新羅의 宮苑池 -九皇洞苑池의 性格을 중심으로- (The Palace Garden Ponds of Silla: Mainly on the characteristics of Guhwangdong garden pond)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 충남대학교 백제연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 백제연구 / 53호 / 51 ~ 87페이지
· 저자명 : 오승연

초록

궁원지는 유휴, 제의 등의 기능을 목적으로 조성된 궁에 속한 원지이다. 지금까지 신라 궁원지의 연구는 규모와 의장, 출토 유물 면에서 가히 압도적이라 할 수 있는 월지에 관한 것이 대다수를 차지하며 주로 조경학적 측면에서 다루어져 왔을 뿐고고학적 연구 성과는 미약한 단계에 머물러 있다.
필자는 이러한 현상의 원인이 궁원지의 형태ㆍ구조ㆍ기능적 측면을 고려한 보다 정확한 분류안의 부재에서 기인한 것으로 판단하고, 현재까지 발굴을 통해 확인된 신라 원지 유적 중 “궁원지로서 대상의 설정과 정확한 구조의 파악”을 시도하였다.
그 결과, 신라의 삼국 통일과 함께 축조된 월성해자 석축부는 지금까지 ‘석축해자’로 명명되고 있으나 구조와 입지의 특성상 원지임이 분명하므로 ‘월성 외곽 석축 원지’라는 새로운 명칭을 제안하였다. 국립경주박물관 부지 내 원지는 지금까지남쪽의 조산과 세트를 이루는 남궁의 곡지계 궁원지로만 추정되었으나, 그 위치가 월성 외곽 석축 원지의 연장선상에 있고, 구조적으로도 유사한 것으로 파악되므로 ‘월성 외곽 석축 원지’의 일부인 것으로 재해석 하였다.
구황동원지는 최근까지 분황사의 사원지로 보는 견해가 있으나 전체적인 공간 배치, 경관 구성요소의 선택, 관련된 궁의 입지 가능성 등을 종합적으로 살펴볼 때 궁원지로 보는 것이 타당하다는 점을 분명히 하였다. 다시 말해 구황동원지는 공간 배치에서 기존의 주장과 달리 의도적으로 원장을 둘러 분황사와 분리된 독립 공간을 형성하고 있고, 사원지에서는 전혀 채택되지 않는 섬ㆍ석가산ㆍ정원석 등의 구성요소를 갖추고 있으며, 평면 형태에서도 사원지에서 나타나지 않는 곡지계 원지가 적용되었다는 점에서 사원지로서의 가능성은 매우 낮으며, 오히려 경관 구성요소와 평면 형태가 대표적 궁원지인 월지, 용강동원지의 그것과 거의 동일한 것으로 보아 궁원지로 파악하는 것이 옳은 것이다. 그리고 구황동원지의 築臺 남쪽은 2차 원지 축조시기의 통방 구조이므로, 지금까지 확인되지 않은 이궁의 존재가능성이 높다. 만약 필자의 이러한 추론이 타당한 것이라면, 구황동원지는 분황사와 황룡사 사이에 존재한 이궁의 북쪽에 위치한 후원지가 된다. 그 이궁은 아마도 『삼국유사』에 기록으로만 전해지는 용궁일 가능성도 배재할 수 없을 것이다.

영어초록

Palace garden ponds are the garden ponds which belong to Palaces and are built for the purposes of pleasure, rest, religious or ancestral rites and etc. Silla dynasty had made the system for city and castle since at least the mid sixth century influenced by the system for city and castle of Chinese Sui dynasty and Tang dynasty. Therefore we can assume that palace garden ponds were built around that time but Guhwangdong garden pond of the early 7th century is the earliest one excavated for the present. Until now the research of Silla palace garden ponds is mostly about the landscape architecture of Moon Pond which is preponderant in the aspect of scale, ornament technique of garden and excavated articles. On the other hand, archaeological research is insignificant and the research on the analysis, classification, systematic relation and development with time of garden pond is in the beginning level.
I thought that the cause of this situation is resulted from the absence of more accurate classification including shapes, structures and functional aspects of palace garden pond and presented the classification of palace garden ponds in 2003 and claimed the existence of the kind of rectangular shaped ponds and the kind of curved shaped ponds. In this paper I tried “the classification of garden ponds as palace garden ponds and the understanding of accurate structure” on Silla garden pond remains which are verified by the excavation until now according to the classification of the year of 2003.
Among them, the stone-built part of Wolsung moat which was built at the time of Silla’s unification of three dynasties has been called ‘the moat built with stones’ by now but this is definitely a garden pond based on the characteristics of structure and location and I suggest the new name of ‘the Garden pond made with stones outside Wolsung’ for it. In addition, through the content analysis of the various reports I claimed No.2 moat and No.3 moat in District Na which are known as the moats made with stones don’t have enoughcharacteristics for classification yet and mentioned the possibility that the eastern water path of a stone-built moat in District Da is not a water path but a northern stone-built wall of another stone-built garden pond.
Therefore, already known stone-built moats outside Wolsung are rectangular-shaped palace garden ponds and according to the characteristics of location I revealed that they are a large scale palace garden ponds to which Silla’s unique way of using space was applied by locating many interconnected garden ponds.
Secondly, a garden pond inside space attached to the National KyoungJu(?) Museum has been presumed a curved shaped palace garden pond in Southern Palace which is connected to a southern artificial mountain but since the location is connected with the extension of the stone-built garden pond outside Wolsung and the structure of it is similar with that of the stone-built garden pond outside Wolsung, I reinterpreted it the part of the stone-built garden pond outside Wolsung.
Thirdly, some people consider Guhwangdong garden pond as a temple garden pond but I mentioned that it is appropriate to consider it as a palace garden pond based on overall consideration of overall space allocation, the choice of landscape formation elements, the location possibility of related palace and etc.More concretely speaking, the space allocation of Guhwangdong garden pond is the independent space isolated from Bunhwangsa by having intentional garden walls. It is different from existing claims. And since it has an island, a stone-piled mountain, garden stones and etc which had not been used in temple garden ponds and its ground plan has curved shaped ponds which have not appeared in temple garden ponds,we can exclude the possibility that it is a temple garden pond. Contrary, we can know that Guhwangdong garden pond has sufficient conditions for a palace garden pond based on the fact that the landscape formation elements and the ground plan of Guhwangdong garden pond are almost same with those of Moon pond which is the representative of Silla palace garden ponds and Yong-Gang-Dong garden pond. Since the southern side of Guhwangdong garden pond embankment has the Tongbang structure which is the structure that there is no partitioned room and there is an open space and was built at the second construction period of garden pond, we need to pay attention to the high possibility of the existence of attached palace which is not verified by now. If my this inference is correct, Guhwangdong garden pond becomes the rear garden pond located in the north of the attached palace which exists between Bunhwangsa and Hwangryongsa. We can not exclude the possibility that this attached palace is maybe Yong-Gung which is only written in Samgukyusa.

참고자료

· 없음