조선 시대 ‘春王正月’ 이해의 흐름

Abstract

This paper studied to understand how the word “春王正月”, which implies the meaning of 尊周大一統, was understood in the Joseon dynasty era. “元年春王正月” is written at the beginning of Spring and Autumn Annals(春秋), which refers to spring and January. However, considering the calendar of the Zhou Dynasty, “春王正月” is actually winter and November, not spring and January. Several Chinese scholars have captured this gap and tried to understand it with their own grounds. The discussion of understanding “春王正月” by Chinese scholars such as 胡安國ㆍ程頤ㆍ朱熹ㆍ王守仁 and 顧炎武 had a significant influence on the understanding of Spring and Autumn Annals in Korea. 胡安國 advocated the so-called “以夏時冠周月”. This is the content that 孔子 changed the original season and calendar through his unknown intentions, which inherits the consciousness The Commentary of Gongyang (公羊傳) and 程頤. Although 朱熹 has a subtle difference from 胡安國‘s opinion, he praised The Commentary of Hu(胡氏傳), which 胡安國 wrote. 胡安國’s argument was treated as an established theory in public discussions from the early Joseon Dynasty to the late Joseon Dynasty. 王守仁 argued that ‘孔子 was just written as it was used in the calendar of the Zhou Dynasty,’ different from the discussions and results from the previous scholars. Some scholars of Joseon, such as 張維, positively accepted 王守仁‘s argument, but many scholars, such as 宋時烈, also argued strongly. It seems that it took a long time for this argument to appear in public discussion. By the time of King Jeongjo, a book named Ri Zhi Lu(日知錄) by 顧炎武 was popular with key officials of King Jeongjo and the time, and from then on, 顧炎武's theory of “春王正月” became a general theory. The conflict between the established theory of the public domain and the dissenting theory of individual scholars, and the process of changing their positions are interesting areas in academic history. This paper tried to track the process of understanding the short word “春王正月”.