신라 왕실 삼성(三姓)의 연원

김기흥(Kim Ki-Heung) 한국고대사학회 2011 韓國古代史硏究 Vol.0 No.64

신라의 김씨는 진흥왕대에 대중국 외교 관계에서 처음 사용되었다. 『北齊書』에 보이는 신라왕 ‘김진흥’은 ‘왕인 진흥’으로 ‘김’은 ‘왕’의 의미이다. 김씨 왕실의 바로 앞에 있었던 다른 부계 혈통의 ‘예전 왕’들은 ‘옛 왕’ 즉 ‘석김(昔金)’에서 왕을 나타내는 ‘김’을 피하고 석(昔)만을 남겨 구분한 듯하다. 석씨에 앞서 집권하였던 왕실 계통은 시조 혁거세의 이름에 보이는 ‘광명’의 의미를 취하여 ‘박’이란 성씨로 구별하였다. 三姓은 석씨계 집단의 도태 후에 칭해진 것으로서 씨족이나 족단들이 준별되는 상태에서 賜姓하여 준 것이 아니었다. 기존 왕계에 따라 성씨를 나누고, 왕실과 친연관계가 있는 귀족들에 대하여는 부계 혈연관계에 따라 구분하여 가다가 결국 상대적 친소정도에 의해 성씨를 구별하였던 것이다. 그런데 이들 지배층은 누대의 정치적 연합과 통혼관계를 통하여 복합적인 혈연관계를 형성하고 있었다. 이에 중고기 성골왕실의 근친혼이 강화되며 권부의 핵심에서 도태되었던 박씨계에 대해 김씨계는 여전히 혈연적 유대감을 갖기도 하였다. 김씨 왕비가 대외적으로 박씨를 칭하기도 하고, 신라 말에는 김씨였을 가능성이 있는 신덕왕이 박씨를 칭하는 일도 나타났다. 신덕왕은 견훤이나 궁예 등이 신성한 자임을 선전하는 중에 신라 왕실의 권위를 다시 세우고자 퇴락한 김씨왕계 대신 신라 초기 왕계인 박씨의 원손임을 천명하는 복고적 행태를 보였다. 한편, 김씨의 경우 7세기에 이르러 김알지 이외에 중국의 신화적 제왕인 소호금천씨를 시조로 보는 인식이 나타났다. 국제화의 진전 속에 왕실의 위상을 제고하기 위한 정체성의 확대 시도이며, 아울러 국가 중추세력으로 등장한 가야계 김씨까지를 포괄하기 위한 것이었다. 시조를 중국의 신화적 존재로 설정하게 되자 중국의 김씨 시조인 김일제도 먼 일족 정도로 인식할 수 있게 되었다. ‘대당고김씨부인묘명’에는 소호금천씨를 세조로 김일제를 원조라고 하고 그의 후손들이 요동에 피난한 양 말하였다. 그런데 김씨부인이 중국내에 본관을 둔 ‘경조(京兆) 김씨’ 임을 분명히 하고 중국내 연원 관계를 강조하고 있다. 따라서 이 묘명의 성씨 관련 내용은 재당 신라계 귀화인들의 경계인적 사고방식에서 적극 윤색된 것으로 신라 김씨 왕실의 연원을 그대로 말한 것으로 볼 수 없다. Kim, one of the three House names(Kim, Seok, Park) that were used by members of the Shilla royal family, seems to have been used for the first time in 565, by King Jin’heung-wang in his diplomatic dealings with China. At the time, the full and formal name that was used to refer to the Shilla king in diplomatic occasions was ‘Kim Jinheung.’ From the fact that such title literally meant ‘King Jin-heung,’ we can see that the term ‘Kim’ actually had the meaning of ‘King.’ It seems that the houses which provided former kings(which would make them ‘former royal families’), yet now stripped of power and shut out by the Kim House members, were not allowed to use the name ‘Kim,’ as such last name would falsely indicate that they were the present house in power making kings. They may have only been allowed to use the name ‘Seok-Kim(昔金),’ which would have meant ’Past king’ with the prefix ‘Seok(昔),’ while ‘Kim’ alone would be the equivalent of ‘(Present) King.’ Meanwhile, the descendants of kings and Houses which predated the ‘Seok’ kings and its house were also present at the time, and have been part of the Shilla dynasty’s central nobility class for quite some time. They were not to be referred to as ‘Seok.’ So they distinguished themselves with the last name ‘Park,’ which reflected the meaning of the term ‘Gwang’myeong(“light”)’ that can be found inside the Founder Hyeok’-geo‘se’s name. (‘Hyeok’geo‘se’ is usually referred to as “Park Hyeok‘geo’se”). Then in the 7th century, a new perspective to view the name Kim started to emerge. Unlike the previous thinking which believed that Kim Al-ji, the origin of the last name Kim, was the beginning of the house, the new idea came to argue that the mythical emperor of China, ‘Soho Geumcheon,’ was the true beginning and origin of the Kim house family members. This seems to have been a result of the Shilla government’s overall efforts to lift the status of the king and also enhance its importance in the process, as it became necessary for the Shilla dynasty to boost its image and establish its prowess throughout the East Asian region. Once the founder of the House name Kim was established as an ancient and also mythical being from China’s past, another historical figure named Kim Il-je(金日?), the origin of the Chinese last name Kim and whose origin can also be traced to the Huns(‘匈奴’), came to be considered as a distant relative of the Shilla royal family as well, and even be recorded in Shilla epitaphs. This caused a debate concerning the matter of whether or not the Shilla royal Kim family was related to the Hun tribes, yet the possibility of the Shilla Kim house descending from the Huns is nearly nonexistent.

