earticle

영어

In this essay I focused on the controversial problem, what is the 'Independency' of the state in the traditional East Asian world? I supposed that the boundary of politics (政) could be the standard. If one unit had their own politics(政), it could be said ‘independent'. Even though it was under the appointment (冊封) and tribute (朝貢) system or provinces and districts (郡縣) system, which was led by china. I examined the concept ‘politics' (政) in the ZuanGuoCe (戰國策), ZuoZhuan (左傳), Shiji (史記) and some pre-Jin (先秦) times' inscriptions. Among them I found 426 cases. Most of them indicated that usually ‘politics (政)’ was performed in the individual states, not in the world. (天下) And the subject who performing the ‘politics’ was a consul (執
政), not a king. Generally the consul was the supreme commander and also administered the state. While the king performed various rituals which were strongly related to the Zhou(周) court. So the king belonged to the son of heaven's world. But the consul belonged to the state. In the Zuozhuan, the consul was called ‘a commander of the people’ (民之主) and the king was called ‘a supervisor of the Divine’. (神之主) In the Spring and Autumn times, the concept of state's boundary was practical not nominal, it also meant the limit of individual state's ‘politics'. Therefore we can say that separated ‘politics’ indicate the ‘independency' of the state in the traditional chinese world. If Koguryo (高句麗) had their own ‘politics', Koguryo could be said independent.