지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In this article, how the perceptions toward ancient dynasties such as Koguryo or Balhae have changed, in terms of historical mentioning included inside the official History textbooks published or released during the modern and contemporary time periods of the Korean history, are examined. And total of three distinctive time periods have been suggested by this researcher as essential eras, in terms of tracing such changes.
The contents of most of the History textbooks that were published or released around the time when the country was being opened to the rest of the world for the first time, were influenced by the discussions of the 'Three Han entities being One(the Sam-Han Il-Tong-ron/三韓一統論 discussions), which were mainly based upon the idea of Shilla being the most prominent and legitimate entity of them all, as mentioned in the classic Korean history text 'Samguk Sagi /三國史記'. Within this frame of reference, dynasties like Koguryo and Baekjae were considered to be subordinate('附') states to Shilla. Historians who eventually overcame this kind of academic attitude were Shin Chae Ho and Park Eun Shik. These two considered Balhae and Shilla as two dynasties which have co-existed at the time, and refused to accept the concept of the so-called 'Unified Shilla'. They also tried to elicit a line of legitimacy for the
Korean Ancient history from a specific succession line which was theorized by them to have started with the Dangun Kingdom, then continued to Buyeo and Koguryo, and finally ended with Balhae.
The Joseon Governor General office, responding to such historical
perspectives and also to thwart them overall, attempted to document the ancient history of events that happened on the Korean peninsula within the context of the Japanese ancient history, and also deliberately based their historical perspective upon favorably embracing Shilla's alleged unification of the peninsula. And after that, when Japan invaded the Manchu region in 1931 and later also the Chinese mainland in 1937, they decided to highlight the history of Koguryo and Balhae, and also the alleged fact that those two dynasties maintained a submissive position to Japan for a long time.
After 1945, there have been attempts to review the history of Shilla and Balhae without any kind of discrimination, yet ancient Korean history based upon Shilla-based perspectives soon resurfaced and again became a dominant perspective throughout the country. It should also be noted that the political intrigues and shifts which continued inside both the South and North Korean governments during the 1960s forced the overall school education to harbor a primary objective emphasizing the importance of historical perspective based upon the concept of independent actions and thinking. Coming into the year 2000, an attempt to review Shilla and Balhae indiscriminately, and also to refer to the era as the 'South and North dynasties period', appeared in the official textbooks for the first time, but the actual contents of those sections in textbooks still remained practically unchanged from mainly being defined by the 'Unified Shilla dynasty'mentality, thus resulting in a compromised state of the relevant mentions in textbooks.
The contents of most of the History textbooks that were published or released around the time when the country was being opened to the rest of the world for the first time, were influenced by the discussions of the 'Three Han entities being One(the Sam-Han Il-Tong-ron/三韓一統論 discussions), which were mainly based upon the idea of Shilla being the most prominent and legitimate entity of them all, as mentioned in the classic Korean history text 'Samguk Sagi /三國史記'. Within this frame of reference, dynasties like Koguryo and Baekjae were considered to be subordinate('附') states to Shilla. Historians who eventually overcame this kind of academic attitude were Shin Chae Ho and Park Eun Shik. These two considered Balhae and Shilla as two dynasties which have co-existed at the time, and refused to accept the concept of the so-called 'Unified Shilla'. They also tried to elicit a line of legitimacy for the
Korean Ancient history from a specific succession line which was theorized by them to have started with the Dangun Kingdom, then continued to Buyeo and Koguryo, and finally ended with Balhae.
The Joseon Governor General office, responding to such historical
perspectives and also to thwart them overall, attempted to document the ancient history of events that happened on the Korean peninsula within the context of the Japanese ancient history, and also deliberately based their historical perspective upon favorably embracing Shilla's alleged unification of the peninsula. And after that, when Japan invaded the Manchu region in 1931 and later also the Chinese mainland in 1937, they decided to highlight the history of Koguryo and Balhae, and also the alleged fact that those two dynasties maintained a submissive position to Japan for a long time.
After 1945, there have been attempts to review the history of Shilla and Balhae without any kind of discrimination, yet ancient Korean history based upon Shilla-based perspectives soon resurfaced and again became a dominant perspective throughout the country. It should also be noted that the political intrigues and shifts which continued inside both the South and North Korean governments during the 1960s forced the overall school education to harbor a primary objective emphasizing the importance of historical perspective based upon the concept of independent actions and thinking. Coming into the year 2000, an attempt to review Shilla and Balhae indiscriminately, and also to refer to the era as the 'South and North dynasties period', appeared in the official textbooks for the first time, but the actual contents of those sections in textbooks still remained practically unchanged from mainly being defined by the 'Unified Shilla dynasty'mentality, thus resulting in a compromised state of the relevant mentions in textbooks.
목차
머리말
1. 개화기
2. 일제강점기
3. 현대 1 : 통일신라 대 ‘남북조‘(1945~한국전쟁 전후)
4. 현대 2 : 통일신라 중심에 ‘부(附)‘한 발해(한국전쟁전후~1990년대)
5. 현대 3 : 절충적인 남북국시대(제7차 교육과정)
맺음말
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
발해 정치사의 연구 현황과 과제
한국사연구
2003 .09
-
The Study of Ancient Korean History and Its Problems
Korea Journal
1987 .12
-
발해의 대외관계사연구의 현황과 과제
한국사연구
2003 .09
-
渤海의 天下觀연구 : 高句麗와의 連繫性을 중심으로
고구려발해연구
2008 .11
-
8세기 중엽 渤海와 日本의 關係
한국고대사연구
2002 .03
-
제 7차 교육과정 高等學校 國史敎科書의 내용 분석
역사교육
2002 .12
-
해방후 현대사 교육 내용 기준의 변천과 국사교과서 서술
역사학보
2010 .03
-
남북국의 경계와 상호 교섭에 대한 재검토
역사와현실
2011 .12
-
고구려 발해의 상관성 연구와 과제
고구려발해연구
2008 .07
-
한국교과서의 문제와 전망 : 근현대사를 중심으로
한국사연구
2002 .03
-
발해 문화사의 연구 현황과 과제
한국사연구
2003 .09
-
역사교과서 문제의 교재화와 학습자의 인식
역사와 세계
2009 .06
-
고등학교 세계사 교과서의 중국고중세사 서술 : 역사 용어를 중심으로
역사교육
2017 .06
-
역사교육에서 고대사 영역의 내용 체계와 계열성 검토 : 2011 교육과정과 2013 검정교과서를 중심으로
역사교육
2018 .09
-
韓國 史書에 나타난 高句麗의 正體性
고구려발해연구
2004 .12
-
南雲 李弘稙의 韓國古代史 認識 : 《韓國古代史의 硏究》를 중심으로
한국사연구
2009 .03
-
국사 교과서의 만주지역 서술
역사와 담론
2006 .09
-
高句麗史
성곡논총
1997 .07
-
The Portrayal of Korea : A Critical Analysis of Korean History in American Secondary Schools
International Journal of Korean History
2000 .12
-
국정 『국사』 교과서와 검정 『한국사』 교과서의 현대사 체계와 내용 분석
역사와현실
2014 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-014524137