唐前期 進士科와 明經科 급제자의 檢證

하원수(河元洙) 중국고중세사학회 2018 중국고중세사연구 Vol.49 No.-

새로운 사료와 시각을 도입한 심층 연구의 확산: 2014~2017 인도사 연구동향

구하원 역사학회 2018 역사학보 Vol.0 No.239

최근 인도사 연구는 양적으로 성장이 다소 주춤한 대신 다양한 사료를 이용하여 새로운 해석을 시도하는 등 질적으로 성장하고 있다. 이전 연구와 비교하였을 때 1차 사료의 범위가 상당히 넓어졌으며, 많은 연구가 탈식민주의 이론(Postcolonial theories)과 서벌턴 연구(Subaltern Studies) 이후 나타난 대안적 시각을 도입하고 있다. 본고에서는 2014년부터 2017년까지 4년간 출간된 국내 인도사 관련 연구를 논의한다. Ⅱ장에서는 영국의 식민통치와 근대화에 대한 연구를 영국 식민 정책 및 기관에 대한 저술과 인도인들의 저항 및 독립 운동으로 나누어 논의하였다. 몇몇 논문은 이미 널리 알려진 사건이나 소재에 대해 새로운 사료와 해석을 도입하여 인도 근대사에 새로운 시각을 제공한다. Ⅲ장에서는 식민통치와 민족주의에 대한 담론을 넘어서서 인도 근대사의 영역을 확장시키는 다양한 연구를 살펴보았다. 이 장에서는 여성과 피지배계층에 대한 연구뿐 아니라 문학과 사본학(寫本學) 등 사료가 확장됨을 논의하였다. 또한 한국-인도 교류사를 비판적으로 고찰할 필요성을 제기하였다. 마지막 에서는 현재 인도사 연구의 성과와 한계를 짚으며 앞으로 이를 더욱 활성화시키기 위한 방안을 제시하고자 하였다. While the growth of studies in Indian history in Korea has slowed down slightly during the past four years, it has also seen a rise of multi-layered studies based on new historical sources and perspectives. In comparison to earlier studies, the breadth of primary sources has expanded, and many studies have embraced alternative perspectives following the rise of Postcolonial theories and Subaltern Studies. This paper discusses four years’ research on Indian history in Korea, from 2014 to 2017. Chapter II examines writings on British colonial rule and the rise of modernity in India, of which several discuss well-known events or topics; with the use of new sources and perspectives, I suggest that they provide a new perspective to modern Indian history. Chapter III examines a variety of topics in India modern history, including studies on women and the subjugated classes, as well as the widening range of historical sources which now incorporate literary texts and manuscript studies. I also suggest the need for a critical examination of historical exchanges between India and Korea. The final chapter considers the achievements and limits of current historical research in Indian studies, with suggestions to enrich the field.

인도 근대 미술의 여성상과 민족주의(Nationalism)의 성장

구하원 한국미술사학회 2009 美術史學硏究 Vol.262 No.262

19세기 인도 자이나교 사원 건축의 변천과 그 원인 : 샤뜨룬자야의 모띠샤 뚱크를 중심으로

구하원 미술사와 시각문화학회 2007 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.6 No.-

Satrufijaya, located in Gujarat, India, is one of the most important pilgrimage sites for Svetambara Murtpujak Jains, who comprise the majority of Jains in western India. The summit of Satrunjaya hill is covered with more than 800 temples including the main temple dedicated to Adisvara, the first of 24 Jinas, or teachers, of Jainism. However, in spite of the alleged antiquity of the site, most of the temples were built only during the 19th century. This was contemporaneous with a series of court cases regarding the ownership of the site between the Jains and the Hindu rulers of the surrounding area, This paper examines the architecture and patronage of the 19th-centu-ry temples at Satrunjaya, focusing on Mot1siiry Tunk, one of the latest temple complexes built at the site. Architecturally, the temples of Motisah Tunk provide an exemplar of 19th-century Jain temple architecture, Compared with earlier Jain temples built in the Western Indian Style, or Maru-Gurjara Style, the large central courtyard, multiple subsidiary temples, powerful outer walls, as well as eclectic sculptural and decorative elements of Motisah Tunk are indicative of significant changes within the Jain communi-ty. Motisah Tunk was built by Motisah, a merchant from Bombay (Mum-bai) who had gained an enormous amount of wealth from opium export during the early 19th century, While patronage of temples and religious events served as an established means of acquiring merit for Jain lay peo-pie, this also provided the patron with financial stability, or credit (sakb), among fellow merchants, which was crucial during the pre-modern era, This essay argues that the architecture of Motisah Tunk represents the patrons' desire to sustain the mode of traditional credit-building under British colonial rule. However, this did not stop the patrons from incorpo-rating western or non-traditional architectural elements, which served to enhance the religious experience of the worshiper, This paper also explores the dichotomy in South Asian art history, which has consequently relegated the study of 19th-century religious monuments to a scholarly periphery. The colonially constructed (and later widely accepted) notion of India as an ancient, religious society that only became “modern" with its encounter with the West, has led to studies that focus either on pre-modern, "traditional" art, or on the other hand, modern, “Westem-style” art. As a result, Motisah Tunk, a modem monument with a pre-modern function (as a religious structure) and traditional style, has remained in relative obscurity, Nevertheless, the acknowledgement of this dichotomy and its constructed nature are imperative to the understanding of the temples as well as their patrons who reconstructed a modern religious community during the 19th century in South Asia.

