Earticle

1636년 부사 김세렴의 추천에 따라 능서관으로 일본을 다녀온 전형은 자신의 사행 경험을 기록으로 남겼다. 후손 집안에 “전진 사해사일기(全進士東槎錄日記)”라는 표제 하의 『병자해사일기(丙 子海槎日記)』가 전한다. 17세기 전반의 사행록은 『해행총재』 외의 사행록을 거의 찾아볼 수 없는 데다 작자는 정사, 부사, 종사관 등 사신들이 주류를 이루는 경향을 보면 능서관 전형의 『해사일기』는 매우 희귀한 경우이기 때문이다. 문집의 기록을 보면 전형의 교유관계가 중앙까지 아우르고 있었 고 이미 서법으로 명성이 나 있는 상태였다. 김세렴이 여러 차례서신을 보내 사행에 함께 할 것을 요청하였던 점, 10월 1일 부산 에서 김세렴을 만났을 때까지 사행 참여를 고려하였던 점과 함께 와다 소인에게 본인의 지위를 김세렴을 따라온 것으로 밝힌 동시 에 김세렴의 명 이외에는 비교적 자유롭게 일본 문사와 수응하였 던 점을 아울러 감안한다면, 능서관이라는 직책은 1636년 통신사 행에서 김세렴을 보좌하기 위해 임시로 설치되었던 직임이었던 것 으로 보인다. 전형의 기록과 김세렴의 기록을 전반적으로 비교하면 내용이 유 사하면서도 전형 쪽의 기록이 더 자세하다. 부사와 여정을 함께 하면서도 일본인을 만나고 주변을 관찰하는 것이 사신보다는 자유 로운 면이 있었기 때문에 상세한 관찰과 기록이 가능했을 것이다. 따라서 전형의 기록은 사신의 사행록을 풍부하게 보충할 수 있는 기록이라 할 수 있다. 또한 전형에게 통신사행은 중앙의 인물들과 교유관계를 넓힐 수 있는 기회로 작용하였던 것이다. 따라서 일본에 대한 관찰뿐 아니라 같이 사행을 함께 한 조선인들도 관심의 대상이자 관찰의 대상 이 되었다. 따라서 『해사일기』는 사신이 아닌 사행원으로서 겪은 사행의 실제를 보여주는 생생한 기록이라 할 수 있다.

In 1636, Jeon-hyeong, who visited Japan as a Neungseogwan, left a record of his diplomatic experience on the recommendation of vice envoy Kim Se-ryeom. Byeongja Haesa Ilgi(丙子海槎日記) under the title of Jeonjinsa Haesa(全 進士東槎錄日記) was handed down to the descendants’ families. If you look up early 17th century records, there are hardly to find any diplomatic records except for 『Haehaeng Chongjae』. Additionally, according to the atmosphere of the age, the author was mainly comprised of emissaries such as senior emissary, vice emissary and third emissary. Therefore, in case of 『Haesa Ilgi』 written by Jeon-hyeong who had played a roll in a Neungseo-gwan not an emissary was very rare to exist. Given some factors, as follows, the position of Neungseogwan seems to have been established temporarily to assist Kim Se-ryeom’s diplomatic work called Tongsin Sahaeng in 1636. There are four factors could find out. First, Kim Se-ryeom sent several letters asking to go with him for Tongsin Sahaeng. Second, Jeon-hyeong had considered participating in diplomacy until he met Kim Se-ryeom in Busan on October first. Third, he told Soin Wada, Japaenese literati, his position as a man following Kim Se-ryeom. Fourth, he responded relatively freely to Japanese literati except for Kim Se-ryeom’s orders. Comparing Jeon-hyeong’s record with Kim Se-ryeom’s one in general, the contents are similar, but Jeon-hyeong’s one is more detailed. He would had been possible to observe and record more deeply because he was more freedom than any emissaries when it comes to meet Japanese literati and observe the surroundings. Therefore, Jeon-hyeong’s record helps those diplomatic records to supplement more plentifully. For Jeon-hyeong, Tongsin Sahaeng gave an opportunity to broaden the friendship with government officials. Therefore, not only the observation of Japan, but also the Joseon who dispatched together became as an interested object and a observing target. 『Haesa Ilgi』 is a vivid record, which experienced as a member of Sahaeng-won not as an emissary, that shows the reality of diplomacy.

Research on Josentongsinsa have been developed significantly over time in many various fields such as literature, painting, clothing, architecture, medicine, geography, etc. Moreover, area studies have been actively conducted on the transit areas of Japan where Josentongsinsa had stayed. However, there have been only a small number of research on the major transit areas, especially on Iki. Thus, in this research, the exchange activities in Iki were readdressed based on the records of Sahaengrok(diplomatic missions) written by Josentongsinsa, and some data from Japan. The features of the exchange activities in terms of the history and industries of Iki were especially scrutinized since they were not examined much in other previous literature reviews. Iki was in a close relationship with Korea, receiving advanced cultural resources due to its location on the sea route connecting to the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago. Even though there were times when Iki was in a hostile position regarding the invasion of the Wakou(Japanese dwarf pirates) and Toyotomi Hideyoshi to Joseon, it can be assumed that Iki made its best effort to build and maintain an amicable relationship with its neighbor through the exchange activities with Josentongsinsa in the late Joseon dynasty. In Iki, whaling had been prevalent since B.C. and in the late Josen dynasty, it emerged as one of the most developed and leading industries in that area. It is found that the people of Iki used the whaling with their utmost efforts as hospitality for Josentongsinsa. The fact that the people of Iki demonstrated the whaling process and showed their own authentic local culture was also noticed. Furthermore, the whale meat which was their local specialty was included in the dishes served for Josentongsinsa and Josentongsinsa expressed their interest in the different food cultures. These facts indicate that the characteristics of the sea route of Iki played one of the factors that affected the exchange activities with Josentongsinsa. Some interactions and exchanges with local people of Iki can be also presumed as it was the transit area in the sea route where the itinerary can be unexpectedly changed due to the weather change. Unfortunately, there have been only a few related remains in Iki causing the slow progress of the relevant studies in the present, unlike other transit areas. It is hoped that future research on the exchange activities in Iki especially based on analysis of the old records such as historical data that are not cited yet could be further elicited.

