본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

고려 성종대 歷史繼承意識의 전개 양상

Notions of “Historical Inheritance”(歷史繼承意識) that prevailed during Goryeo king Seongjong’s reign

1

조회

0

다운로드

20

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류기타인문학

초록

Examined in this article are historical beliefs the Goryeo people had during king Seongjong’s reign. There was a particular notion of “Three Han units being one(三韓一統意識, from the very beginning, and also later on),” which was related to the government’s efforts to establish the state system. And in the meantime, there was also the historical sense shared by many Goryeo people who believed that they succeeded the old Goguryeo dynasty(高句麗繼承意識) and inherited its legacy and property. Interestingly, this belief was directly used in the government’s pursuit of issues concerning Goryeo’s very own territory. Regarding the former case, we can examine Choi Seung-roh(崔承老)’s example. He considered founder king Taejo Wang Geon’s unification of the later three dynasties as essentially a unification of Go[gu]ryeo and Shilla, and in a peculiar manner excluded Baekje. We can see that he did not deny the notion of Goryeo inheriting Goguryeo’s legacy and position. But at the same time he also rather emphasized the “Three Han units were one” notion, as he wanted to stabilize the dynasty by forming unity among the Goryeo people. And regarding the latter, we can see the actions of Seo Hee(徐熙). While fighting the Khitans, the Goryeo government preliminarily decided to hand over the region north of the Daedong-gang river, revealing a sentiment that considered (the territory of) Goryeo as virtually the same with [that of] Shilla in the past. Then Seo Hi, who was dispatched to negotiate terms with the Khitan troops, argued that region above the Samgak-san(三角山) mountain had belonged to the late Goguryeo dynasty, and then building upon that, he managed to diplomatically retrieve the region east to the Abrok-gang(鴨綠江) river line(which had also been agreed upon earlier as the borderline between Goryeo and Sung), based upon the supposedly historical fact that ‘Goryeo succeeded Goguryeo.’ This is a clear example of the “Succeeding Goguryeo” belief being ideologically utilized in expanding Goryeo’s own territory. But after the expansion efforts were concluded, its meaning in the present gradually began to diminish.

Abstract

Examined in this article are historical beliefs the Goryeo people had during king Seongjong’s reign. There was a particular notion of “Three Han units being one(三韓一統意識, from the very beginning, and also later on),” which was related to the government’s efforts to establish the state system. And in the meantime, there was also the historical sense shared by many Goryeo people who believed that they succeeded the old Goguryeo dynasty(高句麗繼承意識) and inherited its legacy and property. Interestingly, this belief was directly used in the government’s pursuit of issues concerning Goryeo’s very own territory. Regarding the former case, we can examine Choi Seung-roh(崔承老)’s example. He considered founder king Taejo Wang Geon’s unification of the later three dynasties as essentially a unification of Go[gu]ryeo and Shilla, and in a peculiar manner excluded Baekje. We can see that he did not deny the notion of Goryeo inheriting Goguryeo’s legacy and position. But at the same time he also rather emphasized the “Three Han units were one” notion, as he wanted to stabilize the dynasty by forming unity among the Goryeo people. And regarding the latter, we can see the actions of Seo Hee(徐熙). While fighting the Khitans, the Goryeo government preliminarily decided to hand over the region north of the Daedong-gang river, revealing a sentiment that considered (the territory of) Goryeo as virtually the same with [that of] Shilla in the past. Then Seo Hi, who was dispatched to negotiate terms with the Khitan troops, argued that region above the Samgak-san(三角山) mountain had belonged to the late Goguryeo dynasty, and then building upon that, he managed to diplomatically retrieve the region east to the Abrok-gang(鴨綠江) river line(which had also been agreed upon earlier as the borderline between Goryeo and Sung), based upon the supposedly historical fact that ‘Goryeo succeeded Goguryeo.’ This is a clear example of the “Succeeding Goguryeo” belief being ideologically utilized in expanding Goryeo’s own territory. But after the expansion efforts were concluded, its meaning in the present gradually began to diminish.

