earticle

영어

This article is about analyzing the discourses of the mourning dress system in the period of the Tang Dynasty. It centers around ①debating on establishing the mourning dress system between sister-in-law and brother-in-law ②debating on revising the mourning dress system between uncle and nephew ③the expansion of waiqinfu(外親服) and the faction of guli(古禮) criticizing for it. Depending on debaters, there are differences of grounds for the discourses; mainly, it seems that the notions of qing(情) and qin(親) markedly appeared in the period. It was not unique to this period that qing(情) and qin(親) were emphasized as the principle of establishing the mourning dress system. They were the extension of the spirit of the Wei-Jin(魏晉) period that were cultivated in a pedantic atmosphere and tried to reflect the sentiment of warm-heartedness and fidelity in Ritual Systems(禮制); the three discourses mentioned were also highly contentious subjects. The reason why the same subjects on the mourning dress system became contentious over the whole period of Tang Dynasty was related to the appearance of national Jeonrye-seo(典禮書) such as Chen-guan-li(貞觀 禮), Xian-qing-li(顯慶禮), and Kai-yuan-li(開元禮) and the completion of Yullyong(律令). In the Wei-Jin(魏晉) period, the discourses of the mourning dress system had not necessarily led to institutionalization. In the period of Tang Dynasty, however, Rite Procedures(儀節) which was organized in national Jeonrye-seo(典禮書) reflected the regulations of Tangryeong(唐令); for example, in the year of 658, during the ruling of Emperor Kao-tsung(高宗) of Tang, when Xian-qing-li(顯慶禮) was compiled, it was mentioned “taking Ling(令) and Shi(式) into account.” Also, the decision on the discourses for rituals was stipulated as an institution in Jeonrye-seo(典禮書), and Tangryeong(唐令) was also revised as based on the stipulations. Specifically, about the mourning dress system, the discourse of reinterpretation to the stipulations in Sangfu(喪服) was incorporated into Jeonrye-seo(典禮書) as being an institution. Also, it made the regulations of Tangryeong(唐令) be revised. Thus, the decision on the discourses for the stipulations of mourning dress in the period of Tang Dynasty was institutionalized, and it was legally supported by Tangryeong(唐令); thereby, the practice of rituals(行禮) was bindingly and stably assured. Nevertheless, institutional and legal support by yejeon(禮典) and Tangryeong(唐令) was still insecure, because Tangryeong(唐令) and 예전 could be modified Emperor's decision. Although the insecurity caused the reiteration of the discourses about the stipulations in Sangfu(喪服), the reinterpretation of the stipulations in Sangfu(喪服) helps understand the process and actual situation of making byŏllye(變禮).

한국어

본 논문은 ①형수와 시동생 사이의 복제 제정 논의, ②외삼촌과 조카 사이의 복제 개정 논의, ③외친복의 확대와 이에 대한 고례파의 비판 등을 중심으로 당대에 일어났던 복제 담론 을 분석한 것이다. 논자들에 따라 구체적인 논거의 차이는 있지만, 이 시대에는 ‘정(情)’과 ‘친 (親)’의 관념이 강하게 나타나고 있다. 제복(制服)의 원칙으로서 ‘정’이나 ‘친’을 강조하는 관점 은 이 시대만의 특별한 것은 아니다. 그것은 인간의 감정을 예제(禮制)에 반영하고자 했던 위 진 시대정신의 연장이며, 위의 세 가지 복제 담론 역시 위진 시대에 이미 크게 쟁론되었던 논제들이다. 그럼에도 당대 전 시기에 걸쳐 또다시 복제(服制) 상에서 유사한 논제의 쟁론이 지속되었던 것은, 정관례⋅현경례⋅개원례 등 국가 전례서(典禮書)의 등장⋅율령 체 제의 완비와 관계가 있다. 위진 시대의 복제 담론은 그것이 반드시 제도화로 연결되는 것은 아니었다. 그러나 당대에 이르면 상복 규정에 관한 담론의 결정은 예전(禮典)에 의해서 제도화 되고, 또 당령(唐令)에 의해서 법률적 뒷받침을 받게 됨으로써 행례의 강제성과 안정성을 담보 하게 된다. 하지만 황제의 의지에 따라 언제든지 변경될 수 있는 당령과 예전의 속성상 그것은 불안정성의 다른 측면이기도 했다. 이러한 불안정성으로 인해 ｢상복｣편의 동일한 규정에 대한 유사한 담론이 되풀이되기도 했지만, ｢상복｣편의 규정에 대한 재해석을 통해 변례(變禮)를 만 들어가는 과정과 실태를, 여기서 생생히 엿볼 수 있을 것이다.