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
Professor Tamaki Harada argued in his article published in 2004 that the Emperor Gojong ordered his ministers to decide upon the Protectorate Treaty (Convention) in consultation with the Japanese Representative Hayashi Genj? and the Special Ambassador to Korea Ito Hirobumi when the treaty draft was submitted to the Korean government on November 17, 1905. His argument was mainly based on the Korean Five Ministers' Memorial to the Throne [五大臣上疏文] dated December 16, 1905. This article criticizes his argument with the analysis of the related written materials.
1. It? Hirobumi, the Japanese Special Ambassador to Korea, presented his Mission Report to the Japanese Emperor on December 8 1905. He falsely represented the situations in Seoul, even faking up the fact that the Korean Emperor approved of the treaty draft. The Beginning and the End of the Conclusion of The New Agreement Between Japan and Korea [日韓新協約調印始末], an attached document of Mission Report [復命書], distorted and exaggerated every stage and scene on the court of the day following the wrong information that Korean Emperor approved the Japanese treaty draft. It was revealed by the fact that the Korean Five Minister's Memorial to the Throne reused the contents of this document.
2. Professor Harada emphasized the importance of the fact that the Korean Five Ministers' Memorial was recorded in the Ilseongnok [日省錄, Empirical Records of Daily Reflection]. He argued that it is enough to prove that the Emperor Gojong accepted the treaty if the Memorial was recorded in the Emperor's diary. According to a careful analysis of the situation when the royal daily events at the time were recorded and compiled, Emperor side lost power of the compilation of royal records by the Japanese Adviser system. It was clearly revealed that the Five Ministers' Memorial was recorded in the Illseongnok not by the Korean Emperor side but by the Japanese adviser to Department of the Royal Household.
3. What did then the Korean Emperor act to the Japanese proposition of protectorate treaty? As for this question this paper took two autograph letters from the Emperor Gojong to the international society as evidence. In these letters the Emperor Gojong insisted that he refused Japanese proposal from first to last. Even some subject conveyed that Emperor said himself that he will rather die for the country than to admit the Japanese proposal. Professor Harada interpreted Emperor Goiong's international activities as Emperor's double play, a skilled aspect of a veteran of Court polity. But this paper sustains a view that it was just his consistent activity with his original attitude to the Japanese leaders.
1. It? Hirobumi, the Japanese Special Ambassador to Korea, presented his Mission Report to the Japanese Emperor on December 8 1905. He falsely represented the situations in Seoul, even faking up the fact that the Korean Emperor approved of the treaty draft. The Beginning and the End of the Conclusion of The New Agreement Between Japan and Korea [日韓新協約調印始末], an attached document of Mission Report [復命書], distorted and exaggerated every stage and scene on the court of the day following the wrong information that Korean Emperor approved the Japanese treaty draft. It was revealed by the fact that the Korean Five Minister's Memorial to the Throne reused the contents of this document.
2. Professor Harada emphasized the importance of the fact that the Korean Five Ministers' Memorial was recorded in the Ilseongnok [日省錄, Empirical Records of Daily Reflection]. He argued that it is enough to prove that the Emperor Gojong accepted the treaty if the Memorial was recorded in the Emperor's diary. According to a careful analysis of the situation when the royal daily events at the time were recorded and compiled, Emperor side lost power of the compilation of royal records by the Japanese Adviser system. It was clearly revealed that the Five Ministers' Memorial was recorded in the Illseongnok not by the Korean Emperor side but by the Japanese adviser to Department of the Royal Household.
3. What did then the Korean Emperor act to the Japanese proposition of protectorate treaty? As for this question this paper took two autograph letters from the Emperor Gojong to the international society as evidence. In these letters the Emperor Gojong insisted that he refused Japanese proposal from first to last. Even some subject conveyed that Emperor said himself that he will rather die for the country than to admit the Japanese proposal. Professor Harada interpreted Emperor Goiong's international activities as Emperor's double play, a skilled aspect of a veteran of Court polity. But this paper sustains a view that it was just his consistent activity with his original attitude to the Japanese leaders.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 協商指示說이 근거로 삼은 한국측 史料들의 관련 內容
Ⅲ. 협상지시설 原出處로서의 伊藤大使의 「奉使記事摘要」「日韓新協約調印始末」
Ⅳ. 한국황제 協商指示說의 기록화의 배경
Ⅴ. 한국 황제측의 공식 대변 기록들
Ⅵ. 맺음말
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
일제강점기 초등교과서에 표상된 明治天皇 : 조선총독부 편찬 ‘역사교과서’를 중심으로
일어일문학
2017 .05
-
로마 제국과 일제의 통치자 숭배 비교 연구 : 기독교와 관련하여
한국기독교신학논총
2013 .04
-
고려 무인정권기 명종의 현실인식과 정치운영
한국사연구
2015 .03
-
唐 후기 皇位 繼承의 樣相과 宣宗의 즉위 -長子 명분을 중심으로
중국사연구
2019 .01
-
일제강점기 초등 ‘국사’교과서에 수록된 삽화의 현황과 특징
역사교육
2011 .06
-
무인정권, 그리고 전란 속의 왕권 : 고려 고종(1192-1259) 연구
한국인물사연구
2009 .09
-
淸 중기 總理事務王大臣 체제와 정국운영
동양사학연구
2013 .09
-
근대 중국의 國祖 認識과 민족문제
동북아역사논총
2008 .06
-
한국 강제병합 과정에 대한 재조명 : 한일구조약의 불법·무효성에 관한 법학적 연구
동북아역사논총
2010 .09
-
韓中 두 나라의 異國人假面戱와 ‘貢物 바치기’에 대한 비교 고찰
중국문학
2017 .01
-
일본 고대국가에서 ‘化’의 개념
동양사학연구
2000 .04
-
로마 군대 황제의례의 성격연구
대구사학
2013 .01
-
Treaties Leading to Japan’s Annexation of Korea : What Are the Problems?
Korea Journal
2016 .12
-
康熙帝의 淸 帝國 구상과 滿洲族의 정체성 : 예수회 선교사들의 기록을 중심으로
역사학보
2007 .12
-
여성ㆍ여계천황론과 상징천황제
일어일문학
2009 .02
-
왕위계승분쟁을 통해 본 조루리 작가의 천황관 - 진신의 난, 호겐의 난을 중심으로 -
日本學硏究
2011 .01
-
대한제국의 생존전략과 '을사조약'
역사학보
2005 .12
-
唐代 南郊祀의 皇帝 親祀와 그 정치적 효과
중국고중세사연구
2004 .08
-
을사조약 이후 대한제국 집권세력의 정세인식과 대응방안
역사와현실
2007 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-911-002847315