조청관계에 대한 편의적 이해 사례

이영옥 동북아역사재단 2012 東北亞歷史論叢 Vol.- No.35

What kind of attitude is reasonable for Korean and Chinese to face the other and develop a future-oriented relationship? One way to answer this question is to study how the two peoples regard the relationship between them. This thinking led me to analyze the historical and scholastic materials of the Joseon-Qing wars and the tribute system. First, I analyzed how the court annals of Joseon and of Qing recorded the Joseon-Qing wars. The wars, I thought, had a strong influence on presenting the Chinese image to average Koreans. The average Koreans regard the wars as an accident that barbarians invaded and caused chaos. They are accustomed to calling it “Horan ”(胡亂), and not war. The Joseon annals tell us that the recorders of Joseon looked down upon Manchus as barbarians, and their army as bandits. After the war, they did not change their attitude and opinion regarding the Manchus. There was a contradiction that Joseon continued to look down upon the Manchus, even though they presented tribute to the Qing Dynasty. We can say that people in the Joseon period made an arbitrary understanding of the relationship with the Qing Dynasty. Second, I analyzed how several Chinese scholars, including Pu Baichen, describe the tributary relationship between Joseon and the Qing dynasty. They took the suzerain-vassal relationship based on the tribute system as the basic frame to analyze and state the relations between Joseon and Qing Dynasty. However, the tribute system displays its falsity in that the relations with Joseon were analyzed through the management of the Qing Dynasty, and when referring to the relation of suzerain-vassal(宗藩), 藩 means fanbu (藩部) and is not an accurate term in the sense that it has a different meaning from that of fan in earlier periods. They use the terminology, and this led writings to flow focused on the Qing Dynasty. They insisted that the Qing Dynasty was very considerate of Joseon,and claimed that the Qing Dynasty requested much tribute in the beginning stage, but the quantity gradually lessened as they were politically stabilized, and when Joseon suffered from the famine, Qing Dynasty sent food and provided dispensation. Also, it is insisted that the Qing Dynasty promised to militarily protect Joseon from Japan, and that domestic affairs and diplomacy could enjoy considerable freedom. However, they overlook the following matters. The political stabilization of Joseon from the standpoint of Qing Dynasty was directly related to the stabilization of that country’s border regions. Because of this, it is natural to interpret that since it was believed that the requests for numerous tribute and excessive political interference could trigger unwanted issues and the quantity of tribute was reduced. Next, by focusing on the responsibility of Japan in the process by which the tributary relationship was broken, they tried to hide the fact that the Qing Dynasty could not cope with the changed situation. The Sino-Japanese War occurred as Qing China and Japan fought to exert exclusive influence, and the people of Joseon suffered material losses due to the war. We believe that both Qing Dynasty and Japan are not freed from responsibility in the war. However, Pu insists as follows:Japan could not hide its warlike nature and intrusive expansionist policies and provoked the war, and Qing Dynasty encouraged the conclusion of treaties between Joseon and foreign nations in order to protect Joseon from danger. In short, it is not true that only one country among Korea and China has the attitude of arbitrary understanding of the other. This kind of understanding was transferred to the average people by official records,and resulted in distortion of the historical facts. We should have a mature attitude to accept uncomfortable truth. If so, we can develop a future-oriented relationship between Korea and China.

