갑신정변과 궁중 내부 세력의 내응과 반발 : 특히 내시 유재현을 중심으로

장희흥 한국동학학회 2009 동학연구 Vol.26 No.-

갑신정변 당시 김옥균 등 개화파는 정변의 성공을 위하여 궁궐 내 왕의 측근 세력인 궁녀와 내시들을 포섭하였다. 즉 궁녀 고대수 등과, 이름 모를 환관 등은 정변에 동참, 왕의 동태를 살피거나 궁중 내 불을 지르는 등 일정한 역할을 하였다. 그러나 내시 유재현은 처음에는 개화파에 가입하였으나, 이후 왕의 최측근으로 개화파의 정변에 반대하고 사대파의 입정을 대변하면서 개화파들이 노력으로 서울로 입성한 윤웅렬의 북청군대를 돌려보내는 역할을 하였다. 결국 내시 유재현은 정변 2일 아침에 서재필에 의해 처형되었다. 내시 유재현은 왕의 측근으로 왕에게 충심을 다한 인물로 보인다. During the Kapsin Coup of 1884 leaders of the Enlightenment Party such as Kim Okkyun tried to ensure the success of their coup by rallying close associates of the king within the palace, such as court ladies and eunuchs, to their side. These moves proved to be partially successful as court ladies such as Ko Taesu and many unknown eunuchs participated in the Kapsin Coup, playing specific roles such as keeping tabs on the king's moves or lighting fires within the palace. In this regard, while the eunuch Yu Chaehy?n had initially joined the ranks of the enlightenment forces, he eventually came to oppose the coup launched by the Enlightenment Party and became the king's closest confidante. Representing the political position of the pro-Qingfaction, Yun would play an important role in the dispatch from Pukch??ng of the military unit led by Yun Ungry?l to Seoul as part of efforts to counter the march of the enlightenment forces. The eunuch Yu Chaehy?n was consequently executed by S? Chaep?l on the morning of the second day of the coup. A close associate of the monarch, Yu Chaehy?n proved to be loyal to his king to the end.

갑신정변과 궁중 내부 세력의 내응과 반발 - 특히 내시 유재현을 중심으로 -

장희흥 한국동학학회 2009 동학연구 Vol.0 No.26

갑신정변 당시 김옥균 등 개화파는 정변의 성공을 위하여 궁궐 내 왕의 측근 세력인 궁녀와 내시들을 포섭하였다. 즉 궁녀 고대수 등과, 이름 모를 환관 등은 정변에 동참, 왕의 동태를 살피거나 궁중 내 불을 지르는 등 일정한 역할을 하였다. 그러나 내시 유재현은 처음에는 개화파에 가입하였으나, 이후 왕의 최측근으로 개화파의 정변에 반대하고 사대파의 입정을 대변하면서 개화파들이 노력으로 서울로 입성한 윤웅렬의 북청군대를 돌려보내는 역할을 하였다. 결국 내시 유재현은 정변 2일 아침에 서재필에 의해 처형되었다. 내시 유재현은 왕의 측근으로 왕에게 충심을 다한 인물로 보인다.

