일제의 경기·인천지역 3·1운동 탄압 양상

이양희(李良熙) 한국역사연구회 2019 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.113

In 1919, the March 1st movement began in Seoul and Pyeong’yang, and then spreaded to other regions throughout the Gyeong’gi-do province as well. The aim of this article is to examine the Japanese colonial authorities’ response and oppression of the movement, through cases of individual areas of the time. In the Gyeong’gi-do province, the Colonial authorities mobilized not only the Military Police and ordinary civil Police force, but also a so-called Self-defense squad (called “Ja’wi-dan”) composed of Japanese individuals who were living in Joseon at the time as well, in order to forcibly and effectively suppress the protesters. Colonial authorities also organized Inspection units (named “Sachal-ban”) to monitor public opinions of the Korean population, situation surrounding the religious sects, and foreign missionaries’ operations currently underway in Joseon. Coming into April, the Joseon Governor General office began to organize Self-defense squads with not only Japanese but also influential Korean figures known throughout the country. These Korean squad members were instructed to appease the Korean public and weaken the Manse protests in the process. Since April 13th, in the Gyeong’gi-do province, such Korean squads were organized in Su’weon-gun, Jin’wi-gun, Anseong-gun, Gang’hwa-gun and Go’yang-gun. The colonial authorities in Gyeong’gi-do also selected one or two local influentials from each of the Gun(郡) units, and assigned them to the task same as that of the squads. This shows us the fact that the colonial authorities’ method was shifting from ‘ex-post facto suppression’ from aggressive ‘beforehand prevention.’ Meanwhile, the Governor(Jang’gwan) of the Gyeong’gi-do province requested the Japanese army be dispatched, so the 78th and 79th Regiments began sending over 830 troops to 26 areas inside Gyeong’gi-do. In order to intimidate the Korean public, the Japanese army would march down the street or conduct large-scale inspections in areas heavily populated by Koreans. Since March through June, there were over 60 cases of armed suppression in Gyeong’gi-do alone, and from at least 6,000 to 19,700 Korean souls were either injured, killed or arrested by the Japanese colonial authorities. The Provost Martial and Police Commissioner of the Gyeong’gi-do province requested that the police force in the area not be reduced, arguing that ‘The longing for independence embedded in their[the Joseon people] minds would never go away.’

16세기 화담 서경덕과개성문인의 사회적 조건

이동인 조선시대사학회 2022 朝鮮時代史學報 Vol.- No.103

This study aims to examine the social condition of literary figures in the Gaeseong area, and most of all Hwadam Seo Gyeong-deok, who opened the Hwadam School(花潭學派), one of the most representative schools from 16th century Joseon academism. Gaeseong was the center stage for the Hwadam school, so learning more of the social status and conditions of Seo Gyeong-deok and the Gaeseong-based literary figures(all members of the Hwadam school themselves) will let us better understand not only the area’s nature, but also the Hwadam School’s formation and evolution. Below are the results of this research that I’d like to share. First, the household of Hwadam was elevated from the commoner[良人] class to the Sajok(士族) class. His father and grandfather received military ranks[武散階, Musan’gye, ranks indicating how high a military post one could get] such as Su’eui Bu’wi(修義副尉) and Jin’yong Gyo’wi(進勇校尉), and Seo Gyeong-deok himself became a Saeng’weon(生員) figure. While his immediate ancestors acquired the status[官品, Gwanpum] as a governmental official by serving under the Five Divisions[五衛, O-Wi] as Gabsa(甲士) soldiers, Seo was able to obtain an elevated status by passing the Saeng’weon-shi exam, and earned the entire family a new identity as a Sajok household, as the Sajok class continued to expand throughout the 16th century. Second, Seo Gyeong-deok seems to have owned enough property to immerse himself in academic studies, without ever needing to engage in economic activities. In his last days, he owned female slaves and lowborn concubines, and was in possession of horses and donkeys. He had a house inside Gaeseong, and tombs for his father and himself were established at Hwagok(花谷), the northeast side of the city. There was also the ‘Hwadam’s Special Residence(花潭別業, Hwadam Byeoleob)’ in the vicinity, which suggests he owned some land and forests in that area as well. He should have had some land in the Pungdeok(豐德) area too, as we can find graves for his grandfather and great grandfather located there. Third, Seo Gyeong-deok’s household, the Dangseong Seo House, was actually a Minor household[僻貫, Byeok’gwan]. All the in-law houses, which were households whose females married the Dangseong Seo House males, for example the Ulsan Park House, Bo’an Han House and Tae’an Yi House, were also households of minority. And in fact, so were the households of the Gaeseong area’s literary figures and their in-law houses. Members of these households shared a similar social status, as they tended to have no immediate ancestors[四祖, Sajo] who were successful in their political careers[顯官, Hyeon’gwan], and were only able to pass civil exams(such as the Sama-shi exam or the Mun’gwa course) and become Gaeseong Sajok figures within their generation. Graves for members of these households are also in Gaeseong, once again showing their Gaeseong-oriented nature. Fourth, residents of the Gaeseong area were indeed discriminated from the rest of the country, but not for political reasons. The reason was social, and was due to no other than the Munbeol consciousness of the time, which was the Munbeol houses’ ego for being a very successful and lofty household. The atmosphere of the time was very much against commercial activities, even viewing it as the worst of the worst kind of occupation(末業, Mal’eob), and as Gaeseong was a city famous for its own commercial activities, people from Gaeseong were perceived accordingly as well. The Sajok households in Gaeseong were mostly less esteemed, and had minor House names. Choi Se-jin(崔世津), Kim Hi-seong(金希聖), Han Se-jin(韓世津), Kim Ja-yang(金自陽), Kim Myeong-eon(金明彦), all successful passers of the Mun’gwa course in the 16th century, were all denied promotion for not being from more highly esteemed Munbeol households, which again shows that Gaeseong was indeed discri...