신라 시조 박혁거세의 실체

김기흥(Kim, Ki Heung) 건국대학교 인문학연구원 2015 통일인문학 Vol.61 No.-

신라는 5세기에 이르러 국가체제를 확고히 하고 정체성을 강화면서 전통적 조상신인 태양신을 인격화하여 시조로 숭배하고자 하였다. 피장자가 확실치 않은 오래 된 무덤들을 개보수하여 조상신인 혁거세의 무덤이 포함된 오릉으로 조성하였던 듯하고(435), 신화상 그의 탄생처에 신궁을 세워(487) 숭배하며 인격화를 한층 진전시키고자 하였다. 그런데 왕실이 직계 조상을 더욱 숭모해가는 중에, 불교가 공인되는(528) 사실까지 있게 되면서 혁거세 숭배는 식어갔다. 그리하여 『국사』 가 편찬될 때(545) 그는 역사적 시조로 자리하지 못했던 것으로 여겨진다. 진흥왕 중기 이후, 국력 성장과 국제정세의 변화에 힘입어 대외정책을 일대 전환하여 백제 고구려와 대결을 불사하며 대대적 영토 확장을 이루어내면서 상황은 달라졌다. 현실의 변동은 역사의식의 변화를 수반하였다. 진흥왕은 신라의 건국이 고구려와 백제보다 앞선 것으로 하고자 하였던 듯하다. 더구나 그는 신선 등 전통사상에 우호적이라서 혁거세에 대한 관심도 적지 않았을 것이다. 그리하여 최초 『국사』 편찬 시 시조 남해차차웅의 부신(父神)으로 말해졌을 혁거세는, 개편작업을 통해 인격적인 역사적 시조로 기술되었던 것으로 여겨진다. 그런데 그 뒤 그는 전통적 조상신도 아니고 역사적 시조로서의 위상도 취약하여 국가적으로 제한적인 숭배를 받는데 그쳤다. The Shilla dynasty Founder Park Hyeok’geo’se had been an ancestral god that had been traditionally worshipped by the Shilla people. In the 5th century, Shilla was continuing to form its own state structure, in the wake of all the competitions with Goguryeo and Baekje, and in the process of reinforcing its own identity, they tried to reinforce the memorial worshipping of the traditional ancestral god as well. They chose to personalize the God of Sun which had been traditionally worshipped as the ancestral god. So they renovated a tomb whose owner was not that well known, and in 435 declared that it was the tomb of the founder. And instead of the previous shrine for the traditional ancestral god, they built a ‘Shin’gung(神宮)’ hall in 487 at the place which was reportedly the birthplace of him according to myths, and began to worship him in such a new format. But coming into the 6th century, Buddhism was officially established as the new religion for the dynasty in 528, and the royal family at the time came to worship its own direct ancestors more than Hyeok’geo’se, so the worshipping of this ‘ultimate founder’ was weakened. He was not even recognized as the historical founder in the newly published Kuksa(國史), national history book of Shilla, in 545. But then, when heroic King Jin’heung was able to conquer significantly large regions inside the territories of Baekje and Goguryeo, and enlarged the realm of Shilla considerably, the situation changed. It seems like King Jin’heung wanted to insert a notion that the foundation of Shilla preceded those of Goguryeo and Baekje in the history books. As a result, Hyeok’geo’se, which had earlier been considered and described as the mere god-like father figure of the supposed state founder Nam’hae Chacha’ung in previous historical resources, came to be portrayed as the historical founder ancestor, effectively putting the year of Shilla’s foundation before those of the other two countries. As he became a historical founder ancestor, the previous god-like status of his was seriously weakened. He became an entity that was neither a traditional ancestral god nor a very strong historical founder. State worshipping of him ended up being very limited.

