아레오파고스 의회의 구성

崔滋英(Che, Ja-young) 韓國西洋古典學會 1992 西洋古典學硏究 Vol.6 No.-

고대 아테네의 법원(法源)과 법 실현의 주체

최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 대구사학회 2009 대구사학 Vol.94 No.-

In the ancient Greek polis, the function of state was not so complicated as that of the modern state, the administrative and judicial power distributed to various categories of social group such as villages, families, clans and tribes. In ancient society generally, the division of criminal and civil laws, as well as that of public crime and private wrong (tort), was not so definite, and the sovereignty defining and realizing laws was not standardized but multiple. The centrifugal propensity and multifarious phases of ancient society caused the customary or unwritten laws to have a greater gravity than the written or statute laws. To say that Dracon`s Law was the first written law in the ancient Greek society does not mean that the society was based on the written laws themselves. Solon`s Law, which was said to have discarded all the articles of Dracon`s Law except the clause relating to involuntary murder, was looked upon as an ancestral, and all the laws, being established in later periods for about 250 years, were assumed to be his. Sonlon`s Law referred not only to any specific items, but to some principles of legitimacy which made a room for public opinion and the customary or unwritten laws to operate. Here, we could say that, the real gist is not whether the law is customary, unwritten or written law, but who has the sovereignty to define and materialize laws in reality. Not to speak of a public or a private, prosecution was set up by private initiation, and the sentence as well as execution of laws was is in most part carried out by the public. The judicial institution, in which the public took the initiative, shows up that the structure of polis was not bureaucratic and that the judicial power was not an exclusive possession of some kind of limited politicians.

동,서양 접촉 이후의 근대 약초학에 보이는 실용성 : 근대 서방과 우리나라 『동의보감』의 약효에 대한 이해의 비교를 중심으로 On a comparision of the alleged effects of the medical botany between the modem West and the 『Dong-Eui-Bo-Gam (E佮⁡⁣潭灡物獩潮映瑨攠慬汥来搠敦晥捴猠潦⁴桥敤

최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 대구사학회 2007 대구사학 Vol.89 No.-

전쟁의 원인과 국제관계에 대한 투키디데스의 분석 -긍정적 인간성과 평화의 지향에서 보이는 현대적 의미-

최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 대구사학회 2010 대구사학 Vol.101 No.-

Thucydides, a historian of the Ancient Greece, considered the real cause of the Peloponnesian War, which was formally kept out of sight, to be the growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm which the Lacedaemonians felt against Athens. In the same context, the realism of power domination is described, as it is well known, in the Athenian debates against the revolting Mytilenians and in the argument of the Athenian ambassador in Melos. Some scholars supposed that Thucydides supported the concept of power domination, but others denied this kind of simplification and tried to find various concepts in Thucydides, for example, morality, humanity, and the influence of chance (tyche) which could not be calculated in advance. This essay is to suggest that the purpose of Thucydides in writing history was not only defined to describe human natures, but could be extended to find a method to solve the troubles of war and power domination. In the beginning of his History, he wrote that he came to write the Peloponnesian War, as it lasted longer than any other previous one, and its scale of preparation was the largest among them. Then, the human nature could never be erased, but, it seems to me, Thucydides tried to give a lesson that in the state of peace the negative human nature based on violence got reduced and the positive one of moral humanity promoted. The war which used to break out upon excessive human desire for power, however, makes the negative human nature enhanced. It could be said that the lesson Thucydides tried to give a message helps to overcome the realism of power and imperialistic aggression. It is a warning, in my opinion, against pursuing excessive human desire, undue concentration of power and long lasting war. The war could be tolerated in case of inevitable defence against attack, but it should not be extended to the rule of power looking after excessive human desire and private profit. It is not easy, however, to define actually the boundary between the defensive and offensive war, and it needs really a wise, moderate discretion. One criterion for a wise judgment might be whether whoever inside as well as out of a country enjoys freedom and equality, not being repressed by the violence of power. The actual democracy does not just refer to the formal rights of voting, but to a really free state of any kind of violence. Internal governing system has directly something to do with international relations as well. Thucydides` warning against the deployment of negative human nature on the war of great scale or the violence of power may be also applied to today`s assignment for the decentralization of power against central authority, as well as disarmament. In relation to this, we had better refer to the suggestion of Platon, who warned against a large scale of community, that a desirable state be consisted of 5040 citizen members. And in the first half or the 20th century, J.A. 1-lobson brought forward a thesis that the democratic government goes for international harmony, and the dictatorship for international agony.

