题名

敵對的朝貢體系：遼金與高麗關係

并列篇名

The Hostile Tributary System: The Relationship between Liao/Jin and Goryeo

DOI

10.6166/TJPS.202206_(92).0003

作者

朴炳培(Byung-bae Park)

关键词

高麗 ； 遼 ； 金 ； 朝貢體系 ； 長期和平 ； Goryeo ； Liao Dynasty ； Jin Dynasty ； Tributary System ； Long Peace

期刊名称

政治科學論叢

卷期/出版年月

92期（2022 / 06 / 01）

页次

61 - 107

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

本文將分析遼金與高麗之間的朝貢冊封關係。本文指出，國際權力結構因素和朝貢國的國內因素，決定儒教理念因素在前近代東亞朝貢體系中發揮的影響力範圍和程度。遼金與高麗在朝貢體系的框架內維持了二百年的長期和平，但其具體面貌與明清和朝鮮之間的「典型的朝貢冊封關係」相去甚遠：第一，遼金與高麗以唐朝的外交儀禮（即「唐禮」）為準則進行交流，但沒有共享價值體系（儒教理念）；第二，遼金雖然在東亞地區佔據軍事優勢地位，但未能掌握霸權地位；第三，遼金與高麗之間幾乎沒有牢固的相互合作或相互信任的模式。儘管如此，由於遼金與高麗的地理毗鄰性、在該地區的支配地位、雙方共同的懸案等因素，遼金與高麗在前近代中國王朝和韓半島王朝的關係中首次構築了最頻繁、最多樣的管道，這種互動模式延續到了明清和朝鮮之間的關係。要而言之，在遼金與高麗間的朝貢體系下，儒教理念因素的影響力被最小化。在國際層次上，儒教理念因素只在外交儀禮上發揮了其影響力，而儒教圈朝貢國內部的儒教發展與中國皇帝的紐帶感或信賴強化沒有直接關係。這些特徵與明清和朝鮮之間的朝貢體系成了鮮明的對比。
英文摘要

