RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      • 좁혀본 항목

      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

        • 원문유무
        • 음성지원유무
          • 원문제공처
          • 등재정보
          • 학술지명
          • 주제분류
          • 발행연도
          • 작성언어
          • 저자

        오늘 본 자료

        • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
        더보기
        • 무료
        • 기관 내 무료
        • 유료
        • KCI등재후보

          고려 대몽항쟁기 分司南海大藏都監의 운영체계와 설치 배경

          윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Iin) 역사실학회 2014 역사와실학 Vol.53 No.-

          Examined in this study is how the Division of the Grand Sutra Publication office(分司大藏都監) established and operated in the Namhae(南海) area during Goryeo"s defense against the Mongolians was related to the local publication practices overseen by the Gye’su-gwan(界首官) regional authorities, as well as to the Goryeo government’s defensive strategy of establishing new defense posts on distant islands(Hae’do Ipbo/海島入保). In Goryeo, whenever an individual would request for a book to be published, it had to be granted and authorized by the king himself in order for it to be processed by the local Gye’su-gwan authorities. The division office at Namhae was under the jurisdiction of Jinju-mok(晉州牧) authorities. There are some cases in which the Anchal-sa(按察使) magistrates intervened in the affairs of the division office, but they do not seem to have been the authorities in charge. Creation of drafts for carving as well as management of human resources were all handled by the Main office for the Grand Sutra publication(大藏都監) located on the Gang’hwa(江華) island. The Division office(分司都監) was only in charge of the carving process, yet was created as an official function of the state nonetheless, and Jeong An(鄭晏)’s support and donation was in response to that function. The reason the division office was established not in the realm of Jinju-mok but at the NamHhe area was because it had to serve another purpose, which was national defense. Being stationed there had another merit as well, as the place served as an sanctuary for the entire process to unfold. Considering all this, it is hard to believe that other division offices would have been established in several other areas as well, or that all of the tablets were created at Namhae. The division office was only established in Namhae.

        • KCI등재

          고려 태조대 鎭 설치에 대한 재검토 : 禮山鎭 · 神光鎭을 중심으로

          윤경진(Yoon Kyeong-jin) 고려사학회 2010 한국사학보 Vol.- No.40

          In this article, the Jin(鎭) units such as Yesan-jin(禮山鎭) and Shin'gwang-jin(神光鎭(Nil'eo-jin(?於鎭), which were established by King Taejo of the Goryeo dynasty, are examined from a new perspective. Previous studies considered these Yesan-jin and Shin'gwang-jin units to have been at the Yanggwang-do(楊廣道) province's Yesan-hyeon(禮山縣) area and the Gyeongsang-do(慶尙道) province's Shin'gwang-hyeon(神光縣) area. Yet certain facts, such as the situation in which those two units were installed, the exact time point when Goryeo first took control of the areas, characteristics of the regions where they were installed, and things that were done when the fortresses were built, all suggest that those units were never located in those previously suggested areas. Instead, these two units seem to have actually been at the Buk-gye(世界) region's Yong'gang-hyeon(龍岡縣) area and the Seo'hae-do(西海道) province's Shin'eun-hyeon(新恩縣), area. Yesan-jin was first built when the Seo'gyeong(西江) capital was being constructed, and the installation of this unit marked the beginning of the Goryeo dynasty's march toward the North. In the meantime, Shin'gwang-jin was built after a trunk line connecting the Gae'gyeong capital, the Su'an-hyeon(遂安縣) area and the Seo'gyeong capital was finally established. And there are more cases that should be reexamined in a similar way. Yeonsan-jin(燕山鎭) seems to have been not at the Yeonsan-gun (燕山郡) area but at the Tangjeong-gun(湯井郡) area, while the Gun'ak(軍岳) area which appears in the history of Yong'gang-hyeon seems to have originally been a Hyang(鄕) village located in the Gangseo-hyeon(江西縣) area.

