동북아역사재단 NORTHEAST ASIAN HISTORY FOUNDATION 로고 동북아역사재단 NORTHEAST ASIAN HISTORY FOUNDATION 로고 Newsletter

역사화해와 상리공생(相利共生)을 위한 연구·정책·실천
Research, Policies, and Practices for Historical Reconciliation and Mutual Growth and Cooperation The year 2010 was certainly very eventful. It looks as though that our everyday lives in 2011 will also be dominated by concerns and anxiety over North Korea's provocations. The regional climate is also volatile. In connection with inter-Korean tension hostilities, there has emerged a structure of confrontation in 2010, with the United States and Japan on one side and China and Russia on the other. In the meantime, Japan and China have continued their territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands and Russia and Japan, over the South Kuril Islands.
Chung Jae-jeong President Northeast Asian History Foundation
한일 지식인의 책무
Duties and Obligations of Korean and Japanese Intellectuals The following is a summarized version of "Assessment of the Rally for the Korean and Japanese Citizens' Joint Declaration Marking the Centennial of Japan's Forced Annexation of Korea: Efforts by Korea and Japanese Civil Societies to Overcome Colonialism", a paper presented by Visiting Professor Odagawa Koh [小田川 興] of Waseda University at the Agenda Development Conference for the planning of the 4th International NGOs Conference on History and Peace (hereafter, "International NGOs Conference) in 2011. Along with "And a path, at last, opened by a big river" by President Kim Yeong-ho of Yuhan University featured on the last issue of our newsletter (December 2010 Issue), the following paper will provide valuable insight into the significance and future of the "Joint Declaration by Korean and Japanese Intellectuals", the product of the joint effort by the civil societies of Korea and Japan.
Odagwa Koh [小田川 興] Visiting Professor, Waseda University
암각화에서 배우는 소통의 지혜
Learning about the Wisdom of Communication from Petrogylphs We were cruising down the highway on a cool autumn morning. I hadn't been on a field survey in a very long time. I was in the company of petroglyph specialists who had taken part in the 2010 International Conference on Petroglyphs Celebrating the 40th Anniversary of the Discovery of Korean Petroglyphs (October 26-27, 2010). I had been on many field surveys since my college years, but rarely does one get to go on one with the top specialists in a given field. Needless to say, I was excited.
Joo, Sung-JeeOffice of Public Relations
고구려 고분벽화 터키 전시회 고구려 고분벽화, 형제의 나라에 가다
Goguryeo Tomb Mural Exhibit in Turkey Goguryeo Tomb Murals Visit Korea’s Brother Nation On November 29, 2010, a meaningful exhibit entitled "Eternal Life: Exhibit of Tomb Murals of the Ancient Korean Kingdom of Goguryeo" was held in Istanbul, Turkey's largest city. Situated on the southern end of the Bosphorus Strait, which cuts between the Asian and European continents, Istanbul is a historic city that went by the name Byzantium as a part of Ancient Greece and then by the name Constantinople during the time of the Byzantine Empire. There is a reason why the Northeast Asian History Foundation decided to hold an exhibit of Goguryeo tomb murals in such a historic city straddling the Asian and European continents.
Choi, Jongtaik Professor, Korea University
제2회 동아시아사 교과서 학술회의 [동아시아사]를 길어올리는 마중물
Academic Conference on East Asian History Textbooks An Evaluation for the Success of East Asian History as a School Subject "You want us to do what even scholars find challenging?" At the Association of Korean History Teachers in January 2009, "East Asian History" (subject) was selected as the theme for the history education scheduled for January 2010. However, things were not easy from the get-go. The quote above demonstrates the overall mood at a regional meeting in April. The attendees were at a complete loss on all fronts, from the purpose and nature of the subject, regional scope, and the organization of content. The first response to East Asian history as a school subject was utter confusion. And this was two years after the official announcement of the 2007 Revised National Curriculum.
