고구려 후기 고구려, 수ㆍ당, 북방 제국의 대립관계

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The relationship between the Korean kingdom of Koguryo and China during the Sui and Tang dynasties presently represents the most glaring discrepancy in historical perspectives between Korea and China. The memory of Koguryo's defeat of successive invasions by Sui and Tang became a source of pride whenever historical circumstances demanded that Koreans fight a foreign power. But for the Chinese descendents of the Sui and Tang, the dynasties' disastrous defeats was a past that was best forgotten, choosing to emphasize Koguryo's eventual downfall to Tang forces instead.
After the 1980's, a new historical understanding began to emerge concerning Koguryo in the Chinese historical academia. Scholars advocated a perspective on Koguryo-Chinese relations very different from those of the past. The established view of the Koguryo-Chinese war as a foreign war, a war between two different peoples (Korean and Chinese), began changing. The opinion that Sui and Tang did not launch an 'invasion' of Koguryo, that Koguryo was not fighting off foreign invaders, that the wars between them were not interstate wars at all, is gaining wider currency.
Diverse approach on relations on Koguryo-Sui/Tang relations has disappeared, replaced by apologetic opinions of Sui and Tang, such as Koguryo suffered more than the defeated Sui during the latter's invasion or that Taizong of Tang regretted not his defeat at the hands of Koguryo but rather the death of his minister, which require stretches of logic. Such opinions go so far as to state that while Koguryo may have warred with the Sui and Tang, she remained subservient as a vassal for a longer period, and that war between them were 'exceptional' events. It all leads to the conclusion that Koguryo was fated to be absorbed into and 'unified' by SuilTang China, emphasizing that most of Koguryo's populace were assimilated into China and became a part of the extended Chinese nation.
A purview of the developments in research in China reveal a movement away from studying China as a multiethnic nation, with research based on the heavily biased perspective of Chinese dynasties are becoming more prevalent. Needless to say, academic research stressing one's opinion at the expense of the other cannot produce accurate historical thinking.
The question of whether Koguryo is pan of Chinese history or not, when entertained from the standpoint of Koguryo itself, can only produce an answer that it is not the same country as the Sui and Tang.
The problems with unilateral claims of the Chinese academia run into even greater problems when the issue is expanded and viewed from the context of global history.
The war between Koguryo and Sui, and subsequently with the Tang, are not 'local' conflict of two hostile countries, but rather an international conflagration involving every nation and tribe making up the East Asian world order at the time. Khitan and Malgal played a significant role in the Koguryo-Sui War of 598, the same role performed by the Turks in the Koguryo-Sui Wear of 612, followed by the Xueyantuo in the 645 war between Koguryo and Tang, Tiele in 661-662 Koguryo-Tang conflict, and finally, Shilla, Tibet, and the Turks all took part in the final showdown between Koguryo and Tang in 667-8 AD, considering these conflicts vital to their own interests. The nomadic tribes located to the north of both Koguryo and China remained a critical variable in their mortal conflict.
As the Chinese academia has assigned to war between Koguryo and Sui/Tang a status of internecine conflict within a single nation, they have neglected analysis of the great war thar engulfed East Asia in its entirety from the perspective of international politics. Thus it is necessary that a comprehensive study of the effects of Koguryo-Sui/Tang Wars hand upon the history of East Asia.
The fact that Chinese scholars of the 20th century bitterly criticized 'emperor-centric' records produced as a result of the class id

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. 고구려, 수ㆍ당 관계에 관한 중화인민공화국 학계의 연구사
• Ⅲ. 중화인민공화국 연구자들의 침탈논리에 대한 비판
• Ⅳ. 고구려, 수 당 국제대전의 성격과 북방 제국의 역할
• Ⅴ. 요약 및 결론
• 〈Abstract〉