鞠躬인가 五拜三叩頭인가?: 조서를 맞이하는 예식을 둘러싼 조선과 명 사신 간의갈등에 관한 탐색
Research on Conflict between Joseon Court and Ming envoy Surrounding YeongJo(迎詔) ritual
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
During the first half of the Joseon Dynasty, conflicts between the Joseon court and Ming envoy occasionally happened. Among these conflicts, the main and continuing problem was the ceremony procedure of accepting Joseo(詔書) outside the capital city gate. The Joseon side tried to receive Joseo(詔書) in Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner. On the contrary, Ming envoy said that it should be received in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. There were several times confrontations over this issue. In 1537, when the Joseon embraced the demand of Ming envoy, finally the confrontation came to an end with reception of Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. The Joseon was trying to practice Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner, based on Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注) given by Ming emperor Taejo(太祖). However, the protocol for YeongJo(迎詔) ritual, which was written after Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注), was prescribed that the king of Bunkuk(蕃國) would receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. Such a modification was made, in dimension of Ilsidongin(一視同仁), for Bunkuk(蕃國) to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner as in the case of the provinces of the Ming Dynasty. Although the Ming Dynasty, in order to implement the more complete Ilsidongin(一視同仁), wrote the revised protocol for YeongJo(迎詔) ritual after the completion of the Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注), it did not take any official or institutional measures to implement it. Because of this, the act of asking the Joseon to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner depended on the individual ability, interest, and inclination of the individual envoy, and occurred in an irregular and intermittent manner. It was not because the ceremony had a humiliating meaning for the ceremony that the Joseon dynasty strove not to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. The Joseon court thought that the reception of Joseo(詔書) in Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner had been done a long time before and it was reasonable in terms of courtesy. In addition, the Joseon court could not have revised the way of the original by believing only these words because some Ming envoys made objection. Therefore, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner was meaningful to discard the existing one rather than to accept the new one. In other words, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner would have come as a result of the amity of Ming emperor Taejo(太祖) and the amendment of the ritual which has been followed since. In other words, it would be regrettable for the Joseon that they changed the ritual which had been done since Ming emperor Taejo(太祖) gave the protocol. In addition, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner implied the observance of more appropriate and proper ritual, and the acceptance of World courtesy(天下通禮).
Abstract
During the first half of the Joseon Dynasty, conflicts between the Joseon court and Ming envoy occasionally happened. Among these conflicts, the main and continuing problem was the ceremony procedure of accepting Joseo(詔書) outside the capital city gate. The Joseon side tried to receive Joseo(詔書) in Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner. On the contrary, Ming envoy said that it should be received in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. There were several times confrontations over this issue. In 1537, when the Joseon embraced the demand of Ming envoy, finally the confrontation came to an end with reception of Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. The Joseon was trying to practice Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner, based on Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注) given by Ming emperor Taejo(太祖). However, the protocol for YeongJo(迎詔) ritual, which was written after Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注), was prescribed that the king of Bunkuk(蕃國) would receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. Such a modification was made, in dimension of Ilsidongin(一視同仁), for Bunkuk(蕃國) to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner as in the case of the provinces of the Ming Dynasty. Although the Ming Dynasty, in order to implement the more complete Ilsidongin(一視同仁), wrote the revised protocol for YeongJo(迎詔) ritual after the completion of the Bunkukuiju(蕃國儀注), it did not take any official or institutional measures to implement it. Because of this, the act of asking the Joseon to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner depended on the individual ability, interest, and inclination of the individual envoy, and occurred in an irregular and intermittent manner. It was not because the ceremony had a humiliating meaning for the ceremony that the Joseon dynasty strove not to receive Joseo(詔書) in Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner. The Joseon court thought that the reception of Joseo(詔書) in Kuk-kung(鞠躬) manner had been done a long time before and it was reasonable in terms of courtesy. In addition, the Joseon court could not have revised the way of the original by believing only these words because some Ming envoys made objection. Therefore, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner was meaningful to discard the existing one rather than to accept the new one. In other words, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner would have come as a result of the amity of Ming emperor Taejo(太祖) and the amendment of the ritual which has been followed since. In other words, it would be regrettable for the Joseon that they changed the ritual which had been done since Ming emperor Taejo(太祖) gave the protocol. In addition, for the Joseon dynasty the acceptance of Opasankodu(五拜三叩頭) manner implied the observance of more appropriate and proper ritual, and the acceptance of World courtesy(天下通禮).