만공월면滿空月面과 그 후원자들 — 일제강점기 한국불교 중흥의 동력

이주민 한국국학진흥원 2024 국학연구 Vol.0 No.54

만공월면滿空月面(1871~1946)은 일제강점기에 한국불교의 자주권을 지키며선불교를중흥시킨선승이다. 1905년덕숭산에입산하여정혜사를일신하였고, 1931년수덕사주지로취임하면서가람의기틀을닦았다. 본연구에서는 만공이 주도한 정혜사와 수덕사의 불사를 분석하여 대표적 후원자들을 밝히고 그 역할에 주목하였다. 만공의후원자는세부류로나눌수있다. 첫번째는왕실인물로고종의 다섯째 아들인 의친왕義親王 이강李堈을 들 수 있다. 의친왕은 덕인당德仁堂 김수덕⾦修德과 수인당修仁堂 김흥인⾦興仁과함께만공을후원하였다. 또계동궁桂洞宮 이기용李琦容은 슬하에 자식이 없어 의친왕의 12남 9남 중 1남 5녀를양자로입적시키는데, 이런각별한인연으로묶인사동궁과계동궁은 만공의 핵심 단월 세력으로 활약한다. 두번째후원세력은당시의예술가를비릇한문화예술계인사들로한국적 추상화의대가장욱진가문인결성장씨집안이다. 장욱진의고모장기규張基珪 는결성장씨가문과만공을연결하는주요매개자였다. 일제강점기에신흥 지주로급부상한결성장씨는축적된부를기반으로만공을후원하였으며정혜사와수덕사의다수불사는장씨집안의지원이있었기에가능하였다. 그 외에비구니일엽과친구관계로알려진여성화가나혜석羅蕙錫이견성암에서 하안거를보내며만공과인연을맺었다는사실을방함록을통해밝혀낼수 있었다. 세번째후원자는전북태인출신의거부가산거사迦⼭居⼠ 김수곤⾦⽔坤이다. 신심이깊었던김수곤은금산사, 법주사, 백양사등여러사찰에시주하였으나 그중만공과의관계는특히각별했던것으로보인다. 수덕사조인정사중건 상량문기문을직접작성할정도로만공의대단월로서김수곤의역할은막중했다. 김수곤의외동딸김진민⾦鎭珉은여성서예가로활동했는데정혜사관음전현판의글을직접쓰면서부녀가함께불사에참여하는이색적인이력을 만들어내었다. 오늘날정혜사와수덕사가선불교의중흥지로서자리매김할 수있었던것은만공이라는걸출한선승의역할뿐만아니라, 만공을중심으로 모였던 후원자들 노력이 만들어낸 결과라고 할 수 있다. Mangongwolmyeon(1871-1946) was a Buddhist monk who maintained the autonomy of Korean Buddhism in Japanese colonial era and revived Zen Buddhism. In 1905, he entered Deoksungsan Mountain and renewed Jeonghyesa Temple, and in 1931, he was inaugurated as the chief monk of Sudeoksa Temple, laying the foundation for Garam. In this study, the representative sponsors were identified and their roles were noted by analyzing the Buddhist temples of Jeonghyesa Temple and Sudeoksa Temple led by Mangong. There are three categories of patronage for all. The first is a royal figure, and King Yi Gang, the fifth son of King Gojong, is Prince Uichin. King Uichin sponsored Mangong along with Kim Soo-deok of Deokindang Hall and Kim Heung-in of Suindang Hall. In addition, Lee Ki-yong of Gyedonggung Palace has no children, so one of the 12 sons and nine sons of King Uichin is adopted. The relationship between Mangong and the royal family continued, centering on the figures of Sadonggung Palace and Gyedonggung Palace. The second supporters are the family of painter Jang Wook-jin, who is considered a painter of Korean abstract paintings. Jang Wook-jin’s aunt, Jang Ki-kyu, seems to have served as a mediator between the Jang family and Mangong. The family of Gyeol-sung, who became an emerging landowner in Japanese colonial era, donated the accumulated wealth to Mangong, and with the sponsorship, many Buddhist temples of Jeonghyesa Temple and Sudeoksa Temple could be achieved. In addition, it was revealed through the Bangham Book that Na Hye-seok, known as a friend of Buddhist nun Il-yeop, sent summer retreat from Gyeonseongam Hermitage. The third sponsor is Kim Soo-gon, Gasan gṛhapati from Taein, North Jeolla Province. Kim Soo-gon, who was deeply religious, gave property to various temples such as Geumsan Temple, Beopjusa Temple and Baekyangsa Temple, but it is presumed that his relationship with Mangong was particularly different. Kim Soo-gon’s role in patron was so important that he wrote the article of Sangryangmun, which was built by Joinjeongsa, Sudeoksa Temple. Kim Soo-gon’s only daughter, Kim Jin-min, worked as a female calligrapher, and wrote the writing on the signboard of Gwaneumjeon Hall of Jeonghyesa Temple, creating an unusual scene in which women and women participate in the Buddhist temple together. It can be said that Jeonghyesa Temple and Sudeoksa Temple were able to be established as the restoration of Seon Buddhism today as the result of the efforts of Mangong and its supporters.