서재필의 한국근대사 인식

주진오 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2009 한국학연구 Vol.21 No.-

이 글은 연세대학교 현대한국학연구소에서 발간한 My Days in Korea and Other Essays에서 ‘My Days in Korea’ 부분에 나타난 서재필의 한국근대사에 대한 인식을 검토한 것이다. ‘My Days in Korea’는 『신한민보』의 영문판 The New Korea에 1938년 7월 7일부터 1940년 4월 4일 까지 약 1년 9개월에 걸쳐 매주 한 번씩 연재되었다. 이렇게 영문으로 기고를 하게 된 이유는 이미 한글을 잊은 한인 2세들에게 한국의 근대사를 알린다는 것이었다. 그런데 그 내용을 보면 조선의 왕실을 부패한 존재로 매도하고 있으며 백성들에 대해서도 무지한 존재로 묘사하고 있다. 특히 고종에 대해서는 무능한 군주로 평가하는 한편, 명성황후는 조선의 국정을 파탄으로 몰아넣은 주범으로 서술하고 있다. 반면에 대원군에 대해서는 배외주의자라는 한계를 가지고 있었으나 유능한 정치가로 평가하고 있다. 한편 그는 조선을 은둔의 왕국으로 묘사하면서 문호개방과 자주적 근대화를 추진할 수 있는 조건을 갖추지 못한 나라로 평가하였다. 중국에 대해서는 조선과 비슷한 수준의 나라로서 배울 것이 없는 나라로 혹평을 가하였다. 반면에 일본은 근대 지향적이고 조선에 대해 선의를 가지고 도와주려고 하던 나라로 평가하여 그 침략성에 대해서는 언급하지 않고 있다. 그러한 악조건 속에서 조선의 근대화를 지향했던 개화파 세력에 대해서는 격찬을 아끼지 않고 있다. 그리고 이들이 일으켰던 갑신정변에 대해서도 한국근대화를 위해 불가피했던 사건으로 평가하였다. 하지만 다른 한편에서는 갑신정변이 준비 없이 진행된 ‘조끼 주머니 속의 혁명’이라고 반성하기도 하였다. 독립신문과 독립문 그리고 독립협회에 대한 서술에서는 자신이 주도한 것으로 서술하면서 러시아와의 대립을 부각시키고 있다. 그의 기고문을 통해서 그가 얼마나 당시의 역사에 대해서 잘못된 정보를 가지고 있으며 스스로를 정당화하는데 집중하고 있는지를 알 수 있다. 따라서 이러한 글은 그가 고령에 다가 직접 체험했다는 것, 아메리칸 드림의 상징이라는 점이 복합되어 당시 한인 2세들에게 받아들여졌을 것이다. 그러나 그 내용은 오히려 그들로 하여금 자신의 조국에 대해 부정적인 인식을 심는 역할을 하였을 것으로 생각된다. This essay examines Sŏ Chaep’il [Philip Jaisohn]’s understanding of modern history of Korea as reflected in his “My Days in Korea.” Recently reprinted in Philip Jaisohn, My Days in Korea and Other Essays, published by Yonsei University Institute for Modern Korean Studies, “My Days in Korea” comprised his weekly contributions over a year and nine months, from July 7, 1938 to April 4, 1940, to The New Korea, the English-language edition of the Sinhan minbo. He wrote in English, as he intended to familiarize America’s second-generation Koreans, who did not know Korean, with the modern history of their parents’ homeland. To begin, he denounced the Chosŏn royal house as corrupt, as well as depicting the Korean people in general as ignorant. In particular, he assessed Emperor Kojong as an inept monarch while denouncing Empress Myŏngsŏng as the culprit who brought national governance to ruins. In contrast, the Taewŏn’gun earns Sŏ’s praise as a capable statesman in spite of his limitation as an isolationist. Regarding Chosŏn Korea as a country Sŏ depicts it as the “Hermit Kingdom” that lacked the conditions for pursuing an open-door foreign policy and autonomous modernization. Korea’s immediate neighbor, China, was no better off as a country from which nothing is worthy of learning, whereas Japan―with its modern orientation―sincerely sought to help Korea; Japan’s aggressions toward Korea gets no mention. Presenting the Enlightenment Faction as a force that worked for Korea’s good in spite of such adverse conditions, Sŏ spares no praises. He characterizes the Kapsin Coup (1884) that he and other Faction members engineered as an undertaking inevitable for the sake of Korea’s modernization, though he shows remorse when down-playing the Coup as “a revolution inside a vest pocket” attempted without adequate preparation. In his discussion of The Independent, the Independence Gate, and the Independence Club, Sŏ describes them as his initiatives and emphasizes his confrontational stance toward Russia. Overall, his writing reveals how his information on Korean history was inaccurate, as well as an effort to justify his earlier actions. The second-generation Koreans must have read Sŏ’s writing in light of the fact that the thoughts of a man of advanced age epitomizing the American dream were based on actual experience. Ultimately then, “My Days in Korea” most likely imbued them with a negative perception of Korea.