투키디데스와 폴리비오스의 역사관

崔滋英(Che, Ja Young) 韓國西洋古典學會 1995 西洋古典學硏究 Vol.9 No.-

古代

崔滋英(Che Ja-young) 역사학회 1999 역사학보 Vol.163 No.-

고대 그리스 사회에 대한 한국 중등 교과서의 오류 및 최병조 교수의 촌평에 대한 두 가지 제언 -『고대 그리스 법제사』 개정판 출간에 즈음하여-

최자영(Jayoung Che) 한국서양고전학회 2019 西洋古典學硏究 Vol.58 No.2

한국에서는 고대 그리스 폴리스 사회에 대한 여러 가지 오해가 만연해있다. 터무니없이 잘못된 지식이 광범하게 펴져있는 주요 원인은 해방 후 반세기 이상 중등 · 고등 교육의 교과서에 잘못된 내용이 기재되어 있기 때문이다. 중등 교사는 물론 대학 교수들도 그릇된 지식을 가지고 있어서 고대 그리스 사회에 대한 왜곡이 심각하며, 역사뿐 아니라 사회과학 전반에 걸쳐 부정적 영향을 미치고 있다. 그 왜곡되고 있는 사례의 예를 몇 가지 소개하도록 한다. 아울러 최병조 교수가 『서양고전학연구』 제35집, 189-219쪽에 실은 글 가운데 일부에 대해 필자의 의견을 재논평 형식으로 싣는다. 최교수의 글은 필자가 쓴『고대그리스법제사』중 부록 VIII, 『학설휘찬』(Digesta)에 그리스와 로마 법 사이의 연관성을 보여주는 총 30여 개 발췌문에 관련한 논평이었다. 여기서는 필자가 여전히 미진하다고 생각하는 두 가지 점만 간단하게 지적하기로 한다. 하나는 ‘proxenetika (hermeneutikon)’에 관한 것, 다른 하나는 그리스 전치사 ‘epi’의 용법에 관련한 것(210-211쪽)이다. 동시에 이 글이 나온 지 이미 10년이란 세월이 흘러서, 개정판 출간에 즈음해서야 그 내용을 검토 반영하게 된 데 대해 양해를 구한다. 그 때 최교수는 로마법에 관련하여 필자가 사용한 부적절한 용어, 책명, 라틴어 번역에 보이는 오류까지 수정 의견을 내주었다. 그 세심함은 돈으로 헤아릴 수가 없는 것이다. 그런 세심한 배려 때문에 이번 개정판 출간으로 이 책은 한층 더 그 격조가 높아지는 계기가 될 것이며, 그 때문에 감사의 정을 전한다.

콘스탄티노플의 라틴제국 지배 시기 동방 정교회와 카톨릭 교회 간 관계에 대한 일고

최자영(Che, Ja-young) 역사학회 2012 역사학보 Vol.0 No.216

The Fourth Crusade(1202~1204), propelled by the cooperation of Frankcrusaders and Venetian forces, resulted in the fall of Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire. The Latin Empire lasted from 1204 to 1261, when the Empire of Nicaea recovered Constantinople thereby reestablishing the Byzantine Empire. Political and social conflict under the rule of the Latin Empire resulted, regardless of modern nationalism, between classical hellenism - traditional civic values of autonomy and liberty on the one hand, and the oppression of military forces and hierarchic, uniformed system of religion on the other. That is, traditional autonomy was relatively more respected under the government of the Byzantine Empire than under the dominance of the Franks and Latins. Under the rule of the Franks and Latins, the majority of the lower priests and a lesser number of the higher ranks consisted of Byzantines of the Eastern Orthodox Church. With the influx of Frankish princes and the priests came feudal prerogatives of tax collection their collection by absentee landlords. Additionally, the Frank-Latin princes in the Balkans invited friars from Europe, more or less independent of the hierarchic Western Catholic Church, and granted them feudal lands.

