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
Although Korea had been in deep connection with the ocean, its marine activities began to shrink rapidly since the Koryo Dynasty and were almost discontinued in the Chosun Dynasty. Interest in the lost-forgotten ocean was revived with the introduction of world maps and various geographical books from the Western world in the 17th century. Curiosity evolved into interest and further into argument for commercial relations with southern district of China by the northern learning group in the late 18th century. While the group supported commercial relations they, on the other side, maintained the sense of balance in preparation for emergency that might happen.
As men of power exercised their authorities with turning the 19th century argument for marine trade was daunted in general, but some intellectuals such as Lee Gyu-gyeong and Choi Han-gi insisted on marine trade more aggressively than on commercial relations with southern countries. However, their view had limitations in that they saw Western powers with a too optimistic eye. This shows that the sense of balance held by the northern learning group was being lost.
Turning the 1840s, a sense of impending crisis against Western powers was heightened, which daunted the argument for marine trade and instead resulted in the emergence of an argument for maritime defense aiming at stopping the advance of Western powers. The leaders of argument for maritime defense were those who inherited the theory of northern learning such as Park Gyu-su and Nam Byeong-cheol. Entering upon the 19th century, interest in commercial trade and that in maritime defense were separated from each other and only one of the two tended to be emphasized, which was unfortunate from the viewpoint of maritime history.
It was only after the opening of ports when the ocean was viewed from the viewpoints of both commercial trade and military defense. Military interest was dominant at the beginning, but later interest in marine trade was heightened rapidly with the understanding that military power must be preceded by economic power, which made the government execute policies pursuing both national prosperity and defense related to the ocean. However, such efforts were frustrated by Qing's policy of annexing Chosun as one of its federal states, and Chosun had to depend on Qing for its maritime defense.
It was a great blunder for Chosun to put maritime defense in Qing's hand. Taking advantage of this, the Qing Dynasty held a militarily dominant position in the Korean Peninsula and strengthened its plunder in economic sectors. Qing's military and economic dominance in Chosun amplified conflict between China and Japan surrounding the Korean Peninsula, which exploded into the Sino-Japanese War. It was a matter of course that Chosun's strategy for liberation ended in vain with the defeat of Qing.
As men of power exercised their authorities with turning the 19th century argument for marine trade was daunted in general, but some intellectuals such as Lee Gyu-gyeong and Choi Han-gi insisted on marine trade more aggressively than on commercial relations with southern countries. However, their view had limitations in that they saw Western powers with a too optimistic eye. This shows that the sense of balance held by the northern learning group was being lost.
Turning the 1840s, a sense of impending crisis against Western powers was heightened, which daunted the argument for marine trade and instead resulted in the emergence of an argument for maritime defense aiming at stopping the advance of Western powers. The leaders of argument for maritime defense were those who inherited the theory of northern learning such as Park Gyu-su and Nam Byeong-cheol. Entering upon the 19th century, interest in commercial trade and that in maritime defense were separated from each other and only one of the two tended to be emphasized, which was unfortunate from the viewpoint of maritime history.
It was only after the opening of ports when the ocean was viewed from the viewpoints of both commercial trade and military defense. Military interest was dominant at the beginning, but later interest in marine trade was heightened rapidly with the understanding that military power must be preceded by economic power, which made the government execute policies pursuing both national prosperity and defense related to the ocean. However, such efforts were frustrated by Qing's policy of annexing Chosun as one of its federal states, and Chosun had to depend on Qing for its maritime defense.
It was a great blunder for Chosun to put maritime defense in Qing's hand. Taking advantage of this, the Qing Dynasty held a militarily dominant position in the Korean Peninsula and strengthened its plunder in economic sectors. Qing's military and economic dominance in Chosun amplified conflict between China and Japan surrounding the Korean Peninsula, which exploded into the Sino-Japanese War. It was a matter of course that Chosun's strategy for liberation ended in vain with the defeat of Qing.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 16~18세기 해양 인식의 추이
Ⅲ. 18세기 후반~19세기 전반 海洋通商論의 전개
Ⅳ. 19세기 후반 海防論의 추이
Ⅴ. 맺음말
〈ABSTRACT〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
《七劍十三俠》的板本與幻想英雄敍事
한국중어중문학 우수논문집
2018 .11
-
통상조약에 나타난 해양관련 조항과 海禁의 해체- 제1, 2차 아편전쟁을 중심으로 -
중국사연구
2014 .01
-
을사조약 이후 청국정부의 한국인식
역사와현실
2007 .12
-
『열하일기』의 〈皇城記〉, 청 왕조 정통론
국어국문학
2009 .09
-
19세기말 조선의 疆域인식 변화 : 李重夏의『勘界事謄錄』을 중심으로
역사와실학
2008 .12
-
朝鮮後期의 鄕村防衛實情과 民堡論
역사교육
2010 .06
-
1874~5년 海防ㆍ 陸防論議의 性格
동양사학연구
1985 .12
-
한국의 해양영웅 張保皐와 李舜臣의 비교 연구 : 장보고축제와 진남제의 역사적 맥락
지방사와 지방문화
2002 .05
-
19세기 중반 金直淵의 燕行과 청 정세 인식
대동문화연구
2012 .01
-
文의 전통, 그리고 ‘技擊’ 서사
중어중문학
2016 .09
-
華夷觀과 조선조 사대부의 對外認識
중어중문학
2012 .04
-
전쟁, 국가건설, 신화 만들기
역사학보
2012 .12
-
1960년~1970년대 한국사 개설서의 조선시대 상업사 서술과 상업사 연구
한국사연구
2019 .03
-
19세기 한국의 국제법 수용과 중국과의 전통적 관계 청산을 위한 투쟁
역사학보
2004 .03
-
1995~2015년 명청사 연구 성과와 새로운 전망
동양사학연구
2015 .12
-
近代 中國의 博覽會 認識
중국사연구
2018 .01
-
청사공정 10년의 빛과 그림자
민족연구
2012 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0100-2009-911-018289866