正祖代 國行儀禮로서 厲祭의 설행과 守令 糾察
The Performance of National Ritual Yŏ-je(厲祭) and Control over Local District Magistrates under the Reign of King Jeong-jo(正祖)
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Yŏ-je, a national ritual to defeat the epidemic, was introduced in the process of reorganizing national rituals according to Hongwu-lizhi(洪武禮制) in the early Joseon Dynasty. Originally, ancient Chinese Yŏ-je had been a ritual for Yŏ(厲), the ruling class who had died without descendants, but in both Ming and Joseon, people who died unfortunately was included in the ‘Yŏ=Musaguishin(無祀鬼神)’ category. In this way, Yŏ-je became a ritual symbolizing the king’s generosity(仁政) for the dead, especially for the ruled class. Based on the Confucian perspective on the relationship between politics and disaster, Yŏ-je, like the act of burying the dead, established itself as ye(禮) to prevent future disasters by being generous with the dead. Like his grandfather, King Jeong-jo respected the authority of Kukcho-oryeǔi(國朝五禮儀) and sought to restore the national rituals that had been shrunken after the two wars(兩亂), under the leadership of the powerful king. While the former kings focused on large sacrificial rites(大祀), King Jeong-jo expanded his interest to small sacrificial rites(小祀) such as Yŏ-je. King Jeong-jo thoroughly understood the origin and history of Yŏ-je and adjusted the formality to fit the original intention of Yŏ-je. In Chun-gwan-tong-go(春官通考), a national liturgical book compiled during King Jeong-jo period, it was recorded that King Sukjong himself wrote a prayer and dispatched high officials to perform special Yŏ-je(別厲祭) not only in the northern suburb but also in the eastern, western and southern suburbs. It was also briefly recorded about the sacrificial food of special Yŏ-je held in the three suburbs. The increased number of places of Yŏ-je was worth being recorded to emphasize the generosity of the king. The epitaph of King Jeong-jo read: “King Jeong-jo held Yŏ-je in the four suburbs to do all he can do for his people.” From then on, until the end of the Joseon Dynasty, Yŏ-je repeatedly appeared in epitaphs of the kings like clichés, reproducing the symbol of kings’ generosity. Yŏ-je was designed to be held not only in the capital city but also in the local provinces. Yŏ-je held in the capital city and local provinces were almost the same in terms of dates, places, orders, and sacrifices. But the official in charge of the ritual was different. For the king’s generosity to be realized nationwide through Yŏ-je, each local district magistrate had to perform Yŏ-je by himself. However, concerns continued that local Yŏ-je was not being performed properly, because of private rituals led by indigenous forces. From time to time, some negligent local district magistrates had local functionaries and elders prepare and perform Yŏ-je instead. King Jeong-jo emphasized the local district magistrates’ role in the practice of Local Yŏ-je. He made superior governors supervise the performance of local Yŏ-je, and punished local district magistrates in severe cases. In 1792, King Jeong-jo ordered the altar and ritual utensils to be repaired nationwide. In Mokminsimseo(牧民心書), written by Jeong Yak-Yong, one of Jeong-jo’s best friends, local district magistrates were given not only the duty to perform local Yŏ-je, but also the responsibility to correct the bad customs such as private rituals. In this year, one local district magistrate, Park Ji-Won repaired the local altar and left a record to commemorate it. In 1799, another local district magistrate Jeong Yak-Yong wrote a prayer for local Yŏ-je. From both cases, we can find out that King Jeong-jo’s orders were being carried out at the local level.
