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 제122호
- 발행연도
- 2021.12
- 수록면
- 239 - 278 (40page)
- DOI
- 10.35865/YWH.2021.12.122.239
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Examined in this article is the Eoje Jeon’un-shi, which came from Qing to Joseon during King Jeongjo’s reign. How it shed a new light on the actions of two individuals named Na Deok-heon and Yi Hwak, and how it affected the Joseon people’s recollections of the war with the Manchurians that occurred in the Byeongja-year(1636), is the main focus of this study.
When the (Qing) Emperor Hongtaiji was enthroned for the first time, Joeon representatives Na Deok-heon and Yi Hwak refused to bow, despite all the beating and torture they had to suffer. But upon their return to Joseon, they were accused of joining the celebratory occasion of Hongtaiji’s enthronement, and also of receiving an official letter from him who clearly called himself an Emperor. To answer for their crimes, they were summarily exiled. At the time it was indeed reported that they never actually bowed, but people did not believe it, and the doubtful stares existed even after they were given posthumous governmental positions during the reign of King Sukjong.
Then later, in 1778(2nd year of King Jeongjo’s reign) the Joseon people learned that the story of the two was inserted in the Eoje Jeon’un-shi(御製全韻詩), and after this very book was officially imported into Josoen the next year(1779), the situation changed dramatically. The actions of Na Deok-heon and Yi Hwak were heralded as a brave and decisive act which declared to the entire world Joseon’s determination to uphold its loyalty toward the legitimate master of China (the late Ming), against the barbaric Qing which undeservedly proclaimed its leader as an Emperor. They even received posthumous titles for that, and governmental officials and academic scholars alike, regardless of their political parties and world views or even perception of the Qing, engaged in vibrant efforts of creating biographies for these two men.
But certain portions in Eoje Jeon’un-shi, which documented Qing’s invasion of Joseon (and also immediately followed the story of Na and Yi), was conveniently ignored in the process. This paved a way for the Joseon people’s memories of the Byeongja-year war to convert into a different sort of recollection, which remembered the event as one symbolizing Joseon’s everlasting loyalty toward the late Ming.
When the (Qing) Emperor Hongtaiji was enthroned for the first time, Joeon representatives Na Deok-heon and Yi Hwak refused to bow, despite all the beating and torture they had to suffer. But upon their return to Joseon, they were accused of joining the celebratory occasion of Hongtaiji’s enthronement, and also of receiving an official letter from him who clearly called himself an Emperor. To answer for their crimes, they were summarily exiled. At the time it was indeed reported that they never actually bowed, but people did not believe it, and the doubtful stares existed even after they were given posthumous governmental positions during the reign of King Sukjong.
Then later, in 1778(2nd year of King Jeongjo’s reign) the Joseon people learned that the story of the two was inserted in the Eoje Jeon’un-shi(御製全韻詩), and after this very book was officially imported into Josoen the next year(1779), the situation changed dramatically. The actions of Na Deok-heon and Yi Hwak were heralded as a brave and decisive act which declared to the entire world Joseon’s determination to uphold its loyalty toward the legitimate master of China (the late Ming), against the barbaric Qing which undeservedly proclaimed its leader as an Emperor. They even received posthumous titles for that, and governmental officials and academic scholars alike, regardless of their political parties and world views or even perception of the Qing, engaged in vibrant efforts of creating biographies for these two men.
But certain portions in Eoje Jeon’un-shi, which documented Qing’s invasion of Joseon (and also immediately followed the story of Na and Yi), was conveniently ignored in the process. This paved a way for the Joseon people’s memories of the Byeongja-year war to convert into a different sort of recollection, which remembered the event as one symbolizing Joseon’s everlasting loyalty toward the late Ming.
목차
머리말
1. 1636년 나덕헌·이확을 둘러싼 논란
2. 나덕헌·이확에 대한 기억의 변주
3. 변한 것과 변하지 않은 것
맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
고려전기 복시(覆試)의 시행과 기능
역사와현실
2017 .12
-
谷口園 鄭象觀의 『史記』 애호와 그 의의 -｢讀馬史｣ 및 南漢朝와의 왕복 서한을 중심으로-
한국한문학연구
2024 .08
-
숭덕 연간 대조선 세폐 감면의 배경 검토
역사와현실
2024 .12
-
자산(自山) 안확(安廓)의 내적 개조론과 ‘조선적 문화주의’의 기획
한국민족문화
2017 .08
-
To Remember the Ming: Eighteenth-Century Joseon Envoys and their Interpreters on the Ming-Qing Transition
THE REVIEW OF KOREAN STUDIES
2022 .06
-
조선후기 기자의 위상 변화와 조·청 외교에서의 활용 양상
국학연구
2023 .07
-
신미양요와 청의 조선 정책
중국근현대사연구
2021 .09
-
병자호란 연구의 새로운 定礎 [서평] 구범진(2019), 병자호란, 홍타이지의 전쟁, 까치, 403쪽.
인문논총
2019 .01
-
숙종조 어필 수집 양상과 숙종의 어제 찬술
장서각
2021 .04
-
병자호란 實記로 본 扈從臣과 勤王兵의 응전 양상
동양고전연구
2024 .09
-
한중일 삼국의 근대국제관계 - 청일전쟁
동방학
2018 .01
-
병자호란 이후 倭情咨文의 전략적 의미
한일관계사연구
2015 .04
-
Unfolding Relations between Joseon and Ming during the Ming-Qing Transition
Journal of Northeast Asian History
2019 .06
-
여말선초 대중국관계와 국왕시호(國王諡號)
역사와현실
2017 .06
-
조선 호피·표피의 淸朝 진헌
역사학보
2019 .12
-
현대중국어 ‘是(시)’에 대한 재고찰
중국어교육과연구
2023 .11
-
‘是不是NP’의문문의 화행과 한국어 대응 형식 연구
중어중문학
2016 .06
-
论“丙子之役”后朝鲜对清朝关系的实态 -以贡物变化情况为视角-
한중인문학연구
2015 .01
-
宋代『神宗實錄』의 編修와『宋史』「王安石傳」
韓國史學史學報
2018 .01
-
淸의 간도정책과 이범윤의 이주민 관리 연구
인문과학연구
2016 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
병자호란의 開戰원인과 朝ㆍ淸의 군사전략 비교연구
이종호
군사
2014
.03
동아시아 차원의 정묘·병자호란 이해와 새로운 출발점 : 한명기의『정묘·병자호란과 동아시아』를 읽고
노영구
역사비평
2010
.02
1636년 〈金國外藩各蒙古貝勒奉朝鮮國王書〉의 서식과 인장: 실물 문서로 드러나는 병자호란 전야 후금·조선 관계의 이면
구범진
동아문화
2020
.12
1637년 청나라의 조선 정복 전쟁 - 구범진, 『병자호란, 홍타이지의 전쟁』(까치, 2019)에 대한 서평
계승범
동북아역사논총
2020
.09
丁卯·丙子胡亂 전후 主和·斥和論 관련 연구의 성과와 전망
許泰玖
사학연구
2017
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0