17세기 전반 황해도 공납제 변화와 別收米 시행

엄기석 조선시대사학회 2023 조선시대사학보 Vol.- No.106

This study examines the operation and changes of Hwanghae Province(黃海道) tribute system in the first half of the 17th century. In the first half of the 17th century, Hwanghae Province(黃海道) tribute system was enforced by the spread of sadaedong(私大同) and jakmi(作米) of tribute. As a result, the payment in money rather than payment in kind became common. However, because the gongan(貢案) was not properly organized, there were differences in the amount of taxes paid by region, and there was a problem that bangnap(防納) continued due to the maintenance of payment in kind by the central government. There was a solution to this problem, which was to revise the gongan(貢案), and fully implement payment in kind, but it was only at the discussion stage. In Hwanghae Province(黃海道), as mentioned above, the disruption of the existing system and the demand for improvement were seen early on. However, it did not lead to institutional reform, which was due to external factors such as the threat from the north. Due to Later Chin(後金) threat, the financial operations of the Hwanghae Province(黃海道) could not be normalized. In particular, the Ming Dynasty sent reinforcements in 1610, and the tribute system in Pyeongan Province(平安道) and Hwanghae Province(黃海道) was virtually suspended. The tribute system was restored in 1646, more than 30 years later. The tribute system in Hwanghae Province(黃海道) was changed to Byeolsumi(別收米), which collected 5do(斗) for every 1gyeol(結). Byeolsumi(別收米) was a system that only covered the value of tribute and did not cover local finances. As a result, even after the implementation of Byeolsumi(別收米), there were still calls for the implementation of the Daedong system(大同法) in Hwanghae Province(黃海道). The emphasis was on the need to organize local finances, especially the Japyeok(雜役) section. As a result, we can see that the scope of the existing tribute system was not simply tribute payment, but also included the existing local financial operations. Therefore, the Daedong system(大同法) needs to be viewed from a broader perspective.

16세기 공납제(貢納制) 운영 변화의 구조적 원인과 배경

蘇淳圭 ( So Soon-kyu ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2022 大東文化硏究 Vol.117 No.-