朝鲜通事群体与朝清关系研究—以凤城徐氏家族为中心

李丹 한중인문학회 2019 한중인문학연구 Vol.65 No.-

The Tongsa(通事) refers to the interpreter, and the Tongsa group is an important medium for ancient Chinese diplomacy. The Joseon Tongsa was the Joseon interpreter official set up in the Qing Dynasty, was mainly responsible for Joseon Dynasty interpretation and communication, became a bridge and the bond of tributary relations between the Joseon Dynasty and Qing Dynasty. From the end of Kangxi to the early years of Qianlong, among the Xu's Tongsa family, especially the Xu Zongshun and Xu Zongmeng brothers are the most active. They mainly performed the duties stipulated by the Qing Dynasty, such as serveing as the ambassadors of Qing Dynasty to Joseon Dynasty, receiving the tributary Joseon envoys, supervising trade, interrogating and returning the drifters and the offenders, and so on. They play the role of communicate likings and needs and coordinate the etiquette of the two countries. At the same time, for personal survival and family building, they also disregard the Qing Dynasty's manage, relying on the role of interpreter, using power to violate the Qing Dynasty's regulations and seeking private interests, asking for and accepting bribes, participating in the Lantou(揽头) trade, the money obtained is used to set up the house and donated an official for his son, and was discovered and confiscated property by the Qing Dynasty. In the Qianlong period, with the stability of the Joseon-Qing relationship and the emphasis on the concept of "giving more and getting less" (厚往薄来),the flexible Tongsa used the role of interpretation to seek power to operate the space , causing dissatisfaction in the Qing Dynasty. Not only is it not satisfied with Joseon Tongsa's request for bribes, but it also has a negative sense of Joseon Tongsa's ability to interpret. As a result, the role of Joseon Tongsa was gradually weakened. Through the specific translation activities and power operation process of the Xu's family, we can re-examine the relationship between the Joseon Dynasty and Qing Dynasty ,and feel the social life and political survival of the Joseon Tongsa group. 통사(通事)란 역관을 가리키며, 통사 집단은 고대 중국 외교왕래의 중요한 매개체였다. 조선통사(朝鮮通事)는 청조에 설치된 조선어 통역관으로, 조선어 번역과 의사소통을 주로 맡음으로써 말이 통하지 않는 조선왕조와 청조 양국 외교의 교량 역할 및 조공 관계의 유대를 구축하는 역할을 담당하였다. 강희 말에서 건륭 초기까지 서씨 통사 가문 중에서 특히 서종순과 서종맹 형제가 가장 활약하였다. 이들은 청조에 규정된 조선왕조로의 출사, 조선왕조 사신의 접대, 무역 감사, 표류인과 범월인(犯越人)의 심문과 송환 등의 직책을 주로 수행하였으며, 본국의 의사를 잘 전달하고 양국의 예의를 조정하는 역할을 하였다. 그러나 또한 동시에 이들은, 개인의 생존과 가문의 건설을 위해 청조의 행정을 무시하고서 통역이란 직책을 빌미로 권력의 편의를 이용해 사사로운 이익을 도모하고 뇌물을 요구하거나, 남두무역(揽头贸易)에 참여하거나 하였고, 그렇게 얻은 돈은 주택을 마련하거나 자식의 관직을 위한 연납비로 쓰였다. 그래서 나중에는 결국 청조 조정에 발각되어 이들의 재산은 몰수당하였다. 건륭시대에 이르러 청조와 조선왕조의 양국관계가 안정되고 후왕박래 이념이 강조되었는데, 유연한 외교방식을 구사한 통역 집단이 번역 직책을 이용하여 권력 운용에 관여하고자 도모한 것이 청조의 불만을 야기하였다. 후왕박래(厚往薄來) 이념에 위배되고 뇌물을 받는 통사의 행위가 건륭제의 불만을 야기하기뿐만 아니라 조선통사의 통역능력이 낮아지는 경향도 존재했다. 따라서 통역을 담당한 통사의 역할은 점차 약화되었다. 서씨 통사 가문의 구체적인 번역 활동과 권력의 운영 과정을 전개해 나타냄으로써 조·청 관계를 살펴볼 수 있고 그 중에서의 통사 집단의 사회생활과 정치생존 방식도 느낄 수도 있다.

조선시대 서해 북단 해역의 경계와 島嶼 문제 ― 海浪島와 薪島를 중심으로 ―

서인범 명청사학회 2011 명청사연구 Vol.0 No.36

In the late Ming Dynasty period, when the perception of maritime border was indistinct, there were four viewpoints on the starting point of the north-western border between the Ming Dynasty and the Joseon Dynasty; the Nokdo Island at the Yalu River estuary which is located in the coast of Liaodong, the Jangjado Island located in between the Nokdo Island and the Geowoodo Island which belongs to Cheolsan-bu, the Sindo Island located at the strategically significant place for the maritime defense in the mouth of the Yalu River, and the Geowoodo Island located sixteen kilometers away westward from Cheolsan-bu. As a conclusion, the Sindo Island was the starting point of the border of the north-western border. The reason that the Joseon envoys did not recognize the Sindo Island or Geowoodo Island as the territory of the Joseon Dynasty was that lots of people from Liaodong moved to the area and settled down there after the Japanese invasion of 1592. And since Mao Wen-lung, who was expelled from Liaodong area when Nurhaci of Jianzhou Jurchen occupied Liaoning area, established his military post at the Gado Island located within the territory of the Joseon Dynasty and took the offshore control. Therefore the Joseon government could not take this area under her control and had to abandon it temporarily. The Hongzhi Emperor of Ming Dynasty expressed his doubt about the location of Haerang Island and since the era of the King Seongjong of the Joseon Dynasty, it became the direct cause of a diplomatic dispute between the Ming Dynasty and the Joseon Dynasty. People from the Joseon Dynasty traveled to the island or lived there to avoid drafted labor from the government and for a purpose of doing commercial activities or fisheries. The Joseon government, which was deeply concerned about this issue, brought those people back to Joseon and punished them. However, many of Chinese people moved to the Sindo Island located in the territory of Joseon, and settled down there to avoid drafted labor from their government. This could casue a serious problem to the Joseon government thus the government requested Liaodongdusi (the military commander of Liadong area) to prohibit those people from moving to the island. But Liaodongdusi did not properly react to the request. Therefore, the Joseon government tried to put political pressure on Liaodongdusi by notifying him that they would send envoys directly to Beijing in case he did not grant their request. In this way, the Joseon government could solve the problem. The reason that the Joseon government tried to solve the Haerangdo Island and the Sindo Island problem in advance so that it would not develop any bigger problem has an important significance. The Joseon government was concerned that the issue might cause damage on their spirit of toadyism toward the Ming Dynasty. And they saw possibilities of a border dispute between them and the Ming Dynasty which could get caused by a small problem in the borderland.

