발해시대 遼東지역의 귀속 문제
The Question of Where Liaodong Area Has to Belong in Balhae Period
0
조회
0
다운로드
19
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It has been being discussed where Liaodong area has to belong in Balhae Period. While it has been thought that Liaodong area was not the part of Balhae’s territory in its early studies, yet in these days, some views which shows Liaodong belongs to Balhae’s territory are being increased. Accordingly, as a consequence of reviewing concerned historical sources supporting the idea that Liaodong area belongs to Balhae’s territory, it could be worked to confirm that there are little conclusive proof in that idea. As Liaodong area was neither the part of Balhae’s territory nor Tang dynasty’s, it could be considered the buffer zone between Balhae and Tang. Liaodong area, a buffer zone, did its role to ease off the tension on the relationship between two countries and to help Balhae expand its domain northest. In the early 10th century, Khitan firstly advanced to the northeast, where already Balhae’s especially strengthened troops had been stationed. Therefore Khitan went into Liaodong area, wheeling about its direction to the southeast. Balhae kept Khitan in check by taking diplomatic steps with Shilla and old Chinese dynasties at that times. However, Balhae changed its policy into an aggressive attack to Khitan because Khitan began to territorialize Liaodong area. After Khitan attacked Buyeo prefecture of Balhae in the northeast, then it took Balhae’s capital in a short time. Because of those events, it could be assumed that Balhae concentrated on the front toward Liaodong in that process. Meanwhile, Balhae dispatched its envoy to Khitan only one time. It resulted from the fact that Balhae put its stress on the friendly relationship with Tang dynasty. Balhae couldn’t take positive action the big change according to the appearance of Khitan. Balhae was preoccupied with the world orders which had been made around Tang dynasty. As a result, Balhae eventually fell into ruin.
Abstract
It has been being discussed where Liaodong area has to belong in Balhae Period. While it has been thought that Liaodong area was not the part of Balhae’s territory in its early studies, yet in these days, some views which shows Liaodong belongs to Balhae’s territory are being increased. Accordingly, as a consequence of reviewing concerned historical sources supporting the idea that Liaodong area belongs to Balhae’s territory, it could be worked to confirm that there are little conclusive proof in that idea. As Liaodong area was neither the part of Balhae’s territory nor Tang dynasty’s, it could be considered the buffer zone between Balhae and Tang. Liaodong area, a buffer zone, did its role to ease off the tension on the relationship between two countries and to help Balhae expand its domain northest. In the early 10th century, Khitan firstly advanced to the northeast, where already Balhae’s especially strengthened troops had been stationed. Therefore Khitan went into Liaodong area, wheeling about its direction to the southeast. Balhae kept Khitan in check by taking diplomatic steps with Shilla and old Chinese dynasties at that times. However, Balhae changed its policy into an aggressive attack to Khitan because Khitan began to territorialize Liaodong area. After Khitan attacked Buyeo prefecture of Balhae in the northeast, then it took Balhae’s capital in a short time. Because of those events, it could be assumed that Balhae concentrated on the front toward Liaodong in that process. Meanwhile, Balhae dispatched its envoy to Khitan only one time. It resulted from the fact that Balhae put its stress on the friendly relationship with Tang dynasty. Balhae couldn’t take positive action the big change according to the appearance of Khitan. Balhae was preoccupied with the world orders which had been made around Tang dynasty. As a result, Balhae eventually fell into ruin.
