Earticle

The Ando shell mound is located in the northern tip of Ando at the end of the Yeosu Peninsula, rising eight meters above the sea. The shell mount consists of three layers. Excavations produced four pit grave from Neolithic Age, nine hearths, 11 vertical features, and about 500 articles showing the Neolithic cultural characteristics of the south coast. There were bones of three men and two women found in the tombs. Tomb 3 had five shell bracelets, which can be compared with those excavated at the shell mounds in Kyushu. In addition, earthenware similar to Jomon pottery of Kyushu was excavated, which offers many implications for cultural exchanges between Korea and Japan. There were about 220 stonework pieces made of obsidian that seem to have been imported from Kyushu along with one earring. The articles excavated at the Ando shell mound are judged to be very important for understanding the burial customs and external exchanges between the south coast of the Korean Peninsula and the Kyushu region of Japan.

『삼국사기』기록에 따르면 고구려는 기원전 37년부터 668년까지 705년 존 속하면서 광대한 영토와 많은 인구를 지니고 정치, 경제, 군사적 위력을 과시 하였다. 삼국시기 고구려는 막강한 위력을 가진 대강국이었던 것으로 하여 삼국의 역사발전에서 중요한 역할을 하였을 뿐만 아니라 동아시아역사에서도 무시할 수 없는 자리를 차지하고 있었다. 하여 이러한 고구려를 지켜낸 고구 려사람들의 성격을 언급할 때에는 일반적으로 강인하고 패기(覇氣)가 넘치는 고구려인, 나아가 상무적인 기상을 연구의 대상으로 삼기도 하였다. 고구려의 상무적 기풍에서 “궁시”(弓矢)는 빠뜨릴 수 없는 대상이다. 활은 인간이 사용한 도구 중에 가장 많이 그리고 가장 오랫동안 사용한 것 중의 하나이다. 일반적으로 “궁시”는 수렵을 위한 생업도구로 발생하였으나 점차 집단 간의 분쟁에서 다른 도구들과 마찬가지로 “궁시” 역시 살상무기로 사용 되기도 하였다. 궁시(弓矢)는 원시시대로부터 유일하면서도 가장 우수한 비병(飛兵)으로서 사람들의 생활에서 불가결의 도구였으며 또한 무기였었다. 이 원시적 무기였 던 궁시는 화약무기의 사용이 시작된 중세기부터 근세에 이르기까지도 무기 계에서 중요한 위치를 차지하였다. 고대 동북아 여러 종족들의 궁시는 매우 발달하였는데 그 중에서도 가장 부강하였던 고구려의 궁시가 대표적이다고 생각된다. 물론 궁시는 고대 북방민족이 공동히 사용한 무기류의 일종이긴 하지만 고 구려와 같이 궁시관련 문헌기록이 빈번히 출현하고, 실감 있는 벽화자료가 풍부하며, 수없는 고고유물이 출토되는 경우는 고구려가 유일하다고 하겠다. 오늘날까지 고구려 궁시에 대한 연구가 거의 사냥도구나 전쟁무기에 국한 되어, 궁시가 고구려 사회에 미친 영향을 규명하기에는 한계가 있었다. 이로서 본고는 궁시라는 모티브를 중심으로 반영된 고구려문화의 일면을 고찰하는데 주목적을 두고 “고구려 궁시문화”라는 개념설정을 시도하여 그 내용으 로 “건국신화 속의 궁시요소”, “벽화에 보이는 궁시도”, “유물로 본 고구 려 궁시” 등 세 부분으로 나누어 논술하려 한다. “고구려 궁시문화”에 대한 시론의 첫 작업으로 먼저 고구려건국신화 속의 “궁시”요소를 정리하였다. 이에 『동명왕편』의 주석문을 바탕으로 구『삼국사』의 고구려건국신화 내용을 기초로 한 고구려건국신화의 최종형태에 대한 복 원을 시도하고, 그 속의 궁시요소를 지적하였다. 신화에 빈번히 출현하는 궁 시요소는 고구려사람들의 선사(善射)에 대한 숭상을 나타내기도 하였다. 신화 속에는 고구려 시조의 신기(神技)를 표현하고 있는데 주몽의 이러한 남 다른 재능을 나타내는 중요한 수단이 바로 궁(弓)이었다. 이로서 고구려건국 신화는 주몽을 영웅화, 신격화하는 과정에서 궁시요소는 결정적 역할을 발휘 하였다고 할 수 있다. 고구려사회에서 궁시문화는 고구려의 경제, 정치, 군사 측면에서 소홀히 할 수 없는 중요한 역할을 하였다. 고구려 궁시문화에 대한 시론을 통하여 고구려문화를 보다 전면적이고 객관적으로 파악하는데 조금이라도 도움이 됐으면 하는 바람이다.

