근∙현대 지역사료 수집, DB 구축 및 공동 활용

강순애 한국기록관리학회 학술발표논문집 2008 한국기록관리학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2008 No.추계

녹문(鹿門) 임성주(任聖周)의 자필 서간에 관한 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2015 서지학연구 Vol.64 No.-

이 글은 새로 발견된 녹문(鹿門) 임성주(任聖周, 1711∼1788)의 자필 서간을 대상으로 녹문 임성주의 삶과 학문전승, 『녹문선생문집(鹿門先生文集)』에 수록된 도암 이재에게 올린 서간 내용 및 자필 서간의 서지적․내용적 측면을 연구한 것이다. 녹문 임성주는 조선조 후기 영․정조시기에 낙론에 기반을 두면서도 스승인 이재(李縡)가 주장한 심성설인 인물성동론(人物性同論)을 한 단계 더 발전시켜 호론이 주장하는 인물성이론(人物性異論)을 주장하였고, 이기설(理氣說)에 있어서는 이(理)와 기(氣)의 이원론적 관념을 기(氣)의 일원론적 관념으로 통일 발전시켜 조선조 성리학 육대가(六大家) 중의 한 사람으로 일컬어졌다. 『녹문선생문집』 권1에는 4편의 서간이 실려 있다. 영조 3년(1727)의 서간은 녹문이 17세에 도암 이재에게 문하의 제자로 받아주기를 청하는 것이다. 영조 6년(1730)의 서간은 녹문이 20세 되던 해에 도암 이재에게 자신의 의문점을 물어보기 위해 쓴 것인데 실제로 보내지 않은 것으로 알려져 있다. 영조 13년(1737)의 서간은 녹문이 27세 되던 해에 도암에게 올린 것으로 미발심체(未發心體)의 선악을 다루는 심론의 영역에서 매우 중요한 것이다. 영조 21년(1745)의 서간은 녹문 임성주가 35세 되던 그해 가을에 도암에게 올린 것으로 집안의 합제(合祭) 문제에 조언을 구하는 내용이다. 임성주의 자필 서간은 『녹문선생문집』에 수록되지 않았으며, 녹문이 영조 16년(1740) 여주에 있으면서 그의 스승인 도암 이재에게 올리려고 작성한 초안이다. 서간의 크기(세로 × 가로)는 61.4 × 38.2cm이다. 필첩 전체는 본문은 세로 25줄, 서간 위쪽 여백에 가로 3줄이다. 전체 글자 수는 본문 475자, 간기 부분이 17자이다. 스승과 관련된 글자인 ‘후(候)’, ‘정중체후(靜中體候)’, ‘문하(門下)’, ‘함장지간(函丈之間)’, ‘등람(登覽)’과 ‘하람(下覽)’ 등의 앞에는 존경을 표시하기 위해 공격(空格)을 두고 있다. 이 서간문 글씨체의 특징은 안진경의 해․행서에 바탕을 두고 필세(筆勢)와 자세(字勢)가 적절하게 균형을 이루면서 강한 기운이 있으면서도 유창한 특징을 지니고 있고, 결체(結體)는 근엄하면서도 풍격은 수려하지만 변칙의 멋스러움이 있으면서도 선비의 품격은 그대로 지니고 있다. 이 글은 내용의 전개상 8단락으로 나눌 수 있다. 임성주가 스승인 도암 이재의 안부를 여쭙고, 친구 대심(大心 ; 李維의 字)이 죽어서 2주기가 지났는데 대상이 지나기 전에 묘에 가기로 했는데 하지 못했음을 슬퍼하였으며, 집안에 우환과 상사 등이 많아 학문은 제대로 하지 못함을 걱정하였다. 도암 이재에게서 강송하던 시절을 생각하며 학문의 진도가 제대로 나아가지 못하여 우려를 하였고, 순(舜)임금의 ‘惟精惟一’과 공자의 ‘克己復禮’를 생활 속에 실천하려는 다짐을 하였으며, 경계와 채찍질 해줄 스승 곁에서 공부하기를 소망하였다. 임성주가 도암과 길이 멀어 자주 회합하지 못함을 걱정하였고, 스승에게 질정 받을 것이 많아 여름에 말을 빌려 뵈올 계획이며 붙인 글은 어느 때나 받게 될지 우려한 내용이다. 이 연구는 향후 민간기록의 연구는 물론 서지학, 기록관리학, 역사학, 국어학계에 가장 기본적인 연구 성과로 활용될 것이다.

