三韓 起源과 遺俗의 問題

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Until now the issue over the origin of Samhan has been explained through two points of view that are completely different. Some tend to view the whole Samhan of Mahan, Jinhan, Byeonjin han primarily as the result of the growth of indigenous power, while some others view of Mahan, Jinhan, Byeonjin as being related to the northem people's migration to the south direction. But both views do not seem to match which the actual articles on the origin of Samhan in record of Hanjeon(韓傳), Samgukji(三國志). Since Samgukji Hanjeon manifests that Mahan was a kind of natives while Byeonjinhan(Byeonjin·Jinhan) were migrated power that came down to the south, the Samhan that has been mentioned in Samgukji Hanjeon can be inferred as having a binary structure in its origin. And the concept of 'Samhan' appear in Samgukji Hanjeon could be deciphered as a progressive viewpoint in the formation of Samhan.<br/>
Also there are gaps in many aspects between the cultural inheritance of Mahan and Byeonjinhan as represented in Hanjeon, Samgukji. By the way some have so far dismissed them either as their cultural backwardness or advancedness of Mahan and Byeonjinhan, or some others have considered them as the reflection of hostility on the Chinese side in the wake of the expanding power of Mahan. And there still exists the question of whether it can be used as a ground for the difference in the chronology of the records, Hanjeon. However the difference between the culture of Mahan and Byeonjinhan could be interpreted in relation to the origin of Samhan. Though we shall premise that there was the common cultural foundation in the basic, overall cultural features for Mahan, Byeonjinhan, from a two-pier perspective on the origin, could witness the footprints of the cultural inheritance of the early of organization, Samhan.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 머리말
  
• Ⅰ. 馬韓, 辰韓의 起源
  
• Ⅱ. 三韓의 遺俗 問題
  
• 맺음말