18~19세기 조선 맹자학의 주석서와 그 작자 = A Study on commentary on Mencius studies and its Authors of Joseon Dynasty in the 18th,19th centuries

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study attempts to understand overall impression of commentary on Mencius of Joseon Dynasty in the 18th-19th centuries and its writers. The 18th and 19th centuries were considered ``Confucianism era`` as considerable books on Confucianism were published. Although many studies on it were conducted, an approach to its overview remains unsatisfactory. As an attempt to overview a tendency of interpretation of Mencius during the 18th and 19th Joseon Dynasty, this study examines a commentary distribution in each chapter of『Mencius』and inclination of its commenters. Judging from a frequency of notable annotations, interpretation of Mencius during the 18th and 19th centuries did not show a drastic change in interest including definite change in frequency and major interest area. However, decrease in social attention to usefulness of Confucianism seems relevant with overall decrease in quantities of commentary. Furthermore, commenters tendency showed a certain degree of change. During the 18th century, there were many Noron scholars who became a master of crown princes and who were in central political world. On the contrary, during the 19th century, there were many Namin scholars who gave up entering government post and deepened their consciousness on matters of Joseon Neo-Confucianism, living in countryside, especially in Youngnam region. It is considered to be influenced by the political environment of the time where it was no more possible to enter the central political world only with knowledge of Confucianism due to reign of potentates of the 19th century while the reign of Yoengjo and Jeongjo, a king who was fond of learning, shaped a condition for going into central political world with knowledge of Confucianism. In addition, arguments over human and natural laws, which still remains to be an important object of discussion, and limited import of books prevented Confucianism from becoming an expanded discussion on politics and economy. Rather, it was expressed as a tendency of ruminating traditional awareness of problems. Along with these characteristics, general overview on commentary distribution and commenters provides considerable implications on understanding of Mencius studies tendency in the latter Joseon Dynasty.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 문석윤, "한국유학사상대계 Ⅲ" 한국국학진흥원, 2005

2 성균관대 대동문화연구원, "한국경학자료집성 35-48" 성균관대학교 출판부, 1991

3 "한국경학자료시스템"

4 최석기, "한국경학가사전" 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원, 1998

5 안현주, "조선시대에 간행된 <孟子 >의 諸板本에 관한 硏究" 한국도서관·정보학회지 37 (1) : 305 ~ 328, 2006

6 최석기, "조선시대 대학장구 개정과 그에 관한 논변" 보고사, 2011

7 이영호, "조선 논어학의 형성과 전개양상" 동양철학연구 (59) : 119 ~ 174, 2009

8 홍원식, "심경부주와 조선유학" 예문서원, 2008

9 김종석, "심경강해" 이문출판사, 1999

10 한형조, "심경-주희의 마음 훈련 매뉴얼" 한국학중앙연구원 출판부, 2009

11 함영대, "성호학파의 맹자학" 태학사, 2011

12 부유섭, "건륭 연간 연행록을 통해 본 중국 도서 유입에 대하여" 대동한문학(大東漢文學) (34) : 157 ~ 190, 2011

13 백민정, "茶山의 『中庸講義(補)』 條對 내용 분석: 正祖 『經史講義·中庸』 御製條問 및 기타 條對와의 비교를 중심으로" 동방학지 (147) : 399 ~ 448, 2009

14 부유섭, "燕行錄을 통해 본 康雍 年間 中國 書籍 유입에 대하여" 漢文學報 22 : 269 ~ 306, 2010

15 백민정, "正祖와 茶山의 '大學'에 관한 철학적 입장 비교" 퇴계학보 (126) : 243 ~ 298, 2009

16 함영대, "星湖學派『孟子』 解釋의 關心과 그 意味" 동양철학연구 (61) : 43 ~ 74, 2010

17 유민정, "存齋 魏伯珪의 『孟子』 해석 硏究" 성균관대학교 대학원, 2013

18 김효동, "乃菴 崔左海의 『論語』 解釋에 관한 硏究" 성균관대학교 대학원, 2012

19 백민정, "『孟子』 해석에 나타난 正祖의 사유 경향 분석 －『孟子講義』 御製條問 및 條對와 『鄒書春記』의 問答을 중심으로－" 철학사상 (34) : 167 ~ 215, 2009

20 백민정, "<論語 >에 대한 正祖의 철학적 관점 분석 − <論語講義 > 御製條問 및 條對와 <魯論夏箋 > 問答을 중심으로 −" 동양철학연구 62 (62) : 79 ~ 115, 2010