중국 근대 대(對) 조선 서사 기록과 문학적 형상화 연구 - 황준헌(黃遵憲)ㆍ주가록(周家祿)ㆍ장건(張謇)의 중한관계 저작과 시문을 중심으로

정해리 중국인문학회 2016 中國人文科學 Vol.0 No.64

The paper analyses relationship between the Joseon Dynasty and Qing Dynasty during modern transition on 『朝鮮策略(ChaoXianCeLue)』ㆍ『奧簃朝鮮三種 (AoYiChaoXianSanZhong)』ㆍ『朝鮮善後六策(ChaoXianShanHouLiuCe)』 and poetry and prose which were written by HuangZunXian(1848-1905)ㆍZhouJiaLu(1846-1909)ㆍ ZhangJian(1853-1926). It considers these works located on the center of shaping new alternation in East Asia as vivid records. The study, specifically, examines (1) Chinese policy of Joseon strategy (2) Search on process of forming modern discourse in East Asia (3) Analyse epic records of the Joseon Dynasty and poetry and prose on chinese recognition of Joseon and identify of forming modern history. And it takes view of macro-framework under form and process of modern discourse in East Asia. Firstly, the paper is a comprehensive analysis of literary works on the relationship between Korea and China and poetry and prose such as 『朝鮮策略(ChaoXianCeLue)』 ㆍ『奧簃朝鮮三種(AoYiChaoXianSanZhong)』ㆍ『朝鮮善後六策(ChaoXianShanHouLiuCe), and then studies on how it changed and what was the changing process. Secondly, it examines the process of forming modern discourse in East Asia, the recognition for intellectuals of Qing and Joseon Dynasty about a convulsion of East Asia situation, and the countermeasure against that situation. Last but not least, HuangZunXian, ZhouJiaLu, and ZhangJian left more than a few poetry and prose which were the problems and destiny of the Joseon Dynasty as topic and interacted with writers of that period. The study focuses on their literary works to search the chinese intellectuals of Joseon recognition and identity of forming modern history.The Im-o Military Revolt(壬午軍亂) which plays important background in political and period about epic records of Joseon Dynasty and poetry and prose is not only a local problem at that time. It arose from transition between Joseon Dynasty and Qing Dynasty in traditional chinese world order system and western influence on East and emerging Japan. In addition, Qing Dynasty made the best use of Joseon Dynasty situation to defense Russia that moved southward. Thus, chinese policy of Joseon strategy focused on keeping traditional chinese world order system. And it caused international dispute with status of Joseon Dynasty. On the other hand, literary works on the relationship between Korea and China which were written by HuangZunXian, ZhouJiaLu, and ZhangJian revealed chinese view on modern transition of the Joseon Dynasty with diversified recognition. It could be said that Joseon and Qing had the same identify of forming modern history in terms of the recognition that are traditional master-servant relationship between two countries, causes and solutions of Joseon Dynasty decline, key figures who were Heungseon Daewongun, Queen Min, Gojong and civil servants, writers, and strenuous efforts in the Joseon Dynasty.

김동욱(1966)의 「李朝 妓女史 序說–士大夫와 妓女에 대한 風俗史的 接近」에 대한 학술적 검증 및 오류 정정 -기녀의 기원(起源) 및 이조 기녀사(史)에 관한 오류들을 중심으로-

