본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

조선 세조대 ‘女眞 和解事’에 대한 연구 - 申叔舟의 파견을 중심으로 -

The “Jurchen Reconciliation” during the Reign of King Sejo: Focusing on the Dispatch of Shin Sukju

1

조회

0

다운로드

16

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류역사학

초록

The Uryangkhad (兀良合) and the Odoli (斡朶里) moved southward to the current Southern Manchurian area to escape from the invasion of Oljeokhap (兀狄合). Since that, time conflict and struggle were repeated. The representative event of this conflict and struggle was the defeat of Tong Monqke Temur (童猛哥帖木兒), the head of the Odoli. The conflict sometimes caused a movement of reconciliation, but during the reign of King Sejong (世宗), it was decided to disperse power and to divide the Jurchen to be more helpful in the defense of the six commanderies rather than to seek reconciliation or integration. The Joseon’s policy began to change along with the reign of King Sejo (世祖). He stressed the legitimacy of the enthronement by noting the so called “heavenly calling,” which was also stressed in his diplomacy. King Sejo promoted the “Jurchen Reconciliation” (女眞 和解事) by dispatching Shin Sukju (申叔舟). This was made by boasting of the newly established power’s legitimacy even though it was caused by the conflicts between the Jurchens. Shin supervised the “Jurchen Reconciliation” in the six commanderies in Hamgil Province (咸吉道) for 80 days. First, he visited the five commanderies near the Tumen River in person and attracted that participation of various chiefs of the Odoli and the Uryangkhad. In the next place, he sent the intention of King Sejo to Uryangkhad leaders (諸種兀狄哈) in a translated into the Jurchen language. When he sent that letter, he used chiefs who had deep relations with Joseon. Finally, he attempted to get compassion from those leaders by giving a cordial reception of wives and children of captured Uryangkhad. Finally,the “Jurchen Reconciliation” was successful due to the participation of the Uryangkhad. However, Ming China objected to the diplomatic relations of the Jurchens of the three commanderies in Jianzhou (建州三衛) with Joseon, and the fact that Nangpaeahan (浪孛兒罕), a supporter of Joseon, interfered in the reconciliation and betrayed Joseon transformed the relations between Joseon and Ming China and the Jurchen. Joseon accepted the request of Ming China regarding the Geonjusamui of Amnok River and declared not to make a communication with them. However, Joseon beheaded the family of Nangbalahan in Amnok River. Although Ming raised the issue of the punishment of Nangpaeahan, Joseon tried to conquer the Moryeonui (毛憐衛). Accordingly, Joseon’s recognition of the Amnok River and the Tuman River basin seemed different. Such recognition took place right after the foundation of Joseon. Since then, it was linked to Gongheomjin (公險眞), which Yun Gwan (尹瓘) of Goryeo had opened after the dispute with Ming China regarding the naming of Jurchen groups. And Joseon had in mind that the north of Tuman river basin,unlike the Amnok River basin, could be incorporated into Joseon’s territory by installing a commandery directly. Thus, the Jurchen in the adjacent areas of The six commanderies north of Tuman River basin intended to comply with the regulations and instructions of Joseon. While the Jurchen Reconciliation during King Sejo’s reign was executed to bring stability in the Tuman river basin, it was conducted under this recognition and background.