6세기 신라 干群 경위의 구성과 성립과정

홍승우(Hong, Sueng Woo) 한국사학회 2018 史學硏究 Vol.0 No.131

6세기대 신라 금석문에 나오는 간군 경위 관등을 분석하여, 당시 관등의 구성과 그 성격을 규명하고, 그것을 바탕으로 신라 경위의 성립과정을 밝히고자 하였다. 율령 반포를 전후해 건립된 중성리비․냉수리비․봉평리비의 비문과 창녕비 등 진흥왕대 비문의 내용을 비교․분석하고, 주변국의 사례를 포함한 여러 문헌자료를 종합하여 고찰하였다. 그 결과 다음과 같은 결론을 도출하였다. 중성리비․냉수리비․봉평리비에서 왕과 함께 국정을 이끌어나갔던 6부의 핵심지배층들에게서 두 종류의 관등이 확인되었다. 하나는 喙․沙喙部인들만이 가지고 있었던 경위 관등으로, 阿干支와 그 하위 某干支관등들을 중심으로 하는 것이다. 다른 하나는 여타 4부의 수장 및 유력자들이 소지한 것으로, 干支와 壹伐등으로 구성되었다. 율령 반포 당시의 간군 경위 관등은 太阿干支이하의 5개 등급이 중심이었으며, 이는 신라 마립간 아래의 喙․沙喙部유력자들을 서열화 시키기 위한 목적을 가진 것이었다. 그에 비해 상위 4개 간군 경위는 太阿干支이하 간군 관등과 동일한 성격의 것이 아니라, 6부를 구성하던 여러 독자세력의 수장적 지위에서 유래한 위호인 干支들 사이의 위계가 반영된 전통적 위호였다. 형식적으로는 이들 위호가 喙․沙喙部에 적용되었던 경위 관등 보다 상위의 지위였지만, 이들이 당시 하나의 관등제로 동일하게 기능하고 있었던 것은 아니다. 그에 비해 진흥왕대인 6세기 중반의 금석문들에서는, 상위 간군 경위가 阿干支등과 같은 성격의 관등으로서 기능함을 확인할 수 있다. 이전과 달리 干支와 壹伐로 구성된 부별 독자 위계제는 사라지고, 6부인 전체가 경위 관등을 소지하는 변화와 함께 이런 현상이 나타난다. 6부 干支들과 壹伐등의 유력자층을 경위 관등에 모두 포괄하기 위해, 최상위 간군관등을 증설하면서 경위가 완성된 것이다. 다만 최상위 4개 간군 경위 관등은, 이전에 존재하던 독자세력의 수장적 지위인 간지들을 서열화하기 위해 만들어졌던 옛 위호를 그대로 계승한 것은 아니며, 경위의 고위 관등으로 새롭게 만들어진 것이다. 이로써 신라 경위 17관등이 완비되었다. This paper analyzed Inscriptions of Silla stele in the 6th Century, such as Pohang Jungseongri Stele, Pohang Naengsuri Stele, Uljin Bongpyeongri Stele and other historical records, to reveal the constitution and the nature of the top 9 Official rank of the Silla Dynasty’s Governmental Ranking system called Gyeong-wi. And based on it, reconstructed the process of establishing the Gyeong-wi. As a result, the following conclusions were drawn. There were two kinds of Governmental Ranking system for the ruling classes of Silla 6bu around 520’s, when King BeobHeung declared the law codes called Yul-Ryeong. One was a system that is limited to WheBu and SawheBu. It was composed of only 5 lower top rank, named DaeArGanji, ArGanji, IlgilGanji, SaGanji, GeobeolGanji, out of 9 top rank. The other one was for the ruling classes of 4bu except Whe and Sawhe among the Silla 6bu. It was composed of Ganji and Ilbeol which means Chief of bu and top position under the chief. At that time, the Gyeong-wi was not completed, and it was not applied to every ruling classes in the Silla 6bu. In the middle of the 6th century, At the reign of King Jinheung, new 4 high-top Official rank had been added on top of existing ranks. Finally, Gyeong-wi had been completed with 9 upper grades and 8 lower grades. And also it had been applied to every ruling classes of Silla Dynasty.

