초록 close

오운의 『동사찬요』는 그 동안 17세기 초엽에 나온 사략형 사서로서 크게 주목을 받았다. 기존의 연구를 통해 『동사찬요』에 나타난 역사인식의 내용과 판각에 따른 차이가 대체로 밝혀졌다. 그런데 기존의 논문들은 『동사찬요』의 改刊과정에 대한 설명에서 부족한 부분이 있으며, 그 결과 『동사찬요』의 내용 가운데 가장 많은 변화를 보인 역사지리에 대한 서술에서 어떤 변화가 있었고 그것이 가지는 의미가 무엇인가에 대한 설명에 부족한 점이 있었다. 오운은 1606년 영주에서 『동사찬요』를 편찬하였다. 유성룡은 이를 보고서 선조에게 봉진하였다. 그 후 이 봉진본을 바탕으로 1609년 “기유계림부간”이라는 간기를 가진 활자본을 간행하였다. 이 책은 오운이 1609년 1~2월 사이 경주부윤으로 재직하던 당시에 8권으로 간행되었다. 그후 이를 수정하여 11권으로 만들었는데 8권본의 판목을 그대로 이용하면서 새로 들어간 권1상, 권1중, 권1하, 권2상의 4권만 판목을 별도로 만들어 간행하였다. 1614년에는 이에 다시 「지리지」를 보충해 넣어 12권본으로 만들어 영주에서 간행하였다. 이때 이러한 수정이 있게 된 것은 한백겸의 지적 때문이었다. 그 뒤 후손들에 의해 1908년 영주 삼우정에서 16권본이 간행되었다. 이렇게 수정된 『동사찬요』를 중심으로 오운의 상고기에 대한 역사지리인식을 살펴보면 8권본에서는 단군, 기자, 위만의 삼조선에 대해 평양 중심의 인식관에서 크게 벗어나지는 못하였으나 11권본으로 가면서 단군의 역사적 연원을 九種의 단계로 올려본다거나 箕子의 강역을 요하 이동 한수 이북으로 상정하여 강역을 확대하여 이해하는 등 그 위상이 높아지거나 확대되는 모습을 보이고 있다. 위만을 이은 사군에 대해서는 현도군의 위치에 대해 심양 일원으로 비정함으로써 조선중기 이래 현도를 요동지역으로 상정하려는 생각의 선구를 이루었다. 패수에 대해서는 시기별로 다르게 지칭할 수 있음을 언급함으로써 이후 다양한 역사지리에 대한 비정의 선구적 형태를 보여주기도 한다. 삼한의 위치에 대해서는 한백겸과의 서신교환을 통해 12권본의 「지리지」에서 마한=전라도, 변한=가야, 진한=신라의 삼한설을 결국 받아들였다. 삼국의 역사지리에서 고구려는 남쪽으로는 한강, 북쪽으로는 요하에 이를 정도로 삼국 가운데 가장 넓은 영토를 차지한 것으로 보았으며, 이러한 영토관은 「지리지」의 서술에서 고구려 군현 명칭에 대한 보충으로 나타났다. 이러한 오운의 역사지리인식은 상고기의 강역을 한반도 내의 좁은 영역에서 보려는 전통적인 조선전기의 역사지리인식에서 벗어나 요동일원에서의 변화를 중시하는 한백겸 이래 조선후기 학자들의 역사지리인식으로 넘어가는 과정의 산물로 평가할 수 있다. 그리고 삼국의 경쟁에서 최종적 승리를 거둔 신라의 승리 요인을 도덕적 차원에서 설명하거나 고려 선대 세계에 대한 황탄하고 신이한 전설을 11권본에서 탈락시키고 있는 데서는 오운의 역사인식이 유교의 도덕적 합리적 역사관에 바탕하고 있음을 볼 수 있다. 이러한 점에서 본다면 오운은 유교적인 도덕률과 합리성에 기반을 하면서도 주자학의 정통논리를 적용하려는 사림들의 역사인식을 대표하는 인물이라고 할 수 있으며, 또한 『동사찬요』는 한백겸 이래의 역사지리에 대한 관심의 선구를 이루는 사서라고 할 수 있다.