Abstract

The Uryangkhad (兀良合) and the Odoli (斡朶里) moved southward to the current Southern Manchurian area to escape from the invasion of Oljeokhap (兀狄合). Since that, time conflict and struggle were repeated. The representative event of this conflict and struggle was the defeat of Tong Monqke Temur (童猛哥帖木兒), the head of the Odoli. The conflict sometimes caused a movement of reconciliation, but during the reign of King Sejong (世宗), it was decided to disperse power and to divide the Jurchen to be more helpful in the defense of the six commanderies rather than to seek reconciliation or integration. The Joseon’s policy began to change along with the reign of King Sejo (世祖). He stressed the legitimacy of the enthronement by noting the so called “heavenly calling,” which was also stressed in his diplomacy. King Sejo promoted the “Jurchen Reconciliation” (女眞 和解事) by dispatching Shin Sukju (申叔舟). This was made by boasting of the newly established power’s legitimacy even though it was caused by the conflicts between the Jurchens. Shin supervised the “Jurchen Reconciliation” in the six commanderies in Hamgil Province (咸吉道) for 80 days. First, he visited the five commanderies near the Tumen River in person and attracted that participation of various chiefs of the Odoli and the Uryangkhad. In the next place, he sent the intention of King Sejo to Uryangkhad leaders (諸種兀狄哈) in a translated into the Jurchen language. When he sent that letter, he used chiefs who had deep relations with Joseon. Finally, he attempted to get compassion from those leaders by giving a cordial reception of wives and children of captured Uryangkhad. Finally,the “Jurchen Reconciliation” was successful due to the participation of the Uryangkhad. However, Ming China objected to the diplomatic relations of the Jurchens of the three commanderies in Jianzhou (建州三衛) with Joseon, and the fact that Nangpaeahan (浪孛兒罕), a supporter of Joseon, interfered in the reconciliation and betrayed Joseon transformed the relations between Joseon and Ming China and the Jurchen. Joseon accepted the request of Ming China regarding the Geonjusamui of Amnok River and declared not to make a communication with them. However, Joseon beheaded the family of Nangbalahan in Amnok River. Although Ming raised the issue of the punishment of Nangpaeahan, Joseon tried to conquer the Moryeonui (毛憐衛). Accordingly, Joseon’s recognition of the Amnok River and the Tuman River basin seemed different. Such recognition took place right after the foundation of Joseon. Since then, it was linked to Gongheomjin (公險眞), which Yun Gwan (尹瓘) of Goryeo had opened after the dispute with Ming China regarding the naming of Jurchen groups. And Joseon had in mind that the north of Tuman river basin,unlike the Amnok River basin, could be incorporated into Joseon’s territory by installing a commandery directly. Thus, the Jurchen in the adjacent areas of The six commanderies north of Tuman River basin intended to comply with the regulations and instructions of Joseon. While the Jurchen Reconciliation during King Sejo’s reign was executed to bring stability in the Tuman river basin, it was conducted under this recognition and background.

참고문헌 (52)

