal work of a gentry and a literati, Jiangyinxianzhi, or a shrine, the ultimate purpose of it was to express Jiangyin people’s death and sacrifice not as treason against Qing Dynasty, but as loyalty or purity to Ming Dynasty. The Qing Dynasty, which was at its peak during Qianlong reign, acknowledged that the resistance of Han Chinese in Ming-Qing transition was not an act of treason against them, but a righteous act of loyalty to the Ming Dynasty. And now, Qing dynasty wanted to establish himself as a loyal subject for Han Chinese.

淸朝의 日本認識

홍성구 역사교육학회 2009 역사교육논집 Vol.42 No.-

The Japanese invasion of Korea in 1592 became the opportunity that Jušen (Manju) was able to perceive Japan before the Qing dynasty's entry into the Shanhai pass (山海關) in 1644. After Houjin (Qing)'s two invasions of Korea in 1627 and 1636, the Qing dynasty was trying to establish a relation with Japan to introduce a new weapon, the fowling piece. They also were trying to create the favorable international political environment in the situation that had Qing confronting with Ming. At that time, Korea was requested to mediate the relationship between Qing and Japan. After the Qing dynasty's entry into the Shanhai pass, they were trying to build a new Qing-centered world order. Japan was also asked to be incorporated into this new order. But this was still indirect contact that Korea intervened, as well as the Qing dynasty could not aggressively try to establish a relation with Japan because of the embargo on overseas trade (海禁) to suppress the anti-Qing movement. In addition, the Japanese government took a negative attitude to the establishment of relation with Qing. After suppressing the anti-Qing movement of Zheng's forces (鄭氏勢力) in 1683, the Qing dynasty attempted to establish contact with Japan for trade, but the Japanese government still had a negative attitude about the establishment of official relations. Nevertheless, the informal civil trade between Qing and Japan was developing because Qing had to import the copper from Japan for its monetary policy and the Qing imperial family finance was invested in the copper trade as well. Therefore, Qing and Japan were placed in a inseparable economical relationship. From this time, the Japanese government adopted a new trade policy that issued the trade permit to the civil merchants of Qing and Japanese reign title was used in. Because of this policy, the trade order of the two nations was practically under Japan's thumb.

