대한제국 말기 일제의 경성감옥 설치와 본감 ‧ 분감제 시행

박경목 한국근현대사학회 2008 한국 근현대사 연구 Vol.46 No.-

This paper analyses the Kyngsung-gamok and the prisons in the national 16 districts which were established in the process of aggression of Japanese imperialism at the end of the Korea Empire Choseon tried to promote independently the modernization of prison system for an imprisonment with hard labor. But it was frustrated by the aggression of Japanese imperialism, such as the korean-Japan protocol in 1904 and the Eulsa treaty in 1905. The Japanese imperialism wanted to govern the prisons for centralization of Korean society control system, centering on Tonggambu which was its government organ. For it, Kyungsung-gamok was established in April, 1908. At the same time, total 8 Bonggamok were set up in the national 7 districts and seoul. The number of imprisonment persons increased rapidly after the Bongam had begun in earnest. The Japanese imperialism expanded and reinforced the government and the control for Koreans through establishing prisons in the entire Korea. In Oct. 1908, Kyungsung-gamok was moved into newly built prison in Hyunjeo-dong Seodaemun Seoul. This place was center of the north Korea, and it was a path for many people and many goods. This newly built Kyungsung-gamok could remove potential anti-Japan of common people including anti-Japan fighters, and it acted as the symbol of the control and the surveillance. After that, Japanese imperialism established Bungam in the 8major districts in Nov. 1908. With this total 16 prisons were set up in the nation. The establishments and the spreading all over the world of prisons were the process of infiltration of colonialization. At the same time, that was the expansion of korean control system for colonialization. As a result , the establishment of Kyungsung-gamok and the operation of Bongam and Bungam system were acted as the control and the surveillance for the common people including the anti-Japan fighters. Also those made koreans obey absolutely Japanese imperialism. This paper analyses the Kyngsung-gamok and the prisons in the national 16 districts which were established in the process of aggression of Japanese imperialism at the end of the Korea Empire Choseon tried to promote independently the modernization of prison system for an imprisonment with hard labor. But it was frustrated by the aggression of Japanese imperialism, such as the korean-Japan protocol in 1904 and the Eulsa treaty in 1905. The Japanese imperialism wanted to govern the prisons for centralization of Korean society control system, centering on Tonggambu which was its government organ. For it, Kyungsung-gamok was established in April, 1908. At the same time, total 8 Bonggamok were set up in the national 7 districts and seoul. The number of imprisonment persons increased rapidly after the Bongam had begun in earnest. The Japanese imperialism expanded and reinforced the government and the control for Koreans through establishing prisons in the entire Korea. In Oct. 1908, Kyungsung-gamok was moved into newly built prison in Hyunjeo-dong Seodaemun Seoul. This place was center of the north Korea, and it was a path for many people and many goods. This newly built Kyungsung-gamok could remove potential anti-Japan of common people including anti-Japan fighters, and it acted as the symbol of the control and the surveillance. After that, Japanese imperialism established Bungam in the 8major districts in Nov. 1908. With this total 16 prisons were set up in the nation. The establishments and the spreading all over the world of prisons were the process of infiltration of colonialization. At the same time, that was the expansion of korean control system for colonialization. As a result , the establishment of Kyungsung-gamok and the operation of Bongam and Bungam system were acted as the control and the surveillance for the common people including the anti-Japan fighters. Also those made koreans obey absolutely Japanese imperialism.

