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
The diplomatic policy of Song during the period from the eleventh to twelfth century is characterized by its pursuit of practical orientation. Because of the impossibility of defeating the the Khitans by military powers Song could not help choosing the policy of a relatively short war and a long-lasting peace at the cost of national territory. The process of the battle and peace at Chanyuan (?淵) well reflected this policy. After the dynasty had accomplished the re-unification within the original territory of the earlier Song dynasty, it again tried to expand its northern territory by war, but ended in failure and the loss of national strength. With the conclusion of the Treaty of Chanyuan in 1004 the long war was over, and this was an important turning point to decide the diplomatic policy with Liao. It also had been influential in the relationship with other states.
The Song-Liao War was a kind of political tool to conclude the Treaty of Chanyuan to maintain peace with other states; an original goal. The Song-Liao War broke out due to Liao’s invasion of Song, but neither attained superiority over the other. Thus Song could not help approving Liao as a state with nearly equal status for the first time.
Since 1980 Chinese historians’ view of the Treaty of Chanyuan has been a good example that demonstrates the oneness of the multiple ethnic groups under one nation. If the view of the perpetual history of the various ethnic groups contemporary Chinese territory belong to Han ethnic group-oriented Chinese history is accepted, the Song-Liao War could be defined as a kind of civil war.
However, it is clear that Song and Liao had separate national identifies from each other at that time and also consisted of different ethnic groups. Furthermore, the Treaty of Chanyuan had content in which Song and Liao approved each other as Southern and Northern dynasties. Because the authoritative history described the Song dynasty as “genuine” Chinese history, the Treaty of Chanyuan has been debated as to whether it was humiliating to the Han ethnic group or reached between two equals.
I think the arbitrary interpretation of history through contemporary viewpoints contaminated by political power is inclined to be distorted. It is desirable to evaluate history as it was. But, recently, most Chinese historians have a deviated intention to describe their history as such that all of their own past history of different states by different ethnic groups within present Chinese territory belongs to the single Chinese history continued through the Han ethnic group.
The Song-Liao War was a kind of political tool to conclude the Treaty of Chanyuan to maintain peace with other states; an original goal. The Song-Liao War broke out due to Liao’s invasion of Song, but neither attained superiority over the other. Thus Song could not help approving Liao as a state with nearly equal status for the first time.
Since 1980 Chinese historians’ view of the Treaty of Chanyuan has been a good example that demonstrates the oneness of the multiple ethnic groups under one nation. If the view of the perpetual history of the various ethnic groups contemporary Chinese territory belong to Han ethnic group-oriented Chinese history is accepted, the Song-Liao War could be defined as a kind of civil war.
However, it is clear that Song and Liao had separate national identifies from each other at that time and also consisted of different ethnic groups. Furthermore, the Treaty of Chanyuan had content in which Song and Liao approved each other as Southern and Northern dynasties. Because the authoritative history described the Song dynasty as “genuine” Chinese history, the Treaty of Chanyuan has been debated as to whether it was humiliating to the Han ethnic group or reached between two equals.
I think the arbitrary interpretation of history through contemporary viewpoints contaminated by political power is inclined to be distorted. It is desirable to evaluate history as it was. But, recently, most Chinese historians have a deviated intention to describe their history as such that all of their own past history of different states by different ethnic groups within present Chinese territory belongs to the single Chinese history continued through the Han ethnic group.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 전쟁: 전연맹약에 이르기까지
Ⅲ. 화의: 전연맹약
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
[ABSTRACT]
참고문헌 (80)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-910-002363199