RISS 학술연구정보서비스

다국어 입력

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

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    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.
        • 무료
        • 기관 내 무료
        • 유료
        • KCI등재

          『高麗史』兵志의 체제와 그 특징

          朴胤珍(PARK YUN JIN) 고려사학회 2011 한국사학보 Vol.- No.44

          As far as 『Goryeosa(高麗史, history of Korean dynasty)』 says in the introductory remarks, about its documentation system being based on 『Yuanshi (元史, history of Yuan Dynasty)』, the cataloging of Byeongji(military section, 兵志) in 『Goryeosa(高麗史)』 is no exception: Byeongji 1 of the 81th volume(Military System(兵制)) as well as Byeongji 2 of the 82th volume(Suk-wi(宿衛), Jinsu(鎭戍), Cham-yeok(站驛), Majeong(馬政), Dunjeon(屯田)). However, the part of Seongbo(Castles and Fortresses,城堡) which catalogues Goryeo's distinctive strategy to defend against foreign forces in Byeongji 2, is not found in 『Yuanshi』. The system of Byeongji in 『Goryeosa』 and 『Yuanshi』 is differed. The troops which belong to Suk-wi(宿衛) in Byeongji 2, 『Yuanshi』 are described as rather independent troops in Byeongji 3 『Goryeosa』. And Gansugun(看守軍), Wisukgun(圍宿軍), two of independent troops in Byeongji 3 『Goryeosa』, played the same role as Suk-wi(宿衛) in Byeongji, 『Yuanshi』. They were deployed at Jinjeon(Royal portrait archive, 眞殿) and Neung(Royal tombs, 陵) to protect the places. Originated from 『Yuanshi』, the Wisukgun troop defended the Imperial city when the there was no castle around the city. For example. Wisukgun emblematically surrounded the capital, both inside and outside of castle gates as well as at Jinjeon and Neung. Consequently, Gansu-gun and Wisuk-gun in 『Goryeosa』 came from the low-ranked militaries of Suk-wi in 『Yuanshi』. While the low-ranked militaries of Suk-wi in Yuanshi were temporarily organized, Gansugun and Wisukgun in 『Goryeosa』 were regular troops and hence. organized as the separated troops to Suk-wi. In the meantime, 『Goryeosa』 recorded that Gansugun and Wisukgun were the troops during Injong era, in order to fulfill the principle of cataloging based on the record from Injong and Euijong era as well as referring to Sangjeonggogeumrae(詳定古今禮), Sikmoksupyeonrok (式目編修錄) and miscellanea, since the introductory remarks of 『Goryeosa』 had insufficient reference data. The narrative principle of 『Goryeosa』, according to its editor. was supposed to follow the system of 『Yuanshi』 and refer to Sangjeonggogeumrae. In this study, the analysis of system and contents of 『Yuanshi』 demonstrated their effort to follow the principle of the introductory remarks. 『Goryeosa』 is differentiated with 『Yuanshi』 in terms of reflecting the distinctiveness of Goyro Dynasty.