참고문헌 (49)
- 김종복, "발해사의 전개와 영역 변천, In 발해 5경과 영역 변천" (2007), 동북아역사재단
- 宋基豪, "柳得恭의 渤海考와 成海應, In 朝鮮의 政治와 社會", pp.810~ (2002), 집문당
- 丁若鏞, "아방강역고", pp.182~ (2001), 現代實學社
- 松井等, "渤海國の疆域, In 滿洲歷史地理 1", pp.422~ (1913), 丸善株式會社
- 鳥山喜一, "渤海史考", pp.300~302 (1915), 奉公會
- 津田左右吉, "遼の遼東經略", 滿鮮地理歷史硏究報告, 3 (1916)
- 津田左右吉, "津田左右吉全集 12", pp.201~ (1964), 岩波書店
- 津田左右吉, "渤海考", 滿鮮地理歷史硏究報告, 1 (1915)
- 津田左右吉, "津田左右吉全集 12" (1964), 岩波書店
- 丁謙, "新唐書北狄列傳地理考證", 浙江圖書館叢書第一集, pp.15~16 (1915)
- 金毓黻, "東北通史" (1941), 國立東北大學 東北史地經濟硏究室
- 島田好, "渤海中京顯德府卽遼陽說", 滿洲學報, 2 (1933)
- 島田好, "唐末の遼東", 滿洲學報, 3 (1934)
- 白鳥庫吉, "渤海史上の難問題に就いて", 史學雜誌, pp.46~49 (1934)
- "白鳥庫吉全集 5", pp.508~ (1970), 岩波書店
- 和田淸, "渤海國地理考", 東洋學報, 36(4) (1954)
- 和田淸, "東亞史硏究(滿洲篇)", pp.112~ (1955), 東洋文庫
- 日野開三郞, "小高句麗國の硏究" (1984), 三一書房
- 盧泰敦, "高句麗 遺民史 硏究, In 韓㳓劤博士停年紀念史學論叢", pp.86~ (1981), 지식산업사
- 古畑徹, "いわゆる小高句麗國の存否問題", 東洋史硏究, 51(2), pp.208~ (1992)
- 손영종, "발해의 서변에 대하여", 력사과학, pp.2~ (1980)
- 손영종, "발해사연구론문집 1" (1992), 과학백과사전종합출판사
- 장국종, "발해사연구 1", pp.53~58 (1997), 사회과학출판사
- 魏國忠, "渤海王國據有遼東考", 龍江史苑 (1985)
- 魏國忠, "高句麗 渤海硏究集成, In 渤海卷(2)" (1997), 哈爾濱出版社
- 孫進己, "渤海疆域考", 北方論叢 (1982)
- 孫進己, "高句麗 渤海硏究集成, In 渤海卷(2)", 哈爾濱出版社
- 翰林大學, "春川", 아시아文化硏究所, 102~ (1988)
- 王承禮, "中國東北的渤海國與東北亞", pp.156~ (2000), 吉林文史出版社
- 魏國忠, "渤海國史", pp.179~180 (2006), 中國社會科學出版社
- 宋基豪, "渤海政治史硏究", pp.149~150 (1995), 一潮閣
- 한규철, "渤海國의 서쪽 邊境에 관한 연구", 역사와경계, 47(47), pp.73~96 (2003), 부산경남사학회
- 金鎭光, "발해 문왕대의 지배체제 연구", 박사, pp.2007
- 河內春人, "東アジアにおける安史の亂の影響と新羅征討計劃", 日本歷史, 561 (1995)
- 赤羽目匡由, "いわゆる賈耽<道里記>の<營州入安東道>について", 史學雜誌, pp.116~118 (2007)
- 古畑徹, "唐渤紛爭の展開と國際情勢", 集刊東洋學, 55 (1986)
- 金渭顯, "契丹的東北政策", pp.22~23 (1981), 華世出版社
- 姜鳳龍, "新羅 下代 浿江鎭의 設置와 運營--州郡縣體制의 확대와 관련하여", 韓國 古代社會의 地方支配, 11, pp.207~ (1997), 韓國古代史硏究
- 韓圭哲, "渤海의 對外關係史", pp.130~131 (1994), 신서원
- 酒寄雅志, "渤海國家の史的展開と國際關係", 朝鮮史硏究會論文集, 16 (1979)
- 酒寄雅志, "渤海と古代の日本", pp.86~ (2001), 校倉書房
- 임상선, "발해의 지배세력연구", pp.120~121 (1999), 신서원
- 김기섭, "발해의 멸망과정과 원인", 한국고대사연구, (50), pp.103~132 (2008), 한국고대사학회
- 池內宏, "鐵利考", 滿鮮地理歷史硏究報告, (3) (1916)
- 池內宏, "滿鮮史硏究 中世1", pp.77~78 (1933), 吉川弘文館
- 三上次男, "渤海國の滅亡事情に關する一考察, In 和田淸博士還曆記念 東洋史論叢" (1951)
- 三上次男, "高句麗と渤海" (1990), 吉川弘文館
- 朴玉杰, "高麗時代 歸化人 硏究", pp.93~ (1996), 國學資料院
- 김종복, "남북국(南北國)의 책봉호(冊封號)에 대한 기초적 검토", 역사와 현실, (61), pp.61~85 (2006), 한국역사연구회