16세기 공납제는 민호의 부담을 가중시키고, 국가시스템의 존속을 위협하는 대표적인 ‘폐단’으로 언급되었다. 때문에 많은 연구가 16세기 공납제를 다루었으며, 공납제 운영의 다양한 양상들이 규명되었다. 그러나 기존연구에서 다루고 있는 16세기 공납제 운영의 변화 모습이 왜, 어떻게 발생하였는지에 대해서는 몇 가지 점에서 재검토의 여지가 있다. 우선 기존연구에서는 16세기 공납제 운영의 모습을 15세기 제도의 연장에서 찾지 않고, 뒷 시기인 17세기와의 상호관련성 하에서 고찰하였다. 그리고 이러한 공납제 운영 양상을 17세기 후반의 대동법 성립의 하나의 배경으로서 서술하였다. 이러한 시각은 결국 16세기 공납제 운영의 모습이 왜 그렇게 변화하였는지를 계기적으로 이해하는데 큰 어려움으로 작용하였다. 본고는 이러한 점에 착안하여 15세기 이루어진 재정구조의 정착과 정비의 결과로서 16세기 공납제 운영의 변화상을 구명해 보고자 하였다. 또 기존연구에서는 16세기 이후 재정적 위기, 연산군에 의한 폐정 등이 공납제 운영상의 모순을 증가시켰다고 언급하였다. 그러나 15세기 제도정비의 결과와 16세기 상황을 함께 염두에 둘 때, ‘재정적 위기’란 것이 무엇인지 명확하지 않으며 그것이 실재하는지도 의문이다. 아울러 연산군에 의한 폐정이 존재한 것은 사실이지만, 4~5년에 불과한 연산군대 정치적 유산이 한 세기에 걸쳐 영향을 미친다고 볼 수는 없다. 본고는 기존 연구에서 이미 충실히 밝혀진 내용을 바탕으로, 16세기 공납제 운영 변화의 원인과 배경을 보다 구조적으로 파악해 보고자 하였다. 논의의 층위를 중앙, 지방, 왕실로 구분하여 이들의 상호관계 속에서 공납제 운영이 변화하는 모습을 추적해 보도록 하겠다. Tributary system was regarded as a representative ‘malady’ that increased the burden of individual households and threatened the survival of the national system in the 16th century. Therefore, many studies dealt with the tribute system of the 16th century, and as a result, various aspects of the tribute system operation were identified. However, there is room for reexamination in some respects as to why and how the tribute system operation was changed in the 16th century, which was investigated in previous studies. First of all, previous studies examined the operation of the tribute system in the 16th century by taking into account the correlation with the later 17th century, rather than considering it as an extension of the 15th century system. In addition, they described the aspect of the tribute system operation as a background to the establishment of Daedongbeop(大同法) in the late 17th century. This view eventually acted as a great difficulty in understanding why the operation of the tribute system was changed in the 16th century. Accordingly, this study aimed to investigate the changes of the tribute system in the 16th century as a result of the settlement and reformation of the financial structure established in the 15th century. Besides, according to previous studies, the financial crisis after the 16th century and misgovernment by King Yeonsan(燕山君) increased the contradiction in the operation of the tribute system. However, it is not clear what the financial crisis was and it is questionable whether it existed, in view of the results of institutional reform in the 15th century and the situation in the 16th century. Although it is true that there was misgovernment by King Yeonsan, it cannot be said that the political legacy in the reign of King Yeonsan, which was only 4~5 years old, had an impact over a century. This study aimed to more structurally understand the causes and background to the changes of tribute system operation in the 16th century, based on the findings faithfully revealed in previous studies. This study will trace the changes in the operation of the tribute system in their relationship by dividing the discussion into central, regional, and royal court.

여몽 관계의 성격과 동아시아의 국제관계 - 중국 학계의 '책봉과 조공' 관계 연구의 한계와 문제점을 중심으로

윤은숙 동북아역사재단 2012 東北亞歷史論叢 Vol.- No.35

The appearance of the Mongol Empire brought great changes in the East Asian international order, to a degree not found in earlier history. The unitary rule of the Mongols required a complete revision of the Confucian proprieties referring to “investiture-tribute” that had been recognized as the existing East Asian international order. The external frame of “investiture-tribute” was accepted in the Great Mongol Empire period, but it has intrinsic differences in the sense of “tribute and investiture” recognized as the global order the Chinese perceive. Chinese scholars such as Pu Baichen, Huang Songjun, and others interpret the diplomatic relations between Goryeo and the Mongols as the cruelest example of “tribute and investiture” relations. They argue that the “investiture-tribute” system was considered to be crueler than that of other Chinese dynasties and the essence of “investiture-tribute”was actualized by the Mongols when the “investiture-tribute” system of the Mongols was applied to Goryeo, emphasizing the fact that the Mongols were the original Chinese dynasty in order to strengthen their logic. However, this logic made a mistake in stretching the meaning of the true nature of the “investiture-tribute” system and overlooking the nomadic attributes and aims. The diplomatic relations between Goryeo and Mongol have important issues to be interpreted only as a simple “investiture-tribute” system. First, the brotherhood alliance of the two nations was based on the anda system of the Mongols, which was the nomadic order in the background of the equality, and completely different from tribute based upon the premise of inequality according to the Confucian order. The preferential goal of the Mongols before the war with the Jin Dynasty was the establishment of friendly relations with Goryeo and the surrounding nations. Therefore, the Mongols did not request tribute of Goryeo upon the establishment of the brotherhood alliance. Rather, the fact that Goryeo attempted to provide a certain amount of tribute based upon prior examples of East Asian international relations cannot be stretched for its meaning and described as “tribute.” This enabled the Mongols to change according to the later situation, but the brotherhood alliance itself was not a relationship formed under the premise of “the tribute system.”Second, even though the Great Mongol Empire borrowed the external frame of Chinese system for “investiture-tribute,” the diplomatic relations between the two countries cannot be explained only through “investiture-tribute.” In particular, the fact that the king of Goryeo had dual positions as a monarch and as a son-in-law of the imperial family shows that it was not a relationship for a power doctrine, but the actual relationship. The dual position of the Goryeo king was connected as an opportunity provided to participate in the overall politics of the Great Mongol Empire. The king of Goryeo could discuss major national issues from the selection of the Khan to foreign expeditions and the right of succession for the next ruler, and could prepare the chance to analyze the future state of affairs by grasping internal trends at the Mongols’imperial court. Third, the Great Mongol Empire’s requests to Goryeo for tribute were noticeably reduced after the inter-marriage. In other words, the requisition of goods to Goryeo was reduced, the size and the frequency of the bestowed goods were increased and the general offerings were increased. This is verified as very different from the insistence of China that the typical tribute was conducted through forced request of tribute and acceptance. Therefore, the relations between the two countries went through a diverse range of changes according to the practical necessities of each country, rather than through a unitary system. If explaining the relations of the two countries formed and changed as the result of complicated mutual reactions,...

