瀆盧國考

丁仲煥(Chung Jung-hwan) 백산학회 1970 白山學報 Vol.- No.8

Different views have been maintained by different scholars on the location of the ancient tribal state Dokno(瀆盧)which is mentioned in the section on Byon-jin(弁辰) of Dongijon(東夷傳 - Tung-i-ch’uan), the Samgukji (三國志 San-kuo-chieh-History of the Three Chinese Kingdoms), and no determination has as yet been made on this point. First of all, Chŏng Ta-san (Yak-yong 若鏞 丁茶山), the erudite scholar of modern Korea, maintained that present-day Geoje Island (巨濟島)was the site of this ancient state, phonologically interpreting the pronunciation of the name of the state. However, in view of the circumstances around the third century, when the Samgukji was written, this writer can say that this insular area was hardly a place for a powerful tribal state to have prospered. Especially, in consideration of the remarks in that old Chinese history book that Dokno was a port of international importance for its convenience for marine transportation and was close to Japan only with the seas in between, this writer is led to look to some other place, preferably somewhere around Pusan, downstream of the River Nakdong(洛東江), for the most probable site of this ancient state. Dr. Togo Yoshida(吉田東伍) of Japan supposed Dokno to have been situated in present-day Dadaepo(多大浦) of Pusan City, but this area is hardly a probable place for one powerful tribal state to have prospered, either. Later, Dr. Tsuzei Naka(那珂通世)of Japan accepted this opinion of Dr. Yoshida, and Dr. Yi Pyong-do(李丙燾)of Korea, also succeeding to this Yoshida theory, surmised that Dokno must have been located in Dongnae(東萊), which included Da-dae-po in the past. Other than these, Dr. Yasukazu Suematsu(末松保和), also of Japan, made remarks on a probable site of Dokno, too, but his opinion was not far removed from the above-mentioned two theories, one preferring Geoje Island and the other, Dadaepo. Thereupon, this writer, after giving a thorough consideration to these different views preferring either Geoje Island or Dadaepo, looking for a most probable place where a tribal state of the days can have been founded from the point of view of the extant historical remains and also for a most probable location according to historical literature, and judging from the general trend of phonological changes in the language with regard to the names of places, has reached a decision that the location of the ancient tribal state Dokno agrees to the present-day Dongnae Section(東萊區)of Pusan City, that is, the general area of old Dongnae Township(舊東萊邑). For one thing, when viewed from such historical remains as the sites of shell mounds, ancient tombs, earthen castle walls, mountain castle walls, etc. widely scattered in this area and also from the general aspects of the vicinity, it is quite probable that this area was once the centre of a thriving tribal state. For another, present-day Dongnae Section of Pusan City provides an excellent port: the historical remains thereabout verily prove that iron was mined from this area, as is recorded in the Samgukji; and the refore this area can very well have been a centre of international trading. Finally, it is by no means too far-fetched a conclusion that the word ‘Dongnae’ was a beautified version of Dokno by euphony through ages. For all these reasons, this writer has tried to make it clear that Dokno was not located either on Geoje Island or in Dadaepo, but was actually situated in present-day Dong nae Section of Pusan City, beyond reasonable doubt.

欺盧六村과 六村人의 出自에 대하여

丁仲煥(Chong Chung-hwan) 역사학회 1962 역사학보 Vol.17·18 No.-

眞聖女王陸考

丁仲煥(Chung Chung Hwan) 한국미술사학회 1970 美術史學硏究 Vol.- No.105

감자튀김시 Silicone Oil 의 튀김유 산화방지효과에 관한 연구

김기홍,정병상,심중환,배재오 ( Ki Hong Kim,Byoung Sang Chung,Joong Hwan Sim,Jae Oh Bae ) 한국유화학회 1993 한국응용과학기술학회지 Vol.10 No.2

