교조신원운동기 동학교단과 정부 간의 담론투쟁―유교적 측면을 중심으로― = The Discursive Struggle between the Religious Body of Donghak and the Government during the Period of the Movement Vindicating the Innocence of the Founder of Donghak ― A Consideration on Its Confucian Aspects ―

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The campaign to vindicate the innocence of the founder of Donghak(敎祖伸寃運動) can be divided into three periods. In its first period, the leaders of Donghak demanded, through institutional proceedings to Chungcheong Gamyeong(忠淸監營) and Jeolla Gamyeong(全羅監營), that their followers should be released and their founder be cleared of the false charge. As the leaders tried to advocate their legitimacy and the Gamyeong also sticked to its existing governmental policy of ‘disapproval of Donghak’, there appeared controversy about ‘whether Donghak is orthodoxy(正學ﾗ) or heresy(異端).’Realizing the limit of ‘petition to the local government’, they took two approaches in the second period of the movement; that is, appeal by kneeling in front of the palace(伏閤6上疏) and announcement of the repulse of Japan and the West(斥倭洋 宣言). The leaders of Donghak, appealing to the central government, vindicated mainly the innocence of the founder by way of appeal by kneeling in front of the palace, the strategy that Confucian scholars actually monopolized then, while followers in Jeolla-do employed the method of ‘announcement(榜文)’, a non-institutional way, and the cause of ‘the duty(義理) of loyalty and filial piety’,announcing the repulse of Japan and the West to the local government and people.
In the third period of the movement, the leaders got out of the total dependence on appeal and adopted as their key strategy ‘the announcement of the repulse of Japan and the West.’ There at last ensued formal negotiations between ten thousands of Donghak followers and the government astounded by their force.
The leaders of Donghak attempted to show their sincerity and appeal to people,and the government tried to cut off the influence and urged its dissolution.
Accordingly, the controversy between the two sides was taken place with its focus on ‘duty(義理)’, not on ‘the repulse of Japan and the West.’

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "嶺上日記"

2 "羅巖隨錄"

3 오문환, "해월 최시형의 정치사상" 모시는 사람들 2003

4 李相禧, "조선조 사회의 커뮤니케이션 현상연구" 나남 1993

5 裵亢燮, "조선시대 민중의 시위 문화-신문고에서 복합상소까지" 33 : 2008

6 오인환, "상소의 설득구조에 관한 연구: 시무상소문을 중심으로" 한국언론학회 47 (47): 1-37, 2003

7 박맹수, "사료로 보는 동학과 동학농민혁명" 도서출판 모시는사람들 2009

8 표영삼, "동학 2-해월의 고난 역정" 통나무 2005

9 이경원, "교조신원운동기 동학지도부의 유교적 측면에 대한 고찰" 19 : 2010

10 나인호, "개념사란 무엇인가-역사와 언어의 새로운 만남" 역사비평사 2011

11 김선경, "갑오 농민 전쟁과 민중 의식의 성장" 한국사회사학회 (64) : 7-227, 2003

12 "韓國民衆運動史資料大系, 1894年의 農民戰爭篇 附東學關係資料 1: 東學文書" 驪江出版社 1985

13 "東學黨與完伯書"

14 박영학, "東學運動의 公示構造" 나남 1990

15 歷史問題硏究所, "東學農民戰爭史料叢書 2" 史芸硏究所

16 송호근, "東學: 個人과 社會의 原形" 2013

17 裵亢燮, "朝鮮後期 民衆運動과 東學農民戰爭의 勃發" 景仁文化社 2002

18 朴孟洙, "敎祖伸寃運動期 參禮集會에 대한 再檢討" 28 : 2007

19 崔承熙, "增補版 韓國古文書硏究" 지식산업사 1989

20 "『한국민족문화대백과』의 ｢議送｣ 항목"

21 배항섭, "19세기 후반 민중운동과 公論" 한국사연구회 (161) : 313-347, 2013

22 홍동현, "1894년 ‘東徒’의 농민전쟁 참여와 그 성격" 역사문제연구소 12 (12): 169-198, 2008