초기 평양 지역 개신교 선교의 정착과 연합

소요한 한국복음주의선교신학회 2024 복음과 선교 Vol.67 No.3

이 논문은 초기 평양 지역 개신교 선교 과정 가운데 나타났던연합 활동을 중심으로 살펴보고자 했다. 평양 지역의 선교 연구에있어 교파별 연구가 주를 이루는 가운데 기존에 살펴볼 수 없던 것을 고찰하려고 했다. 먼저 미국 북 감리회 소속 선교사인 윌리엄 제임스 홀, 미국 북 장로교 소속 선교사였던 사무엘 마펫, 그래함 리등의 선교의 시작과 정착은 교파별로 진행되었기 보다는 연합 선교 활동을 통하여 진행되었다. 그 과정은 의료 선교사였던 제임스홀에 의해 개척되었고 의료 선교를 토대로 장로회, 감리회 선교사들의 연합 활동의 모습이 존재했다. 이러한 연합 선교 활동으로 인해 이들의 선교는 평양 지역의 기독교 박해 사건으로서 평양 지역관헌과 기독교의 충돌과 청·일 전쟁이 있음에도 불구하고 선교지를 지켜나갔다. 특히 내한 선교사들뿐만 아니라 이들과 함께 선교를 위해 희생적으로 헌신했던 한국인 조사들의 활동이 있었기 때문에 평양 지역에 있던 청·일 전쟁이 지나갔음에도 불구하고 선교지를 지속 시킬 수 있었다. This study aims to investigate the early Protestant mis sionary endeavors in the Pyongyang region, with a particu lar focus on the ecumenical efforts among the missionaries. Rather than approaching the research through denomination al lines, this study seeks to explore the missionary activities through the lens of their collaborative undertakings. In the early stages, the missionary work and settlement efforts of figures such as William James Hall of the Northern Method ist Church, Samuel Moffett, and Graham Lee of the North ern Presbyterian Church were not confined by denominational boundaries but were characterized by cooperative missionary activities. This collaborative process was pioneered by medical missionary James Hall, establishing a foundation for coopera tion between Presbyterian and Methodist missionaries through medical missions. Despite the challenges of Christian persecu tion in the Pyongyang region and conflicts with local author ities, these unified missionary efforts enabled the missionar ies to sustain their mission fields. Particularly, the sacrificial dedication of Korean assistants who worked alongside foreign missionaries was crucial in maintaining the mission field even after the region had been ravaged by the Sino-Japanese War.

윌리엄 제임스와 그렌빌 스텐리 홀의 종교이론 비교

김재영(Chae Young Kim) 한국종교학회 2010 宗敎硏究 Vol.61 No.-

The academic study of religious conversion in the psychology of religion first arose and developed in New England America in the 19th century. At that time, this was seen as a uniquely American intellectual theme of interest which stands out if one looks at the dominant questions which were then current in European academic circles. Two schools within the psychology of religion arose and developed in New England Universities. One school developed at Harvard University under the influence of William Jamess concern of religious experience. The other school emerged at Clark University under the leadership of Jamess former student, Granville Stanley Hall. These two schools frequently clashed because they employed different approaches. But, the range of their research was quite similar. One of these key researches was religious conversion issues. Furthermore, the early works of religious conversion exposed the dynamic interpretation of conversion issues as the deep human reality. However unfortunately, as things developed, if we attend to current developments as these have existed in recent years, we find that the range of the study on religious conversion issue has been narrowed down to the empirical statistical analysis. This current situation would be different from the early study of religious conversion. For the comprehensive study of religious conversion, above all, I think that the original dynamic hermeneutic spirit on conversion issues should be retrieved in the early works of religious conversion focusing on the two schools. Especially I think that it would be necessary to revisit critically William James and his student, Granville Stanley hall`s works on religious conversion in the context of psychology of religion movement. To do so, in this paper, I have compared critically the definition of religious conversion, the location or the matrix of religious conversion, the types of religious conversion, and the relationship of religious conversion and body.

