『海東文獻總錄』과 『文獻通考』 「經籍考」 비교 연구

Abstract

This study examined the characteristics of the Haedongmunheonchongrok(海東文獻總錄) and the Munheontonggo(文獻通考) ‘Gyeongjeokgo(經籍考)’ by comparing them. Although many studies have been accumulated on the Haedongmunheonchongrok, there has been no sufficient examination of the background of transmission and interrelationship of ‘Gyeongjeokgo’, which had a decisive influence on its compilation. Accordingly, I conducted a detailed comparative review of the distribution status of Munheontonggo, ​​the evaluations of later generations, and the ‘Gyeongjeokgo’ and Haedongmunheonchongrok. As a result, it was discovered that although the ‘Gyeongjeokgo’ was compiled during the Yuan Dynasty, it was still the highest level of annotation list that scholars of the time had access to even in the mid-Joseon Dynasty. In addition, it was confirmed that the characteristics of the annotation of the Haedongmunheonchongrok, such as the fact that it mainly consists of excerpts from other books rather than the compiler’s opinions, and the fact that it also includes books that the compiler did not see directly, all followed the characteristics of the compilation style(輯錄體) derived from ‘Gyeongjeokgo’. However, since it was a cultural restoration project carried out in a situation where books had been lost due to war, the proportion of commentaries written directly by the compiler was relatively large compared to that of ‘Gyeongjeokgo’, and it has the complex nature of a biographical note by focusing on the deeds of people, which are the unique characteristics of the Haedongmunheonchongrok that distinguish it from ‘Gyeongjeokgo’.