旅庵 申景濬의 詩理論 體系

이향배(Lee, Hyang-bae) 어문연구학회 2018 어문연구 Vol.96 No.-

본고는 詩則 을 중심으로 여암 신경준의 시론의 체계성에 대해 분석하였다. 신경준은 조선후기 호남 3대 실학자로 평가받는 인물로 성운학, 지리, 과학기술 등 다방면에 저술을 남기고 있다. 시칙 은 그의 시론을 알 수 있는 대표적 비평서이다.「시칙」은 이전의 비평가들의 이론을 자신의 견해대로 집약하여 재정리한 저술이지만 그 과정에서 여타의 시론에서 찾아볼 수 없는 시론의 체계성을 갖추고 있다. 특히 도해의 활용은 독자에게 시론의 체계를 쉽게 설명해주고 있을 뿐만 아니라 시론의 체계성을 잘 보여주고 있다. 첫째로 신경준은 시의 綱領으로 體ㆍ意ㆍ聲을 설정하였다. 이는 한시에 갖추고 있어야 할 요소이다. 체는 詩體를 말하며, 의는 意境의 설정 문제로 주의와 운의로 나누어 구성하였다. 성은 시구를 이루고 있는 글자의 음운조화이다. 이 세 가지는 한시에 갖추어야 할 강령이었다. 둘째로 신경준은 체의성을 구현하는 방식으로 10조목을 제시하였다. 物ㆍ情ㆍ事는 시의 소재이며, 포진은 상황을 直敍하는 방법이고 영묘는 대상을 묘사하는 기법이다. 포진과 영묘는 시의 작법에 해당하며, 이를 구현 방식으로 체시된 체용, 주빈, 동정은 의경을 시구로 표현하는 방법이며, 上下前後左右와 長短廣狹重輕은 立語할 때 의경을 안배하는 방식이다. 興比賦는 표현기교이며, 起ㆍ承ㆍ敍ㆍ轉ㆍ息ㆍ宿ㆍ結ㆍ卒은 작품의 내용 구성하고 전개하는 방식이다. 또한 그는 詩格에 해당하는 것으로 48격을 제시하였다. 셋째로 신경준은 시 작법의 요체로 여섯 가지를 들고 있다. ① 의경설정의 범위 ② 문장서술의 간결함 ③ 법도 있는 서술 ④ 신묘한 문장의 변화 ⑤ 시어와 뜻의 저속함이 없음 ⑥ 자연스러운 결론 등이다. 이로 볼 때 신경준은 학시자에게 시론을 이해시키려는 목적으로 제가의 시론을 삼강령 10조목의 체계로 「시칙」을 저술하고 작법의 요체를 보완하여 제시했음을 알 수 있다. This study analyzed the systemicity of Yeoam Shin, Gyeongjun’s poetics with focus on Poetic Rules(詩則) . Shin, Gyeong-jun is a person who is rated as one of the Honam three great Silhak(Realist School of Confucianism) scholars in late Joseon Dynasty. Yeoam wrote lots of books in many quarters like Chinese phonology, geography and scientific techniques, etc., and among others, his Poetic Rules is a representative critical book, through which his poetic theory could be traced. Poetic Rules is a re-arranged book by integrating the theories of the former critics in line with his views, but the book is equipped with the systemicity of poetics which can never be found in the other poetic theories. Particularly, his use of diagrams not only explains the system of poetics to readers with ease, but it also explicitly shows the systemicity of poetics. First, Shin, Gyeong-jun set up Style. Significance. Sound(體ㆍ意ㆍ聲) as the Code of poetry. These are the very elements, with which Chinese poetry should be equipped. Style refers to a poetic style; Shin composed Significance, as an issue of significance boundary setting, by dividing it into a central message and a message of classical dignity. Sound is an issue of harmonious phonemes of letters forming poetic lines. Actually, these three sorts were the Code, which Chinese poetry should fulfill. Second, the ways to embody Style, Significance and Sound(體ㆍ意ㆍ聲) are pojin(鋪陳)and yeongmyo(影描). Pojin(鋪陳) refers to the way of direct description of a situation while yeongmyo(影描) is the way to describe an object. pojin(鋪陳)and yeongmyo(影描) belong to a writing technique of a poem, and the substantiality and function of a thing, subject and object(主賓), and movements, which are penetrated as the way to embody pojin(鋪陳)and yeongmyo(影描), are the methods of expressing the significance boundary as poetic lines; in addition, the top & bottom, the front & rear, and the left & right, and the