상세검색
최근 검색어 전체 삭제
다국어입력
즐겨찾기0
커버이미지 없음
KCI우수등재 학술저널

統一新羅 開始期의 印花文土器

-曆年代 資料 確保를 위하여-

  • 947

이 글에서는 기왕의 연구를 통해서도 소개된 바 있는 충남 부여의 능산리사지(陵山里寺址)와 정림사지연지(定林寺址蓮池), 부소산성(扶蘇山城)에서 서기 660년경 이후에 유입된 것으로 판단되는 신라문물인 인화문토기(印花文土器)를 세부적인 위치적 정황과 함께 기형과 문양을 재검토함으로써 기존 인화문토기에 대한 인식 재고와 역연대 추정 자료의 활용에 대한 당위성을 더욱 보강하였다. 신라의 삼국통일 직전 부여지역에 유입된 인화문토기의 특징적이며 공통된 양상은, 정형(定形)적인 마제형종장문(馬蹄形縱長文) 출현 이전의 과도기적 양상으로 명료하게 이해된다. 즉 인화문토기의 가시적인 속성인 문양은 이른 시기의 기하학적 모티브를 여전히 유지하고 있을 뿐 아니라, 시문구에 문양이 양각으로 처리된 원문류(圓文類), 수적형문(水滴形文), 능형문(菱形文) 등 단일문류(單一文類)의 개별 밀집시문이 우세하다. 또한 유사종장문(類似縱長文)과 초기종장문(初期縱長文)도 확인됨으로써 문양 변천의 형식학적 전개과정상, 문양시문의 혼란기를 거쳐 가까운 어느 시기에 종렬이 체계화되고 정형화된 1열 3개 이상의 마제형종장문 출현을 시사한다. 한편 서기 660년경 인화문토기의 문양시문 양상을 원문류의 밀집시문 유행과 1열 3개 이하 유사・초기종장문의 출현으로 파악한다면 이러한 문양시문의 과도기를 거쳐 다음으로 전개될 정형화된 마제형종장문의 출현은 언제인가? 이는 곧 과도기의 문양시문 양상의 존속기간에 대한 문제로 귀결된다. 이를 유추해 볼 수 있는 역연대 보강자료로서 경주와 부여에서 멀리 떨어진 경기도지역 남한산성(南漢山城) 출토 인화문토기를 제시해 보았다. 남한산성은 기존의 발굴조사를 통해 신라가 당으로부터 한강유역을 방어하기 위해 서기 672년경에 축조한 주장성(晝長城)으로 가장 유력시되어 왔던 곳이다. 이곳에서도 정형종장문 출현 이전의 과도기적 인화문토기 양상이 서로 동일하게 확인되는 점이 주목되었다. 결국 문양시문의 혼란기를 거쳐 가까운 시기에 전개될 마제형종장문의 출현은 문양 변천의 형식학적 관점에서 670년경 이후이며, 통일신라 개시기에 근접한 양상으로 유추해 볼 수 있었다.

It is very difficult to establish the chronology of archaeological materials and data for the early phase of the Unified Silla Dynasty, which we know from documentary records was a very chaotic period in which the war for unification took place at the end of the Three Kingdoms Period. It has been believed that this was due to the long-term existence of specific tomb burial systems in the Silla period, the unwillingness to change, the diversity in perspectives of pottery chronology, and the rarity of data which set the standards of chronological recording. Therefore, this study reviewed pottery with stamped design, one of the cultural products of the Silla Dynasty, which is thought to have been introduced after sometime around AD 660, based on the historical literature, into Neungsan-ri-saji, Jeongrim-saji-yeonji and Buso-sanseong (mountain fortress) in Buyeo, Chungnam Province—this material has also been introduced in previous studies. This study also put detailed geographic contexts, pottery types and patterns into consideration. By doing so, it reinforced the feasibility of reconsidering the previous understanding of this artifact type and the use of materials based on the reverse chronological estimation. The characteristic and common aspects of pottery with stamped design introduced into the Buyeo area right before the unification of the Three Kingdoms are clearly characterized by the transitional traits which appeared before the emergence of the set-form horse shoe angle vertical pattern (馬蹄形縱長文). Namely, not only did the patterns, which are a visible attribute of ‘pottery with stamped design’, retain early-stage geometric motifs, single-pattern types of individually condensed pattern decoration treated with patterns engraved in relief on the decoration tools—such as of the round-shaped pattern type (圓文類), the water-drop mark pattern (水滴形文), the diamondshaped mark pattern (菱形文)—were also predominant. Besides, it has been confirmed that semi-circle type single patterns were densely designed to form similar-vertical patterns (類似縱 長文) in a way similar to the design of more than three vertical patterns in a row. In addition, individual unit vertical patterns proved to emerge as less than three semi-circle-type early-stage vertical patterns in a row which were not positioned and arranged properly in the row and column system. These have suggested that the emergence of more than three horse shoe angle vertical patterns, the row and column of which was systematized and typified, appeared somewhere around this period via the confused stage of pattern design, in terms of the typological development of pattern changes. If we regard the fashion of round-shaped densely patterned designs and the appearance of less than three similar- and early vertical patterns in a row to be the aspects of pattern design for pottery with stamped design around AD 660, then when did the fixed forms of horse shoe angle vertical pattern, which followed after such a transitional pattern design, occur? Namely, this is a question which involves the issue of how long the aspects of the transitional pattern design existed. As the reverse chronological back-up data which could be used to infer this issue, the pottery with stamped design excavated from Namhan-sanseong (South of the Han Mountain Fortress) in the Gyeonggi area far from Gyeongju and Buyeo was suggested. Namhan-sanseong has strongly been believed to be the Jujangseong that was constructed around AD 672 to protect Silla from Tang China through previous excavations. It was noticeable that the aspects of transitional pottery with stamped design before the emergence of set-form vertical pattern were confirmed here as the equivalents. To conclude, it has been inferred that the approxi

Ⅰ. 머리말

Ⅱ. 轉換期의 時代 區分 硏究史

Ⅲ. 轉換期의 印花文土器

Ⅳ. 印花文土器로 본 統一新羅 開始期

Ⅴ. 맺음말

로딩중