전근대 시기 『위략(魏略)』은 『삼국지(三國志)』 배송지(裵松之) 주와 함께 잡다하고 번잡한 사서로 혹평되었다. 이러한 혹평은 이들 사료의 사료적 가치마저 부정하거나 무시하는 경향을 띠게 되었다. 그러나 『위략』을 인용하고 있는 『삼국지』배송지 주는 다양한 사료를 교차 비교하는 방식을 통해 철저한 고증을 진행하였고, 이 과정에서 오늘날에는 전하지 않는 많은 사료를 소개하고 있다는 점에서 그 가치가 다시금 재평가되고 있다. 『위략』 또한 『사기(史記)』·『한서(漢書)』에서 소홀하게 다루어지거나 서술 범위를 벗어난 시기의 고조선 관계 기사를 포함하고 있다는 점에서 결코 무시할 수 없는 사료적 가치를 지니고 있다. 그런데 『위략』의 고조선 관계 기사는 어환(魚豢)의 신분을 고려할 때 기존의 신뢰할 만한 권위 있는 사서를 참고한 것이 분명하다. 이와 관련하여 주목되는 것이 동한(東漢) 명제(明帝) 때부터 편찬되기 시작하여 동한 말 채옹(蔡邕)이 최종 속보한 『동관한기(東觀漢記)』이다. 그런데 『동관한기』에는 「동이전」이 별도로 입전되어 있지 않았다. 이와 함께 배송지 주의 부여 관련 『위략』 인용문에서 ‘구지(舊志)’를 언급하고 있는 것으로 보아, 『동관한기』 「지리지」에 삽입되어 있는 고조선 관계 기사를 참고하였던 것으로 판단된다. 이렇게 볼 때 『위략』의 “취지이천여리(取地二千餘里)” 기사 또한 역사적 해석은 별도로 하더라도 사료적 출처가 분명한 기사로 보아야 할 것 같다.

In the pre-modern period the Weilue and the Sanguozhi commentary by Peisongzhi were harshly criticized as a sundry and complicated historical text. These criticisms tended to dismiss and ignore the historical value of these texts. However, the Sanguozhi commentary by Peisongzhi which cites the Weilue, adopted thorough investigation by comparing diverse historical material, and in the process has introduced much historical material which are no longer extant and therefore the value of this text is being re-evaluated today. The Weilue likewise includes material carelessly treated and outside the time period covered by the Shiji and Hanshu related to Old Choson and has historical value which must not be ignored. It is clear that considering the social standing of Yuhuan, the Old Choson chapter of the Weilue consulted reliable and authoritative historical texts of that period. What is worth notice in this respect is the Dongguanhanji, which began to be compiled during the reign of emperor Mingdi of the Eastern Han and the final draft completed by Chaiong of the late Eastern Han. However there is no chapter on eastern barbarians in the Dongguanhanji. As seen from Peisongzhi mentioning an“old record”in the citation related to Buyeo, it seems he had consulted passages related to Old Choson in the geography chapter of the Dongguanhanji or the chapter on Old Choson. Therefore, the passage “acquired 2,000 li of territory” in the Weilue, aside from historical interpretation must be seen as a passage having a authentic historical source.

In the pre-modern period the Weilue and the Sanguozhi commentary by Peisongzhi were harshly criticized as a sundry and complicated historical text. These criticisms tended to dismiss and ignore the historical value of these texts. However, the Sanguozhi commentary by Peisongzhi which cites the Weilue, adopted thorough investigation by comparing diverse historical material, and in the process has introduced much historical material which are no longer extant and therefore the value of this text is being re-evaluated today. The Weilue likewise includes material carelessly treated and outside the time period covered by the Shiji and Hanshu related to Old Choson and has historical value which must not be ignored. It is clear that considering the social standing of Yuhuan, the Old Choson chapter of the Weilue consulted reliable and authoritative historical texts of that period. What is worth notice in this respect is the Dongguanhanji, which began to be compiled during the reign of emperor Mingdi of the Eastern Han and the final draft completed by Chaiong of the late Eastern Han. However there is no chapter on eastern barbarians in the Dongguanhanji. As seen from Peisongzhi mentioning an“old record”in the citation related to Buyeo, it seems he had consulted passages related to Old Choson in the geography chapter of the Dongguanhanji or the chapter on Old Choson. Therefore, the passage “acquired 2,000 li of territory” in the Weilue, aside from historical interpretation must be seen as a passage having a authentic historical source.

Sanguozhi, Peisongzhi commentary, Weilue, Old Joseon related passages, textual source