홍무제의 대외인식과 조공제도의 정비

김경록 명청사학회 2012 명청사연구 Vol.0 No.37

The Emperor Hongwu had been recognized that the cause of confusing in the late of Yuan dynasty was Yuan dynasty’ misleading, and he also had a strong confidence that the law and system of rite was caused to opposite opinion against civil society due to lacking of follow an old law. According to his these perspective, he had been reviewed and updated the law and system base upon a strong dictatorship in order to establish central control system. His effort on reestablishment of law system was not only settling the society domestically but also constructing an international tribute system centered around Ming. As the same result of other national structure, the law of system was a key means for the rulers to maintain the supreme imperial power and maintain social stability. Ming dynasty had been also revised a variety of their national dictator control system depend on build for the nation to center of china. First of all, he made a law strictly as well to escape from a scarce against social unstable on his citizen as to prevent his cabinet members’corruption. He had put on efforts to operate that the build law had helped contributing to control his citizen depend upon deliberated government documentation system. The first sequency was a building the law system then took focus on his citizen. He had been tried to set up his nation in conjunction with essence of human moral based upon traditional attitude. The order of rebuild law system was prioritize by emperor on noblesse and oblique. After accomplishment of his efforts he had applied his philosophy to international oder. As to considering an established international tribute system centered around Ming, he had been made a bill of each tribute system. Actually Ming that had strong military power and national capabilities had enforced to the other nation to follow the Ming’s tribute system It was reflected to other nation to keep the responsibility that Ming build the an international tribute system centered around one. It was a hierarchy in international order that accept the vertical oder between Ming and other nation compared to modern era. Once Ming have accept the tribute nation, it had differentiated with Emperor based upon specified tribute system. The influence of the system of rite in the early period of the Ming Dynasty on the system of rite in the middle and late period. In conclusion, the international order that had been builded by Ming was a stabilized relation that rooted on not only an international tribute system centered around Ming but also between each nation in conjunction with the principle of nonaggression.