秋史 金石學의 再照明 - 史的 ‘考證’ 문제를 主眼目으로 -

崔英成 동양고전학회 2007 東洋古典硏究 Vol.29 No.-

우리나라 금석학사에서 추사 김정희는 부동(不動)의 위치에 있다. 추사에게 금석학은 엄연히 하나의 문호를 수립한 학문 영역이었다. 추사는 고증학적 연구 방법과 현장 조사를 두 축으로, 종래 해제(解題) 정도에 머물던 조선 금석학의 수준을 ‘학’의 단계에까지 끌어 올렸다. 그러나 추사학, 특히 추사 금석학의 경지에 대해서는 아직까지 ‘신성불가침’의 두터운 보루가 깔려 있다. ‘최초’니 ‘최고(最高)’니 하는 것들이 추사 금석학을 논한 글들에 따라 붙는 수식어들이다. 이제는 추사의 ‘참모습’을 객관적으로 보아야 할 때가 왔다고 본다. 이 글은 이 점을 염두에 두고 추사의 금석학 연구 성과를 재조명하려 하였다. 특히 지금까지 잘못 알려진 것을 바로잡고 칭송 위주의 서술에서 탈피하여, 추사의 금석학 연구 성과의 참 모습을 드러내 보이고자 하였다. 추사의 금석학은 과연 조선의 선배 학인들이 이룩한 학문적 성과와는 무관한 것인가, 추사 금석학의 한계는 무엇인가 하는 점에 초점을 맞추어 논의를 진행하였다. Chusa Kim Jeong Hee has a firm his position in the epigraphy history of Korea. Epigraphy was an undeniable study to be well-served to him. Based on the two methods of historical research and site investigation, he has developed from existing bibliographical level of the epigraphy of Chosun up to the level of a sort of ‘learning.’But regarding Chusahak, especially, his achievement of epigraphy, it seems that no one has raised any questions. Whenever referring to him, we could see ‘the first’ or ‘the oldest’ words accompanied with him. Now it is time to study his ‘real nature’ more objectively. Considering this, in this study, I recounted the performances made by Chusa for epigraphy and in particular, I tried to get away from mainly existing praise towards him as possible and show true and objective characteristics and achievements along with correcting something that has been misunderstood. And for discussions, I focused on questions, does the Chusa’s epigraphy have ever nothing to do with the academic achievements made by his predecessors? and what is the limit of the Chusa’s epigraphy?