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 제111호
- 발행연도
- 2019.3
- 수록면
- 221 - 253 (33page)
- DOI
- 10.35865/YWH.2019.03.111.221
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The “Jeonggam-rok prophecy” of the late Joseon period was a product of people’s imagination and hope for a new social order. The Jeonggam-rok text criticized the ruling order of the time, and prayed for the fall of the Joseon dynasty, so the Joseon government had to monitor it, and try to oppress it to the best of its ability.
During the reign of King Jeongjo, the king and the government considered Jeonggam-rok as heresy, and figured that such heresy was born because ‘Righteous studies’ were never fully nurtured and realized. They believed that direct oppression and elimination would never be sufficient to make heresy go away, and argued that reestablishing a firm Confucian order would be the only way to go. As a result, as the government continued to deal with the Jeonggam-rok text and the prophecy inside it, increasingly emphasized was no other than the virtue of ‘ideological enlightenment.’
Sentences declared for Jeonggam-rok-related offenders vividly reflected the government’s such intention. The overall goal of such rulings was to set an example for the rest of the society. Leaders whose guilts was confirmed were used as examples that would send signals to potential offenders in the future, by eventually going through steps of being charged, making confession, being judged and then executed for their crimes, while the other minor offenders were offered intentional mercy by being mildly exiled or simply released, or even spared from arrest itself in the first place. And after a scandal or controversy was dealt with the king or the government would issue a proclamation or statement, to confirm the legitimate nature of punishments the offenders received, and make sure that the population would accept the official ideological stance of the government at face-value. In other words, the government’s dealing with the Jeonggam-rok offenders was designed for the king to use it in his efforts of ruling people not only as a ‘king(leader)’ but also as a ‘master(teacher),’ and make the people more obedient to the ruling authority of the government.
This type of response formalized during King Jeongjo’s reign to deal with Jeonggam-rok became a standard procedure to deal with heresy in general, and was later employed in the government’s dealing with Christianity as well. Yet what worked under Jeongjo’s supervision did not work that well in later periods, as it was in fact a solution which was only sustained by Jeongjo’s own personal ability and authority. Aiming to reestablish Confucian authority and force the public to accept the king’s instructions was no longer a valid approach to heresy, especially in the time when the society itself was rapidly changing. That was why Christian beliefs continued to penetrate the Joseon society in the 19<SUP>th</SUP> century even when the government was oppressing it hard. We can see that from a series of revolts, including the Hong Gyeong-rae insurrection, which were based upon the Jeonggam-rok text and also broke out in the 19<SUP>th</SUP> century. Simply speaking, Ideological approach to heresy was no longer working.
During the reign of King Jeongjo, the king and the government considered Jeonggam-rok as heresy, and figured that such heresy was born because ‘Righteous studies’ were never fully nurtured and realized. They believed that direct oppression and elimination would never be sufficient to make heresy go away, and argued that reestablishing a firm Confucian order would be the only way to go. As a result, as the government continued to deal with the Jeonggam-rok text and the prophecy inside it, increasingly emphasized was no other than the virtue of ‘ideological enlightenment.’
Sentences declared for Jeonggam-rok-related offenders vividly reflected the government’s such intention. The overall goal of such rulings was to set an example for the rest of the society. Leaders whose guilts was confirmed were used as examples that would send signals to potential offenders in the future, by eventually going through steps of being charged, making confession, being judged and then executed for their crimes, while the other minor offenders were offered intentional mercy by being mildly exiled or simply released, or even spared from arrest itself in the first place. And after a scandal or controversy was dealt with the king or the government would issue a proclamation or statement, to confirm the legitimate nature of punishments the offenders received, and make sure that the population would accept the official ideological stance of the government at face-value. In other words, the government’s dealing with the Jeonggam-rok offenders was designed for the king to use it in his efforts of ruling people not only as a ‘king(leader)’ but also as a ‘master(teacher),’ and make the people more obedient to the ruling authority of the government.
This type of response formalized during King Jeongjo’s reign to deal with Jeonggam-rok became a standard procedure to deal with heresy in general, and was later employed in the government’s dealing with Christianity as well. Yet what worked under Jeongjo’s supervision did not work that well in later periods, as it was in fact a solution which was only sustained by Jeongjo’s own personal ability and authority. Aiming to reestablish Confucian authority and force the public to accept the king’s instructions was no longer a valid approach to heresy, especially in the time when the society itself was rapidly changing. That was why Christian beliefs continued to penetrate the Joseon society in the 19<SUP>th</SUP> century even when the government was oppressing it hard. We can see that from a series of revolts, including the Hong Gyeong-rae insurrection, which were based upon the Jeonggam-rok text and also broke out in the 19<SUP>th</SUP> century. Simply speaking, Ideological approach to heresy was no longer working.
목차
머리말
1. ‘이단(異端)’으로서의 ‘정감록 참위설’ 인식
2. 사건 관련자의 선택적 처벌
3. 교서, 윤음 반포와 향촌통제 강화
맺음말
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (20)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
『신증동국여지승람』에 반영된 효 인식
영남학
2015 .01
-
『만물유취』 『秋官門』과 순암 형법관의 기초
한국실학연구
2018 .01
-
조선 초기 지방지배와 향촌교화에 대한 연구와 쟁점
역사와실학
2023 .04
-
고려 전기 養老政策의 성립과 그 정치문화적 의의
한국사연구
2017 .03
-
藤原宮の御井の歌
일본연구
2015 .02
-
푸코의 칸트 『인간학』 독해의 양면성
서강인문논총
2024 .08
-
이단과 성서 해석 : 『개역한글』의 이단적 해석
성서마당
2023 .06
-
조선의 歐美全權公使 派遣에 대한 청 정부의 대응(1887~1890)
학림
2021 .01
-
기독교의 기원에 대한 하나의 키워드 : 이단
제3시대
2017 .05
-
신성모독: 인도네시아에서 종교 자유와 관용의 축소
동아연구
2020 .01
-
[일반] 교회사에 나타난 정통과 이단
성서마당
2023 .06
-
깨달음의 본질과 일상성: 왜 신비화와 일상성의 비교인가?
동서비교문학저널
2024 .06
-
[구약] 구약에 나타난 이단 : 십계명을 통해 본 구약의 이단적 요소들
성서마당
2023 .06
-
제사에서 귀신 존재 문제에 대한 주자의 고찰 - “여재(如在)”와 “교화(敎化)”에 대한 비판을 중심으로 -
유학연구
2020 .01
-
〈최필공전〉 연구 - 서사적 특징과 문학적 의미를 중심으로 -
한국학논집
2023 .03
-
後漢年始儀礼の構成に関する試論
중국고중세사연구
2016 .02
-
원불교교화구조 변화를 위한 제언
원불교사상연구원 학술대회
2022 .10
-
에피파니오스의 이단 이해에 관한 연구: 교회의 일치를 위한 마중물의 필요성을 중심으로
생명과 말씀
2017 .08
-
길 위에서
수필미학
2022 .06
-
‘상위’공간개념 언어성분에 관한 의미지도 연구
중국언어연구
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2019-911-000526791