length, breadth & narrowness, and heaviness & lightness are the ways of evenly distributing the significance boundary when using words for poetry. Heungbibu is the way for technical skills in expression, while introduction. development. description, turn. pause, continuance, conclusion and ending are the ways of organizing and developing the literary work contents. These belong to poetic formality and dignity, and Shin, Gyeong-jun presented 48 sorts of poetic formality and dignity in all. Third, Shin, Gyeong-jun put forth 6 sorts as key factors in writing techniques of poetry such as ① the scope of significance boundary setting, ② brevity in sentence description③ description with customs ④ variations of wondrous sentences ⑤ Non-existence of vulgarity in poetic words and significance ⑥ natural conclusion, etc. To sum it up, it might be true that Shin, Gyeong-jun wrote Poetic Rules by systematically arranging the poetic theories maintained by various scholars with the intent of making learners of poetry easily understand poetics.

최근 발굴된 영조시절의 문신 구택규(具宅奎) 초상화 두 점 -문인화가 윤위가 그린 흉상과 화원 장경주가 그린 반신상

이태호 명지대학교(서울캠퍼스) 인문과학연구소 2015 인문과학연구논총 Vol.36 No.1

Gu Taek-gyu (1693〜1754, 具宅奎) was a scholar-official active during the reign ofKing Yeongjo in the late Joseon period. Two paintings of Gu in official garb haverecently been discovered. One is a half-length portrait painted in 1746 by court painterJang Gyeong-ju(張敬周)(plate 1), while the other is a head-and-shoulders portraitproduced in 1750 by scholar-artist Yun Wi(尹愇)(plate 2). Jang (1710〜after 1775),from a well-know family of court painters, was a royal artist, whose job was to paintportraits of the king, while Yun (1725〜1756) was the grandson of Yun Du-seo(尹斗緖, 1668〜1715), a scholar-artist famous for his self-portrait. The two artist's portraits of Gu are in similar style but show slight differences,particularly in the contrast between the well-trained formal aesthetics of the courtpainter and the simple, realistic expression of the scholar-artist. The biggest differencebetween the two paintings is found in their depiction of Gu's face: Jang omits all trace ofage spots and pockmarks – a “Photoshop job,” in today's parlance – while Yunportrays a slightly dark face with pockmarks around the nose and eyes and a clearlyvisible age spot on the left cheek. This appears to suggest that Gu asked Jang not toinclude the blemishes on his face. This presence and absence of skin blemishes in each picture is a noteworthydifference. Joseon period portraits are often remarkable for their detailed realism, inwhich including facial skin diseases and blemishes was considered the height of virtue. Court artist Jang Gyeong-ju's half-length portrait of Gu Taek-gyu indicates that suchfeatures could be omitted at the request of the client. Scholar-artist Yun Wi'shead-and-shoulders portrait of Gu, by contrast, is notable for the honest realism of itssimple lines.