淸朝 역사에 대한 새로운 접근과 수업 활용을 위한 사료 소개

이선애 한국역사교육학회 2020 역사교육연구 Vol.- No.38

脫중심주의적 역사관을 위한 역사교육이 요구되면서 <동아시아사> 교육과정에도 이에 발맞춘 다양한 시도와 노력이 반영되었다. 그러나 중국 중심적이고 한족 중심적인 관점이 교과서 구성과 내용에 남아있고 학계의 새로운 연구 경향이 반영되지 못한 부분도 있다. 明과 淸을 중국의 왕조로서 연속적으로 바라보고 명 청 교체를 중국 왕조의 변화로 일괄하는 <동아시아사> 교육과정 성취기준과 교과서 서술방식은 중국 혹은 한족 중심의 역사 인식을 보여주는 대표적인 사례이다. 본고에서는 脫중심주의적 역사인식을 <동아시아사> 교육에 활용할 수 있는 방안으로 청의 역사를 새롭게 바라보는 관점을 소개하고 청과 조선의 사료들을 검토했다. 新淸史는 한족 중심의 漢化論을 반박하고 만주족의 청 제국을 재조명하는 연구 경향이다. 신청사적 관점은 청의 역사를 ‘중국’이라는 영역에 한정시키지 않고 만주족의 기원과 특징적 제도, 내륙아시아와의 밀접한 관계에 주목한다. 본고에서는 신청사적 관점을 통해 청에 대한 역사 인식을 전환하고 이를 脫중심주의적 역사교육과 연계하는 방안을 모색했다. 본고에서는 우선 청대 관찬 사료의 편찬과 수정 과정을 검토해 만주족 청 제국이 고민했던 시대적 문제를 진단했다. 그리고 청의 초기 역사를 규명하는 데 사료적 가치가 높은 조선의 문헌을 통해 만주 정권의 발전 과정을 명 건주여진 조선이 얽혀있던 다각적인 관계 속에서 살펴보았다. 이는 명 청의 연속성에 주목했던 기존의 역사 인식을 건주여진 후금 청의 연속성으로 전환하는 작업이며, 명과 조선 사이에 낀 주변적 존재였던 건주여진의 성장이 동아시아 국제질서에 미친 영향을 되새겨보는 작업이기도 하다. 중국·한족 중심적 역사관에서 벗어나 청의 역사를 재조명한다면 동아시아를 내륙아시아와 연결시켜 역사 인식의 공간적 범위를 넓힐 수 있다. 그리고 만주 정권의 초기 역사는 주변으로부터 본 새로운 동아시아 역사상을 제시할 수 있다. 청조 역사에 대한 새로운 접근은 <동아시아사> 교육이 ‘중심주의적’ 문제에서 완전히 벗어나는 하나의 길이 될 수 있을 것이다. As the demand for the historical education with decentering historical view is growing, various efforts and attempts are being made in the field of East Asian History education to meet such demand. Yet, the composition and contents of textbooks still contain Sino centric perspective, or the view that center mainly on Han people, and do not reflect the latest research trend of the academic circles. The achievement standard for the curriculum of East Asian History or the textbook description of Chinese history that views Ming and Qing as a continuation of Chinese dynasties and lumps together the transition from Ming to Qing as part of the dynastic change is the representative example of the historical perception that centers on Han people or supports Sinicization. This paper introduces the perspective of looking at Qing history differently and examines the historical materials from Qing and Joseon as a method of using the decentering historical view in the East Asian History education. The perspective of New Qing History is a research trend that refutes the Sinicization and sheds new light on Qing as the empire of the Manchus. This perspective does not limit Qing history to the scope of ‘China,’ but focuses on the origin and unique institutions of Qing, and their close relationship with the Inner Asia to capture the diverse aspects of Qing history. This paper introduces the perspective of New Qing History and takes note of the fact that Qing is an empire of the Manchus, which sets it apart from Ming. First, this paper examines the compilation and revision process of the official historical records of Qing, something that is not covered in current East Asian History textbooks. In doing so, this paper moves away from the Sino centric perspective that views Ming and Qing as a continuation, and examines the contemporary questions, with which the Qing empire of the Munchus struggled. By referring to the materials from Joseon dynasty that have high historical value in investigating the early Qing history, the development of the Manchu regimes, which carried on from Jianzhou Jurchens to the Later Jin, and then down to Qing, is examined within the complex multilateral relationships that existed among Ming, Jianzhou Jurchens, and Joseon in the late sixteenth through early seventeenth century. This perspective is a shift from the existing historical perspective that focuses on the continuation of Ming and Qing to that of Jianzhou Jurchens, Later Jin, and Qing. It also ruminates on how the rise of Jianzhou Jurchens impacted the international order of East Asia, which had only been viewed as having a marginal existence, while caught between Ming and Joseon. By veering away from the Sino centric historical view and shedding new light on Qing history, our historical perception could expand spatially as we connect East Asia to the Inner Asia. Also, the early history of Manchu regimes can present a new historical point of view of East Asia that was seen not merely from the center, but from the periphery. This new approach to the Qing history could be one of the many ways to compensate for the problems of the centering perspective that the current East Asian History education has.

