Hyeon’ryeong(縣令) and Hyeon’wi(縣尉) personnel were assigned to local units that were designated as Hyeon(縣), and not to other units like Ju(州), Bu(府) and Gun(郡). They served a crucial function of their own in the Goryeo local adminis...
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
Hyeon’ryeong(縣令) and Hyeon’wi(縣尉) personnel were assigned to local units that were designated as Hyeon(縣), and not to other units like Ju(州), Bu(府) and Gun(郡). They served a crucial function of their own in the Goryeo local adminis...
Hyeon’ryeong(縣令) and Hyeon’wi(縣尉) personnel were assigned to local units that were designated as Hyeon(縣), and not to other units like Ju(州), Bu(府) and Gun(郡). They served a crucial function of their own in the Goryeo local administration. The Hyeon’ryeong prefects held the rank of 7-pum, alongside other Hyeon officials such as Sarok Chamgunsa(司錄參軍事) and Jangseogi(掌書記, both manned by personnel on their first ever governmental assignments), while the Hyeon’wi officers held the rank of 8-pum. All these posts were also considered as assignments given to officials who recently entered the government for the first time. It means these posts were these officials’ first ever post, and also the “first ever local post(‘Chosa We’gwan-jik, 初仕外官職’)’ they got. But there are certain questions that come to mind. If Hyeon’ryeong and Hyeon’wi were both indeed Chosa We’gwan-jik posts, the order of rank between them would have become another issue. And there seems to have been changes in the nature of both these posts.
First of all, Hyeon’wi posts were provided as Chosa We’gwan-jik to personnel who entered the government for the first time, either after passing a civil exam or through the Eumseo(蔭敍) route. But during the Goryeo period’s latter half, when dynastic affairs were under interferences of the Mongol Yuan (元) Empire, Hyeon’wi posts were abolished, and to the local Hyeon units only the Hyeon’ryeong prefects were assigned. To the Hyeon’ryeong post, unlike Hyeon’wi, officials who had already served their Chosa We’gwan-jik posts -or even Gweonmu posts- were assigned. We can see there was a clear difference between the ones assigned as Hyeon’ryeong and the ones assigned as Hyeon’wi, in terms of their experience and their overall career. And the Hyeon’ryeong prefects clearly outranked other Chosa We’gwan-jik figures, like the aforementioned Sarok Chamgunsa and Jangseogi.
During the period of Yuan interference, Hyeon’ryeong prefects served as sole leaders of the local Hyeon units. But there were some changes made to their status, and how they operated. Newcomers to the government preferred staying in the capital to being forced to report to local assignments, while the Pan’gwan(判官) officers in Ju(州), Bu(府), Gun(郡) units were abolished (just like the Hyeon’wi officers in Hyeon units), and the number of Sok-hyeon(屬縣, Hyeon units without prefects) units continued to diminish, as they were turned into ‘real’ Hyeon units (with prefects).
In the ending days of Goryeo, alongside the Gammu(監務) system, the Hyeon’ryeong prefects were targeted in local reform discussions. In retrospect, amongst other local posts, Hyeon’ryeong was the one that went through the most changes.
『사군지』 「건치연혁(建置沿革)」조에 나타난 한사군 위치 비정의 특징
5세기 초·중반 동아시아 국제질서의 재편과 고구려의 외교정책
『사군지(四郡志)』 '사실(事實)’조를 통해 본 유득공의 한국고대사 인식
학술지 이력
연월일 | 이력구분 | 이력상세 | 등재구분 |
---|---|---|---|
2026 | 평가예정 | 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증) | |
2020-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) | |
2017-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) | |
2013-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2010-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2008-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2006-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2005-10-05 | 학술지명변경 | 한글명 : 역사와 현실 -> 역사와 현실외국어명 : 미등록 -> YŎKSA WA HYŎNSIL | |
2004-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2001-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) | |
1998-07-01 | 평가 | 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) |
학술지 인용정보
기준연도 | WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) | KCIF(2년) | KCIF(3년) |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.87 |
KCIF(4년) | KCIF(5년) | 중심성지수(3년) | 즉시성지수 |
0.87 | 0.92 | 1.68 | 0.36 |