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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 한국역사연구회 역사와현실 역사와 현실 제108호
- 발행연도
- 2018.6
- 수록면
- 45 - 89 (45page)
- DOI
- 10.35865/YWH.2018.06.108.45
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
During the reign of Joseon king Seongjong, certain governmental officials, especially the ones who served in the capacity of providing remonstration for the king, claimed that their arguments were products of a ‘public consensus(公論),’ in an effort (or attempt) to justify their such arguments and fulfill their political needs. Such attitude could be labelled as “placing ‘public consensus’ above all else,” and how such attitude was formed is examined in this article.
The reign of King Seongjong was a time which saw a young king ushered to the throne and the power of the meritorious vassals suddenly more weakened than before. The dynamics within the government was shaken, and power was shifting. In that situation, the remonstration officers, as well as other officials who were manning posts which were usually regarded as seats that required special level of integrity (the “Cheong’yo-jik” posts), used their own jurisdiction and authority (demonstrated by the Hongmun-rok register, the pi’hyeom practice and their Seo-gyeong function) to form their own sphere of influence. By doing so they sort of monopolized the authority to rule what was right and declare what was wrong.
Jo Gwang-jo and others, who managed to expand their influences with the incident in which the reinstatement of former Queen Shin’s honor was appealed to the king, fully embodied such trend and charged ahead with various dynastic reform projects. Yet their lack of sensitivity in dealing with delicate issues, such as the abolishment of the So’gyeok-seo office or meddling with the Jeong’guk Gongshin entitlement, angered king Jungjong and eventually caused a backlash to occur, in the form of an infamous purge which expelled them all from the government in the Gi’myo-year.
One might say the idea to found a power structure with ‘Cheong’yo-jik’ posts at its center required an attitude “placing ‘public consensus’ above all else.” Then again, in such system within which a particular group of officials essentially monopolized the ‘Cheong’yo-jik’ posts and then rose to loftier positions in the government based upon those seats, made it very difficult for all the governmental seniors to play a mediating role, and put the “Gi’myo Sarim” figures in check to prevent such tragedy from happening in the first place.
The reign of King Seongjong was a time which saw a young king ushered to the throne and the power of the meritorious vassals suddenly more weakened than before. The dynamics within the government was shaken, and power was shifting. In that situation, the remonstration officers, as well as other officials who were manning posts which were usually regarded as seats that required special level of integrity (the “Cheong’yo-jik” posts), used their own jurisdiction and authority (demonstrated by the Hongmun-rok register, the pi’hyeom practice and their Seo-gyeong function) to form their own sphere of influence. By doing so they sort of monopolized the authority to rule what was right and declare what was wrong.
Jo Gwang-jo and others, who managed to expand their influences with the incident in which the reinstatement of former Queen Shin’s honor was appealed to the king, fully embodied such trend and charged ahead with various dynastic reform projects. Yet their lack of sensitivity in dealing with delicate issues, such as the abolishment of the So’gyeok-seo office or meddling with the Jeong’guk Gongshin entitlement, angered king Jungjong and eventually caused a backlash to occur, in the form of an infamous purge which expelled them all from the government in the Gi’myo-year.
One might say the idea to found a power structure with ‘Cheong’yo-jik’ posts at its center required an attitude “placing ‘public consensus’ above all else.” Then again, in such system within which a particular group of officials essentially monopolized the ‘Cheong’yo-jik’ posts and then rose to loftier positions in the government based upon those seats, made it very difficult for all the governmental seniors to play a mediating role, and put the “Gi’myo Sarim” figures in check to prevent such tragedy from happening in the first place.
목차
머리말
1. 청요직 중심의 권력구조 개편과 ‘공론지상주의’
2. 언로 보호의 기치와 공론지상주의적 행보의 일상화
맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (26)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
16세기 사림의 성장과 노촌(老村) 이약동(李約東)
대구사학
2016 .01
-
새 시대를 이끌어 갈 공론은?
역사와현실
2018 .03
-
正祖 經學의 淸代 學說 受用 樣相에 對한 一考察 -『弘齋全書』 『經史講義 書』와 『欽定書經傳說彙纂』의 比較를 中心으로-
고전문학연구
2019 .01
-
Next of “King”
Localities
2016 .11
-
중종대(中宗代) 음악정책의 중흥과 개혁
온지논총
2022 .01
-
조선전기 태사묘太師廟의 변화
국학연구
2019 .07
-
고려전기 公服制의 정비 과정에 대한 연구
사학연구
2016 .03
-
조선후기 관왕묘(關王廟)에 대한 인식의 전환과 그 의미 : 18세기 서울 동·남관왕묘를 중심으로
역사와현실
2016 .09
-
새 유교 세대의 출현: 사림의 유교화 정풍운동 －사림파 학설 비판과 그 대안 설명－
서강인문논총
2024 .12
-
Two Types of -yo : Agreemental and Concordial
언어
2023 .09
-
선조 초반의 정국과 학문적 대응— 이황과 기대승을 중심으로 —
한국사상과 문화
2015 .01
-
중국-EU-미국 간 지리적 표시 보호제도에 대한 글로벌 분쟁 및 중국의 시사점
민족연구
2019 .01
-
성종대 공론장에서의 검열과 비판 -치세 초반 儒生과 師表에 대한 논의를 중심으로-
한국한문학연구
2017 .01
-
갑오개혁 당시 言官機關 해체와 그 기능의 계승
사림
2020 .01
-
고려시대 왕사·국사 책봉 의례와 군신·사자 관계의 구현
역사와현실
2021 .03
-
인용의 ‘-대(요)’류의 용법과 분류
언어학 연구
2015 .04
-
조선후기 ‘대리정치’의 권한 범주와 왕권
역사와 담론
2018 .01
-
15세기 김종직의 학문기조와 사상적 특색
한국철학논집
2016 .11
-
조선 전기 청요직(淸要職)의 위상과 인사이동 양상
한국사상사학
2017 .01
-
일제의 경기·인천지역 3·1운동 탄압 양상
역사와현실
2019 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
조선시대 사림세력 형성의 역사적 배경
김범
국학연구
2011
.12
기묘사화 전개과정과 중종의 역할
이정철
국학연구
2017
.11
조선 공론정치론에 대한 비판적 검토와 제안 : 李珥의 公論개념을 중심으로
김경래
사학연구
2012
.03
안동 문화의 변화와 민속의 재창조
이상현
,
송화섭
비교민속학
2004
.02
Application of a Peptide Nucleic Acid-Based Asymmetric Real-Time PCR Method for Rapid Detection of Vibrio cholerae
Mingyeong Kang
,
Taek-Kyun Lee
한국산학기술학회 논문지
2019
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2018-911-003164513