「향산삼체법(香山三體法)」의 오언율시 텍스트에 대한 서지적 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2013 서지학연구 Vol.54 No.-

This paper engages in a bibliographical study of the 72 poems of the five-character regulated verses, which appear in the First Cast Gapinja-Type Edition of Hyangsansamchebeop. It will explore several themes in the following order: the life and literature of Bai Juyi(白居易); the composition of the Hyangsansamchebeop poems; the collection of works and writing-related matters; and a comparison of Hyangsansamchebeop with Zhu Jincheng’s Bai Juyi ji jian jiao(白居易集箋校). All 72 poems of Hyangsansamchebeop were collected in Anthology of Poems by Bai Juyi(白居易文集). Bai Juyi ji jian jiao cites that there are 7 poems from Book 13, 4 poems from Book 14, 1 poem from Book 15, 4 poems from Book 16, 1 poem from Book 17, 3 poems from Book 19, 1 poem from Book 20, 1 poem from Book 23, 1 poem from Book 24, 6 poems from Book 25, 21 poems from Book 26, 16 poems from Book 27, 2 poems from Book 28, 3 poems from Book 34, and 1 poem from Book 37, making 72 poems in all. The poems included in Hyangsansamchebeop show us matters related to the writing of the poems such as the time, place or government post Bai was in when he wrote the works. Bai selected the most works from his 50s and from his writings done in Changan and Luoyang. Bai Juyi went through various government posts after passing the jinsasi(進士試) examinations at 29 years of age. His official life bore close relations to the writing time and place and had a great influence in the creation of the poems. The poems contain scenes of Bai Juyi’s everyday life and surroundings with 25 poems for “Spring”, 16 poems for “Wine”, 13 poems for “Autumn”, 12 poems for “Sentiments”, 3 poems for “Partings”, and 3 poems for “Winter”. Altogether, there are 72 poems in 6 categories. A comparison done of the First Cast Gapinja-Type Edition of Hyangsansamchebeop (Model A), created around the 10th year of King Jungjong’s reign, with Zhu Jincheng’s Bai Juyi ji jian jiao (Model B) yielded the following results. First, the original texts of Model A and Model B have differences in letters: there are instances of Model A and Model B having similar Chinese characters so that there are no great differences in the translation; instances of Model A and B having contrasting letters so that it is difficult to know the differences in translation; instances where Model A and B have contrasting letters yet differences in translation are clear; instances where later annotations show that the letter of Model A is more correct; and instances where later annotations show that the letter of Model B is more correct. Secondly, the annotations which appear in Model B complete the translation of the original text. Thirdly, the poems in Model A and Model B have the same titles, yet Model B sometimes has different titles for the poems in the annotations. The results of this study will be used in the most fundamental studies of Bibliography, Chinese Literature, Chinese poetry which includes the study of Bai Juyi’s poetry.