영조대 對淸使行의 운영과 對淸關係에 대한 인식

연갑수 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2010 한국문화 Vol.51 No.-

The reign of Joseon’s King Yeongjo (1724~1776) corresponds to that of Yongzheng Emperor (1722~1735) and Qianlong Emperor (1735~1795) of Chinese Qing Dynasty. In that period, Joseon and Qing were stable in politics and had kept good relations with each other. Such good relations resulted from Qing Emperors’ preferential treatment on Joseon - the Emperors had led the relations with Joseon. Amicable relations of that period can be evidenced by the frequency of envoy dispatches. Average annual Joseon-to-Qing envoy dispatch had declined from 2.42 times to 1.67 times while average Qing-to-Joseon envoy dispatch from 1.29 times to 0.43 times. Envoy dispatch gave a great burden to the national finance of both countries, in particular, being far heavier on Joseon. The declined frequency indicates that Qing Emperors had confidence in Joseon and there were not much issues to be solved politically. Aside the political stability of bilateral relations, Joseon had a economic difficulty in maintaining the envoy delegation. Joseon had earned lots of Japan’s silver through the transit trade between Qing and Japan. However, since 1720s Joseon’s silver stock had dropped sharply due to the rapid decline of japan's silver production, the rise of Chinese raw silk price and others. So, Joseon government restricted the unauthorized trading and private trade of civil trader in order to prevent the outflow of silver. The measure was obviously expected to strengthen the exclusive power of envoy trade which had been exercised by the hands-on staff of delegation, that is, interpreter. But, in the condition that silver outflow should be prevented, any measure could not help reducing the size of envoy trade. The most sensitive issues, which King Yeongjo had given much attention to in relation with Qing, were the installation of Hyojang crown prince (孝章世子) who was only seven years old and the description of King Injo Restoration in 『Ming History (明史)』- At that time, Qing was preparing to publish the official history of Ming Dynasty and Joseon tried that King Injo Restoration would not be described as Injo's usurpation of Gwanghaegun’s throne in 『Ming History』. For King Yeongjo who was week in the legitimacy of accession, such issues should be solved to show his dignity as King. Though the department of protocol of Qing raised an objection, the installation of Hyojang crown prince was approved by Qing Emperor finally in 1725. King Injo Restoration issue was successfully settled in 1739 by officially receiving, from Qing government, the printed copy of the part related to Joseon in 『Ming History』. In King Yeongjo period, there were important cooperators for Joseon’s envoy dispatch. The typical cooperator was Kim Sang-Myeong (1668 ?~ 1742). He is the grandson of Kim Yeo-gyu who defected to Qing around 1627. His family gained the favor of Kangxi Emperor and especially Kim Sang-Myeong assumed high-ranking position by contributing to Yongzheng Emperor’s ascending. He played important roles in solving diplomatic issues Joseon requested to Qing in the background. In particular, He played a crucial part in changing the contents of 『Ming History』. Zheng Shitai (鄭世泰), a Beijing-based business magnate, actually monopolized the trade of Joseon delegation in Beijing. Besides trading, Joseon delegation had procured urgent financing and other conveniences. King Yeongjo and other leaders of Joseon had dual attitudes for Qing. They thought intentionally and unfairly that both Yongzheng Emperor and Qianlong Emperor were inclined to luxury life and had brutal and miser mind. They also focused on the negative aspect of Qing that overall Qing society admired luxury life. Such was based on the idea that Qing was a barbarian dynasty. However, on the other hand, they acknowledged that Qing imposed lighter taxes than Ming and was generous to Joseon and Joseon’s delegation. In terms of the change of international order, persons in p...

The Scholars of Circle of Northern Learning`s Perception on Qing Porcelain and the Changes in Joseon`s Porcelain Consumption

