세종대는 유교적 이상주의의 비전에 근거하여 예악제도를 비롯한 각종의 문물 제도의 완비를 추구하며 정전(正典)을 형성해 가는 시기였다. 이러한 유교국가로서의 문화 적 위상은 당대의 학술과 문화를 담당할 계층과, 교양의 내용을 필요로 한다. 그리고 그것 을 내면화하도록 견인하는 교육과 학문의 체계를 요구한다. 이 글은 이런 맥락에서 세종대 의 강경－제술 논쟁, 그리고 집현전 학사를 중심으로 제기되는 경학－시학에 대한 논의에 초점을 두었다. 이러한 논의들은 당대 젊은 선비들의 학문 연찬 과정과 연결되고, 과거제도 와 연계된 상시의 교육의 문제와도 연계되었다. 강경－제술 논쟁에서 강경론자들은 강경이 제술에 대하여 배타적으로 진정한 성학의 영역 에 속하는 것으로 이해했다. 제도적으로 강경을 시행하고 그에 따른 학습 과정이 제대로 실현될 때 유교국가의 이상을 실현해 나갈 젊은 지식인과 관료를 길러낼 수 있다는 것이다. 이들이 교육자로서 후진에게 학문적인 사승관계를 형성하고, 혹은 고․하위의 관리가 되 어 정책을 설정하는 소단위로서 이상적인 유교 문화를 지속적으로 창출해 나갈 것이라는 비전을 갖고 있었다. 이에 비해 제술론자들은 강경과 제술의 관계를 보다 유기적인 관계로 인지하고 있었다. 대표적인 제술론자였던 변계량은, 강경과 제술이 초학자가 학습을 시작 하여 이를 일정한 학문적 성과로 온축하고, 다시 저술로 풀어내 가는 학문적 일대기를 구성 하는 연속적인 과정으로 이해되고 있었다. 그런데 문과 초장 제술이 세종의 강경한 입장과 문신 대다수의 찬성 속에서 과거 정식이 되면서, 강경은 상시의 교육에서 강화되는 방향으 로 나가게 되는데, 그 구체적인 논의의 결실은 성균관에서의 분재독서(分齋讀書)이다. 분 재독서는 결국 ‘유교 경전에 정통한 경서의 전문가를 양성’할 수 있도록 이끄는 전문적이 고 체계적인 경학 연구를 의도한 것이다. 집현전 학사들은 강경과 제술이 모두 경서에 대한 이해를 시험한다는 면에서 경학의 영역 으로 간주했다. 강경－제술 논쟁이 비록 완전한 합의에 도달했다거나 풍성한 학문적 부흥 을 가시적으로 드러내지 못했지만, 이에 대한 지속적인 논의와 제도적인 시행을 거쳐 오면 서 경학을 권면하는 풍조가 조성된 것으로 판단했다. 이에 따라 집현전 학사들은 강경 대 제술의 문제를 경학 대 시학의 문제로 확대시켜 나갔다. 이들에게 과거는 문장으로 나라를 빛낼[文章華國] 인재를 선발하는 과정으로 인식되었다. 시학으로 표현되는 문예의 능력은 이러한 국가의 문화적 위상을 높이는 현실적인 차원에서 필요했다. 시학의 우위를 일방적 으로 주장하려는 것이 아니라 경학과 시학의 균형적인 발전 방안을 모색한 것이라고 할 수 있는데 경학과 문학을 겸비한 인재들을 양육하여 문화국가로서의 조선의 위상을 구축 하는 것이 그 최종적인 목표였다고 할 수 있다.

