本文關(guān)鍵詞： 朝鮮王朝 認(rèn)同 《燕行錄》 《家禮》 國(guó)法　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：朝鮮王朝（1392-1910）素稱(chēng)禮儀之邦，朝鮮時(shí)代的禮書(shū)卷帙浩繁、禮家前赴后繼，與中國(guó)禮學(xué)范式不同之處在于，朝鮮王朝的整個(gè)國(guó)家機(jī)構(gòu)與政治體制都建立在禮學(xué)的基礎(chǔ)之上，不僅朝鮮王室的禮儀制度借助《家禮》得以完善，而且地方社會(huì)秩序的維持也得益于民眾對(duì)《家禮》的遵奉，可以說(shuō)禮學(xué)是構(gòu)建與主導(dǎo)朝鮮政治、文化的核心要素。同時(shí)要看到的是，朝鮮是中國(guó)的藩屬?lài)?guó)，對(duì)中國(guó)禮教積極效仿，在政治與文化認(rèn)同層面上也有其自身的態(tài)度。本文以為，禮學(xué)建構(gòu)下的朝鮮王朝對(duì)華認(rèn)同觀(guān)可以從對(duì)中國(guó)與對(duì)自身認(rèn)知兩方面的情感角度來(lái)結(jié)合考察。 一方面，從朝鮮對(duì)中國(guó)的認(rèn)知態(tài)度考量，朝鮮遵明制、著明衣，對(duì)明代政權(quán)有著天然的服膺，但明清易代后，朝鮮在“中國(guó)中心主義”的概念上主觀(guān)地將“中華”與“滿(mǎn)清”兩者分離開(kāi)來(lái)。在政治上依舊認(rèn)同前明制度，視滿(mǎn)清為“蠻貊之邦”，在文化上獨(dú)守先王法服，對(duì)清國(guó)文化不無(wú)鄙夷，這其中不乏有遵奉正統(tǒng)的高傲正義感，但又存在著對(duì)滿(mǎn)清政權(quán)合法性的偏見(jiàn)。透過(guò)17世紀(jì)中葉至19世紀(jì)末朝鮮燕行使者在中國(guó)的實(shí)地經(jīng)歷與感受，不難發(fā)現(xiàn)文化與政治認(rèn)同之間并非包含、并列而是動(dòng)態(tài)遞進(jìn)、相互作用的關(guān)系，政治歸屬的漸行漸遠(yuǎn)加深了朝鮮在文化上對(duì)胡風(fēng)滿(mǎn)俗的偏見(jiàn)，而文化上的失落又助推了他們對(duì)滿(mǎn)清蠻貊政治的鄙夷。更進(jìn)一步地說(shuō)，通過(guò)對(duì)《燕行錄》的考察，可以看到在彼此的對(duì)望中，朝鮮對(duì)滿(mǎn)清的文化與政治認(rèn)同感在逐步遞嬗。 另一方面，從朝鮮自身角度來(lái)考量，《家禮》朝鮮化的進(jìn)路又是反映朝鮮自身政治、文化體系構(gòu)建并逐步完善以即朝鮮從“認(rèn)同”走向“自我”的過(guò)程。透過(guò)《家禮》在朝鮮五百余年的傳播史，不僅可以從文化角度闡釋朝鮮禮學(xué)范式沿革與“聲教”異變的進(jìn)程，厘清朝鮮不同時(shí)期家禮之“通論”、“諸先生禮說(shuō)”、“問(wèn)答”、“補(bǔ)苴”、“常變”、“祝辭”、“禮式”、“家范”等書(shū)寫(xiě)形式的形成與特點(diǎn)，也可以從朝鮮前期國(guó)法體系的建構(gòu)、朝鮮中期國(guó)法與家禮的分離、朝鮮后期法典的修訂與士禮的多元性等三個(gè)方面考察朝鮮家禮與國(guó)法之間的關(guān)系，，藉此以說(shuō)明《家禮》在朝鮮自身政治、法律體系的構(gòu)建進(jìn)程。 本文透過(guò)禮學(xué)宰制下“他者”與“自我”間的對(duì)望和檢視，借以勾繪李氏朝鮮的政治與文化認(rèn)同在遞嬗過(guò)程的復(fù)雜輪廓，以此為東亞政治與儒教文明的交流研究提供一個(gè)拋磚引玉的平臺(tái)。
[Abstract]:The Korean Dynasty 1392-1910) was called a state of ritual, and the official books of the Korean era were voluminous, and the liturgical family continued one after another. What was different from the paradigm of Chinese propriety was that the entire state and political system of the Korean dynasty was based on the theory of rites. Not only has the etiquette system of the Korean royal family been perfected with the help of "Family Rites", but also the maintenance of local social order has benefited from the people's adherence to "Family Rites", which can be said to be the building and dominating of Korean politics. The core elements of culture. At the same time, it should be seen that North Korea is a subordinate state of China, actively imitating Chinese ethics, and has its own attitude on the level of political and cultural identity. The Korean dynasty's concept of identity to China under the construction of Rites can be viewed from two aspects of emotion: China and self-cognition. On the one hand, from the perspective of North Korea's cognitive attitude towards China, the DPRK obeys the Ming system, wears the Ming clothing, and has natural clothing for the Ming regime, but after the change of the Ming and Qing dynasties, North Korea has subjectively separated "China" from "Manchu" in the concept of "China-centrism". Politically, it still agrees with the pre-Ming system, regards the Manchu Qing as a "Meng-Mo state", and culturally abides by the imperial rule of law. There is no lack of disdain for the culture of the Qing Dynasty, which includes a sense of pride and justice in respect of orthodoxy, but also a prejudice against the legitimacy of the Manchu regime. Through the experience and feelings of Korean Yan operators in China on the ground from the middle of 17th century to the end of 19th century, It is not difficult to find that the relationship between culture and political identity is not included, but is a dynamic progressive and interactive relationship. The gradual development of political affiliation deepens the cultural prejudice of North Korea against Hu Fengman's vulgarity. Moreover, through the investigation of Yan Xing Lu, we can see that North Korea's cultural and political identity of Manchu Qing Dynasty is gradually changing in the hope of each other. On the other hand, from the point of view of the DPRK itself, the path of "family rites" toward North Korea is a reflection of North Korea's own politics. The construction and gradual improvement of the cultural system means the process of North Korea moving from "identity" to "self". Through the spread of "Family Rites" in North Korea for more than 500 years, Not only can we explain the evolution of Korean ritual paradigm and the process of "vocal teaching" from a cultural point of view. To clarify the formation and characteristics of the forms of writing such as "general theory", "Mr. Zhu Li's theory", "Q & A", "compensation", "Chang change", "wish speech", "ritual style", "family norm" and so on in different periods of Korea, can also be made from the construction of the state law system in the early stage of Korea. The separation of the state law and the family rites in the middle period of the DPRK, the revision of the code of law in the late period of the DPRK and the pluralism of the law of the people's Republic of Korea, etc., to examine the relationship between the family rites of Korea and the law of the state, in order to explain the process of constructing the political and legal system in the DPRK itself. This paper attempts to draw the complex outline of the political and cultural identity of Lee's North Korea in the process of evolution by examining and examining the relationship between the "other" and "self" under the system of propriety and propriety, in order to draw a picture of the complex outline of the political and cultural identity of Lee's North Korea. This provides a platform for the exchange of East Asian politics and Confucian civilization.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D091

