한국 조각사에서 9세기라는 시기 (The Ninth Century in Korean Sculpture)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 미술사와 시각문화학회
· 수록지 정보 : 미술사와 시각문화 / 34호 / 94 ~ 125페이지
· 저자명 : 임영애

초록

통일기 신라(676-935) 조각 가운데 정확한 제작 시기를 알 수 있는 예는 36점에불과하다. 그래도 8세기와 9세기 후반에 제작된 불상들은 드문드문 남아있지만, 9세기 전반의 기년작(紀年作)은 찾을 수 없다. 이 글은 한국조각사에서 기년작이9세기 전반에는 없는데, 9세기 후반에는 촘촘한 간격으로 남아있는 이유에 대한궁금증에서 시작되었다. 물론 연구자에 따라 9세기 전반에도 불상이 활발히 조성되었지만 현존하지 않을 가능성을 지적하기도 한다. 9세기 전반에 기년작이 공백인 것은 우연히 빚어진 결과일까? 그러나 필자는 9세기 후반의 기년작이 압도적으로 많은 점을 고려하면 9세기 전반의 공백이 우연한 결과라고 보기는 어렵다고생각한다.
물론 9세기 전반이 공백기라고 해서 이 시기에 불상이 전혀 만들어지지 않았다고 주장하는 것은 아니다. 이 시기, 사찰의 창건은 거의 없었지만, 기왕의 사찰은 여전히 운영되고 사세(寺勢)를 이어갔으니 간간이 불사(佛事)는 이어졌을것이다. 다만 이 글에서 필자는 9세기 전반이라는 특정 시기는 정치·사회·경제적으로 특별히 어려웠던 시기이며, 이에 따라 많은 공력이 필요한 기념비적인 불상의 제작이 쉽지 않았음을 이야기하려 한 것이다. 즉 필자는 9세기 전반은 의미있는 불상이 제작되었으나 지금까지 남아있지 않은 것이 아니라, 불상이 제작되기 어려웠던 시기였음을 밝히려 했다. 그러나 9세기 후반이 되면 정치·경제적으로 안정이 이뤄지면서 상황이 상대적으로 나아졌으며, 특히 스스로 전륜성왕임을자처했던 경문왕(景文王, 재위 861-875) 시대에 불교조각은 제2의 전성기를 맞는다. 바로 이 시기에 제작된 상(像)이 신라 3대 금동불인 〈백률사 금동불〉과 불국사의 두 금동불이라고 생각된다.
흥미롭게도 신라 왕경과 지방의 불상은 재료에서 분명히 구별된다. 실제로 9세기 후반 전국적으로 철불이 조성되었지만 신라 왕경(王京)에서는 철불이 제작되지 않았다. 이는 신라에서 동(銅)과 철(鐵)이라는 두 재료에 대한 구분이 분명했음을 알려주며, 왕경에서는 동불(銅佛), 지방의 경우 철불(鐵佛)로 구분하여 제작·봉안했다고 생각한다. 이 글에서 필자는 9세기 후반 지방에서는 도금을 하여금동불처럼 보이는 대형의 철불이 제작되었다면, 같은 시기 신라 왕경에서는 신라 3대 금동불과 같은 기념비적인 불상이 제작되었을 것으로 추정하였다. 지금까지 신라 3대 금동불의 제작 시기에 대한 다양한 의견이 있었지만, 필자는 9세기라는 시기의 사회·정치·경제적 상황을 통해 볼 때 9세기 후반에 제작되었을 가능성을 피력했다.

영어초록

Among the various Buddhist sculptures of the Unified Silla Kingdom (676- 935) Kingdom, only 36 examples can be conclusively dated to a specific period. Most of these examples are from the eighth century or the latter half of the ninth century. However, there are no Buddhist sculptures that have been definitively dated to the first half of the ninth century. Thus, the absence of verified examples from this period became the impetus for this article, especially as a point of contrast to the discernibly higher number of Buddhist sculptures scattered across the latter half of the ninth century. Of course, there are scholars who purport that Buddhist sculptures were actually made in earnest during the early to mid-ninth century but have not been presently discovered due to a myriad of reasons. On the other hand, there are also scholars who have presented the completely opposing possibility that sculptors did not create any Buddhist sculpture at all during this time. Either way, one must question whether or not it is a coincidence that there is a lack of Buddhist sculptures that can be verifiably dated to the first five decades of the ninth century. Taking into consideration the conspicuously larger number of Buddhist statues attributed to the following five decades, it is highly unlikely that the vacancy of Buddhist statues in the first half of the century was simply something that happened by chance.
Of course, to describe the first half of the ninth century as a ‘void’ of Buddhist sculpture does not necessarily mean that there were absolutely no Buddhist statues that were made during this period. Although very few temples were newly founded or constructed in the early to mid-ninth century, preexisting temples continued to operate and maintain their daily affairs, which most likely included the sporadic creation of a Buddhist statue. However, this article focuses on the generally low, and effectively nonexistent, output of Buddhist statues during the first half of the ninth century. This can be partially explained by the great effort required to push forward such an endeavor, which was made exponentially more challenging by the political, social and economic hardships of the period. Therefore, this article sets forth to illustrate that although meaningful statues made during the first half of the century may have survived to the present, the circumstances of their production were at the very least problematic as this was not a time during which the production of Buddhist sculptures thrived in Korea. However, the political and economic situation stabilized after the mid-ninth century, improving the overall situation of the Silla Kingdom. The ameliorated circumstances ushered in a second golden age of Buddhist sculpture during the reign of King Gyeongmun (861- 875) who claimed to be a cakravartin (Wheel-Turning King). This is the most likely production period for the three major gilt-bronze Buddha statues of the Unified Silla Kingdom which consist of the Gilt-bronze Standing Buddha Statue of Baengnyul Temple as well as the two Gilt-bronze Buddha Statues of Bulguk Temple.
Interestingly, there is a distinct difference between the materials used to make Buddhist statues for the Silla royal capital versus examples made for the surrounding areas. Buddhist statues made from iron were created in every region across the country except for the royal capital during the latter half of the ninth century. This indicates that there was a recognizable separation between the two materials of copper and iron in the Unified Silla Kingdom.
Copper was reserved for Buddhist statues created and enshrined in the royal capital of Silla while iron was widely used in every other region. During this period, there were also examples of large-scale iron Buddhist statues created in regions outside of the royal capital that were gilded to imitate the appearance of gilt-bronze Buddhist statues. Thus, it is highly probable that the three major gilt-bronze Buddha statues of the Unified Silla Kingdom, or at least similarly monumental examples, were created in the royal capital during the latter half of the ninth century and inspired imitations throughout Korea. Until now, scholars have been unable to reach a consensus on the production dates for the three major gilt-bronze Buddha statues of the Unified Silla Kingdom. But the social, political, and economic conditions of the ninth century, in addition to the state of Buddhist sculpture production during the first half of the ninth century, make a strong case for dating the three statues to the latter half of the ninth century.

참고자료

· 없음