        • KCI등재

          『三國史記』地理志 수록 군현의 三國 分屬

          윤경진(Yoon Kyeong-jin) 고려사학회 2012 한국사학보 Vol.- No.47

          In 『Samguk sagj(三國史記)』's 「Geography section(地理志)」, all the Gun-hyeon units' origins are clarified, and in the beginning of every entry, there is a mention saying 'originally Goguryeo' or 'originally Baekje' or 'originally Shilja.' Examined in this article, are such categorization of all the units in the Geography section, and all the discrepancies confirmed. Their categorization into the Three Dynasties was not an accurate reflecUon of the borders among the three ancient dynasties at any given time point, but was a mere mathematical representation of 'three Ju(州) provinces per dynasty.' which demonstrates the compilers' perception of the past at the time they were engaged in creating the Geography section of 『Samguk sagj』. In the early days of the Coryeo dynasty, the area north of the Samgak san mountain was considered as the old Goguryeo territory, and the area below the Han gang river was believed as the old territory of Baekje. The 'Nine Ju provinces' were allocated to the 'Three dynasties' in an equal fashion because the people of the time considered those 9 provinces as the symbol of Shilla' unification of the three ancient kingdoms. But there were other records inside as well, which do not always correspond with such belief.

        • KCI등재

          7세기 초 백제의 대수(對隋) 군사외교와 사서(史書)의 인식

          윤경진 ( Yoon¸ Kyeong-jin ) 경북대학교 영남문화연구원 2021 嶺南學 Vol.- No.78

          이 연구는 7세기 초 백제의 對隋外交의 실체와 그에 대한 史書의 인식에 대해 검토한 것이다. 수는 598년 고구려 원정에 나섰으나 遼河에 이르러 수위 상승과 보급 차질 등으로 성과 없이 철군하였다. 그런데 『隋書』 高麗傳에는 요하 도달로 고구려가 사죄한 것처럼 편집하였다. 이것은 원정의 성과를 드러내려는 의도에 따른 것이다. 백제는 수의 원정에 편승하여 軍導를 청하였다. 이는 재개될 원정에 맞추어 새로운 전략을 제안한 것이었으나 수 문제는 고구려의 사죄를 이유로 거부하였다. 고구려의 사죄와 백제의 요청은 내용 전개로 볼 때 모두 600년의 일로 파악된다. 백제는 607년 다시 수에 고구려 원정을 청하였으며, 양제는 이를 수락하고 고구려의 동정을 살피도록 하였다. 『수서』에는 백제가 挾詐하며 중국을 엿보았다고 하였는데, 이는 『수서』 찬자가 ‘麗濟連和’의 관점에서 백제의 행위에 의혹을 제기한 것이다. 또한 백제는 611년 고구려 원정이 가시화되자 軍期를 청하였고 원정이 단행된 612년에는 직접적인 군사행동도 도모하였다. 이에 대해 『수서』는 “實持兩端”이라는 의혹을 제기했는데, 이는 당시 백제가 신라 공격을 도모한 것이라는 데 근거한 것이었다. 『삼국사기』는 당시 상황에 대해 『수서』 기사를 채록하면서 의혹 부분은 모두 삭제하였다. 이는 국내의 전승 자료를 채록한 같은 시기 신라의 청병 사적에 사실성을 부여하기 위한 것이었다. This article reviews the reality of Baekjae's diplomacy toward Sui(隋) dynasty in the early 7th century and the perception of historical books about it. Sui dynasty went on the expedition to Goguryeo in 598. However when its' troops arrived at the Liao-ho river(遼河), they withdrew without outcome because of water level rising and setback in supply. Nevertheless, in Biography Goryeo(高麗傳) of Sui-shu(Book of Sui : 隋書), the descriptions were edited as if Goguryeo apologized when the troops of Sui reached the Liao-ho river. It was in accordance with the intention of reveal outcome of the expedition. Baekjae wanted to become a guide for the troops as it took a ride in the expedition of Sui. It proposed a new strategy in line with the expedition which would be resumed. The apology of Goguryeo and request of Baekjae are all believed to have been in 600 when considering development of the contents. In the year of 607, Baekjae requested expedition to Goguryeo once again. Emperor Yang of Sui accepted the request and ordered to take a close look in movements of Goguryeo. In Sui-shu, it was described that Baekje did a fraudulent act and tried to read Sui dynasty. The writer of Sui-shu raised suspicions about Baekje's actions from the viewpoint that Goguryeo and Baekje was in solidarity. In addition, when the expedition to Goguryeo was visualized in 611, Baekjae asked participation in the operation and in the year of 612, when the expedition was executed, it aimed to do direct military action. In response, Sui-shu raised suspicions that the outside of Baekje was different and the inside was different. It was based on the conjecture that Baekje attempted to attack Silla at that time. Samguk-sagi(The Chronicles of the Three States: 三國史記) extracted articles of Sui-shu about situation at that time, but it deleted all parts of suspicion. It was to give realism to Silla's historic sites about asking for a dispatch of troops. They extracted passed-down sources of same period and put them on record.

