일연(一然)의 신라사 시기구분 인식 = Ilyeon's perception and periodization of the Shilla dynasty's history

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In 『Samguk Yusa』 , the history of Shilla is periodized in a fashion different from the one featured in 『Samguk Sagi』. It describes the history of Shilla in three eras, the 'Early ancient' period, the 'Middle ancient' period, and the 'Late ancient' period. Among them, the Middle ancient period, which is established as commenced with the introduction of Buddhism, could be considered the most distinctive characteristic of this kind of periodization. Then again, this kind of periodization only appears in the 'Chronological table' volume, and some scholars have argued that this volume actually did not come from Ilyeon himself. So, to be examined in this article would be, whether we could consider the periodization of Shilla history suggested in 『Samguk Yusa』 to be consistent with Ilyeon's own perception of the Shilla's history or not, and how he was periodizing the history of Shilla afrer all.
First of all, cross-checking the 'Extraordinary things' volume with the 'Chronological table' volume, especially in each volume's 'Middle ancient' section, revealed a huge difference in both the documented contents and the fashion they were described. And the 'Extraordinary things' volume did not contain any reference to the periodization in question. This backs up the hypothesis that was presented earlier to suggest the possibility that the 'Chronological table' volume might have been 'added' (later some time). So, the previous belief which considered the Shilla history periodization featured in the 'Chronological table' volume as also part of Ilyeon's thinking should be reconsidered.
In the meantime, we should also note that, in structural terms 'Extraordinary things' volume shows divisions in chapters and also in books(卷), which seems as a result of not some quantity problems but the author's very intention. 2nd book of this volume starts with the reign of King Munmu-wang, and it suggests that Ilyeon was considering the completion of the wee dynasties' unification (the state of 'Iltong Sam-han') to be very important, and also as a major breakthrough for the history of Shilla. Ilyeon established a unique historical structure viewing that the first dynasty Go-Joseon went through a period of division(from Sam-Han period through the wee dynasties period) and then the situation was resolved and the peninsula was unified under Shilla and that Shilla later went on to become Goryeo. In other words, Ilyeon considered the first unification ever, the unification which achieved 'Iltong Sam-han', as an important event which marked the beginning of a new era for the history of Shilla.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 머리말
• 1. 『삼국유사』 ‘중고(中古)’기 검토
• 2. 「기이(紀異)」편에 반영된 일연(一然)의 신라사 인식
• 맺음말
• 〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 "한국고대사회연구" 서울대 출판부 1990
• 2 "일연과 삼국유사" 신서원 2007
• 3 김수태, "신라중대정치사연구" 일조각 1996
• 4 申瀅植, "신라사의 시대구분 문제 『한국사의 시대구분에 간한 연구』"
• 5 병삼, "신라불교사상사와 『삼국유사』 의해편 In: 일연과 삼국유사" 신서원 2007
• 6 김철준, "신라 상대사회의 Dual Organization" 1 : 1952
• 7 김두진, "삼국유사의 사료적 성격 In: 역주 삼국유사Ⅴ" 이회문화사 2003
• 8 하정룡, "삼국유사 사료비판" 민족사 2005
• 9 김태영, "韓國의 歷史認識" 창작과 비평사 1976
• 10 今西龍, "記" 朝鮮史學會 1928
• 11 蔡尙植, "至元15年(1278)仁興社刊 歷代年表와 三國遺事 In: 高麗史의 諸問題" 삼영사 1986
• 12 "眞表 占察法會의 성립과 성격" 한국고대사학회 49 : 2008
• 13 주운화, "樂을 통해서 본 신라인의 복속·통합 관념-가야금과 현금의 정치적 상징-" 38 : 2005
• 14 李康來, "本史와 遺事" 1998
• 15 李昊榮, "新羅의 統一意識과 ‘一統三韓’ 意識의 성장" 26 : 1996
• 16 李昊榮, "新羅의 統一意識과 ‘一統三韓’ 意識의 성장" 단국대 동양학연구소 26 : 1996
• 17 武田幸男, "新羅骨品制の再檢討" 67 : 1975
• 18 李基東, "新羅社會와 佛敎" 21 : 1991
• 19 姜仁求, "新羅王陵의 再檢討 In:三國遺事의 綜合的 檢討" 한국정신문화연구원 1987
• 20 權英五, "新羅史 時期區分과 『三代目』" 45 : 2007
• 21 末松保和, "新羅三代考 『新羅史の諸問題』"
• 22 丁仲煥, "新羅 聖骨考 In: 李弘稙博士華甲紀念 韓國史學論叢" 신구문화사 1969
• 23 김두진, "新羅 眞平王代의 釋迦佛信仰" 국민대 10 : 1988
• 24 "新羅 五臺山信仰의 成立時期" 한국사상사학회 28 : 2007
• 25 한기문, "新羅 下代 興輪寺와 金堂 十聖의 性格" 20 : 2002
• 26 곽승훈, "新羅 下代 前期 興輪寺 金堂 十聖의 奉安과 彌勒下生信仰" 11 : 1998
• 27 한국정신문화연구원, "三國遺事의 綜合的 檢討"
• 28 東北亞細亞硏究會, "三國遺事의 硏究" 중앙출판 1982
• 29 金相鉉, "三國遺事의 書誌學的 고찰 In: 三國遺事의 綜合的 檢討" 한국정신문화연구원 1987
• 30 李基白, "三國遺事의 史學史的 意義 In: 韓國의 歷史認識 上" 창작과 비평사 1976
• 31 李基白, "三國遺事의 史學史的 意義"
• 32 金相鉉, "三國遺事의 刊行과 流通" 38 : 1982
• 33 金泰永, "三國遺事에 보이는 一然의 歷史認識에 대하여" 5 : 1974
• 34 村上四男, "三國遺事解題 『三國遺事考證 上』"
• 35 "三國遺事硏究論選集" 백산자료원 1986
• 36 "三國遺事硏究論選集" 백산자료원 1986
• 37 "三國遺事硏究論選集" 백산자료원 1986
• 38 民族文化硏究所, "三國遺事硏究 上" 영남대 출판부 1983
• 39 이기백, "三國遺事 紀異篇의 考察" 1 : 1984
• 40 李根直, "三國遺事 王曆의 編纂性格과 時期" 101 : 1998
• 41 金相鉉, "三國遺事 王曆篇 檢討-王曆 撰者에 대한 疑問-" 단국대 15 : 1985
• 42 高翊晉, "三國遺事 撰述攷" 38 : 1982
• 43 "三國遺事"
• 44 邊太燮, "三國統一의 民族史的 意味-?一統三韓?意識과 관련하여" 2 : 1983
• 45 "『三國遺事硏究論選集』, 백산자료원 재수록"
• 46 "『三國史記』 卷41, 列傳1 金庾信 上 “眞德王 太和元年戊申 春秋以不得請於高句麗 遂入唐乞師”"
• 47 趙壽鶴, "‘三國遺事 (紀異)卷第二’의 設定理由" 31 : 1995
• 48 남동신, "?『삼국유사』의 사서로서의 특징 In: 일연과 삼국유사" 신서원 2007
• 49 "?『占察經』의 成立과 그 思想" 역사실학회 32 : 2007
• 50 金福順, "?『三國遺事』 ?興法?편과 중고기의 설정" 19 : 2000
• 51 池憲英, "?<三代目> 硏究 序說" 68 : 1990