참고문헌 (27)
- 최종석, "조선초기 迎詔禮 운영과『蕃國儀注』", 역사와 담론, (86), pp.139~177 (2018), 호서사학회
- 최종석, "고려말기⋅조선초기 迎詔儀禮에 관한 새로운 이해 모색 -『蕃國儀注』의 소개와 복원-", 민족문화연구, (69), pp.269~309 (2015), 민족문화연구원[DOI]
- 최종석, "13~15세기 천하질서하에서 고려와 조선의 국가 정체성", 역사비평, (121), pp.10~44 (2017), 역사문제연구소[DOI]
- "조선왕조실록", ~
- "明太祖實錄", ~
- "고려사", ~
- 이규철, "특집 : 조선 성종대 외교의례 변경에 대한 논의와 대명의식", 역사와 현실, (98), pp.169~197 (2015), 한국역사연구회
- 계승범, "파병 논의를 통해 본 조선전기 對明觀의 변화", 대동문화연구, (53), pp.309~346 (2006), 대동문화연구원
- 유바다, "朝鮮 初期 迎詔勅 관련 儀註의 성립과 朝明關係", 역사민속학, (40), pp.123~160 (2012), 한국역사민속학회
- 권인용, "15~19세기 중국인의 조선 인식" (2005), 고구려연구재단
- 소종, "명나라 사신 공용경(龔用卿)의 조선사행 연구", 역사문화논총, 6 (2010)
- 전세영, "명대(明代) 중국의 조선관(朝鮮觀) 연구 -명사(明史) 「조선열전(朝鮮列傳)」을 중심으로-", 21세기정치학회보, 21(1), pp.1~22 (2011), 21세기정치학회[DOI]
- 윤승희, "조선 초기 조선국왕 책봉의례의 정비와 그 특징", 조선시대사학보, (85), pp.83~112 (2018), 조선시대사학회[DOI]
- 宮岐市定, "洪武から永樂へ―初期明朝政權の性格", 東洋史硏究, 27(4) (1969)
- 岩井茂樹, "明代中國の禮制覇權主義と東アジアの秩序", 東洋文化, 85 (2005)
- 檀上寬, "明代海禁=朝貢システムと華夷秩序" (2013), 京都大學學術出版會
- 정동훈, "명초 국제질서의 재편과 고려의 위상 –홍무 연간 명의 사신 인선을 중심으로–", 역사와 현실, (89), pp.113~150 (2013), 한국역사연구회
- 정동훈, "永樂帝의 말과 글 - 영락 연간 조선-명 관계의 두 층위 -", 한국문화, (78), pp.151~182 (2017), 규장각한국학연구원[DOI]
- 김은정, "庚午本 『皇華集』 편찬경위와 詩文酬唱의 의미", 한국한시연구, 7 (1999)
- 김문식, "조선시대 國家典禮書의 편찬 양상", 藏書閣, (21), pp.79~104 (2009), 한국학중앙연구원[DOI]
- 殷夢霞, "使朝鮮錄" (2003), 北京圖書館出版社
- 김문식, "明使 龔用卿이 경험한 외교의례", 조선시대사학보, (73), pp.195~228 (2015), 조선시대사학회
- 김한규, "사조선록使朝鮮錄 연구: 송(宋), 명(明), 청(淸) 시대 조선 사행록(使行錄)의 사료적 가치", pp.280~ (2011), 서강대학교출판부
- 구도영, "중종대 사대인식(事大認識)의 변화 - 대례의(大禮議)에 대한 별행(別行) 파견 논의를 중심으로 -", 역사와 현실, (62), pp.345~376 (2006), 한국역사연구회
- 高艳林, "嘉靖时期中朝关系的新阶段", 西北师大学报: 社科版 (2008)
- 최종석, "조선시대 예교 담론과 예제 질서" (2016), 소명출판
- 최종석, "고려후기 ‘자신을 夷로 간주하는 화이의식’의 탄생과 내향화 - 조선적 자기 정체성의 모태를 찾아서 -", 민족문화연구, (74), pp.161~220 (2017), 민족문화연구원[DOI]
