09년도 ‘새역모’ 역사교과서(自由社版)의 일본고대사 서술 검토 (Review on the description of Japanese ancient history in the 2009 Jiyuusha version of history textbook)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 역사교육학회
· 수록지 정보 : 역사교육논집 / 43호 / 249 ~ 279페이지
· 저자명 : 이재석

초록

2009 Jiyuusha version of history textbook does not have much difference with 2005 Fusosha version history textbook. Therefore the issues raised on the Fusosha version can be raised on the Jiyuusha version also. The particular points of the descriptions on primative-ancient history of 2005 New History Textbook are as follow. First of all, dealing of myths became more skillful. Secondly It emphasizes the superiority of Japan by stressing Japanese tradition and native culture. Thirdly it is overemphasizing the Shotoku Taishi. This list of pointings can be applied to the 2009 authorized textbook.
And I mentioned that it has reflected strong self-consciousness toward the relationship with China. It is well described in the articles about setting schematic relation on tribute and Shotoku Taishi who was persistent to keep uniqueness and independence against Chinese dynasty. And on the point to compare Chinese and Japanese emperors, same as in the 2005 version, it emphasizes that there were revolutions and dynasty changes in China but there has been none like that in Japan whose emperors have been succeeded following the bloodline of the family.
In the meantime, on the relationship with Korean peninsular, it still has not resolved several issues. I could conform that it always stresses Japan (倭 Wa) standing comparatively superior and has tendency to ignore or hide the relation with Korean peninsular. Especially on the relations with the countries in Korean peninsular in 4-6 century, it still holds the same position with existing Mimana rule opinion and there is no mention at all about Balhae from its founding to fall.

영어초록

2009 Jiyuusha version of history textbook does not have much difference with 2005 Fusosha version history textbook. Therefore the issues raised on the Fusosha version can be raised on the Jiyuusha version also. The particular points of the descriptions on primative-ancient history of 2005 New History Textbook are as follow. First of all, dealing of myths became more skillful. Secondly It emphasizes the superiority of Japan by stressing Japanese tradition and native culture. Thirdly it is overemphasizing the Shotoku Taishi. This list of pointings can be applied to the 2009 authorized textbook.
And I mentioned that it has reflected strong self-consciousness toward the relationship with China. It is well described in the articles about setting schematic relation on tribute and Shotoku Taishi who was persistent to keep uniqueness and independence against Chinese dynasty. And on the point to compare Chinese and Japanese emperors, same as in the 2005 version, it emphasizes that there were revolutions and dynasty changes in China but there has been none like that in Japan whose emperors have been succeeded following the bloodline of the family.
In the meantime, on the relationship with Korean peninsular, it still has not resolved several issues. I could conform that it always stresses Japan (倭 Wa) standing comparatively superior and has tendency to ignore or hide the relation with Korean peninsular. Especially on the relations with the countries in Korean peninsular in 4-6 century, it still holds the same position with existing Mimana rule opinion and there is no mention at all about Balhae from its founding to fall.

참고자료

· 없음