삼국시대 年號銘 金銅佛像의 제작연대에 관한 연구

Abstract

There are some bronze buddha statues of three kingdoms period which have a description of 'Era name(年號)' on them with a sexagenary cycle. They are the statue of the 7th year of Yeonga(延嘉), the 5th year of Geonheung(建興), the 4th year of Gyeong(景). The art historians have tried to approach to these examples by stylistic compare to contemporary chinese sculptures, while the historians have tried to interpret them by the historical background of the era name itself. Even these era names are unknown to us, but we can presume the estimate date of them by according to the descriptions of sexagenary cycle(干支). Even in a rare case, the first year(元年)'s sexagenary coincide with the description on the sculptures, but it is not agreement in more often case. So the possibility of changing era name(改元) during one king's reign should be always presupposed. This thesis tried to strike a balance of art historical and historical opinion by tracing the most appropriate cause of changing era name when the supposed first year which is presumed by the art historical stylistic approach. Especially, I supposed that these changing era name in the three kingdom's period was closely connected with the political situation of contemporary China. This idea was derived from the case of Silla(新羅)'s era name which we know when it was changed correctly. We got to know that there was a remarkable political or social change in China at that time. So I attempt to search the possible historical background of changing era name of each case of dating which surmised by the art historical survey. According to the art historical opinion, the buddha statue of era name ‘Yeonga' belongs to A.D.539 which correspond to the year 'Gimi(己未)'. So the first year of ‘Yeonga' would be 7 years before so that can be account to A.D.533. Around this year, Northern Wei(北魏) was divided to Eastern and Western Wei(東･西魏). In this state of disorder, Goguryeo(高句麗) might be needed to indicate thier diplomatic stance. The appointing the crown prince at A.D.533 could be interpreted as a part of measures to demonstrate their independency. Because of that, the era name is most likely to be changed at that time. The case of the era name ‘Yeonggang(永康)', the 7 years has been dated to A.D.545 and A.D.551 which the first year of ‘Yeonggang' correspond to the King Yangwon(陽原王)'s accession. So it can be commonly accepted to an appropriate date for this statues. If it can be admitted that the first year of era name ‘Geonheung' should be A.D.592, it was the time of the Japanese empress Suiko(推古)'s succession. Further more, Baekje(百濟) have been sent a group of artisans for support to build the temple of Hokoji(法興寺) and this event shows us the close political and cultural situation between Baekje and Japan. So it can be presumed that the era name of Baekje changed at A.D.592 to construct more solid relationship with the newly succesed royal court of empress Suiko. The last era name ‘Gyeong' have faced quite different result to the former art historical opinion. I hope to suggest that this statue was made at A.D.631 which time is later than 60 years from the former opinions. Because in this case, we can find that A.D.628 the first year of ‘Gyeong' correspond to the first year of Zhenguan(貞觀) of Tang(唐) Dynasty and around this time, Goguryeo sent a map of their territory to Tang to build a diplomatic amity. It means the year A.D.628 was appropriate date which we can guess the era name was changed in Goguryeo. This thesis tried to arrange the buddha statues which have a era name by the chronologic sequence under the point of art historic style and then to find the historical background of the changing the era name in the relationship between the three kingdoms and Chinese political situation. But it is just an available suggestion until the buddha statues in the chinese garments style are only can be appeared after Northern Wei's Emperor Xiaowen(孝文帝)'s policy of Sinicize.