17세기 남원의 시가문학 - 광해 혼조에 대한 문학적 대응을 중심으로 -

이상원 동아시아고대학회 2014 동아시아고대학 Vol.0 No.35

이 글은 17세기 초반 남원 지역에서 활동했던 몇몇 사족들의 작품을 대상으로 광해 혼조에 대한 문학적 대응 양상을 살펴보고 그 의미를 파악한 것이다. 장경세의 <강호연군가>는 퇴계 이황의 <도산십이곡>을 효방하여 애군우국지성과 성현학문지정을 노래한 것인데, 여러 작품에서 사실에 부합하는 리얼리티가 떨어지는 것을 확인할 수 있다. 이는 그가 남원 지역 유력 사족으로서의 지위를 다지기 위한 일환으로 이 작품을 창작했기 때문에 그런 의도성이 지나치게 개입하여 나타난 현상이다. 정훈의 시가에는 광해 혼조에 대한 극단적 부정과 인조대 서인 정권에 대한 극단적 찬양이라는 지나친 이분법적 구도가 자리 잡고 있다. 이는 당시 남원 지역 사족지배 질서를 주도한 가문들이 광해조의 북인 정권에서 소외되어 있다가 인조반정 이후 서인 정권에 참여한 것과 밀접한 관련이 있는 것이며, 이들 유력 사족으로부터 인정받기 위한 정훈의 의식적 노력의 소산이다. 조위한의 <유민탄>은 현재 작품은 전하지 않고 내용을 짐작할 수 있는 간략한 기록만 전하고 있다. 기존에는 이 기록들과 작품 제목을 근거로 현실고발문학 또는 현실비판문학으로 이 작품을 이해해 왔다. 그러나 남원 이주 당시 남원으로의 이주를 유배에 가까운 것으로 받아들이는 조위한의 심리 상태를 고려할 때 이 작품은 점점 피폐해져 가는 자신의 영혼을 달래고 위로하기 위해 창작된 것으로 보인다. This study examines the patterns and significance of literary responses to Gwanghae Honjo(광해 혼조), including works by members of certain distinguished families in the Namwon(남원) area of the early seventeenth century. Mimicking Dosanshipigoke(도산십이곡) by Toigye(퇴계) and Lee Hwang(이황), Jang Gyeong-se’s Ganghoyeongungae(장경세의 강호연군가) discusses loyalty to the king, patriotism, and passion for the study of sages. Deeply steeped in the author’s intentions to solidify his position as a prominent noble family in the Namwon(남원) area, the work lacks realism, in light of the facts presented in several others. The poetry of Jeong Hune(정훈) is characterized by an excessively dichotomous structure, split between his extreme denunciation of Gwanghae Honjo(광해 혼조) and his exaltation of the Seoin regime during the reign of King Injo. This is closely related to the fact that the families dominating the social order in the Namwon(남원) area joined the Seoin(서인) regime after the coup against King Injo(인조), following years of alienation from the Bukin(북인) regime during the reign of Gwanghae(광해). The work is the result of his efforts to become recognized by these powerful families. There are only brief records with which to approximate the content of Yumintan(유민탄) by Jo Wi-han(조위한). No actual copies of the work remain. The traditional understanding of the work, based on these records and its title, is that it reported on or criticized the social realities of the times. Considering that he saw his move to Namwon(남원) almost as his exile, it is guessed that he created the work to comfort and console his spirit, which had gradually become impoverished.

