渤海 康王代 對外交涉의 전개와 그 의미

안재성 한국고대사학회 2022 韓國古代史硏究 Vol.- No.106

This article is a study on the development process and purpose of foreign negotiations during the reign of King Kang(康王). King Kang of Parhae actively carried forward negotiations with the Tang dynasty and Japan, which strengthened his royal authority. Therefore, analyzing and reviewing the records of foreign negotiations during this period will be a necessary task to identify the background and purpose of the negotiations by King Kang. The negotiations during the reign of King Kang were mainly conducted in regard to investiture(冊封). The title of “King of Parhae Prefecture(渤海郡王),” which he received in 795, was a relatively degraded investiture compared to the previous King Mun(文王)’s “King of Parhae Kingdom(渤海國王)”. In response, King Kang dispatched Malgal Commander-in-Chief(靺鞨都督) Mirago(密阿古) to change Tang’s recognition, and eventually regained his status as “King of Parhae Kingdom” in 798. Yet, because of the clash between Tang and Ziqing Domain Garrison(淄靑藩鎭), negotiations with Tang were halted, which led to Malgal’s exclusive negotiation. To overcome the crisis, King Kang resumed negotiations with Tang. Later, in accordance with the international situation, the king dispatched envoys. As a result, King Kang was repeatedly invested by Tang from 805 to 806 AD; through negotiations with Tang, King Kang could retain the legitimacy of his throne. Meanwhile, King Kang actively negotiated with Japan as well. In the process of negotiations, while King Kang accepted Emperor Kammu(桓武天皇)’s demands, he attained Parhae’s stands such as “restriction of the number of envoys” and “withdrawal of the limit on envoy visit” to Japan. In this way, King Kang reorganized the system of negotiations with Japan and strengthened the control over the negotiation right. However, negotiations with Japan during the reign of King Kang were no longer carried out after 799; it was because King Kang considered the threat of Emishi(蝦夷) and Japanese conquest of the northeastern regions against them in 801. Still, the amicable relationship between Parhae and Japan continued, which indicated by the establishment of the “Parhae Envoy Guesthouse(渤海客院)” at Noto no Kuni(能登國) in 804. Later, Parhae envoys’ entry into the northern route was officially recognized in the ninth century. The background of King Kang’s active negotiations with neighboring countries from the beginning of his reign was related to Parhae’s domestic political situation in the late 8th century. After the death of King Mun, who achieved national development of Parhae, there were a series of struggles for the throne occurred. To resolve the chaos of Parhae in internal struggles of the ruling class, King Kang to launch negotiations with foreign countries. In addition, King Kang chose Chŏngnyŏk(正曆, or the latter word could be 歷) as the era name, expressing his political directionality. Also, he implemented various policies to strengthen his royal power like deciding the posthumous titles of King Mun and Sŏng, extending Sanggyŏng Castle, and others. As a result, the once-tarnished royal authority could be restored, and King Kang’s dominance over Parhae was secured for 15 years. 이 글은 渤海 康王代 對外交涉의 전개 과정과 목적을 살펴본 연구이다. 강왕은 재위 동안 唐·日本과 활발하게 교섭을 진행하였으며, 그 결과 왕권이 강화되었다. 따라서 대외교섭의 기록을 분석·검토하는 작업은 강왕이 교섭을 추진했던 배경과 목적을 파악한다는 의미가 있다. 강왕대 대당교섭은 주로 ‘冊封’과 관련하여 진행되었다. 795년 강왕이 받았던 ‘渤海郡王’은 文王과 비교하면 상대적으로 격하된 책봉이었다. 이에 강왕은 靺鞨都督 密阿古를 파견하여 당의 인식을 전환했고, 그 결과 798년 ‘渤海國王’의 지위를 회복할 수 있었다. 하지만 당과 淄靑藩鎭의 충돌로 인하여 교섭이 중단되었고, 이는 말갈의 단독 교섭으로 이어졌다. 강왕은 위기상황을 극복하기 위하여 대당교섭을 재개하였다. 이후 국제정세에 맞춰 사신을 파견하면서 805년과 806년까지 거듭 진봉되었다. 이처럼 강왕은 당과의 교섭을 통해 정통성을 확보할 수 있었다. 한편 강왕은 일본과도 활발히 교섭을 진행하였다. 교섭 과정에서 강왕은 桓武天皇의 요구를 들어주면서도, ‘사신 인원의 제한’과 ‘聘期 연한의 철회’라는 발해의 입장을 일본에 관철했다. 이처럼 강왕은 대일교섭의 체계를 재편하여 교섭권에 대한 통제를 강화하였다. 그러나 강왕대의 대일교섭은 799년을 끝으로 더는 이루어지지 않았다. 이는 강왕이 蝦夷의 위협과 801년 蝦夷에 대한 일본의 동북 정벌을 고려했기 때문이다. 하지만 804년 能登國에 ‘渤海客院’이 설치되는 등 발해와 일본의 우호 관계는 지속되었다. 이처럼 즉위 초부터 강왕이 주변국가와 교섭을 진행한 배경은 8세기 후반 발해의 국내정세와 관련이 있다. 국가적 성장을 이룩했던 문왕이 죽은 후 발해에서는 왕위쟁탈전이 일어났다. 따라서 강왕은 지배층의 내분으로 인한 혼란을 수습하고자 교섭을 진행한 것이다. 이와 더불어 강왕은 연호를 ‘正曆(歷)’으로 정하면서 자신의 정치적 방향성을 표명하였다. 또한 문왕과 成王의 시호를 확정하였으며, 上京城을 증축하는 등 왕권을 강화하기 위하여 노력하였다. 그 결과 실추되었던 왕권을 회복할 수 있었고, 강왕은 15년 동안 발해를 통치할 수 있었다.