Transformation of the Dualistic International Order into the Modern Treaty System in the Sino-Korean Relationship

Song Kue-jin(송규진) 고려대학교 한국사연구소 2010 International Journal of Korean History Vol.15 No.2

Transformation of the Dualistic International Order into the Modern Treaty System in the Sino-Korean Relationship

송규진 고려대학교 한국사연구소 2010 International Journal of Korean History Vol.15 No.2

The transition from a tribute system to a modern treaty system was by no means uniform and unilateral, but rather more complex and multilateral. Also, a certain period of transition was inevitable when a prolonged regional order came across a new one. Such aspects are typically evident in the East Asian international order surrounding Korea. Although Korea was incorporated into the modern treaty system after the Treaty of Kanghwa, the East Asian international order surrounding Korea did not change straight into a modern treaty system but shifted to a dualistic international order in practice. China institutionally maintained the tribute system by signing “the Korea-China Regulations for Maritime and Overland Trade”. The superpower of the time that led the dualistic international order surrounding Korea was China. Because of China who did not recognize Korea as an independent state then, Korea had many limitations in active participation in the international society. Therefore, breaking away from China’s external pressure appeared as an important objective. There had been some groups who attempted to promote internal reform and escape from China’s interference but they failed due to China’s intervention and Kojong’s pro-Chinese dependent policies. Although Kojong also did have the intentions to alleviate China’s tribute system in concert with the West, he prioritized stability of his power and repeated historical actions by requesting for Chinese troops when his regime was threatened. The dualistic international order came to an end with China’s complete denial of the tribute system in the Treaty of Shimonoseki following the Sino-Japanese War. Yet, China still tried to preserve the special relationship with Korea by only permitting the recovery of relationship up to signing “the Korea-China Regulations for Maritime and Overland Trade” and mutually sending the consular representatives. Therefore, the Korea-China relationship, not readily included in the modern treaty system, had a certain period of a transitional phase. However,China’s effort to reinforce its influence over Korea by preserving the special relationship was no longer viable. In consequence, China decided to sign the modern treaty following the establishment of the Greater Korea Empire, and the active involvement of Britain,Russia and Japan, as well as to deal with the practical issue of protection of Chinese people. The Greater Korea Empire and China officially established a modern treaty relation after founding “the Treaty of Commerce between Korea and China” in 1899. This incident marks the change of the international order of Northeastern Asia from a dualistic existence of a modern treaty system and a tribute system to a modern treaty system. The international community could only acquiesce in the Japanese colonization of the Greater Korea Empire after Japan – the nation that was rising as the dominant player in the East Asian international order around Korea – won Russo-Japanese Wars. However, superficially the modern treaty system was founded on the idea that individual countries have equal in international relations, even though in reality, this system had resort to military power to resolve international conflicts. This point leads me to guess that If Korea and China had adopted the modern treaty system before the Sino-Japanese War, and had jointly maneuvered against the Western and Japanese hegemony, the Korea and China relationships might have developed in a different direction.

조공제도에 대한 서구학계의 해석 검토

김진웅 ( Jin Wung Kim ) 역사교육학회 2013 역사교육논집 Vol.50 No.-

This study intends to analyze a variety of interpretations presented by Western scholarship on the tribute system in historical East Asia. It classifies a number of explanations on the historical institution as two distinctive schools and examines their logic, characteristics, and limitations. The first school based on John K. Fairbank`s paradigm views the tribute system as the only medium for China`s relations and diplomacy with its neighboring states in the premodern era. The “Fairbank model” conceives of an East Asian world order of tributary relations centered on China. This model posits that Chinese rulers initiated tributary relations because of the value of the prestige that foreign tribute would bring to their rule in China. Foreign rulers participated in tributary politics because of the value of the benefits of trade with China. The Fairbank paradigm is problematic for a number of reasons. It is internally flawed and incapable of interpreting major events and underlying dynamics in East Asian international politics. The second school suggested primarily by scholars of international relations understands the tribute system as one institution of historical East Asian international relations. The actual international system of premodern East Asian politics was much broader than the tribute system. Other institutions, such as war and even the balance of power politics, can be found in international relations in historical East Asia. In other words, the tribute system was only part of the whole picture of historical East Asian international politics. Despite its logical validity and persuasive powers, the interpretation also reveals its own inherent flaws. History is subject to multiple interpretations and perspectives. It is clear that the “tribute system” constitutes the fundamental institution to explain the premodern East Asian world order. At the same time, we must make efforts to move beyond the “tribute system” paradigm to better understand historical East Asian international politics.

