http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
포상팔국 전쟁의 개전(開戰)시기와 전쟁양상에 대한 재검토
정상희 한국역사연구회 2018 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.110
Examined in this article are records like Samguk Sagi (三國史記), Samguk Yusa (三國遺事) and the “Han section” [韓傳] of the Chinese Samguk-ji (三國志), and references inside them regarding the Posangpal-guk war to be exact, in order to determine when the war actually broke out and why. Based upon such determination, hopefully we’d be able to understand the social dynamics that enabled the war, or the relationships among all involved countries that bred such war to begin with. First, the Naehae Isageum(奈解尼師今) entry in the “Chronology” section [Bon’gi] of Samguk Sagi and the Mulgyeja biography [勿稽子傳] of the “Biographies” section [Yeoljeon] in the same book were examined. It should be noted that the very object of Posangpal-guk’s attack is recorded differently in the former record and the latter. Addition to this, the identity of the emissary who asked for a relief force, and the very leader of that relief force, are also recorded differently between the two records. One record even contains factual details that are never mentioned in the other. For example, the Posangpal-guk’s attack upon the Galhwa-seong fortress is mentioned only in the “Biographies” section and not in the “Chronology” section. This suggests a possibility that both records (Bon’gi and Yeoljeon) were not in a relationship in which one abbreviated the other, but their respective contents were from entirely different sources of information. Another example could be felt from the Mulgyeja biography inside Samguk Yusa, as unlike Samguk Sagi, his biography here notes the fact that eight states, including Bora-guk(保羅國), attacked Shilla perimeters. Interestingly, ‘Bora-guk’ or ‘Samul-guk(史勿國)’ are state names which cannot be found in other sources. The second point that was examined was the actual time point when the Posangpal-guk war began. Taking the contents of the Hanjeon section in Samguk-ji into account, it seems it was early or middle period of the 3rd century. According to this record, in the mid-3rd century king-like figures emerged in the 12 states of Byeonhan, and Guya and Anya, who had been friendly with each other, came to form two of the most influential factions in the region. The described situation does fit the condition that would have preceded the Posangpal-guk war, and makes us presume the early or mid-3rd century was indeed when the war broke out. The final point to be discussed was the victims of Posangpal-guk’s attacks, based upon references made in Samguk Sagi’s “Chronology” as well as “Biographies” sections. It seems like the main target of Posangpal-guk was the Ham’an region’s Ara-guk(阿羅國), and it is highly possible that the Posangpal- guk state -with Guya at its center- isolated Anya-guk and surrounded it with the intention to expand its own power and influence. In response, for assistance Anya asked Shilla, which had been clashing with Guya for some time, and Shilla involved itself in the conflict by aiding Ara-guk(Any-guk), intending to crush and subdue the Guya-centric faction. Shilla’s such interference was the reason for Golpo, Chilpo and Gosapo (members of the Posangpal-guk alliance) attacking Shilla’s Galhwa-seong fortress three years later. In other words, Posangpal-guk, including the Gimhae region, was able to establish itself through the war, and the Posangpal-guk war itself was literally a process in which Guya was expanding its own power.
동북아 경제통합을 이끌 한·중·일 연합 -유럽통합의 독․불 연합 사례로부터 얻는 교훈-
정상희,이종원,황기식 경희대학교(국제캠퍼스) 국제지역연구원 2010 아태연구 Vol.17 No.1
This paper seeks to draw some useful implications from the European integration case for the regional cooperation in Northeast Asia. Authors believe that establishing close relationship between two key major players (i.e. French-German coalition) has been one of the most important factors in the successful EU integration process, and suggest to make similar coalition among East Asian key countries, such as between Japan-Korea and China-Japan. In conclusion, it suggests that coalition between two key players would take a leading role in terms of creating a chance for Northeast Asian economic community including Northeast regional FTA. 본고는 유럽통합 과정에서 중추적 역할을 담당했던 독․불 연합의 사례를 통해 미진한 동북아 지역 경제협력에의 시사점을 도출하고, 중국과 한국, 그리고 일본의 협력에 기반한 동북아 지역 경제협력 추진이 후발국가들의 개혁과 발전을 촉진하며, 지역경제협력 실현도 가능할 것임을 제시한다. 본고는 동북아 지역 경제 협력과 관련해 유럽통합의 경험으로부터 얻을 수 있는 몇 가지 교훈을 검토하는 데 주목적을 갖고 있으며 특히 유럽통합 과정에서 추동력과 추진력으로서 중요한 역할을 했던 독·불 연합으로부터 몇 가지 교훈을 이끌어 내고자 한다. 독·불 협력체제와 유사한 동아시아 양국협력체제의 구축은 동북아 각국에서 적절한 시장경제체제의 확립에 필요한 경제개혁을 앞당기는 원동력과 효율적으로 실현할 수 있게 하는 외부적인 압력으로 작용할 것이다.