Lee, Dong-ukTeacher, Suwon Information Science High School
반출 문화재를 생각한다
In Contemplation of Stolen Cultural Properties A cultural property, which embodies the spirit of a nation, is a witness to history. In order to preserve the witness' memory in its most vivid form, the witness should be left in its original place and form. The defacement and loss of a cultural property destroys a scene of history and puts a people's authentic way of life into disarray. Culture properties have suffered damage all throughout the ages. Some have been snuck out of the country in their entirety while others have had bits and pieces cut off. Of the cultural properties that have been taken out of Korea, the vast majority was taken out but a century ago by imperialist powers. Returning them to their original place would be crucial in the effort to overcome the tragic past and restore world cultural heritage.
Yeon, Min-soo Research Fellow, Research Department
끝나지 않은 전후보상문제
Ongoing Issue of Postwar Reparations It has been 100 years since Japan's forced annexation of Korea and 60 years since Korea's liberation from Japan. Nevertheless, there are still legacies of Japan's colonial rule that remain unresolved. This is a follow-piece to the essay in the last issue (Dec. 2010). It is a meditation on the lingering tasks Japan must resolve in regards to the two Koreas and Asia at large.
Kim, Gyeong-nam Professor, Hosei University
센카쿠열도(댜오위다오) 영유권 논란
센카쿠열도(댜오위다오) 영유권 논란 Question센카쿠열도(尖閣列島, 중국명 댜오위다오[釣漁島])를 둘러싸고 일본과 중국 사이에 긴장감이 감돌고 있다. 두 나라가 이 섬을 각각 자국 영토로 주장하는 이유는 무엇인가? Answer역사적 연원과 편입 여부에 대한 다른 생각중국과 일본의 주장은 크게 영유인식과 편입 시기, 청일전쟁 후 할양여부, 대일강화조약에 대한 해석에서 커다란 차이를 보이고 있다. 일본은 1885년부터 1895년까지 조사하고 세계정세를 고려한 끝에, 청국 등 어느 나라도 센카쿠열도를 귀속하지 않고 있다는 것을 신중히 확인한 다음, 각의 결정으로 오키나와현에 편입했다고 주장한다.반면 중국은 1372년 명나라 때부터 오키나와 책봉사가 남긴 보고서인 고문서에 댜오위다오를 표식으로 삼아 항해했다는 기록이 있는 점을 들어 중국이 먼저 ‘발견’했다고 주장한다. 오래전부터 중국 어민들이 이용한 섬이고 무인도가 아니었다는 것이다. 특히 일본 외무성이 편찬한 외교문서를 보더라도 청국의 영유권주장에 메이지정부가 답변을 회피한 적도 있으며, 1894년 청일전쟁 승리에 편승하여 몰래 “영유”하고는 국제사회에 선언도 하지 않았던 경위를 보더라도 일본의 소위 “영유”는 국제법상 의미를 갖지 못한다는 것이다. 다음으로 일본은 청일전쟁을 처리하기 위해 맺은 1895년 5월의 ‘시모노세키조약(馬關)조약’의 할양범위에 센카쿠열도는 포함되지 않았으므로 당연히 2차 대전 후 반환 영토에도 포함되지 않는다고 주장한다. 이에 중국은 1939년 오키나와와 대만의 영유권 분쟁에서 댜오위다오의 영유권을 대만의 것으로 인정한 일본재판소 판결에서 보더라도, 이 섬은 대만 팽호(澎湖)제도와 함께 전후에 반환된 것이 틀림없다고 반박한다.이처럼 일본은 센카쿠열도를, 제2차대전후 맺은 대일강화조약에 따라 일본에게 되돌아온, 오키나와와 같은 성질의 반환 받은 섬이라고 주장하는 반면, 중국은 대일강화조약에 조인하지 않았다며, 댜오위다오의 점령도 반환도 인정하지 않는다.이밖에 일본은 중국과 대만에서 편찬한 지도 중 일부와 1953년 1월
이명찬 독도연구소 연구위원
Address 81 TONGILRO (MIGEUN-DONG) IMGWANG BLDG., SEODAEMUN-GU, SEOUL 03739
TEL 02-2012-6000
FAX 02-2012-6175
COPYRIGHT © 2023 Northeast Asian History Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.