원 제과(1333년)의 고려인·중국인 대책문(對策文) 비교 연구 = A Comparative Study of the Answer pages(對策文) submitted to authorities from Goryeo and Chinese applicants in the Yuan Imperial State Examination of 1333

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this article, the answer pages submitted by a Goryeo applicant Yi Gok and a Chinese applicant named Yi Je, who both successfully passed the Yuan Imperial State examination that was held in 1333, are examined and analyzed in a comparative fashion.
The intention of the question was to demand the applicants to clarify the difference between the titles of “Hwang”, “Je”, “Wang”, and “Pae”, and examine the validity of extant records concerning these concepts, as well as the difference in politics based upon each of one of these concepts, and whether or not these four concepts correlated with the seasons of spring, summer, autumn and winter.
Yi gok cited the words of 『Mencius』, and argued that Hwang, Je and Wang were different from Pae. He also argued that the differences between the concepts depended upon the question of whether or not one chose to take actions out of his or her original nature, or restored its nature and acted upon it, or borrowed it from within. He then finally argued that the end results between taking the path of either “Wang” or “Pae” would differ and vary by one’s decision to either secure one’s sincerity(道心) or follow one’s instinct(人心),
Chinese Yi Je cited So Wong’s 『Hwang’ geuk Gyeongse-seo』, and documented the meaning of the four concepts, and also presented emperors who could be considered as examples for each of the concepts. Yi Je suggested a method of training the mind(心法) which according to him was from the legendary ancient Chinese emperors such as Yo, Sun, Wu, Tang and Mun-wang. He also argued that everything depended upon the will of the king or emperor, and demanded that everyone should try to study the concept of Gyeong(敬), which was essentially ‘respect’.
In their answers, Yi Gok from Goryeo and Yi Je from the empire both based their arguments upon Confucian classical texts and tried to present an ideal case of governance while also asking the king or emperor to train their minds.
But their arguments also slightly differed in some aspects, as Yi Je attempted to bring a clear distinction to the four concepts based upon So Wong’s 『Hwang’ geuk Gyeongse-seo』, while Yi Gok did not mention this book at all and instead grouped three of the four concepts as mentioned above and argued their general difference from the last one(‘Pae’). In the meantime, the objective of the state examination question was to ask the applicants to come forward with requirements for an ideal king who could lead everyone to a universally Confucian society.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 머리말
• 1. 자료 검토와 14세기 전반의 시대적 상황
• 2. 고려인 이곡과 중국인 이제의 대책문 비교
• 3. 이곡 군주관의 특징
• 맺음말
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 金錚, "중국과거문화사" 동아시아 2003

2 김난옥, "원나라 사람의 고려 유배와 조정의 대응" 118 : 2005

3 스기야마 마사아키, "몽골 세계제국" 신서원 1999

4 都賢喆, "목은 이색의 정치사상 연구" 혜안 2011

5 오타기 마쓰오, "대원제국" 혜안 2013

6 조병순, "高麗本新刊類編歷擧三場文選對策硏究" 韓國書誌學會 2006

7 都賢喆, "高麗末 士大夫의 政治思想 硏究" 일조각 1999

8 柳浩錫, "高麗時代의 制科應試와 그 性格, In 宋俊浩敎授 停年紀念論叢" 1987

9 高惠玲, "高麗後期 士大夫와 性理學 受容" 일조각 2003

10 趙東元, "邵雍의 歷史觀" 6 : 1982

11 이성무, "賓貢科와 制科, In 한국과거제도사연구" 민음사 1997

12 千惠鳳, "朝鮮朝의 乙亥小字體 活字本 御試策" 15 : 1998

13 권용철, "大元제국 말기 權臣 바얀의 정치적 行蹟" 동양사학회 (120) : 223-260, 2012

14 주채혁, "元朝 官人層 硏究" 정음사 1986

15 鄭仁在, "元代의 朱子學 -元儒의 道統意識을 中心으로-" 19 : 1979

16 渡邊健哉, "元代科擧的 策問和對策" 5 (5): 2009

17 포은사상연구원, "元代性理學" 포은사상연구원 1993

18 배숙희, "元代 科擧制와 高麗進士의 應擧 및 授官" 동양사학회 104 (104): 121-154, 2008

19 周采赫, "元 萬卷堂의 設置와 高麗儒者, In 孫寶基博士停年紀念韓國史學論叢" 1988

20 John W. Dardess, "Conquerors and Confucians : Aspects of Political Chang in Late Yuan China" Columbia Press 1973

21 김광철, "14세기초 元의 政局 동향과 忠宣王의 吐藩 유배" 3 : 1996