        • KCI등재

          『高麗史』형법지 禁令 편목의 내용과 성격

          김난옥(Kim Nan-ok) 고려사학회 2011 한국사학보 Vol.- No.44

          Although contents concerning chronological articles related to prohibitory decrees are evident in both the〈Goryeosa(高麗史, History of Goryeo)〉, 〈Goryeosajeolyo(高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉, there are also many cases in which some chronological articles that appeared in one of these works were omitted from the other. Such omissions included not only simple articles but also long prohibitory decrees boasting many articles. The chronological articles pertaining to prohibitory decrees consisted of various types of documents. Examples included not only edicts (詔), regulations (制), decrees (旨), instructions (敎) and verdicts (判). but also memorials (奏), requests (請), and petitions (上書) to government offices and individuals as well as announcements (榜) and certificates (牒). However, half of these documents were non-prohibitory decrees whose contents did not include any indication of being a particular type of document. The majority of the non-chronological articles were in keeping with Tang Law. Unlike the chronological articles, it is difficult to find similar articles in other historical materials. There were also only a few cases in which these provisions were closely related to the contents of the chronological articles. For the most part, these particular prohibitory decrees tended to focus on such matters as the outbreak of a fire, arson and the slaughtering of horses and cattle. While the non-chronological articles found in the prohibitory decrees of the Criminal Code of 〈Goryeosa(高麗史, History of Goryeo)〉 only featured one provision that started with the term, ‘all (諸),' every prohibitory decree located in the 〈History of Yuan (元史)〉 began with the term, ‘all (諸)'. While the majority of the prohibitory decrees in the former recorded the penalties to be meted out for criminal actions, only one-third of such entries in the latter included the penalties. It proved difficult to find provisions of the non-chronological articles in the Criminal Code of 〈Goryeosa(高麗史, History of Goryeo)〉 that were directly influenced by Yuan Law. However, there were some instances in which actual prohibitory degrees were conveyed to Goryeo via the imperial edicts of Yuan, the (an Advisory Board to the king), or the Jungseoseong(Chancellery for Internal Affairs) during the period of Yuan Intervention. The prohibitory decrees found in the Criminal Code of 〈Goryeosa(高麗史)〉 should be perceived as highly valuable basic materials with which to analyze the criminal code and policies of Goryeo. However, the wide range of contents included in these decrees meant that they were also dispersed across other articles of the Criminal Code. This can be regarded as the result of the arbitrary division of such entities into various items and articles based on such factors as compilation principles or the whims of the compilers. In this sense, it can be regarded that the Criminal Code of 〈Goryeosa (高麗史)〉 was not compiled based on organized principles of compilation, but rather in an unorganized and flexible manner. However, viewed in another manner, the organic connection that exists with other provisions and articles can be regarded as an important characteristic of the Criminal Code of 〈Goryeosa(高麗史)〉.

        • KCI등재

          공민왕대 기사의 수록양식과 원전자료의 記事 전환방식

          김난옥(KIM NANOK) 고려사학회 2013 한국사학보 Vol.- No.52

          The annual average numbers of articles in the era of King Gongmin were 61 in the 「Sega(世家)」 in 〈Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Goryeo)〉 and 39 in the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉 and thus the former was approximately 1.5 times of the latter. However, the increase and decrease in the number of articles over time of the former and the latter were generally proportional. The numbers of articles between the end of the 12th year and the 13th year of King Gongmin and between the end of the 14th year and the beginning of the 13th year of King Gongmin are much smaller compared to other periods because some of materials in original books were omitted or deleted in the complicated relationship with Yuan. The most notable thing in the recording systems of the 「Sega(世家)」 and the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉 is that whereas the daily sexagenary cycles were indicated in approximately 85% of articles in the former, the daily sexagenary cycles were indicated in only approximately 9% of articles in the latter. In the case of the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉, the daily sexagenary cycles were mostly omitted because many articles gathered were synthesized and summarized because of the principle of '‘summarization'. Articles beginning with ‘this month' or ‘this year' were those for events that clearly occurred in the month or year but could not be dated to certain days. However, among the entire articles for the era of King Gongmin, the number of those beginning with ‘this month' was only 8 and the number of those beginning with ‘this year' was only 3. The reason why articles related to Hwanjo(桓祖) were included in the extremely small numbers of ‘this month(是月)' and ‘this year(是年)' articles was that the articles related to Hwanjo(桓祖) were added when ‘Goryeo History' was complied in the Joseon Dynasty period. The Lee Seong-Gye related articles contained in the 「Sega(世家)」 and the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉 are almost the same as those in the 「Taejo Series(太祖總序)」 and excessively decorated the achievements of Lee Seong-Gye compared to the activities of persons in the era of King Gongmin recorded in the 「Biographies(列傳)」. As with the case of Hwanjo(桓祖) related articles, this was because the achievements of Lee Seong-Gye were unnaturally included in the 「Sega(世家)」 and the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉. The preface and messages in 〈Mokeunmungo(牧隱文藁)〉 were recorded in detail in 「Sega(世家)」 and briefly in the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉. Cases where terms such as proclamation(宣旨) and royal messages(勅書) were irregularly changed in the process of converting the content of the anthology into articles in the 「Sega(世家)」 and the 〈Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)〉 could be found. The reason for this is considered to be the confusion resulted from frequent changes in the principle of compilation of the ‘Goryeo History' or the carelessness of compilers.

