본문 바로가기
KERD
논문원문KCI 등재

箕子朝鮮說의 사회학적 검증과 ‘犯禁8條’의 실체

Sociological Scrutiny of Gija Joseon and the Fact about the Code of Eight Prohibitions

10

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류역사학

초록

Some Chinese historians of traditional era argued that in the 11th Century BCE King Wu of Zhou enfeoffed Gija as the Lord of Joseon and subsequently he established Gija Joseon and became the harbinger of civilization. The Northeast Project, initiated by China nearly a decade ago, has carried forward the same argument. However, if we apply empirical methodology of sociology, we come to the conclusion that the theory of “Gija Joseon” lacks historical substance. The only existing material remains of Gija of the 11th century BCE is the ‘tomb of Gija’ which still exists at the same location where it was originally made-- the Cha county, located in the south-western part of Shandong Province. This piece of evidence clearly demonstrates that Gija did not come to GoJoseon to assume kingship and nor did he die on the Korean peninsula. It is apparent that he lived and died in the vicinity of the capital of the ancient Chinese state of Shang. Furthermore, the scope of power of the state Zhou did not extend to GoJoseon in the early period of its establishment which implies that GoJoseon lay outside the sphere of Zhou’s power and King Wu did not have authority to enfeoff Gija as the Lord of Joseon. Shangshu of Confucius records that in the thirteenth year of his reign King Wu of Zhou travelled to the place where Gija lived a life of retirement to discuss with him the principles of government. It is unambiguously evident that Gija lived in the territory of ancient China and the place where he lived and died was in such close proximity of the capital of Zhou that King Wu could travel there to seek his advice. The theory of Gija Joseon was manufactured and transmitted to the posterity without any solid supporting evidence by Chinese historians Fu Sheng and Sima Qian in their works Shangshu dazhuan and Shiji respectively nearly 1000 years subsequent to the time of Gija. If we analyse their motivation and objective from the sociological point of view we realize that the theory of Gija Joseon was invented as a mode of legitimization of the invasion of GoJoseon by the Emperor Wu of Han. . Emperor Wu needed to induce self-sacrificing and patriotic spirit of his subjects to win the protracted war against a formidable enemy which in turn made it necessary that he justified the war to the political forces of his times and also overcame the opposition of peasant-soldiers who were the worst victims of this lengthy war. The historians of ancient China manufactured the theory of Gija Joseon as an ideology that served the political interests of the state and legitimized the invasion of GoJoseon. It is obvious that the “Theory of Gija Joseon” is not a ‘historical fact’ but an insubstantial ideology that was invented or manufactured for justifying and legitimizing the war against GoJoseon launched by Emperor Wu of Han.

Abstract

Some Chinese historians of traditional era argued that in the 11th Century BCE King Wu of Zhou enfeoffed Gija as the Lord of Joseon and subsequently he established Gija Joseon and became the harbinger of civilization. The Northeast Project, initiated by China nearly a decade ago, has carried forward the same argument. However, if we apply empirical methodology of sociology, we come to the conclusion that the theory of “Gija Joseon” lacks historical substance. The only existing material remains of Gija of the 11th century BCE is the ‘tomb of Gija’ which still exists at the same location where it was originally made-- the Cha county, located in the south-western part of Shandong Province. This piece of evidence clearly demonstrates that Gija did not come to GoJoseon to assume kingship and nor did he die on the Korean peninsula. It is apparent that he lived and died in the vicinity of the capital of the ancient Chinese state of Shang. Furthermore, the scope of power of the state Zhou did not extend to GoJoseon in the early period of its establishment which implies that GoJoseon lay outside the sphere of Zhou’s power and King Wu did not have authority to enfeoff Gija as the Lord of Joseon. Shangshu of Confucius records that in the thirteenth year of his reign King Wu of Zhou travelled to the place where Gija lived a life of retirement to discuss with him the principles of government. It is unambiguously evident that Gija lived in the territory of ancient China and the place where he lived and died was in such close proximity of the capital of Zhou that King Wu could travel there to seek his advice. The theory of Gija Joseon was manufactured and transmitted to the posterity without any solid supporting evidence by Chinese historians Fu Sheng and Sima Qian in their works Shangshu dazhuan and Shiji respectively nearly 1000 years subsequent to the time of Gija. If we analyse their motivation and objective from the sociological point of view we realize that the theory of Gija Joseon was invented as a mode of legitimization of the invasion of GoJoseon by the Emperor Wu of Han. . Emperor Wu needed to induce self-sacrificing and patriotic spirit of his subjects to win the protracted war against a formidable enemy which in turn made it necessary that he justified the war to the political forces of his times and also overcame the opposition of peasant-soldiers who were the worst victims of this lengthy war. The historians of ancient China manufactured the theory of Gija Joseon as an ideology that served the political interests of the state and legitimized the invasion of GoJoseon. It is obvious that the “Theory of Gija Joseon” is not a ‘historical fact’ but an insubstantial ideology that was invented or manufactured for justifying and legitimizing the war against GoJoseon launched by Emperor Wu of Han.

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)

다운로드