조선,청조의 조공관계와 외교질서 -『중국역대조공제도연구』의 비판적 분석

Abstract

The reason why the forms of two nations` exchange as well as the contents of it in the relation between Joseon and Ching Dynasty need attentions is because that way, the forms revealed on the surface and the practical contents can be different. In analyzing the writings on the relation of the two nations, it is important to review if the terminologies such as ``tribute``, ``Feudal suzerainty`` and ``Fan-shu`` were accurately used. If considering this point, the problems the writings of Pu, baichen have are clear. He takes Feudal suzerainty based on the tribute system as the basic frame to analyze and state the relation of Joseon and Ching Dynasty. However, the tribute system displays its false in that it the relation with Joseon was analyzed through the regulation of Ching Dynasty, and when referring to the relation of Feudal suzerainty(宗藩), 藩 means Fan-shu(藩部) and is not an accurate term in the aspect that it has a different meaning from the meaning of 藩 in the earlier periods. Eventually, Pu, baichen was using the terminology, Feudal suzerainty which does not exactly reflect the tribute system or the time instead of the tribute relation, and this led his writings to flow as focused on Ching Dynasty. The problems found in his writings are largely two. First, Pu, baichen insisted that Ching Dynasty was very considerate of Joseon. He claimed that Ching Dynasty requested a lot of tributes in the beginning stage, but the quantity gradually reduced as they were politically stabilized, and when Joseon suffered from the famine, Ching Dynasty sent the foods and threw the dispensations. Also, he insisted that Ching Dynasty made a promise to militarily protect Joseon from Japan and the domestic affairs and the diplomacy could enjoy a considerable freedom. However, Pu, baichen overlooked the following matters. The political stabilization of Joseon in the standpoint of Ching Dynasty was directly related to the stabilization of own nation`s border regions. Because of this, it is natural to interpret that since it was considered that the requests for numerous tributes and the excessive political interferences could trigger the unwanted distributes and the quantity of the tributes was reduced. Next, by focusing on the responsibility of Japan in the procedure in that the tribute relation was broken, he tried to hide the fact that Ching Dynasty could not cope with the changed situation. The Chino-Japanese War was the incident happened as Ching and Joseon fought to exert exclusive influences, and the people of Joseon suffered material loss due to the war. We consider that both Ching Dynasty and Japan are not freed from the responsibilities in the war, however Pu, baichen insisted as following; Japan could not hide their warlike nature and incursive expansionist policies and invoked the war, and Ching Dynasty encouraged the conclusion of the treaty between Joseon and foreign nations in order to protect Joseon from the danger. The writings dealing with the relation of Joseon and Ching Dynasty can be evaluated by the criteria such as ① if the standpoints of both sides are properly reflected, ② if the collapse reasons of the tribute relation are clearly listed, and ③ if the tribute relation is being analyzed in the viewpoint of Ching Dynasty of Manchuria people. According to these criteria, it is because the writings of Pu, baichen cannot be evaluated as properly analyzing the relation of Joseon and Ching. He reflected only the standpoint of one nation, and blame the third nations for the collapse of the tribute relation, and the standpoint of Ching Dynasty for the Manchuria people was not considered. Even though his writings has the strength in that the forms and procedures of the tribute relation are dealt in detain, these problems found do not allow for him to avoid the criticism that he presented a deflective point of view.