This article analyzes the investiture / tributary relationship between Liao / Jin and Goryeo. It argues that the spheres and degrees of ideological influence that Confucianism displayed in the premodern East Asian tributary system were determined by the factors of the international power structure and the domestic factors of the tributary states. The Liao Dynasty, and later the Jin Dynasty, and the Goryeo Dynasty maintained a long peace for nearly 200 years within the framework of the tributary system. However, the specific details of this peace had some major differences from what would become the typical investiture/ tributary relationship between the Ming/Qing and the Chosŏn Dynasty. First, the Liao / Jin Dynasties and the Goryeo Dynasty had exchanges with each other by making the protocol of the Tang Dynasty (Tangli or ＂Tang rites＂) a rule, but they did not share the same value system (the ideology of Confucianism). Second, the Liao and Jin Dynasties became militarily dominant over East Asia, but they did not hold a hegemonic position. Third, there was little deep mutual cooperation and there were few patterns of mutual trust between the Liao/Jin Dynasties and Goryeo Dynasty. Nevertheless, the Liao/Jin Dynasties and the Goryeo were the first to build the most frequent and varied channels in the relationship between the premodern Chinese Dynasties and the Dynasties in the Korean Peninsula due to factors such as their geographic proximity, their hegemonic status in their applicable areas, and their common issues of concern. It was a vital step in the overall historical relations between both countries, and these patterns of interaction later carried over to the relationships between the Ming/Qing Dynasties and the Chosŏn Dynasty. In summary, the influence of the ideological factors of Confucianism under the tributary system between the Liao/Jin Dynasties and the Goryeo Dynasty was minimized. The influence of the ideological factors of Confucianism at the international level was just a display of protocol, and the development of Confucianism within the tributary states in the Confucian cultural area was not directly connected to a bond with the Chinese emperors nor was it related to strengthening trust. This was in sharp contrast with the tributary relationship between Ming/Qing and Chosŏn.
主题分类 社會科學 > 社會科學綜合
参考文献
  1. 郭嘉輝, Ka Fai(2020)。元明易代與天下重塑：洪武賓禮的出現及其意義。臺灣東亞文明研究學刊，17(1)，1-54。
    連結：
  2. Amitai-Preiss, Reuven(ed.),Morgan, David O.(ed.)(1999).The Mongol Empire and Its Legacy.Leiden:Brill.
  3. Barfield, T.(1989).The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China, 221 BC to AD 1757.Cambridge M. A.:Blackwell.
  4. Callahan, W. A.(2012).Sino-speak: Chinese Exceptionalism and the Politics of History.The Journal of Asian Studies,71(1),33-55.
  5. Collier, D.(1996).Insights and Pitfalls: Selection Bias in Qualititative Research.World Politics,49(1),56-91.
  6. Dardess, J. W.(1983).Confucianism and Autocracy: Professional Elites in the Founding of the Ming Dynasty.Berkeley:University of California Press.
  7. Dreyer, E. L.(1982).Early Ming China: A Political History, 1355-1435.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
  8. Duncan, J. B.(2000).The Origins of the Choson Dynasty.Seattle:University of Washington Press.
  9. Fairbank, J. K.(1968).A Preliminary Framework.The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations,Cambridge:
  10. Fairbank, J. K. & S. Y. Teng. 1941. “On the Ch’ing Tributary System.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 6(2): 135-246.
  11. Fletcher, J. F.(1968).China and Central Asia, 1368-1884.The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations,Cambridge:
  12. Franke, Herbert(ed.),Twitchett, Denis C.(ed.)(1994).The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 6: Alien Regimes and Border States, 907-1368.New Jersey:Cambridge University Press.
  13. Geddes, B.(2003).Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.
  14. Hevia, J. L.(1995).Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the Macartney Embassy of 1793.Durham:Duke University Press.
  15. Ikenberry, John(ed.),Mastanduno, Machael(ed.)(2003).International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific.New York:Columbia University.
  16. Jung, D.(2016).From a Lord to a Bureaucrat: The Change of Koryŏ King’s Status in the Korea-China Relations.The Review of Korean Studies,19(2),115-136.
  17. Kang, D. C.(2013).International Relations Theory and East Asian History: An Overview.Journal of East Asian Studies,13(2),181-205.
  18. Kang, D. C.(2010).East Asia before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute.New York:Columbia University Press.
  19. Kang, D. C.(2007).China Rising: Peace, Power, and Order in East Asia.New York:Columbia University Press.
  20. Kelly, R. E.(2012).A ‘Confucian Long Peace’ in Pre-Western East Asia?.European Journal of International Relations,18(3),407-430.
  21. King, G.,Keohane, R. O.,Verba, S.(1994).Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
  22. Liska, G.(1962).Nations in Alliance: The Limits of Interdependence.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.
  23. Morgenthau, H. J.(1973).Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace.New York:Alfred A. Knopf.
  24. Morrow, J. D.(1991).Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances.American Journal of Political Science,35(4),904-933.
  25. Perdue, P. C.(2015).The Tenacious Tributary System.Journal of Contemporary China,24(96),1002-1014.
  26. Smith, A.(1998).Extended Deterrence and Alliance Formation.International Interactions,24(4),315-343.
  27. Snyder, G. H.(1990).Alliance Theory: A Neorealist First Cut.Journal of International Affairs,44(1),103-123.
  28. Walker, H. D(1971).California, L. A.,Department of Philosophy, University of California.
  29. Walt, S. M.(1987).The Origins of Alliance.Ithaca:Cornell University Press.
  30. Waltz, K. N.(1979).The Theory of International Politics.New York:McGraw Hill.
  31. Westad, O. A.(2012).Restless Empire: China and the World Since 1750.New York:Basic Books.
  32. 丁晟權, Seong-kwon(2007).고려 광종대 석불의 특성과 영향.문화사학,27,579-600.
  33. 丁晟權, Seong-kwon(2013).고려 광종을 보는 또 다른 시각：미술사와 고고학을통하여.한국인물사연구,19,223-266.
  34. 尹世遠, Sae-weon(2008).전륜성왕의 개념형성과 수용과정에 관한 연구.동양사회사상,17,173-202.
  35. 尹榮寅, Peter(2002).서구 학계 조공제도 이론의 중국 중심적 문화론비판.아세아연구,45(3),269-290.
  36. 고구려연구재단（편）=Koguryo Research Foundation(ed.)(2005).한중 외교관계와 조공책봉.서울=Seoul:고구려연구재단=Koguryo Research Foundation.
  37. 申安湜, An-sik(2017).고려초기의 영토의식과 국경 분쟁.군사,105,361-388.
  38. 全海宗, Hae-jong(1970).한중관계사 연구.서울=Seoul:일조각=Ilchokak Publishing Company.
  39. 全慶淑, Gyung-sook(2014).고려 성종대 거란의 침략과 군사제도 개편.군사,91,229-259.
  40. 朴元熇, Won-ho(2002).명초 조선관계사 연구.서울=Seoul:일조각=Ilchokak Publishing Company.
  41. 朴志焄, Jih-hun(2011).송요 간의 전쟁과 화의：전연의 전역과 맹약을중심으로.동북아역사논총,34,95-130.
  42. 朴炳培, Byung-bae(2021)。臺北=Taipei，國立政治大學政治學研究所=Department of Political Science, National Chengchi University。
  43. 朴潤美, Yun-mi(2017).서울=Seoul, Korea,숙명여자대학교대학원 사학과 한국사 전공=Department of Korean History, The Graduate School, Sookmyung Women’s University.
  44. 李命美, Jae-seok(2016).13~14 세기 고려 몽골 관계 연구：정동행성승상부마 고려국왕, 그 복합적 위상에 대한 탐구.서울=Seoul:혜안=Hyean Publishing Company.
  45. 李春植, Choon-shik(1969).조공의 기원과 그 의미：선진시대를 중심으로.중국학보,10,1-21.