이정남,미즈타니 사야카 바른역사학술원 2024 역사와융합 Vol.- No.22

본 연구에서는 풍속사적 측면에서 ‘조선시대의 기녀사(史)’를 다룬 최초의 학술논문인 김동욱(1966)의 「이조 기녀사 서설(사대부와 기녀)-이조 사대부와 기녀에 대한 풍속사적 접근」을 대상으로 ‘기녀의 기원(起源)’에서부터 ‘조선시대 기생사(史)’ 전반의 내용들에서 발견되는 다양한 학술적 오류들과 문제점을 각종 정사(正史)의 기록과 야사(野史) 그리고 관련 자료들과의 비교ㆍ대조를 통해 객관적이고 실증적으로 조목조목 규명하였다. 첫째, 김동욱(1966)의 「이조 기녀사 서설(사대부와 기녀)」은 일제강점기대표적인 친일 사학자이자 한국 기생 역사왜곡의 확립자인 이능화(1927)의 조선해어화사 와 집필방식뿐만 아니라 내용상에서도 겹치는 부분이 상당히많다. 특히 각종 야사(野史), 패관(稗官), 잡록(雜錄), 소설(小說) 등의 참고문헌도 그렇고 그 문헌들에 등장하는 다양한 기녀(기생)들도 동일한 인물들이다수 소개되어 있어 전체적으로 이능화(1927)의 조선해어화사 의 큰 틀에서 크게 벗어나지 못하고 있다 . 둘째, 대부분의 내용들이 조선 태조(太祖) 때부터 연산군(燕山君) 전후에 이르기까지의 조선 전기에 집중되어 있기 때문에 「이조(李朝) 기녀사(妓女史) 서설(序說)」 즉 조선시대 기녀의 역사를 풍속사적 측면에서 전반적으로 서설(序說)하였다고 보기에는 학술적 연구범위의 한계성을 지적할 수 있다. 셋째, 무엇보다 「3-11. 기녀(妓女)와 정절(貞節)」에서의 의기(義妓)ㆍ열기(烈妓)ㆍ정기(貞妓)의 사례들을 제외하면 아무리 풍속사적 접근이라 할지라도전체적으로 음란하고 자극적이고 섹슈얼리티에 편중된 네거티브한 기녀(妓 女)의 일화(逸話)만을 중심으로 소개하고 있다는 점에서 상당히 문제적이라할 수 있다. 넷째, 「이조 기녀사 서설(사대부와 기녀)」은 풍속사적 측면에서나마 조선시대의 기녀사(史)를 다룬 최초의 논문이라는 점, 학계에 있어서 김동욱(金東 旭)의 국문학자로서의 높은 평가와 권위 등의 연유로 여기에 실린 내용들은이후 기생 관련 논문과 단행본 그리고 이들을 어떠한 검증도 없이 그대로 인용한 인터넷 상의 각종 기생 관련 정보들, 특히 조선시대의 기생(妓生)에 관한최초의 연구나 기생의 기원(起源) 등 연구사(史) 분석부터 시작하는 석ㆍ박사학위논문 등에서 어떠한 의심이나 추가적인 검증없이 무분별하게 반복해서 재생산되어 왔다. 하지만 김동욱(1966)의 「이조 기녀사 서설(사대부와 기녀)」은 다양한 학술적 오류들과 잘못 해석ㆍ기술된 내용들이 상당수 발견되기 때문에 이의 인용에 있어서는 연구자 스스로가 추가적이고 철저한 검증작업을 통해 학술적 타당성을 충분히 확보한 후 이를 재인용해야 할 것이다. This study conducted a detailed analysis of I. Seosul (Introduction) II. Life of Gisaeng, which includes errors about Ginyeo (Gisaeng) such as the origin and role of Gisaeng, type and definition of Gisaeng, Gisaeng system, and abolition of female musician system. Then, this study compared them with related historical records, codes, and annals, including [History of Goryeo Dynasty] and [The Annals of the Joseon Dynasty], to correct each error in details. For III. Ginyeo and Sadaebu, this study examined the main ideas of each theme, investigated detailed information of cited references, corrected errors, and explored overall descriptive characteristics. The main matters corrected in this study were as follows. First, [Introduction of Gisaeng’ History in the Joseon Dynasty(Sadaebu and Ginyeo)] by Dongwook Kim (1966) shows a considerable number of overlapping parts in terms of writing method and contents with the [Joseon Haeeohwasa] by Neunghwa Lee (1927), who is one of the main pro-Japanese historians during the Japanese colonial era and distorter of Korean Gisaeng history. In particular, both of them cover the same unofficial histories, stories, tales, episodes, and novels, and a lot of the Gisaeng introduced in these materials are the same people. Second, most of the contents and episodes focus on the early Joseon Dynasty, from King Taejo to Yeonsangun. Therefore, the [Introduction of Gisaeng’ History in the Joseon Dynasty] is limited in its academic scope and fails to cover the history of Ginyeo during the Joseon Dynasty in terms of customs. Third, the [Introduction of Gisaeng’ History in the Joseon Dynasty] involves considerable problems as it only focuses on negative Ginyeo episodes biased to obscene, provocative, and sexual episodes, except for the episodes of Ginyeo of righteous deeds in [Ginyeo and Fidelity]. Lastly, [Introduction of Gisaeng’ History in the Joseon Dynasty(Sadaebu and Ginyeo)] has been reproduced indiscreetly without any doubt in Gisaeng-related papers, publications, papers on the Gisaeng of the Joseon Dynasty and origin of Gisaeng, and other master’s and doctorate papers starting from research history analysis considering the fact that it was the first introductory research that covered the history of Ginyeo during the Joseon Dynasty and evaluation and authority of Dongwook Kim in academic circles as a Korean literature scholar. Thus, researchers need to go through additional and thorough verification process to secure academic validity before re-citing the [Introduction of Gisaeng’ History in the Joseon Dynasty].

