만국공법의 두 가지 지평과 구한말 유학

Abstract

In the latter half of nineteenth century, ‘Manguogongfa(萬國公法)’ was regarded as a term referring to international law. According to previous studies, in 1880’s conservative confucian scholars rejected ‘Manguogongfa’, while reformist confucian scholars insisting on accepting and utilizing it, but, since 1890, the former showed a tendency to point out the injustice of Japanese aggression against Chosŏn under According to previous studies, in 1880’s conservative confucian scholars rejected ‘Manguogongfa’, while the latter began to grasp it negatively. In this paper, firstly, it has been pointed out that the horizon of nationalism and the horizon of natural law were mixed in ‘Manguogongfa’. Then, this paper reveals that both reformist Confucian scholars and conservative Confucian scholars commonly viewed the world order at that time as Chinese ancient times, according to traditional preconceptions. Reformists, viewing the world at that time as the Warring States period(戰國時代) in Chinese history, looked upon ‘Manguogongfa’ as a international treaty(“從約”), while conservative scholars such as Choi Ik-hyeon and Gwak Jong-seok viewing the world as the Spring And The Autumn period(春秋時代), regarded that as an alliance treaty. Thorough this process, the horizon of nationalism in ‘Manguogongfa’ was largely accepted by reformist scholars, and that of natural law in it was embraced by conservative scholars. As the international law system at the time denied the past China－centered world system, the acceptance of ‘Manguogongfa’ would have caused a profound change in the world view of conservative Confucian scholars. However, they emphasized the elements of natural law contained in Manguogongfa or Gongfahuitong(公法會通), interpreted it as Confucian values, and conceived international relations in accordance with Confucian values. On the other hand, they fought against the horizon of nationalism in ‘Manguogongfa’, for the notion of modern nation that conforms to Hegel's theory of state was unfamiliar to them. From the modern perspective, the view of the conservative Confucian scholars who opposed nationalism seems to be anachronistic. However, looking at the twentieth century as a history of competing between nationalism and globalism, we can say that the Confucian reinterpretation of ‘Manguogongfa’ still has a modern meaning.