        • KCI등재

          『고려사절요』卒記의 기재방식과 성격

          김난옥 고려사학회 2012 한국사학보 Vol.- No.48

          The description methods used in obituaries (jalgi) during the Goryeo era generally consisted of a mention of government office and peerage followed by praise or censure of tbe deceased. However. while 30% of obituaries consisted of simple descriptions of the office and peerage of the deceased 20% involved lengthy obituaries that included the office and peerage. praise and censure. family pedigree, background, related episodes, and follow up measures. The individuals found in the obituaries (jolgi) were mainly high ranking ministers. 85% of the obituaries involved officials of 2 pum or higher. Over 50% were officials from the Jungseo Munhaseong (Chancellery for State Affairs). By the time late Goryeo rolled around, the number of cases that included descriptions of the status of the deceased based on investitures rather than official titles had increased. 93% of obituaries appeared in both the <Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Goryeo)> and <Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)>. Moreover, there were only a few cases in which, although an obituary was prepared, such information was not also reproduced in the sega (世家, noble family history) of the deceased. The majority of the sega included only the offices and peerage of the deceased. However, the obituaries found in the <Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)> included biographical information and episodes pertaining to the person, such as the family pedigree and background, and therefore exhibited a wider range of information about the deceased than the sega. This can be attributed to the fact that the role played by biographies (yeoljeon) in the <Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Goryeo)> was in many ways replicated by the obituaries (jolgi) in the <Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Goryeo History)>. A look at the compilation process of the <Goryeo Guksa (高麗國史, History of the Garyeo State)> leads to the conclusion that the obituaries (joigi) found in the <Goryeosa Jeolyo (高麗史節要, Essentials of Garyeo History)> were more in keeping with the original form of the <Goryeo Sillok (高麗實錄, Annals of Garyeo Dynasty)> than the biographies (yeoljeon) fOood in the <Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Garyeo)>. While access to various materials from not only the <Goryeo Sillok (高麗實錄, Annals of Garyeo Dynasty)> but also the epitaphs and works of the deceased ensured a quantitative increase in biographies (yeoljeon), there remained some leeway to include contradictory contents from the original records or to embellish the original contents. Furthermore, the omission of the biographies of Confucian scholarship (yurimjeon) from the biographies (yeoljeon) found in the <Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Garyeo)> can be explained by the fact that the obituaries (jolgi) found in the (Goryeo Sillok (高麗實錄, Annals of Goryeo Dynasty)> mostly involved high ranking officials. To this end, it was difficult to include Confucian scholars, which maintained a certain dislance from the government bureaucracy, in the biographies (yeolieon) found in the (Goryeosa (高麗史, History of Goryeo)>.

        • KCI등재

          『高麗史』「辛禑傳」의 편찬방식과 자료적 성격

          이정란 고려사학회 2012 한국사학보 Vol.- No.48

          People of the Joseon dynasty recorded King Woo(禑王) not in the Benji(Basic Annals. 本紀) of Goryeosa(History of Goryeo, 高麗史), but in the biographies(列傳), suggesting that he was not a son of King Gongmin(恭愍王), but a son of Shindon (辛旽) the traitor, so he took the throne illegally. In other words, they made it clear that they downgraded the reign of King Woo(禑王) through recording it not in the Benji(本紀), but in the biographies under the cause of defeating the traitor. Therefore, the very existence of ‘Shinwoojeon[辛禑傳]' was an example of how the people of the Joseon dynasty interpreted the history of the Goryeo dynasty by their own interests. However, no one has ever tried to take an analysis of the contents and structure of ‘Shinwoojeon[辛禑傳]'. Therefore. this study aimed at learning the characteristics and values of ‘Shinwoojeon[辛禑傳]' as the historical material and reviewing the historical values of Goryeosa(高麗史), as a chronicle by studying the printing methods in-depth and comparing the styles of the Benji(本紀) and the biographies. The results of our study are as follows. The producers of ‘Shinwoojeon' made every endeavor to maximize the visual and immediate effects of the biography by using various techniques like using the name of King Woo directly in the biography, not using the name of King Woo directly in the biography, not using any classification method on the record of King Woo, and not using the date of the record as much as possible. On the other hand, they devised various and detailed ways of making the biographies like not using the obituary(卒記), using compressed sentences, selecting and placing words, and which made ‘shinwoojeon' more perfect as a biography than its model, ‘Wangmang-jeon'(the biography of Wangmang, 王莽傳). However, with its the structure of the biography, ‘shinwoojeon[辛禑傳]' still has elements of the Benji(本紀) such the records of natural disasters and obituary(卒記), using succinct style of writing, arrangement of articles by time, and detailed information, making it an usual kind of record.

