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
Chinese historians assert that Koguryo was one of Chinese provinces because it was established inside the border of Hyeondo-gun and governed by Koguryohyun. This paper argues that the assertion is wrong by studying the timeline of Koguryo's establishment, the locations of Hyeondo-gun and Koguryo, and the government of Hyeondo-gun.
According to Samkuksaki, Koguryo was established in B.C. 37 and this has been generally approved without any counterclaims. However, Kongjo's annotations on Wanghee, Sangseo, and Gongankuk's annotations on Jukwan advance that Koguryo was established well before B.C. 37. Particularly, Buksa, Taepyeonghwanugi, and chekbuwongu shows that Hyeondo-gun started its existence from the governance of grandchild of Ju Mong.
The Chinese historians' claim resulted from the misunderstood premise that the Koguryo and Hyeondo-gun was geographically over wrapped in its existences. This paper rebuts the claim by demonstrating several facts.
First, Samgukji states that Hyeondo-gun was located 200 li away from Yo-dong in the north while Koguryo was situated 1000li away from Yo-dong in the east.
Second, Hyeondo-gun was one of the smallest provinces of Seohan in its size and political power while Goguryeo was prosperous in the area and its property was extended to 2000li.
Third, according to Samkuksagi, by A.D. 74, Koguryo continued conquering the area including Biruykuk, henginkuk, North Okjeo, Sunbi, Yangmac, kemakuk, kudakuk, East Okjeo, and Kalsakuk
Lastly, Huhanseo states that Okjeo and Koguryo is originally the property of Joseon. It explains that Koguryo, Kojeo, and Buyeo was established as a continuance of Gojoseon, and they shared the custom and the law with one another.
The critical materials for this paper is Samgukji, Huhanseo, and Buksa. The documentations from these prove that the Chinese historians' assertion is the description of Koguryohyun, which should be distinguished from Koguryo.
In conclusion, Chinese historians' claim that Koguryo was one of the Chinese provinces is wrong because they conflict with the major historic materials described above.
According to Samkuksaki, Koguryo was established in B.C. 37 and this has been generally approved without any counterclaims. However, Kongjo's annotations on Wanghee, Sangseo, and Gongankuk's annotations on Jukwan advance that Koguryo was established well before B.C. 37. Particularly, Buksa, Taepyeonghwanugi, and chekbuwongu shows that Hyeondo-gun started its existence from the governance of grandchild of Ju Mong.
The Chinese historians' claim resulted from the misunderstood premise that the Koguryo and Hyeondo-gun was geographically over wrapped in its existences. This paper rebuts the claim by demonstrating several facts.
First, Samgukji states that Hyeondo-gun was located 200 li away from Yo-dong in the north while Koguryo was situated 1000li away from Yo-dong in the east.
Second, Hyeondo-gun was one of the smallest provinces of Seohan in its size and political power while Goguryeo was prosperous in the area and its property was extended to 2000li.
Third, according to Samkuksagi, by A.D. 74, Koguryo continued conquering the area including Biruykuk, henginkuk, North Okjeo, Sunbi, Yangmac, kemakuk, kudakuk, East Okjeo, and Kalsakuk
Lastly, Huhanseo states that Okjeo and Koguryo is originally the property of Joseon. It explains that Koguryo, Kojeo, and Buyeo was established as a continuance of Gojoseon, and they shared the custom and the law with one another.
The critical materials for this paper is Samgukji, Huhanseo, and Buksa. The documentations from these prove that the Chinese historians' assertion is the description of Koguryohyun, which should be distinguished from Koguryo.
In conclusion, Chinese historians' claim that Koguryo was one of the Chinese provinces is wrong because they conflict with the major historic materials described above.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 고고구려(故高句麗)와 고구려국(高句麗國)의 건국
Ⅲ. 현도군과 고구려의 위치 검토
Ⅳ. 고구려현의 성격과 고구려의 귀속문제
Ⅴ. 요약 및 결론
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
초기 고구려의 주도세력과 현도군
한국고대사연구
2015 .03
-
高句麗史
성곡논총
1997 .07
-
4~5세기 고구려에 유입된 중국계 인물의 동향-문헌자료를 중심으로-
한국고대사연구
2003 .12
-
韓國 史書에 나타난 高句麗의 正體性
고구려발해연구
2004 .12
-
중화인민공화국 학계의 고구려 유민 연구 검토
고구려발해연구
2007 .12
-
中國 內 高句麗遺蹟에서 出土된 高句麗土器 硏究
중국사연구
2007 .01
-
唐代 高句麗 표기 기피현상 : 隋唐 墓誌銘의 國名 표기 분석을 중심으로
동북아역사논총
2012 .12
-
고구려와 북방민족의 관계에 대한 중화인민공화국 학계의 견해
고구려발해연구
2007 .12
-
고구려 후기 고구려, 수ㆍ당, 북방 제국의 대립관계
고구려발해연구
2007 .12
-
北方民族史에서 본 高句麗의 正體性 : 鮮卑, 契丹, 柔然을 중심으로
고구려발해연구
2004 .12
-
高麗의 高句麗 繼承意識
고구려발해연구
2004 .12
-
고구려 中期天下觀의 推移
고구려발해연구
2008 .03
-
고구려 발해의 상관성 연구와 과제
고구려발해연구
2008 .07
-
中國學界의 高句麗 對外關係史 硏究現況
한국고대사연구
2003 .09
-
2007년 이후 중국의 고구려 종교 · 사상사 연구 동향
고구려발해연구
2017 .03
-
高句麗에 流入된 中國系人物의 動向 : 4~5世紀의 考古學 資料를 中心으로
고구려발해연구
2004 .12
-
고구려 벽화를 통해서 본 고구려의 정체성 연구
고구려발해연구
2007 .12
-
高句麗 '民族'問題 認識의 現況과 課題
한국고대사연구
2003 .09
-
壁畵를 通해서 본 高句麗의 옷차림文化 : 中國 및 北方地域과의 比較를 中心으로
고구려발해연구
2004 .06
-
壁畵을 통해서 본 高句麗 音樂과 樂器 : 高句麗 音樂 文化에 관한 再討論
고구려발해연구
2004 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-019496421