「答宋伯純」 및 「藏淸軒記」를 통해 본 중재자 金昌翕-兩宋 가문 간의 갈등에 관하여-

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to illuminate the role of mediator Kim Ch'anghŭp by examining the conflict between Yangsong families through the analysis of Reply to Song Paeksun and Changch'ŏnghŏn'gi. The aim of such examination is to highlight the political and social figure of Kim Ch'anghŭp. The seeds of discord between Yangsong families were sown in the summer of 1703 with the publication of the “Master-Disciple Clarification Memorial” written by Kwŏn Sangha's scholars Sin Yu which contained the phrase, “What does it matter to Song Siyŏl even Song Chunkil is surprised and lamented?” The divergence of interpretation among the descendants of Yangsong families stemmed directly from this statement. Sin Yu, a figure on the Song Siyŏl side, interpreted that Song Chunkil obeyed Yi Kyŏngsŏk, who held significant influence at the time, out of fear. while Song Chunkil's scholars, including Song Hachŏk, argued that Song Chunkil's words were merely expressing concerns about the current situation and were by no means intended to cater to Yi Kyŏngsŏk. Consequently, they exchanged letters from the latter half of 1703 to 1705 to criticize each other. Eventually, after July 1705, Song Siyŏl's descendant, Song Ilwŏn, was discredited at the Kŏmdamsŏwŏn. And thus, the relationship between Yangsong families irreversibly deteriorated. Kim Ch'anghŭp, closely associated with Yangsong families, closely monitored this dispute. In order to mediate the discord between Yangsong families, Kim Ch'anghŭp sent letters and writings to Song Ilwŏn and Song Hachŏk, the leading figures in the dispute. In these writings, Kim Ch'anghŭp emphasized their lineage as descendants of the Ŭnjinsongssi clan and heirs to the tradition of Yangsŏnsaeng, urging them to cultivate their minds while judging “Shiŭi” well without engaging in contentious arguments. Kim Ch'anghŭp's deep intention in mediating the discord between Yangsong families was to promote internal unity within the Noron faction amidst the fierce political landscape of the early 18th century. Reconstructing the entire story of this incident in detail and shedding light on Kim Ch'anghŭp's response is a novel endeavor in this paper. It is anticipated that this will contribute to advancing understanding of Kim Ch'anghŭp and the historical context surrounding him.