日帝 下 新羅 花郞 硏究와 南堂 朴昌和의 ≪花郞世紀≫ -花郞制의 起源･成立 問題를 中心으로- (A Study on Silla Hwarang during the Imperial Japan and Hwarangsegi(花郎世紀) by Park Chang Hwa : Concentrating upon the Origin and Establishment of Hwarang System(花郞制))

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 신라사학회
· 수록지 정보 : 신라사학보 / 41호 / 223 ~ 261페이지
· 저자명 : 정운용

초록

항일독립운동기 일본인 중 화랑을 연구한 몇몇 연구자로는 今村鞆, 池內宏, 鮎貝房之進, 三品彰英 등을 들 수 있다. 이들의 원화･화랑 연구는 대부분 ≪삼국사기≫의 내용을 부인한 채, 원화･화랑을 무당으로 파악하고, 화랑의 ‘武士的 정신’을 강조하였다. 아울러 원화를 娼女라 주장하면서도, 任那日本府說이나 日鮮同祖論에 입각한 논리로 신라 화랑을 바라보았다.
반면에 박창화의 ≪花郎世紀≫는 자신의 신라사 인식에 입각하여 색다른 花郞觀을 드러내고 있다. 그의 ≪화랑세기≫는 미궁에 빠져있던 원화의 유래를 언급하는 것에서 시작하고 있다. 즉, 중국(燕 나라)에서 제사를 관장하던 燕夫人의 國花 풍습이 東漸하여 신라의 神宮 제사를 주관하는 원화가 생겨났다고 서술한 것이다. 아울러 ‘화랑’이라는 명칭은 법흥왕의 총애를 받던 魏花郞의 이름에서 비롯한 것이라 하고 있다.
추측컨대 연부인은 풍요와 다산을 의미하는 神母로서의 성격을 갖고 있어 보인다. 아울러 위만조선의 위만이 ‘燕人’이었다는 것에서 착안하여 燕夫人을 언급한 것일는지도 모른다. 또 여타 史書에서 國仙으로 거명되는 薛原郎과 대등하게 화랑 文努를 ‘護國仙’으로 등장시키고 있다.
당시 박창화는 일본인 화랑 연구자들이 업적을 충분히 접할 수 있었을 것이다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 그들이 가공의 존재 또는 창녀로 취급한 원화를 중국 泰山 封禪祭와 대등한 祭儀 주관자로 설정하면서 화랑의 시원으로 그려 놓고 있다. 일본인 연구자들이 화랑의 무사적 정신의 강조한 반면, 朴昌和의 ≪화랑세기≫는 호국선 文努를 언급하면서 화랑의 출중한 무예 수준을 드러내고 있을 뿐이다. 박창화는 일본인 화랑 연구자들과는 정 반대의 논리로 신라 화랑의 傳記를 그려놓았는데, 이것이 신라사･신라인의 실상에 근접한 서술이라 여겨진다.

영어초록

In the period of Anti-Japanese Independence Movement, the premise of Japanese’s study of Hwarang was an inconsistency. Imamura Tomo(今村鞆), who approached to Hwarang in the field of folklore such as history of social customs, denied the part of inscription about Hwarang in ≪Samkooksagi(三國史記)≫ recognizing them as shamans. It substantially seems that modified perception of Hwarang in Joseon Dynasty caused an error in viewing Silla Hwarang. Subsequently, Ikeuchi Hiroshi(池內宏) emphasized the ‘warrior spirit’ of Silla people, taking note of the development of Silla Dynasty in 5~6C. On his angle, studying the ‘History of Manchurian and Joseon(滿鮮史)’, the process of thinking might came from the need of courageous soldiers and prominent leaders for Japan’s invasion of China. ‘The warrior spirit of Silla people’, which Ikeuchi deduced, varied to ‘Hwarang’s Sesok-Ohgye’･‘Hwarang’s warrior spirit’ in the stage of Ayukai Husanoshin(鮎貝房之進)’s study.
Ayukai’s study has ‘Imlailbonbusul(任那日本府說)’ on the premise. He preposterously claims that Hwarang and Silla Dynasty, who had the warrior spirit, were descendants of Japanese(大和民族). Furthermore, he refers to Wonhwa(源花) as a nationally revered Hwarang but actually was a prostitute. His study, which covers substantial historical records of Hwarang, appears to had come from an idea based on the ‘same ancestors of Japan and Joseon(日鮮同祖論)’. Contemporarily, Mishina shoei(三品彰英) who mobilized anthropological knowledge figured Wonhwa, the origin of Hwarang, and Hwarang themselves as an assembly or southern coming-of-age ceremony. Also, while contending the combating function of Hwarang, he comprehends the state was not a national affair. This is an entirely unacceptable interpretion and signification.
On the other hand, Park Chang Hwa shows an unconventional view of Hwarang(花郞觀) based on his historical knowledge of Silla through ≪Hwarangsegi(花郎世紀)≫. It begins with referring to the origin of Wonhwa who was in the maze. In other words, it is saying that chief priest Yoenbuin(燕夫人)’s Kookhwa(國花) propagated to the east, leading to a priest of shrine(神宮), Wonhwa, in Silla. Besides, designating ‘Hwarang’ came from Weehwarang(魏花郞) who gained favor of King Bubheung. It seems that Yoen-buin has a feature of goddess of furtility and fecundity. Or she might had been mentioned from the idea that Weeman(衛滿) from Weeman-Joseon were Yeon-in(燕人). Moreover, Hwarang Moonlo(文努) appears as a Hokooksun(護國仙), equivalent to Seolwonrang(薛原郎) who is brought up at numerous documents of history as a Kooksun(國仙).
Park Chang Hwa would have been able to fully understand the achievements of Japanese historians. Nonetheless, he set up Wonhwa, who was either a fictitious character or just a prostitute in Japanese’s study, not only as a priest equivalent to the priest of TaeSan Bongsunje(泰山 封禪祭) in China but also as the origin of Hwarang. While Japanese historians emphasized the warrior spirit of the Hwarang, ≪Hwarangsegi≫ has no such reference. It simply suggests the outstanding martial skills of Hwarang through Moonlo. It explains the biography of Silla Hwarang on the contrary of Japanese historians’ view, which could be much more approximate description to the history of Silla and Silla people. This is the reason we should pay attention to ≪Hwarangsegi≫ written by Park Chang Hwa.

참고자료

· 없음