There are several men in 'Samguk-sagi' part 47, who participated and served with distinction in the battle. They lived in 7th, served with distinction in the war of the uniting three kingdoms. The studies about them were done several times. These studies were debated only if the sprit of dying himself for his country was deeply spreaded. Though man’s action in the blood spattered battle unforeseeable, man hope to live instinctively. We find out these man in the 7C’s battle and war heroes who was obliged to make an entry into the enemy's camp all alone. Moreover a lot of battles to make an entry into the enemy's camp all alone were defeated, their military merits were trivial to kill several enemies. In the ancient, the battle’s victory or defeat was decided by the leader’s command to work in perfect unison. From the other viewpoint war hero acted as the maverick mindset. The battle was defeated by his action as the maverick mindset. Silla needed war heroes. The fabricated war heroes' story was translated by song from mouth to mouth. The fabricated war heroes' story influenced strict Born-rank System(골품제) minutely.

Until now, Premodern East Asian international relations or order were known as Tributary Systems. Ethnic minorities rendered tribute to the Ming(明) Dynasty, Middle Kingdom(中華). This fact was basis of an argument which belonged to the Ming Dynasty. Particularly, the Jurchen rendered tribute to the Ming Dynasty. Their territory is known as the Northeastern 3 provinces(東北三省), now. According to this logic, this area was under the Ming's territory. But, the Chosun imposed a tribute on the Jurchen and there were many visit of foreign envoy during the King Sejo, especially. In this case, how should we interpret the Chinese statement? This paper studied the situation of the envoy grasped nature and situation and suggested a different interpretation of general envoys. When analyzed the time in year, we were able to know that the Chosun's stance or relation with the Jurchen reacted sensitively and the number of the envoy increased and decreased, too. On the ground of such case, It was possible that the Chosun not only followed the occurrence of events but controled the envoy, flexibility. From the point of view of the Jurchen, they had to adapt themselves to new circumstances. Through this, they obtained economic benefits and kept balance. Meanwhile, when analyzed the time in month, the envoy was concentrated on time between November and next February. Their envoy's rate was relatively high in November and December because the envoy wanted to attend dongji(冬至) or Zhengcho(正朝) ceremony. This event is the method that the Ming Dynasty controled Chosun, and Chosun dominated Jurchen, similarly. When analyzed the envoy in power, the rate of people in and around the Chosun's territory was high in November and December or next January and February. That is to say, the Jurchen in and around the Chosun's territory followed the control of Chosun. Like this, the Chosun controlled the Jurchen in the manner of the envoy. The national defense and the King Sejo's royal authority were stabilized. So these events were important things. In particular, the envoy's policy of the Jurchen lived in the Du-man River(豆滿江) is evidence which took the lead in international order in and around the Chosun. Therefore, the Chosun as well as the Ming Dynasty accepted the Jurchen's envoy. I believe it is the false opinion to think that the Jurchen's habitation belongs to the Ming's territory because of the envoy.

This article reveals characteristics of the social status system in the Chosǒn dynasty by analyzing the operation of the Royal Officer Order(Chongban, 宗班) in the Chosǒn court. According to the Complete Code of Law(Kyǒngguktaejǒn, 經國大典), the Chosǒn government, on conferring titles of the Royal Officer Order, classified sons of royal families into sons of first wives, sons of concubines from common status, and sons of concubines from slave status. But, the Genealogy of the Royal Family(Sǒnwǒnkyebokiryak, 璿源系譜紀略) not only divided sons of royal families into these three categories, but even discriminated against sons of concubine's daughters and grandsons of concubine's sons. This discrimination on the basis of blood line was considered not only in the royal court, but was enacted commonly in Chosǒn society. This traditional discrimination existed even until the collapse of the Chosǒn court, and still persists in Korean society.

