日本民俗學の足跡と展望 -柳田民俗學との關係から-

佐野賢治 ( Sano Kenji ) 남도민속학회 2008 남도민속연구 Vol.16 No.-

Yanagita Kunio said that the folklore implies to ask scientifically what the Japanese and Japanese culture are, and is the learning in Gyeongsejemin(經世濟 民-administrating the state to relieve the people’s suffering) in order to realize a human being’s happiness. Yanagita’s folklore comes to be equipped with a form in the 1930s. The development in the Japanese folklore is mostly overlapped with Yanagita Kunio’s lifetime and attitude toward learning. Yanagita’s folklore, and the Japanese folklore, which had been developed before and after the war, are not surely the same. The activation and the way of revival in folklore need to be started from what squarely looking the social issue in reality. The beginning in folkloric interest of the modern society is placed on the national studies in the Edo period. As the national studies are the culture peculiar to Japan, which was not influenced by the foreign thought, it is the learning that aims to proceed with discovering in Japanese classics or ancient history. And, what such old custom and track are remained in the middle of rural life was indicated by Motoori Norinaga, who is a great man in the national studies. Meanwhile, Sseuboi Shawgoro asserted that the origin or change in custom and convention is proved given comparing the results by carrying out the folk survey in each region because the custom and convention are recognized the extant of the previous period, from the viewpoint of anthropology in evolutionism. The Japanese folklore continued a flow of the national studies in Edo period, but is what was influenced by folklore in Sseuboi Shawgoro, who introduced British anthropology in the former term of the Meiji. The period of the birth in the Japanese folklore as the modern science is from 1910 to 1935. Japanese society was rapidly progressed the modernization by the Meiji Restoration. However, the traditional living culture was re-evaluated over 1920~1930, thus the movement of relativism in a significance of modernization was actively performed. There was suggestion through the specific case that the objective or character in activity of each field is different, but there is a significance of existence in the traditional living culture of the Rural Mountain-Fishing Villages, which had been rated just lowly with being forgotten amid modernization. In the word called ‘folk customs’, there was a feeling as the movement, which positively pushes ahead with the thought along with the expression in the position of re-evaluation on traditional culture amid a spiral of modernization. The folklore before and after the war broke with Yanagita’s folklore, thereby being able to be characterized by establishment in Japanese folklore as the independent science. However, the Japanese folklore has failed to reach the conquest of Yanagita’s folklore so far. Accordingly, the growth period of folklore can be said to be until 2000 when Miyata Noboru was dead, who made an effort to establish Japanese folklore while inheriting folklore as the learning as Gyeongsejemin(經世濟民) in Yanagita. As a subject in charge of Japanese folklore following Yanagita’s death, there is activity in university and Local Folklore Academy. And, the interest in cultural properties against a decline in folk customs caused by high economic growth boosted the energy of preparing the folk journal. Miyata was absorbed in a research from the folkloric point of time on the problem dubbed ‘women·gender·discrimination,’ which can be said to be the theme that was avoided by Yanagita, who had lived in the Meiji period. And, it is the discussion that folklore has significance in its comprehensiveness. The present folklore is being grown folklore, which is equipped with its looks, such as ‘history folklore·regional folklore·comparative folklore·religious folklore· believer folklore·Buddhism folklore·environmental folklore·urban folklore· female folklore·tourism folklore·application folklore·’ And, this segmentation in folklore can be indicated to be one trend or tendency in modern folklore· Yanagita’s folklore is said to be Japanese folklore, but it can be said to be one process of recognizing the range in ‘folk’. The range in folk can be broadened from the rotational axis. And, even the world folklore, which was told by Yanagita, got closer to possibility of realization in today, which is the information society·Beyond ‘race’·‘nation’·‘nationals’·‘class’ that are the conventional distinction in people, a concept of being globally common people, who have the sympathy in the living-culture level and the consciousness of jointly belonging as a global citizen, is required for today’s world.

