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 제29호
- 발행연도
- 2013.12
- 수록면
- 59 - 105 (47page)
- DOI
- 10.18706/jgds.2013.12.29.59
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Last year, one monument(so called ‘Maxianmonument’)was discovered at Maxian riverside, Ji"an city, China. The Chinese scholars claims based on the characters inscribed as ‘Muja(戊子)’ and ‘Jeonglyul(定律)’, that it was built in AD.388 by Kuanggyeto the Great, as an monument which herald the law about how handle the grave-caretakers enact, by the command of his late father, king Kogukyang. But such claims are often in doubt in many ways. According to my surveys ascertaining characters on that monument, there are the characters as "Jeongmyonyon Kanseok(丁卯年刊石)" which means that it was built in AD.427 together with the characters as "Muja" on the Maxian monument. Besides, unlike Chinese scholar"s claims there were not the characters as "Jeonglyul" which means that enacts laws on it, and they also misread ‘sin(神)’ as ‘lyul(律)’. I wonder why Chinese scholars stick to only the characters as "Muja" and "Jeonglyul" with hiding the truth? If we accept Chinese scholars" claims, then this monument might be older than the monument of Kuanggaeto the Great in AD.414, which is the oldest until now. But I am sure that it could not be done. If it is not older, then they don"t have any reason to deny the presence of some characters or hide the truth. Of course, it is possible for us to tell this above conclusion under the premise that the Maxian monument is the genuine. But unfortunately there are too many doubts to believe that the monument is authentic. If they are really willing to demonstrate that the monument is authentic, first and foremost, they must open the monument and pursue research in collaboration with international partners. If not, they will become deeply embroiled in controversy over the monument in the future.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 상식을 뛰어넘는 비문
Ⅲ. 시대를 넘나드는 표현들
Ⅳ. “天道自承”인가 “自承元王”인가
Ⅴ. 비문 어디에도 없는 “定律”
Ⅵ. “丁卯年刊石”의 검증
Ⅶ. 석문 및 번역
Ⅷ. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (9)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-910-001116272