대한제국기~1950년대 교과서를 통해 본 발해 인식의 변화

구난희 한국역사교육학회 2015 역사교육연구 Vol.- No.21

이 연구는 대한제국기부터 1950년말까지의 역사교과서 속에 나타난 발해 관련 서술을 검토하였다. 근대 역사 교과서가 직면한 과제는 크게 두 가지였다. 외형적으로는 전근대적 역사서술체계를 해체하는 것이었으며 내용적으로는 민족의 연원을 확대 재구성함으로써 자국사의 유구성과 우월성(제국성)을 확립하는 것이었다. 이 관점들은 모두 발해사 서술을 변화시키는 동력이 되었다. 구체적인 서술의 양상은 당대의 정치사회적 요구와 관련을 맺으면서 변화해나가고 있음을확인할 수 있었다. 시기별 특징을 정리하면 다음과 같다. 첫째 대한제국기까지만 하더라도 발해는 신라정통성이라는 맥락 구조에 갇혀 ‘인근국 역사’라는 위상을 벗어나지 못했지만 통감부 시기에 접어들면서 신라정통의 인식에 일정한 변화가 시도되고 고구려 계승이라는 매개를 통해 발해는 한국사로의 한 귀퉁이로 진입하기 시작했다. 국권 침탈의 위기의식이 자국사의 유구성과 제국성으로 이어진 것이다. 둘째 일제강점기를 맞으면서 일제가 허가한 교과서에서 발해는 그다지 주목 받지 못하다가 일제의 만주 침략이 본격화되면서 일본에 조공한 만주의 한 왕조로 다루어지고 있었다. 반면 다행스럽게도 장도빈이 저술한 조선력사대전에서 한국사로 정확히 자리매김하고 그 의의를 부각하였다. 일제강점기라는 시대상황에서 북방에 펼쳐졌던 고대의 제국적 경험이 저항 민족주의의 중요한 한 축을 담당하였다. 셋째 해방 후 발해는 남북국 시대라는 체계 위에 안착되고 전후 사례가 없을 정도로 발해와 신라간의 긴밀한 교류가 강조되었고 교육과정에 이를 명시하였지만, 교과서 서술은 의외로 소극적이었다. 해방과 함께 맞이한 분단의 현실이 양국의 관계와 공존의 역사를 남북통일의 역사 컨텐츠로 주목하였지만 한국전쟁을 겪으면서 이러한 인식이 교과서 서술에 안착되지 못했던 것이다. 넷째, 이러한 인식의 제한은 한국전쟁 이후 남북 분단이 고착화되면서 더욱 빠르게 전환되었다. 급기야 신라중심적 역사관이 남북국시대 인식을 앞서고 발해의 결말은 열등한 타자 북한을바라보는 시각과 오버랩되었다. 발해는 북방고토에 대한 아쉬움으로 마감한 채 다시금 한국사의변두리에 두어졌다. 현재까지도 교과서 속 발해는 체제면에서나 내용면에서나 여전히 분단고착기의 답보적 상태를 이어가고 있다. 동북공정에 의한 발해사 중국 편입이 노골화되고 공존과 평화를 향한 다양한통일 논의가 모색되고 있는 대내외 현실은 발해사에 대한 한국사 내적 지위와 내용 구성에 대한새로운 검토와 변화를 요구하고 있다. 이 글이 이러한 사회적 요구에 대한 일정한 해답을 찾는 실 마리를 제공해 주기를 기대한다. This study reviewed the descriptions of Parhae in the history textbooks from the Korean Empire period to the late 1950s. The history textbooks of the modern times faced two major issues. Externally, it was the decomposition of the premodern style of historical descriptions and internally, it was to expand and re-construct the national chronology to secure the length and superiority(imperiality) of national history. All of these perspectives motivated the change of historical description about Parhae. In a larger view, the principle was the decomposition of Silla’s legitimacy and the contextualization of Korean history in the northern native land. The specific descriptions were related to the sociopolitical demands of the time. First, until the Korean Empire period, Parhae was confined in the contextual structure of Silla’s legitimacy and considered ‘the history of neighboring state’, but entering the Residency-General period, certain changes were made to the awareness of Silla’s legitimacy and Parhae was placed on the outskirt of Korean history for the succession of Koguryo. The awareness of crisis of loss of sovereignty led to the length and imperialism of national history Second, entering the Japanese colonial period, the textbooks approved by Japan discussed Parhae as an empire in Manchuria that tribute to Japan. Fortunately, however, it clearly settled as a part of the Korean history with significance in Jang, Do Bin’s Joseon-ryeoksa-daejeon. In the situation of the Japanese colonial period, the ancient imperial experience in the north took an important part of the nationalism of resistance. Third, after the liberation of Joseon, Parhae has settled on the system of the North and South States Period and the close interaction between Parhae and Silla was unprecedently emphasized. This was stated in the national curriculum, but the descriptions in the textbooks were rather passive. The reality of division soon after the liberation was stressed as a historical content of the unification of North and South, but the same awareness was not applied to the descriptions in the textbooks. Fourth, such restricted awareness was converted even faster as the division of North and South settled after the Korean War. The historical view focused on Silla was even surpassed the awareness of the North and South States Period and the fall of Parhae was overlapped with the perspective of North Korea as an inferior other. Parhae was placed back on the outskirt of Korean history with the regretful view of the Northern Native Land. Even today, Parhae in the textbooks is still conveying the conventional view from the period of division, in terms of both the systems and the contents. Now, China has argued Parhae is the part of their history with Northeast Project of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences(Dongbei-Gongcheng), and various discussions of reunification are sought for coexistence and peace. Under these circumstances, new discussions and changes are required for the history of Parhae in the history of Korea and its contents. It is hoped that this study provides a clue for the search of a certain solution to these social demands.

