Most studies on Nammyeong Jo Sik's literary works have been focused mainly on the discussion about his poems and aesthetic sense on which his literature was based. Moreover, researches on his prose unlike that on poetry have made little progress, especially with no studies on epitaphs, which are considered important among his prose in classical Chinese. This thesis is to examine Nammyeong Jo Sik's style of writing and the underlying aesthetic sense, focusing on his epitaphs, which most researchers have had little interest in so far. When he wrote epitaph, Nammyeong Jo Sik put great emphasis on frank narration among other things, which is to describe the truth about the dead person in question. Besides, he stressed two points; first, to know the dead concerned very well and to frankly describe the fact about the dead person without flattering attitude, under any circumstances. We can prove that he applied these rules to the writing of epitaph. Above all, it is clear in the fact that among about 22 epitaphs, most of them were for his own father, relatives, close friends and relatives of his pupils whose family history and specific situations he himself knew very well. Secondly, as shown explicitly from the epitaph for his deceased father, he faithfully followed his own rule not to flatter a dead person by exaggerating or making an excuse. In addition to the rule of truth, he exalted epitaph to the high place of literary works not only by narrating the fact frankly, but also freely expressing his own feelings. At this point, it is worth mentioning the episode concerning the epitaph he wrote for the late father of Guam(龜巖) Yi Jeong(李楨), who was one of major scholars living in Yeongnam(嶺南) province and Nammyeong Jo Sik kept in contact with. As Guam Yi Jeong sent the epitaph to T'oegye(退溪) Yi Hwang(李滉), asking for correction, this led to an indirect argument between T'ogye Yi Hwang and Nammyeong Jo Sik. Exceptionally T'oegye Yi Hwang corrected a lot the epitaph written by Nammyeong Jo Sik, severely criticizing the form and content of the epitaph. Naturally, Nammyeong Jo Sik did not accept the criticism of T'oegye Yi Hwang, because they were much different in a philosophical inclination and view of study as well as literary taste and style. Consequently, they both showed great opposition to each other's style and aesthetic sense concerning the epitaph beyond compromise. Nammyeong Jo Sik thought that he was not so much literarily successful, but he himself was the successor of 'ancient prose'(古文) tradition, while he criticized T'oegye Yi Hwang's style naming it 'popular prose'(今文) despite his success in the world. On the other hand, T'oegye Yi Hwang criticized Nammyeong Jo Sik's epitaph for his consistently changing rule, mentioning that there are certain rules of epitaph narration, which are the fixed rule and changing rule. Form this controversy between the two persons concerning epitaph writing, we can understand to some extent the thought of men of noble family in the early Chosen dynasty period concerning epitaph as an important form of prose in classical Chinese.

The article aims to compare the thought and practice between Nammyeong Jo Sik(1501-1572), the Confucian scholar of the mid Choso˘n period and Yamazaki Ansai(1618-1682), the Confucian scholar of the early Tokugawa Japan. Most of the comparative studies are conducted to highlight the differences between the cases compared. People, for example, will expect from the comparative study of Nammyeong and Ansai's thoughts to see the differences of reception and development of the Neo-Confucian thought in Choso˘n and Tokugawa Japan. This article, however, focuses on the commonalities and similarities shared by the two Neo-Confucians who lived in the totally different political systems and backgrounds. Both of them concentrated not on how to philosophize their own thinking but on ways to actualize the truths revealed by their antecedents. Their lives, therefore, were consistent in practising the truths discovered by the sages. Their concrete methods of practice were Jing(敬) and Yi(義). The two thinkers actualized their beliefs: Nammyeong as Chushi(處士) in times of the massacre of literati in mid Choso˘n period, and Yamazaki Ansai as Binshi(賓帥) in the barrack state, a counry unfamiliar with Neo-Confucianism. They shared the common dreams of being the Wangshi(王帥) and truly corresponded to Chu Hsi(朱熹)'s idea of the citizen of the cosmopolitan world.