15ㆍ16세기 漕倉制의 재정립과 그 이해방향

한정훈(Han, Jeong-Hun) 부산경남사학회 2015 역사와 경계 Vol.94 No.-

This study is to clarify the understanding direction of the tribute shipping system using granary warehouses in the 16th century. We find this study historically valuable in the fact that it provided a different understanding direction from the view points of the previous studies by examining the aspects of its internal and external changes in the 15th and 16th century. The management system of 9 tribute granary warehouses established in the late 15th century had a limitation in its operational structure. That is, the riverside warehouses on the Yesung and the Han river and Gongsegochang on the Asan bay made use of the structures of the anchorages and the organization of the nearby naval forces respectively; on the contrary, only the tribute granary warehouses in Cholla-do performed the tribute-shipping activities equipped with the assigned cargo vessels and crews. In particular, Gongsegochang which was not equipped with cargo vessels and crews was integrated under the shared management system with the riverside and seaside warehouses. In the 16th centurys tribute shipping system by using granary warehouse were the issues discussed such as the readjustment of the tax receipt system, the relief of the crews, the canal excavation works, and the use of the private vessels which had been under progress in the realignment process in the 15 century. Along with this, the major achievements at that time can be summed up as the reorganization of the tribute granary warehouses into 8 ones and the acquisition of the crews and cargo vessels to Gongsegochang. The changes of Gongsegochang had the great meaning in that they unified the management structures of the seaside warehouses as well as those of tribute granary warehouses in Cholla-do. While there were a temporally increased number of the cases of the renting of the private vessel in the early 16th century, the understanding as well as the existing views needs to be re-examined that tribute shipping system by using granary warehouses was greatly disturbed by the drastic downsizing of the tax collecting areas or by the adoption of the private vessel renting system. The tribute-shipping system in the 16th century was managed based on the tribute granary warehouse system rather than on the private vessel renting system.

조선시대(朝鮮時代) 외교문서(外交文書) 자문(咨文)의 행이체계(行移體系)와 변화과정

김경록 ( Kyeong Lok Kim ) 한국고문서학회 2015 고문서연구 Vol.46 No.-

The relationship between the Joseon Dynasty and China developed with a balance in justification and practicality, reflecting the comprehensive change in international and domestic environment. Joseon, belong to the World System of Centering around China, applied the Official Document System of China and exchanged their diplomatic documents. The diplomatic documents to Ming and Qing dynasty during Joseon period are: Danja(單子), Jeongmun(呈文), Sinmun(申文), Gyemun(啓文), Jumun(奏文), Jamun(咨文), Jangmun(狀文), Jonmun(箋文), P`yomun(表文) and so on. Later, Johoe(照會) was added in the late 19th century. These documents were influenced by China; therefore, they were produced, delivered, received and stored according to the Chinese Official Document System. Among these diplomatic documents of Joseon period, Jamun was the documents so-called, Pyunghangmun(平行文) which was exchanged between the governments of higher than the second grade. The documents of Joseon were issued by the King of Joseon dynasty, and received by the Board of Rites(禮部), the Board of War(兵部), the Five Army office of the Commander-Governor(五軍都督府), and the Liaodong Commander-Guard(遼東都司) of Ming dynasty, and by the Board of Rites, the Board of War, and the Shenyang Board of Rites(盛京禮 部), the Shenyang Board of War(盛京兵部) of Qing dynasty. Jamun among diplomatic documents was the most exchanged documents between Joseon and China because of its practical use. Though the specified forms of Jamun in Ming dynasty were handed down to Qing dynasty, some partial changes were made, reflecting the weakening of China`s status in the course of modernization. Its contents include all kinds of diplomatic affairs occurred between China and Joseon in a comprehensive manner. The administrative system of Jamun may be classified by their final destination, whether it is to Beijing or to Shenyang, and also by the use of the administration system of official documents( ) of China. Since the documents delivered to Ming 行移體系dynasty were finally received by the Chinese emperor in the end, they were generally handled with more care than the ones that are being sent to Shenyang. In addition, delivered Jamun by Sahaeng(使行) a dispatched envoy from Joseon dynasty contained relatively more important information than the ones delivered under the administration system of official documents of China. Through the format, contents, and administration system of this type of Jamun, we may identify that the Jamun was the key diplomatic document within the world System of Centering China during Joseon period. Moreover, we may also understand the characteristics of the international order of Joseon dynasty through an analysis of Jamun. In the early 19th century, the Western Powers` advance into East Asia radically changed the traditional conception of the East Asian international order. The decline in Qing`s international standing brought changes in fundamental World-view(世界觀) for Joseon who was keeping its national security under the World system of centering Around China. This naturally led to a change in diplomatic policy and diplomatic documents. The changes occurred in the format, contents and its administration system of the Jamun caused Joseon, who was attempting to reform and modernize its diplomatic system to establish modern diplomatic organizations and to formulate appropriate diplomatic document system. Meanwhile, Qing dynasty tried to maintain their world system of centering around Qing(淸中心國際秩序) to Joseon. The gap between Joseon and Qing dynasty`s foreign policy became more deepened by not only their relation itself, but also their relation with the Western Powers including Japan. In conclusion, a traditional diplomatic document Jamun lost its identity as a diplomatic document in accordance with the defeat of Qing dynasty in the Sino-Japanese War which signifies the collapse of the traditional international order.