참고문헌 (36)

  1. 朴漢卨, "高麗 王室의 起源: 高麗의 高句麗繼承理念과 關聯하여", 史叢, 21·22 (1977)
  2. 朴禮在, "高麗太祖 王建의 高句麗 復古意識", 공군사관학교논문집, 7 (1977)
  3. 金光洙, "高麗朝의 高句麗繼承意識과 古朝鮮認識", 歷史敎育, 43 (1988)
  4. 鄭求福, "高句麗의 ‘高麗’ 國號에 대한 一考: 三國史記의 기록과 관련하여", 湖西史學, 19·20 (1992)
  5. 高句麗硏究會, "徐熙와 高麗의 高句麗 繼承意識" (1999), 學硏文化社
  6. 안병우, "고구려와 고려의 역사적 계승 관계", 한국고대사연구, 33, pp.117~140 (2004), 한국고대사학회
  7. 朴漢卨, "高麗의 高句麗 繼承意識", 高句麗硏究, 18 (2004)
  8. 崔圭成, "중국의 東北工程의 실체와 高麗의 高句麗 繼承意識", 白山學報, 70 (2004)
  9. 박용운, "고려의 고구려계승에 대한 종합적 검토" (2006), 일지사
  10. 윤경진, "고려의 건국과 고구려계승의식 -‘弓裔의 高麗’에 대한 인식을 중심으로-", 한국문화, (68), pp.143~179 (2014), 규장각한국학연구원
  11. 윤경진, "고려의 三韓一統意識과 ‘開國’ 인식", 한국문화, (74), pp.335~375 (2016), 규장각한국학연구원
  12. 윤경진, "고려 동북 9성의 범위와 ‘公嶮鎭 立碑’ 문제", 역사와 실학, (61), pp.165~214 (2016), 역사실학회
  13. 윤경진, "신라 興德王代 체제 정비와 金庾信 追封 ― 三韓一統意識 출현의 일 배경 ―", 사림, (52), pp.105~142 (2015), 수선사학회
  14. 윤경진, "신라 神武-文聖王代의 정치 변동과 三韓一統意識의 출현", 신라문화, 46, pp.207~242 (2015), 신라문화연구소
  15. 윤경진, "신라 景文王의 통합 정책과 皇龍寺九層木塔의 改建 ― 9세기 三韓一統意識의 확립과 관련하여 ―", 韓國史學報, (61), pp.453~490 (2015), 고려사학회
  16. 河炫綱, "高麗時代의 歷史繼承意識", 梨花史學硏究, 8 (1975)
  17. 金哲埈, "趙明基華甲記念論叢" (1965)
  18. 吳瑛燮, "崔承老 上書文의 思想的 基盤과 歷史的 意義", 泰東古典硏究, 10 (1993)
  19. "高麗史", ~
  20. 권덕영, "唐 墓誌의 고대 한반도 삼국 명칭에 대한 검토", 한국고대사연구, (75), pp.105~138 (2014), 한국고대사학회
  21. "海東繹史 續集 권10, 地理考10 高麗", ~
  22. 신안식, "高麗前期의 兩界制와 '邊境'", 한국중세사연구, (18), pp.215~244 (2005), 한국중세사학회
  23. 윤경진, "고려 태조-광종대 북방 개척과 州鎭 설치: 『高麗史』 地理志 北界 州鎭 연혁의 분석과 補正", 규장각, (37), pp.251~288 (2010), 규장각한국학연구원
  24. "遼史", ~
  25. 김순자, "10-11세기 高麗와 遼의 영토 정책: 압록강선 확보 문제 중심으로", 北方史論叢, 11, pp.247~248 (2006)
  26. 이미지, "고려 성종대 地界劃定의 성립과 그 외교적 의미", 한국중세사연구, (24), pp.5~34 (2008), 한국중세사학회
  27. "新唐書 권227, 列傳145 東夷 高麗", ~
  28. "三國史記", ~
  29. 노태돈, "삼국통일전쟁사" (2009), 서울대학교 출판문화원
  30. 노태돈, "7세기 전쟁의 성격을 둘러싼 논의", 한국사연구, (154), pp.329~345 (2011), 한국사연구회
  31. 金瑛河, "新羅의 百濟統合戰爭과 體制變化", 韓國古代史硏究, 16 (1999)
  32. 김영하, "7세기 후반 한국사의 인식문제 -신라의 백제통합론과 삼국통일론을 중심으로-", 한국사연구, (146), pp.361~389 (2009), 한국사연구회
  33. 김영하, "신라의 ‘통일’영역 문제-교과서 내용의 시정을 위한 제언-", 韓國史學報, (56), pp.7~32 (2014), 고려사학회
  34. 윤경진, "고구려 ‘南平壤’의 실체와 출현 배경", 서울과 역사, (95), pp.7~53 (2017), 서울역사편찬원
  35. "宋史 권491, 列傳250 外國7 定安國", ~
  36. 金渭顯, "遼代 渤海 復興運動의 性格", 명대논문집, 11 (1978)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)