        • KCI등재

          『고려사』 식화지(食貨志) 외관록(外官祿) 규정의 기준 시점과 성립 배경

          윤경진(Yoon Kyeong-jin) 한국역사연구회 2010 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.78

          Assessed and determined in this article, is why a specific time period was selected to be described as the era that witnessed the supposed completion of the Local officials' Salary system, and why was the documentation of the "We'gwan-rok(外官祿 : Salaries for the Local Officials)" entry of the Economy Section(食貨志) inside 『History of the Goryeo Dynasty(高麗史)』 was actually fabricated. It seems like a political consideration was involved in the documentation process, as a specific order of the government which was issued during a specific time period was described as issued at an entirely different date. The reason for that will be examined here. The "We'gwan-rok(外官祿)" entry is composed of two sets of regulations("Kings' orders"). One set is allegedly from the era of King Munjong's reign(文宗朝, Munjong's orders), while the other is supposed to be from the era of King Injong's reign(仁宗朝, Injong's orders). Yet both sets of records are actually based upon one source of information, a text that was created in the 2nd year of King Myeongjong's reign. This text also has a supplemental section(追記) which covered facts that occurred until the early days of King Shinjong's reign. The so-called "Munjong's orders" portion seems to have been based upon the main body of the said Myeongjong text, and the "Injong's orders" portion seems to have been based upon the supplemental section. And in the meantime, regarding the Gyeonggi Capital region(京畿) and the Western Gyeonggi region(西京畿), the establishment of such units themselves is thoroughly highlighted and emphasized. This seems because the officials who were behind the Salary system Reform project during King Gong'yang-wang's reign needed to establish a concept of "The Institutions of the Munjong's days('文宗舊制'), in order to propel their plans toward substantial reforms. They claimed that the dynasty's salary system had already been firmly established during the reign of King Munjong(and had to be resurrected), and in order to supply their argument with a proof, they actually fabricated the so-called "Munjong's orders," and created the "Injong's orders" as well, based upon the above-mentioned records.

        • KCI등재

          『고려사』지리지 ‘대경기’ 기사의 비판적 검토

          윤경진(Yoon Kyeong-jin) 한국역사연구회 2008 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.69

          Reviewing it as a reference to the land swvey(度田) project of the Gyeonggi region conducted in the 18th year of King Gongmin-wang's reign - Inside the Geographies section of 『Goryeosa』, there is a reference to an administrative policy regarding a 'Grand Gyeonggi' region that was implemented in the 23rd year of King Muniong's reign. Recently this reference was argued as a valid one, yet in terms of logic and proofs, one could say such argument is far from valid. This reference is actually made to the land swvey(度田) project of the Gyeonggi region which was conducted in the 18th year of King Gongmin-wang's reign. Statistical information regarding the Eub-ho titles of those times concurs with such conclusion. This 'Gyeonggi' exhibited a range which was exactly the same with that of the revised Gyeonggi reign in the 2nd year of King Gongyang-wang. Because of the cause presented at me enthronement of King Gongyang-wang, the political faction which was promoting the land ownership reform during the ending days of the Goryeo dynasty was not in a position to acknowledge the result of the Gyeonggi area land survey project, as it was the accomplishment of Shin Don's reforms. So they labelled this administrative policy of the Gongmin-wang's time as 'the old practices of the Munjong days', and in the jiri-gi section of 『Goryeosa』, the date of implementation was recorded as the 23rd year of King Munjong's reign, and not Gongmin-wang's 18th year.

