용산과 일본군 용산기지의 변화 (1894~1945)

신주백(Sin, Ju-back) 서울시립대학교 서울학연구소 2007 서울학연구 Vol.- No.29

Youngsan located in Seoul has precisely been a strategic place for military use: From the time of the Japanese colonial period Youngsan has operated to be a military camp city with other two cities as Nanam and Jinhae developed by Japan in Southern province in Korea. Accordingly, the formation of the camp city of Youngsan and the appearance of New Youngsan (Sin Youngsan) is related with the occupation process of the Japanese colonial power over the Korean Peninsula, which still remains. The historical image related with Youngsan made in the colonial period had no chance to be altered when after liberation new outer power U.S. replaced Japan, occupying former Japanese camp site Youngsan, not leaving any self-examination for Koreans. This kind of distorted image became fixed deeper into the mind of the people with the break of the Korean war. For these reasons most of the Koreans did not have a question of What is really Youngsan? Some people recognize Youngsan itself just as an U.S. Camp site in Korea not likely Americans. Therefore it was not meaningful for them to examine consciously the new name of Sin Youngsan (New Youngsan). With the building of Sin Youngsan subway station a decade ago, people have had a familiar image of Sin Youngsan better. But the name of Sin Youngsan was originally invented to indicate the residence of Japanese people in the colonial period by Japan: although there is nothing substantially different within Youngsan and Sin Youngsan, most of the Koreans now have vague geographical images of them. We see another scar made by tragic modern history of Korea.

지유샤판 중학교 역사교과서의 현대사 인식

신주백(Sin Ju-Back) 한일관계사학회 2009 한일관계사연구 Vol.33 No.-

지유샤판 역사교과서는 2006년도 ‘후소샤판의 완전 복제품’이다. ‘새역모’는 현재 사용되고 있는 8종의 역사교과서가 한중예속사관, 구미추수사관,공산주의찬양사관에 빠져있다고 비판하고 있다. 새역모는 이번 교과서에서 세련된 편집방식과 교묘한 논리전개 속에서 천황중심사관, 전쟁미화사관을 적극 내세우고 있다. 그들이 이렇게 역사교과서를 통해 역사를 왜곡하는 궁극적인 목표는 제9조를 폐기시키고 새로운 헌법을 만들어 위기에 강한 천황을 중심으로 자랑스러운 국민이 모여 사는 국가를 만드는데 있었다. 지유샤판 교과서는 이 목표를 명확히 제시한 교재이다. 하지만 현대 한일관계사와 일본현대사에 관한 기술을 보건데 지유샤판 교과서는 자기 중심적이고 배려심이 없는 교재이다. 학생들로 하여금 상대방에 대한 차별의식을 키우도록 하는 교재이다. 역사교육을 통해 상호 존중하는 학생을 육성하기보다 싸움 닭을 키우려 하고 있다. Jiyushya history textbooks are the complete clone of 2006 years Husoshya. Tukurukai currently the history textbook of 8 bells which are used is critical officer Korean-Chinese assignment and officer appetizing harvest, that is falling into to officer communism praise. Tukurukai with the editing method which is refined from this textbook the positive is standing officer emperor of Japan center and officer warfare beautification from the logical development inside which is dexterous. They will beg and 9th of constitution they disuse and making a new constitution, in order to secure the justifiability for the history textbook they distort. This leads and in order to make the nation which lives in crisis the strong emperor of Japan in the center the proud citizen Fall in from as is standing. But today about the contemporary Korean-Japanese relations history and Japanese contemporary history technique the hygienic Jiyushya textbook own center and is the teaching material which is not the care auricle. With the students in order to raise a discrimination consciousness letting about the counterpart, is a teaching material. historical education leads and the low of trade name respecting rears the student, raises the fight chicken.

관점과 태도로서 내재적(內在的) 발전(發展)의 분화와 민중적(民衆的) 민족주의(民族主義) 역사학(歷史學)의 등장- 민중(民衆)의 재인식(再認識)과 분단(分斷)의 발견(發見)을 중심으로

신주백 ( Ju Back Sin ) 연세대학교 국학연구원 2014 동방학지 Vol.165 No.-

This paper examines research trends in the 1970s with respect to perspectives and attitudes towards Korea``s internal development. It also discusses these trends in the historical context of Korean academia and evaluates their significance in terms of publicness. In the 1970s, two groups of researchers interpreted Korean history in terms of internal development. The first initiative was a reaction to the historical perceptions of the Park Chung-hee regime. The second development resulted from a new awareness of the people as the main body of history and the discovery of the country``s division. The former manifested itself as democratic publicness as opposed to government-inspired publicness, while the latter inspired the formation of the internal development of democratic publicness. Academic awareness of the division of Korea has expanded from historical studies into Korean studies of the division period, that is, the initiative of critical Korean studies. Advocates of this idea argued that the people, as the main witnesses of history, should play a leading role in overcoming division through the establishment of democracy. Advocates of democracy introduced popular nationalism by establishing a relationship between nationality, democracy, and the public in their theorization of the concept of ``the people.`` As a result, historical studies of the division period became historical studies of popular nationalism.