운호(雲湖) 임정주(任靖周)의 자필 서간문에 관한 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2015 서지학연구 Vol.61 No.-

This paper studies Unho Im Jeong-ju’s newly discovered handwritten letter by looking over the academic origins and exchange information of the figures contained in letter works of unhojib and examining the bibliography and content of handwritten letter. Unho Im Jeong-ju(任靖周, 1727∼1796) was a neo-Confucian spirit philosopher in Yeongjo’s and Jeongjo’s reign of Joseon. His anthology is unhojip 6 volumes 3 books. of which vol. 1-2 are listed 45 letter works written by 24 authors. Their’s academic origins of the characters contained in this letter works lay in the Yulgok Yi Yi, Sagye Kim Jang-saeng, Wooam Song Si-yeol, and Doam Yi Jae faction’s branch of spirit philosopy of neo-Confucianism. 45 letter works’ topics are 47 cases Confucianism discussion, disciplines, etiquettes, discussions, etc. there were some very important arguments during the Confucian discussion, it was also recorded for the compilation of Writings on Nokmun Im Seong-ju. Im Jeong-ju’s handwritten letter has not been included in the unhojib, which contains new records related to the compilation of the Collected Works of Nokmun(Nokmunseonsaengmunjib). The size of this letter is 34.2 x 57.8 cm, the total number of characters of the text is 511 characters. The part relating to the other party can leave a space of one character(gonggyeok, 空格) to show respect. Features of the script of the letter is as follows: First, there are forms without departing from the norms of typical Stroke in a semi-cursive and cursive style(行草書體) and the square style(楷書體) of An Jin-kyeong. Second, there are characters who Unho drive a stylishly and unique penmanship; the appearance of the stroke the incidental characters that confusion may come from the cursive style is represented differently, it displays a scooped hollow with unconventional in chaekbatchimbeon(‘辶’, one of incidental characters), and represents the unique calligraphy style that followed several generations. Third, Unho skillfully revivies graceful and elegant characteristics going to connect two letters, three letters, and four letters in letters written by connecting of the cursive style. The writing can be divided into 7 paragraphs according to the content development. This article is based on information related to the compilation of Nokmunseonsaengmunjib when Im Jeong-ju was chief of Chongsan County from the thirteenth(1789) to nineteenth year(1795) of Jeongjo’s reign. He refused work of eongwan (言官) and nangcheong (郎廳) appointed by the country due to the deteriorating health and workload, and was asked for the compilation and correction of Im Seong-ju Writings to Kim Sang-jin. He has expressed a desire to study hard with friends and organize a meeting well. He invited his friends to the meeting, while at the same time was asked to editing and proofreading for Im Seong-ju’ haengjang (行狀, a brief history of life) and some manuscripts. This study will be used in the basic future studies of private records as well as in those of bibliography, record management, history and Korean language.

「향산삼체법(香山三體法)」 칠언절구의 구성, 내용 및 텍스트 비교에 관한 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2014 서지학연구 Vol.57 No.-