Japan House was the community residence of Japanese in Choryang, Busan. Traders and merchants from Tsushima for various purposes stayed for a long period in Chorayng Japan House for trade and diplomatic missions. While these Japanese residents daily contacted Chosun officials and merchants, a variety of incidents occurred in Japan House. For instance, burglary, robbery, assault, smuggling and Japanese trespassing prevailed while prostitution of Chosun women in the Japan House premises and circulation of unlawful funds for smuggling were also major part of trouble. One of the main causes of crime lay in the difference in the perception of trading goods. The Tsushima officials recognized rice as the payment for trading whereas Chosun perceived it as a royal gift of which the grant could be delayed or exempted altogether. The different perception caused trespassing and assault of Tsushima people residing in Japan House. In addition, the structural problem in the lack of rice and firewood due to the excessive imposition of labor service of Dongrae-bu resulted in the various violations in Japan House. In general, an amicable relationship was sustained after Kiyu Treaty until the occupation of Japan house. However, this amicable relationship was in reality based on the immense sacrifice of Dongrae-bu residents and the expense for 250 years of peace was also imposed on them. If a confliction occurred in resolving the incident, Chosun often ceased the distribution of necessity and closed the market to pressure Japan House. These were the easy solution to solve the problem and the biggest concern of Japan House. During the Edo period, Japan officially closed its door to trading, however, kept the four entrances open to interact with other countries. It actively accepted advanced European culture from the Netherlands through Nagasaki. The strength built through this exchange eventually led to the success of Meiji Reformation. Although Chosun also officially closed its door, Japan House could serve as a window to the outside world depending on the its diplomatic policy towards Japan. On the positive note, Japan House was the door through which goods were exported from Chosun and imported to the country at the same time. It was also the source where the information of Chosun and China was spilled and where that of Japan came through. Until it was forced to close by the Meiji government, Japan House was kept openfor the practical purpose of Chosun despite the considerable expense for its maintenance. Chosun government held both positive and negative attitudes towards Japan House, however the dominant opinion viewed it as a subject to isolate and control. The historical records of Chosun rarely show positive description of Japan House residents. The consistent control and confinement over Japan House in the end resulted in such byproducts as trespassing, illegal trading, prostitution and assaults.

Jeollabuk-do was an important region as expressed as treasure house and paradise of Joseon Dynasty in the Japanese colonial rule. Main product of Jeollabuk-do with many plains including the Jeonju plain was naturally the rice. Iksan-gun within Jeollabuk-do was suitable for farming since it had good condition in crop development as a warm climate. Also, the rice was represented as Iksan-gun's farm products. Thus Japanese to establish the farm entered in Iksan-gun after the opening of the Gunsan port in 1897. A landowner system is developed in Hamra for the fertile land and a geographical condition near Kanggyeong. Although the Japanese who wanted to buy farm land around Hamra increased in number after the opening of the Gunsan port, Hamra has less the Japanese land than other regions. The Korean landowners retained land, especially, almost they who had more than 10ha land lived in their land, Hamra. Farm land owned by Japanese increased significantly during Japanese colonial rule of Korea 1910-45. The region where Japanese owed most land was Damang-ri(다망리) and Sindae-ri(신대리) which lay on the border between the Seosu-myeon(서수면) and Hamra, and The smallest area was Hamyeol-ri(함열리), the central place in Hamra. Nevertheless, Korean landowners owned more land than Japanese in Hamra. But landowners in Hamra may not be able to avoid the Agricultural Land Reform after the 1945 Liberation of Korea.

