일반논문 : 「기악(伎樂)」추적고(追跡考) -"무(舞)"에서 "악(樂)"으로 = A Study on Gigaku/kiak -From "Dance" to "Gagaku", The History of Transition-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The propagation of ‘Gigaku/Kiak dance’ by Mimasi/Mimaji should be considered as part of the course of history in which the ancient Japanese power accepted Buddhist culture positively from Baekje. As there existed the art of ``Gigaku/Kiak`` and its internal exchange in East Asia, considering the propagation of ‘Gigaku/Kiak dance’ by Mimasi/Mimaji as part of this wide trend can make it possible for us to look into the dynamics of the history of art or culture. The main points of the study is as follows. First, ``Gigaku/Kiak dance`` in NihonShoki(日本書紀, Japanese Chronicles) should be conceived as ``dance(舞)``, and this perspective allows us to clarify the changing trajectory of Gigaku/Kiak. Second, We should give attention to the facts as an indication of its decline that Gigaku/Kiak (dance) disappeared from the Royal Court by around 850 and the scores of Gigaku/Kiak as a musical piece rapidly increased from the tenth and eleventh century, and this facts suggest that there existed some connection between the prevalence of Gagaku/Aak(雅樂) and the decline of Gigaku/Kiak dance. Third, the incorporation of Gigaku/Kiak dance into the music of Gagaku/Aak, mostly the flute(橫笛), can be considered as part of the development of art from ``dance`` to ``Gagaku (music)``. Fourth, another reason for the decline of Gigaku/Kiak (danece) may be that the compulsory labor of Gigaku/Kiak dance became too heavy a burden for the people in charge since the Heian period. Fifth, it is estimated that, in its composition, Chido(治道), Sisi(獅子, lion), and a body of Kongo(金剛), Karura(迦樓羅), Konron(崑崙) and Rikisi(力士) are part of the original conveyed by Mimasi/Mimaji, and inquiring into unstable and stray characters like Gojyo(吳女·五女) and Baramon(波羅門) may provide a clue as to the whole story of the transformation of Gigaku/Kiak (dance), also giving an opportunity to answer the issue whether the obscene content of Kyokunsho(敎訓抄) is the original of Gigaku/Kiak dance by Mimasi/Mimaji. Sixth, in other words, it is possible that ``Gigaku(妓樂)`` shown in Kyokunsho is not that of Mimasi/Mimaji, and considerable transformation and confusion by errors can be contained in it. Seventh, the existing study on Gigaku/Kiak (dance) which has developed with its focus on Kyokunsho should undergo more considerate re-examination, and Korean study on Gigaku/Kiak (dance) which accepted this Japanese study should take a more empirical attitude towards this study including issues about the Gigaku/Kiak of Beakje and Goryeo. And to secure proper verification and confidence in it, we should, firstly, conduct a concrete investigation into the two regions, ‘Kure(吳)’ and ``Sakurai(櫻井)``, and secondly, re-examine the existing analysis of the composition of Gigaku/Kiak dance and the roles of characters from the perspective that explaining the wide gap between the elegant dance of Rikisi(力士) of Manyoshu and the obscene one of Kyokunsho is essential to clarify the essence of the transformation of Gigaku/Kiak (dance). These microscopic studies are important in themselves, yet it is more important to position the study on Gigaku/Kiak (dance) within the wide frame of the history of art, and to interpret its significance in it. It will include the intersection and negotiation of various social, political and cultural elements, and enlighten the traces and vestiges that the precedents left in the later arts and culture. Studies with this objectives will allow us to make a sketch of the history of art, culture and society with its focus on Gigaku/Kiak dance.