Kyoung-Ha Park,Joo-Young Park 중앙대학교 문화콘텐츠기술연구원 2017 다문화콘텐츠연구 Vol.0 No.26

This paper examines the Joseon scholars` perception on Qing porcelains based on the transformed relationship between Joseon and Qing in the 17<SUP>th</SUP>-18<SUP>th</SUP> century, mainly through the record of royal court such as 『Diaries of the Royal Secretariat』, 『Dongmunhwigo Bopyun』, 『Records of Daily Reflection』, 『Records of the Border Defense Council』, 『Veritable Records of the Joseon Dynasty』 and the scholars` collection of works such as “Bukhakeu” written by Park, Jae-Ga and “Seolsuwaesa” written by Lee, Hee-Kyung. After Joseon experienced the 1627 · 1636 Manchu Invasions, Joseon had negative perceptions toward Qing. Nevertheless, Joseon continued visiting Qing, while maintaining the tributary relationship due to the practical reasons such political and military power. Through the frequent visits to Qing, some Joseon scholars started to realize the real situation in Qing and their idea about Qing started changing. Additionally, those of whom visited Qing as ambassadors even insisted to actively accept Qings advanced culture and commodities. In the 18<SUP>th</SUP> century, as the circle of Northern Learning scholars came to the fore, their idea to adopt Qing`s culture along with Joseon`s social and economic changes seemed to be influenced on Joseon porcelains. As Joseon`s economy and political situations stabilized, the luxurious trend was created through the influx of expensive Chinese porcelains. This Joseons circumstances increased the consumption of Qing`s high-quality porcelains. Later, when the increased porcelain consumption could not meet the demand only through importing Qing porcelains, the Bunwon had to be responsible for the unfulfilled demand. The growth of expensive blue-and-white porcelains consumption caused the negative effects in Bunwon. Eventually, the Joseon kings commanded to forbid producing and using the expensive porcelains such as Gabki and blue-and-white porcelains.

喇嘛, 僧伽, 그리고 淸 帝國 ― 淸代 티베트 사원의 승려인구 변화와 淸의 對 티베트 정책 ―

김한웅 동양사학회 2023 東洋史學硏究 Vol.165 No.-

With its territorial expansion and population growth, the Qing dynasty was a remarkable era of the Chinese history for both its economic development and ethnic diversity. Mongols and Tibetans inhabiting northwestern and western parts of the Qing empire were a key to such a development, and Tibetan Buddhism, as a major religious and cultural underpinning for the people, became a matter of interest for the Qing dynasty. Accordingly, the Qing adminstration had devised an institutional apparatus, such as Lifanyuan (Board for the Administration of Outlying Regions), for their control. This paper analyzes a gap between the theoretical and assigned numbers of Tibetan monastics and their actual and bona fide existence in the Tibetan Buddhist world in order to understand the ways in which the Qing dynasty addressed the matters related to Tibetan Buddhism. The religious population of Tibetan Buddhism comprised two major parts: reincarnate lamas (Tib. sprul sku) and sangha communities. According to the regulation of Lifanyuan, there was a designated quota of the reincarnate lamas during the Qing times. However, the quota does not match with the huge growth of numbers of reincarnate lamas, which can be verified by recent studies by scholars such as Gray Tuttle. This clearly tells the fact that the Qing dynasty did not have a control of the spread of the phenomenon of reincarnate lamas. The more general religious population of Tibetan Buddhism, the sangha communities, shows a similar pattern. The Qing times saw an exponential growth of monk populations of Tibetan Buddhism, which exceeded the growth speed of the general population of Qing. Nevertheless, the Qing administration developed a very limited institutional measures to deal with the phenomenon. It was obvious, however, that the Qing court had been well aware of these two populational developments. In sum, it can be argued that Qing did not have ability nor intention of controling the population of Tibetan monatics such as reincarnate lamas and sangha communities. The Tibetan Buddhism world had its own initiatives and dynamics for its development during the Qing times.