        • KCI등재

          新羅 太宗(武烈王) 諡號 논변에 대한 자료적 검토

          윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Jin) 역사실학회 2013 역사와실학 Vol.51 No.-

          Examined in this article are the discussions and conflicts that supposedly continued between Shilla and Dang, over the issue of Shilla king Taejo Mu’yeol-wang’s posthumous title(諡號). These discussions and conflicts are respectively documented in both ?Samguk Sagi(三國史記)? and ?Samguk Yusa(三國遺事)?, and attempted in this article is a comparative analysis of these records, in order to determine the original contents of the discussion and how they were actually recorded later on. In general, it is said that King Taejong’s posthumous title is established based upon the fact that he contributed to the ‘unification of the three dynasties(一統三韓).’ And from this, scholars have been believing that the notion of “Sam-han is united as one”(三韓一統意識) had already been established in the early stage of the Middle period of Shilla. Records from these two sources show certain differences from each other, in terms of the exact time point of the initiation of the issue, the real nature of the Dang Emperor which was part of the discussion, and also how the discussion proceeded. But both records are ultimately based upon the same original material, and it seems that 『Samguk Yusa』 is the one that reflected the original more perfectly. Then again, the original material is rather focused upon Kim Yu-shin(金庾信) instead of King Mu’yeol-wang, and also contains portions that do not match factual details or even stories with mythical proportions that cannot possibly be trusted. And it also shows a perspective from a period even later than king Shinmu-wang(神文王)’s reign, which was far later than the time point when the discussion actually occurred. 『Samguk Sagi』 eliminated or modified portions from the original either irrational or unverifiable, and acknowledged the alleged meaning behind Taejong’s posthumous title. Yet considering the nature of the original text, it is highly possible that there was never a discussion at all. Therefore the meaning of Taejong’s posthumous title should be evaluated differently from before.

        • KCI등재

          知康州事 王逢規와 高麗 太祖 王建

          윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong Jin) 역사실학회 2018 역사와실학 Vol.66 No.-

          이 연구는 신라말 현 진주 지역에 기반을 둔 해상세력으로 이해되었던 王逢規가 실제로는 高麗 太祖 王建임을 논한 것이다. 이는 927년 왕봉규가 보낸 사신 林彦이 같은 해 고려에서 보낸 사신과 동일인이라는 데 기초한다. 그가 소속을 바꾸어 한 해에 두 차례 사신으로 간다는 것은 현실성이 없으므로 파견주체도 동일인으로 보아야 한다. 왕봉규의 직함인 泉州節度使와 知康州事는 自稱이 아니라 중국 왕조에서 수여한 것이며, 직함의 천주와 강주 또한 중국 지명이다. 당시 신라 강주의 상황은 왕봉규의 등장과 소멸을 뒷받침하지 않는다. 왕건은 독립적인 국왕이었지만 외교적으로 신라에 부속된 존재로 간주되었기 때문에 그의 사신은 신라 사신으로 간주되었다. 왕건이 즉위할 때 이름은 逢規였고, 이후 王氏를 칭하다가 後唐에 국왕 책봉을 요청하면서 王建으로 개명하였다. Pursued in this study is the possibility that a historical figure named Wang Bong-gyu(王逢規), a leader of a maritime faction with a base established in today’s Jinju area at the end of the Unified Shilla period, was actually Wang Geon(王建), the founder king of the Goryeo dynasty himself. This hypothesis is based upon the fact that emissary Im Eon(林彦), who was dispatched by Wang Bong-gyu in 927, was actually the same person who was dispatched by the Goryeo government the very same year. It would not have been possible for him to change sides in the course of a single year, and be dispatched in the same capacity twice in that year, so it would be more than natural to assume that he was only sent once, and also by a same entity. Wang Bong-gyu’s official titles, which were Magistrate of Cheonju(泉州節度使) and Prefect of Gangju(知康州事), were not named by himself arbitrarily but were officially bestowed from the Chinese government. Regions in the titles are also Chinese. There was in fact a Gangju area in Shilla (on the Korean peninsula) as well, but the situation of the Shilla Gangju area does not seem to correspond with the emergence of Wang Bong-gyu as well as his fall. Meanwhile, Wang Geon was the king of Goryeo, an independent country, but was also considered as part of Shilla (at least up until that point), so the emissary he sent to China was also considered and described as a ‘Shilla emissary’ by the Chinese. Wang Geon’s birth name seems to have been Bong-gyu(逢規) even at the time of his enthronement, and later after assuming the last name Wang(王氏) he finally changed his name to Wang Geon(王建) when he formally requested China’s(in this case Hu-Dang/後唐’s) recognition of his enthronement.

