Earticle

This study examined the extant original copy of the Wolinchongangjigok (1447, the 29th year of King Sejong’s reign), owned by Mirae-n. By examining the text’s records, empirical research, and related studies, this study examined the compilation of the Hunminjeongeum Haeryebon and Wolinchongangjigok. Regarding the publication of Wolinchongangjigok, this study details the ‘Chojugapinja Combined Hangul Type’, distinctive typefaces, the Chojugapinja, and the Chojugapinja small typeface. This article comprehensively summarizes the typographical value of Wolinchongangjigok based on its compilation and publication. In the compilation of Wolinchongangjigok, the process was understood in the context of continuity with the Hunminjeongeum Haeryebon, and the intertextuality with Seokbosangjeol was revealed. Wolinchongangjigok was published using Hangul in large letters of the ‘Chojugapinja Combined Hangul Type’ and Chinese characters in small letters in the ‘Chojugapinja small typeface’. This was emphasized as a technical achievement that even the dots indicating tones were implemented in metal type, saying that the ‘national character superiority’ notation is the only form in the world’s printing history. The characteristic types of the Wolinchongangjigok were presented through empirical evidence, including the final consonant notation Leeyeongborae type, the final consonant notation Sungyeongeum ‘ㅱ’ type, and the final consonant notation modified type. Some of the elements of the first order gapin character appearing in the Wolinchongangjigok were extracted and their characteristics were elucidated. The printing value of the Wolinchongangjigok was comprehensively evaluated from the perspectives of scientific practicality, originality, and the convenience of inheritance and improvement.

한국학중앙연구원 藏書閣 소장 왕실문헌은 1970년대 초 통합 관리체계로 변경된 이후, 현재까지 소종래별 분류가 어렵다고 평가받는다. 본 연구에서는 장서각 왕실문헌이 가진 본연의 가치에 맞는 연구 활성화의 기반 마련을 위해 소종래별 분류 기준 및 방안을 제시하고자 하였다. 그리고 이를 통해 장서각 왕실문헌을 중심으로 한 왕실문헌 연구의 활성화와 한국학 연구의 저변 확대가 이루어질 수 있다고 보았다. 본 연구에서는 왕실문헌에 부착된 도서라벨 등을 장서각 왕실문헌 소종래 분류 기준으로 선정하였다. 도서라벨에 의거하여 소종래를 변별한 결과, 한국본만 약 85%, 중국본 및 일본본을 합산하면 92% 정도의 소종래 변별이 가능하다고 주장하였다. 본 연구에서는 현행 통합 관리체계를 유지하되 소종래별 정보를 반영한다면, 기존의 장점으로 언급된 주제별 集書 기능이 유지되면서도 소종래 정보를 통한 원질서 회복의 단초를 마련할 수 있다고 보았다.

Since the implementation of a unified management system in the early 1970s, the royal documents within the Jangseogak Archives at the Academy of Korean Studies have faced challenges regarding classification by their source of origin (sojongrae). This research seeks to present a framework for provenance-based classification to facilitate research commensurate with the inherent value of the royal collection. It is anticipated that this approach will catalyze the revitalization of royal document studies and expand the academic breadth of Korean Studies. This study identifies book labels as a key metric for determining the provenance of the Jangseogak royal documents. Empirical differentiation based on these labels demonstrates that the original source can be identified for 85% of Korean texts and 92% of the total collection, including Chinese and Japanese volumes. The findings suggest that integrating provenance data into the current management system allows for the preservation of subject-based collection strengths while establishing a point of departure for the restoration of the documents’ original archival order.