『조선인내조행렬차제(朝鮮人來朝行列次第)』는 교토의 출판업자 기쿠야 시치로베[菊屋七郞兵衛]가 발간한 목판본으로 통신사 행렬 에 대한 안내서로 알려져 있다. 현존하고 있는 18세기의 기쿠야판 『조선인내조행렬차제』는 신묘사행으로 불리는 8번째 조선통신사의 1711년(쇼토쿠[正德]원년)행렬, 10차 사행인 1748년과 11차 사행인 1763년에 발행된 것이 주종으로 전하고 있다. 기쿠야판 『조선인내조행렬차제』의 구성은 조선의 역사를 간략히 서술한 ‘조선인내조물어(朝鮮人来朝物語)’ 서문, 진구[神功] 황후 의 삼한정복으로 인한 삼한내조(三韓來朝)부터 도요토미 히데요시[豐臣秀吉]의 조선 침략에 동원된 공물 헌상의 견해를 적은 ‘조선 인래조물어’, 조선에서 에도까지의 여정을 기록하고 체류지 및 휴 식지에서 접대역할을 맡은 다이묘[大名]에 관한 정보, 조선에서 보내온 헌상물 목록 및 오사카[大阪]에서 요도가와[淀川]까지 사 절단을 태워 온 가와고자부네[川御座船]를 그린 도선도, 동행하는 다이묘들과 가문을 나타내는 문양, 조선인 사절단으로부터 일반적 으로 쓰이는 조선말을 받아 적은 ‘つうじ唐人のことば(通詞唐人ことば)’ 등이 수록되어 있는 ‘조선인내조행렬차제’가 있다. 1711년의 조선통신사 방일 때 국휘분쟁, 접대소홀 등 조선통신 사를 홀대하는 사건이 있었는데 모두 아라이 하쿠세키[新井白石] 가 펼친 막부개혁과 밀접한 관련이 있다고 본다. 당시 조선과의 문화적 차이로 오는 열등감을 감추고 막부의 위상을 높이려는 하 쿠세키의 계획적인 외교적 홀대와 일본이 우월성을 강조하는 방법 으로 교토의 출판업자인 기쿠야 시치로베를 통해 기쿠야판 『조선 인내조행렬차제』를 출판하였을 가능성이 있다. 그러므로 기쿠야판 『조선인내조행렬차제』는 조선통신사를 통해 유지해 온 한일간의 성신교린의 취지가 아닌 일방적인 조공의 사절단으로 조선통신사 를 폄하시켜 일본인의 자긍심과 조선통신사에 대한 호기심을 동시 에 충족시키기 위한 교육 또는 홍보에 중점을 둔 안내서라 할 수 있다.

chōsenjinkyoretsunosidai(ちょうせんじんぎょうれつのしだい, 朝鮮人 行列次第) is a woodblock print published by Kyoto publisher Shichirobe Kikuya and is known as a guide to the procession of Joseon Tongsinsa. The contents of the Kikuya edition of “chōsenjinkyoretsunosidai” include the preface of “chōsenjinraichōmonogatari,” which briefly describes the history of Joseon, the Samhan conquest of Empress Jingu, and the tribute to Hideyoshi Toyotomi’s invasion of Joseon. There are information on daimyo, who recorded the journey from Joseon to Edo and served as a receptionist at the place of stay and rest, a list of dedication from Joseon, a picture of a ship carrying a delegation from Osaka to Yodogawa, a pattern of accompanying Japanese, and a commonly used Korean language. In 1711, Joseon Tongsinsa’s visit to Japan was more neglected than before in relation to the Shogunate Reform conducted by Arai Hakuseki, and there was a dispute over documents and titles. It is possible that Hakuseki’s planned diplomatic neglect and Japan’s superiority to hide the inferiority that comes from cultural differences with Joseon at the time, and published “chōsenjinkyouretsunosidai” through Kyoto publisher Shichirobe Kikuya. Therefore, the Kikuya edition of “chōsenjinkyouretsunosidai” can be said to be an educational promotional book to satisfy the pride and curiosity of the Japanese by disparaging it as a one-sided mission of tribute, not the purpose of friendship between Korea and Japan.

This is consideration to the cultural exchange between ChosenTsushinshi(the Korean Emissary) to Japan and feudal retainer of domains in the Edo. Especially, a case study of the Kuroda clan is subject of analysis. Chosen Tsushinshi's journals namely Haeyurok(海游錄), Dongsaillgi(東槎日記) and so on are very useful. As a result, differences in culture and customs between Japan and Chōsen became clear：Government office system, Bestowal of Henki, Bushi’s Honor consciousness, Burei uchi, Responsive costs. Probably, Chosen Tsushinshi couldn’t understand these. Though Japan and Chōsen were Kanji cultural sphere, it was natural that. Noble‐looking man watched Chosen Tsushinshi. It’s one example. The Japanese were interested in Chosen Tsushinshi. They observed sharply that Fukuoka clan thought at that time. Because it wasn’t recorded, there was a new discovery. Chosen Tsushinshi’s journals tell us new historical facts. They have potential of study.