여헌 장현광 성리설 연구의 쟁점과 과제

김용헌 (사)한국인물사연구회 2010 한국인물사연구 Vol.13 No.-

Jang Hyeongwang is one of the prominent confucian scholars in Chosun Dynasty. Jang Hyeongwang belonged to the Toegye School. Nevertheless his theory of Li and Ch`i(gi), what is called li-gi-gyeong-wi-seol in some respect, was not similar to Toegye's but to Yulgok´s. So, after 1920s, the philosophy of Jang has been studied by many modern Confucianism researchers. Roughly speaking, many researchers' arguments have been focused on two main issues. On the question of where Jang`s theory stands between Toegye`s and Yulgok´s, there are four different views. While some of modern scholars hold a view that Jang´s theory is closer to Yulgok`s, others maintain that Jang succeeded Toegye's philosophical mind whose main intention was to enhance the position of Li. In the other hand, Some scholars have an opinion that Jang`s theory is a proper compromise between Toegye's and Yulgok`s, others insist that Jang`s theory is original theory transcending both Toegye's and Yulgok`s. Another issue is concerning how Jang`s theory of Li and Ch´i can be ontologically conceptualized. Over this topic Tao-monism has been in conflict with Li-monism. Some people who regard Jang`s theory as Tao-monism understand that Tao is the only substance in Jang`s philosophy. Others who regard Jang`s theory as Li-monism insist that Li is the only substance in Jang`s philosophy. Besides, there are opinions that Jang`s theory can be prescribed as li-gi-il-won(原)-non or li-gi-il-bon(本)-non looking upon Li and Ch´i as one origin. Hence, according to them, the main characteristics of Jang's theory is the unified relations between Li and Ch'i in this world.

여헌 장현광 성리설 연구의 쟁점과 과제

김용헌(Kim Yong-Hun) 한국인물사연구소 2010 한국인물사연구 Vol.13 No.-

Jang Hyeongwang is one of the prominent confucian scholars in Chosun Dynasty. lang Hyeongwang belonged to the Toegye School. Nevertheless his theory of Li and Ch'i(gt), what is called li-gi-gyeong-wi-seol in some respect, was not similar to Toegye's but to Yulgok's, So, after 1920s, the philosophy of lang has been studied by many modern Confucianism researchers. Roughly speaking, many researchers' arguments have been focused on two main issues. On the question of where Jang's theory stands between Toegye s and Yulgok's, there are four different views. While some of modern scholars hold a view that Jang's theory is closer to Yulgok's, others maintain that lang succeeded Toegye's philosophical mind whose main intention was to enhance the position of Li. In the other hand, Some scholars have an opinion that lang's theory is a proper compromise between Toegye's and Yulgok s, others insist that Jang's theory is original theory transcending both Toegye's and Yulgok's. Another issue is concerning how Jang's theory of Li and Ch'i can be ontologically conceptualized. Over this topic Tao-monism has been in conflict with Li-monism. Some people who regard Jang's theory as Tao-monism understand that Tao is the only substance in Jang's philosophy. Others who regard Jang's theory as Li-monism insist that Li is the only substance in Jang's philosophy. Besides, there are opinions that Jang's theory can be prescribed as li-gi-il-won(原)-non or li-gi-il-bon(本)-non looking upon Li and Ch'i as one origin. Hence, according to them, the main characteristics of Jang's theory is the unified relations between Li and Ch'i in this world.