명나라의 대외정책과 동아시아의 국제질서 — 조공체제의 구조적 이해

양은걸 중한연구학회 2024 중한연구학간 Vol.0 No.33

동아시아 국제질서에 관하여 종래의 연구는 중국왕조가 수여한 관작⋅왕호로부터조공국의 서열을 검토한 연구는 있어도 국제질서의 원리로부터 고찰한 연구는 거의 없다. 본문에서는 동아시아세계 국제질서의 원리에 주목하여 작위제적 질서, 관료제적 질서, 종법질서가 존재하였다는 것을 해명하였다. 그 중에서 조공체제를 받혀주는 것이 앞의 양자인데 존존의 군신질서이고, 친친의 종법질서는 조공체제 외에 있는 여러 나라를의제적인 혈연관계로 중국 중심의 국제질서 중에 포괄하였다. 이런 종법질서가 커다란변화를 초래한 것이 명나라시기이다. 명나라는 대외관계를 조공제도에 일원화하여 극히엄격한 정치제도를 채용하였다. 그리고 모든 조공국에게 관복을 하사하여, 종법질서를적요하였다. 이로서 화이일가의 이념세계를 가시화하는 것으로 조공체제를 정당화 하였다. 그 전까지 조공체제와 무연하였던 종법질서가 조공체제에 내포되어 조공일원체제를이데올로기 면에서 보완한 것이 명나라시기 동아시아 국제질서의 특지이라고 하겠다. As for the international order in East Asia, most of the previous studies discussed the order of tribute states from the perspective of the principles of the international order. This paper focuses on the principles of the East Asian world order and puts forward clearly the peerage order, bureaucracy order and patriarchal order that exist in the East Asian world.The patriarchal order applies to many neighboring countries that are not included in the tribute system, and tries to incorporate it into the international order centered on China by virtual kinship. The period during which the role of this patriarchal order changed significantly was the Ming Dynasty. Ming Dynasty used tribute system to manage foreign relations in a unified manner and adopted a very strict political system. Furthermore, by giving crown to all tribute countries, the patriarchal order is applied, and the idea of Huayi family is visualized, so as to achieve the purpose of justifying the tribute order.Until the Ming Dynasty, the patriarchal order, which had nothing to do with the tribute system, was included in the tribute system and supplemented and perfected the tribute unitary system ideologically.