발해의 고구려 역사 계승 문제

한규철 한국고대사학회 2004 韓國古代史硏究 Vol.33 No.-

The Chinese argument that Parhae was not independent is based on the fact that a tribute - investiture relationship existed between Parhae and Tang Dynasty. Under this system, they argue, a king of Parhae was invested in with the title of "governor - general of Holhan Province" of the Tang Dynasty. But, even if we acknowledge the influence of the Tang Dynasty over East Asia, the investiture relationship at the time should be understood as a diplomatic formality in connection with the approval of royal successions, not as an act of governing provincial regimes of the Tang Dynasty. Also, a tributary relationship is widely regarded as a type of official trade between the dynasties. According to the New History of the Tang Dynasty, Parhae always used its "own era names" and "freely offered" posthumous titles to deceased kings without Tang's approval. Furthermore, the epitaph uncovered from the tomb of Princess Jeonghyo, the fourth daughter of third king Mun revealed that Parhae called itself an empire like China and its king was addressed as the "emperor." In fact, Parhae was so independent as to launch an attack on Tang in A.D. 732 to prevent contacts between Tang and the "Heuksu Malgal" tribe under its control. It should be acknowledged that Parhae succeeded Koguryo, because the state of Parhae was founded in the former territory of Koguryo and its population mostly consisted of Koguryo people, even though a number of Koguryo people had been forcibly relocated to other areas following the downfall of Koguryo in 668. In other words, the argument that the Malgals suddenly filled the old Koguryo territory lacks credibility. The argument that Parhae was composed of the Malgals is based on the New History of the Tang Dynasty, which describes Dae Jo - young, the founder of Parhae, as a Malgal tribesman. Another reason with which the Chinese deny the relationship between Koguryo and Parhae is that both Old History and New History of the Tang Dynasty put Koguryo in the section of "Eastern Barbarian Dynasties," while Parhae was included in the section of "Northern Barbarian Dynasties." However, the History of Sui Dynasty put Koguryo and Parhae together in the Eastern Barbarian section. In this context, we can detect the fact that the history writers since the Old History of the Tang Dynasty maintained a dynasty - centered historical perspective. Under this approach, they could not acknowledge Parhae, which was created 30 years after the fall of Koguryo, as a country that inherited Koguryo. In any case, it is an unmistakable fact that Parhae was a kingdom established in succession of Koguryo in terms of territory as well as the inhabitants. It is utterly unreasonable to argue that the Malgals suddenly replaced all Koguryo people in the old Koguryo territory or their population suddenly increased to outnumber the indigenous Koguryo people. In addition, the key to understanding the composition of Parhae inhabitants is the fact that the tribal name "Malgal (Mo - ho)" was given by outsiders, not by the Malgals themselves. It is widely known that the forbearers of Malgal were Suksin before the Qin Dynasty and Eup - ru during the Han Dynasty. These names were not used by the tribes themselves but were coined by different Chinese dynasties to refer to various "uncivilized" barbarian tribes around the periphery. It is unlikely that the Malgal people would change their own tribal name, or would they be willing to use such derogatory word as "Malgal." The term "Malgal" was coined based on the old Sino - centric and dynasty - centered historical perspective as a general term referring to ethnic minorities in the Northeastern borderland of the Tang Dynasty. It was also a derogatory name for the inhabitants living in the periphery of Koguryo. In other words, the term "Koguryo people" were used to refer to the residents in and around the capital Pyongyang and the people residing in outlying areas were called the uncivilized "Malgals." Records describe Dae Jo - young, the founder of Parhae, as "a Koguryo eccentric" or "a Sokmal Malgal." But, these descriptions of him do not mean that he could be either a Koguryo person or a Malgal person. It simply means that he was a "villager from the Songwha River in Koguryo." By the same token, it is also clear that the ethnicity of the ruling class and the ruled could not have been different. We learn from the Old History of the Tang Dynasty the fact that Parhae succeeded Koguryo. The book says that the "customs of the two dynasties were the same." Customs generally include established practices related with the ceremonies of coming - of - age, marriage, funeral and ancestor memorial, as well as the language. So, the Chinese records themselves testify to the successive relationship between the two Korean dynasties. This relationship can also be confirmed through their shared cultural heritage. There are certain lasting traditions in human societies that do not change even with the passage of time. Among them are the burial style and the heating system. For the tombs of Koguryo aristocrats, they relied mainly on masonry, such as stone chambers, stonewall and stone coffins. Parhae inherited this tomb style; a group of royal tombs in Yongcheonbu, the capital of Parhae, including the Tomb of Three Spirits (Samryeong Bun), were built in this manner. In the past, the earthen tombs in Parhae were thought to be the Malgal's typical grave pattern. Today, however, this type of tomb is known as a burial style for the commoners of Parhae, not a burial pattern of Malgal, which is a different tribe. All the commoners of Kognryo and Parhae were buried in earthen mounds and this type of burial was universal at the time. Korea is the only country in the world where people with the last name "Tae" exist, and they claim they are the descendants of Dae Jo - young, the founder of Parhae. Korea is also the only country in the world where apartment houses are equipped with "Ondol," the traditional "hot -floor" heating system. The Ondol (warm rocks) system originated from Koguryo and the Parhae people also used the system. In the Old History of the Tang Dynasty, there is a description of Ondol: "In Koguryo, lives of ordinary people are mostly poor. In winter, a long hole is dug under the floor of a room and people keep charcoal fire there to keep the room wann." The Ondol strucrures are found in the Koguryo relics in Pyongyang and Jiban (presently Jian, Jilin Province, China). They are also discovered in the royal palace site in the capital of Parhae and the kingdom's surrounding areas such as the Littoral Province. All these findings are evidence that testifies to the successive relationship between the two Korean dynasties.