‘Discovery of Yankodo’ record as Japanese core material on Dokdo territory issue was written by Guzu Shuske(葛生修亮) the leader of Black Dragon Association. Before Guzu publish A Guide for Fishery on Korean Sea(韓海通漁指針), he contributed the same contents on Black Dragon 『Association Review』of Black Dragon and Geographic magazine. In the 『Review』, he described ‘Terra Nullius Island’ Yankodo was not Choseon territory but he described about the fact that Choseon shark fishers used the island continuously in A Guide for Fishery on Korea Sea. He attached a map 『A brief map on Choseon seashore』which describing Choseon territory including only Ulleundo, implying ‘Yankodo’ fishery belong to Japanese territory. Until present, Japan and Korea cite the record of ‘Discovery of Yankodo’ as important territory research. Koreans mention about the record contents which describing `On clear weather, it is seen from the top of Ulleungdo mountain and Japanese and Korea fishers call this island as Yanko', which means Korean emphasize the relationship of the two islands in the record ‘Dokdo is seen from Ulleungdo’. Japan insisted Yanko was not known to Choseon people and the island was first discovered by Japan emphasizing the record ‘Japanese and Korean fishers call this as Yanko’. And Japanese blamed the fact The Choseon Royal Decree No. 41 which mentioned about Seokdo as Dokdo ignored the Yanko name called by Choseon fishers. As those insistences, in spite of the importance of the record in the research, ‘Discovery of Yankodo’ has been translated self-centered manner by each side. It is quite regret to know both research attitudes because researchers forgot the basic direction which should grasp the problem and the characteristics of the record by emphasizing only the result of belongings of the island. As such, ‘Discovery of Yankodo’ insistence which was distorted by Black Dragon Association is still remains as heat territory issue between Japan and Korea.

This article indicates features and problems in current history textbooks and concentrates upon problems revealed in description of the history of thought. Current history textbooks overcome a negative effect of uniformity which traditional government-designated textbooks had by developing more authorized textbooks. They also intend to make students look into Korean history in wider context of world history and stress practical aspects by focusing on modern history, which make significant changes in history textbooks. One of the features is that many teachers of middle and high schools actively participated as researchers and writing staffs and played a leading role for raising sense of realism. Despite these features and strengths, problems are not inconsiderable. That the part ranging from the beginning of our history to the fall of Joseon dynasty only occupies on third of a textbook is quite against fairness. Political and social history is mainly described in the ancient and medieval history due to its absolute lack in amount of description. The depth of description in study, thought, religion or culture is far behind that of traditional government-designated textbooks. It matters that width and depth of historical description varies according to researchers' and writing staffs' preferences and teachers lead in both writing and reviewing the textbooks. Above all, what matters the most is to limitedly describe the field of study, thought and culture. It is urgent to increase awareness in basic studies. Problems such as oppositive and dichotomous descriptive structure or description with unclear causal relationship or fact relevance are indicated to be overcome.

在北宋, 对高丽与日本的交流关系研究 除外政治外交側面, 疏于寻究文化本体側面. 本稿是, 根据北宋时期畵論書的繪畫交流史资料, 对于高丽与日本的文化认识和其交流及其性格推究了. 首先, 把《圖畵見聞志》高丽國和《宣和畵譜》番族門的“番族”概念作为研究对象, 推究了北宋时期对外族观念的演变. 比《史記》外夷列傳的中國中心世界观和历史观,《宣和畵譜》番族門是在宋代理學体系生成的. ‘番族’与‘藩族’之间总有差异. “番族”概念 非比‘夷狄’是浓厚的排他性, 出于文化的方法. 在《宣和畵譜》番族門, 不能贬抑夷狄習俗, 描写外族傳統風俗内含的“美風”. 这可以说明,《宣和畵譜》番族門在文化的层面上, 突出外族的存在. 北宋中期之后, 和高麗进行了直接活泼的書畵交流. 从北宋神宗时关心高丽文化, 与此同时高丽方把书画大量到手, 而且直接派送畵家等. 又高丽世俗畵, 更发达的唐代畵風, 是一种高麗貴族藝術. 这幅扇面畵, 装在‘松扇’, 派宋高麗使带去礼物. 在北宋时期对日本关系, 遣唐使废止以后, 不断被佛敎僧进行了文化交流, 结果在988年奝然的弟子嘉因把皇帝亲书带走, 结果建立正式的关系.《宣和畵譜》山水門里收录的日本國《海山風景圖》,《風俗圖》等, 是倭畫屛風, 畵日本風物及山水小景. 此日本世俗畵, 还有装在扇, 经过高麗转交的. 最后一章, 对番族畵的观念, 深究了对高丽与日本的文化接变. 高麗書畵《著色山水圖》等流传中國, 高麗 畵家李寧为使者被派出北宋. 北宋末畵風深彩色的山水畵風流行. 此高麗畵和其畵家活動影响到北宋末畵風潮. 北宋时期皇帝自身是書畵爱好者, 又因繪畵史的得了丰硕的成果,在对外族的关系, 文化的交流往来穿梭. 北宋皇室的收集書畵或爱好外族畵, 不仅仅外交的策略次元. 在中國外族之間, 先進文化与後進文化不相关, 以相互間文化接變, 开创新的文化變容. 北宋对高丽与日本的交流关系, 重视外族文化实体, 以后爲构成東北亞文化共同體貢獻.