Abstract
Yŏ-je, a national ritual to defeat the epidemic, was introduced in the process of reorganizing national rituals according to Hongwu-lizhi(洪武禮制) in the early Joseon Dynasty. Originally, ancient Chinese Yŏ-je had been a ritual for Yŏ(厲), the ruling class who had died without descendants, but in both Ming and Joseon, people who died unfortunately was included in the ‘Yŏ=Musaguishin(無祀鬼神)’ category. In this way, Yŏ-je became a ritual symbolizing the king’s generosity(仁政) for the dead, especially for the ruled class. Based on the Confucian perspective on the relationship between politics and disaster, Yŏ-je, like the act of burying the dead, established itself as ye(禮) to prevent future disasters by being generous with the dead. Like his grandfather, King Jeong-jo respected the authority of Kukcho-oryeǔi(國朝五禮儀) and sought to restore the national rituals that had been shrunken after the two wars(兩亂), under the leadership of the powerful king. While the former kings focused on large sacrificial rites(大祀), King Jeong-jo expanded his interest to small sacrificial rites(小祀) such as Yŏ-je. King Jeong-jo thoroughly understood the origin and history of Yŏ-je and adjusted the formality to fit the original intention of Yŏ-je. In Chun-gwan-tong-go(春官通考), a national liturgical book compiled during King Jeong-jo period, it was recorded that King Sukjong himself wrote a prayer and dispatched high officials to perform special Yŏ-je(別厲祭) not only in the northern suburb but also in the eastern, western and southern suburbs. It was also briefly recorded about the sacrificial food of special Yŏ-je held in the three suburbs. The increased number of places of Yŏ-je was worth being recorded to emphasize the generosity of the king. The epitaph of King Jeong-jo read: “King Jeong-jo held Yŏ-je in the four suburbs to do all he can do for his people.” From then on, until the end of the Joseon Dynasty, Yŏ-je repeatedly appeared in epitaphs of the kings like clichés, reproducing the symbol of kings’ generosity. Yŏ-je was designed to be held not only in the capital city but also in the local provinces. Yŏ-je held in the capital city and local provinces were almost the same in terms of dates, places, orders, and sacrifices. But the official in charge of the ritual was different. For the king’s generosity to be realized nationwide through Yŏ-je, each local district magistrate had to perform Yŏ-je by himself. However, concerns continued that local Yŏ-je was not being performed properly, because of private rituals led by indigenous forces. From time to time, some negligent local district magistrates had local functionaries and elders prepare and perform Yŏ-je instead. King Jeong-jo emphasized the local district magistrates’ role in the practice of Local Yŏ-je. He made superior governors supervise the performance of local Yŏ-je, and punished local district magistrates in severe cases. In 1792, King Jeong-jo ordered the altar and ritual utensils to be repaired nationwide. In Mokminsimseo(牧民心書), written by Jeong Yak-Yong, one of Jeong-jo’s best friends, local district magistrates were given not only the duty to perform local Yŏ-je, but also the responsibility to correct the bad customs such as private rituals. In this year, one local district magistrate, Park Ji-Won repaired the local altar and left a record to commemorate it. In 1799, another local district magistrate Jeong Yak-Yong wrote a prayer for local Yŏ-je. From both cases, we can find out that King Jeong-jo’s orders were being carried out at the local level.