This article uses the three types of Juhak Seonsaeng An (籌學先生案) currently handed down, and the ‘DB Integrated Juhak Seonsaeng An’ as a new bibliography that built them into a database. In particular, I tried to empirically examine the aspects of the Sanwon (算員)’s passing and entering into another Examination, and to examine what social meaning it has. As a result of reviewing the three types of Juhak Seonsaeng An in turn, paying attention to the aspect of ‘entry into another Examination’, it was confirmed that each of them was a different type of Juhak Seonsaeng An compiled independently. In the ‘DB Integrated Juhak Seonsaeng An’ as a new bibliography, 135 cases (133 people) were found when the matters related to ‘entry into another Examination’ were summarized. 135 cases from the total number of 1,231 people, so about 10.8% of cases have passed the another Examination. They had a strong intention to further increase their social status by passing another Examination. Looking at the aspects of passing and entering another Examination, there are various Examinations, Chapkwa[雜科] (Yeokgwa[譯科], Medicine[Uikwa, 醫科], YinandYangGwa[陰陽科], Yulgwa[律科]), Mugwa[武科], and Samashi[司馬試] (Saengwon[生員], Jinsa[進士]). It is confirmed until the preliminary examination [Samashi] of the Munkwa [文科], but not the passing of Munkwa. Even within the Chapkwa, the proportion of Yeokgwa and Medicine [Uikwa] was high. It can be seen that the Sanwon mainly passed and entered Yeokgwa and Medicine [Uikwa]. There have been confirmed cases of entering Mugwa and Samashi [Saengwon, Jinsa], but there have not been so many. It is believed that such background and dynamics had influenced the compilation of the Palsebo [八世譜] of ‘UiYeokJu’ [醫譯籌] by combining Medicine [Uikwa], Yeokgwa, and Juhak in one place. In other words, the Juhak entrants were becoming one of the most dynamic elements of social change in the Late Joseon Dynasty.

본 연구는 일제강점기와 해방 전후의 격변기에 방대한 신문과 고서를 수집한 일소 오한근의 생애와 수장 활동의 사료적 가치를 재조명하였다. 이를 위해 오한근의 출판․인쇄업 경력을 검토하고 기고문을 분석하여 그의 수집 철학을 도출하였으며, 특히 그의 소장본이 국회도서관 및 대학박물관 등으로 공공화되는 과정을 추적하였다. 오한근은 신문 등의 자료를 일시적 소비재가 아닌 시대의 증언이자 역사 기록물로 인식하고 보존과 전승에 주력하였다. 그의 활동은 개인 소장본이 공공 지식 자원으로 전환되는 과정을 보여주는 중요한 사례로서 역사적 의의를 지닌다.

This study re-evaluates the life of Ilso Oh Han-keun and the historical significance of his extensive collection of newspapers and rare books from the Japanese colonial and post-liberation eras. By reviewing his publishing career and analyzing his writings, the research identifies his philosophy of treating print media as vital historical testimonies rather than transient goods. It also traces the process of his private collection’s transition into the public domain, including institutions like the National Assembly Library and university museums. Oh’s dedication to preservation highlights a significant case where individual efforts evolved into national intellectual assets and public records, providing a crucial foundation for Korean modern historical research.

본고는 蓀谷 李達(1539∼1612?) 시의 전승 상황을 재검토하고, 두 차례 간행된 문집의 성격을 규명하고자 한 것이다. 이달의 시는 1618년에 간행된 初刊本 ｢蓀谷詩集｣ 목활자본과 1693년 重刊本 ｢蓀谷集｣ 목판본에 전하지만, 문집 간행 이전부터 ｢龍城唱酬集｣․｢鶴山樵談｣․｢國朝詩刪｣․｢惺叟詩話｣․｢樂府新聲｣․｢芝峯類說｣ 등 여러 문헌에도 수록되어 있었다. 본고는 이들 문헌과 ｢蓀谷詩集｣을 대교하여 이달 시의 수록 양상과 字句의 同異를 검토하였다. 또한 이 과정에서 문집에 수록되지 않은 작품도 정리하여 이달 시의 全貌를 구체적으로 확인하고자 하였다. 이어서 초간본과 중간본의 異本 對校를 통해 각 板本의 성격과 善本 문제를 논해보았다. 중간본은 초간본에 수록된 시를 유지하되, 각권의 순서를 조정하고 일부 작품을 재배치하였다. 또한 분명한 誤字는 수정하였지만, 간행 과정에서 새로운 오류가 발생하기도 하였다. 이상의 연구를 통해 이달 시 전반에 대한 校勘 작업의 필요성을 제기하고, 향후 연구를 위한 문헌적 토대를 마련하고자 하였다.

