清末 新政期 天津商曾의 活動과 그 性格

• 영문명: The Historical Origins of Autonomy Movement Theory of Korea and Taiwan in the 1920s
• 발행기관: 한국외국어대학교 역사문화연구소
• 저자명: 문명기(Moon, Myung-Ki)
• 간행물 정보: 『역사문화연구』제15집, 135~168쪽, 전체 34쪽
• 주제분류: 인문학 > 역사학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2001.12.30

영문 초록

This article aims to revIew the features. especially the diffrences which were reflected in the two regions' autonomy movement under the Japanese rule. The self-government movement of the two regions began about the same time . maybe influenced by the changes in the world politics and prompted by the Koean People's Liberation Movement occurred in 1919. but the autonomy theory and activities of each region differed significantly. In Korea. the ultimate goal of the resistance was 'liberation'. that is the establishment of an independent nation-state freefrom J apanese influence . On the contrary. Taiwanese did not 'aim high '. seemingly just satisfied with the realization of autonomy. The difference encourages students of history to dig into the historical backgrounds for these phenamena. Then. why? One of the main causes lies in the characteristics of the two regions' ruling elites before colonization. In Korea, the civil examination system prevailed almost all the sectors of the society throughout the Cho-sun dynasty(1392-1910), while the same system in Taiwan had at most a slight influence on society or ruling class only since 19th century. Therefore, shift of state power from each region to Japanese Imperialism had quite different effect on respective region. Korean ruling class might have been shocked by the possibility of the loss of opportunity for 'the ladder of success', while Taiwanese ruling class might have no reson to find out the cause for resistance, because they have relied on other ways for their economic and social status(military power, commerce, etc.). Their cultural orientation also sharply differed. Korean ruling class was educated and trained to conduct on the basis of the Neo-Confucianism, and the Neo-Confucianism they embraced included the contempt for the 'barbarians'(華夷觀念). Combined with traditional diplomacy concept(交隣) in which Cho-sun dynasty did not approve Japan as an equal counterpart, this belief system provided the ruling class for raison detre of the resistance. But in Taiwan, although they were more or less influenced by NeoConfucianism, the ruli ng class were lack of ideological weapons for resistance. That explains why many Korean ruling class became the leader of resistance movement, while Taiwanese counterpart were not so eager to resist. There are one more historical factor that could explain the difference. Taiwan had not been a state itself. but a part of 'Middle Kingdom' . and Taiwanese had a state to rely on even when they became the subject of 'Japanese empire'. closely relating Taiwan's fate to that of China. which unabled Taiwanese to think they should 'help themselves'. This factor. which I call 'China Factor'. also affected the process. albeit not the result. of Taiwanese and Korean resistance movement. and I think it has some' dispersing' (the energy of resistance) effects on the Taiwanese part.

목차

I. 序論

II. 天律의 보이코트운동과 淸朝·袁世凱의 對應

III. 天律商會(1905-1912)의 構成과 機能

IV. 結論

키워드

천진상무총회 대미보이코트운동 비상회세력 국가권력과 사회