This paper engages in structures, contents and a text comparison of the 51 poems of a quatrain with seven words to a line, which appear in the First Cast Gapinja-Type Edition of Hyangsansamchebeop. It will explore three themes in the following order: ⅰ) the composition, selected works and writing-related matters of the Hyangsansamchebeop poems; ⅱ) the contents of the Hyangsansamchebeop poems; and a text comparison of Hyangsansamchebeop poems with Zhu Jincheng’s Bai Juyi ji jian jiao(白居易集箋校). 51 poems of Hyangsansamchebeop were collected in Anthology of Poems by Bai Juyi(白居易文集). Bai Juyi ji jian jiao cites that there are 15 poems from Book 13, 10 poems from Book 14, 5 poems from Book 15, 2 poems from Book 16, 3 poems from Book 18, 4 poems from Book 19, 1 poem from Book 23, 1 poem from Book 27, 1 poem from Book 34, 5 poems from Book 35, and 1 poem from Book 37. 3 poems did not appear on the Anthology of Poems by Bai Juyi(白居易文集). The poems included in Hyangsansamchebeop show us matters related to the writing of the poems such as the time, place or government post Bai was in when he wrote the works. the most works from his 30s and 40s were selected and from his writings done in Changan, Luoyang, Kangzhou, Xiagui, Zhouzhi, Zhongzhou, Hangzhou, and from Changan to Kangzhou along the way. Bai Juyi went through various government posts and wrote a lot of poems in his 30s up to 70s; he wrote a satirical poem in his 30s in Changan, Zhouzhi and Xiagui; some of the satirical and most of the quiet poem in his 40s in Changan, Kangzhou and Zhongzhou; a quiet and sentimental poem in his 50s in Changan and Hangzhou and in his 60s and 70s in Luoyang. His official life bore close relations to the writing time and place and had a great influence in the creation of the poems. The poems contain scenes of Bai Juyi’s everyday life and surroundings with 22 poems for ‘Personal relationships with others’, 9 poems for ‘Sentiments’, 7 poems for ‘Scenery’ and 3 poems for ‘songs of historical facts’. Altogether, there are 51 poems in 4 categories. A comparison done of the First Cast Gapinja-Type Edition of Hyangsansamchebeop (Model A), created around the 10th year of King Jungjong’s reign, with Zhu Jincheng’s Bai Juyi ji jian jiao (Model B) yielded the following results. First, the original texts of Model A and Model B have differences in letters: there are instances of Model A and Model B having similar Chinese characters so that there are no great differences in the interpretation; instances of Model A and B having contrasting letters so that it is difficult to know the differences in interpretation; instances where later annotations show that the letter of Model A is more correct; and instances where later annotations show that the letter of Model B is more correct. Secondly, the original texts of Model A and Model B have differences in poem’s title; the annotations of poem’s title which appear in Model B complete the interpretation of the original text; A and Model B have the same titles, yet Model B sometimes has proved wrong and corrected letters for the poems in the annotations. The results of this study will be used in the most fundamental studies of Bibliography, Chinese Literature, Chinese poetry which includes the study of Bai Juyi’s poetry.

서․발문을 통해본 미확인 고문헌의 현황과 기존 고서목록의 수정․보완에 관한 소고

강순애 한국서지학회 2012 서지학연구 Vol.52 No.-

Korea University Institute of Korean Culture has completed the first project, aimed to establish an information-genealogical research resource, with extracting the prefaces and epilogues from the photographic editions of the old documents and from the old documents in each institution. This project has produced three final reports. The second project was directed to correct and mark with a dot, annotate and markup XML format about the 1,450 texts out of 10,000 articles for three years. The selection criteria was picked out prefaces and epilogues of the unconfirmed ancient literature, added articles distinctly showing intellectual lineage 3,800 articles are included in the The catalogue of the unconfirmed old documents in Korea. Out of these articles, many old documents arranged in 2009-2010 were recognized as the unconfirmed books, because they were not published in one separate volume, but contained in the collection works and printed 2 or more different texts as one book. Among those articles, Some turned out to be the existent book and it could help modify and supplement comprehensively the existing bibliographies of old documents in each libraries. Looking at these old literature by subject, these were kyong-bu(經部) 15 kinds, Sa-bu(史部) 58 kinds, Ja-bu(子部) 21 kinds, Jip-bu(集部) 76 kinds. Among those kinds, by modifying and supplementing old document’s bibliographies, these were kyong-bu(經部) 15 kinds, Sa-bu(史部) 15 kinds, Ja-bu(子部) 6 kinds, Jip-bu(集部) 7 kinds. It could found information such as the author and editor, the role of the author, the compilation and publication, edition, missing prefaces, et cetera through these materials. Furthermore, it was pointed out that making up for a defect of the bibliographical note was very necessary in order to accurately search the Korean old documents. It allows a new recognition of the impotance of Korean ancient literature’s prefaces and epilogues and facilitates the release and sharing of the results.

