국문 사행록의 미학

머리말

숙부 홍억의 자제군관이란 직함으로 연행에 참여한 홍대용. 그가 두 달 걸려 도착한 북경까지는 3,111리 길이었다. 돌아오는 시간과 거리를 계산하면 대충 넉 달에 6천 리가 넘는 장도였다. 많은 수의 사람들이 한 무리가 되어 도보로 오가던 ‘공무여행’이었다. 교통편이 없으니 숙박시설 또한 마땅할 리 없었다. 그래서 아랫사람들은 ‘한둔’이라고 부르던 ‘한뎃잠’을 자기 일쑤였다. 먹는 것 역시 변변치 않았고, 목욕을 한다거나 때에 따라 입성을 갈아입는 일 역시 사치였다. 그러면서도 나라의 명이니 ‘군말 없이’ 따라야 했다. 그렇게 다녀온 사행이 조선조 말까지 수백 회에 이른다. 정례화 되어 있던 사행파견의 이면에는 조?중 간 외교적 현안 외에 경제 교류나 문화 교류 같은 실질적인 의도가 담겨 있었다. 그래서 고생인 줄 알면서도 이런 저런 연줄을 동원하여 사행에 참여하려는 지식인들도 적지 않았다. 말로만 듣고 책으로만 읽어오던 대국의 경물과 선진문물을 확인하고픈 욕망이 사람들마다 가슴에 그득했다. 그래서 당시 연경은 세계를 향한 통로이자 외부의 정세를 엿볼 수 있던 유일한 창구였다. 중화를 몰아내고 중원을 차지한 오랑캐들의 사는 모습이 궁금하기도 했을 것이다. 중원을 차지한 이상 그들은 더 이상 옛날의 그 오랑캐가 아니었다. 번화한 도회와 풍족한 물화를 보며 ‘고인 물’ 같던 조선 지식인들의 내면에도 파문이 일었다. ‘앞으로 어떻게 살아갈 것인가?’ 자문하던 이들에게 중국의 모습은 해답 그 자체였다. 좋은 점은 좋은 점대로, 그른 점은 그른 점대로 그들에겐 자신들의 미래를 설계해나갈 모델이었다. 시시콜콜 적어놓은 견문들을 단순한 ‘흥밋거리’로만 바라볼 수 없는 것도 바로 그 때문이다. 그 내용들

 

이 실제 삶의 현장으로 투입되었는지 알 수는 없지만, 읽는 사람들로 하여금 마음의 눈을 뜨게 한 것은 사실이다. 그러나 그것이 이 기록들의 가르침 전체는 아니다. 관습화되다시피 한 중국과의 외교관계나 절차가 깨어있던 지식인들에겐 수치와 모멸 그 자체였다. 사대주의가 큰 나라들 사이에 끼인 작은 나라의 생존원리이긴 했으나, 그것을 흔쾌히 수용하기란 쉽지 않았을 것이다. 명분과 자존심 때문이었다. 특히 조선중화주의로 무장한 교조적 성리학자들에게 오랑캐 청국의 존재는 현실적으로 어찌해볼 수 없는, ‘거대한 산’이었다. 따라서 그들에게 ‘연행’이란 명분의 한계를 초탈하기 위한 ‘개안의 굿판’일 수밖에 없었다. 온갖 고생을 마다하면서 오랑캐가 차지한 중원을 보고자 한 당대 지식인들의 깊은 속내엔 자존심을 현실에 대한 인정으로 맞바꾸어야 하는 절실함이 있었다. 그래서 그곳을 간 것이다. 뻔한 일이긴 했으나 가보지도 않고서 자신의 생각을 바꾼다는 것은 더욱더 자존심 상하는 일이었기 때문이다. 그런 참담함을 뼈대로 하고 있으면서도 겉으로는 그렇지 않은 척 ‘담담하게’ 기술해나간 것이 연행록이다.

 이 책에서는 명나라 말기의 ?죽천행록?부터 고종대 <병인연행가>까지 200여 년 사이에 나온 예닐곱 건의 사행록들을 다루었다. 실제 국문기록들은 이보다 훨씬 많지만, 이 연행록들의 이본들이거나 내용적으로 부실한 것들이 대부분이다. ‘한 숟갈만 떠먹어도 한 솥 전체의 국 맛을 알 수 있듯이’, 이 정도만 읽어도 국문 사행록의 대강을 파악할 수 있으리라 보는 것은 일종의 착각인가, 아니면 만용인가?

