韓国農村に於ける親族の範囲

In this essay, the author presents an analysis of Korean kinship circles in the rural districts, based primarily on an analysis of the present-day situation with due consideration given to historical background. The argument is dividedinto two sections; the problems in terms of legal history, and the results of some field researches conducted by the author and his colleagues. First, the limit of the recognition of kin is examined historically, analyzing the details of mourning grades of several important legal regulations issued in different periods in Korean history, such as Gofuku-seido (the five-graded mourning institution) of the Koma dynasty, Keikoku-taiten (1461), Shirei-binran (1844) etc. ・・・ The comparative analysis of these regulations reveals that in spite of chronological differences they share the fundamentally similar pattern in terms of the limit of kin subject to a mourning grade. One of the noticeable tendencies through the series of these regulations is the gradual development of the status differentiation among the collateral members between the successor of the house and non-successors. Further the discussion extends to the regulations of the recognized kin of Keihodaizen (1905) and Kanshu-chosa-hokoku (1910), the range of which is found wider than the mourning grades of above regulations. In comparison with the patterns of kin circles traced through above historical legal regulations, including the modern civil code, he presents the analysis of a range and function of a set of recognized kin among contemporary farmers. The author arranges his data collected from seven villages according to the classification applied by Han-Yi Feng: relatives through father, relatives through mother, relatives through husband, and relatives through wife. And he employs the following criteria for the recognition of close relatives: 1) subjective aspects・・・・・・ the consciousness of familiarity and respect. 2) objective aspects・・・・・・ a) attendance and aid at wedding and funeral ceremonies, b) aid in disasters and sickness, and c) the frequnecy of social intercourse in ordinary life. Through the analysis the author suggests several important issues on the kinship study in rural Korea. Firstly, the range of the paternal and maternal kin varies according to the sex of Ego, particularly he draws attention to the case of female Ego, which has been overlooked by previous studies. Secondly he reveals the importance of, and actual close relation with, wife's kin, which has been tended to be disregarded against the traditional orientation toward the paternal kin. The range of kin designed by laws and regulations is framed centred on the paternal kin and includes very little affines, particularly wife's side; and even moral attitude takes an expression of disregarding wife's kin, though in actuality they have very close relations with them. He explains these two different categories of kin in terms of Korean consciousness: it is the formal respect which is directed toward paternal kin, and the informal familiarity toward wife's and mother's kin. Thirdly, if the kinship is viewed from the actual function in rural areas, a set of kin is recognized in terms of a household, rather than of an individual. Finally he hopes this essay would stimulate further nation-wide scientific researches on Korean kinship.