조선총독부의 고적조사와 총독부박물관 = The archaeological research in colonial Korea and the Museum of the Government-general

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Modern Japan conducted a full-extent study of ancient customs in Korea, in order to complete the submission of the Korean people and to rule them more efficiently. This research was followed by an archeological program which aim was to study the ancient sites of Korea; this program occupied a central position inside the legitimation process of Japanese domination, along the compilation of an annalistic History of Korea(Chōsen-shi) . The archaeological program did in fact begin before the Annexation, but it grew larger with the foundation of the Museum of the Government-general, which was to be in charge of this research. Even if this museum was not a large one, it embraced projects and pursued goals situated on a common ground inside the international stream of its time.
In this paper, we will discuss about the content of this archeological research and about the Museum, in charge of it. We will focus on cultural policies in Korea as seen by Kuroita, who elaborated the core of this research and who was well informed about the international tendancies of his time. Eventually we will try to analyze the historical nature of the Museum.
This examination we propose will enable us to close up on Kuroita’s vision of modern historical science as a science designed to serve the construction process of national consciousness in modern Japan. As we shall see through an analysis of the archaeological program and of the Museum’s policies as they were planed by Kuroita, the aim of this “edification” policy was not restricted to the sole Japanese but was in fact to be extended to the Korean themselves, in order to build them into a Nation. The historical science as seen by Kuroita, as it appears in the process, should not only serve the “edification” of the Nation or foster its spirit, but it should also serve the technical purpose that was the spiritual domination of the colonized people of Korea.
Thus, the “spiritual independance” or “national pride” expected from Japanese had fundamentally a dualistic meaning for the Koreans. Here the problem lies in the tension between the early Korean nationalism as it germed at the end of the 19th century, and the national consciousness as Japanese Empire’s subjects as elaborated during the colonial ear. The historical science, as it was mobilized inside colonial policies in order to dominate Korea, could not help but be in the locus of a huge contradiction.
The historical science as a mean to build the Nation in modern Japan was not completed in the sole Japan but was also deeply rooted in the process of domination in Korea. It is because, from the beginning, the models which served as grounds for Kuroita’s vision of archaeological investigations and of the Museum were the European historical and archaeological sciences as they functionned at the beginning of the 20th century as colonial institutions in European colonies. Kuroita brought these models to colonial Korea and used them for the “edification” of the Korean people.
As the logic of preservation of ancient objects shows, Kuroita’s policies also comprehended scholar goals that were hard to achieve in metropolitan Japan, but that were tried in colonial Korea where formal procedures were a lot easier. Some of these experiments tried in Korea were to be brought and realised later in Japan. On the other hand, some institutions such as the project of a National Museum were elaborated in colonial Korea, and this museum were to be established in South Korea after the liberation, although there were still no museum of that kind in Japan. Eventually, we assume a study of the archaeological research conducted in colonial Korea and of the Museum of the Government-general, will enable us to grasp how archaeological and historical sciences were used for the “edification” of one’s Nation and of a colonized people, following the model Kuroita saw in the case of European powers, and also to understand how these modern sciences could reinforce themselves through the colonial experience.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. 조선총독부와 조선의 고적조사
• Ⅲ. 고적보존정책과 역사적 배경
• Ⅳ. 조선총독부박물관
• Ⅴ. 맺음말 - 식민지주의와 총독부박물관

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이성시, "조선왕조의 상징 공간과 박물관"

2 다카기 히로시, "국사의 신화를 넘어서" 휴머니스트 2004

3 이성시, "국사의 신화를 넘어서" 휴머니스트 2004

4 "고적 및 유물 보존 규칙(大正 5년 7월 4일 조선총독부령 제52호)"

5 黒板勝美, "遺跡保存に関する意見書" 1912

6 黒板勝美, "遺跡保存に関する意見書" 23 (23): 1912

7 黒板勝美, "西遊二年欧米文明記" 文会堂 1911

8 黒板勝美, "西遊二年欧米文明記" 1911

9 "虚心文集 4" 吉川弘文館 1939

10 黒板勝美, "田中青山伯" 青山書院 1917

11 東京国立博物館, "東京国立博物館百年史" 東京国立博物館 307-311, 1973

12 李王職, "李王家徳寿宮日本美術品圖録"

13 藤田亮策, "朝鮮考古学略史"

14 小泉顕夫, "朝鮮総督府博物館" 8 (8): 1925

15 崔南善, "朝鮮歴史通俗講話４古墳"

16 藤田亮策, "朝鮮文化財の保存" 1 : 1951

17 有光教一, "朝鮮学事始め" 青丘文化社 1997

18 朝鮮総督府朝鮮史編修会, "朝鮮史編修会事業概要"

19 稲葉岩吉, "朝鮮史硏究の過程"

20 朝鮮総督府, "朝鮮半島史編成ノ要旨及順序 朝鮮人名彙考編纂ノ要旨及順序" 朝鮮総督府 1916

21 黒板勝美, "朝鮮の歴史的観察" 78 : 1921

22 斎藤忠, "朝鮮に於ける古蹟保存と調査事業とに就いて" 15 (15): 45-, 1940

23 藤田亮策, "朝鮮に於ける古蹟の調査及び保存の沿革" 199 : 91-, 1931

24 藤田亮策, "朝鮮に於ける古蹟の調査及び保存の沿革"

25 梅原末 治, "日韓併合の期間に行なわれた半島の古蹟調査と保存事業にたずさわった一考古学の回想録" 51 : 1969

26 "季刊 日本思想史-特集 植民地朝鮮における歴史編纂 76"

27 "大正五年度 朝鮮古蹟調査報告書" 朝鮮総督府 1917

28 黒板勝美, "大同江附近の史蹟"

29 黒板勝美, "国立博物館について" 33 (33): 1918

30 黒板勝美, "国立博物館について" 33 (33): 1918

31 黒板勝美, "史蹟遺物保存に関する研究の概説" 1 (1): 1915

32 黒板勝美, "史蹟名勝天然記念物 1-3" 1915

33 黒板勝美, "古跡を巡りて（中）-ペルシャの旅"

34 黒板勝美, "古跡を巡りて（上）-マカオからインドまで" 1928

35 黒板勝美, "古跡を巡りて(下)-上古文明の揺籃の地イラク·シリヤを歩くの記"

36 藤田亮策, "古文化の保存と硏究: 黒板博士の業績を中心として" 黒板博士記念會 1953

37 朝鮮總督府博物館, "博物館略案內" 朝鮮總督府 1936

38 朝鮮総督府博物館, "博物館略案内" 朝鮮総督府 1931

39 黒板勝美, "博物館について"

40 黒板勝美, "南欧探古記" 16 (16): 1910

41 近藤二郎, "別冊生きる" 安田火 災海上保険株式会社 2002

42 藤田亮策, "ビリケン総督－朝鮮の思い出(一)"

43 藤田亮策, "ビリケン総督-朝鮮の思い出（一）" 52 : 2-, 1958

44 小泉顕夫, "ドルメン" 満鮮特輯號 1933

45 李成市, "コロニアリズムと近代歴史学-植民地統治下の朝鮮史編修と古蹟調査を中心に" 刀 水書房 2004

46 李成市, "コロニアリズムと近代歴史学"

47 Benedict Anderson, "Imagined Communities-Reflecstions on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism" Verso Editions 1991