도움말

Choi Myeong-gil(崔鳴吉)’s argument of supporting the pursuit of peace with the enemy(主和論), and the issue of Daemyeong Euiri(對明義理)

No.162, 2013.9, 87-122 (36 pages)
Copy
Quick View Quick View
Purchase $5.29
Export
Usage : 760
Citations : 0
분야내 활용도 : 1%
More detail >

· Usage : Full-text article downdloads count since 2010.

· Citations : Cited in the DBpia's articles

· Impact Score : Calculates the article impact score on a basis of the usage in the last 24 months.

Abstract
Examined in this article, are the basis and contents of the controversy that occurred between arguments to either pursue peace with the enemy or to boycott peace negotiations with the enemy, at the time of the two invasions from Manchu(“胡亂”) in 1627 and 1636. Purpose of such examination is to determine the characteristics of the latter argument, as well as the reason the former argument was never allowed to prevail at the time. Also discussed here is the fact that Choi Myeong-gil’s argument for peace negotiation continued to change its stance and bases, as tension between Joseon and Hugeum(Qing) continued to rise. What Choi Myeong-gil really thought about his own argument of peace pursuit, and the idea of making peace with Qing, and what kind of stance he had after the war when Joseon was forced to aid Qing with troops, are discussed here as well in order to determine the connection between his argument of supporting peace and the issue of Daemyeong Euiri(對明義理).
By doing so it is intended here to catch what was missed from previous examinations based upon a perspective which tended to believe that the argument to support peace was based upon an attitude of pursuing practical advantages, and that the argument of boycotting negotiations was based upon an attitude of pursuing a righteous agenda. In retrospect, both arguments were not that different in nature, and the pursuit of either one did not mean either maintaining or giving up the Daemyeong Euiri(對明義理). It was a clash of opinions in an emergency situation in which the stake was the dynasty’s fate itself.

TOC
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 主和論에 대한 반발과 主和論者에 대한 비난
Ⅲ. 崔鳴吉 主和論의 단계적 변화와 그 명분
Ⅳ. 崔鳴吉과 對明義理
Ⅴ. 맺음말
참고문헌
〈ABSTRACT〉
Keyword
Cited articles (0)

Please apply for Alerts and check the information by e-mail!

Cited articles not found.

Other articles of first author (1)

Please check the detailed of Huh, Tae koo Identified author!

Within this Journal (13)

Please check the detailed of No.162!

  • 처음
  •  
  • 이전
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  • 2
  •  
  • 다음
  •  
  • 마지막
Recommended Articles (10)

We provide services, 'DBpia Recommended Articles' and 'Customers who used this article also used', that used text mining, usage and citations data.

DBpia Recommended Articles

More recommended articles!

Customers who used this article also used

Metrics

Usage Status

· Usage

· Top 3 institutions list on usage

More detail >
No Top institutions Usage
1 서울대학교 107
2 경희대학교 59
3 고려대학교 49

Impact Score

· Impact Score

· The article impact score on the subject

More detail >

: %

2016-09
2016-10
2016-11
2016-12
0
20
40
60
80
100
  • 0%
  • 20%
  • 40%
  • 60%
  • 80%
  • 100%

Citations

Detailed Info
Copyright Policy

The copyright of all work are belongs to the original author. The contents of each work shall not be responsible or guarantee. Crawl the metadata of articles do not allowed without agreement.

top