『Dongsachanyo』 Written by O Un has been taken attentions considerably as a Saryakhyung historical record(a well-condensed historical record) published in the early of 17th century. By investigating many of existing studies researched 『Dongsachayo』, we can reconsider contents of O Un's historical cognition and difference by versions of 『Dongsachanyo』. All of existing articles haven't tried to investigate the revision process of 『Dongsachanyo』. At the result, it contains something deficiency at explanations how those descriptions in the part of historical geographies had been changed and what is the meaning of its changing. O Un compiled 『Dongsachanyo』 in 1606 when he had taken refuge in Youngju. Yu Sung-ryong dedicated to the King SunJo a version of 『Dongsachanyo』. At later the type of the imprint "Giyugyerimbugan" was published on the basis of a version dedicated to the King SunJo. That record was the very version that O Un published as 8 volumes while he held office as a Geyungju Buyun at about January to February in 1609. Then that was revised and published as 11 volumes that new volumes of four plus the existing 8 volumes. In 1614, it was published as 12 volumes supplemented a part of geography in Youngju. It owed to Han Baek-Gyeom' advice. And in 1908, 『Dongsachanyo』 of 16 volumes was published at Samujeong, Youngju. 『Dongsachanyo』 compiled by O Un is remarkable in that its contents continuously had been revised and supplemented as well as it contained important contents of historical geographies. Among many of historical records, there is no case that had been revised and supplemented continuously except 『Dongsachanyo』. When I try to appraise O Un's cognition about historical geographies of Ancient period by analysing the revised 『Dongsachanyo』, it shows that it didn't get out of the centered cognition toward PyungYang in relative to three Chosuns of Dan-gun, Gija and Wi-man in the version of 8 volumes but the version of 11 volumes seems that it's cognition is expanded and enhanced in that it was traced back the historical period of Dan-gun to the stage of Gujong. And the version of 11 volumes applied the cognition about the expanded activity area of Gija from the East of Yoha to the North of HanSu. While 『Dongsachanyo』 accepted the traditional opinion that Nak-rang corresponded to Chosun-Hyun, Imdun to Dongee-Hyun, Hyundo to Okjeo, Jinbun to Sab-Hyun, it has been taken the lead of opinion that it presumed the boundary of Hyundo to be the East area of Yoha since the middle of Chosun by deducing highly as the area of Simyang in relating to the place of Hyundo. As the other case of discussing about PaeSu, O Un tried presenting the initiative type of inferences and deducing from various historical geographies. As regards the place of Samhan, O Un supported Kweon Geun's opinion of Samhan that Mahan corresponded to Baikjeo, Beunhan to Goguryeo and Jinhan to Silla among the existing opinions but he became to suspect Kweon Geun's opinion by keeping correspondence with Han Baek-Gyeom many times. Of course, O Un didn't revise his opinion in the part of Samhan in one volume of the version of 8 Volumes which compiled as such facts of the existing historical geographies but he finally accepted that Han baek-Gyeom's opinion of Samhan that Mahan corresponded to Baikjeo, Beunhan to Gaya and Jinhan to Silla in the part of 「Jiriji(geographical records) of the version of 12 Volumes O Un presumed to expand the main area and capital city of earlier Goguryeo into Manju area. And he understood that Goguryeo expanded into Hansu toward the South and into Yoha toward the North and finally occupied the widest territories among three dynasties. His cognition of historical territory was reflected as supplement of names of Gun and Hyun around Goguryeo in describing of the part of 「Jiriji」 O Un's cognition of historical geographies can be appraised as a product in the transitional period that changed from a traditional cognition of historical geographies in the early of Chosun which fixed to restrict the stage and boundary of Upper Ancient times within Korean peninsula into scholars' cognition following Han Baek-Gyeom in the later of Chosun which considered importantly changes in the areas of Yodong. On the other hand we can find a explanation that it contained the cognition of Confucian moralism in 『Dongsachanyo』 that Silla took the place of the final winner and that became the winner the reason why dynasty of Silla had the causes of moralism. In the version of 8 volumes, we can find a Similar cognition in that dynasties of GyeonHwon and GungYea were recorded as non-orthodox dynasties. Judging that O Un understood the Upper Ancient times by using terms such as non-orthodox dynasties and satellite dynasties, it may be appraised that O Un already tried describing history on the basis of orthodox cognition of Neo-Confucian. Compared that there was not a differentiation between before and after unification of Silla in the version of 8 volumes, there is appeared that the differentiated Silla of Samguk period from Silla after nine year of the King Moonmu' reign in the version of 11 volumes. And Judging that recorded the period after 19th year of the first King's reign of Goryeo dynasty as the period of Goryeo, it seems that O Un recorded to apply orthodox cognition strictly compared with the earlier times. It is also shown that his cognition of orthodox logic was applied in the part of 「Jiriji」. After he had criticized the ways of describing firstly districts and Gun or Hyun of the subordinate unit in the part of 「Jiriji」, 『Samguksagi』, he systematically described to arrange the historical geographies according to the precedence of Ju, Gun and Hyun that followed to describe firstly the place of king and his subordinates. Judging from above investigation, it can be appraised that O Un is the representative historiographer who tried to apply the Neo-Confucian orthodox logic on the basis of confucian moral principle and rationality. Then 『Dongsachanyo』 deserve to be appraised as the pioneer historical record that fulfilled concern of historical geographies after Han Baek-Gyeom.