19세기의 향촌질서 전개는 일반적으로 사족지배체제의 해체로 설명되며, 이를 대신하는 양상으로 수령-이서 등이 중심이 되는 국가주도의 향촌지배질서의 확립과 일반 인민의 저항 및 상승의식 고취로 설명되곤 한다. 그런데 19세기 경기도의 일부 동계는 사족의 위상이 강 화되는 양상이 나타나면서도 일반 인민에 대한 포섭을 중시하는 양면적인 양상이 나타나기도 한다. 양근의 대야동 동계 역시 이와 같은 복잡한 성격을 공유하면서 현대까지 여러 변천을 거쳐 장기지속해온 동계조직이다. 특히 해당지역의 사족들은 관직역임경력 및 사림의 적통계 승과 같은 유리한 조건이 없이, 19세기의 일반적인 추세에 역행해 국가의 감시가 보다 강력한 경기지역에서 자신들이 주도하는 향촌질서를 재구성했던 것이다. 이와 같은 문제를 설명하기 위해서는 이들이 어떠한 계기와 조치를 통해서 위로부터 가해 지는 국가의 힘은 물론, 아래로부터 상승하는 인민들의 반발에 대응하였는지를 살피는 것이 중요하다. 이들은 공동납 관행과 같은 관아의 수세편의주의에 호소하여 일반 인민의 분동 요 구 등을 1차적으로 물리치는 것에 성공하였다. 나아가 오가작통제에 적극적으로 참여함으로 써 공적 지배체제와 자신들의 일체화를 강화하였다. 또한 동계조직운영에서 일반 인민의 지 분을 마련하고, 상호부조의 물질적 기반을 마련하면서, 구체적인 상호부조 조치를 시행하여 2차적으로는 인민의 요구를 만족시켜주고자 하였다. 결국 대야동계의 주도세력은 국가의 향촌지배체제와 결함함으로써, 사족을 중심으로 한 ‘지배’적 질서를 가시적으로 구성하면서도, 이면으로는 인민을 만족시키기 위한 구체적 조치 를 통해 ‘포섭’을 진행해가고 있었던 것이다. 이와 같은 특성은 대야동계가 장기지속이 가능 했던 요인을 설명해주면서도, 동시에 전반적인 특정 추세에서 역행적 사례가 나타날 수 있었 던 역사적인 배경과 요인을 해명해준다
The development of the local order in the 19th century is generally explained by the dissolution of the local confucian elites(在地士族) governance system, which is replaced by the centralized order of the county's governor(守令) and officals(吏胥) led, and the resistance of the ordinary people and the promotion of a sense of ascension. However, some village organization(洞契) in Gyeonggi-do(京畿道) in the 19th century appear to be intensified. At the same time, there are two-sided aspects that emphasize the inclusion of the general public. Yang-Geun(楊根) Daeya-dong(大也洞)‘s village organization is also a long-standing village organization that has shared many of these complex characteristics and has undergone long periods of change. In particular, the local confucianism elites in this region reconstructed their own order of incense in the region of Gyeonggi, where state surveillance was more powerful, without favorable conditions such as the experience of public post and the succession of famous confucian scholars(士林). In order to explain these issues, it is important to see how they responded to the forces of the state from above, and the reaction of the rising people from below. Since the 19th century, they have actively responded to the organizing five houses(五家作統) which have been strengthened for the crackdown of Catholicism. and have successfully combined with the authorit and governance of the state to defeat the demands of ordinary people just like separate village(分洞) from elites. On the other hand, it aimed to satisfy the needs of ordinary people by sharing of participation in operating village organization, establishing the material basis for mutual assistance, and implementing specific mutual aid measures. In the end, the main stream of the Daeya-dong village organization had a defect in the state's local governance system, which made it possible to construct a ‘dominant’ order centered on local confucian elites, while proceeding with ‘subsumption’ through concrete measures to satisfy the people. It was. These characteristics explain the factors that led to the long-term sustainability of the Daeya-dong village organization, and at the same time, explain the historical background and factors that led to retrograde cases in certain general trends.
The development of the local order in the 19th century is generally explained by the dissolution of the local confucian elites(在地士族) governance system, which is replaced by the centralized order of the county's governor(守令) and officals(吏胥) led, and the resistance of the ordinary people and the promotion of a sense of ascension. However, some village organization(洞契) in Gyeonggi-do(京畿道) in the 19th century appear to be intensified. At the same time, there are two-sided aspects that emphasize the inclusion of the general public. Yang-Geun(楊根) Daeya-dong(大也洞)‘s village organization is also a long-standing village organization that has shared many of these complex characteristics and has undergone long periods of change. In particular, the local confucianism elites in this region reconstructed their own order of incense in the region of Gyeonggi, where state surveillance was more powerful, without favorable conditions such as the experience of public post and the succession of famous confucian scholars(士林). In order to explain these issues, it is important to see how they responded to the forces of the state from above, and the reaction of the rising people from below. Since the 19th century, they have actively responded to the organizing five houses(五家作統) which have been strengthened for the crackdown of Catholicism. and have successfully combined with the authorit and governance of the state to defeat the demands of ordinary people just like separate village(分洞) from elites. On the other hand, it aimed to satisfy the needs of ordinary people by sharing of participation in operating village organization, establishing the material basis for mutual assistance, and implementing specific mutual aid measures. In the end, the main stream of the Daeya-dong village organization had a defect in the state's local governance system, which made it possible to construct a ‘dominant’ order centered on local confucian elites, while proceeding with ‘subsumption’ through concrete measures to satisfy the people. It was. These characteristics explain the factors that led to the long-term sustainability of the Daeya-dong village organization, and at the same time, explain the historical background and factors that led to retrograde cases in certain general trends.