The Trend of Research on Koguryo and Parhae History of Chinese Academic Circle in 2016

범은실 ( Fan Enshi ) 한국고대학회 2017 先史와 古代 Vol.- No.53

이 글에서는2016년도중국학계에서발표한 고구려, 발해사 연구 논저에 대해 정리하였다. 더불어, 이들 주제와 연관성이 있는, 예맥, 부여에 관한 연구도 함께 살폈다. 그 외, 일부 동북 지역사 槪說논저 중, 고구려, 발해사와 연관된 글도 간략하게 언급하였다. 우선, 이론과 접근법에 대한 검토이다. 현재 고구려, 발해사 연구 분야에서 병목현상이 뚜렷하게 나타나고 있는데, 주요 사료가 반복적으로 이용되고 있고, 기초적인 지식 체계가 이미 어느 정도 정립된 상태이다. 따라서 향후 연구 방향에 대해 깊이 있는 성찰이 있어야 할 것으로 보인다. 이 문제와 관련해서, 2016년에 중국 학계에서도 일부탐색이 시도되었다. 耿鐵華의 「建立高句麗目錄學的思考」에서는 고구려 연구문헌목록 정리 작업의 필요성을 제기하였는데, 고구려 학술사 검토의 필요성에서 출발한 제언이다. 宋玉彬의 「構建渤海都城硏究新平台的學術思考<八連城>讀後」에서는 발해도성연구에 관한 새로운 플랫폼 건설을 제시하였다. 저자는 발해도성연구분야에서 우선 발해도성의 구체 개념을 명확히 하고, 그 연후에 진일보 도성 유적 판단 기준을 마련해야한다고 보았다. 그리고 그 토대에 입각하여 고고학자료와 문헌사료에 나타나는 단서를 종합적으로 검토해야 한다고 역설하였다. 그 외, 「國際視野下的渤海國硏究小島芳孝敎授、伊夫裏耶夫硏究員、格裏曼硏究員訪談錄」이라는 제목의 탐사 보도 한편이 주목된다. 祝立業은 일본 학자 코지마(小島芳孝), 그리고 러시아학자 이블리예프(伊夫里耶夫), 그리만(格里曼)이 제시한 발해연구의 국제적 시각에 대한 제언을 자세히 담아냈다. 그 다음으로, 동북아 시각에서 바라본 총론 성격의 연구이다. 현재 국제학계에서는 고구려, 발해 역사를 심도 있게 다루기 위해서는 동북아역사 무대를 전제로 접근해야 한다는 점을 점차 인식하고 있다. 2016년 이 분야 연구 성과로, 王綿厚의 『中國東北與東北亞古代交通史』, 程?娜의 『古代東北民族朝貢制度史』, 趙紅梅 등이 지은 『漢唐東北亞古代民族社會發展硏究』 등을 손곱을 수 있다. 馮立君의 논문 『高句麗與柔然的交通與聯系以大統十二年陽原王遣使之記載爲中心』에서 또한 동북아 차원의 넓은 시각에서 고구려의 역사적 역할에 대해 논의하였다. 셋째는 문헌사료 정리 작업이다. 중국학계에서는 앞선 시기 고구려, 발해사 연구자료에 대한 비교적 체계적인 작업을 진행하였으나, 아직 전면적이지 못하며, 특정 주제를 중심으로 한 접근이 미흡하다. 2016년 姜維公이 主編한 『東北古代民族曆史編年叢書』는 앞선 시기 미흡했던 부분에 대한 보완적업으로서, 현재 이미 『夫餘曆史編年』, 『高句麗曆史編年』, 『百濟曆史編年』, 『契丹曆史編年』, 『渤海曆史編年』 等을 출판 발행하였다. 물론, 향후 진일보한 사료고증 작업이 보완되어야 할 것으로 사료된다. 넷째는 새로운 자료의 활용이다. 이른바 새 자료란, 두 측면을 포함하고 있는데, 첫째는 문자사료로서, 현재 주로 묘지명 자료를 손꼽을 수 있다. 예를 들어, 葛繼勇의 『新出高乙德墓志與高句麗末期的內政外交』에서는 입당 고구려인 高乙德 묘지명을 연구 대상으로, 고구려 말기의 내정, 외교, 정치제도 등에 대해 논의하였다. 둘째는 고고학 자료인데, 예를 들어, 王希丹의 『論集安高句麗墓壁畵中的細腰鼓』에서는 고구려 고분벽화에 담겨있는 정보를 통해 고구려 악기 腰鼓에 대해 살폈다. 다섯째는 고전 주제에 대한 새로운 탐색이다. 고구려, 발해사 연구분야에는 장기간에 걸쳐 이견이 분분한 일부 주제들이 있어왔다. 2016년에학계에서는일부 쟁점사항에 대해, 새로운 이론과 시각, 자료를 토대로 재검토를 시도하였으며, 새로운 견해가 제시되기도 했다. 예를 들어, 姜維公과 祝立業은 고구려 시조전설에 대해 검토하였고, 李大龍은 고구려를 멸망시킨 唐羅“聯軍” 중, 신라의 역할에 대해 논의하였다. 그리고 魏存成은 호태왕릉에 대해 살폈고, 辛時代는 발해국 건국문제를 검토하였으며, 劉曉東은 발해 문자명 와당에 대한 논의를 진행하였다. 여섯째는, 신진 학자들의 등장이다. 2016년에 고구려사 연구 분야에서 박사논문 3편이 심사를 통과되었는데, 유념해볼 필요가 있다. 우선은 吉林大學 王志剛의 박사학위논문 『高句麗王城及相關遺存硏究』 이고, 다음으로, 延邊大學 鄭京日의 박사학위논문 『玉桃裏高句麗壁畵墓硏究』이며, 그 다음으로 東北師範大學 孫??의 박사학위논문 『高句麗諸王硏究』이다. This paper summarizes research articles about Koguryo and Parhae(Bohai) published in the Chinese academic in 2016. It also examines the research on Yemaek(濊貊) and Puyo (夫餘), which are related to these topics. Additionally, among introductory articles about the Northeast regional history, some of them linked to Koguryo and Parhae's history were briefly mentioned. First of all, it is a review of theory and approach. Currently, bottleneck phenomenon is evident in the research field on Koguryo and Parhae. Since major historical sources are repeatedly being used, and basic knowledge systems have already been established to some extent, it is necessary to have a deep reflection on the direction of research in the future. In regard to this topic, Chinese academic circle attempted to partially analyze the issue in 2016. In “Jianli Gaojuli muluxue de sikao(Reflections on the Establishment of Koguryo Bibliography)” by Geng Tie Hua, the author proposed the necessity of organizing the bibliography of the studies about Koguryo, a suggestion which started form the necessity of reviewing the historiography of Koguryo. Song Yu Bin(宋玉彬)'s “Goujian Bohai ducheng yanjiu xinpintai de xueshu sikao < Baliancheng > duhou(Academic Thoughts on New Platform about Research on Constructing Parhae Castle - After Reading Baliancheng)” proposed a foundation of the new platform for the research about Parhae's castles. The author insisted that it is essential to clarify the concept of Parhae's castles in detail, and install a criterion to judge the remains of the castles. Then the author argues the necessity to comprehensively review the clues appearing in archaeological data and historical texts on the basis of this criteria. In addition, it is noteworthy that the exploration report entitled “Guojishiyexia de Bohaiguo yanjiu - Kojima Yoshitaka jiaoshou, Ivliev yanjiuyuan, fangtanlu(Research on Bohai State from an International Perspective - Interviews with Professor Kojima Yoshitaka, Researcher Ivliev and Griman” Zhu Liye(祝立業) closely reviewed the proposals about the international view of the study of Parhae presented by the Japanese scholar Kojima Yoshitaka, and the Russian scholars Ivliev and Griman. Next is a study of the general introduction type studies from the Northeast Asian perspective. Currently, international academia is gradually recognizing that, for an in-depth study about Koguryo and Parhae histories, it is necessary to approach to them on the basis of the Northeast Asian history. For the research achievements of this field in 2016, Wang Mian Hou(王綿厚)’s Zhongguo dongbei yu dongbeiya gudaijiaotongshi(Ancient History of Interchange in the Northeast China and Northeast Asia), Cheng Ni Na(程?