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王振忠;;18世紀(jì)東亞海域國(guó)際交流中的風(fēng)俗記錄——兼論日、朝對(duì)盛清時(shí)代中國(guó)的重新定位及其社會(huì)反響[J];安徽大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年04期

2 張中秋;家禮與國(guó)法的關(guān)系、原理、意義[J];法學(xué);2005年05期

3 鄭容和;;從周邊視角來(lái)看朝貢關(guān)系——朝鮮王朝對(duì)朝貢體系的認(rèn)識(shí)和利用[J];國(guó)際政治研究;2006年01期

4 尚會(huì)鵬;;“倫人”與“天下”——解讀以朝貢體系為核心的古代東亞國(guó)際秩序[J];國(guó)際政治研究;2009年02期

5 李揚(yáng)帆;;涌動(dòng)的東亞——明清易代時(shí)期東亞政治行為體的身份認(rèn)同[J];國(guó)際政治研究;2010年03期

6 張乃和;認(rèn)同理論與世界區(qū)域化研究[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

7 楊念群;;何謂“東亞”?——近代以來(lái)中日韓對(duì)“亞洲”想象的差異及其后果[J];清華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年01期

8 韓東育;;東亞研究的問(wèn)題點(diǎn)與新思考[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)戰(zhàn)線(xiàn);2011年03期

9 葛兆光;大明衣冠今何在[J];史學(xué)月刊;2005年10期

10 孫艷姝;;晚清中朝朝貢關(guān)系詳考[J];史學(xué)月刊;2011年01期

本文編號(hào)：1546705