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 analyzed the modern history of Dabohashi who worked at Joseonsa Pyeonsuhoe as a professor of Gyeongseong Imperial University during Japanese rule and, furthermore, reviewed the descriptive aspect of ‘Korean modern history’ and recognition of ‘Japaense annexation of Korea’. First of all, it is noteworthy to pay attention to Dabohashi Giyoshi, a scholar representative of a national school academism from the standpoint of modern history. The pride Dabohashi had in academism study methodology is distinguishable from the historical descriptions of the non-academic scholars. This paper classified theses on Korean modern history written by the Japanese into academism and non-academism, a national school and a private school, and Daeryknangin and government service journalist and former officials, etc.
Also, through 『Study on rule history of colonial Joseon, this paper looked into Dabohashi’s recognition of Japaense annexation of Korea. That is, through concrete cases, this paper examined the meaning of an actual proof he emphases so much. Dabohashi maintains in this writing, through the term of ‘actual proof’, as if he is based on an objective, scientific and absolute fact, but it can be seen that actually, he takes an attitude of according with a national position. The point the author wants to talk is that such an aspect is not a special phenomena during a special age. Though it was possible to have revealed more dramatically under a special situation named a war system, it was a pitfall that can be fallen into when basically historical science fixes nation as the subject.
Also, through 『Study on rule history of colonial Joseon, this paper looked into Dabohashi’s recognition of Japaense annexation of Korea. That is, through concrete cases, this paper examined the meaning of an actual proof he emphases so much. Dabohashi maintains in this writing, through the term of ‘actual proof’, as if he is based on an objective, scientific and absolute fact, but it can be seen that actually, he takes an attitude of according with a national position. The point the author wants to talk is that such an aspect is not a special phenomena during a special age. Though it was possible to have revealed more dramatically under a special situation named a war system, it was a pitfall that can be fallen into when basically historical science fixes nation as the subject.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 다보하시 기요시(田保橋潔)의 식민사학 내 위상
Ⅲ. 식민사학의 ‘한국근대사’ 서술 유형
Ⅳ.『朝鮮統治史論考』의 ‘한국병합’ 서술 검토
Ⅴ. 맺음말
[참고문헌]
[Abstract]
참고문헌 (53)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-910-003112521