조선시대 『홍무정운』의 지식전파 형식

량야오중 지식인문학연구회 2019 지식인문학 Vol.1 No.1

『홍무정운』은 명나라 태조 홍무제 8년(1375)에 악소봉(樂韶鳳), 송염(宋 濂) 등 11명의 문인이 황제의 명으로 편찬한 운서이다. 주원장이 이러한 운서를 편찬하라 명한 목적은 천하에 ‘중원아음’을 정함으로, 백성 및 지식 층이 『홍무정운』을 기준으로 삼아 천하의 통일된 정음체계를 통해 자신의 중앙 집권 통치를 강화하기 위함이었음을 알 수 있다. 중국의 인접국가로서 한국은 예전부터 중화문화의 깊은 영향을 받았다. 조선시대에는 한시의 압운이나 독음 규범 등 문제로 인하여 조선왕조는 한자 표준음의 학습과 심사를 매우 중시하였다. 『홍무정운』은 완성 후 조 선왕조에 도입되어 크게 중시되었으며, 중국 최고 권위의 표준 운서로 각 광받았다. 『홍무정운』이 국가의 대표적인 규범 한자음인 ‘정음’ 지식체계 로서 조성왕조에 오랜 시간 광범위하게 전파되어 조선시대 학문과 운서편 찬에 막대한 영향을 미쳤다. 본 논문은 『홍무정운』이 조선시대에 전파된 배경에서 출발하여, 조선왕조 시대 『홍무정운』이 전파된 형식과 그로 인한 영향에 대해 고찰하고, 일종의 지식체계로서 『홍무정운』이 조선왕조에 전파된 시대적 상황을 묘사해 보고자 한다. 『홍무정운』이 명나라의 ‘정음’ 지식체계로서 조선왕조에 전해진 후 강습, 과거시험, 시부압운, 정자규범, 교각중간 등 다양한 형식을 통해 전파 되었음을 알 수 있었다. 그의 전파된 상황을 『조선왕조실록』, 『승정원일기』 및 조선시대 지식인의 기록에서 확인할 수 있다. 『홍무정운』은 조선왕조 에서 광범위하고 폭넓게 전파되었으며, 대표적인 지식체계로 특히 왕실과 조선 사대부들에게 인정되고 수용되었다. 이러한 외래 지식체계의 전파는 조선왕조의 강한 중앙집권 통치의 결과이기도 하며, 또한 사대부층과 백 성들이 외래 지식을 적극적으로 받아들인 결과이기도 한다. 양자의 상호 작용 아래, 『홍무정운』은 일종의 정음체계로 조선왕조에 전파되고 유래되 며 점차 깊숙이 뿌리내리게 되었다. 그 원인을 살펴보면, 지리적으로 인접 한 한중 양국의 정치적, 문화적 요인으로 운서라는 특수한 지식체계가 양 국 사이에 쉽게 전해질 수 있었던 것이다. 조선왕조는 역사적으로 한학을 중시하여, 한자 음운의 선택은 언어 문자의 정통성과 밀접히 연관된 매우 중요한 문제였다. 『홍무정운』이 조선왕조에 전파되고 지식체계와 왕실권 력이 결합하여, 한중 양국의 지식체계가 함께 소통하고 변천하는 역사의 새로운 지평이 열리게 된 것이다. “Hongwu Zhengyun” became a book in the 8th year of Emperor Hongwu of the Ming Dynasty (1375). It is an official rhyme book compiled by 11 people such as Yue Shaofeng and Song Lian. Emperor Zhu Yuanzhang ordered the compilation of this rhyme book to set the “Zhongyuan Yayin(Main land positive sound)” for the country, and let the people and the intellectuals use “Hongwu Zhengyun” as the standard of the positive sound. Emperor consolidate its centralization through unified sound system of the country. As a close neighbor of China, Korea has been infiltrated by Chinese culture since ancient times. In the Joseon era, the Joseon Dynasty attached great importance to the study and examination of the standard pronunciation of Chinese characters, because of the rhetoric for writing Chinese poetry and pronunciation specification. After the book “Hongwu Zhengyun” was written, it was introduced to the Joseon Dynasty and received attention. It was regarded as the most authoritative standard rhyme book in China. “Hongwu Zhengyun” as a “positive” knowledge system that represents the will of the state and regulates the pronunciation of Chinese characters, has been widely and long‐lasting spread in various ways in the Joseon Dynasty, and has had a tremendous impact on the Sinology and rhyme compilation in the Joseon era. This paper starts with the background of the dissemination of “Hongwu Zhengyun” in the Joseon era, and examines the form of dissemination of “Hongwu Zhengyun” in the Joseon Dynasty and its influence on the Joseon era. Thus this paper depicted the dissemination of “Hongwu Zhengyun” as a knowledge system in the Joseon Dynasty. “Hongwu Zhengyun” as an authoritative “positive sound” knowledge system of the Ming Dynasty, In the Joseon Dynasty, there were four kinds of dissemination forms: the lectures, the imperial examinations with rhyme of poetry, the orthographic specification and the reprint. The dissemination can be seen in the records of “the Annals of the Joseon Dynast”, “Seung Jung Won Diary” and the records of Korea intellectuals. Through these methods, “Hongwu Zhengyun” has been widely and long‐lasting spread in the Joseon Dynasty, and the knowledge system what it represented has also been accepted and recognized by the Korea intellectuals. This dissemination of foreign knowledge system is not only the result of the state power dominated by the top of the Joseon Dynasty, but also the spontaneous acceptance of the intellectuals and the underlying people from the bottom up. Through the interaction of the both, a knowledge system can be spread among countries and solidified in the countries that which accept the knowledge system. The reason is that China and Korea are geographically closed, so the similar political and cultural factors make this special knowledge system of rhyme book spread between the two countries. The Joseon Dynasty had always attached importance to Sinology, so the choice of Chinese phonology is an important issue concerning the orthodoxy of language. This is both the need of the national language policy and the need for the dynastyʹs authoritarian rule. Through the spread of “Hongwu Zhengyun” in the Joseon Dynasty, the knowledge system and state power was combined and it has written a chapter of knowledge circulation and change in the history of China and Korea.

