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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 고조선단군학회 고조선단군학 고조선단군학 제23호
- 발행연도
- 2010.11
- 수록면
- 5 - 37 (33page)
- DOI
- 10.18706/jgds.2010.11.23.5
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
China launched Northeast Borderland History and the Chain of Events Research Project (hereinafter, referred to as Northeast Project) in 2002, which can be interpreted as one of the serial attempts towards Neo Sinocentrism. Based on the concept of United Multiethnic Nation, China claims that Chinese history includes the history of every ethnic group who resides in China as Chinese nationals. Accordingly, the Northeast project reveals China’s intention to incorporate the history of its neighboring countries in the Northeast Asian region into Chinese history. This stirred Korean historian community and consequently resulted in proactive research on Korean ancient history such as Goguryeo dynasty.
This paper studies on the Chinese publications on Go-Joseon and Hansa-gun and reached a finding that Chinese historians distorted Korean history in order to develop the Northeast Project. The publications distorted not only Goguryeo history but also the roots of Korean ethnicity and pre and post history of Go-Joseon, which is the first established dynasty in Korean history. Asserting Gija-Joseon and Wiman-Joseon, Chinese history academia does not recognize the existence of Dankun-joseon and Dankun mythology. In addition, Chinese historians claim Hansa-gun Pyongyang theory denying Korean historians’ Hansa-gun Yodong theory.
The paradox from my finding is that they utilize the theories from Korean history academia as the base of their claims. It is unfortunately true that some of Korean historians also have doubtful views on the existence of Dangun, Dangun-Joseon, Gija-Joseon, Wiman-Josen, and Pyeongyang theory. However, if Korean historian community fails to the substantiation of Dangun, as the founder of Go-Joseon and Dangun-Joseon, the Korean ancient history will lose its identity as an independent nation and will be defined as a colony of China governed by the extreme influence of Chinese politics and
culture as Chinese academia asserts. The Chinese historian community’s denial of existence of Dangun-Joseon paradoxically presents that we need to make the commitment to the elaborate research on the substantiation of Dangun-Joseon.
This paper studies on the Chinese publications on Go-Joseon and Hansa-gun and reached a finding that Chinese historians distorted Korean history in order to develop the Northeast Project. The publications distorted not only Goguryeo history but also the roots of Korean ethnicity and pre and post history of Go-Joseon, which is the first established dynasty in Korean history. Asserting Gija-Joseon and Wiman-Joseon, Chinese history academia does not recognize the existence of Dankun-joseon and Dankun mythology. In addition, Chinese historians claim Hansa-gun Pyongyang theory denying Korean historians’ Hansa-gun Yodong theory.
The paradox from my finding is that they utilize the theories from Korean history academia as the base of their claims. It is unfortunately true that some of Korean historians also have doubtful views on the existence of Dangun, Dangun-Joseon, Gija-Joseon, Wiman-Josen, and Pyeongyang theory. However, if Korean historian community fails to the substantiation of Dangun, as the founder of Go-Joseon and Dangun-Joseon, the Korean ancient history will lose its identity as an independent nation and will be defined as a colony of China governed by the extreme influence of Chinese politics and
culture as Chinese academia asserts. The Chinese historian community’s denial of existence of Dangun-Joseon paradoxically presents that we need to make the commitment to the elaborate research on the substantiation of Dangun-Joseon.
목차
1. 서론
2. 고조선 문제
3. 한사군 문제
4. 소결
참고문헌 (58)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Descriptions of the History of Gojoseon Shown in Foreign Textbooks
THE REVIEW OF KOREAN STUDIES
2007 .12
-
단군학 정립을 위한 몇 가지 전제
고조선단군학
2003 .06
-
‘고조선’조와 ‘전조선기’로 본 고조선의 역사적 실체 재인식
고조선단군학
2012 .05
-
고려ㆍ조선시대의 역사의식과 문화정체성론
韓國史學史學報
2004 .01
-
고구려사의 귀속문제
고조선단군학
2004 .12
-
China`s Northeast Project and Korean History
Korea Journal
2005 .03
-
환웅, 삼조선과 부여ㆍ고구려ㆍ요ㆍ금ㆍ원ㆍ청의 계보 : 지식형태사에 입각한 한국과 방계의 역사
고조선단군학
2007 .06
-
전근대 동국의식의 역사적 성격 재검토
역사비평
2015 .05
-
백암 박은식의 고조선 인식 : 신채호와 비교를 중심으로
한국사학보
2014 .02
-
‘조선’ 국호로 본 여말선초의 역사인식과 이상국가론
역사와현실
2018 .06
-
중국소설 《西遊記》 번역본의 조선후기 유통에 관한 연구 : 영남대 소장 번역필사본을 중심으로
중국어문논역총간
2017 .01
-
[총설] 최근의 한중관계사·한일관계사 연구의 쇄도와 새로운 동양사 연구 방향의 탐색
역사학보
2014 .09
-
고조선의 天下觀에 관한 試論
사학연구
2007 .12
-
북한의 단군민족주의에 대한 검토
고조선단군학
2019 .06
-
대만의 대학 역사교재 분석 —중국근대사(1840~1910년) 속의 한중관계사를 중심으로—
史叢(사총)
2009 .01
-
檀君朝鮮, 神話에서 歷史로의 進入過程
고조선단군학
2018 .06
-
『조선시기』를 통해 본 명인 오명제의 조선력사 인식
고조선단군학
2002 .12
-
China`s Northeast Project and South Korean-Chinese Relations
Korea Journal
2005 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-911-000471886