朝鮮 15세기 ‘地理志’에 기재된 道 分定 磁器의 성격

Abstract

Gwanchan geography books (geography books written or commissioned by the state) of the fifteenth century show differences in the table of contents and products depending on the period of compilation. Porcelain is no exception, and it is listed together with other products among the local product items (for tributes) of each county, among the items for missed tributes of each province, or at the end of an item for each county. Porcelain is listed in terms of the location where it is produced, as in the cases of weirs, salt pans, and iron foundries. The changing trend of such a system is in line with the tribute system, which was continuously improved since the founding of the Joseon Dynasty. In this paper, we examined the reason that the contents related to porcelain were organized differently in each geography book, and, based on this, the meaning of “porcelain” among the items for missed tributes in each province in The Veritable Records of King Sejong was reviewed. Changes in the product item where porcelain is listed are in line with the characteristics of porcelain given as a tribute. The reason for this is that changes in the production and demand for porcelain, which was given as a tribute in each county, were reflected in geography books. In addition to the descriptive rule of “produced in each village,” the writers of The Veritable Records followed the principle of “allocation by province” in consideration of the characteristics and locality of the products when listing the products among the missed tribute items for each province. In particular, the contents of the missed tribute items of each province show that Pyeongan and Hamgil provinces were not assigned porcelain dedicated to the king, while Gyeonggi, Chungcheong, Hwanghae, Gangwon, Jeolla, and Gyeongsang provinces were. Identifying this was the main achievement of this paper. We examine the characteristics and examples of white porcelain dedicated to the king as suggested by previous studies, with questions about the dubious interpretation of “white porcelain as a gift and Buncheong porcelain (bluish-green stoneware) as a tribute,” which has been consistently remarked upon in previous studies. We found that the characteristics of white porcelain dedicated to the king mentioned by previous studies were included within the limited scope of porcelain used by the king and other members of the royal family, and did not match the characteristics of the porcelain dedicated to the king assigned to each province as identified in this paper. Therefore, for an accurate understanding of the porcelain dedicated to the king assigned to each province later, the vague interpretation of “white porcelain as a gift and Buncheong porcelain as a tribute,” which has been consistently noted so far, needs to be reexamined. In this process, it is necessary to approach it from the perspective of the received gift and as an offering under the tribute system, rather than the dualistic view of dedication to the king and the tribute system.