엔인(円仁)의 『입당구법순례행기(入唐求法巡禮行記)』에 기록된 선박부재(船舶部材) ‘녹□(搙□)’에 대한 비판적 고찰

김성준 ( Kim Sung-june ) 호남사학회(구 전남사학회) 2018 역사학연구 Vol.72 No.-

일본은 遣唐使를 15회 파견했는데, 838년 견당사의 항해와 관련해서는 이에 동승한 엔닌(円仁)이 『入唐求法巡禮行記』를 남김으로써 그 항해의 전말이 상세하게 남아 있다. 이 기록에서 특히 관심을 끄는 것은 엔닌이 승선한 견당사선이 중국의 揚州 海陵縣 연안에 표착했을 당시 日記에 언급된 정체를 알 수 없는 船舶部材 ‘搙□’ 또는 ‘槈□’다. 가장 오래된 필사본인 東寺 觀知院본에 ‘搙□’로 표기되었으나 이것이 인쇄본으로 출판되는 과정에서 ‘槈□’로오기되었고, 이것이 널리 알려지게 되었다. 搙는 搙은 捻(비틀 ), 搵(잠길), 拄(떠받칠 ) 등의 의미가 있고, 槈는 鎒(괭이 ), 耨(김맬 )와 같으며, ‘괭이’나 ‘호미’를 뜻하지만, 는 중국, 한국, 일본에서 전혀 사용되지 않는 한자여서 ‘搙□’나 ‘槈□’는 글자 그대로 무엇을 의미하는 지가 불분명하다. 따라서 ‘搙□’ 또는 ‘槈□’가 무엇을 의미하는지에 대해 船底 結構, 횡강력재, 披水板(側板) 등 여러 견해가 제기된 바 있다. 이 논문은 『입당구법순례행기』에 기록된 선박부재 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘槈□’가 무엇인지 살펴본 것이다. 먼저 II에서는 『입당구법순례행기』의 여러 板本과 編譯本에 ‘搙□’ 또는 ‘槈□’가 어떻게 표기 및 해석되고 있는지 살펴보고, III에서는 기존의 연구결과를 검토하여 일본의 견당사선이 어떤 선형의 선박이었을지를 추정할 것이다. 일본의 견당사선이 중국식 정크, 화선식 준구조선, 한선이었을 경우, ‘搙□’ 또는 ‘槈□’가 선박의 어떤 부재였을지를 검토하였다. 결론적으로 ‘搙□’ 또는 ‘槈□’는 搙栿(버틸 , 들보, 즉 지지용 들보)의 오기로서 ‘횡강력재’로 판단했다. 일본 학자들이 견당사선을 ‘중국형 정크선’으로 추정하는 것과는 달리, 중국형 선박에는 선저와 갑판부에 각각 독립해 있는 횡강력재가 없는 것으로 미루어 견당사선은 和船形 선박이거나, 韓船形 선박일 것으로 추정할 수 있다. 누아가 화선형 선박일 경우 후나바리(船梁), 한선형 선박일 경우 가룡목과 가목으로 볼 수 있다. 하지만 화선식 준구조선은 대형선을 건조하는 데 한계가 있다는 점을 고려하면 日本史書에 百濟舶이나 新羅船으로 기록된 한선형 선박일 개연성이 큰 것으로 보인다. Japan despatched the Embassy to Tang China 15 times from the 7th century to the 9th century. Ennin(円仁), who was a Japanese Buddhist monk and accompanied the Embassy in A.D. 838, recorded the Diary of a Pilgrimage to Tang China in Search of the Law (『入唐求法巡禮行記』) in which included the detailed information of the sailing from Japan to Tang China. It is ‘搙□’/’槈□’, an unknown piece of ship’s parts, recorded on June 29 written in Ennin’s Diary that has attracted scholars’ interest. The Chinese letter ‘搙’ is same as ‘拄’ which means ‘support’ and the letter ‘槈’ is same as ‘鎒’ or ‘耨’ which means ‘hoe’, but the other Chinese letter ‘槈’ was not used in any of 3 countries of China, Korea and Japan. It caused many scholars to propose 搙□/槈□ as assembling structure near bottom(船底 結構), transverse beam or leeboard. This paper examines which part of a ship was 搙□/槈□, a piece of ship’s parts, recorded in Ennin’s Diary. Section II summarizes how 搙□/槈□ was recorded and interpreted in various versions of Ennin’s Diary and Section III reviews which type of ship’s shape was the Japanese Embassy Ship to Tang China(遣唐使船). As a result of the review, it was presumed that the Japanese Embassy Ship to Tang China was likely to be a Chinese junk, a Japanese ship or a Korean ship respectively. Based on the results of the study, it was examined which part of ship would be 搙□/槈□ if the Japanese Embassy Ship was a Chinese junk, a Japanese ship or a Korean ship respectively. In particular, the author critically reviews the opinion that 搙□/槈□ was regarded as leeboard. In conclusion, the author deems that 搙□/槈□ was typographical error of 搙栿 which means supporting transverse beam. Some Japanese researchers presumed that the Japanese Embassy ship would be a Chinese junk. But considering that there is none of separate transverse beam both near bottom and deck in a Chinese junk, it was likely that the Embassy ship might be a Japanese ship or a Korean ship. 搙□/槈□ can be regarded as hunabari(船梁) in case of a Japanese ship, or garongmok(加龍木) and gamok(駕木, 橫梁) in case of a Korean ship respectively. However, considering the fact that Japanese ship has a limitation on construction of large ship for accommodating more 100 passengers of the embassy, it seems likely that the Japanese Embassy ship in 9th century was a Korean styled ship recorded as a ‘Baekje ship’(百濟舶) or a ‘Silla ship’(新羅船) in the Japanese Historical Documents.