소현세자의 2차 귀국을 통해 본 도르곤의 對조선 전략

이명제 동양사학회 2022 東洋史學硏究 Vol.160 No.-

Around 1644, when Qing completed the occupation of Beijing, there were remarkable changes in the relationship between Joseon-Qing. The heavy ‘Annual Tribute Payment’ imposed on Joseon was greatly reduced, and Crown Prince Sohyeon, who had been held as a hostage, returned to Joseon. In addition, regular envoys to the Qing were also integrated once a year, and the amount of gift provided for Qing envoys was also reduced. The Joseon-Qing relationship, which had been characterized bya series of tensions and conflicts, seemed to begin stabilizing from Ming-Qing Transition. Existing studies have consistently focused on Qing's “Enterting the Pass” as a decisive factor in these changes around 1644. In fact, the Ming fall and the Qing conquest of China removed major variables in the Joseon-Qing relationship. At that time, regency Dorgon also decided to send Crown Prince Sohyeon back to Joseon, and cited the Qing conquest of China as the reason. In other words, since then Qing's “Enterting the Pass” has been pointed out as a marked watershed in the Joseon-Qing relationship, and Crown Prince Sohyeon's return has been regarded as supporting the idea. However, the changes in the Joseon-Qing relationship are not explained by “Enter the Pass” alone. This is because that began in 1643, a year before “Entering the Pass” by Qing. Therefore, I think there was another variable worth our attention, other than “Enter the Pass” against a background of the conversion of the Joseon-Qing relationship. In this study, it is the regency of Dorgon that is presented as the keyvariable. After Hong Taiji's death in 1643, Dorgon, who seized power in an unusual way, used Joseon to extend his power base. Immediately after Dorgon became regent, he planned and realized Crown Prince Sohyeon's second return. It was to strengthen ties with Crown Prince Sohyeon, the next heir to the throne of Joseon. Crown Prince Sohyeon's second return was to show Dorgon's strategy for Joseon in advance. After “Entering the Pass,” Dorgon tried to augment his influence in Joseon by permanently returning Crown Prince Sohyeon. The challenge of getting adequate compensation for his investment has begun.

병자호란 직후 청사출래(淸使出來)와 정치외교적 의의

리샤오칭 ( Li¸ Xiaoqing ) 대구사학회 2021 대구사학 Vol.144 No.-

In this paper, by examining the purpose and the negotiation activities in Hanyang of Qing Dynasty’s Envoys dispatched to Joseon after the Manchu war of 1636(丙子胡亂), the political and diplomatic significance of the Qing Dynasty’s Sahaeng(使行) toward Joseon was investigated. After the Manchu war of 1636(丙子胡亂) Joseon requested an end to the Qing's request for conscription through Sahaeng(使行) in April and September 1637. In October 1637, the Qing dispatched an envoy to Joseon for the installation of King Injo without Joseon‘s resquest, and the Qing dynasty’s envoys negotiated with Joseon focusing on the issue of repatriation of Naturalized jurchen(向化人), Chinese(漢人), Joseon people who captured by the Qing tried to come back Joseon(走回人). The issue of repatriation was an important negotiation issue even in later Sahaeng(使行) toward Joseon. It can be said that in the relationship between the two countries the most urgent task of Joseon was the resolution of the issue of conscription. However, what the Qing dynasty considered important was the maintenance of hierarchical relationship with Joseon and the establishment of a Qing-centered international order. Besides exemption from conscription, Joseon's other concern is the return of the crown prince. In September 1637, Joseon requested the return of the crown prince , but was rejected by the Qing Dynasty. In February 1639, an envoy was sent with a request for the installation of the queen and crown prince, and it was also expected that the crown prince could return to Joseon through the installation of the crown prince. After that, Injo's illness also made it a reason to request the crown prince to return to Joseon. However, from Qing's point of view, the installation of the queen and the crown prince was a procedure that could settle a hierarchical relationship of Joseon and Qing Dynasty. It is for this reason that the Qing Dynasty mentioned the installation of Crown Prince before Joseon’s request. In November 1639, the Qing dynasty’s envoy who came for the monument of Samjeondo(삼전도비) stayed in Hanyang until December 5 and supervised the construction of the monument. All work was completed on December 8th. From the Qing point of view, the monument of Samjeondo was regarded as a symbolic space for the success of the Manchus and the victory of the war to Joseon. From the point of view of Joseon, it was the result of the defeat and a symbol of obedience to the Qing Dynasty. For the first time the Qing dynasty dispatched a envoy after the Manchu war of 1636(丙子胡亂), Joseon discussed the standard of treatment for the Qing dynasty’s envoy. At first, it was intended to use the rules of treatment for Tangcha(唐差), but it was implemented according to the rules of treatment for Ming dynasty’s envoys(明使). the Qing dynasty’s envoy dispatched this time seemed to be satisfied with the reception of Joseon. In October 1637, the reception to the Qing dynasty’s envoy dispatched for the installation of King Injo was the first step in making the reception of Qing dynasty’s envoys regular. In September 1639, the reception for Qing dynasty’s envoy who is named Mandaerhan is different from that of the previous treatment for Qing dynasty’s envoys. It was because Mandaerhan was a official temporarily dispatched(差官) who came to visit King Injo. Joseon viewed Mandaerhan as a official temporarily dispatched who came under the emperor's orders, but the lowest level department(접대소) was installed to entertain Mandaerhan. This is different from the case of the reception for officials who were temporarily dispatched and served the Ming emperor's orders. It can be said that this was influenced by the the reception for Jin dynasty’s envoys, and the antipathy towards Qing was reflected in the reception. The reception of Mandaerhan in September 1639 and Maputa in November 1639 is another point worth noting. King Injo did not go out for greeting the two envoys. In September, Mandaerhan was a official temporarily dispatched, so there was no need for Injo to greet according to the ceremonial regulations. However, it was a precedent that Injo did not greet envoy on the excuse of his illness from November 1639. Afterwards, Joseon recorded cases in which the king did not greet envoy and made it a custom. (Kyungpook National University / lixiaoqing0313@naver.com)

