滿鮮史, 滿學, 그리고 滿洲學

Abstract

This paper traces the history of Manchu Studies as an academic discipline in Japan and China respectively, addressing that the development of Manchu Studies in East Asia shared a common background in strong nationalism. The field of Manchu Studies in Japan was arguably developed along with “East Asian History” (Toyoshi), a modern scholarly discipline that emerged under the influence of European thoughts and education system introduced to Japan since the late nineteenth century. This paper explains that Japanese scholars invented such new concepts as “East Asia” (Toyo) and East Asian History (Toyoshi) as part of their efforts in search for modern Japan, and later expanded their scholarly inquiries into Korea and Manchuria and eventually established the so-called “History of Manchuria and Korea” (Mansenshi), which contributed to justify the Japanese imperialist policy in Korea, Manchuria and China. By this time, the Chinese were also struggling with their mission of searching for modern China. But they faced more arduous task than their Japanese counterparts, because they had to destroy the Qing Manchus, but simultaneously succeeding the Qing legacy, most notably, its vast territory. This paper explores the history of Manchu Studies in China in the context of nationalism, which required separating China from the Qing and the Manchus in the late nineteenth century, while now encouraging the contemporary Chinese scholars to identify the Great Qing empire with the People’s Republic of China in the early twentieth century. By juxtaposing the two different regional terms, “Manchuria-Korea” (Mansen) in Japan and the “Northeast” (Dongbei) in China, we can be sure that both Japan and China have developed their territorial interests in Manchuria and scholarly questions for Manchu Studies from the same ideology, namely nationalism, an idea that newly emerged in East Asia in the early twentieth century. As a new agenda for Manchu Studies in Korea, this paper suggests a perspective from borders, an alternative critique to nationalism in which Manchu Studies in Japan and China has been embedded for a century long. After a brief review of Korean historiography of the Qing-Choson relations in general and Kim Hangyu’s arguments for “History of Liaodong” (Yodong sa) in particular, it discusses the ways in which a perspective focusing on borders where contacts and conflicts between different groups took place will be able to contribute to expand Manchu Studies.