「我朝同於趙宋」──十八世紀朝鮮儒者對宋代中華秩序的詮釋

'Equivalent to the Song Dynasty'': Eighteenth-Century Korean Confucian Interpretation of ''China Order''

本文以分析朝鮮王朝世宗朝的名臣許稠與世宗之間的君臣對話為起點，觀察了許稠透過「中國之法，有不可法者」之論述，批判並拒絕了明代君主集權的「時王之制」與相關政治措施，不僅讓朝鮮儒者在朝鮮政治中扮演的政治主體地位得以維持，也影響了朝鮮王朝近世幾百年的政治文化發展，使朝鮮王朝君臣面對明、清兩代中華秩序時，並非全盤接受，反以宋代（或更古及三代）之中華秩序拒絕明代。特別在明清鼎革後，尤其朝鮮正祖一朝，朝鮮王朝君臣不斷地將朝鮮王朝與宋代中國歷史追比，視朝鮮王朝為宋代中國之再現，表達出「三代之治再現於朝鮮」，建立其自我歷史定位與文化自信。當吾人以歷史作為參照，更能發現所謂「中華秩序」的多元性與複雜性。

"This article starts with the analysis of the dialogues between Sejong the Great and Heo Jo, a minister in the Joseon dynasty. It shows that Heo Jo criticized and refuted the centralization and political order of the Ming dynasty, and proposed ''Partial Adoption of China Order''. Heo's proposal not only kept intact authoritative status of the Korean Confucians, but also left a great impact on the political and cultural development of the Joseon dynasty in the following centuries. Therefore, opposed to the China Order of Ming and Qing dynasties, the monarchs and officials of Joseon were inclined to follow political order of the Song dynasty, or even the ancient ''Three- Dynasties'' i.e. the Hsia, Shan, and Chou dynasties. After Qing's taking over the Ming, especially during the reign of Sejong the Great, the Korean reigme kept associating itself with the Song political order and regarded the Joseon dynasty as revival of the fomer. They even claimed that the best political order of the Three Great Dynasties was reinstalled in the Joseon dynasty, which enhanced its historical role and confirmed cultural consciousness and confidence. In short, this study elaborates the diversity and complexity of the so-called ''China Order'' through the course of Korean History."