月沙 李廷龜의 冠服奏請 陳奏正使와 관련된 送別 기록 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2017 서지학연구 Vol.69 No.-

이 글은 현재 남아있는 월사(月沙) 이정귀(李廷龜, 1564∼1635)의 관복주청 진주정사와 관련된 송별 기록을 대상으로 공성왕후와 추숭, 월사 이정귀의 관복주청을 위한 외교활동, 관복주청 진주정사와 관련된 송별 기록을 분석한 것이다. 광해군은 2년(1610) 생모인 공빈 김씨의 추숭을 위한 계획을 추진하였다. 공빈 김씨를 왕비나 왕후로 격상하는 것, 제례에 있어서 태묘(太廟)와 원묘(原廟)에 대한 것, 공성왕후의 부묘와 책봉문제에 있어서 신하들과 이견이 있었다. 공성왕후 추숭의 고명(誥命)과 관련하여, 제1차 주청사가 광해군 5년(1613) 12월 11일 명으로부터 공성왕후의 고명을 받는데 성공하였다. 공성왕후 추숭의 관복(冠服)과 관련하여, 광해군은 7년(1615) 윤8월 8일 제2차 관복을 주청하기 위해 동지 겸 진주사 민형남과 부사 허균을 명에 파견하였으나 실패하였다. 광해군 8년(1616) 11월 4일 제3차 관복주청사에 월사 이정귀, 부사에 유간이 선발되었다. 월사 이정귀의 관복주청을 위한 외교활동에 있어서, 관복을 주청 받기 위해 고명과 관복을 함께 받아야 하는 당위성, 조선 성화 11년(1475)과 성화 17년(1481) 및 중국 형왕(荊王)에게 책명과 관복을 준허한 사례, 관복을 받아서 부모에게 지극한 예를 다하게 해달라는 간곡한 부탁 등을 주문의 핵심 내용으로 하였다. 광해군 8년(1616) 11월 4일 관복주청사 이정귀, 부사 유간, 서장관 장자호는 사신으로 파견되어 관복을 하사 받아, 이듬해 8월 19일 한성으로 돌아왔다. 9월 17일에 공성왕후의 관복을 태묘에 고하였다. 광해군은 이로써 7년여에 걸치는 생모 추숭 작업의 대장정을 마무리하였다. 관복주청 진주정사와 관련된 송별 기록은 기윤헌, 김상용, 민형남, 배대유, 유숙, 유역, 이각, 이춘원, 정엽, 조위한, 조존세, 홍명형, 황익중의 시 13편이 남아 있다. 시의 형식은 칠언시 20운 40행 1편, 오언율시 3편, 칠언율시 6편, 오언율시와 칠언율시가 병합된 것 1편, 칠언율시와 오언율시가 병합된 것 2편이다. 운자는 모두 평성의 지(支)자 3회, 경(庚)자 3회, 선(先)자 2회, 미(微)자 2회, 청(靑)자 2회, 양(陽)자 1회, 한(寒)자 1회, 어(魚)자 1회가 사용되었다. 시의 내용은 대부분 광해군이 공성왕후의 관복을 받기 위해 세 번째 주청사로 발탁된 월사 이정귀의 문장이 으뜸이고 19년간 세 번의 사행 길에 오르는 그의 임무는 황하의 근원을 찾아가는 중국의 장건에 비유하여 노래하였다. 임금은 어버이를 위해 온 정성을 쏟고 조정의 명운이 달린 일이니 공성왕후의 관복을 받는 데 최선을 다해 줄 것을 기원하였다. 또한 그를 떠나보내는 마음들의 표현은 건강의 염려, 적적함, 이별의 슬픔과 안타까운 심회를 기록하였다. 이 연구는 향후 민간기록의 연구는 물론 서지학, 기록관리학, 역사학, 국어학계에 가장 기본적인 연구 성과로 활용될 것이다.