야나기타(柳田國男) 민속학과 식민주의

남근우(Nam Kun-wu) 역사문화학회 2006 지방사와 지방문화 Vol.9 No.2

What type of attitude and distance did Kunio Yanagita, who pursued "single-country folklore studies" as self reflective research(內省の學), take toward the "Korean folklore studies" that were established and developed in Korea, under the Japanese imperial rule? In Japan, discussions of conventional theories have become common opinions; 1) Yanagita anticipated the establishment of "Korean folklore studies" and supported scholars from Korean such as Son Jin-Tae and Song Seok-Ha in their research; but 2) he exercised extreme caution concerning Korean folklore research conducted by the Government-General of Chosen and its government-controlled scholars; and yet 3) from the point of view of single-country folklore studies, he was circumspect and passive about comparing Korean and Japanese folklore. In this paper, I first reviewed the propriety of these 1) and 2) above, which are also related to the relativity issues surrounding single-country folklore studies, and I found that each was hard to prove. In particular, as regards the latter, which involved the exploitation of "folklore studies" conducted by the Government-General of Chosen and the Government-General of Formosa for the purpose of compiling materials to be used for the colonial rule, Yanagita did not exercise "extreme caution"; on the contrary, I found that he placed high value on these studies, saying that they were "superb work that will stand the test of time." Next, I targeted the issue in the thesis 3) above, in the context of a series of statements by Yanagita concerning comparative folklore studies during the war. Specifically, to demonstrate the relationship between Yanagita's folklore studies and colonialism, I chose a group of statements from around 1940 that advocated the necessity of comparative studies of ancient legends, based on the premise that "cultural exchange beyond that which was recorded" existed in East Asian as well as a grand plan for "Greater East Asian folklore" that was an extension of this position. At the same time, I picked out remarks that Yanagita made about his wartime view of life and death, and then explore the issue of whether the creation of a "martyrdom" ideology in order to 'be useful to the world" (世用實益) as well as a "Greater East Asia folklore" with Japanese folklore at the pinnacle were becoming practical topics in Japanese folklore studies.

