경주 교동 최씨가 소장 秋收記⋅收稅記 자료의 전존 현황과 특성

Abstract

Over 330 historic materials on harvest season possessed by ‘Rich Men’ Gyeongju Choi clan in Gyeongju Gyodong are important documents that can be used to reveal Rich Men Choi’s unique landowner management cases. Among which, 274 are the data written during harvest season for the purpose of receiving rent from the land distributed sporadically in Gyeongju and northern part of Ulsan. The major characteristics identified in Rich Men Choi’s historic house are as follows. First, when estimating the whole data, it showed chronological distribution from the late 19th century to the first half season of Japanese occupation. Second, different types of harvest materials written during the same year co-existed and a certain correlation between them is identified. Third, up to the Japanese colonial period, most paddy fields of Gyeongju Choi clan applied ‘Tajo(打租: receiving a rent with a half-dividing of the harvest)’method. Rent acquisitions identified in other regions in contemporaries were ‘Jipzo(執租: adjusting rent rates before harvesting)’ or ‘Dojo(賭租: receiving a rent with a certain amounts of harvest)’. However Rich men Choi clan shared in half of seeds and rice straws with tenant farmers. So among tenant farmers in Gyeongju, Rich men Choi’s rent acquisition method was called as ‘Dangalim(indicating 5:5 allocation).’ On the other hand, Rich men Choi wrote separate materials to menage barley-farm product and bean harvest and there were now 62 of them have been remained. Various case studies on harvest records of paddies have been published, but few rent aquisition cases from harvest of bean and barley have been identified. Rich men Choi’s average rent identified during harvest season does not show a big difference from the rent amount in other regions, although it reviewed a part of all cases. But the average rent of barley and bean collected from the tenant farmers is significantly low despite the difficulties in guessing the absolute production because they received rent in the way of Dojo. This is considered as a result of lending the rest fields except the arable lands of Rich men Choi to tenant farmers and receiving the minimum rent. Like this, Rich men Choi’s landowner management has a difference from the cases of other regions. In this paper, the focus is on analyzing the current status of the entire data and how it was written. So further studies need to complement the insufficient parts that were not resolved in this paper and reveal the specific historic points of view about Rich Men Choi’s landowner management case.