15세기 조선 왕실이 택한 관요 자기와 선별배경

오영인 ( Youngin Oh ) 이화여자대학교 도예연구소 2018 陶藝硏究 Vol.- No.27

This article is intended to take note of direct or indirect impact of policy in the Joseon Dynasty valid in manufacturing and characteristic of Royal kilns ceramic. It determined the installation of Royal kilns and the consequential alterations and characteristic of ceramic in Gwangjo, Gyeonggi-do the 15^th Century, observed results carefully a Royal attitude granted ceramics by Ming, import of Ming system, perception toward the ceramics. Since the mid-15th century, some kilns in Gwangjo, Gyeonggi-do produced a little celadon with a number of porcelain by Royal demand. With the common opinion, it is a suggested background to produce focusing on porcelain thought based on Confucianism. Merely, the mid-15th century was a period trying to prepare a framework for Dynasty, to have respect to Ming in the Joseon. Really, the then characteristic of Royal kilns ceramic has echoes of that of Jingdezhenyao in Ming and granted ceramics by Ming. The Royal Court of Joseon Dynasty looked for appropriateness of the foundation and source of maintenance of civilization from Ming, would like to show dignity as an independent state with the friendly relationship of Ming. On the one hand, the Royal Court of Ming Dynasty granted the Joseon Dynasty many kinds of article to show the Imperial authority, the Royal Court of Joseon Dynasty would read too much into those. In other words, Ming imperial ceramics became accepted as screamers and valuables by excelling in management in the Joseon Dynasty. As heard from Ming envoy sent to the Joseon Dynasty, the Royal Court of Joseon Dynasty would use those by Ming's allowance and allegedly make a model in the manufacture of Royal kilns ceramic. Then the Royal Court of Ming Dynasty used porcelain as the dishes and utensils used in ancestral rites, bestowed many porcelains on the Joseon Dynasty. In short, characteristic of Royal kilns ceramic in the Joseon Dynasty, on porcelain, deserved to be assessed to make a kind of return for Ming imperial ceramics. Furthermore, it showed the name of the Joseon Dynasty subject who tried to promote as the Ming Dynasty.

1910~20년대 일본인 저작의 조선 의생활(依生活) 항목 비교 - 이마무라 도모(今村鞆)ㆍ니시무라 신타로(西村眞太郞)ㆍ마츠다 코(松田甲)의 기록을 중심으로 -