大正時代における「耳塚」論争 : 南方熊楠、柳田国男、寺石正路、3者のやりとりを中心に

橋爪博幸 동의대학교 인문사회연구소 2010 인간과 문화 연구 Vol.16 No.-

日本の京都に、「耳塚」と呼ばれる塚がある。1592年から1598年まで朝鮮半島で行われた壬辰戦争で、日本の武将たちが朝鮮人の鼻や耳を切り取り、それを持ち帰って埋めた塚である。この耳塚についてはすでに琴秉洞(クムビョンドン)が《耳塚―秀吉の鼻斬り耳斬りをめぐって(増補改訂》(1994年)において詳述しているが、1910年代に日本の民俗学者のあいだで論争があったことはあまり知られていないので紹介する。最初、柳田国男が、その塚の由来について朝鮮人の耳を埋めたものかどうか疑問であると記した。このことに対し、南方熊楠がそれに反論している。南方熊楠顕彰館に所蔵されている未公開資料から、その際に、土佐の寺石正路から多くの資料提供を受けていたことが確認された。その後、柳田は1917年3月刊行の雑誌《郷土(きょうど)研究(けんきゅう)》で、耳塚についての認識不足を認める訂正文を載せている。なお、耳塚の由来に関する上記3者のあいだで交わされた史料の多くは、1909年に星野恒がまとめた耳塚についての論文〈京都大仏前の塚は鼻塚にして耳塚に非さる考〉でも取り扱われた文献であった。 江戸時代の日本において、耳塚は「京(けい)観(かん)」と関連づけて記されてきた。「京観」とは、戦勝の記念に敵の遺骸を積みその上に土を盛った塚を意味する。江戸時代に出版された書籍のなかには耳塚を「京観」と同義であるとし、そのなかで、それを肯定的に捉える論調のものがある。明治時代になると耳塚の捉え方は一変し、たとえば星野恒や寺石正路は、耳塚築造の意図を「京観」ではなく、「供養」のためであると記している。 上記3者のうち、南方はこの「京観」について注目し、柳田国男や寺石正路へ宛てた書簡のなかで「京観」の意味を解説し、耳塚が「武威を耀かす」ものであると指摘している。しかし、その数ヶ月後、南方は雑誌《日本及日本人》に掲載された論文〈酒泉等の話〉のなかで耳塚の話題に触れるも、「京観」に言及することはなく、耳塚と「京観」とを同視するその見解を公表することはなかった。理由のひとつとして、南方の耳塚論は、柳田への反論が主目的であり、「京観」に触れなくても、その目的が果たされたと考えたことが挙げられる。 軍国主義を拡張しつつあった当時の日本にあって、耳塚は朝鮮半島との政治的問題のひとつであった。日本に住んでいたLafcadio Hernがその著書 “Japan: An attempt at interpretation”(1904)のなかで耳塚を「戦勝記念碑(Ear-Monument)」と記したことについて、当時、朝鮮総督であった齋藤実は、耳塚の撤去を訴えてきたMary Crozierに対し、L. Hern の見解こそ「誤謬」であると反論している。南方熊楠は、政治的な問題にかかわることを理由に、耳塚と「京観」についてのみずからの見解を発表することを取り下げた可能性もある。 今日では、秀吉が「供養」のためではなく、朝鮮半島での戦果を記念する「京観」として耳塚を築いたことは明らかである。そしてわれわれ日本人は、その塚が、日本側から一方的に仕掛けた戦争がもたらした、ひとつの負の遺産であることをしかと認識せねばならない。 There is a mound in Kyoto, Japan called Mimizuka. During the Jinshin War fought in the Korean peninsula from 1592 to 1598, Japanese warriors cut off the noses of Koreans, brought them back to Japan, and buried them in this mound. Details of the Mimizuka were already mentioned by Kum Pyong-dong 琴秉洞 in Mimizuka — Hideyoshi no hanakiri mimikiri wo megutte (Mimizuka — Hideyoshi’s cutting-off of noses and ears; revised and expanded edition, 1994). The fact that there was a controversy about it in the 1910s among Japanese ethnologists, however, is far from common knowledge, and that is why I’m introducing it here. It began when Kunio Yanagita set forth his doubts about the origin of the mound, specifically whether ears of Koreans had actually been buried there. Kumagusu Minakata argued against Yanagita’s thesis. Documents not yet open to public view in the Kumagusu Minakata Archives confirm that, at that time, Minakata had been provided with a lot of material by Masamichi Teraishi in Tosa. Later, Yanagita published a retraction in the magazine Kyodokenkyu (March, 1917) in which he admitted his lack of understanding of Mimizuka. In the earlier Edo era, Mimizuka was referred to as an example of “Keikan 京観.” Keikan is the commemoration of a victory through heaping up a mound of dead bodies of the enemy and covering them with soil. There were books published in the Edo era that considered Mimizuka to be a form of Keikan; of those, some thought it a praiseworthy example. However, with the onset of the Meiji era, Mimizuka was understood in a completely different way. For example, Hisashi Hoshino and Masamichi Teraishi stated that the intention of building Mimizuka had nothing to do with Keikan, but was instead a prayer-monument for the repose of the souls of the dead. Among the three persons mentioned above, Minakata maintained his Mimizuka=Keikan theory. In his letters addressed to Yanagita and Teraishi, he explained what Keikan meant and pointed out that Mimizuka was something that had boosted spirits among the armed forces. Several months later, however, in his thesis, “About Shusen, etc.” (published in the magazine Nihon oyobi Nihonjin), Minakata, despite references to Mimizuka, never once mentioned Keikan. Nor did he ever publish his opinion that Mimizuka was a form of Keikan. That was probably because, for one thing, the main purpose of his theory was to present an argument against Yanagita’s theory; once that had been done, there was no further need (he must have thought) to mention Keikan, and in addition to that, Minakata might have foregone publishing his opinion about Mimizuka and Keikan because it now involved politics. It is obvious these days that Hideyoshi built Mimizuka not as a prayer for the repose of the souls of the dead, but as Keikan to commemorate the achievement of the war in the Korean peninsula. And, we, the Japanese, ought to recognize that the mound stands as a negative legacy of a war that Japan waged unilaterally.

