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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 한국역사연구회 역사와현실 역사와 현실 제113호
- 발행연도
- 2019.9
- 수록면
- 343 - 380 (38page)
- DOI
- 10.35865/YWH.2019.09.113.343
이용수
DBpia Top 10%동일한 주제분류 기준으로최근 2년간 이용수 순으로 정렬했을 때
해당 논문이 위치하는 상위 비율을 의미합니다.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The so-called ‘Tributary System’ has been at the crux of an idea which was considered to be most relevant in explaining the nature of premodern East Asian international order. It was widely believed that this particular system inherited the structure and logic of the Chinese Feudal system from the Zhou dynasty, and was firmly established in the early years of Ming.
The Ming dynasty, which became the new presider of Chinese hegemony in 1368, had to notify its neighbors the advent of a new order. So Ming claimed that, ‘in the grand tradition of Zhou Feudalism,’ its leader would stand as emperor and treat adjacent countries accordingly as lords. Yet the methods they eventually employed, such as receiving tributes, bestowing titles, guest ritual, and distributing calenders(曆書), were all what came before within the boundaries of the Goryeo-Mongol relations, which had been established and maintained for a long time since the Jeongdong Haengseong(征東行省) provincial government was installed on the Korean peninsula by the Mongol empire.
Interestingly, modeling the Ming-Goryeo relations after the old Yuan-Goryeo relationship was initially suggested by Goryeo itself. Ming only accepted such offer, and then chose to glorify it with some grand Chinese tradition. In other words, the diplomatic protocols established in the early Ming years was a mere revisit to the legacy left by the earlier Goryeo-Mongol relationship.
Ming is often cited as the dynasty which formulated the most Chinese-centric international order ever. Yet what contributed the most to such formula and even more so than Ming itself ever did was in fact the long gone Mongol Yuan empire. If Goryeo did not relay such Yuan legacy (to which itself also belonged) to Ming, the so-called Tributary System as we know it may not have formed at all in the first place.
The Ming dynasty, which became the new presider of Chinese hegemony in 1368, had to notify its neighbors the advent of a new order. So Ming claimed that, ‘in the grand tradition of Zhou Feudalism,’ its leader would stand as emperor and treat adjacent countries accordingly as lords. Yet the methods they eventually employed, such as receiving tributes, bestowing titles, guest ritual, and distributing calenders(曆書), were all what came before within the boundaries of the Goryeo-Mongol relations, which had been established and maintained for a long time since the Jeongdong Haengseong(征東行省) provincial government was installed on the Korean peninsula by the Mongol empire.
Interestingly, modeling the Ming-Goryeo relations after the old Yuan-Goryeo relationship was initially suggested by Goryeo itself. Ming only accepted such offer, and then chose to glorify it with some grand Chinese tradition. In other words, the diplomatic protocols established in the early Ming years was a mere revisit to the legacy left by the earlier Goryeo-Mongol relationship.
Ming is often cited as the dynasty which formulated the most Chinese-centric international order ever. Yet what contributed the most to such formula and even more so than Ming itself ever did was in fact the long gone Mongol Yuan empire. If Goryeo did not relay such Yuan legacy (to which itself also belonged) to Ming, the so-called Tributary System as we know it may not have formed at all in the first place.
목차
문제의 소재 : 조공시스템은 과연 실재했나?
1. 책봉, 천자의 공인(公認)은 무엇으로 보증되었나 : 고명(誥命)과 인장(印章)
2. 천자가 주재하는 시간에 포함되기 : 역서(曆書)의 반포
3. 중국과의 의사소통은 어떤 지면에 담겼나 : 외교문서식
4. 주변국의 의무이자 권리 : 조공의 간격
5. 조공국 최고의 의무 : 친조(親朝)
6. 번왕에의 마지막 예우 : 시호(諡號)
맺음말 : 외교제도는 왜, 그리고 어떻게 만들어졌나?
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (55)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Tributary Activities of Vietnam and Korea with China: Similarities and Differences
International Journal of Korean History
2021 .02
-
10~12세기 조공·책봉체제의 실태와 변용에 관한 연구
역사문화연구
2021 .01
-
고려가 몽골제국에 바라는 것 - 김구(金坵)의 외교문서에 표현된 원종 대 양국관계의 재구성 -
한국사연구
2022 .12
-
‘중화제국질서’를 둘러싼 논의의 확산과 수렴 - 조공체제론과 다중체제설을 중심으로
역사문화연구
2018 .01
-
New Perspectives on the Study of Korean Diplomatic History: Diplomatic Documents of Korea (2009-2018) and Korea’s Foreign Relations and Diplomatic History (2019)
Journal of Northeast Asian History
2024 .06
-
고려의 對蒙 대응 논리와 ‘大國이미지’ : 1231, 1232년 외교문서를 중심으로
한국사학보
2015 .11
-
정묘호란 이후 조선에 대한 명의 貢路⋅貢期 변경 및 조공사행 통제 강화
민족문화연구
2024 .05
-
고려 원종대 이장용의 대몽 외교활동
한국인물사연구
2016 .03
-
몽골제국의 붕괴와 고려-명의 유산 상속분쟁
역사비평
2017 .11
-
중국 대학 한국어 전공자를 위한 한중 외교 문서 연구
어문론집
2022 .12
-
중국인 한국어 학습자를 위한 외교문서 교육 내용 개발
어문론집
2023 .06
-
고려후기 사여관복(賜與冠服) 행례와 예제(禮制) 질서의 형성
역사와현실
2020 .12
-
15세기 한중 관계사 : 禮制的-一元的 책봉·조공의 확립
동양사학연구
2017 .09
-
조공시스템과 해역연구
인문사회과학연구
2020 .01
-
至元 30년(1293) 원 제국 사절단과 베트남의 서신 왕래를 통해 본 원-베트남 관계의 양상
역사학연구
2021 .01
-
중국의 외교문서 공개 및 출판 사례 연구－대륙과 대만의 사례를 포괄하여－
史叢(사총)
2020 .01
-
대한제국기 金冊의 현황과 양식적 특징
古文書硏究
2015 .01
-
김구의 대몽 외교활동에 관한 두 가지 문제
전북사학
2023 .03
-
Silla’s Perception of the International World Order as Seen through Diplomatic Documents
International Journal of Korean History
2019 .08
-
공민왕은 주원장을 믿을 수 있었을까 - 신흥 명을 바라보는 고려의 불안 -
한국사연구
2025 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0