娜)’s Gudai dongbeiminzu chaogonzhidushi(The History of the Tributary System of the Northeast Ethnic Groups), Zhao Hong Mei(趙紅梅) and others’ Hantang donbeiya gudaiminzu shehui fazhan yanjiu(A Study on the Development of Ancient Ethnic Societies in the Northeast Asia during the Han and Tang Dynasty Period) can be counted in. Feng Li Jun(馮立君)’s article entitled Gaojuli yu rouran de jiatong yu lianxi - yi datong shiernian Yangyuanwang qianshizhi jizaiwei zhongxin(The Traffic and Contact of Koguryo and Rouran - Centered on the Records of King Yangwon’s Dispatch of the Envoy in the 12^th Year of Datong) also discussed about the historical role of Koguryo in a broad perspective of Northeast Asia. The third part is about the reorganization work of historical texts. Although the Chinese academia has previously carried out a relatively systematic work on Koguryo and Parhae, it was not fully comprehensive yet, and the approach based on certain topics is insufficient. In 2016, Dongbei gudaiminzu lishibianniancongshu(A Series of Ancient Northeast Ethnic Groups’ Chronological History), compiled by Jian Wei Gong(姜維公), was a supplementary work for the previous work’s inadequacy. Presently, the author has already published other works such as Fuyulishi biannian(Chronological History of Puyo), Gaojulilishi biannian (Chronological History of Koguryo), Baijilishi biannian(Chronological History of Paekche), Qidanlishi biannian(Chronological History of Khitan), and Bohailishi biannian(Chronological History of Parhae). Of course, it will be necessary to supplement the improved study on historical texts in the future. Fourth is the usage of new resource. The so-called new resources includes two aspects; the first is the textual source, which mainly indicates the epitaph materials in present. For example, Ge Ji Yong(葛繼勇)’s Xinchu Gaoyide muzhi yu Gaojuli moqi de neizhengwaijiao (Newly Excavated Epitaph of Ko Uldok and Administration and Diplomacy in the Last Period of Koguryo), which examines the epitaph of an immigrant to Tang Dynasty named Ko Uldok(高乙德), discussed about the administration, diplomacy, and politics in the last period of Koguryo. The second is archeological resources. As an example, Wang Xi Dan (王希丹)’s Lun Jian Gaojuli mubihuazhong de xiyaogu(Discussion about Seyogo in Koguryo’s Tomb Murals at Ji’an) analyzed “Yogo”, an instrument of Koguryo in the Koguryo’s tomb murals. The fifth part is a new search for classical themes. In the studies on Koguryo and Parhae, there have been some debated subjects over a long period. In 2016, academic circles have tried to revise some of these issues based new theories, perspectives, and resources, and new arguments have been suggested. For example, Jian Wei Gong and Zhu Liye examined Koguryo’s foundation myth, and Li Da Long(李大龍) discussed about the role of the Silla in the allied force of Tang Dyansty and Silla, which destroyed Koguryo. Wei Cun Cheng(魏存成) reviewed the Tomb of King Ho, and Xin Xi Dai(辛時代) studied about the topic of Parhae’s foundation. Additionally, Liu Xiao Dong carried out the discussion on Parhae’s text inscribed roofend tile. The sixth is the emergence of new scholars. In 2016, three doctoral theses in the field of Koguryo history have passed the examination, which is worth paying attention. First of all, Wang Zhi Gang(王志剛)’s doctoral thesis entitled Gaojuli wangcheng ji xiangguan yicun yanjiu(A Study on Koguryo’s Capital Castle and Related Relics) in Jilin University. Next, Yutaoli Gaojuli bihuamu yanjiu(A Study on Koguryo’s Tomb Murals in Oktori) was presented by Jung Kyung-il in Yanbian University, and Sun Wei Ran(孫??) in Northeast Normal University wrote a doctoral thesis entitled Gaojuli zhuwang yanjiu(A Study on Koguryo’s Kings).