富士川流域における盆と施餓鬼供養の地域的変容 -柳田国男の固有信仰論の再検討

지영임 한림대학교 일본학연구소 2012 翰林日本學 Vol.0 No.20

This article reviewed the regional features of the Bon Festival and he rite for bestowing food on hungry ghosts(=Segaki) offering which were practiced on the riverbasin of Fujigawa from the Buddhist and folk perspective to reexamine Yanagita Kunio’s theory of proper-belief. The Bon Festival and Segaki offering in Fujigawa basin show mixed aspects of Nagarekenzyo, Mushiokuri and a memorial for war dead. Especially, a mixture of Nagarekenzyo and Mushiokuri is not only a regional feature, but at the same time, it is also a regional transformation. Despite the purpose of showing lament to the drowned, there are several more elements in common that these ceremonies share with Segaki offering. For example,Muenbotoke, which wishes to get over with sweltering summer without severe diseases, or an offering for straying souls that could not go to the world beyond because of their tragic death. The essence of Muenbotoke, and the hungry ghost’s existence that were emphasized on the Bon Festival, is apt to be considered as a mixture of outer factors likes Buddhism and traditional folklores. But, Yanagita Kunio explained Japanese’s spiritual concept by focusing on the theory of proper-belief which led to a denial of Buddhism and Japanese traditional view on the otherworld. This research points out that Yanagita’s hypothetical theory of proper-belief should be reappraised based on the direct field. 富士川流域で行われた調査に基づいて、盆行事と施餓鬼供養の地域的変容を探ってみた。家の盆行事の際には無縁仏も祀られているが新仏、祖霊に重点が置かれており、寺や村共同の川施餓鬼の際には祖霊も祭られているが餓鬼⋅無縁仏、新仏の供養に重点が置かれている。まず、盆に寺院で行われる施餓鬼の場合、新仏に重点をおかれているものが多い。事例1、2、3、4のように施餓鬼供養には新盆の家がゲストとして参加しているが、地区によっては新仏供養が中心になっているところもある。最上は『西郊民俗』無縁仏特集号(1960)とその後の資料から、「無縁仏が盆における供養の中心からはなれてゆき、非業の死にあって、浮かばれない亡霊がそれに代わり、やがて新仏が、それから一般の仏が供養の中枢にすわり、それも場合によっては全く忘れられてゆく」と分析している。最上の施餓鬼供養における供養の対象への変化は富士川流域の寺院で行われる施餓鬼の場合にも当てはめることができよう。一方で、村共同で行われる施餓鬼も無縁仏または水死者の霊を慰めるためであったものが、いつか新仏も祀るようになり、祖霊のための供養も併せて行われていることも注目できる。 このように無縁仏から新仏へと供養の対象が変化するのは無縁仏と新仏の類似のためであろう。死後の祭りを十分にうけられない無縁仏は、安らかに落ち着くことができず、絶えずこの世にさまよいでて、世の人々に禍をおよぼすと考えられている。新仏も充分に清まった落ち着いたものではないため、人々に不安を与えるものである点において、無縁仏に類するものがある34)。したがって、寺や村共同体の施餓鬼供養において無縁仏の祟りやすい性格を有する新仏を盆に迎え祀ることによって、その性格を和らげることに意味があったと考えられる。 それでは実際に盆にくる霊はどのように変化したのだろうか。また、それは柳田がいった「三種の霊」とどのように違うのだろうか。この点と関連して興味深い点は、静岡県富士郡芝川町廻沢の事例である。廻沢では村人中心の施餓鬼に僧侶が来て読経を上げるが、支度をするのは村人であり、僧侶は一切関与しない。また、参考になるのは山梨県南巨摩郡南部町本郷の事例であるが、本郷寺の住職は施餓鬼を寺の行事というより住民の積極的な働きかけによって習慣的に行われる行事であると語った。このことは、村共同の施餓鬼と寺院の施餓鬼の由来が異なることを意味し、また、その対象も異なることを物語る。最上は、仏教が伝来された最初のごろの盆行事は「村人共同に浜辺や川原その他の広場で華々しくまつられ、その期間も盆月一杯におよぶ長期にわたるものともなった。後々仏寺が檀家の死者供養に力をそそぐようになると、仏寺で行われる施餓鬼供養も、施餓鬼といいながら檀家新仏の供養を主とするようになり、さらには檀家一般精霊の供養のみがめだつようになる」と述べている35)。最上のこの指摘は、元々村人共同の祭りであった盆行事が、江戸時代以降成立した檀家制度により、各家の死霊供養が中心となり、また寺で行われていた施餓鬼も各家の死霊供養に力を入れるようになったことを意味する。すなわち、先祖祭や祖霊祭の原型となるものは、村施餓鬼や寺施餓鬼であり ...

