지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
During the 16th and 17th century, the law that dictated the social status of an offspring born from a humble-ordinary marriage to be determined by the social class occupied by the father of the offspring(奴良妻幷産 從父法), was generating many causes for lawsuits involving Nobi workers. Over issues such as the social status of those kind of offsprings or the issue of ownership regarding those individual offsprings, the owners of Nobi figures and the Nobi worker themselves, severely clashed and collided with each other.
At the time, Nobi Owners actually encouraged the Nobi figures they owned to marry ordinary class females. They even had females from humble origins registered as entities occupying ordinary statuses, and arranged marriages between them and the Nobi figures they owned, and then claimed the offsprings born out of those marriages as entities under their ownership. In the meantime, the females occupying ordinary status often chose to forfeit their social status and claimed themselves as humble Nobi figures, and then surrendered to other households(他家) or recipients as public servants(公賤). Governmental offices or offices working for the royal family such as Naesu-sa or Seonggyun-gwan became refugees for such willfully surrendering figures.
The conflicts and clashes that continued between the Nobi owners and Nobi figures burst out in the form of legal lawsuits. And there were certain characteristics to be noted as well. Owners of the Nobi figures claimed that the spouses of the Nobi figures they owned were from ordinary origin, yet the Nobi figures refused to admit their social status as ordinary figures and instead argued that they were in fact Nobi figures. We can see here that the intentions of the Nobi owners, who wished to claim the ownership over the offsprings born out of ordinary-humble couples by observing the so-called ‘Determining the status of the child by the status of the father(從父)’ rule, and the intentions of the Nobi figures, who wished to escape the status of a private Nobi(私奴婢) in order to better their working condition(身役) and living situations, were clashing with each other.
At the time, Nobi Owners actually encouraged the Nobi figures they owned to marry ordinary class females. They even had females from humble origins registered as entities occupying ordinary statuses, and arranged marriages between them and the Nobi figures they owned, and then claimed the offsprings born out of those marriages as entities under their ownership. In the meantime, the females occupying ordinary status often chose to forfeit their social status and claimed themselves as humble Nobi figures, and then surrendered to other households(他家) or recipients as public servants(公賤). Governmental offices or offices working for the royal family such as Naesu-sa or Seonggyun-gwan became refugees for such willfully surrendering figures.
The conflicts and clashes that continued between the Nobi owners and Nobi figures burst out in the form of legal lawsuits. And there were certain characteristics to be noted as well. Owners of the Nobi figures claimed that the spouses of the Nobi figures they owned were from ordinary origin, yet the Nobi figures refused to admit their social status as ordinary figures and instead argued that they were in fact Nobi figures. We can see here that the intentions of the Nobi owners, who wished to claim the ownership over the offsprings born out of ordinary-humble couples by observing the so-called ‘Determining the status of the child by the status of the father(從父)’ rule, and the intentions of the Nobi figures, who wished to escape the status of a private Nobi(私奴婢) in order to better their working condition(身役) and living situations, were clashing with each other.
#노비소송(奴婢訴訟)
#노양처병산법(奴良妻幷産法)
#종부법(從父法)
#압공위천(壓公爲賤)
#압공위사(壓公爲私)
#투탁(投托)
#반주(叛主)
#Nobi/奴婢 Lawsuits
#the law regarding the social status of an offspring born from a humble-ordinary marriage
#the law dictating the social status of such offspring to be determined by the social class occupied by the father of the offspring
#forcing an ordinary figure to a lowly position
#claiming a public entity as a private property
#surrendering
#Banju
목차
머리말
1. 16, 17세기 노양처병산법과 노-주 대립
2. 노비소송을 통해 본 노양처병산법
맺음말
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
조선초기 사노비 정한법(定限法) 논의와 그 성격
역사와현실
2006 .12
-
조선후기 奴婢賣買 자료를 통해 본 奴婢의 사회ㆍ경제적 성격과 奴婢價의 변동
한국민족문화
2008 .04
-
고전서사에 형상화된 노비의 존재성 탐구
돈암어문학
2017 .06
-
대명률과 조선 중기 형률상의 신분 차별
역사와현실
2007 .09
-
호적대장을 통해 본 조선후기 노비층의 증감현상― 대구부 동상면을 중심으로
대동문화연구
2015 .01
-
반계 유형원의 奴婢論
한국인물사연구
2013 .03
-
고려 후기 전민변정과 조선 초기 노비 정책의 의의와 한계
역사비평
2018 .02
-
17世紀에 있어서의 奴婢從良
한국사연구
1969 .04
-
朝鮮後期 奴婢의 土地所有 : 「記上田畓」을 중심으로
한국사연구
1990 .12
-
[총론] 고문서를 통해 볼 수 있는 것들 : 해남윤씨가 문서와 노비, 사대부, 친족 결속
역사와현실
2013 .03
-
속량(贖良) 문서를 통해 본 17세기 조선 정부의 사노비(私奴婢) 통제 양상의 변화
역사와현실
2013 .03
-
일본 전후문학의 한국어번역과 전쟁책임 : 오오카 쇼헤이(大岡昇平)의『들불(野火)』을 중심으로
아시아문화연구
2007 .05
-
조선초기의 各司奴婢와 그 經濟的 처지
한국사연구
1996 .03
-
조선시대 奴婢制의 推移와 노비의 존재 양태 : 동아시아의 奴婢史 비교를 위한 摸索
역사민속학
2013 .03
-
고려·원간 ‘交婚’ 법제의 충돌
동방학지
2010 .01
-
15세기 정소(呈訴) 절차와 관찰사의 역할
역사와현실
2006 .03
-
임진왜란 시기 경상도 사족의 전쟁 체험 : 함양 양반 정경운을 중심으로
역사와현실
2007 .06
-
고전소설 속 노비의 행위와 처벌 : 〈숙향전〉·〈숙영낭자전〉·〈운영전〉을 대상으로
돈암어문학
2017 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-016474694