지중해 지역문명 간 교류 연구의 정책적 활용

Abstract

Whether to recognize the Mediterranean Sea as a ‘Closed Sea’ or to define it as an ‘Open Sea’ is closely related to the historical research tradition in Europe. The former limits the geographical boundaries of the study to the Mediterranean Sea and its surrounding regions (the Mediterranean Sea between Europe and Africa). The latter, on the other hand, is the result of interpretation according to the perspective of interchange between local civilizations. In historical studies, geographical boundaries and cultural boundaries do not coincide. Therefore, the historical interpretation of the two perspectives shows completely different results. This study examines the historical problems of the ancient and medieval Mediterranean in the context of the series of problems faced by modern Europe (The influx of african refugees in Europe, ‘Grexit’ and ‘Brexit’). In other words, most of the problems are due to Euro-centrism. The view of open sea is a viewpoint of interchange between civilizations and also a viewpoint of competitive cooperation. Based on this, in ancient and medieval history, the Mediterranean was not the boundary of civilization and barbarism, nor the sea of ancient Greek city civilization. Many local civilizations in Africa-Eurasia were the history of the balance of relationships established through the process of complementary exchange and contact. This implies an improvement in the history of the Mediterranean-European region. First, the meaning of difference in historical studies should be interpreted as diversity, not discrimination. Second, interpretation of the history of the Mediterranean as a dichotomy of civilization and barbarism is a distortion of history. Third, interpretation of the Mediterranean history should be based on the composition of competitive cooperation. Fourth, in the ancient and medieval periods of the Mediterranean, the Alexander Empire, the Roman Empire and the Sicilian kingdom of Friedrich II were experiments for the realization of coexistence of the Mediterranean multi-culturalism. In the development of history, violent means such as war were mobilized, but there was active exchange in the background. History distortion occurs when both sides of history are not considered together. At this point, the historical meaning of the conflict is misinterpreted as evolution (or development). The problem of North African refugees comes from misinterpretation of history. Inter-racial discrimination is a one-sided rejection of the other, and the logic of cross-cultural superiority is only used as a justification for the logic of domination-domination. Different interpretations reveal new history. Even in the case of historical studies, the complementary composition of the relevant factors (the framework of competitive cooperation) will be an alternative to the European civilization crisis.