한일 아동문학 비교 및 전개양상 考察 - 1930년 류전국남(柳田國男)『일본석화집(日本昔話集)』과 손진태(孫晉泰)『조선민담집(朝鮮民譚集)』을 중심으로-

사희영 한국일본어문학회 2019 日本語文學 Vol.80 No.-

「說話」というのは國の國民によって傳術された物語です。その話は本當の話、または人によって作成され、變更されました。日本の柳田國男と韓國の孫晉泰の近代民俗學者たちは、廣く散らばっている說話を收集するために努力した。日本の說話が西洋の近代の流れによって消えているとき、柳田國男は昔の話に關心を持ち、昔話を集めて、1930年に『日本昔話集』を出版した。一方、同時期に、朝鮮の民俗學者である孫晉泰は東京で朝鮮說話を收集し、整理した『朝鮮民譚集』を發表した。この2冊の本は、忘れらていくた話を發掘し、普及するために重要な役割をしたのである。この本は、以後、子供のための繪本に受け繼がれて子供の敎育の重要な資料となり、近代韓國人と日本人の生活や考え方を把握できる重要な資料である。柳田國男の『日本昔話集』と孫晉泰の『朝鮮民譚集』を比較してみると、軍國主義の以前に大きな制約なく出版されたことを知ることができた。そしてこの2冊の本には變わらない普遍性が迂められているのが分かった。2冊の本の共通点は、動物寓話一編、奇跡の話一編、面白い話一編など三編の話である。昔話は、同じテ一マで始まったているが、他の結論に仕上げられている。だから起源がどこなのかはわからないが、話し手によって少しずつ違った形で變容されたことが分かるのである。登場人物のキャラクタ一を比べてみると、 『朝鮮民譚集』は、立身出世の道德的で尊敬できる人物が多かったが、『日本昔話集』では、經濟的な金持ちを象徵するキャラクタ一が多かった。全體的に『日本昔話集』は、社會規範を傳達する手段として、社會·敎義の內容を敎える本である。これに比べて『朝鮮民譚集』は、好奇心を介して樂しさを維持しながら、想像力を育てる描寫が多く描いてあることができた。 ‘Folktale’ are narrated by the people of a nation. The story was a real story or was created and changed by the person who says.Modern folklorists who are Yanagita Kunio of Japan and Sohn Jin-tae of Korea whom collected and published the widely distributed stories folktales.When the Japanese folktale was to be died out by Western dernization,Yanagita Kunio was interest in the old folktale and collected and then published 『Nihongbanashisyu』in 1930.On the other hand, during the same period, Son Jin-tae who is a folklorist of Joseon published 『Joseonmindansyu』in Japanese in Tokyo and collected the story of Joseon folktales and arranged it.These two books have played a major role in excavating and spreading the forgotten tales. This books are handed down as a fairy tale for children so that it is an important resource for children's education, as well as being able to identify the lives and possible thoughts of modern Koreans and Japanese people.When we compare Yanagita Kunio’s 『Nihongbanashisyu』with Son Jin-tae’s 『Joseonmindansyu』, could confirm that We could know that these two books were published without any major constraints before militarism. And both books contained unchanging universality.The two books shared in common were three folktales including one animal fable, one miracle Tales and one funny story.These stories began with the same subject matter but concluded with different content. So it is impossible to know where the origin is, but we could find that the stories were changed into different forms slightly by word of mouth.In the case of characters, many types appeared of a social climber who have a moral influence in 『Joseonmindansyu』, while the charcters were symbolizing a character with economic wealth as a target figure in 『Nihongbanashisyu』.Overall, 『Nihongbanashisyu』is a book that teaches social and doctrinal content as a means of communicating the norms of society. By comparison , 『Joseonmindansyu』can be described as a book that fosters imagination while retaining fun features through a curiosity plot.