대당대일본과의 교류관계를 통해 본 발해의 복식문화 연구

전현실(Jeon Hyun-Sil),강순제(Kang Soon-Che) 한국복식학회 2005 服飾 Vol.55 No.4

This study is consider·ed about the relation or costume among Parhae, ancient Japan and Tang and the culture of this time commonly was influenced by Tang;s culture. The recorded items, which were exchanged from Parhae to Tang and ancient Japan, are the pelt of marten, seal, bear and tiger skin or Ammowhaha(암모화) Gu(구) and so on. Other items from Tang and ancient Japan to Parhae are various clothes and material like silk and so on. This Parhae's clothes made with leather obtained through hunting were the main product of Parhae and had been greatly famous in Tang and ancient Japan. At that time, Tang and ancient Japan had been only dependent on the agricultural life but had not been accustomed to the hunting life, and thereupon, the people in Tang and Nara Era had difficulties to get leather clothes. Accordingly, the leather products stood for the rich, and the people who purchased the leather products from Parhae were recognized as the rich. On the other hand, The prince and the royal family in Parhae were dispatched to Tang as Sooktwui(숙위). They paid a tribute to Tang and In return for it, Tang gave to Sookwui as well as to Parhae's envoys various items and clothes such as Po(포), belt(대), gold and silver Eodae(어대) and textile like a type of silk. These clothes were considered as the formal uniform like Kwanbok(관복) of Parhae. Specially, the time when Sookwui was sent to Tang rot-responded with the time when Tang gave formal uniform to Parhae's envoys. Therefore, we can confirm that the sending of Sookwui influenced to form uniform system of Parhae. In this exchange relation, there were several duplicated items showed, for example Po(포)-belt(대), Eui set(의일습), Eoeui(어의), Jobok(조복), Go(고). These items in Parhae were appeared in process of exchanging from Tang to Japan and from Tang to Parhae. At that time, the exchanges between Tang and Parhae were frequently active much more than those between Tang and Japan, and the acceptance of the culture from Tang was easier in Parhae than Japan in consideration of the geographical location. Therefore, those clothes could be understood as the items already used in Parhae and affected from Tang. These items in Parhae were appeared in process of exchanging from Tang to Japan and from Japan to Parhae. As a result, it is expected that the costumes, which Parhae took from Japan, are the same as those of Tang.

Parhae’s Maritime Routes to Japan in the Eighth Century

( Kim Chang Seok ) 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2010 Seoul journal of Korean studies Vol.23 No.1

Parhae was a coalition state comprised of the Koguryo˘ and Malgal people. The biethnic nature of the Parhae population played an important role in its relations with neighboring states, Japan in particular. Koguryo˘ (traditional dates BC 37-668), after its subjugation of Okcho˘ and Tongye located along the northeast coast of the Korean peninsula, had commanded maritime trade around the East Sea, also known as the Sea of Japan. The Malgal had also been deeply involved in this maritime trade since the Three Kingdoms Period when they were called U˘ mnu. After Koguryo˘ collapsed, the Malgal tribes independently maintained relations with the Emishi and the Okhotsk region. As the Malgal tribes were incorporated into the new Parhae state, however, the trading environment of the regions surrounding the East Sea changed. It is against this historical context that the preference for the northern route by eighth-century Parhae missions to Japan should be understood: on their way to Japan, they frequently visited Dewa, the center of the Emishi people. In the course of their expansion to the northeastern region of Honshu-, the Japanese wanted to prevent the possibility of a close relationship between Parhae and Emishi. Once Parhae began to interact with Japan on a more equal footing in 762, Japanese suspicion of Parhae’s intentions to contact Emishi deepened. It was around this time that the Japanese authorities strongly suggested Parhae not to take the northern route on the pretext of the precedent of Koguryo˘ missions to Japan and because of the national codes of Japan. Ideologically, this reflects a Japan-centric view of the world. Behind this urge to control travel routes, however, was the concern to control the balance of power between Parhae, Emishi, and Japan.

유득공 『발해고』의 사료인용 양상과 역사서술 방법

노요한 ( Noh Johann ) 한국실학학회 2021 한국실학연구 Vol.- No.42

泠齋柳得恭(1748∼1807)의 『발해고』는 유득공이 당시 조선 역사에서 망각되어 있던 발해사를 복원하기 위해 한국, 중국, 일본의 여러 역사서와 기타 문헌에 단편적으로 전하는 발해 관련 사료들을 수집하여 편찬한 것이다. 『발해고』는 이처럼 조선 후기에 이루어진 발해사에 대한 최초의 역사 저술이라는 점과 함께 자서에서 신라와 발해가 양립한 南北國시대라는 역사 개념을 처음으로 제출하였다는 점, 국가 간 영토 경계의 문제에서 실증적 역사 서술 가지는 중요성을 환기했다는 점 등 발해사 연구와 조선후기 북방지역에 대한 역사지리 연구에 있어 선구적 성과를 제출하였다는 데에 그 역사적 의의가 있다. 그렇다면 『발해고』는 이러한 목적을 달성하기 위해 중국과 자국의 역사서에 파편처럼 흩어져 있던 발해의 사적을 어떠한 방식으로 집적하여 撰次하고 있으며 그 인용 양상은 어떠할까. 또한 유득공은 서문의 말미에서 이 책을 ‘발해고’라고 한 것은 아직 역사를 완성하지 못하여 감히 역사로 자처할 수 없었기 때문이라고 하였는데, 유득공이 구상한 발해 역사는 어떠한 역사서술의 체제를 가지는 것이었으며, 그 역사관은 어떠한 것이었을까. 본고는 이러한 점을 중심으로 유득공 『발해고』의 諸寫本을 점검하고 『발해고』의 사료인용 양상과 역사서술 방법에 대해 살펴보고자 한다. Study of the Parhae Kingdom (Parhaego, 渤海考) compiled by Yŏngjae Yu Tŭkkong (泠齋柳得恭, 1748-1807) under the goal of restoring Parhae (渤海) history that had been long forgotten in the national history, is composed of the excerpts that are taken from Parhae-related historical records including history books in Korea, China and Japan, and other literature. Parhaego has a great historical significance in that it played pivotal roles in producing the following leading research findings on Parhae history and historical geography in the northern region of the late Chosŏn Dynasty along with the fact that it is the first Parhae history accomplished in the late Chosŏn Dynasty. Moreover, it introduced in his author’s preface the historical concept of northern and southern halves of a single partitioned nation (南北國), where Silla (新羅) and Parhae coexist for the first time, and it reminded us of the importance of empirical historical descriptions in addressing the issue related to territorial boundaries between countries. Then, so as to fulfill these purposes, how Parhaego collects and compiles the historical traces of Parhae scattered in history books of China and Korea, and what would the citation be like? Moreover, at the end of the auhtor’s preface Yu Tŭkkong said the reason why he entitled his ambitious work ‘Parhaego’, not Parhae history was that he had not yet completed the history of Parhae. If so, what was the historical narrative system that Yu Tŭkkong designed for Parhae history, and what was his view of history? This paper examines various manuscripts of Parhaego, and explores further the aspects of its citation of historical sources as well as its methods of historical narrative.