The rule of King Sejong was pursuing after the completion of various civilizations and institutions including decorum and music based on idealistic visions of Confucianism and after finishing up orthodox scriptures. The cultural position of such a Confucian nation required the officials in charge of arts and sciences and relevant contents of cultures. It also needed systems of education and studies which would lead the internalization of the arts and sciences. In this regard, this thesis aims to investigate into arguments about explication of Confucian scriptures and about writing of books developed during rule of King Sejong and into arguments conducted mainly by scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon about study of Confucian classics and poetic classics. These arguments were connected with contemporary young scholars’ pursuit of study and normal education systems related state examinations. Arguing over explication of Confucian scriptures and writing of books, proponents for explication of the scriptures understood that explication of the scriptures excluding writing of books belongs to true Confucian teachings. They believed that young scholars and government officials could be nurtured who would realize the ideals of a Confucian country when systems were satisfactorily set up to execute the explication of the scriptures and learning process accordingly. They had a vision that the said young scholars would be true educators, bequeath academic legacies to their followers, and continuously create ideal Confucian cultures, as small units to decide on policies when appointed to high or low government officials. In contrast, defenders of writing of books recognized that explication of the scriptures was maintaining more organic relations with writing of books. Gye-ryang Byeon, a representative defender of writing of books, understood that explication of the scriptures and writing of books were part of a continued process for an academic beginner to establish his academic biography which comprises starting of study, accumulation of academic achievements, and writing of books. However, when writing of books, which was the initial step of the civil service examination, was officially incorporated into state examinations by King Seong’s strong support of it and the approval of most of civil vassals, explication of the scriptures began to be materialized in normal education. The concrete results of discussions of explication of the scriptures included the division of academic factions within Seong-gyun-gwan. The division was ultimately intended to foster ‘experts in Confucian scriptures who are well informed of Confucian classics.’ Scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon considered both explication of the scriptures and writing of books as part of the study of Confucian classics since both were used to test students’ understanding of Chinese classics. The scholars thought that social conditions had been created to praise the study of Confucian classics while arguments were being continuously conducted and systems implemented to promote explication of the scriptures and writing of books argument, even though the arguments had not reached a consensus or made visible academic achievements. In this context, scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon extended the issue of explication of the scriptures versus writing of books to that of study of Confucian classics versus poetic classics. The scholars acknowledged state examinations were procedures to screen such talented people as would glorify the nation through writings. People’s literary abilities including poetic classics were practically required to enhance the cultural level of their nation. The scholars did not one-sidedly advocate the superiority of poetic classics but sought ways to accomplish balanced development of study of Confucian classics and poetic classics. Their final goal was to nurture talented people equipped with study of Confucian classics and literary abilities, for the purpose of establishing the position of the Joseon Dynasty as a cultural nation.

The rule of King Sejong was pursuing after the completion of various civilizations and institutions including decorum and music based on idealistic visions of Confucianism and after finishing up orthodox scriptures. The cultural position of such a Confucian nation required the officials in charge of arts and sciences and relevant contents of cultures. It also needed systems of education and studies which would lead the internalization of the arts and sciences. In this regard, this thesis aims to investigate into arguments about explication of Confucian scriptures and about writing of books developed during rule of King Sejong and into arguments conducted mainly by scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon about study of Confucian classics and poetic classics. These arguments were connected with contemporary young scholars’ pursuit of study and normal education systems related state examinations. Arguing over explication of Confucian scriptures and writing of books, proponents for explication of the scriptures understood that explication of the scriptures excluding writing of books belongs to true Confucian teachings. They believed that young scholars and government officials could be nurtured who would realize the ideals of a Confucian country when systems were satisfactorily set up to execute the explication of the scriptures and learning process accordingly. They had a vision that the said young scholars would be true educators, bequeath academic legacies to their followers, and continuously create ideal Confucian cultures, as small units to decide on policies when appointed to high or low government officials. In contrast, defenders of writing of books recognized that explication of the scriptures was maintaining more organic relations with writing of books. Gye-ryang Byeon, a representative defender of writing of books, understood that explication of the scriptures and writing of books were part of a continued process for an academic beginner to establish his academic biography which comprises starting of study, accumulation of academic achievements, and writing of books. However, when writing of books, which was the initial step of the civil service examination, was officially incorporated into state examinations by King Seong’s strong support of it and the approval of most of civil vassals, explication of the scriptures began to be materialized in normal education. The concrete results of discussions of explication of the scriptures included the division of academic factions within Seong-gyun-gwan. The division was ultimately intended to foster ‘experts in Confucian scriptures who are well informed of Confucian classics.’ Scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon considered both explication of the scriptures and writing of books as part of the study of Confucian classics since both were used to test students’ understanding of Chinese classics. The scholars thought that social conditions had been created to praise the study of Confucian classics while arguments were being continuously conducted and systems implemented to promote explication of the scriptures and writing of books argument, even though the arguments had not reached a consensus or made visible academic achievements. In this context, scholars of Jiphyeon-jeon extended the issue of explication of the scriptures versus writing of books to that of study of Confucian classics versus poetic classics. The scholars acknowledged state examinations were procedures to screen such talented people as would glorify the nation through writings. People’s literary abilities including poetic classics were practically required to enhance the cultural level of their nation. The scholars did not one-sidedly advocate the superiority of poetic classics but sought ways to accomplish balanced development of study of Confucian classics and poetic classics. Their final goal was to nurture talented people equipped with study of Confucian classics and literary abilities, for the purpose of establishing the position of the Joseon Dynasty as a cultural nation.

, , , , , , , , ,

State examinations, during th e rule of King Sejong, the civil service examination, explication of the scriptures, writing of books, study of Confucian classics, poetic classics, words and phrases, division of academic factions, glorifying the natio