하원수, 『과거제도 형성사』(서울, 성균관대학교출판부, 2021)의 소개와 논평 및 답변

하원수(Ha, Wonsoo),김종섭(Kim, Jongseob),최재영(Choi, Jaeyoung) 서울대학교 동아문화연구소 2023 東亞文化 Vol.60 No.-

天聖令 田令과 賦役令의 사료적 가치와 역주

하원수(河元洙) 중국고중세사학회 2015 중국고중세사연구 Vol.36 No.-

South Asian Art History Since the 1990s

구하원 한국외국어대학교 인도연구소 2009 남아시아연구 Vol.15 No.1

This article examines the trends found in South Asian art history since the 1990s. Based on a bibliography of South Asian art history compiled in 2003, it introduces the scope of South Asian art history from 1993 to 1998. Following a brief discussion of the formation of art history during the colonial period, it also aims to explain the limits inherent in the discipline. As a discipline seeking to fulfill a role within empirical history, art history has been utilized as a powerful tool in creating modernity, especially within the colonial context. However, recent trends in South Asian art history display new approaches. Firstly, we can find the enthusiastic embracing of multi‐disciplinary or interdisciplinary studies, including the adaptation of theories advanced in anthropology, ethnography, history, and literature. Secondly, subject matters that have been ignored within the traditional narrative of art history have been gathering more interest. Lastly, an interest in the modern and contemporary, which also leads to the subject of identity, has been arising in recent studies of South Asian art history. These trends reflect a broadening of topics in both period and media, as well as approaches within the discipline.

또 다른 타자(他者) 읽기: 남아시아 근현대 미술의 이해

구하원 미술사와 시각문화학회 2012 미술사와 시각문화 Vol.11 No.-

2000년대 이후 국내미술계에서는 남아시아 근 현대미술에 대한 관심이 크게 늘었으나 이에 대한 학문적 논의는 거의 부재하였다. 남아시아 근 현대미술에 대한 이해는 미술사라는 근대적인 학문와 영국의 식민통치로 인해 다양한 문제를 내포하고 있는데 근 현대의 기점을 잡는 문제부터 근대(modern)와 모더니즘(modernism), 모더니티(modernity), 식민주의(colonialism), 탈식민성(postcoloniality) 등 개념을 정립하는데 일어나는 어려움, 그리고 작품과 작가의 해석에서 피할 수 없는 서구중심적인 사고를 들 수 있다. 이 논문은 남아시아 근 현대미술의 이해를 위해 이러한 문제와 용어를 정리하며 빠르타 미떠(Partha Mitter)와 기따 까뿌르(Geeta Kapur)등 대표적인 학자 2인이 이를 해결하고자 한 방식을 살펴보고자 한다. This paper examines the study of modern and contemporary South Asian art, which has been gaining much interest but not much academic studies in Korea. As an introductory essay to the subject matter, I have laid out the theoretical problems inherent in the studies of modern and contemporary South Asian art. Many studies have stated that most of these problems stem from the origins of art history as a modern discipline as well as the history of South Asia as a colonial space. Together with the colonial census, studies of languages and religions, law, and histories, South Asian art history progressed as a colonial project aimed to enhance classificatory governmentality. As a result, there has been much confusion in the definition of periods (when does the "modern" start and end in South Asia?), the terms used in studies of the period (modern, modernity, colonialism, nationalism, postcoloniality), and the interpretation of South Asian works from this period. The second part of the paper focuses on the ideas of modernity, modernism, colonialism, and postcoloniality. However, as concepts within a clearly Western epistemological framework based on the Western historical experience dating back to the Enlightenment, there rises a need to translate such terms when used in the context of South Asian history or art histories of any non-Euroamerican entity. Furthermore, contrary to the notion that the West/ metropole had sole possession of modernity as a phenomenon, scholars have argued that the production of modernity was closely related and dependent upon colonialism or the control of the colony. However, Modernism, as an artistic movement and form of resistance to the patriarchal and bourgeois art of Europe, also provided a means of opposition against colonial rule and Western domination to non-Western artists. This was ultimately accepted and adapted within the multiple facets of nationalism. On the other hand, postcoloniality arose out of a rejection of Eurocentric viewpoints; by describing the historical, political, cultural and epistemological conditions produced by and through the historical experience of colonialism, postcoloniality is defined as not a temporal period, but rather a rejection of the "lack" or "inadequacy" of the Other. The final part of the paper discusses two figures central to the history of modern and contemporary South Asian art. Art historian Partha Mitter and contemporary art critique Geeta Kapur have been most active in defining and critiquing approaches towards modern and contemporary South Asian art. However, while art historian Partha Mitter agrees that the “Picasso Manque Syndrome” is caused by an asymmetrical production of power, he also believes that a genuine loosening of the canon and of the teleological linearity of art history would lead to a global and universal art history. On the other hand, art critique Geeta Kapoor argues that achieving an "internationalism" or Western-based modernism is truly unobtainable, as third-world countries like India cannot avoid the collision between nationalism and internationalism. As non-Western but non-South Asian scholars of modern and contemporary South Asian art, it would be most beneficial to consider the arguments of Mitter and Kapur when positioning oneself in the discipline.