加羅史硏究 : Especially about the relationship with Japan 日本關係를 中心으로

丁仲煥 東亞大學校 1967 東亞論叢 Vol.4 No.-

In this tesis, the writer intends to search into the intercourse between Kara(加羅) and Japan, from A.D. 4th C. to 6th C., which is a side work to the study on Kara history and a part of the ancient Korea-Japanese relationship. Our historial materials about this part are so scant that we can only find some fragments in "Samkusaki(三國史記)", Samkukyusa(三國遺史)" and "Dongkuk Yeochi Sungram(東國輿地勝覽)", but they are not so believable as they are either legendary or doubtful in teir historucal truths. On the other hand, as the Japanese historical materials about this same part, like Nihonshoki(日本書記)- though tey are most rich in quantity-edited by the national necessity of Yamado government and so involved the myths, legends and the intentionals of the posterity, it is hard to find out the historical truth from them. Against these, we can rather find the historical truth from the materials of Chinese side, because, though they are not so rich in quantity, they are consistant of critical and objective obsrevations of the Chinese of those days. So, to deal with this period, we must adopt the Chinese materials as a main source, those of Korean and Japanese as references. (1) In "the intercourse between Kara and Japan in ancient period" the writer shows the fact that before 4th century, Japanese had come out only for communication with Silla, Kara and Nakrang(榮浪) -the Chinese province which was located at the north side of the peninsula-in order to import curious goods and highly developed civilation, the Japanese who communicated with were the tribes that lived on the coast regions of western Japna; rpovince of Kushu(九州),San-in(山陰) etc, and their comunication course was as follows; at first, they arrived in Pusan or Kimhae, then they across the southern sea of peninsula, came out to the Yellow ses, and along the western coast line, they finally arrived in the Chinese province Nakrang or Tailbang(帶方) and the way back was the same course. Thus, Pusan, Kimhae became a communication center in that time. The writer also makes it clesr that the fragmentary records of Japnaese invasious shown in our documents represent the phenomena that the western Japanese communicatiors, who could not peacefully acquire goods, civilization, aggressed Kara and Silla regions off and on. (2) In "the eastern trend of 4th century and the advance of Japanese toward the southern part of Korea", the writer show that the Chinese provinces in the penisula which had lasted for a long time of 420 years, was drived out by King Michum of Kokuryu in 313 A.D., and in the southern part, Paikche and Silla were taking activity for unification as rising powers, and also, the Yamado government was developing its unifying activity in Japan. In such progress of unifying activity in each area, the Japanese under the support by Yamado government, began to aggress to the southern part of Korea. (3) In "the year of the coming of Japanese to the southern part of Korea under the support of Yamado government" the writer would not follow to the opinion of Japanese scholars (mainly Dr. Tsuda and Dr. Suematsu,) and asserts that they came out at of year (A.D. 319) as shown in the inscription of the monument of King Kwangeto of Kokurty. (4) In "the administration of Imna(任那)" the writer presupposes that so called Japnaese administration in Imna was not a true historical reality but only a vacant idea supported by Japanese scholars, and asserts that by the trend of that time it was impossible for Japanese to administrate in Imna. (5) In "Japanese governor in Imna" the writer asserts that there was not established a permanent institute to be regined by Japnaese, such like as Japanese Consul but could recognize only the temporary staying of Japanese aggressors. (6) In "Imna tribute" the writer asserts that Imna tribute was a meaningless name as the "Japanese governor in Imna" was not a substantial institute and the name was nothing but an ideal product arbitrarily made by Yamado government in the book Nihonshoki, according to the Chinese conception about the intercourse of those days between Korea and Japan. (7) In "some other consideration on the regional name of Kara" the writer indicates that it was wrong to compare Sangdari(上차唎) Hadari(下차唎) Sata(娑陀) Moru(牟婁) with Chunlla province of nowadays, and those four regions should be compared with Chinju(晋州) Kuchang(居昌) Sanchung(山淸) Sachun(四川) regions nowadays. (8) In "about the theory of 5 Kaya" the writer makes it clear that, about Kaya region, though some had called them 5 Kaya or others 6 Kaya, as if there were 5 or 6 tribes in that region at that time, it was not a real historical fact about Kaya period, but only an ideal result which imitated the six division system of Silla Kingdom and five division system of Koryu Kingdom.

文獻備考의 硏究

丁仲煥 東亞大學校 1974 東亞論叢 Vol.11 No.1

자연기흉의 양측 기포 동시제거술 : 11예 보고 11 CASES

오중환,윤양구,정경영,이두연,조범구,방서욱 대한의학협회 1990 대한의학협회지 Vol.33 No.2