This study reexamines the transmission of the poetry of Songok Lee Dal from a philological perspective and clarifies the characteristics of the two extant editions of his collected works. Lee Dal’s poems are preserved in the 1618 first edition, Songoksijip, printed with movable metal type, and in the 1693 woodblock reprint, Songokjip. However, many of his poems had already appeared in a range of earlier sources prior to the publication of these collections. By collating these materials with the two extant editions, this study analyzes differences in selection, arrangement, and textual wording. The analysis suggests that the collected works were compiled through an independent editorial process rather than being directly derived from earlier texts. In addition, several poems not included in the collected editions are reexamined, thereby expanding the known corpus of Lee Dal’s poetry. A comparison of the two editions also reveals that while the later edition corrects certain errors found in the first edition, it simultaneously introduces new ones. These findings underscore the necessity of comprehensive textual collation and provide a foundation for future research.

This study aims to conduct a bibliographical examination of Ginyeon Aram (紀年兒覽), an educational text for children from the Joseon dynasty. It reviews previous studies on the extant editions of Ginyeon Aram, and investigates the compilation records of the text, surveys and analyzes the extant copies, and conducts a comparative and genealogical analysis between Ginyeon Aram and Ginyeon Pyeollam (紀年便覽). By examining the compilation records of Ginyeon Aram, this study identifies the draft prepared by Yi Man-un (李萬運) under the title Ginyeon Aram (also titled Zhongguo Dongfang Ginyeon Aram, 中國東方紀年牙覽), the revised and augmented edition by Yi Deok-mu (李德懋) entitled Revised and Augmented Ginyeon Aram (修增紀年兒覽), including its seven sections and the structure of two volumes, as well as the conferral of the title Ginyeon Pyeollamby King Gojong and the later compilation by Kim Se-gyun (金世均). Through a survey and examination of extant copies of Ginyeon Aram held in Korea and abroad, the existing editions are classified into three types: the two-volume edition, the seven-volume edition, and the eight-volume edition. An analysis of differences in catalog entries, textual notation, and the scope of contents shows that the two-volume edition belongs to the lineage of Ginyeon Aram cotained in Cheongjanggwan Jeonseo (靑莊館全書), vols. 25-26, preserved at the University of California, Berkeley Library (ASAMI 24-2). The seven-volume and eight-volume editions, on the other hand, are identified as belonging to the lineage of K2-38=01 among the two extant copies of Ginyeon Pyeollam preserved in the Jangseogak Archives (K2-38=01, K2-38=03). In addition, by comparing the Berkeley collection of Ginyeon Aram and the two Jangseogak collections of Ginyeon Pyeollam, this study examines differences in catalog entries, textual notation, and contents between Ginyeon Aram and Ginyeon Pyeollam. It also reveals that additional compilation of Ginyeon Pyeollam took place after the establishment of the Korean Empire in 1897. Based on the analysis of the compilation records, the survey of extant copies, the structure and scope of contents, and a comparative examination of Ginyeon Aram (ASAMI 24-2) and Ginyeon Pyeollam (K2-38=01, K2-38=03), this study clarifies the textual lineage of Ginyeon Aram.

