유길준이 저술한 서유견문은 단순한 기행문이 아니라 서양의 제도와 문명을 광범위하게 전반적으로 소개하는 저서이다. 유길준은 실학, 중국의 양무사상, 일본의 문명개화와 부국강병사상 및 미국의 민주주의사상을 배우고 익혔으며, 이어 여행을 통하여 유럽의 선진문명을 보았다.유길준은 조선의 백성을 근대국가의 인민으로 일깨우기 위하여 고난의 가시밭길에서 서유견문이라는 열매를 일구어 내었다.본고는 유길준의 서유견문에 나타난 헌법 사상 중 천부인권론, 주권론 및 정부체제론에 대하여 살펴본 것이다.기본권과 관련하여 유길준은 서양의 근대적 인민의 권리론인 천부인권론을 전면적으로 수용하였다. 주권론과 관련하여 유길준은 주권을 국내적인 주권과 국외적인 주권으로 나누어 설명하고 있다. 한편 유길준은 당시의 조선 상황을 설명하기 위하여 대외주권에 관한 새로운 이론인 양절체제(Dual System or Inconsistency System)를 주장하고 있다. 즉 조선과 중국의 관계를 贈貢國이라는 개념으로 파악하면서도 조선이 자주독립국이라고 주장함으로써 조선의 이익을 보호하고자 한 것이다.정부의 형태와 관련하여 유길준은 각국의 정치 체제를 서로 비교한 후 임금과 국민이 함께 다스리는 정치 체제가 가장 훌륭한 규범이라고 지적하면서, 여러 나라 가운데서도 영국의 정치 체제가 가장 훌륭하다고 언급하고 있다. 다만, 시대적 상황적 한계 속에서 혁명적 발상을 하지 않는 이상 전제군주제 하에서 통치자의 권위를 손상시킬 수 있는 입헌군주정을 주장하기는 어려웠을 것으로 판단된다.유길준은 서구 근대의 성과를 가장 먼저 듣고 느끼고 이를 조국의 현실개혁에 반영하려고 하였던 선각자임이 분명하다. 또한 유길준의 서유견문이 갑오경장의 모체가 되었다고 할 수 있다.다만, 서양지식 수용에 소극적이었던 사회 분위기를 감안한다 하더라도 유길준의 서유견문이 당시 사회에 큰 영향을 미치지 못한 점은 안타까운 일이 아닐 수 없다. 제국주의 열강의 침략을 막고 근대 국민 국가를 세우는 것이 시대적 소명이었던 당시에 유길준의 서유견문이 조선을 국민국가로 이끌어낼 계몽서로 미흡한 점이 없지 않다고 하더라도, 당시 우리의 선조들에게 세계 인식의 수준을 보여주는 대표적 서양문물 소개서이자 근대화의 필요성과 방법을 역설한 개화서임을 부인할 수는 없다.

Rev. Kil Sŏn-chu was amongst the first generation of indigenous Protestant Christian leaders. In 1897 he was converted to Christianity at the age of 29 and served as a lay Christian leader while he took a course of study intended for native local preachers. In 1907 he was ordained as a pastor and began preaching in the Changdaehyŏn Church, the central church in P’yŏngyang. In Korea, until recently he is known as the evangelistic pastor who stuck to saving soul and was indifferent to the national issues like Korean independence and cultural changes. In this paper I try to show that Kil Sŏn-chu was not only a devout evangelistic pastor but also was concerned with issues related to Korean independence and cultural changes. This study is divided into the five sections. Following the introduction, the second section gives a historical overview of Korean society at the time in which Kil Sŏn-chu lived, and offers his vitae. The third section deals with the ways that he was conscious of the Korean nation and expressed his willingness to devote himself to the Korean nation in his political and cultural activities. The fourth section traces the motives behind the development of eschatological worldview or faith by Kil Sŏn-chu and thereby explains the way his patriotic concern with the Korean nation was reflected in his eschatological faith. In Kil Sŏn-chu’s life there are shown three different aspects inthree subsequent periods. The first period is from his conversion to Christianity to before his decision to save his soul. He identified the Korean nation as people bound together by a shared history and state. He was engaged in political activities for Korean independence. The second period is from the decision to save his soul to before he was in prison. He was interested in the cultural elementsof the Korean nation. He considered culture as the means for the Korean nation to survive or exist further in this world. The third period is from his release from prison to his death. In his Eschatology, he developed his own concept of eschatology and propagated the gospel of Jesus’ coming being followed by the millennial and eternal world.

Kang Man-Kil is the first historian to position overcoming of division and reunification of the Korean peninsula as the most important scholarly topic. The overall structure of his historiography is constructed of: first, gaining a penetrative historical perspective on the Age of National Division, and second, establishing a new historical framework that can overcome division. These two themes can be encapsulated into his term, ‘reunification nationalism’. ‘Reunification nationalism’ is the rightful guiding ideology for the Korean society, contributing to overcoming division and reunifying the nation. Kang’s reunification nationalism is meaningful in three ways: 1. It is an ‘alternative historiography’, in which the national united front movement based on negotiations between left and right wings since the colonial period is seen as the mainstream of national history. 2. It recognizes the entire Peninsula as one national unit and it is an ‘anti-divisionist historical perception’ that considers all Peninsula citizens to be agents of historical development. 3. All Peninsula citizens are seen to constitute one historical and cultural community, and it is meaningful as a ‘reunification theory’ based on peaceful, reciprocal and equitable methods. In sum, the above-mentioned three aspects of reunification nationalism form the basis of the details of Kang Man-Kil’s reunification nationalism, which is his ‘theory of equitable reunification’.