메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
도진순 (창원대학교)
저널정보
역사비평사 역사비평 역사비평 2019년 봄호(통권 제126호)
발행연도
2019.2
수록면
393 - 422 (31page)
DOI
10.38080/crh.2019.02.126.393

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The controversy over the national foundation year of the Republic of Korea(ROK), became a political hot potato for over a decade with regards to the “National Foundation Day”, and “government-designated national history textbook”. The controversy seemed to have been resolved when President Moon Jae-in declared that the foundation year of the ROK as “1919” and that “2019 is the 100th anniversary of the national foundation” in 2017. In addition, declaring national foundation in 1919 was evaluated as being patriotic as such action commemorates Kim Koo and the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea.
However, based on this study, Syngman Rhee was the actual founder and a leader of ‘1919 national foundation theory’. This theory is first, a way of recollecting the inheritance of legal tradition for Korea without the participation of Kim Koo and his group. Second, a way of recollecting the ROK as not the divided nation but the only central government of the Korean peninsula. Last but not least, an expression of the desire to be unified by the ROK. Behind the curtain of the founding nation theory of 1919, there also was a selfesteem of Syngman Rhee, the President of the Hansung Provisional Government.
The year 2019 is a historic period that marks the 100th anniversary of the 3·1 movement and an establishment of the provisional government. In addition, the year is a period of transition for the Korean Peninsula to surpass beyond the Division, the War, and the Cold War to more expanded terrains.
In the wider perspective of the entire Korean peninsula, the 3·1 Movement, the establishment of the Provisional Government, and the founding of the ROK are separate issues in different dimensions. It is a monopoly and coercion to commemorate above three events comprehensively as one, which also is incompatible with the historical facts of the time. Now is the period to ponder on how to remember the three events in a wider, open view to communicating with North and South.

목차

1. 건국절과 국정교과서를 넘어서
2. 연호와 건국
3. 임시정부의 「건국강령」과 김구의 건국론
4. 이승만: 1919년 건국론과 연호 논쟁
5. 시야의 확대와 전환을 위하여
참고문헌

참고문헌 (14)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0