  46. 李基天, Kichon(2020).당의 입장에서 본 신라의 통일.역사비평,130,228-260.
  47. 李雲泉, Yun-quan(2004).朝貢制度史論：中國古代對外關係體制研究.北京=Beijing:新華出版社=Xinhua Publishing House.
  48. 李錫炫, Suk-hyun(2005).송 고려의 외교교섭과 인식,대응：북송말 남송초를중심으로.중국사연구,39,119-158.
  49. 沈載錫, Jae-seok(2002).고려국왕 책봉 연구.서울=Seoul:혜안=Hyean Publishing Company.
  50. 岩井茂樹(2005)。明代中国の礼制覇権主義と東アジアの秩序。東洋文化，85，121-160。
  51. 金成奎, Sung-kyu(2016).여ᆞ금의 국교 수립과 ‘서표’ 문제.한국사연구,173,127-160.
  52. 金佑澤, Woo-taek(2009).11 세기 대거란 영역 분쟁과 고려의 대응책.한국사론,55,1-58.
  53. 金甫桄, Bo-kwang(2014).고려 성종‧현종대 태조배향공신의 선정 과정과의미.사학연구,113,48-81.
  54. 金渭顯, Wee-hoyun(2007).요대의 발해유민 연구：중화인민공화국 학자들의논저에 대한 토론.고구려발해연구,29,553-590.
  55. 金琪燮, Ki-seob(2008).발해의 멸망 과정과 원인.한국고대사연구,50,103-131.
  56. 金善雅, Seon-ah(2018).고려의 보주 확보와 그 의미.군사,106,361-391.
  57. 金順子, Soon-ja(2006).10~11 세기 고려와 요의 영토 정책：압록강선확보 문제 중심으로.북방사논총,11,239-272.
  58. 金順子, Soon-ja(2012).12 세기 고려와 여진‧금의 영토 분쟁과 대응.역사와 현실,83,139-174.
  59. 金暻綠, Kyeong-lok(2012).홍무제의 대외인식과 조공제도의 정비.명청사연구,37,1-31.
  60. 金鍾福, Jong-bok(2017).완충지대로서의 요동을 통해 본 신라‧발해‧당의 관계.한국고대사연구,88,257-290.
  61. 동북아역사재단（편）=Northeast Asian History Foundation(ed.)(2020).동아시아사 입문.서울=Seoul:동북아역사재단=Northeast Asian History Foundation.
  62. 徐聖鎬, Sung-ho(1999).고려 태조대 대거란 정책의 추이와 성격.역사와 현실,34,16-49.
  63. 高明士, Ming-shih(1983)。從天下秩序看古代的中韓關係。中韓關係史論文集，臺北=Taipei:
  64. 崔德煥, Duck-hwan(2012).993 년 고려−거란 간 갈등 및 여진 문제.역사와 현실,85,259-303.
  65. 崔鐘奭, Jongsuk(2018).조선초기 영조례 운영과『번국의주』.역사와담론,86,139-177.
  66. 崔鐘奭, Jongsuk(2015).베트남 외왕내제 체제와의 비교를 통해 본고려전기 이중 체제의 양상.진단학보,125,1-38.
  67. 崔鐘奭, Jongsuk(2015).고려말기, 조선초기 영조의례에 관한 새로운이해 모색 ：『 번국의주 』 의 소개와 복원.민족문화연구,69,269-309.
  68. 張存武, Tsun-wu(1987)。清代中韓關係論文集，臺北=Taipei:
  69. 張存武, Tsun-wu(1978).清韓宗藩貿易：1637-1894.臺北=Taipei:中央研究院近代史研究所=Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica.
  70. 陸貞任, Jungim(2011).고려·거란 ‘30 년 전쟁’ 과 동아시아 국제질서.동북아역사논총,34,11-52.
  71. 陶晉生, Jing-shen(2013).宋遼金史論叢.臺北=Taipei:聯經出版事業公司=Linking Publishing Company.
  72. 서울大學東洋史學研究室（편）, Seoul National University(ed.)(1989).강좌중국사 II.서울=Seoul:지식산업사=Jisik Sanup Publications CO., LTD.
  73. 黃枝連, Chih-lien(1992).天朝禮治體系研究（下）.北京=Beijing:中國人民出版社=People’s Publishing House.
  74. 黃枝連, Chih-lien(1992).天朝禮治體系研究（上）.北京=Beijing:中國人民出版社=People’s Publishing House.
  75. 黃枝連, Chih-lien(1992).天朝禮治體系研究（中）.北京=Beijing:中國人民出版社=People’s Publishing House.
  76. 黃純艷, Chun-yan(2010)。雍熙戰爭與東北亞政治格局的演變。史林，6，53-59。
  77. 蔡美夏, Mi-ha(2011).신라의 빈례：당 사신을 중심으로.한국사학보,43,37-75.
  78. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2018).1140 년 외교문서로 본 고려－금 의사소통의구조.동방학지,182,165-195.
  79. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2018).고려－거란 관계에서 세 층위의 소통 구조.역사와 현실,107,37-78.
  80. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2018).총론：한중관계에서의 요동.역사와 현실,107,19-35.
  81. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2019).명과 주변국의 외교관계 수립 절차의 재구성：이른바 ‘명질서’ 논의에 대한 비판을 겸하여.명청사연구,51,23-53.
  82. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2015).고려시대 사신 영접 의례의 변동과 국가 위상.역사와 현실,98,103-140.
  83. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2012).명대의 예제 질서에서 조선국왕의 위상.역사와현실,84,251-292.
  84. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2016).서울=Seoul, Korea,서울대학교대학원 국사학과=Department of Korean History Graduate School, Seoul National University.
  85. 鄭東勳, Dong-hun(2018).고려－거란‧금 관계에서 ‘조공’ 의 의미.진단학보,131,51-82.
  86. 鄭紅英, Hong-ying(2012).조선 초기 명과의 사신 왕래 문제에 대한 연구와분석.역사와 세계,42,39-58.
  87. 盧明鎬, Myoung-ho(1997).동명왕편과 이규보의 다원적 천하관.진단학보,83,293-315.
  88. 盧明鎬, Myoung-ho(1999).고려시대의 다원적 천하관과 해동천자.한국사연구,105,3-40.
  89. 檀上寬(2009)。明朝の對外政策と東アジアの國際秩序：朝貢体制の構造的理解に向けて。史林，92(4)，635-669。
被引用次数
  1. (2024)。研究中國外交還需要國際關係理論嗎？。問題與研究，63(2)，1-30。
print cancel