月沙 李廷龜의 戊戌辨誣 陳奏副使와 관련된 送別 기록 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2016 서지학연구 Vol.68 No.-

This paper is a study of the five parting records related to Wolsa Yi Jung-gui’s Musulbyunmu Jinju Busa (1598) and will look into the following topics of Ding Yingtai’s false charges against Joseon, Wolsa Yi Jung-gueui‘s diplomatic endeavors to clear Joseon from Ding’s charge, and an analysis of the parting records related to Musulbyunmu Jinju busa. Ming Dynasty’s zanhuazhushi Ding Yingtai brought false charges against Joseon three times as Imjinwaeran was ending and ceasefire negotiations between the Ming Dynasty and Japan were beginning. The first charge arose from differing points of view surrounding the defeat of Joseon-Ming allied forces in the Battle of Dosan Fortress which took place between December 22 of the 30th year of Seonjo’s reign (1597) January 4 of the 31st year of Seonjo’s reign (1598), but was resolved thanks to the endeavors of diplomatic envoys from both countries. Ding made his second false charge in June of the 31st year of Seonjo’s reign (1598), saying Yang Hao was trying to stop Japanese forces by building a fortress, but Joseon prevented conflict by reacting strongly to the charge. The third false charge made against Joseon on September 21 on the 31st year of Seonjo’s reign (1598) was resolved with the dispatch of investigators from Ming, King Seonjo’s strong reaction, and the selection of Wolsa Yi Jung-gui’s written documents defending Joseon’s name by envoys sent to China. Wolsa Yi Jung-gui’s diplomatic work to defend Joseon involved composing a document clearing Joseon from false charges by refuting the claims one by one in four arguments. Jeongsa Yi Hangbok, Busa Yi Jung-gueui, Seojangwan Hwang Yeoil left Hanyang in November in the 31st year of Seonjo’s reign and arrived in Peking on January 24 in the 32nd year of Seonjo’s reign (1599). Wolsa accompanied Jeongsa Yi Hangbok and participated actively in clearing Joseon’s name, contributing to settling the problem of Ding Yingtai’s false charge. He returned to Hanyang on April 13 in the 32nd year of King Seonjo’s reign (1599). Keunmuk, edited by Wichang Oh Sae-chang and containing parting records relating to the Musulbyunmu Jinju Busa, contains five farewell records by writers and time periods that are clearly known and that are not in the collections with their handwriting. The writers are Kim Deok-gyeom, Kim Soon-myung, Yoon Geun Soo, Yi Dal and Hwang Jin. Of the poems, one is a quatrain with five characters, two are pentasyllabic regulated verses and two are heptasyllabic regulated verses. Of the rhyming characters which are in the neutral tone, ji is used twice, han once, gyeong once, and won once. The greater part of the poems express sadness over Wolsa Yi Jung-gui’s lonely and difficult task in taking care of Ding Yingtai’s false charge which so humiliated Seonjo, all in spite of Wolsa Yi’s poor health. Nevertheless, the poems also wish that Wolsa, with his well-turned verse and diverse diplomatic language, will induce the Emperor into resolving the conflict wisely. On parting with Wolsa, they record at length for Yi to be careful in the snow, that the moon will grow full and wane several times before he returns from the ten million ri journey, and that they shed tears over their hat strings thinking of Yi’s long journey and the difficulty of the task. This study will be used in the basic future studies of private records as well as in those of bibliography, record management, history and Korean language.

고려 팔만대장경 「法苑珠林」의 판각에 관한 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2012 서지학연구 Vol.51 No.-