숙종 대 왕비의 수고명의와 조·청관계

김우진 한국역사연구회 2023 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.127

Joseon and the Qing dynasty had conflicts from the very beginning, and one of the issues over which they clashed with each other was the issue of Qing’s bestowal of a title to Joseon Queen Jang’ryeol. Qing, ever distrustful of Joseon, demanded that Joseon personally greet the Go’myeong(誥命) order, but Joseon, which was more than bitter by past events outright refused to do so. Eventually Joseon found a compromise by having the King receive the order from a Qing emissary and then relay it to the Queen. This practice became the “Gimyo-year protocol.” Then, during King Sukjong’s reign several queens were appointed, deposed, and then reinstated, and in the wake of total of four instances of Joseon having to receive Qing’s order for such occasions, a modified protocol concerning the Appointment-receiving ritual was established. According to this new practice, referred to as the “Imsul-year protocol,” the Qing emissary would arrive at the Inner chamber’s gate, and hand the Go’myeong order over to an eunuch. Later, however, whenever a similar occasion would occur the Joseon government would argue that the Gimyo-year precedence should be honored, while the Qing government would demand the Imsul-year protocol be observed. In the end, two protocols were merged, as a result of another compromise agreed on by both parties. All these fights were because of Qing’s intention to reinforce the Imperial family’s authority, and punish Joseon for its rebellious attitude on a political and diplomatic level, while trying to integrate the Korean peninsula into the Qing-centered ritual order. To such an offensive initiative on Qing’s part, Joseon responded with the argument emphasizing the prudence of the Gimyo-year precedence, out of repulsion against Qing, which was in itself caused by racial, cultural and historical antagonism that naturally led Joseon to refuse to greet and accept Qing’s Go’myeong order. However, both sides could not afford to endanger their relationship and let it be damaged beyond repair, so they chose to honor both precedences(前例) and ritual protocols(典禮) at the same time, which allowed the Su-Go’myeong-eui practice to retain its dual nature and an indirect delivery system, resulting in a third, modified option(變禮) as a follow-up to the Gimyo and Imsul practices.

