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.

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.

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).

한일 간의 流動하는 국민적 기억

신주백(Sin Ju-Back) 한일관계사학회 2007 한일관계사연구 Vol.26 No.-

이 글은 1909년 10월의 安重根義擧와 그 시기를 전후로 일본이 한국을 어떻게 침략했는가에 대해 1945년부터 지금까지 발행된 한일 두 나라의 교과서를 통시적인 측면에서 비교 검토한 논문이다. 두 나라 고등학교 역사교과서에서 安重根義擧에 대한 서술은 한국의 경우 1974년 교과서부터, 일본의 경우는 1994년경 교과서부터 확연히 바뀌어 갔다. 이제는 민족운동가로서의 安重根의 이미지와 그의 행위가 의병운동의 일환이었다는 서술이 정착되었다. 또한 일본의 역사교과서 가운데 安重根義擧가 한국병합의 원인을 제공했다고 책임을 전가하는 서술도 없다. 그렇지만 두 나라 역사교육은 安重根이 항일을 위한 싸움만 한 사람이란 단순 이미지 대신에 일본의 제국주의적 침략이 갖는 문제점과 더불어 이에 저항하며 한국독립과 ‘동양평화’를 위해 이토 히로부미伊藤博文를 저격했다는 관점을 적극 도입할 필요가 있다. 안중근의 행위는 일본제국주의에 맞서 자신의 목숨을 던진 행위였다. 지금의 시점에서 그의 행위를 폭력이란 잣대로 평가하는 것은 역사적 맥락을 무시한 접근이다. 앞으로 安重根義擧와 伊藤博文狙擊事件, 그리고 伊藤博文에 關한 硏究와 歷史敎育은 각자의 존재적 차이를 인정하면서도 당시의 사회와 국제관계 그리고 반제국주의운동을 더 잘 이해하고 인류 보편적 가치까지도 밝히려는 방향에서 이루어져야 한다. This paper is a diachronic comparative study of how Korean and Japanese textbooks have portrayed the period of Ahn Jung-geun’s patriotic deed of October, 1909and the Japanese invasion of Korea. The portrayal of Ahn Jung-geun’s patriotic deed changed noticeably in the Korean textbooks beginning in 1974, and in the Japanese textbooks around 1994. UnderstandingAhn Jung-geun as a nationalist activist and his tactic as a part of the irregular military movement has become dominant in the narrative. Moreover, Japanese textbooks no longer attribute Japan’s annexation of Korea to Ahn Jung-geun’s deed. However, the history education curricula of the two countries have a sharedresponsibility to convey Ahn Jung-geun’s political views more accurately totheir students. They need to move beyond the image of Ahn Jung-geun as merely ananti-Japanese militant tointroduce the viewpoint that his purpose ofshooting Ito Hirobumi was to establish “Peace in East Asia.” What he did was a heroic act of self-sacrifice defying imperialism which was the mobilizing order of the most violent country in the history of mankind. To evaluate his deed today in terms of violence is to disregard its historical context. Future studies on Ahn Jung-geun should attempt to illuminate his contemporary society, international relations, and anti-imperialist movement as well as universal human values.

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.

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

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

1960년대 ‘근대화론’의 學界유입과 한국사 연구

신주백(Sin, Ju-Back) 한국사학회 2017 史學硏究 Vol.0 No.125

한국 학계에서 케네디정권의 근대화론을 처음 적용한 학술회의는 미국의 지원을 받아 1962년에 열렸다. 회의에서는 근대화를 서양화로 이해하고 근대의 기점을 중점 논의하였다. 하지만 아직까지 학계의 관심을 크게 끌지는 못하였다. 1965년 한일기본조약이 체결되며 고조된 민족적 위기의식과도 맞물려 학계에서도 이즈음부터 전통, 민주주의, 산업화, 민족주의를 고려하며 한국적 맥락에서 근대화문제를 해명하려는 논의가 급속히 확산되었다. 학술담론으로서 근대화에 관해 종합적으로 논의하는 회의가 매년 열렸고, 그때마다 한국사 학계는 전통과 관련된 논의에 주로 참여하였다. 그러면서 한국사 학계만의 독자적인 영역에 해당하는 주제인 식민지배의 대항적 주체를 찾기 시작했고, 식민사관을 비판적으로 규명하는 노력을 활발하게 전개하였다. 근대에 한정하지 않고 한국사 전체를 시대구분하며 새로운 한국사상을 정립하려는 노력으로 이어졌다. 결국 1960년대 들어 한국 학계에서 케네디정권의 근대화론을 수용하고 한국적 맥락에서 구체적인 논의를 전개한 과정은 한국사 인식에서 기계적 시간관념과 발전사관이 민족적이고 합법칙적 인식이란 이름으로 시민권을 획득하는 과정이었다. 한국사 학계는 새로운 역사관을 만들어가는 과정에서 국민만들기에 호응하며 정부측의 근대화 기획과 접점을 찾기도 하였다. The first conference to be held in Korea and to ever apply the “Modernization” theory of the U.S. Kennedy administration in its presentations was held in 1962. In this conference, the concept of modernization was understood as “Westernization,” and therefore the ‘beginning point’ of the modern period was extensively discussed. Koreans debate upon this matter, as well as their embracement of the “Modernization” theory, which began essentially with efforts concerning the issue of how to establish periods in Korean history, explosively expanded around 1965 when the Korea-Japan treaty was signed and a sense of crisis continued to rise amongst the Korean people. People started to search for entities (or trends) that opposed colonial ruling, and started to analyze and explain colonial historial perspectives. Periodization efforts concerning the entire Korean history resurfaced as well. The influx of the “Modernization” theory and its expansion in the 1960s was a process in which chronological time-consciousness and development-based perspectives were being newly labelled as a Nationalistic and Pro-‘social principles’ perspectives. An eye to monitor ‘internal developments’ was being ingrained in individual scholars’ perspectives and attitudes.