본 고는 正祖의 御定書 ｢四部手圈｣ 중 ｢五子手圈｣의 편찬 과정과 구성 방식 상의 특징을 검토하고, 그 절록 구절의 내용을 ｢근사록｣과 비교하여 수록 및 미수록 작품을 분석하는 방식을 통해 ｢오자수권｣에 담긴 정조의 ｢사부수권｣ 편찬 목적을 추측하였다. ｢오자수권｣은 정조가 주희의 ｢주자대전｣, 주돈이의 ｢주원공집｣과 정호와 정이의 ｢이정문집｣, 그리고 장재의 ｢장재전서｣를 대상으로 절록하여 편찬되었으며, 그 중 ｢주문수권｣을 제외하고 318句의 구절이 절록된 51장의 1책을 연구대상으로 삼아 분석을 진행하였다. 그 결과를 요약하면 이하와 같다. 첫째, 정조는 주희의 글을 대상으로 한 ｢주문수권｣을 먼저 편찬한 뒤, 1798년 9월부터 10월에 걸쳐 9일 동안 절록 작업을 진행하였으며, 그 양과 편찬 과정에 있어 ｢오자수권｣이 주희의 글을 중심으로 하여 편찬되었다는 점을 유추할 수 있다. 둘째, 구성 상의 특징은 절록된 구절 자체를 중시하는 점, 편명을 일정한 규칙에 따라 간단하게 표기한 점을 확인할 수 있으며, 전반적으로 주희의 ｢근사록｣ 편찬 방식과 구성을 참고하였다. 셋째, ｢오자수권｣과 ｢근사록｣의 절록된 작품을 비교한 결과, 겹치는 구절은 총합 54구로 ｢오자수권｣의 전체 절록 구절 중 1/6에 해당하며, ‘爲學’과 ‘致知’ 관련 구절이 다수로 확인되었다. 이는 ｢오자수권｣의 편찬이 ｢주문수권｣에 담긴 주자성리학 강화에 있었다는 점을 추측케 한다. 넷째, ｢오자수권｣의 전반부에 절록된 글들은 후반부에 등장하는 ｢주문수권｣에 절록된 구절들과 상호보완을 이루면서, 주희 중심의 도통론을 구체적으로 뒷받침하는 구성으로 편찬되어 있다. 또한 여타 정조의 선본류, 수권류 문헌과 다르게 경서 인용이나 성현의 언급은 생략하는 절록 양상을 보였다.

This study examines the compilation process and structural characteristics of the Oja-sugwon (Selected Excerpts from the Five Masters), part of King Jeongjo’s abridgement book series Sabu-sugwon. By comparing the selected excerpts with the Chin-ssu lu and analyzing the included and excluded passages, this study aims to infer the purpose behind the compilation of the Sabu-sugwon and elucidate King Jeongjo’s reception and perspective on the Dotong (Succession of the Way). The research focuses on one volume containing 318 excerpts, excluding the Jumun-sugwon, compiled from the works of Zhou Dunyi, Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi, and Zhang Zai. The findings are summarized as follows. First, after prioritizing the Jumun-sugwon, King Jeongjo personally conducted the selection process over nine days in 1798 without assistance from officials. Second, the structural analysis reveals a primary focus on the excerpts themselves and a simplified, rule-based titling system for efficiency. Third, a comparative analysis with the Chin-ssu lu shows that only 54 excerpts overlap. Fourth, the excerpts from the first four masters in the earlier section complement the Jumun-sugwon in the latter, providing concrete support for a Zhu Xi -centered Dotong-ron. This study is significant in demonstrating King Jeongjo’s adoption of a Zhu Xi-centered Dotong and his self-identification as its successor through his editorial works.

This study aims to examine the academic trends in research on Joseon Dynasty bibliographical catalogs (書目) conducted since the 1970s and to suggest future tasks for the field of Korean catalography. To this end, the trajectory of research was categorized into comprehensive and individual studies. In terms of comprehensive research, the foundational achievements of scholars such as Lee Seong-chun, Yoon Byeong-tae, and Chang Paik-ui were reviewed. Regarding individual research, the current status of the field was analyzed by classifying catalogs into library, government-compiled, woodblock-printing, documentary, and reading catalogs. The analysis reveals that research on catalogs, which initially focused on the bibliographical analysis of individual items, has recently expanded its scope by integrating with adjacent disciplines such as history, literature, and cultural history. Nevertheless, several tasks must be addressed for the qualitative deepening of catalography. First, disparate classification systems must be standardized by comprehensively considering the location, publisher, and purpose of the catalogs. Second, existing errors in previous studies, particularly regarding the compilation dates of woodblock catalogs, should be critically reviewed, and recent research findings must be actively incorporated. Third, there is an urgent need to establish a “Comprehensive Bibliographical Database” that precisely links various catalog data with original images of the physical books. Such follow-up research will serve as a vital academic asset for empirically and multi-dimensionally elucidating the history of Korean printing culture.

