Abstract

Twelve manuscripts of the Crown Prince Jangheon(莊獻世子 1735‑1762) preserved in Jangseogak are dated in 1756, 1757, 1758, and 1761. Most of them were entered the palace as offerings during the reign of King Jeongjo(r. 1776‑1800), and among them 9 manuscripts were included in the Neungheogwan‑mango(凌虛關漫稿), a collection of his works, edited by Jeongjo until 1799 and published in 1814. Firstly, the draft of epitaph for Queen Jeongseong(貞聖王后 1692‑1757) in 1757 is very noticeable. Because in the Annal of the King Yeongjo(1694‑1776) it was recorded as a royal work of the king but after it was included in Neungheogwan‑mango. So this draft might become a basis of recognizing him as the author. And 3 manuscripts of five‑character poem in 1756 and two seven‑character poems in 1758 were respectively put on the part of 1753 and 1756 in the collection of works, so we can find a partial error in the editing process. In next, 3 manuscripts during the secret journey to Pyeong‑yang in April 1761 are also worthy of notice. Among them 2 documents are extraordinary cases in aspect of signing his official signature, in which he identified a common scholar Yi Dae‑sim as a descendent of royal family and stated the intension of his journey. The other is a kind of document ordering to exempt the descendent of Seo Pil‑yeong from compulsory labors, which seems to be signed by a retinue. It is necessary to examine them precisely in the field of old document study. Above this, comparing the 9 works of Neungheogwan‑mango with the original works, we can find out them excessively modified or adapted. This aspect is also appeared in several of his manuscripts out of Jangseogak. This editing manner would be interrelated with both Jeongjo’s affectionate love to his father and his conservative viewpoint on the literature as a statecraft. On this wise, these 12 manuscripts of the Crown Prince Jangheon are not only very rare materials of calligraphic study but also shows the process of collecting and the manner of editing by Jeongjo, particularly suggests that the works of Neungheogwan‑mango have problem with their originality.