국민에서 시민으로 : 새로운 동아시아사 인식의 가능성과 의미를 찾아서

신주백 ( Sin Ju Back ) 역사문제연구소 2017 역사문제연구 Vol.21 No.1

People who live in the region called `East Asia` have not been thinking about their future as (part of) the `future of East Asia.` But a new possibility is rising. Having recently gone through the East Asian economic crisis in 1998, the Koreans are now considering Southeast Asia as part of the East Asian realm on a daily basis. This kind of a rather new concept of East Asia (at least in terms of the Koreans` perspective) is establishing itself in the region, as a very complex political, economic and socio-cultural system. And in the process, an attitude to respect and share various kinds of memories is also forming, thanks to small-scale on-going efforts.

남북한 , 일 , 중 , 대만의 역사교과서 속에 표현된 전후책임 과 역사교육

신주백(Ju Back Sin) 한일민족문제학회 2002 한일민족문제연구 Vol.2 No.-

N/A N/A

한인의 만주 이주 양상과 동북아시아

신주백(Sin Ju-Back) 역사학회 2012 역사학보 Vol.0 No.213

The purpose of this study is to show that the conditions faced by Koreans migrating to Manchuria between the middle of the 19th century and 1945 had changed from one of free migration to one of colonization. Through the study this paper aims to re-determine the characteristics of migration history in the Manchurian region and provide a basis to refocus on the history of compulsory mobilization as a whole during the colonial period. The Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 was a significant turning point for Koreans migrating to Manchuria. The migration of Koreans changed from one based on self-motivated individuals to a forced migration onto which Japan’s imperialistic aims were strongly projected. Forced migration became more structured once Japan invaded mainland China in 1937. Methods used in recruiting new migrants included tricking or pressuring individuals. Contrary to propaganda, migrants had to construct their settlements by themselves and were forced to live within controlled village groups sharing joint responsibilities. Furthermore, some of the people already settled in Manchuria were also forced to move and live in these same village groups. Forced migration served the function of pressuring the national movement that was unfolding among the Korean expatriates and reducing their resistance.

'분단극복사론'의 첫 성과 『조선민족혁명당과 통일전선』

신주백(Sin Ju-Back) 한국사연구회 2010 한국사연구 Vol.149 No.-

Until Kang Man'gil's publication of a book entitled, "The National Revolutionary Party of Korea and the United Front(朝鮮民族革命黨과 統一戰線)" (Hwap'y?ngsa 和平社, 1991), the history of national movements in Korea was regarded as having centered on the nationalist movement associated with the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea and the related struggle for independence. Meanwhile, in North Korea, the contribution of all national movements other than that of the Kim Ils?ng (金日成)-led anti-Japanese armed struggle were, in accordance with the tenets of the Chuch'e Ideology(主體思想), expunged from history books. In Japan, the major focus was on the fact that the 1920s saw the socialist camp replace thenationalist forces as the mainstream movement. However, Kang Man'gil sought to reorganize the history of the national movement around the United Front, a group within which no specific party or social class dominated or exercised a hegemonic position. Kang regarded this task as the main role of historical studies, namely building a cornerstone based upon which the division of Korea could be overcome. His study on the National Revolutionary Party of Korea (朝鮮民族革命黨) was the first of his works which reflected his unique consciousness of issues. Therefore, Kang's historical study, which identifies the history of the national movement as a part of the movement to establish a united nation state, can be regarded as having been embedded with a strong sense of contemporariness. The united front policy of the National Revolutionary Party of Korea was different from that adopted by those who implemented the reconstruction of the Communist Party of Korea (朝鮮共産黨) as well as the guerilla units who engaged in armed struggles in Manchuria. Above all, the National Revolutionary Party of Korea did not recognize the notion of the hegemony of the proletariat, or the leadership of the Communist Party of Korea. Although changeswere made to the united front policy of the socialists during the mid-1930s, these fundamental differences were never narrowed down. Nevertheless, as the war gradually expanded, efforts were made to establish an organization which could overcome these differences and implement communal actions. In effect, a political situation was created in which it became impossible for either side to advocate an anti-Communist or anti-nationalist line. This can be understood as the main reasoning behind the National Revolutionary Party of Korea's decision to join the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea. In addition, the fact that such a union only successfully took place in that area can be explained by the ideological affinity that existed between Kim Ku's(金九) group and the National Revolutionary Party of Korea, both of which shared a belief in the notion of 'socialist nationalism'(社會主義的 民族主義).

동아시아의 현재와 경험에서 한국 역사학・역사교육의 길 찾기

신주백(Sin, Ju-back) 한국역사연구회 2016 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.102

This article was conceived under the idea that one of many solutions for the Korean historical studies’ own crises could come from launching studies or developing education programs on how the history and culture in East Asia as a region was developed and formed. First employed in this article is a perspective viewing past history as part of the present, so that it could be said that conflicts over historical issues which have been going on for a long time and even in the 21st century East Asia is a situation closely related to certain nations’ strategy to modify current regional order. Also employed in the article is a perspective called ‘a very old present,’ to say that the Daehan empire’s neutral diplomacy strategy since the ending days of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th was merely a strategy to maintain the status-quo, just like today’s “Balanced diplomacy” or “Four powers diplomacy.” The Korean society, in an effort to correct this problem, has been examining East Asia and its history from the so-called ‘Local’ paradigm. But this ‘regional history’ concept was also used to expand the “national history” paradigm, which rather turned a blind eye to the fact that bringing resolution to the separated(divided) status of the Korean peninsula should be placed at the crux of East Asian history researches and education. Overcoming the divided reality, and trying to create a new regional order involving multiple states and areas, would be another way for the Korean historical studies and historical education to overcome the current crisis.

