의자왕대 백제에 대한 당의 인식 변화 -외교문서의 분석을 중심으로- = Changes in the perception of Tang toward Baekje during the period of King Euija -Centering on the analysis of a diplomatic document-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article aims to examine changes in the perception of Tang(唐) dynasty toward Baekje, which were seen Tang’s diplomatic document during the period of King Euija(義慈王). The rescript sent to King Mu(武王) or Tang’s attitude on the funeral of King Mu, showed that Tang dynasty was amicable to Baekje when King Euija ascended the throne. Tang dynasty’s friendly perception toward Baekje remained until the early reign of King Euija. However, Silla complained of pincer movement by Goguryeo and Baekje, then it gave Tang two causes that the tribute road was blocked and Silla faced the crisis to be destroyed. Tang began to suspect Baekje of a collaborator for Goguryeo, which caused a crack in Tang’s perception around Baekje. Goguryeo-Tang war became an opportunity to improve Tang’s suspicion about Baekje. Tang kept suspecting Baekje in the early part of the war preparation, but decreased its suspicion in a certain degree because of Baekje``s positive elucidation by sending the prince Buyeo Gangshin(扶餘康 信). According to the analysis of rescript to Baekje and Silla, which were sent at the almost same time in the early period of 645, we can find out that Tang had more confidence to Silla than Baekje at least about the war preparation. It is hard to tell only with the rescript whether Tang``s regular relations between both kingdoms kept in the same manner like above. While Silla supported Tang actively by sending reinforcements in the Goguryeo-Tang war, Baekje merely supplied Tang with arms and attacked Silla. Therefore Tang could not remove the suspicion around Baekje, but rather assumed that Goguryeo and Baekje collaborated. As Tang distrusted seriously Baekje since Goguryeo-Tang war, Silla took advantage of this moment to organize an alliance with Tang. On the other hand, Baekje concentrated on attacking Silla instead of having negative relationship with Tang, but it could not yield desired result. Rather Baekje was placed on the defensive because of Kim Yushin(金庾 信)``s military activities. When Taizong(太宗) of Tang dynasty died and Gaozong(高宗) was crowned, Baekje sent an envoy to sound Tang out. In the rescript, Tang clearly showed that it stood on the side of Silla after the alliance. As Baekje tried improving Tang’s attitude once again to fail, it did not send any envoy more to Tang. Since then Baekje only could choose to strengthen relations with Goguryeo and Wae(倭).

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 장미애, "의자왕대 정치세력의 변화와 대외정책" 한국역사연구회 (85) : 225-258, 2012

2 김수태, "삼국의 외교적 협력과 경쟁 - 7세기 신라와 백제의 외교전을 중심으로-" 신라문화연구소 (24) : 23-38, 2004

3 노중국, "백제사회사상사" 지식산업사 2010

4 윤진석, "백제멸망기 ‘태자’ 문제의 재검토 - 관련사료 분석과 기존견해 비판을 중심으로 -" 부경역사연구소 (29) : 113-142, 2011

5 주보돈, "금석문과 신라사" 지식산업사 2002

6 盧重國, "高句麗ㆍ百濟ㆍ新羅사이의 力關係變化에 대한 一考察" 28 : 1981

7 "隋書"

8 朱甫暾, "金春秋의 外交活動과 新羅內政" 啓明大韓國學硏究院 20 : 1993

9 "資治通鑑"

10 "舊唐書"

11 金善昱, "百濟의 隋唐關係小考" 15 : 1984

12 金壽泰, "百濟의 滅亡과 唐" 22 : 1991

13 "新唐書"

14 "文館詞林"

15 "唐會要"

16 "唐大詔令集"

17 張榮芳, "唐代史書의 百濟에 對한 記錄과 認識" 21 : 1990

18 中村裕一, "唐代制勅硏究" 汲古書院 1991

19 石見淸裕, "唐.太宗期の韓半島三國と中國との外交交涉史料" 일본연구소 (22) : 5-23, 2004

20 鄭孝雲, "古代韓日政治交涉史硏究" 學硏文化社 1995

21 "冊府元龜"

22 "三國史記"

23 박준형, "『文館詞林』에 보이는 蔣元昌과 蔣氏家門 醫官" 역사학회 (222) : 189-218, 2014

24 정동준, "7세기 중반 백제의 대외정책" 한국역사연구회 (61) : 119-145, 2006

25 박윤선, "7세기 전반 삼국의 역관계와 백제의 대당외교 - 백제의 입장을 중심으로" 역사문화연구소 (27) : 3-33, 2007

26 정동준, "7세기 전반 백제의 대외정책" 한국역사연구회 (46) : 37-72, 2002

27 김은숙, "7세기 동아시아의 국제 관계―수의 등장 이후 백제 멸망까지를 중심으로―" 한일관계사학회 (26) : 45-93, 2007

28 방향숙, "5~7世紀 中國王朝들의 百濟에 대한 認識과 外交 戰略의 變化" 백제연구소 (57) : 53-80, 2013