        • KCI등재

          『英烈琴相國集』을 중심으로 본 조선후기 가계기록류의 『高麗史』 이해와 해명 방식

          박윤진 고려사학회 2019 한국사학보 Vol.- No.74

          Geum Ui, who played an active part in the age of the Goryeo military regime, was a problematic person in terms of the virtue ‘Chastity and Righteousness' of the Joseon Dynasty. However, the descendants, who tried to bring honor to their families and confirm the time-honouredness of their families through family records, could not conceal Geum Ui who served as a high ranking official in the Goryeo Dynasty. Thus, they needed an excuse for him. The disgrace of Geum Ui had to be removed in order to bring honor to Bonghwa Geum clan. The descendants asked Ahn Jeongbok, a writer of 『Dongsagangmok』, to write the preface of 『Yeongryeol-geum- sangguk-jip』 and made an excuse for them through Ahn Jeongbok's writing. Ahn Jeongbok had a critical view on the existing 『Goryeo-sa (“the History of Goryeo”)』, lacking in personal criticism. Therefore, he was the right person to deny the acts of Geum Ui recorded in 『Goryeo- sa』. In the preface, Ahn Jeongbok evaluated 『Goryeo-sa』 as filthy history and criticized the existing writing of history by mentioning Yi Hwang to support his view. Based on the writing of Jinhwa, the contents of 『Bohanjip』, and the poem of Kim In-kyung, Ahn Jeongbok, who emphasized historical investigation, revealed that the public estimation of Geum Ui having been a greedy person and a flatterer to Choi Chung-heon was wrong. However, the writing of Jin Hwa, which contained his poems and act records, lacked in credibility because they were made to excuse the acts of Jin Hwa. Geum Ui's couplets with Hwang Bo-gwan, his disciple who was sent into exile with Geum Ui's accusation, showed quite a time gap between the exile and banquet. In the process where Hwangbo Gwan returned to office and served as a governmental official, he needed to reconcile with Geum Ui and have his support. Thus, Hwangbo Gwan exchanged poems with Geum Ui in banquets notwithstanding his exile. Kim In-gyeong, who was the uncle of Hwangbo Gwan, served as a high ranking official in the reign of King Gojong and wrote a poem that mourned the death of Geum Ui. This shows that the relationship between Kim In-gyeong・Hwangbo Gwan and Geum Ui improved. 조선후기의 가계기록류는 종법의식의 강화 속에서 가문의 世系를 정리하고 그들의 자료를 수집하여 해당 가문의 현창을 목적으로 만들어졌다. 이때 『高麗史』와 같은 역사서에서 확인되는 고위직의 조상은 가문의 역사와 영광을 드러낼 수 있는 좋은 존재였다. 그러나 諸臣傳이 아니라 嬖幸・姦臣・叛逆傳에 立傳되어 있다거나 조선시대의 관점에서 부정적인 활동이 기록되어 있다면 이는 자랑이 아니라 흠결이 될 수 있었다. 가계기록류는 가문의 유구함을 보여주기 위해 이러한 하자가 있는 조상을 포기하지 못했고 그들의 활동에 대한 변명이나 미화를 시도했다. 『高麗史』의 공정성을 부정하는 시각, 『高麗史』 찬자인 정인지나 정도전에 대한 비난, 구체적인 세평에 대한 변명 등이 있었으며 자신들의 주장을 安鼎福・李滉・李廷龜・金宗直 등과 같은 명망있는 인물의 언급으로 뒷받침하면서 자신들의 주장에 근거로 삼기도 했다. 『英烈琴相國集』의 방식도 다른 가계기록의 서술 방향과 유사했다. 『東史綱目』의 저자인 안정복에게 서문을 부탁하고 그의 글을 통해 금의에 대한 ‘伸寃'을 시도했다. 안정복은 기존의 『高麗史』에 대해 褒貶 등이 부족하다는 비판적인 시각을 가지고 있었던 인물이었던 만큼 『高麗史』에 기록된 금의의 행적을 부정해줄 수 있는 합당한 사람이었다. 안정복은 『英烈琴相國集』의 서문을 통해, 『高麗史』를 穢史라고 평가하고 이황의 언급을 인용해서 기존의 역사 서술을 비난하며 자신의 견해를 뒷받침했다. 또한 고증을 중요시했던 안정복은 陳澕의 筆記, 『補閑集』의 내용, 김인경의 시를 근거로 금의가 탐욕스러웠으며 최충헌에게 아부한 자라는 세평이 잘못된 것임을 드러내었다. 그러나 진화의 필기는 實紀類로 역시 진화의 행적에 대한 변명을 위해 만들어진 자료였기 때문에 신빙성이 떨어진다. 금의의 고발로 유배를 갔던 그의 문생 皇甫瓘과의 聯句는 유배와 연회가 시간적인 간격이 꽤 있었다는 점을 들어 두 가지 일이 모두 있었을 것이라고 지적했다. 또 황보관이 복직하고 관료생활을 계속하는 과정에서 금의와의 화해와 지지가 필요했으므로 유배에도 불구하고 연회에서 금의와 시를 주고받을 수 있었다고 설명해 보았다. 황보관의 숙부인 김인경이 고종 때 고위직의 관료였을 뿐 아니라 그가 금의의 죽음을 슬퍼하는 시를 지었던 것에서도 김인경・황보관과 금의의 관계가 봉합되었다고 이해되었다.