The purpose of this paper is to grope for the possibility that republicanism is an acceptable political principle to feminism by reviewing the arguments and debates among the scholars. Generally feminists doubt that republican idea of citizenship has originally gendered meaning. They criticise that in the history of western republican discourse citizen was regarded as virtuous male political agency who could participate disinterestedly in public sphere. It means that republican citizenship was based on the gendered separation of the public and the private which excluded women from public sphere. In this context Hannah Arendt was severely attacked by feminists because her idea of political action aiming to restore Aristotelian life of polis was also a masculine conception. Some feminists, however, insisted that her idea was gender-neutral one which did not believe in the classical republican separation of sphere. On the contrary, they affirmed that her idea was of great help to feminism in that it tried to overcome liberal hegemony as feminism did. Especially they argued for her idea to reveal the limit of the maternal feminism which passed over the significance of politics by emphasizing the female ethics of care in private sphere. Historians of women also divided themselves into two camps in estimating the idea of republican motherhood during the eighteenth century revolutions in America and France which eulogized mother's political role to educate her son in home as a virtuous citizen in future. While protagonists of that thesis thought highly of it as the first step toward female citizenship to break through patriarchy, antagonists despised it as a sophistication of the separation of sphere and as a dilution of women's struggle for citizenship. Thus feminist's sceptical estimations of republican citizenship were largely due to it's innate masculinity. However, recently republican idea of freedom as 'non-domination' which radically differs from liberal idea of freedom as 'non-interference' is welcomed by some feminist as a useful frame of reference not polluted by gender. They insist that patriarchy is a structural domination in which women are not free only because they are not interfered individually by men. They emphasize that women's subjection to men can be overcome only when women come to recognize not who they are but in which kind of world they live. It means that even women who are allowed to do by men what they want without interference are not free in the world which is structured by patriarchal domination. They accept this republican idea of freedom as an essential tenet feminism should pursue. This is a very hopeful sign of alliance between republicanism and feminism.

The purpose of this study is to examine the anti-Japanese movement in the U.S. from 1919 to 1924. In particular, this study analyzes main factors of Japanese exclusion movement after World War I from several perspectives and how these factors interrelated to formulate Japanese exclusion movement since 1919. Anti-Japanese hostility was already existed before World War I. There was a racial hierarchy in the United states as well as California since 1790. Asian immigrants were 'aliens ineligible to citizenship' until 1952. Also rapid increase of Japanese immigrants and their successful adjustment in the filed of agriculture stimulated Californians. During the World War I, the racial prejudice for Japanese were not disappeared. Rather the anti-Japanese movement had been greatly changed. Above all, the Gentlemen’s Agreement became the crucial point for anti-Japanese movement during this period. Californians started to recognize this agreement was a failure. Japan’s intervention to issue passport to the Japanese immigrants resulted in immigration of lots of Japanese as well as picture brides. The Japanese birth rate rapidly increased. The issue of Japanese exclusion became the special problem in West coast as well in the U.S from 1919. Furthermore, the Japanese concentration and encroachment in the farming became so remarkable around 1920. The unified anti-Japanese sentiment reflected on the decision of 1920, 1923 Alien Land Act. In 1922 The U,S. Supreme Court determined Japanese as ‘aliens ineligible to citizenship’ through Ozawa Case. Finally, in 1924, Immigration Law forced to exclude Japanese immigrants from Japan. Furthermore, adding the exclusion clause in this law, Japanese immigrants were totally excluded.