18세기 조선의 청조인식 -『노가재연행일기』를 중심으로

이호윤 동아대학교 석당학술원 2018 石堂論叢 Vol.0 No.72

In the 17th century, the substitution of the Qing Dynasty for the Ming Dynasty was the incidentin which the Ming Dynasty that was ‘the Mainland China’s Splendid Civilization’ was destroyed by the Qing Dynasty that was ‘the barbarian intruder’and the Mainland China’s Splendid Civilization became extinct in the world of which the center was thought to be the mainland China by intellectuals in China and some Asian countries, and Joseon that surrendered to the armed force of the Qing Dynasty was included in the order of tribute to an dinstallation by the Qing Dynasty, however ideologically the theory of ‘Qing= barbarian intruder’ and ‘Joseon = the Mainland China’s Splendid Civilization’ began. But after the fall of the Ming Dynasty, on the contrary the Qing Dynasty showed heyday without hesitation, Confucian scholars in Joseon had to newly interpret the zenith of the prosperity of ‘the barbarian intruder’. In that situation, in Joseon two ideologies appeared, one ideological flow was the ‘Joseon’s Splendid Civilization Principle’ and another was the ‘Learning from the North’ that Joseon needed to learn the Qing’s advanced products of civilization. However, Kim Changeop visited the Qing Dynasty in person in the earlier period of the 18th century and wrote the traveler's journal 『NoGaJaeYeonHaengIlgi』, and in his awareness of the Qing Dynasty, ‘Joseon’s Splendid Civilization Principle’ coexisted with ‘Learning from the North’ that acknowledged the Qing Dynasty’s advanced products of civilization, while the two ideologies crossed each other. Kim Changeop, a direct descendant of Kim Sangheon who advocated the theory of the rejection of peace at the time of the Manchu war of 1636 to have spent a long time in captivity in the Qing Dynasty, boasted of the superiority of Joseon’s ‘Manners, Music and the Products of Civilization’ to his heart's content while he had affirmative awareness of the Qing Dynasty’s practical products of civilization instead of ‘the Opinion to take Revenge on the Qing’. Therefore, the ‘Learning from the North’ is thought not to be the ideology that appeared suddenly but is thought to have appeared gradually as the interchange with the Qing Dynasty by visit of envoy to Qing and the experience in and the awareness of advanced products of civilization accumulated. 17세기 명청 왕조 교체는 ‘중화’인 명조(明朝)가 ‘이적(夷狄)’인 청조(淸朝)에 의해 멸망하여 천하에서 중화가 소멸한 사건이었으며 청조의 무력에 굴복한 조선은 청조를 중심으로 하는 조공책봉질서에 편입되지만 관념적으로는 ‘청=이적(夷狄)’, ‘조선=중화’론이 태동하게 된다. 그러나 명조 멸망 이후 청조가 오히려 전성기를 구가하자 조선의 유자(儒者)들은 ‘이적’의 전성에 대해 새로운 해석을 해야만 했다. 이러한 상황 속에서 조선에서는 두 가지 사상이 등장하는데 하나는 ‘조선중화주의(朝鮮中華主義)’이며 또 다른 사상적 흐름은 선진적인 청의 문물을 배워야 한다는 ‘북학론(北學論)’이다. 그런데 18세기 초 청조를 직접 방문하여 기행문 『노가재연행일기』를 남긴 김창업의 청조에 대한 인식은 ‘조선중화주의’와 청조의 선진 문물을 긍정하는 ‘북학론’이 교차하며 공존하고 있었다. 병자호란 당시 척화론을 주창하여 청조에서 오랜 기간 포로 생활을 한 김상헌의 직계인 김창업은 조선의 ‘예악문물(禮樂文物)’의 우월성을 마음껏 자랑하면서도 ‘대청복수론(對淸復讐論)’ 대신 청조의 실용적인 문물에 대해서는 긍정적 인식을 가지고 있었다. 따라서 북학론은 갑자기 등장하는 사상이 아니라 대청사행으로 청조와의 교류 및 선진 문물에 대한 체험과 인식이 축적되면서 점진적으로 나타났던 것으로 여겨진다.