최근 일본의 발해연구 동향과 과제

구난희(Ku, Nanhee) 고구려발해학회 2022 고구려발해연구 Vol.74 No.-

이 글은 2010년 이후 일본학계의 발해 연구 성과를 검토하고 발해 연구의 방향과 과제를 모색한 것이다. 크게 세부주제와 연구자를 중심으로 한 미시적 연구와 세계사적 흐름에서 발해의 위상과 의의를 탐색하는 거시적 연구로 나누어 분석하였다. 2010년대 이후 일본학계의 가장 두드러진 현상은 연구자 폭이 급감하는 가운데, 외교 관계나 고고분야가 주류를 이루던 종전의 경향과 달리 서지 및 금석문 분야 연구와 논평, 사론류의 연구가 증가하고 있다는 점이다. 일본학계는 국가간의 인식 차를 극복하고 발해 내 다양한 속성을 다루려는 지향에 있으나 연구별로 두어지는 중점은 다르다. 예컨대 발해의 북방적 요소를 상대화하고(古畑徹), 요대 사회로 연계지어 발해의 외연을 확장하기도 하며(高井康典行), 외교 문서와 의례를 통해 외교문서에 내재한 발해적 시각을 복원하려는 노력도 있다(浜田久美子). 이와 함께 동아시아세계론에 대한 비판 위에 제기되고 있는 동부유라시아라는 논의가 점차 발해연구에 접목되고 있어 학계 지형에 변화를 일으키고 있다. 현재까지는 주로 발해 외교문서를 대상으로 다원화된 관계상을 밝히는 작업이 이루어지고 있다. 문서의 형식과 표현어구를 상하적 관계로 이해하려는 종래의 이데올로기적 해석을 비판하고 명분과 실리를 살리는 외교 행위로 이해하려는 지향을 이룬다는 점에서 의의가 있다. 아울러 9세기 전개되는 광역의 교역 네트워크를 山陰 지역과 연계한 최근의 연구도 주목할만하다. 그러나 이러한 변화가 발해연구에 미치는 영향은 양면적이다. 당 중심의 고정된 세력관계를 벗어나 발해의 독자적 행보와 그것을 통해 형성된 지역세계를 밝히고 있다는 점에서는 고무적이다. 그러나 이러한 논의가 자칫 발해적 특성을 북방제족에 초점을 맞추어 한국사적 맥락을 퇴색시킬 우려도 있다. 동부유라시아에 대한 비판과 함께 새롭게 형성되고 있는 일본학계의 동향이 지니는 양가성을 어떻게 대응할 것인가에 대한 좀 더 신중한 논의가 필요하다. This paper examines the achievements of Japanese academic research on Parhae since 2010, and seeks the direction and tasks of Parhae research. The analysis was divided into microscopic studies focusing on detailed themes and researchers and macroscopic studies exploring the status and significance of Parhae in the flow of world history. The most remarkable phenomenon in Japanese academia since the 2010s is that while the number of researchers has decreased sharply, research in bibliography, commentary, and historical studies are increasing, contrary to the previous trend focused on exchange issues and archaeology. Japanese academia aims to overcome differences of perception between countries and deal with various attributes in Parhae. For example, there are efforts to relativize the northern elements of Parhae and link them to Liao society to expand the scope of Parhae and restore the Parhae perspective inherent in diplomatic documents and forms. At the same time, discussions on eastern Eurasia, which are being formed based on criticism of East Asia’s world theory, are gradually being incorporated into Parhae research, creating new changes in the academic landscape. In the meantime, work has been carried out to discover and reinterpret thr diversified relations, focusing on diplomatic documents in Parhae. It is meaningful in that it criticized the interpretation of ideological orientation to understand the form of documents or expressions in a vertical relationship, and reinterpreted it as a diplomatic process that pursues a reputation and practicality. In addition, a recent study which links the wide-area trade network developed in the 9th century to the Sannin area is noteworthy. However, the effects of these changes on Parhae research are two-sided. It is encouraging in that it reveals Parhae’s independent steps and the regional world formed through them, beyond the fixed power relationship centered on the party. However, there is a concern that such discussions may tarnish the context of Korean history by focusing on the Parhae characteristics as the Northern tribes. Along with criticism of eastern Eurasia, more careful discussion is needed on how to respond to the ambivalence of the newly formed Japanese academia.