This paper aims to study Beopwonjurim(K.1406)’s 100 volumes and 1,696 woodblocks by proceeding in the following order: the Beopwonjurim’s content and layout, its woodblocks and scale, and the correction and woodblock characteristics in the 82nd volume of Beopwonjurim’s first and second editions. Beopwonjurim is a Buddhist encyclopedia comprising of 100 volumes, 100 parts and 668 sections edited by Dosae around the 7th century. Its classification system consists of heaven and earth, kings, the public figure system, others 1, things, others 2. The first carving of Beopwonjurim was issued in Ingyeonwon in the first year of Hampyeong(998) after Great Master Unseung’s correction. In Goryeo, when the carving of the Koryeo First Tripitaka was concluded in the 4th year of Seonjong’s reign(1087) and the year after Uicheon returned, he proposed that the Beopwonjurim be published the year after that. And so the Song Dynasty’s carving was reprinted and engraved. At present, the 82nd volume remain in their entirety. 100 volumes, 1696 blocks and 3392 sides(3322 sides were actually engraved) of the second carving were done during the 31st year of Gojong’s reign(1244) by 602 engravers in Daejangdogam and Bunsadogam. A comparison of the first Tripitaka (Model A) and the second Tripitaka (Model B) of Beopwonjurim’s 82nd volume leads to the conclusion that the second version has the first model as a basis. The second edition faithfully follows the model of the first while adding a little proofreading. Comparing the 14 woodblocks of the first model and the second model, it can be concluded overall that the first edition is Song Bon’s reprinting. The broad and large letters and powerful strokes in the first model give the impression of force; however, the largeness of the letters lacks an orderly impression. The second model recarved the first model as a basis. The carving is unskilled; and the characteristics of the letters from the first model are hardly shown. Additionally their overall appearance is diminutive and crude.

石北 申光洙의 송별기록 「鶴歌贈法正東歸」에 관한 연구

강순애 한국서지학회 2017 서지학연구 Vol.70 No.-

This paper studies Hakgajeungbobjeongdongui, the newly discovered parting record by Seokbuk Sin Gwang-su, by examining Sin Gwang-su’s life and poetry as well as Hakgajeungbobjeongdongui’s bibliography and content. Sin Gwang-su (1712-1775)’s family clan was Goryeong, his courtesy name Seongyeon, and his pen name Seokbuk or O-ahksanin. He passed the jinsa in the 26th year of King Yeongjo’s reign (1750). In the 48th year of King Yeongjo’s reign (1772) he received the highest score in the girojeongsi and subsequently became donnyeongbudojeong and Yeongwol busa. In the 51st year of King Yeongjo’s reign (1775), he was given the responsibility of ubuseungji. He died the same year at the age of 64. Sin Gwang-su was a representative poet of the Southern faction in late Joseon, with Yi Heon-gyeong naming him “Siho.” He was especially skilled at gwasi and akbu, writing Gwansanyungma and Gwanseoakbu, with 16 volumes and 8 books of Seokbukjib and 1 book of Seokbukgwasijib remaining. Sin Gwang-su wrote the parting record Hakgajeungbobjeongdongui in the 40th year of King Yeongjo’s reign (1764) to express the sadness of parting when Beobjeong Jeong Beom-jo returned east. The handwritten version is neatly written., and the writing in Book 8 of Seokbukjib is thought to have been partly revised at the time the anthology was made. The specimens of handwriting measure 26 cm vertically and 37.5 cm horizontally. The handwritten version has 14 lines, with 2 lines for the subtitle, 11 lines for the body, and the word “Seokbuksaeng” at the end which show that Sin Gwang-su is the author and the penman. Seokbuk adeptly wrote the small script semi-cursive style and the cursive style, both of which are characteristics of “sohaengbancho.” His semi-cursive and cursive style closely resembles that of Wang Xizhi among the chunhuagetie method, yet retains Seokbuk’s own individuality. A comparison of Seokbuk’s handwritten original record and his work in the anthology reveal firstly, that the original record has no title while the latter was given the title of “Hakgajeungbobjeongdongui.” Second, there are revisions to the subtitle and the content. Third, the poem is a 12-stanza 23-line heptasyllabic poem but Line 17 has six syllables. Line 1 to Line 6 has the character “yak” as the rhyming character in the entering tone, while Line 7 to Line 23 has the character “ji” as the rhyming character in the neutral tone. The heptasyllabic poem is divided into three paragraphs content-wise. This study will be used hereafter in the most basic studies of private records as well as in those of bibliography, record management, history and Korean language.