円仁의 『入唐求法巡禮行記』에 기록된 船舶部材 ‘누아’에 대한 비판적 고찰

김성준 호남사학회 2018 역사학연구 Vol.72 No.-

Japan despatched the Embassy to Tang China 15 times from the 7th century to the 9th century. Ennin(円仁), who was a Japanese Buddhist monk and accompanied the Embassy in A.D. 838, recorded the Diary of a Pilgrimage to Tang China in Search of the Law (『入唐求法巡禮行記』) in which included the detailed information of the sailing from Japan to Tang China. It is ‘搙木我 ’ / ‘’, an unknown piece of ship’s parts, recorded on June 29 written in Ennin’s Diary that has attracted scholars’ interest. The Chinese letter ‘搙’ is same as ‘拄’ which means ‘support’ and the letter ‘槈’ is same as ‘鎒’ or ‘耨’ which means ‘hoe’, but the other Chinese letter ‘’ was not used in any of 3 countries of China, Korea and Japan. It caused many scholars to propose 搙木我 / as assembling structure near bottom(船底 結構), transverse beam or leeboard. This paper examines which part of a ship was 搙木我 / , a piece of ship’s parts, recorded in Ennin’s Diary. Section II summarizes how 搙木我 / was recorded and interpreted in various versions of Ennin’s Diary and Section III reviews which type of ship’s shape was the Japanese Embassy Ship to Tang China(遣唐使船). As a result of the review, it was presumed that the Japanese Embassy Ship to Tang China was likely to be a Chinese junk, a Japanese ship or a Korean ship respectively. Based on the results of the study, it was examined which part of ship would be 搙木我 / if the Japanese Embassy Ship was a Chinese junk, a Japanese ship or a Korean ship respectively. In particular, the author critically reviews the opinion that 搙木我 / was regarded as leeboard. In conclusion, the author deems that 搙木我 / was typographical error of 搙栿 which means supporting transverse beam. Some Japanese researchers presumed that the Japanese Embassy ship would be a Chinese junk. But considering that there is none of separate transverse beam both near bottom and deck in a Chinese junk, it was likely that the Embassy ship might be a Japanese ship or a Korean ship. 搙木我/ can be regarded as hunabari(船梁) in case of a Japanese ship, or garongmok(加龍木) and gamok(駕木, 橫梁) in case of a Korean ship respectively. However, considering the fact that Japanese ship has a limitation on construction of large ship for accommodating more 100 passengers of the embassy, it seems likely that the Japanese Embassy ship in 9th century was a Korean styled ship recorded as a ‘Baekje ship’(百濟舶) or a ‘Silla ship’(新羅船) in the Japanese Historical Documents. 일본은 遣唐使를 15회 파견했는데, 838년 견당사의 항해와 관련해서는 이에 동승한 엔닌(円仁)이 『入唐求法巡禮行記』를 남김으로써 그 항해의 전말이 상세하게 남아 있다. 이 기록에서 특히 관심을 끄는 것은 엔닌이 승선한 견당사선이 중국의 揚州 海陵縣 연안에 표착했을 당시 日記에 언급된 정체를 알 수 없는 船舶部材 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’다. 가장 오래된 필사본인 東寺 觀知院 본에 ‘搙’로 표기되었으나 이것이 인쇄본으로 출판되는 과정에서 ‘’로 오기되었고, 이것이 널리 알려지게 되었다. 搙는 搙은 捻(비틀 ), 搵(잠길 ), 拄(떠받칠 ) 등의 의미가 있고, 槈는 鎒(괭이 ), 耨(김맬 )와 같으며, ‘괭이’나 ‘호미’를 뜻하지만, 는 중국, 한국, 일본에서 전혀 사용되지 않는 한자여서 ‘搙’나 ‘’는 글자 그대로 무엇을 의미하는 지가 불분명하다. 따라서 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’가 무엇을 의미하는지에 대해 船底 結構, 횡강력재, 披水板(側板) 등 여러 견해가 제기된 바 있다. 이 논문은 『입당구법순례행기』에 기록된 선박부재 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’가 무엇인지 살펴본 것이다. 먼저 II에서는 『입당구법순례행기』의 여러 板本과 編譯本에 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’가 어떻게 표기 및 해석되고 있는지 살펴보고, III에서는 기존의 연구결과를 검토하여 일본의 견당사선이 어떤 선형의 선박이었을지를 추정할 것이다. 일본의 견당사선이 중국식 정크, 화선식 준구조선, 한선이었을 경우, ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’가 선박의 어떤 부재였을지를 검토하였다. 결론적으로 ‘搙’ 또는 ‘’는 搙栿(버틸 , 들보 , 즉 지지용 들보)의 오기로서 ‘횡강력재’로 판단했다. 일본 학자들이 견당사선을 ‘중국형 정크선’으로 추정하는 것과는 달리, 중국형 선박에는 선저와 갑판부에 각각 독립해 있는 횡강력재가 없는 것으로 미루어 견당사선은 和船形 선박이거나, 韓船形 선박일 것으로 추정할 수 있다. 누아가 화선형 선박일 경우 후나바리(船梁), 한선형 선박일 경우 가룡목과 가목으로 볼 수 있다. 하지만 화선식 준구조선은 대형선을 건조하는 데 한계가 있다는 점을 고려하면 日本史書에 百濟舶이나 新羅船으로 기록된 한선형 선박일 개연성이 큰 것으로 보인다.