요동치는 황해상 서양인 ―1871년 ‘제임스 홀 군도’에서의 추산호 난파 사건

손성욱 역사문제연구소 2024 역사비평 Vol.- No.149

이 글은 1871년 독일 상선 추산호의 난파 사건을 중심으로, 전통적인 동아시아 국제 질서와 근대적 조약 질서의 충돌이 해난 구조 문제에서 어떻게 나타났는지를 분석한다. 18세기 말 영국 매카트니 사절단은 중국에서 무역 확대에는 실패했으나, 서양의 황해에 대한 지식을 확장시켰다. 아편전쟁 이후 서양의 선박들이 황해를 빈번히 항해하게 되었고, 서양인 표류민의 발생이 증가하였다. 1871년 신미양요 시기에, 독일 상선 추산호가 황해에서 난파되었고, 이를 수습하러 간 서양인이 조선에 표착하는 사건이 발생하였다. 조선은 전통적인 표류민 송환 방식을 따랐으나, 영국은 조선에 대한 불신과 불안으로 군함 링도브호를 파견하여 표류민을 구출하였다. 청은 조선은 자주하는 나라라며 거의 개입하지 않았다. 무력 충돌은 발생하지 않았으나, 전통적 조공 질서와 근대적 조약 질서가 혼재하며 요동치는 황해에서 일어난 추산호 난파 사건은 두 질서가 ‘조화’를 이루지 못하며 긴장을 고조시키는 모습을 선명하게 드러냈다. This study delves into the intricate interplay between the entrenched traditional East Asian international order and the nascent modern treaty system, elucidated through the prism of maritime rescue operations. Central to this analysis is the 1871 wreck of the German merchant vessel Chusan in the Yellow Sea. By the late 18th century, the British Macartney Embassy’s efforts to expand trade with China were unsuccessful, yet they significantly advanced Western understanding of the Yellow Sea. In the aftermath of the Opium Wars, Western maritime presence in the Yellow Sea surged, concomitantly elevating the incidence of shipwrecks and the emergence of Western castaways. In 1871, amid the Shinmiyangyo (the United States expedition to Korea), the Chusan met its demise in the tumultuous waters of the Yellow Sea, leading to Western mariners involved in salvage operations being stranded on the shores of Joseon. Adhering to Joseon’s traditional repatriation protocols, the local authorities initiated efforts to return the castaways. However, pervasive distrust and apprehension toward Joseon compelled Britain to dispatch the warship HMS Ringdove to oversee the rescue operations. The Qing Dynasty, asserting Joseon’s sovereignty and autonomy, opted for minimal intervention. Although the incident did not escalate into armed confrontation, the Chusan shipwreck epitomizes the friction inherent in the coexistence of the traditional tributary system and the modern treaty framework within the volatile milieu of the Yellow Sea, thereby exacerbating regional tensions and underscoring the inadequacies of the prevailing international orders in reconciling their conflicting paradigms.

영국의 지도 제작자 아론 애로스미스의 지도에 나타난 한반도의 형태 변화 및 요인 분석

김종근 한국고지도연구학회 2019 한국고지도연구 Vol.11 No.2

18세기 중반 영국의 존 해리슨의 크로노미터 발명은 서구에서의 지도 제작에 혁신적 발전을 가져왔다. 18세기 말 이후 19세기에 이르기까지 영국은 경위도가 정확한 세계지도 제작의 선두주자였으며, 아론 애로스미스는 영국의 대표적인 지도제작자였다. 본 연구는 이러한 아론 애로스미스가 제작한 지도 가운데 한반도와 인근 지역이 나타나는 지도들을 확인하고, 이들 지도상에서 나타난 한반도의 형태 변화 양상 및 변화 요인을 분석하였다. 분석 결과 1790년에 제작된 지도에서부터 1818년에 제작된 지도에 이르기까지 형태의 변화는 동해안, 남해안, 서해안 대부분의 구역에서 일어나고 있었으며, 제주도, 울릉도 및 아르고노트섬 까지 새롭게 기재되었음이 확인되었다. 그리고 이러한 형태변화는 애로스미스가 입수하였던 프랑스의 라페루즈, 영국의 브로튼, 제임스 콜넷, 맥스웰과 홀 등의 한반도 탐사 결과물을 지도상에 반영한 결과였음이 확인되었다.

만재흘수선 : Plimsoll mark인가 Hall mark인가?

김성준 ( Kim S. June ) 영국사학회 2021 영국연구 Vol.45 No.-

The ‘load line’, which marks the maximum allowable loading of cargo on a ship, is today called the ‘Plimsoll mark’. This is to commemorate Plimsoll’s contributions in leading the campaign for enacting the load line in the 1870s. However, prior to Plimsoll’s movement, James Hall, a shipowner of Tynemouth, led the petition for the introduction of the load line, and had provided Plimsoll with the information and data on the load line. Considering these, some argue that the Plimsoll mark should be called ‘Hall mark’. This paper presents the real situation of shipping industry in the UK as the social background of the establishment of the load line in the mid-to-late 19th century(section II), and compares the activities of James Hall(section III) and Samuel Plimsoll(section IV), who took the lead in the movement to enact the load line. Section V evaluates whether it is appropriate to call the load line ‘the Plimsoll mark’. Hall’s social activities, such as the abolition of light due, the foundation of the Tribunal of Commerce, and the establishment of floating institution, were all closely related to his own business. It is more likely that Hall’s advocacy for the introduction of the load line was not purely philanthropist, but rather considered his interests as a shipowner and a director of marine insurance companies. In contrast, Plimsoll had no interest in shipping business. Although his way was somewhat rough and misleading the truth, he purely mourned the death of the sailors, sympathized with the families’ grief, and was angry with the immoral shipowners. It is true that the load line of 1875, which was enacted in accordance with Plimsoll’s agitation and campaign, was not what he wanted in that the shipowners could mark it as he wished, and it was flawed. However, it was ‘Plimsoll’s achievement’ in that it was the first in the history of modern shipping industry to enact the load line. In this respect, it is still valid to call the load line the ‘Plimsoll mark’.