영문표기를 중심으로 본 서구학계의 고구려 · 발해 연구와 성과 소통

구난희(Ku, Nanhee) 고구려발해학회 2021 고구려발해연구 Vol.71 No.-

이 연구는 서구학계에서 사용되는 고구려, 발해의 영문 표기를 대상으로 하였다. 미의회도서관의 서지 분류와 JSTOR(Journal Storage)이라는 학술 데이터베이스를 이용하여 관련 연구성과를 추출하고 표기 현황을 분석하였다. 전자를 통해서는 한국 성과의 서구학계 소개과정을, 후자로는 서구학계의 연구성과를 파악하였다. 양자 모두 관련 성과는 2000년대부터 급격하게 양적으로 성장하였는데 중국의 고고발굴 성과 공개 및 동북공정에 대한 관심에 따른 것으로 이해된다. 현행 ‘국어의 로마자 표기법’에 따르면 Goguryeo와 Balhae로 표기해야 하지만 서구학계에서는 Koguryo로 표기되는 사례가 90%에 상응할만큼 주류를 이루고 있다. Parhae의 경우는 이보다는 적지만 65% 내외의 비율을 차지하고 있다. 이와 달리 일본이나 중국 발음의 표기 용어는 아직 소수에 한정된다. 서구학계에 고구려, 발해가 한국학의 대상으로 진입되어 이러한 표기가 선험적 지식으로 자리잡고 있음을 보여준다. 표기용어는 용어 사용에 그치는 것이 아니라 관련 연구의 성과를 연계하고 학술 소통을 주도하기 때문에 이러한 현상이 초래하는 효과는 적지 않다. 그러나 국어의 로마자 표기법 개정으로 2000년 이후 Goguryeo와 Balhae가 조금씩 늘어나는 추세에 있다. 때때로 이들 용어는 Koguryo로 표기된 데이터베이스에 Goguryeo가 부기되면서 혼란을 부추기도 한다. 더욱이 JSTOR상에서 확인되는 최근 연구에서 발해 표기 용어는 Parhae가 가진 기존의 선점권이 무의미해질 정도로 다양한 용어가 혼용되고 있는 실정이다. Bohai 사용이 증가되는 가운데 Balhae의 사용이 가세한 탓이다. 발해사를 둘러싼 한중간의 온도 차를 감안해 볼 때 이런 현상은 우려하지 않을 수 없다. 이런 현실에서 해당 표기용어를 굳이 국어의 로마자 표기법에 맞추어야 하는지 다시금 의문을 제기하지 않을 수 없다. 궁극적으로 영문 표기의 독자는 영어를 사용하는 서구학계의 연구자들이다. 따라서 그들에게 한국 관련 학술 정보를 용이하게 수용하고 기존의 인식 체계 위에 재생산할 수 있도록 하는 최적의 용어를 고려해야 하기 때문이다. This study treats on romanization of Goguryeo and Balhae used in Western academia. Related research results on the bibliographic classification of U.S. Congressional Library and JSTOR were extracted and the status of notation terms was analyzed. Through the former, the introduction process of the Western academic community of Korean achievements was identified, and the latter was covered the research results of the Western academic community. The related achievements of both databases have grown rapidly in quantity since the 2000s, and it is understood that they are due to interest in the result of archaeological excavation and the conflicts of the Northeast Process in China. According to the current Revised Romanization of Korean, it should be written as Goguryo and Balhae. But in Western academia, 90% of cases are marked as Koguryo and Parhae accounts for around 65%, although less than this. In contrast, the romanization terms in Japanese or Chinese pronunciation are still limited to a few. This shows that Koguryo and Parhae have entered the Western academic society as the subject of Korean studies and this romanization has already become a priori knowledge. The effect of this phenomenon is very high because the romanization term is not limited to the use of terms, but also links the results of related research and leads academic communication. However, ‘Goguryeo’ and ‘Balhae’ have been gradually increasing since the Revised Romanization of Korean at 2000. Sometimes these terms cause confusion as Goguryo is added to the database based Koguryo. Moreover, in JSTOR various terms of recent studies identified on are being mixed so that Parhae’s existing preemptive rights become meaningless. This is due to the addition of Balhae’s use amid the increasing use of Bohai. Considering the cognition’s difference between Korea and China surrounding Parhae history, this phenomenon cannot help but be concerned. In this situation, we cannot help but have a question whether these terms should be tailored to the Revised Romanization of Korea. Ultimately, the readers that romanization targets are researchers from Western academia who speak English. Therefore, it is necessary to consider optimal terms that allow them to easily accept Korean-related academic information and reproduce it on the existing recognition system. In addition, attention was paid to the conflicting perceptions inherent in Library of Congress Classification. Congressional Library. Koguryo’s bibliographies is classified in Korean history, while Parhae’s ones maintains the principle of including it as Chinese history. However, even in the case of Parhae, it is included in the Korean history classification when composed along with Koguryo, Silla, or North Korea. There is also a point to note about the recent trend identified through JSTOR. The situation in which ‘Parhae’ became mainstream has been chainging and it seems to be shifting to a similar quantity to Balhae and Bohai. Considering that ‘Balhae’ is mainly used by Korean scholars, it is more appropriate to maintain the superiority that ‘Parhae’ has unless ‘Balhae’ can substitute. Next, Western academia’s interest in Koguryo and Parhae tends to be treated as a world historical streams in the East Asia or Eurasia rather than as a single phenomenon or a single dynasty. In order to expand the research of Goguryeo and Balhae as a field of overseas Korean studies and attract attention, research approaching from a broader perspective needs to be published in English.

Parhae’s Maritime Routes to Japan in the Eighth Century

김창석 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2010 Seoul journal of Korean studies Vol.23 No.1

Parhae was a coalition state comprised of the Koguryŏ and Malgal people. The biethnic nature of the Parhae population played an important role in its relations with neighboring states, Japan in particular. Koguryŏ (traditional dates BC 37-668), after its subjugation of Okchŏ and Tongye located along the northeast coast of the Korean peninsula, had commanded maritime trade around the East Sea, also known as the Sea of Japan. The Malgal had also been deeply involved in this maritime trade since the Three Kingdoms Period when they were called Ŭmnu. After Koguryŏ collapsed, the Malgal tribes independently maintained relations with the Emishi and the Okhotsk region. As the Malgal tribes were incorporated into the new Parhae state, however, the trading environment of the regions surrounding the East Sea changed. It is against this historical context that the preference for the northern route by eighth-century Parhae missions to Japan should be understood: on their way to Japan, they frequently visited Dewa, the center of the Emishi people. In the course of their expansion to the northeastern region of Honshū, the Japanese wanted to prevent the possibility of a close relationship between Parhae and Emishi. Once Parhae began to interact with Japan on a more equal footing in 762, Japanese suspicion of Parhae’s intentions to contact Emishi deepened. It was around this time that the Japanese authorities strongly suggested Parhae not to take the northern route on the pretext of the precedent of Koguryŏ missions to Japan and because of the national codes of Japan. Ideologically, this reflects a Japan-centric view of the world. Behind this urge to control travel routes, however, was the concern to control the balance of power between Parhae, Emishi, and Japan.