고대 그리스 서사시와 유대인 성경의 정의·노동·전쟁 개념에 보이는 문화적 접변 -헤시오도스의 노동과 나날을 중심으로-

최자영 ( Che Jayoung ) 한국서양고대역사문화학회 ( 구 한국서양고대사학회 ) 2012 서양고대사연구 Vol.31 No.-

하블록에 따르면 헤시오도스의 이상적인 사회에서는 땅이 저절로 풍요를 가져다 준다. 그러나 그것은 자발적인 기능의 배분에 의해 이루어지는 유토피아이다. 헤시오도스에게 노동이 없는 낙원은 존재하지 않으며, 땅은 노동 없이 저절로 먹을 것을 주지 않는다. 크로노스가 지배하던 황금의 시대에도 노동은 있었으며, 다만 그것이 잘 배분되어져 있었을 뿐이다. 헤시오도스의 이상은 제우스가 아니라 그 아버지 크로노스의 치세인 황금 종족의 시대이다. 그리고, 그 후 상계하는 4 종족은 타락으로만 점철한것이 아니다. 4 번째 영웅 시대의 종족은 그 전보다 더 우수하고 정의롭다. 이들은 전쟁터에서 죽게 되는데, 전쟁의 원인도 일면 정의, 질서 등과 무관한 것이 아니다. 또 그 가운데 일부는 저 먼 땅 끝 축복의 땅으로 가서 크로노스의 치하에서 살고 있다. 판도라의 상자가 열린 다음 과로, 질병, 빈곤, 탐욕, 사기 등이 난무하면서 제우스가 정의의 수호자가 되었다. 그런데 이 제우스의 정의도 궁극적으로는 노동의 공정한 배분을 통하여 편안하고 즐겁고 풍요로운 생활을 실천하는 데 있다. 히브리인 성경에 보이는 가끔은 ‘무자비한’ 전쟁의 신도 공동체 존립에 필요한 가치관을 투영하고 있으며, 그 투쟁의 대상은 삶의 터전이 되는 땅, 생계에 필요한 양, 사랑하는 여인 등 경우에 따라 다를 수 있다. 또 외적뿐 아니라 한 공동체 내부인의 반사회적 행위도 규제하는 기능을 갖는다. 그리스 서사시와 성경의 연관성은 개인전의 형태에서도 찾아볼 수 있다. 헤시오도스가 노동과 나날 에서 언급한 트로이아 전쟁은 개인전이 자주 이용되었는데, 이것은 중무장 보병같은 조직적인 군사력이 아직 발달되기전, 전체 집단의 희생을 최소화하기 위한 한 장치였던 것으로 생각해볼 수 있겠다. 개인전의 전사(promachos)들이 활약한 그리스의 서사시와 유대인들의 성경에 보이는 사회는 훗날 알렉산드로스 제국, 나아가 전 지중해를 석권하게 되는 로마제국과도 다른 점이 있다. 후자의 경우 직업 전사들인 용병의 조직적 군사력에 의지하여 군국주의와 전제적 권력을 지향한 위정자들이 대두되는 한편, 공동체가 붕괴되면서 사회계층의 분화, 사회적 불평등이 심화되기 때문이다. 헤시오도스의 『노동과 나날』에 나오는 판도라는 유대인 성경의 실낙원의 주제와 상당히 유사성을 갖는다. 판도라 때문에 모든 질병, 고통, 재앙, 노고 등이 인간을 피곤하게 만들었다. 낙원에서 쫓겨난 인간도 산고와 노고의 짐을 지게 되었다. 그러나 그 때까지만 해도 전쟁에 대한 언급은 없다. 결론적으로, 정의로운 삶은 노동에 의한 평화로운 삶과 밀접하게 연관된다는 점에서 헤시오도스의 『노동과 나날』과 『구약성경』은 공통점이 있음을 보게 된다. 다만 『구약성경』에서는 신의 정의가 개인 뿐 아니라, 그리스의 서사시에 비해볼 때, 공동체 집단을 대상으로 구체화되는 경우가 더 많다. 이것은 원심적인 권력 구조의 고대 그리스와 동방적, 가부장적 권력구조의 히브리 인들의 사회구조적 차이에서 비롯된 것으로 이해가 가능하겠다. 그리스와 근동은 그 지리적 근접성으로 인해 상호간 문화차용이 없지 않았겠으나, 그 구체적 적용에 있어서는 사회적 환경에 따라 차이가 있다고 하겠다. E.A. Havelock supposed the ideal condition of the Golden Age of Hesiod as a spontaneous provider. It is a social utopia, however, of distributed functions voluntarily performed. It has to be kept in mind that Hesiodos never suggested the paradise without labour. Even in the Golden Age when Kronos governed, work should be carried out, but well divided to everybody. The ideal land of Hesiodos was not ruled by Zeus, but his father Kronos whose reign was of Golden Race of men. Four races following the Golden Age were not just on the process of uninterrupted degradation, as the fourth race of heroes, it is said, was superior and righteous. Even if considerable part of them were to die during the war, the cause of war more or less related to the realization of justice or revenge. Moreover a few of them got to be assigned to the isles of the blest at the ends of the earth. There the glebe yields them its fruit twice a year under the reign of Kronos. Zeus came on stage as a protector of justice, just after the box of Pandora opened and hard labour, disease, poverty, avarice and malice got disseminated. Then, the ultimate purpose of his justice was to realize the convenient and abundant life by fair division of labour. Inexorable wars and punishment described in the Bible used to speak for the standard of values necessary for the survival of community. The purpose of war could be getting back territory, sheep, or woman. Moreover, not only the enemy of outside but, now and then, anti social behaviors in a community should be checked by the sway of God or gods.. The similarity between the Greek epics and the Bible could be found in the group of people, ‘promachoi’, fighting in front of the main body of troops. In the Works and Days Hesiodos referred to the Trojan War, where individual warriors, ‘promachoi,’ were frequently described. The ‘promachoi’ seemed to be a device averting mass sacrifice, prevailing in the stage military forces in full kit (hoplites) were not fully developed. The society of the Greek epics or the Hebrew Bible the ‘promachoi’ played more or less a role were dissimilar to those of the Empire of Alexander or Rome. In latter cases, militarism and despotic political power developed on the basis of the professional mercenary forces, and the values of community got deteriorated and social differentiation and inequality intensified. The story of Pandora in the Works and Days of Hesiodos is quite similar to that of lost paradise in the Bible. Every disease, pain, disaster and hard labour from the box of Pandora put the humankind into the yoke. In similar way, those banished from the Paradise got shackled by the pain of delivery and hard labour. In both cases, however, war was not referred to. In conclusion, common factors could be found in Hesiodos’ Works and Days and the Hebrew Bible, as in both cases the justice of humankind was ultimately connected with the peaceful life committed by work. In the Bible, however, the justice of the God used to be realized against a whole community for having betrayed the God's will, which was utterly unfamiliar to the ancient Greek society. This difference, it could be said, originated in the different social structures, as the oriental Hebrew was more patriarchal and group oriented than the Greek of decentralized social structure. There could be interrelations beween Greece and the Near East as they were geographically contiguous, but practical applications in detail differentiated according to their own social circumstances.