        • KCI등재

          『高麗史』와 『高麗史節要』의 修史方式 비교

          이정란(Lee Jung-Ran) 고려사학회 2013 한국사학보 Vol.- No.52

          This paper examined historiographic methods of Goryeosa and Goryeosageolyo based on records on King Yejong(睿宗)'s Decrees. Compared to Goryeosa in which terms that may be used only by the emperor were maintained based on King Sejong(世宗)'s principle of not distorting history, Goryeosageolyo changed terms like Jega(制可), Joga(詔可), and Chingbun(稱蕃). However, such changes were not merely confined to partial and minor changes of terms. In fact, such changes were crucial so as to prescribe the overall characteristics of Goryeosageolyo. Like Goryeosa, Goryeosageolyo retained terms related to the emperor so as that the existence of a world view centered on China based on justification of Neo-Confucianism may be denied. In fact, the reason why terms like Jo (詔), Je(制), Taeja(太子), and Taehu(太后 ; Empress Dowager) were kept in Goryeosageolyo was just a product made to lower the possibility of misreading or to adhere to the King's orders in descriptive or political terms. Therefore, with only the fact that Goryeosageolyo maintained the terms it cannot be evaluated as a history book which attained the same level of principle of not distorting history as that of Goryeosa. Rather, the fact that Jega and Joga were changed into Jongji(從之) displays that Goryeosageolyo was a history book which intended to achieve a world view centered on China based on Sung confucian justification.