 

틈틈이 원고의 체제를 다듬어준 박병배?양영아 군과 사진 제공?교정 등으로 도움을 준 이성훈?신춘호 선생에게 고마움을 표한다. 영문초록의 교정을 꼼꼼히 보아주신 마이클Michael souza 선생의 친절은 두고두고 잊을 수 없다. 내게 귀한 자료의 사진을 찍어 보내주는 일을 ‘즐거움’으로 여긴다는 이현조 박사는 이번에도 수고를 아끼지 않았다. 무어라 감사의 마음을 표해야 할지 모르겠다. 쉽게 접근할 수 없는 사진자료들을 제공해주신 이원복 국립광주박물관장님, 최병현 숭실대 기독교박물관장님, 최은주 과장님께 진심으로 감사드린다. 그간 좋은 책을 열심히 만들어 인문학 분야 전문 출판사의 반열에 우뚝 올라선 역락출판사의 이대현 사장과 이태곤 편집장, 권분옥 선생께도 감사의 마음을 전하며 조심스런 마음으로 이 책을 세상에 내놓는다.

 

 

갑신년 세모

창 밖에 서 있는 나목들과

이 겨울의 추위를 함께 즐기며

백규 씀

 

 

Abstract

 

Jukcheon-Haengrok is the record of Lee, Duck-Hyeong's lifetime achievements, especially the journey that he undertook to the heart of the Ming dynasty as an envoy of Korea's Joseon dynasty. His travel journal was written in pure Korean script. The record begins from his departing day to October 12 in the first volume. His journey log known as the Jukcheon-Haengrok, consists of a core body of text reaching 130 pages with an epilogue of 11 pages. The writer of this travel journal calls himself Heosaeng. His real name, however, Misoo Heo, Mok, a great scholar as well as a literary man of the Nam'in group. An army officer related to Heosaeng accompanied Lee, Duck- Hyeong and made notes of Lee's movements. Heo then compiled his record on the basis of the officer's notes. The Jukcheon-Haengrok was written nearly 70 years before Nogajae's Yeonhaeng-Ilgi, and no less than 120 years before Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok. Two other important historical Korean travel journals. The events narrated in the Jukcheon- Haengrok consist of three parts. The first section refers to the obtaining of a Royal command from the Qing's emperor after an intense applica- tion. The second section covers the journey to Beijing and the return home after intense trials. While the third concerns a trap set by his political opponents and his subsequent form punishment after a series of tribulations. The writer of the Jukcheon-Haengrok intended to depict the troubles and tensions from beginning to end in the narrative style. It is in stark contrast to the Hwapo'hanghae-rok, which was for the purpose of giving an official report.   

It was possible for Heosaeng to relate detailed personal events by virtue of not using Chinese language but by using Korean language, which was not understood by the Chinese. In a more positive respect, the successful writing originated from the Heosaeng's intention to express his envoy's loyalty and patriotism. Even in any side he accepted, the Jukcheon-Haengrok is able to be appreciated because of the interesting narrative writing.

The Jukcheon-Haengrok is one of the earliest known Korean lan- guage travel journals. The writer's identity and his intent were clearly confirmed as both the event itself as well as the writer's literary traits are a matter of historical record.  We can trace the chronicle of the Korean envoy's records in the earlier time by virtue of the appearance of the Jukcheon-Haengrok.

As noted earlier, the Jukcheon-Haengrok was a predecessor by 120 years to the Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok, written and compiled by Hong, Dae-Yong. Dam Heon, Hong, Dae-Yong was a scholar who accepted the doctrines of Zhu Xi as his scholarly foundation. Yet, he also indulged in practical studies for the people's livelihood on the basis of scientific knowledge in place of Zhu Xi's doctrines. He said that his journey to Beijing was a dream of his for several decades. Through his journey, he intended to solidify his advanced world view which was largely unrecognized in Korea, his native country. ‘Encounter and discovery’ was the reason he pursued in his journey to Beijing. Throughout his journey, he had compared the Chinese culture, events, and institutions to that of the Joseon dynasty's. He wanted to view them as a good basis for his self-perception, and verify the propriety of his way of thinking through the people of all social standings he met in China.

Hong, Dae-yong had profound knowledge of the Confucian Classics, astronomy, mathematics, science, and musicology. He opened the first chapter of the Joseon dynasty's practical science school on the basis of his knowledge about these fields. Therefore, he ranks as the first Korean scholar engaged in truly modern learning.  

The Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok as well as the Damheon-Yon'gi which he left reflect  the duality of writing systems at the time. Written in both Korean and Chinese, they are records made separately with the intent of opening up learning to the mass. Hong, Dae-yong inserted diverse poems and letters within the body of the records to reinforce reality and concreteness. Interestingly, he used many poems whenever it was important to give a lot of logical description and narration. This technique was effective in conveying meaning with as little as possible. It resolved the difficulty of understanding between the foreigners and the possibility of wasting time.