제국의 정당화, 여성의 타자화__인도 통치와 여성에 대한 제임스 밀과 존 스튜어트 밀의 글을 중심으로__

구하원 인도철학회 2022 印度哲學 Vol.- No.65

This article examines the writings of James Mill(1773-1836) and his son John Stuart Mill(1806-1873), two representative thinkers of the period during which British rule over India was being consolidated by the East India Company. I particularly focus on their attitudes towards British rule in India as well as women’s rights. Both James Mill and John Stuart Mill left significant bodies of writing on India while working for the East India Company. James Mill’s The History of British India(1817) became a hegemonic text on Indian history, particularly due to its division of the stages in Indian history and criticism of Indian society and culture. He also argued that the status of women in a society reflected its progress towards civilization, and that the appalling position of Hindu women justified British rule of India. On the other hand, although John Stuart Mill left a large number of despatches on Indian education, the Native princes, and governance of the Company, he rarely mentioned his work or India in his political or philosophical writings. In comparison to his father, John Stuart Mill also displays a more tolerant attitude towards Indian customs and culture, with mentions of Indian women as examples of efficient political rulers. The father and son did not deny the justness of British rule in India, in spite of differences in the purpose of such colonial rule as well as in their attitudes towards women and women's rights. This article compared their writings, and how these thoughts were expressed in the policies and rationalization of Company and imperial rule over India, as well as men’s rule over women. I also suggest that their writings were crucial to the rise of Indian intelligentsia and their understanding of history and women in modern India. 이 논문은 동인도회사를 통한 인도 지배가 확고해지던 시기에 영국의 대표적인 지식인으로 꼽히던 제임스 밀(James Mill)과 그 아들 존 스튜어트 밀(John Stuart Mill)의 글을 중심으로 영국의 인도 통치와 여성에 대한 두 사람의 인식을 검토하고자 한다. 제임스 밀과 존 스튜어트 밀은 둘 다 수년간 동인도회사에 재직하며 인도 관련 저술을 남겼다. 제임스 밀은 『영령인도사』(1817)를 통해 인도 사회와 문화를 신랄하게 비판하며 인도사의 서술 방식 등 인도에 대한 부정적인 인식에 오랫동안 큰 영향을 끼쳤다. 그는 또한 여성의 지위를 통해 문명 여부를 알 수 있다고 주장하며 인도 여성의 낮은 지위로 동인도회사의 지배를 정당화하였다. 존 스튜어트 밀의 경우, 회사 재직 당시 남긴 공문을 통해 인도의 교육과 왕조 관련 정책, 통치 방식에 대한 그의 입장을 읽을 수 있으나 이 외의 저술에서는 인도에 대한 논의가 거의 전무하였다. 그러나 아버지와 달리 인도의 전통과 관습을 상당 부분 수용하는 모습을 보이며, 여성의 능력을 보여주는 예로 인도 여성을 꼽기도 하였다. 두 부자는 영국의 인도 지배를 부인하지 않았으나 그 목적에 있어 상이한 입장을 보였으며 여성이나 여성의 참정권에 대한 태도 역시 차이를 보였다. 이 논문에서는 두 사람의 저술에서 보이는 태도를 분석한 후, 동인도회사의 정책과 인도에 대한 제국의 지배, 그리고 여성에 대한 남성의 태도를 고찰하며 이들이 인도 지식인들의 근대적인 역사와 여성에 대한 인식까지 끼친 영향을 간략히 살펴보고자 하였다.

「原道」 小考 ― 道의 구현 주체와 표현 방식 문제를 중심으로 ―

하원수(河元洙) 중국고중세사학회 2021 중국고중세사연구 Vol.61 No.-