末松保和(1904~1992)의 學術史와 식민주의 역사학

신주백(Sin, Ju-Back) 연세대학교 국학연구원 2018 동방학지 Vol.183 No.-

이글은 末松保和라는 식민주의 역사학자의 學術生涯史를 통해 식민주의 역사학이란 무엇이고 한국사 학계에서 그에 대한 태도에 엇박자가 난 이유를 찾아보는 데 목적이 있다. 末松는 폭넓은 조선사 연구 뿐 아니라 방대한 분량의 자료집을 간행하고 다양한 목록을 만들었으며, 번역과 서평까지 게을리 하지 않은 매우 성실하고 역량 있는 역사학자였다. 그의 왕성한 연구 활동은 식민지에 파견된 제국의 관학자라는 우월한 특권적 지위로도 보장되었다. 하지만 식민주의 이데올로그로서의 활동은 일본이 패전하며 식민지를 상실함에 따라 중단할 수밖에 없었다. 그는 귀국 후에 대한제국을 식민지화한 일본의 행위를 공개적으로 옹호하는 역사이념을 생산하지 않았다. 대신에 전근대 조선사에 관한 연구와 그 밖의 다양한 학술 활동을 왕성하게 벌이는 한편에서, 자신의 연구를 심화하는 연구서를 간행하였다. 그 중 『任那興亡史』(1949)가 가장 대표적인 업적이었다. 식민지 조선에서 식민주의 역사이데올로그로 활동하던 末松에게 任那는 본국의 朝廷과 이해를 함께하는 일본의 한 지방이자 內地가 延長된 곳이었다. 총동원체제 시기에 임나는 神代를 관통한 사상원리의 역사적 근거를 찾을 수 있는 곳이었다. 일본이 패전한 후 귀국한 末松는 실증을 포장하는 이러한 시대 인식을 전혀 내세우지 않으면서 더 종합적이고 精緻한 實證으로 임나사를 다듬는 한편, 임나와 韓族의 지배․피지배 관계를 중앙과 지방의 관계에서 植民과 被植民 關係로 바꾸어 바라보았다. 그의 任那史 연구는 일본의 학술공간에서 末松란 학자의 존재감을 보장한 성과물이었다. 하지만 그의 연구는 실증이란 이름으로 한국사의 예속성을 드러낸 결과물이었다. 末松는 50년대 후반을 지나며 滿鮮史體系의 흔적을 벗어났지만, 자신의 실증에 오류가 있다고 보지 않았으므로 임나에 관한 생각을 죽을 때까지 바꾸지 않았다. 실증 연구를 통해 과거의 인식을 바꾸면서 한일간의 과거를 청산하자는 입장이었던 그로서는 당연한 태도였다. 한국과 일본의 후학들은 이러한 변화에 주목하지 않았다. 無知했거나 回避했기 때문이다. 특히 한국사 학계는 실증을 통한 식민주의 역사학의 해명이란 측면에만 몰두하고 존재의 태도와 조건에 주목하지 않았다. 때문에 한국사 학계는 실증 대 실증으로 식민주의 역사학을 비판하고 극복하는 방안을 찾을수록 실증에 가려진 또 다른 숨은 진실을 제대로 드러낼 수 없었다. 오히려 학문의 고립성을 정당화해주고 제국의 이해를 반영하는 식민주의 역사학이 얼마나 뛰어난 학문인가를 증명해 주는 ‘위대한 역설’에 빠지는 경향도 있었다 This paper traces the academic life history of colonialism historian Suematsu Kasukazu with the goal to identify what colonialism historiography is and why an offbeat attitude towards Suematsu Kasukazu developed in the Korean studies academic community. Younger scholars in Korea and Japan did not seek to change the prewar and postwar views of Suematsu Kasukazu (1904~1992). They ignored or avoided them. In particular, the Korean studies academia only focused on the methodology to explain colonialism historiography through substantiation and did not pay attention to the attitudes and conditions of existence. Therefore, as the Korean studies academia criticized colonialism historiography as a matter of substantiation vs. substantiation and found a solution to overcome it, it could not reveal the real truth hidden in substantiation. Rather, there was a tendency to fall into the “great paradox”, which justifies the phenomenon of isolation of the academic world and proves how outstandingly colonialism historiography reflects the interests of the empire.

1945년도 한반도 남서해안에서의 ‘본토결전’ 준비와 부산ㆍ여수의 일본군 시설지 현황

辛珠柏(Sin, Ju-back) 국방부 군사편찬연구소 2009 군사 Vol.- No.70