As a truly Renaissance scholar, he had a lot of deep knowledge and independent opinions about language, music, and literature. Through his knowledge, he intended to display Korea's Joseon dynasty's bearing as an equal to China.

Of more than 400 Jocheonrok or Yeonhaengroks(travel writings of the envoys to Beijing in the Joseon Dynasty), the Eulbyeong- Yeonhaengrok is the most important because it reflects diachronic succession in the records. It is seen as one of the most visible records reflecting a wide range of issues from diplomatic relations to the workings of the intelligentsia's mind.

Other travel journals are also important. The Muo-Yeonhaengrok written by Seo, You-Mun, an envoy clerk, is one of the rarest Korean envoy's records. It chronicles an annual emissary from Korea's Joseon dynasty to China's Qing dynasty from 1798. 10. 19 to 1799. 4. 2. In two respects, it's literary value is prominent. First, Seo, You-mun wrote everyday. Hardly a day goes by, without an antedote. Second, included verifiable historical information within his writing.

Korean Emissary visits to China took place annually and had no special vicissitudes or accidents, and they have no strain. These were not emissaries dispatched for resolving special problems. Because of this, it was natural that common observations were the main contents of the Muo-Yeonhaengrok. For that reason, the minute details of the route is the main contents. The writer's attention to detail is outstanding. Of course, it is the same in the other records as well. Through these records, we can find out the interests and experiences of the literati as well as analysis. The contents of Muo-Yeonhaengrok is an embodiment of the historical writer's personal philosophy, ‘interest-discovery-surprise’. Some of these discoveries include ‘Chinese cultural system and customs’, ‘Catholicism’, ‘geography and topography’, and ‘the footmarks of the previous Joseon dynasty's envoy’.

The diachronic order of the envoy's records already disclosed is the Jukcheon-Haengrok, the Nogajae Yeonhaeng-Ilgi, the Eulbyeong- Yeonhaengrok, the Yeolha-Ilgi, and the Muo-Yeonhaengrok. The Muo- Yeonhaengrok is the final installment of this diachronic order, and it is important in that it gives the type of the envoy's record.

The Ildong-Jang'yuga written by Kim, In-Gyeom in 1764 and Byeong'in-Yeonhaeng'ga written by Hong, Soon-Hak at 1866 are works belonging to Sahaeng Gasa genre. The former is about Japan, while the latter is about China during the Qing dynasty. Both works are similar but differ in that a collection of genres, while the other is a collection of contents. The collection of genres focus on all Sahaeng Gasas. The collection of contents refers to the fact that the authors wrote about experiences in China during the Qing dynasty, as well as Japan; with both being targets of contempt. Both of these works differentiated from the Sahaeng-rok written in prose in the light of generic selection. The Sahaeng-roks written in Chinese were used for public reports for the government, while the others, written in Korean, were used in private reports for the writers' neighbors.

Ildong-Jang'yuga is an outstanding work in both quality and quantity. It was an early work of the Sahaeng Gasa genre. The writer, Kim, was born of a concubine, however, he was an intellectual of the Noron party during the Joseon dynasty.  Connected with him was Kim, Sang-Heon; Kim, Su-Hang and his 6 sons. Kim, Su-Hang; Kim, Chang-Jip and Chang-Up visited China during the Qing dynasty. They were children of Kim, Sang-Heon, who was a war advocate in the Byeongja-Horan. Their family was reflective of the world view of the time which discriminated between ‘Chinese and Barbarians’. Naturally, a superior observer's sight against the inferior object overwhelms in the Ildong-Jang'yuga. Kim, In-Gyeom used the special tribal names ‘Woe, and Woe-nom’ consistently. However, he was skeptical about the view that ‘Japanese were barbarians’, after seeing the politeness and humanity from the ‘barbarian Japanese’ with his own eyes. The Ildong-Jang'yuga was built a firm world view ‘discriminating between the Chinese and Barbarian’. At the same time, it marked an attempt to loosen this world view. The changes of the time were well reflected in the Byeong'in-Yeonhaeng'ga where one anti-Qing overtones reflected on the writings. The writer's attitude that objectifies the negative historical relation with the Qing dynasty to the past event shows clearly. Sometimes we find the world view of ‘discriminating between the Chinese and Barbarian’. This was a typical intelligentsia's hackneyed expression at that time, regardless of personal intention, for he consistently spoke highly of the advanced Chinese culture. For Hong, Soon-Hak, the Qing dynasty was not ‘barbarian’ at all. If an admiration is expressed in the work instead of contempt, we can say that the past world view of ‘discriminating between the Chinese and Barbarian’ had been overcome. The ‘new barbarian’ was the western world, which was thought to threaten the governing system, not the Qing dynasty. The intelligentsia believed that the Qing succeeded the Chinese cultural tradition from the Ming dynasty. Byeong'in-Yeonhaeng'ga is a work which realized the universalization of their view.   