  1. "고려사", ~
  2. "태조실록", ~
  3. "태종실록", ~
  4. "세종실록", ~
  5. "단종실록", ~
  6. "세조실록", ~
  7. "龍飛御天歌", ~
  8. "北征錄", ~
  9. "元史", ~
  10. "明太宗實錄", ~
  11. "明英宗實錄", ~
  12. "大明一統志", ~
  13. "大明會典", ~
  14. 강성문, "朝鮮시대 女眞征伐에 관한 연구", 軍史, 18 (1989), 국방부 군사편찬연구소
  15. 김구진, "驪末鮮初 豆滿江 流域의 女眞 分布", 백산학보, 15 (1973)
  16. 김구진, "吾音會의 斡朶里 女眞에 對한 硏究", 사총, 17(18) (1973)
  17. 김구진, "骨看 兀狄哈 女眞 硏究", 사총 (1976)
  18. 金九鎭, "13C~17C女眞 社會의 硏究: 金 滅亡 以後 淸 建國 以前까지 女眞社會의 組織을 中心으로", 박사, 사학, pp.1989
  19. 김상태, "朝鮮 世祖代의 圜丘壇 復設과 그 性格", 한국학연구, 6(7) (1996)
  20. 김순남, "조선 成宗代 兀狄哈에 대하여", 조선시대사학보, (49), pp.35~63 (2009), 조선시대사학회
  21. 김순남, "16세기 조선과 野人 사이의 모피 교역의 전개", 한국사연구, (152), pp.71~108 (2011), 한국사연구회
  22. 김태영, "朝鮮초기 世祖王權의 專制性에 대한 一考察", 한국사연구, 87 (1994)
  23. 남의현, "明代 兀良哈·女眞의 成長과 遼東都司의 危機", 만주연구, 3 (2005)
  24. 남의현, "명대 요동도사 지배의 한계에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2006
  25. 남의현, "명대요동지배정책연구" (2008), 강원대출판부
  26. 박원호, "宣德年間(1425~1435) 明과 朝鮮間의 建州女眞", 아세아연구, 85 (1992)
  27. 박원호, "明初朝鮮關係史硏究" (2002), 일조각
  28. 박정민, "세조대의 여진관계와 정책 -여진인 來朝를 중심으로-", 한국사연구, (151), pp.103~135 (2010), 한국사연구회
  29. 서병국, "童猛哥帖木兒의 建州左衛硏究", 백산학보, 11 (1971)
  30. 서인범, "명대의 遼東都司와 東寧衛", 명청사연구, (23), pp.97~122 (2005), 명청사학회
  31. 송기중, "《太祖實錄》에 등장하는 蒙古語名과 女眞語名(Ⅱ)", 진단학보, 73 (1992)
  32. 유봉영, "王朝實錄에 나타난 李朝前期의 野人", 백산학보, 14 (1973)
  33. 유재춘, "중・근세 韓・中間 국경완충지대의 형성과 경계인식 -14세기~15세기를 중심으로-", 한일관계사연구, (39), pp.159~204 (2011), 한일관계사학회
  34. 이인영, "申叔舟의 北征, In 韓國滿洲關係史의 硏究" (1954), 을유문화사
  35. 조영록, "入關前 明·鮮時代의 滿洲女眞史", 백산학보, 22 (1977)
  36. 한성주, "두만강지역 여진인 동향 보고서의 분석-『端宗實錄』기사를 중심으로-", 사학연구, (86), pp.39~97 (2007), 한국사학회
  37. 한성주, "朝鮮初期 朝 明 二重受職女眞人의 兩屬問題", 조선시대사학보, 40(40), pp.5~44 (2007), 조선시대사학회
  38. 한성주, "조선 세조대 毛憐衛 征伐과 여진인의 從軍에 대하여", 강원사학, 22(23) (2008)
  39. 한성주, "朝鮮前期 ‘字小’에 대한 고찰-對馬島 倭人 및 女眞 勢力을 중심으로-", 한일관계사연구, (33), pp.203~236 (2009), 한일관계사학회
  40. 한성주, "조선전기 두만강유역 ‘女眞 藩籬・藩胡’의 형성과 성격", 韓國史學報, (41), pp.163~201 (2010), 고려사학회
  41. 한형주, "朝鮮 世祖代의 祭天禮에 대한 硏究-太·世宗代 祭天禮와의 비교 검토를 중심으로", 진단학보, 81 (1996)
  42. 황선희, "세조 초기의 여진관계와 북정", 석사, 사학, pp.2007
  43. 高橋公明, "朝鮮遣使ブ-ムと世祖の王權, In 日本前近代の國家と對外關係" (1987), 吉川弘文館
  44. 中村榮孝, "朝鮮世祖の圜丘壇祭祀について(上)", 朝鮮學報, 54 (1970)
  45. 河內良弘, "申叔舟の女眞出兵", 朝鮮學報, 71 (1974)
  46. 河內良弘, "朝鮮世祖の字小主義とその挫折, In 明代女眞史の硏究" (1992), 同朋舍
  47. ケネス·R·ロビンソン, "一四五五年三月の人名記錄にみる朝鮮王朝の受職野人", 年報 朝鮮學, 6 (1997)
  48. ケネス·R·ロビンソン, "朝鮮王朝-受職女眞人の關係と‘朝鮮’", 歷史評論, 592 (1999)
  49. 姜龍範, "明代中朝關系史" (1999), 黑龍江朝鮮民族出版社
  50. 建文, "論明代對東疆地區的管轄問題", 北方文物, 2 (1995)
  51. 王冬芳, "關于明代中朝邊界形成的硏究", 中國邊疆史地硏究, 3 (1997)
  52. 王臻, "朝鮮前期與明建州女眞關係硏究" (2005), 中國文史出版社

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)