조희진 국립민속박물관 2016 민속학연구 Vol.0 No.39

This study analyzed clothing items contained in the following works by Japanese writers: Manners of the Joseon Dynasty, Aspects of the Joseon Dynasty, Diverse Records of the Joseon Dynasty, Essays about the Joseon Dynasty, and Collected Stories of the Joseon Dynasty. Everyday clothing was an element included among principal items to be investigated from the beginning stage when Imperialist Japan planned to identify various manners and customs of the Joseon Dynasty. This study intended to analyze the objectives and viewpoints with which these three Japanese writers made their records. Imamura, an Imperialist policeman, Nisimura, an inspector of the police agency, and Matsuda in charge of exchanges between the Joseon Dynasty and Japan felt it urgent to understand the manners of the Joseon Dynasty for the smooth performance of their official duties in the Joseon Dynasty which they colonized. Their records selectively included clothing items of the Joseon Dynasty. Manners of the Joseon Dynasty made a systematic composition of Jeson’s clothing items while Aspects of the Joseon Dynasty showed a simple description of materialistic and formative properties of Joseon’s dress designs. Matsuda wrote his work in a style similar to essay-writing, lacking in accuracy compared with the other two authors. The three writers were different from each other in the language used. Imamura described in both Chinese letters and Katakana. Nisimura wrote names of dress designs in Korean, indexing them. Matsuda wrote the main body of his work in Korean. Referring to description methods, they adopted three ways in their writing. First, they compared the clothing styles of the Joseon Dynasty with those of Japan. Next, they distinguished between the new ways of clothing style and the ones of the Joseon Dynasty. Finally, they intended to guide the people of the Joseon Dynasty by showing them which aspects of the Joseon clothing styles needed to be improved, and suggesting alternatives for them. These description methods, their viewpoints, and the objectives of their recording the manners of the Joseon Dynasty projected the roles of Imperialist Japan and the justification of them as the principal agent of modernizing the colonized Joseon Dynasty.

조선시대 양명학에 관한 연구의 과거, 현재, 미래 -조선시대 양명학 일반에 관한 연구를 중심으로-

김세정 ( Kim Sea-jeong ) 충남대학교 유학연구소 2020 유학연구 Vol.52 No.-

The research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty which started since the 1970s has achieved amazingly remarkable results in both quantitative and qualitative aspects during the last 50 years. The author has collected those achievements and made a “List of Works on Yang-ming Studies in the Joseon Dynasty.” The works in that list include 78 books, 46 translations from original texts, two translations from foreign works, 97 doctoral dissertations, 213 master's theses, and 1287 academic papers, totaling up to 1719. The author intends to carry out the analysis of that huge compilation in several stages. In this paper as the first stage, the author considers a part of writings contained in that list (15 books, seven doctoral dissertations, 94 academic papers) which are related to the ‘general Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty,’ that can draw a general outline of the research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty. Through that, the author makes some evaluations of the current situation of that research and the outstanding problems that must be resolved. In those works, 15 published books can be divided according to the time of publication: the 1980s when the research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty established its first base, the 1990s and 2000s when that research developed, and the 2010s when that research was internationalized. While the first half of them provide a foundation to the research on the general Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty, i.e. the introduction, reception and development of Yang-ming studies, in the second half we can see that the research focuses more on the negotiation and interconnection between Yang-ming studies and Neo-Confucianism in the Joseon Dynasty. In addition, the subjects, viewpoints and contents of those books show the diversification and improvement. For the doctoral dissertations on the general Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty, it can be said that those eight dissertations are not much in quantity, but the variety of academic areas they are in - philosophy, history, politics, religious studies, literature, etc.-shows that the main results they obtained are the consideration of Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty from various aspects, the profound knowledge of Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty, and the enrichment of the base for the research on Korean Yang-ming studies. For the 93 academic papers, they can be divided into 3 parts according to their publication time. The first one is the papers published until the 1980s when the research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty started to be established. The second one is the papers published in the 1990s when the research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty was regularly carried out. And the third one is the papers published in the 2000s and 2010s when that research reached maturity. Despite the remarkable results, the research on general Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty still has problems that must be solved. Firstly, the results of research according to the time and domain, and the research on each scholar of Yang-ming studies must be reflected in the research showing the outline of Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty. Secondly, the results of the research on the general Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty that focused much on the philosophical aspect must be balanced among all philosophical, literal, and historical aspects. Only so can Yang-ming studies be fully described and their true character be shown. Thirdly, it is necessary to advance arguments about Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty in the connection with problems of the present era. The ultimate aim should be that the research on Yang-ming studies in the Joseon Dynasty must completely succeed and revive, in the present reality, the self-control and independence and the spirit of time that were showed in ‘variation according to time (隨時變易)’ and the ‘way of adaption (權道)’, the spirit of loving the people and the spirit of practice that were showed in the terms of ‘sincere mind (實心)’ and ‘empathy (感通),’ i.e. the spirit of Yang-ming studies that scholars in the Joseon Dynasty manifested.