論文(논문) : 7~10세기 무슬림 사라센 인의 크레타 섬 및 모레아 진출 -크레타 토착민, 사라센 인, 비잔티움 제국 간 공생과 갈등을 중심으로-

최자영 ( Ja Young Che ) 대구사학회 2013 대구사학 Vol.113 No.-

From the 7th Century the Muslim Saracens invaded Byzantine territory in the Aegean Sea. They settled in Crete after 823, whereupon Abu Hsan of Cordova in Andalusia attacked Crete as he had been in dispute with the Caliph of the Omeiad Dynasty of Spain. Then, Crete came to be under the Saracen`s dominance for a century and a half until Nicephoros Phocas re-conquered Crete to encompass it in the Byzantine territory. In the 8th-10th centuries, the Saracens who had made a base in Crete spread farther around the Aegean Sea. Some of the authors of the Byzantine chronicles as well as modern scholars used to define the activities of the Saracens in the Aegean Sea as piracy, and justify the military campaign of the Byzantine Empire against them as legal activities to exterminate piracy. It is difficult, however, to conclude the Saracen`s advance into the Aegean Sea simply as piracy, and moreover as a cause for the antagonism among different religions or ethnicities. On the contrary, the Cretan aborigines tended to cooperate with the Saracens who came to attack or settle in Crete. Even if they preferred autonomy as much as possible, the Cretans used to demonstrate two opposing propensities. One was to adhere to the authority of the Byzantine Empire, which was shown among the upper class priests: the Orthodox Church was a means to connect the upper class Cretans to the aristocrats of Constantinople. The other was to resist the Byzantine Empire by helping the Saracens, which appeared among the common people. The existence of these two opposing propensities among the Cretans proves that the antagonism between the Saracens and the Byzantine Empire did not refer just to the competition for political and military hegemony, but also to the differences of the political, economic and social structures of which they were oriented to. The Byzantine Empire was sustained by bureaucratic administration, imposition of more or less heavy taxes against farmers or merchants, and the pursuit of political and military hegemony, while the Cretan people or Saracens were inclined to enjoy relatively more liberal livelihoods as farmers or merchants in juxtaposition to the authority of the Byzantine Empire.