참고문헌 (73)
- "世宗實錄", ~
- "高麗史 卷64", ~
- 김영미, "전염병의 문화사: 고려시대를 보는 또 하나의 시선" (2010), 혜안
- "春秋左傳", ~
- 장세후, "春秋左傳 下", pp.331~ (2013), 을유문화사
- "禮記", ~
- 이민수, "예기", pp.518~ (2001), 혜원출판사
- 이욱, "조선시대 재난과 국가의례" (2009), 창비
- 이욱, "17세기 여제의 대상에 관한 연구", 역사민속학, 9(1) (1999)
- 이욱, "조선시대 국가 祀典과 厲祭", 종교연구, 19 (2000)
- 이욱, "朝鮮前期 冤魂을 위한 祭祀의 변화와 그 의미: 水陸齋와 厲祭를 중심으로", 종교문화연구, 3 (2001)
- B. 왈라번, "조선시대 여제의 기능과 의식: “뜬귀신”을 모셨던 유생들", 동양학, 31 (2001)
- 이욱, "유교 기양의례에 관한 연구 : 조선시대 국가사전을 중심으로", 박사, 종교학, pp.2000
- 김유리, "조선시대 여제(厲祭) 설행과 무사귀신(無祀鬼神)의 문제", 역사민속학, (50), pp.73~99 (2016), 한국역사민속학회
- 이태진, "小氷期(1500-1750) 천변재이 연구와 《朝鮮王朝實錄》", 역사학보, 149, pp.212~ (1996)
- 이준호, "조선시대 기후변동이 전염병 발생에 미친 영향 -건습의 변동을 중심으로-", 한국지역지리학회지, 25(4), pp.425~436 (2019), 한국지역지리학회[DOI]
- "高宗實錄", ~ (1902)
- "純宗實錄 卷2", ~ (1801)
- 韓相權, "朝鮮後期 社會問題와 訴寃制度의 發達 : 正祖代 上言·擊錚의 分析을 중심으로", 박사, 국사학, pp.1993
- 한상권, "朝鮮後期 社會와 訴寃制度" (1996), 일조각
- 박현모, "정조의 성왕론과 경장정책에 관한 연구", 박사, 정치학, pp.1999
- 박현모, "정치가 정조" (2001), 푸른역사
- "太宗實錄", ~
- "明史 卷50", ~
- 張廷玉, "明史 5冊(卷47~63)", pp.1311~ (1974), 中華書局
- "春官通考 卷43", ~
- "國朝五禮序例 卷1", ~
- "慵齋叢話", ~
- "中宗實錄", ~
- "語類 卷3 鬼神", ~
- 이주행, "주자어류: 1~13권 원본", pp.58~ (2001), 소나무
- "成宗實錄", ~
- 박성규, "朱子의 厲鬼論", 규장각, (26), pp.151~168 (2003), 규장각한국학연구원
- "修堂集 卷8", ~
- "肅宗實錄 卷32", ~
- 한희숙, "조선전기 장례문화와 歸厚署", 조선시대사학보, (31), pp.39~78 (2004), 조선시대사학회
- "宣祖實錄", ~
- "顯宗實錄 卷5", ~
- "備邊司謄錄 102冊", ~
- "宋子大全 卷101", ~
- "星湖僿說 卷4", ~
- "英祖實錄", ~
- "正祖實錄", ~
- 정경희, "正祖의 禮學", 韓國史論, 50 (2004)
- 김지영, "정조의 예치" (2020), 휴머니스트
- 신진혜, "朝鮮後期 宗廟儀禮 硏究", 박사, 한국사학과, pp.2019
- "日省錄", ~
- "增補文獻備考 卷63", ~
- "『世宗實錄』 地理志, 卷148", ~
- "周禮", ~
- 林尹, "周禮今註今譯", pp.192~ (1972), 臺灣商務印書館
- "純祖實錄 卷1", ~
- "承政院日記", ~
- "六典條例 卷1", ~
- "國朝五禮儀 卷2", ~
- "文宗實錄 卷9", ~
- "默齋日記"[URL]
- "默齋日記", ~
- 정승모, "조선은 지방을 어떻게 지배했는가" (2000), 아카넷
- "世祖實錄 卷2", ~
- "經國大典 刑典", ~
- "續大典 刑典", ~
- "大全通編 刑典", ~
- "燕巖集 卷1", ~
- "牧民心書", ~
- "大東野乘, 五山說林草藁", ~
- 신진혜, "『목민심서』에 나타난 정약용의 군현의례 정비론", 민족문화연구, (68), pp.225~263 (2015), 민족문화연구원[DOI]
- 최선혜, "조선전기 지방사족과 국가" (2007), 경인문화사
- 金仁杰, "조선후기 鄕村社會 변동에 관한 연구 : 18, 19세기 「鄕權」담당층의 변화를 중심으로", 박사, 국사학, pp.1991
- 김인걸, "조선후기 향촌사회 지배구조의 변동" (2017), 경인문화사
- "與猶堂全書 1集, 詩文集 卷17", ~