This section is an attempt to analyze the intrinsic meaning of the Qianshan, Yiwulüshan, and Shouyangshan mountains expressed in the Yeonhaeng-rok. These three mountains figured prominently in the ideology of the envoy writers connected with them. The Qianshan, and Yiwulüshan mountains were sacred areas selected as  initiation places for Korea's Joseon Dynasty's intellectuals to be reborn on their journey.

They succeeded in proving their hypothesis about the world through the journey to China and transfer it to their conviction. However, Shouyangshan mountain was a ritual space to restore the balance of ideology and be recompensed for their self-respect. We can say it is an important meaning in the history of civilization contained in the three mountains.

The journey route was not considered only a physical space, but it was seen as an opportunity to meet each other for the people. It can be reappeared as a meaningful space to some conscious figures. Most of the routes taken by envoys reinforced an amplified knowledge considered marvelous. Most information the envoys got on the way was not common enough to make the subject of consciousness change their attitude for reality. Their surprise or envy of Beijing's advanced civilization was only connected to the regrettable self-confirmation about insuperable self limitation.

Even in the insuperable limitation, the 3 mountains contributed the Joseon dynasty intelligentsia's internal change. Qianshan and Yiwulüshan were initiation spaces as well as divine spaces which people experienced changes in their consciousness. Shouyangshan mountain, on the other hand, was a ritual space where people went if they desired to restore their ideological inertia and compensate for their self-respect.  

This following section researches the diachoronic characteristics of the representative Korean records by the Late Joseon dynasty's Envoys to Beijing(an abbreviation:KRJE), Jukcheon-Haengrok, Yeonhaeng-Ilgi, Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok, Muo-Yeonhaengrok. The writers of the latter records accepted the former records as reference materials, or basis of understanding. Through this process, they were able to criticize the opinions of the former records, but they were not free to stray far from the criterion of the former records. They succeeded in bringing the novelty of the scenic feature of China to life by reinforcing the many things that the former writers had observed. The social status, inclination, and world view of the writers have the functional relation with the differences among the records. Most of the writers were clearly subjective. Others spoke for the ideology or world view that the leading group of the day had. Although they showed somewhat different attitudes depending upon their social situation, the fact that they were exposed to a change of their understanding about Chinese culture is important. We can find out the diachronic aspects connecting the KRJEs. The Jukcheon-Haengrok is a record about epic confrontation and triumph. The essential content of Yeonhaeng-Ilgi concerns the discriminating view held by Chinese and Manchurians, or a hostile feeling against the Qing dynasty and their civilized sublimation. The Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok is a record about the removal of the discrimi- nating view of Chinese and Manchurians by self-awakening, and the inspiration of reason that was learned by the Qing dynasty's culture. And, Muo-Yeonhaengrok is a record to emphasize self-consciousness through minute descriptions of common objects. The minute description, analysis, and objective attitude are common to the envoy writers, especially Hong, Dae-Yong and Seo, Yu-Moon. Yet, Hong, Dae-Yong who all learned the advanced culture of China earnestly, while, at the same time, kept company with the Chinese scholars actively. Seo, Yu-Moon thought that Joseon dynasty was superior to the Qing dynasty in the dress regulations and the funeral rites, etc. Of course, Hong and Seo have something in common with each other in the basic attitude or the direction of description. Kim, Chang-Up's record, Yonhaeng-Ilgi became a paradigm to illustrate the switchover of the writer's consciousness through his experiences in China. Hong followed it, but he showed an image of the more scientific, minute, and careful objectivist than Kim. Comparing to that, Seo succeeded to control the switchover of his consciousness or subjective feeling in the extreme. He followed Hong's line faithfully, and endeavored to overcome Kim's view or attitude of description. Generally speaking, the Jukcheon-Haengrok opened the beginning of the KRJE. However, it is different from the others in that the maker of the memorandum and the writer of record are distinguished. And, it shows the epic inclination thickly to the point as the writer described it, placing the focus on the development of events. The records in the next stage, the Yeonhaeng-Ilgi, the Eulbyeong-Yeonhaengrok, and the Muo-Yeonhaengrok, show the diachronic connection of reception as it is called ‘imitation, following, and independence’. In other words, the Jukcheon-Haengrok is a record from the center of events, while the others focus on a description of the facts, explaination, and demonstration.