        • KCI등재

          儒州(始寧 · 文化)柳氏의 사례를 통해 본 高麗社會의 一斷面 : ‘嘉靖譜'를 참고로 하여

          朴龍雲(Park Yong-woon) 고려사학회 2006 한국사학보 Vol.- No.24

          고려시기 유주유씨 구성원들에 관하여, 『고려사』 열전과 세가 志 및 『고려사절요』 등의 기록과 각종 문집에 전하는 기사, 묘지명 등을 『문화유씨 가정보』의 내용과 비교 검토했다. 그리하여 이들의 신상을 좀 더 정확하게 파악하고 유주유씨 가문의 위상을 헤아려 봄으로써 고려사회의 한 단면을 살피고자 했다. 유주유씨는 고려시기 정치적 사회적 지배신분층의 다수가 그랬듯이, 선조가 태조의 후삼국 통일전쟁에 조력하여 官階를 받고 공신에 책봉된 것을 계기로 기틀을 마련하고, 그 얼마 뒤에 후손들이 上京 從仕하여 兩班家의 일원이 되었다. 하급양반에 머물던 유씨는 武臣亂 시기에 中始祖라고 할 柳公權이 재상에까지 올랐다. 이어서 그의 두 아들이 각각 재상과 추밀을 지내면서 가문 위상이 크게 높아졌다. 손자 柳璥이 무신정권 붕괴에 주도적 역할을 하며 정계의 핵심인물이 된 이후 유주유씨는 대를 이어 고위직자를 배출하고 여러 세족과 혼인관계를 맺으면서 권문 · 세족의 하나로 자리잡는다. 여기서 참고한 가정보는 유공권의 장자와 차자의 서열이 뒤바뀌어 있는 점, 晋州 유씨와 뒤섞인 부분이 있는 점 등의 중대한 오류를 비롯해 자녀나 직위의 誤記 등도 눈에 띤다. 족보 자료의 이용에 철저한 비판과 검증이 필요함을 확인케 한다. In this work, we compared and cross-referenced entries in the Genealogy of Yuju Liu clan. Records from Treatises, Hereditary Houses, and Biographies of Koryosa, Korysa-jolyou and various literary collections, and tomb inscriptions were examined with reference to the entries in Munhua Liu Genealogy of Jiajing Era. It was our intention to grasp the true nature of Yuju Liu clan, and at the same time, to seek our own interpretation for the aspect of Koryo society through our findings. Lius, like most other clans with powerful political and social status, established a foothold in the political power structure by when their ancestors helped Taejo(太祖) with the reunification of the Later Tri-Kingdoms(後三國). Soon afterwards, clan members landed positions in the royal court to join the governing class. They eventually upgraded themselves from the status of the entry-level gentry to the top level when Liu Gongkwon(柳公權), who can be considered the de-facto progenitor of this clan, was appointed to the post of prime minister. Two of his sons, Liu Taek(柳澤) and Liu Eonchim(柳彦琛), also served the royal court as a prime minister and a Military Affairs Commissioner(樞密), raising the fame of the clan even higher. After his grandson Liu Kyoung(柳璥) played the key role in the expulsion of the military regime, the Liu clan established themselves as one of the powerful families, establishing marital connections with a multitude of powerful families. It was noted that Jiajing Era Genealogy contained serious mistakes such as the order of siblings was reversed, some of Jinju Lius were listed as members as well as minor ones including offspring recording and position titles. These erroneous entries reinforces the general precaution that one should be extra careful when using the genealogy as a historical material.

        • KCI등재

          『高麗史』 五行志의 체재와 내용 : 自然災害의 발생추세를 중심으로

          이정호(Lee Jung-ho) 고려사학회 2011 한국사학보 Vol.- No.44

          Basically Goryeosa(高麗史) Ohaengji(五行志) make it a rule to accept the format of Wonsa(元史) Ohaengji. But the former didn't follow the latter unilaterally. On the one hand two texts have a lot in common such as format and articles, on the other hand they have some differences. For example reflecting the reality of the Occurrences of Natural Disasters, Goryeosa Ohaengji has different contents and articles comparing the Wonsa Ohaengji. Besides some articles of Goryeosa Ohaengji follow the other chines history texts such as Songsa(宋史), Sindangseo(新唐書) etc. Goryeosa Ohaengji has several values as historical material. because there are some contents that is not found in other texts. But sometimes it has some problems such as omission and repeating of records. It is assumed that the reason of omission and repeating of records have caused by several correcting process during compiling the Goryeosa. Sometimes such problems have occurred when deciding whether or not to record the Occurrences of Natural Disasters. Because of the belief of the interaction between heaven and man(天人感應), occasionally the records of the Occurrences of Natural Disasters have omitted or exaggerated by the political explanation. This study analyzed long-term trends of the Occurrences of Natural Disasters in Coryeo Dynasty through Goryeosa Ohaengji. Analysis shows that especially the records of Natural Disasters increased in the early 12th century and late 14th century. However it was also found that the records of extraordinary phenomena(災異) was increased in some periods. For example the records of extraordinary phenomena was increased in the periods such as military coup d'etate(武臣政變), seizure of political power by Choi Chung-heon(崔忠獻), the war with Mongol, the beginning of Mongol Intervention(元干涉), middle and late period of King Chungryeol(忠烈王). These are the typical periods of the social changes in Goryeo Dynasty, so the increase of the extraordinary phenomena are regarded as the addition of the records by the political explanation.