        • KCI등재

          고려전기 도의 다원적 편성과 5도의 성립

          윤경진(Kyeong Jin Yoon) 연세대학교 국학연구원 2006 동방학지 Vol.0 No.135

          '스콜라' 이용 시 소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우, 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 7시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

        • KCI등재

          고려 동북 9성의 범위와 ‘公嶮鎭 立碑’ 문제

          윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Jin) 역사실학회 2016 역사와실학 Vol.61 No.-

          이 논문은 고려 예종대 동북 9성의 개척과 관련하여 개척 범위를 파악하고 각 城들의 구체적인 위치를 비정하는 한편, 公嶮鎭에 비를 세워 경계로 삼았다는 사적에대해 비판 검토한 것이다. 현재 동북 9성의 개척 범위에 대해서는 함흥평야에 국한된다는 설에 대해 두만강 북쪽까지 이르렀다는 설이 제기되고 있다. 반면 길주 이남에 분포한다는 실학자들의 주장은 크게 주목받지 못했다. 그러나 『고려사』 지리지에서 동북 9성과 연결된 咸州와 吉州, 端州 연혁의 자료적 근거와 「英州廳壁上記」의 “方 300리” 기록, 그리고 당시 작성된 墓誌銘과 주요 전투 기록 등을 종합해 보면, 동북 9성은 吉州 이남 지역에 분포한 것으로 보는 것이 타당하다. 또한 윤관이 개척 후 공험진에 비석을 세워 경계로 삼았다는 기록은 「영주청벽상기」에서 개척 지역이 본래 고구려 땅임을 입증하기 위해 인용한 ‘高句麗 古碑’를 근거로 생성된 것이다. 이 고비는 개척 지역에 있던 진흥왕의 摩雲嶺碑를 이용해서 제시한 것이었다. 공험진은 바로 마운령 지역에 위치하고 있었다. 고려말 이 지역을 다시 개척하면서 이 비는 “공험진에 있던 고구려 고비”에서 “공험진에 세운 고려 비”로 바뀌면서 동북 9성의 경계를 나타내는 것으로 간주되었던 것이다. Examined in this article is the overall range that was covered by the installation of “ine Nthe fortresses in the Northeast region of the Korean peninsula,(동북 9성)” during the reign of king Yejong of Goryeo, as well as the exact locations of those fortresses. The record that says ‘A stone monument was erected at Gong’heom-jin(公嶮鎭) so that it could serve as a marker for the borderline’ is also critically reanalyzed. The Joseon dynasty Shilhak scholar’s past argument that the Northeast Nine Fortresses were actually installed in regions below Gilju(吉州) area was not that well received by modern scholars for decades. But analysis of various historical resources lead us to conclude that the Northeast Nine Fortresses were indeed positioned below Gilju. Also, the record of a stone monument having been erected at Gong’heom-jin(公嶮鎭) to serve as a border marker seems to have been created based upon the contents of an ancient Goguryeo stone tablet which had been earlier cited -inside a record titled Words on the Yeongju Office wall(“Yeongju-cheong Byeoksang-gi, 英州廳壁上記”) - to argue that the newly covered area (by Yun Gwan’s Nine fortresses) had originally been part of the Goguryeo territory. This ancient tablet, however, was actually the Ma’un-ryeong-bi tablet(stone monument at the Ma’un-ryeong mountain range, 摩雲嶺碑) erected by king Jin’heung-wang of Shilla, which happened to be inside the newly covered region. When this region was newly claimed by the Goryeo government at the end of the dynasty, this tablet was believed (or at least newly called) as the “Goryeo tablet erected at Gong’heom-jin,” and was considered as marking the borderline of the Northeast Nine Fortresses.

        맨 위로 스크롤 이동