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
This paper deals with Vietnamese slavery from the fifteenth century to the early nineteenth century, based on materials from the L and Gia-Long Codes. In particular, it particularly concentrates on three aspects: slaves as property, slaves as a legal status group unto themselves, and slaves in their relationship with their owners as they had existed in Vietnam, and in comparison with China, Myanmar, and Thailand. These comparisons are important to understand the nature of Vietnamese culture, since Vietnamese society is often said to have retained characteristics of Southeast Asian culture under the strong Chinese influence.
In summation, Vietnamese slaves were the property of their owner on the one hand, and were legal persons on the other. In this sense, they may be called “half-person and half-object.” The abstract legal status of Vietnamese slaves coincided with that of their counterparts in China, based on the adoption of Vietnamese laws from the Chinese.
Burmese and Thai slaves were in much better situation than those in Vietnam and China. Some nineteenth century European writers noticed this point, saying: “Slaves in Siam are treated better than servants in England.” Most slaves also were not permanently subjugated. Whenever they could save enough money to pay their selling price, they could buy their freedom. In short, they were persons rather than objects.
To conclude, the social status of slaves in premodern Vietnam was lower than those in Myanmar and Thailand, mainly due to the influences of the Chinese law. Without the influence of the Chinese legal tradition, it would be also possible for the Vietnamese slaves to have a similar standing in society as their counterparts in Myanmar and Thailand did.
In summation, Vietnamese slaves were the property of their owner on the one hand, and were legal persons on the other. In this sense, they may be called “half-person and half-object.” The abstract legal status of Vietnamese slaves coincided with that of their counterparts in China, based on the adoption of Vietnamese laws from the Chinese.
Burmese and Thai slaves were in much better situation than those in Vietnam and China. Some nineteenth century European writers noticed this point, saying: “Slaves in Siam are treated better than servants in England.” Most slaves also were not permanently subjugated. Whenever they could save enough money to pay their selling price, they could buy their freedom. In short, they were persons rather than objects.
To conclude, the social status of slaves in premodern Vietnam was lower than those in Myanmar and Thailand, mainly due to the influences of the Chinese law. Without the influence of the Chinese legal tradition, it would be also possible for the Vietnamese slaves to have a similar standing in society as their counterparts in Myanmar and Thailand did.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 노예와 자유민의 신분적 구분
Ⅲ. 인격체로서의 노예
Ⅳ. 맺음말
[참고문헌]
[Abstract]
참고문헌 (35)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
Vietnam(大越) 황자 ‘李龍祥 Lý Long Tường’에 관한 연구(4) : ‘花山 李氏 古宅(경북 영주시 장수면 星谷里 所在)’에 대한 고찰을 중심으로
박순교
동아인문학
2018
.03
베트남에서의 율령 수용과 그 특징 : 《國朝刑律》의 재평가
임상혁
저스티스
2017
.02
교역에 대한 宋朝의 태도와 高麗海商의 활동 : 高麗 文宗의 對宋 入貢 배경과도 관련하여
김영제
역사학보
2012
.03
베트남 『黎朝刑律』의 체재와 내용 : 唐律의 繼受와 관련하여
유인선
법사학연구
2003
.01
전근대 베트남人의 歷史認識 : 黎文休와 吳士連을 중심으로
劉仁善
동양사학연구
2001
.01
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-911-001339487