        • KCI등재

          朝鮮時代 史書의 權漢功에 대한 서술과 『一齋先生實紀』의 편찬

          이진한 고려사학회 2019 한국사학보 Vol.- No.74

          Gwon Hangong is a leading member of the Andong Gwon family. He lived during the period of the Yuan intervention in Goryeo, passed the state examination and went on to become the highest- ranking official, jeongseung, and his offsprings thrived. He was much favored by King Chungseon, and he involved in enthroning Shimwang Goh to replace King Chungsuk. For this act, he was included in the list of disloyal officials in ‘Goryeosa' published in the early period of Joseon Dynasty. His reputation continued to deteriorate in subsequent historical books including ‘Dongguktonggam (東國通鑑)', ‘Yeosajegang(麗史提綱)' and ‘Dongsagangmok(東史綱目).' He used to be a celebrated figure in the late Goryeo and early Joseon period, but by the late Joseon period, he was seen as a distinctly disloyal official of Goryeo Dynasty. Gwon Hangong's offsprings suffered most from this change in reputation. Particularly, as genealogy became established as a basis for clan rules, the importance of direct ancestors grew, and Gwon Hangong's offsprings could not be proud of him even though he was at the center of the family clan as jungsijo(中始祖). To overcome criticism in major historical books of Joseon Dynasty and negative public opinion, they published ‘Iljaeseonsaengilgo' and ‘Iljaeseonsaengsilgi', hoping to restore honor of Gwon Hangong. These books introduced poems and proses written by Gwon Hangong to emphasize that he was an outstanding writer, and contained his many triumphant achievements to show that he was a distinguished man. His shameful actions that were criticized in Joseon historical books were omitted, or they were strongly refuted or explanations were given. However, these efforts had only limited effect since Gwon Hangong's bad behaviors are indelibly recorded in ‘Goryeosa' and ‘Goryeosajeolyo'. 원간섭기에 살았던 권한공은 과거 급제 후 최고위 관직인 정승에 올랐고, 그 자손이 번창하여 안동권씨를 대표하는 인물의 하나가 되었다. 그런데 충숙왕을 대신하여 심왕 고를 옹립하는 일을 도모해서 조선초 『고려사』 편찬시에 간신전에 포함되었다. 이후 『東國通鑑』, 『麗史提綱』, 『東史綱目』 등 새로운 역사서가 나올 때마다 그에 대한 평가는 더욱 가혹해져갔다. 여말선초만 해도 ‘명사'의 반열에 들었던 권한공은 조선후기에는 ‘고려시대를 대표하는 간신'이 되어버렸던 것이다. 이러한 변화로 인해 가장 고통받는 사람들은 권한공의 후손들이었다. 조선후기에 종법질서가 확립됨에 따라 직계 조상이 중요해졌는데, 그들은 종족의 중심이 되는 中始祖인 권한공을 떳떳하게 내세울 수 없었다. 이에 그들은 조선시대 주요 사서의 사론과 세평을 극복하고 권한공의 명예 회복을 위해 『일재선생일고』와 『일재선생실기』를 편찬하였다. 이 책에서는 권한공이 지은 시와 문장을 모아 그가 뛰어난 문장가임을 강조하였고, 그의 행적 가운데 자랑스러운 것들을 많이 실어 위대한 인물임을 알리고자 하였다. 반면에 조선시대 사서에서 비난을 받았던 부끄러운 일들은 기록하지 않았으며 때로는 적극적으로 그것을 반박하거나 해명하였다. 그러나 『고려사』와 『고려사절요』에 들어있는 권한공의 나쁜 행적은 영원히 지워질 수 없었기 때문에 권한공 후손들의 노력은 한계가 있을 수 밖에 없었다.

        맨 위로 스크롤 이동