개화파연구의 실증적 초석 쌓기와 그 의의

한철호(Han Cheol-ho) 한국사연구회 2010 한국사연구 Vol.148 No.-

The aim of this article is to examine the research methodology, the speciality of contents and the effects which can be found in Lee Kwang-tin's The Progressive Party : 1879~1884. The reason we focuses on this study is that we can show the perspective, methodology and speciality toward the Enlightenment history. Through this, I expect to help to rearrange various views about the Enlightenment history and secure the right position of ideology and activities of the Enlightenment Faction in Korean modern history. Experiencing 4ㆍ19 Democratic Revolution and 5ㆍ16 Military Coup d'Etat, Lee Kwang-rin started studying the ideology and activities of the Enlightenment Faction because he thought that study on the Enlightenment Faction is very important subject which can clearly define the characteristics and development process of Korean modern history and comprehend the Japanese occupation and contemporary history. After that, he found new data of the Enlightenment Faction in and outside the country and analyzed those precisely based on Internal Development Theory(Naejaejeok baljeonnon) and Modernization Theory(Geundaehwaron). Renewing the facts of the Enlightenment Faction and solving the unsolved problems, he laid the foundation stone of the Enlightenment history. However he hadn't analyzed history based on macroscopic theories or views and he couldn't overcome the limitation that he didn't suggest the overall views of the Enlightenment or Korean modern history. Therefor it is vital that we correct the speciality and overall views of Korean modern history through searching for historical material from China, Japan and others. Overcoming the limitation of Lee Kwang-rin is duty for the academic world of Korean history.

개화기 군민동치 제도화 과정 및 입헌군주제 수용 유형 연구

정상우(Chong, Sangwoo) 한국헌법학회 2012 憲法學硏究 Vol.18 No.2

이 글은 우리나라 개화기 입헌군주제 사상의 수용과 헌법적 문서에 규범화되는 과정을 살펴봄으로써 개화기 입헌군주제의 수용 과정과 입헌군주제를 어떠한 유형으로 인식하였는지 살펴보고자 하였다. 개화기 우리나라는 근대 국가의 건설을 위해 헌법개념을 수용하고 갑오개혁과 독립신문, 대한국국제 등에서 입헌군주제를 수용하고자 하였다. 개화기 입헌주의는 정치형태에 있어 군민공치 또는 입헌군주제를 의미하였으나, 유형에 대한 인식은 크게 두 가지로 나뉘었다. 즉 개화파들은 영국식의 입헌군주제 모델을 이상으로 삼았지만, 정치 현실에 있어서는 국왕과 관료들을 중심으로 군주 중심의 입헌군주제를 대안으로 삼고 있었다. 그리고 개화파들은 자신들의 정치적 참여가 보장된다면 군주 주권의 입헌군주제를 수용하는 자세를 가지고 있었다. 즉 입헌군주제가 국왕의 권한의 제약과 의회의 존재를 전제하면서도, 황제권을 강화하고 국민국가를 건설하는 도구적 개념으로도 수용되었다. 따라서 입헌군주제를 채택해야 한다는 주장이 반드시 국왕의 권한을 제약하는 것으로 귀결되지는 않았다. 같은 맥락에서 법률은 국민의 인권 보장이 아닌 국가적 법질서를 확보하기 위한 것으로 이해하였다. 따라서 개화기 입헌군주제의 수용 과정에서 국민과 의회의 개념은 확립되기 어려웠고, 개화파가 의회의 설립을 요구하는 경우에도 보통선거를 전제로한 것은 아니었다. 개화파들은 전제군주제와 입헌군주제 사이에서 입헌군주제를 지지하였지만, 이들이 인식한 입헌군주제는 의회의 설립과 사법부의 역할에 대해 바르게 이해하지 못했으며 국민이나 국민의 인권에 대한 이해도 미진하였다. 그 결과 개화기 입헌주의 수용의 목표는 국민국가의 수립이었으나, 헌법은 국민국가 수립을 위한 도구에 불과하였다. 입헌군주제의 수용은 헌법의 우위가 아닌 부국강병의 수단적 개념이 되었다. This writing was intended to understand how the procedure of accepting the constitutional monarchy during the Enlightenment Period, along with the constitutional monarchy as per se, were received by the contemporary consciousness. In doing so, both the acceptance of the concept of constitutional monarchy in Korean history and the progress during which the concept was led to the course of being ratified for the constitutional documents were reflected upon. During the Enlightenment Period, Korea had strived to accept the concept of constitution in order to modernize itself and worked on implementing the constitutional monarchy through the historical stages such as the Gabo Reform of 1894, the Independent Paper, and the Daehankuk Kukje(established as of Aug.17th, 1899). Constitutionalism during the Enlightenment Period implicated bifunctional political system of the monarchial constitutionalism, but the general understanding of it was largely divided into two different sides. In other words, the pro-enlightenment group idealized the contemporary British model of constitutional monarchy but, at the same time, considered the constitutional monarchy that centralized a monarch in respect of royal sovereignty and bureaucrats as a real alternative in countering the actual political reality. The group posed to accept the sovereignty-centered constitutional monarchy as long as their political participation was guaranteed. Hence, constitutional monarchy was accepted as a tool in empowering the emperor’s seat and constructing a democratic nation, which made sure limitation within the sovereignty’s jurisdiction and emphasized the presence of the congress. It was thus supposed that the very insistence upon choosing the constitutional monarchy meant by no means exerting to limit the power of the sovereignty. What is bordering to such supposition is an understanding that the legislation exists to secure the national law and order rather than human rights of the citizens. As a result, in the process of introducing the constitutional monarchy during the Enlightenment Period, the newly-minted concepts of ‘citizen’ and ‘congress’ had a hard time of assimilating into people’s general consciousness, and, in the event the group demanded an establishment of the congress, the universal suffrage was not something of the guaranteed condition. Between despotic monarchy and constitutional monarchy, the group opt for the latter. However, the constitutional monarchy within the hands of the group did not really understand some of the most important issues like the significance behind the establishment of the congress, roles of the judiciary branch, existential value of the citizens and their human rights. Consequently, although the original purpose of accepting the constitutionalism during the Enlightenment Period was to establish the democratic nation, the constitution was in fact no more than a leverage for establishing the democratic nation. The acceptance of the constitutional monarchy was really a methodological concept under national prosperity and military power, while overlooking the value of the constitution.