이 연구는 1930년대 북미에서 가장 먼저 한국어 강좌를 개설하고 ‘조선도서관’을 개관했던 미국 컬럼비아대학교를 대상으로 북미 한국학과 한국학 도서관의 역사와 현황을 문헌 연구를 통해 살펴보고 ‘조선도서관’ 설립과 운영에 중요한 역할을 했던 미국 유학생 단체 ‘재미조선문화회(The Korean Culture Society)’의 창립과 활동에 대해 살펴본 것이다. 또한 이 시기 국내 언론의 도서 기증 운동의 상황과 수집 장서를 조사하여 문화를 통해 한국을 알리고자 했던 초기의 노력을 조명하며 이러한 노력이 어떠한 과정을 거쳐 북미 한국학 연구의 기반이 되는 한국학 도서관 장서로 성장하였는지 검토하였다.

This study explores the historical trajectory and status of Korean Studies and its libraries in North America, focusing on Columbia University, the first institution in the region to offer Korean language courses and open the ‘Korean Library’ in the 1930s. It examines the founding and activities of The Korean Culture Society, an organization of Korean students in America that played a pivotal role in the library’s establishment and operation. Furthermore, it investigates contemporary domestic media campaigns in Korea aimed at donating books to the library at Columbia. By analyzing these early cultural diplomacy efforts, this paper illuminates how such initiatives evolved into the foundational Korean Studies collections that support academic research in North America today.

Hongmungwan (弘文館) was a central government office of the Joseon (朝鮮) Dynasty that existed from 1463 to 1907. Hongmungwan was responsible for managing court books, handling documents, and responding to the king’s inquiries. This study aimed to understand the scale and nature of the books held by Hongmungwan. An analysis was conducted on the existing Hongmungwan book catalog and 618 types Hongmungwan books held at the Kyujanggak Institute for Korean Studies. Among the 618 types Hongmungwan books, 451 types (73%) were published in Korea, and 167 types (27%) were published in China. By subject, there were 112 types in Gyeongbu (經部), 138 types in Sabu (史部), 112 types in Zabu (子部), and 254 types in the Jibu (集部). From the perspective of printing methods, there were 433 types woodblock prints, 129 types metal type prints, 30 types wooden movable type prints, and 26 types manuscripts. Many books were published between the 17th and 18th centuries, and most of the books remaining today in the Hongmungwan appear to have been collected during the reigns of Injo (仁祖) to Sukjong (肅宗).

본 연구는 1797년부터 1870년까지 조선 후기 印信 주조 정황을 기록한 ｢印信謄錄｣을 대상으로 국가 행정 체계의 변화를 실증적으로 고찰하였다. 자료에 수록된 1,172방의 인영을 분석한 결과, 19세기 인신 주조의 성격은 ‘중앙 집권적 행정 정비’에서 ‘국가 안보 및 개혁’으로 이행하는 양상을 보였다. 특히 1860년대 후반부터 인신 주조 기록은 ‘국방 강화’와 ‘중앙 권력 기구의 개편’이라는 두 가지 큰 흐름을 보여주고 있으며, 진영 설치와 군제 개편, 세도정치로 약화된 중앙 권력 기구의 복원에 따른 인신 제작이 늘어난 점이 특징적이다. 아울러 본 연구는 사찰 담당자에게 주급된 인신 사례를 통해 어필 봉안 및 군사적 보조 등 종교 시설이 국가 행정 내에서 수행한 공적 역할과 위상을 확인하였다. 결론적으로 ｢인신등록｣에 나타난 인신 주조 현황은 단순한 기록을 넘어 조선 후기 국가 통치 체계가 시대적 요구에 따라 변모해 가는 과정을 규명하는 역사적 지표라 할 수 있다.

This study empirically investigates transitions in the late Joseon administrative system by analyzing 1,172 seal impressions from Insin-deunglok. The research reveals that 19th-century seal casting shifted from ‘centralized consolidation’ to ‘national security and reform.’ Notably, the late 1860s saw increased seal production driven by military reorganization, the establishment of defense camps, and the restoration of central authority following the era of Sedo politics. Furthermore, seals issued to Buddhist temple officials highlight the public roles these institutions played, such as enshrining royal calligraphy and providing military assistance. Ultimately, Insin-deunglok serves as a vital historical indicator of how Joseon’s governance system evolved in response to contemporary challenges and shifting national priorities.