조선시대 한중일(韓中日) 관계와 상호인식(相互認識)의 추이

한명기 ( Han Myunggi ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2020 한국학연구 Vol.0 No.57

The three countries of Korea, China and Japan are often referred to as the “Chinese Character Culture Zone” and “Confucian Culture Zone” or “Sinosphere” to emphasize the cultural commonality of the three countries. However, in the past, the interactions and exchanges between the people of the three kingdoms were cut off. This was because all three countries strictly forbade the movement of their subjects between the respective countries. Under this restriction, it was impossible for the majority of the residents, except for the envoys, interpreters, and some merchants, to contact people in other countries. The Chinese perception of Japan was positive before the advent of the Yuan Dynasty. Through contact with Japanese officials and monks who had been envoys, Japan was regarded as a “country of courtesy” and a “country of virtues”. However, Japanese pirates became a major problem for China by the end of the Yuan dynasty, China's perception of Japan became the opposite. The Joseon Dynasty in the late 14 ^th century, also suffered heavily from frequent invasions of the Japanese pirates, started to regard the Japanese with contempt. This antagonistic sentiment is shown in the terms that were used to describe Japan such as “The Island Barbarians”, “The Japanese Enemy” and “The Wicked Scoundrels”. However, since the middle of the 15 ^th century, the ensuing success of the policy of appeasement with the Japanese pirates and the resulting decrease of the invasions, the Korean perception of the Japanese changed, this time for the better. However, Joseon's attitude that they were a Great country and Japan was a subordinate nation continued as before . Joseon Dynasty in the 15 ^th century, had frequent contacts with the Japanese nation while concealing them from the paternal Ming dynasty. The Ming Dynasty did in fact were opposed to Joseon having communication with Japan. 15^th to 16 ^th century intellectuals of Joseon touted that Joseon was the “most loyal subjectnation” to the Ming Dynasty and the “honoured pupil of the Great Chinese Civilisation” therefore they treated Japan as “barbarians” and a “country yetto-be-reformed”. On the other hand, Japan asserted itself as a “God's nation”, and rejected being a tributary state to the Ming Dynasty and scorned the Joseon Dynasty. The geographical difference between Joseon and Japan in relation to China, that Joseon peninsula(the Korean peninsula) is attached to the Chinese continent and Japan is separated from the Asian mainland by ocean, caused the difference in their attitude and perception towards China and this furthermore affected the mutual perceptions they had of each other. In the wake of the Japanese invasions of Korea (Imjin War 1592-1598) contacts between peoples of the three kingdoms increased explosively. First of all, after the war, the mutual perceptions of Joseon and Ming revealed a new face. As the military and geopolitical importance of Joseon emerged after the war, Ming recognised Joseon as their “front” and “defense base”. Ming pressured Joseon and even planned to colonise it. On the other hand, after the war, the Joseon Dynasty recognised the Ming Dynasty as “saviours” despite the serious havoc the military of Ming created in Joseon. But then, they perceived Japan as an “eternal enemy”. In addition, the Joseon Dynasty experienced the formidable prowess of the armed forces of Japan through the war which raised fears. It was through the Imjin War that hostility and fear toward Japan were made to coexist. With the replacement of the Ming Dynasty with the Qing Dynasty, the mutual perceptions of Joseon and Ming, and Joseon's perception of Japan showed signs of change. In particular, through the Later Jin invasion of Joseon (Jeongmyo-Horan 1627) and the Qing invasion of Joseon (ByeongJa-Horan 1636-1637) their perception towards Japan showed sings of change. Some intellectuals began to perceive Japan as an ally to cooperate with in the fight against the “barbarian forces of Qing”, not “the eternal enemy” they once thought Japan was. In the 19th century, the approaching threat of the West gave impetus to Japan's national defence efforts and they were of the opinion that Korea had to be conquered. Indeed, as Japan's power grew again, Qing's sense of crisis toward Japan also grew. In particular, some of Qing's officials who believed that Japan conquering Joseon would prove to be dangerous for Qing, argued that Joseon should be ruled directly. In 1882, during the riots of Joseon soldiers, Qing militarily intervened in the country, established military rule and attempted to make Korea a colony. The situation changed after the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895). Anti-Japanese sentiment spread in Joseon as Japan occupied the Gyeongbokgung Palace, oppressed peasant forces and attempted to colonise Joseon. During the war, the Qing Dynasty was overwhelmed in the face of the superior force of Japan, but many intellectuals in Joseon hoped for the victory of the Qing. However, when Qing was defeated in the First Sino-Japanese War, Joseon through embarrassment was forced to recognise Qing's waning power over the East. Qing's intellectuals also recognised that through the loss of the war they were to learn from Japan. In conclusion, Korean perceptions of the Japanese and of the Chinese during the era of Joseon Dynasty were formed under the geopolitical conditions and security conditions of the Korean Peninsula, which is sandwiched between the Chinese continent and the Japanese archipelago. And they appeared to antagonise or facilitate each other depending on the changes of relationship and situations between Korea and the two countries of China and Japan surrounding the Korean Peninsula. mutual perceptions, “country of courtesy”, “country of virtues”, Japanese pirates, the “most loyal subjectnation” to the Ming Dynasty, Imjin War, “defense base”, “the eternal enemy”, the Later Jin invasion of Joseon, ‘the situation sandwiched between the Chinese continent and the Japanese archipelago’