근대 입헌주의 수용의 비교헌법사 -개화기 원시 헌법문서 분석을 중심으로-

신우철 ( Woo Cheol Shin ) 법과사회이론학회 2007 법과 사회 Vol.0 No.33

일본 중학교 역사교과서의 한국근대사 서술과 역사인식

한철호(Han Cheol-Ho) 한국사연구회 2005 한국사연구 Vol.129 No.-

In order to develop a better understanding of the three Northeast Asian countries and to establish a desirable relationship between them, history textbooks, which is the main compass used for secondary level history education at the national level, should be compiled in an exact manner. Nevertheless, the historical descriptions and perceptions contained in the 2005 version of the New History Textbook put out by Husosha publishers contains even more distortions than the previous edition. As a result, the level of distrust and conflict between the three countries has been raised to new heights. The New History Textbook published by Husosha publishers has employed the geopolitically-motivated Hanbando wihy?pron (Korea as a dagger in the heart of Japan) theory to justify Japan's invasion of the Korean peninsula, which the book argues was carried out to maintain Japans independence during the process of building a modern state. The Hanbando wihy?pron is a theory that argues that Japan's security would be threatened if Korea were to fall into the hands of one of its enemies. Therefore, as this theory runs the risk of instilling students with the belief that Korea and China are potential threat to Japan's security rather than viewing them as neighboring countries with whom friendly ties should be established, the descriptions of history based on this theory should be removed. Based on this notion of the Hanbando wihy?pron, the New History Textbook, emphasizes that while China and Russia intended to conquer the Korean peninsula since the onset of the modern era, Japan supported Koreas efforts to modernize itself and reorganize its military system. The textbook also claims that Japan helped prevent Korea from being invaded by other foreign powers in order to assure Japans own security. In addition, the textbook not only tries to cover up or justify the Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese Wars on the grounds that they were justified defensive actions, it even glorifies these wars. The perception of history hidden within the Husosha textbook reflects Japan's desire to remilitarize and remove the sense of guilt which has long served to restrain the Japanese. There is no way that future relations between the three Northeast Asian countries can be maintained in a positive manner if such distorted perceptions of history are allowed to take roots among the future generations of Japan. In this regards, the three countries should strive to establish a shared perception of history that can contribute to actualizing peace and prosperity in the region.