장현광 성리설의 연원에 대한 고찰 − 나흠순 성리설과의 관련을 중심으로 −

김용헌 동양고전학회 2010 東洋古典硏究 Vol.41 No.-

나흠순의 이기일물론과 인심도심성정설은 장현광의 성리설 형성에 많은 영향을 끼친 것으로 평가되어 왔다. 장현광의 경위설은 리기불상리의 원칙에 충실하다는 점이 두드러지는데, 이는 나흠순의 이기일물설과 일맥상통하는 점이 없지 않다. 그러나 장현광의 이기경위설은 나흠순의 이기일물설과 근본적인 차이가 있다. 첫째, 장현광이 리와 기가 두 가지 존재가 아님을 강조한 것은 사실이지만 그의 이론체계에서 리와 기는 내용적 일치의 관계에 있지 않다. 둘째, 장현광의 철학체계에서 최고 범주는 어디까지나 리라는 점이다. 그의 이기론이 지닌 이러한 특징은 나흠순의 이기설에서 찾아보기 어려운 면모이다. 장현광이 도심을 성, 인심을 정으로 본 것은 나흠순의 인심도심성정설의 영향이 분명하다. 다만 그는 체는 용을 겸할 수 있다는 논리로 도심이 미발뿐만 아니라 이발도 겸한다는 논리를 펼쳤기 때문에 그의 인심도심설이 나흠순의 설의 단순한 답습이라고 하기 어렵다. 더욱이 공과 사를 기준으로 도심과 인심을 구분한 인심도심공사설은 인심과 도심을 모두 이발의 정 층위에서 이해했다는 점에서 나흠순의 인심도심성정설과는 차원을 달리한다. 그렇다면 장현광 성리설의 형성을 어떻게 보아야 할까? 한 마디로 장현광의 철학이론은 호발설을 비판하는 맥락에서 형성되었다고 할 수 있다. 그의 주된 철학적 관심사는 리(사단⋅도심)와 기(칠정⋅인심)를 두 근본으로 여기는 학설을 비판하고 리와 기를 하나로 통합하는 철학 체계를 수립하는 것이었다. 결국 리기경위설로 대표되는 그의 성리설은 당시 조선유학계의 학문적 상황에 대한 고민의 산물이었다는 결론이 가능하다. Jang Hyungang(張顯光, 1554~1570) was one of the very famous Neo-Confucianists of T′oegye School in the Chosun dynasty. Jang, nevertheless, refused to accept Toegye`s theory and had developed his own theory called li-qi-gyeong-wi-seol(理氣經緯說). So the theory was very unique in the history of Korean Neo-Confucianism. He matained that Tao(道), meaning the universal process which all beings including the human must follow, is accomplished by the unity of li(理, principle) and qi(ch`i, 氣, material force). He compared li and qi to warp(經) and woof(緯). According to his explanation, Tao is fulfilled by combining li and qi, as a textile is woven the combination of warps and woofs. He could, for I know, succeed to emphasize the unity of li and qii through this theory. Lots of Scholars in the Chosun dynasty criticized Jang`s theory of li and qi for regarding li and qi as one, and thought that the theory originated from Luo Ch`inshun(羅欽順, 1465~1547), a famous Neo-Confucianist of in Early Ming China. Luo Ch`inshun maintained li-qi metaphysical monism that li and qi is united entity. In this respect, it seems that Jang`s theory is similar to Luo`s. However, I think that there are very important differences between the two. It is true that the main characteristics of Jang's theory is the unified relations between li and qi in this world. In the system of his philosophy, nevertheless, the topological position of li and qi are different in grade each other. Jang insisted that li is a supreme being to be materialized and realized through the movement of qi`in the process of universal development. Qi is accordingly only a kind of matter which completes li. In this sense, Jang`s theory can be regarded as li metaphysical monism that li is the only substance. It means that Jang Hyeongwang`s theory is a great contrast to Luo Ch`inshun`s li-qi metaphysical monism.

여헌 장현광의 정치운영론과 성리설

김용헌 (사)한국인물사연구회 2014 한국인물사연구 Vol.21 No.-

Chang Hyun-kwang(張顯光, 1554~1570), a prominent Neo-Confucian of Joseon in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, didn`t suggest concretely how to manage the country. He just emphasized the importance of harmony among court officials and unity among Confucian scholars in principle. He thought that if the king realized his moral nature, which is also the first principle, that is, the Mandate of Heaven, the unity among Confucian scholars could be achieved and the country is well ruled. So a certain researcher characterized his political theory as one of a moderate harmony among political fractions. In general speaking, it is can be called a kind of a theory of a sage king, based on geongeuknon(建極論). Though Jang belonged to the Toegye School, his theory of Li(principle) and Ch`i(gi, material force), what is called li-gi-gyeong-wi-seol(理氣經緯說), was not similar to Toegye's. He emphasized, unlike Toegye Lee Hwang, the unity of Li and Ch´i, and strongly criticized the theories of dividing Li and Ch´i. His political theory for running the country and his theory of Li and Ch`i seem to be are alike in maintaining unity. However, the main purpose of making his theory of Li and Ch`i is not to support his theory for running the country, but to show his metaphysical thinking on the Tao that the universal process is accomplished by the unity of Li and Ch´i.