일반논문 : 후지가와강 유역의 본행사와 세가키공양의 지역적 변용 -야나기타 구니오의 고유신앙론에 대한 재검토

지영임 ( Young Im Chi ) 한림대학교 일본학연구소 2012 翰林日本學 Vol.0 No.20

본고에서는 불교민속의 관점에서 후지가와(fujigawa) 강 유역에서 행해지는 본(bon)행사와 세가키(segaki)공양의 지역적 특징을 검토하여, 야나기타쿠니오의 고유신앙론을 재검토하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 후지가와 유역에서 나타나는 본행사와 세가키공양은 나가레칸죠(nagarekanzyo), 해충쫓기(mushiokuri), 전사자제사와의 습합이 보이는데, 특히 나가레칸죠, 해충쫒기와의 습합은 이 지역의 특징임과 동시에 지역적변용이다. 이러한 행사들이 세가키공양과 공통적인 요소를 지니는 것은 익사자의 영혼을 애도하는 목적 이외에도 질병이 만연하기 쉬운 무더운 여름을 무사히 극복하려는 바람으로 무연물(muenbotoke) 또는 비참한 죽음을 맞이하여 저 세상으로 가지 못하고 방황하는 영혼에 대한 공양의 의미가 크다고 할 수 있다. 이와같이 본 행사에 특히 강조되는 무연불, 아귀의 존재의 본질은 불교 등의 외래의 요소와 일본의 재래의 민속과의 습합으로 간주해야하는 부분이 있으나. 야나기타쿠니오는 고유신앙론을 축으로 일본인의 영혼관을 설명함으로써 불교뿐만 아니라 일본 고유의 타계관마저도 부정하는 결과를 낳았다. 이러한 점은 가설로서의 야나기타의 고유신앙론이 직접적인 필드에 근거하여 재검토되어야 함을 지적하였다. This article reviewed the regional features of the Bon Festival and he rite for bestowing food on hungry ghosts(=Segaki) offering which were practiced on the river basin of Fujigawa from the Buddhist and folk perspective to reexamine Yanagita Kunio`s theory of proper-belief. The Bon Festival and Segaki offering in Fujigawa basin show mixed aspects of Nagarekanzyo, Mushiokuri and a memorial for war dead. Especially, a mixture of Nagarekenzyo and Mushiokuri is not only a regional feature, but at the same time, it is also a regional transformation. Despite the purpose of showing lament to the drowned, there are several more elements in common that these ceremonies share with Segaki offering. For example, Muenbotoke, which wishes to get over with sweltering summer without severe diseases, or an offering for straying souls that could not go to the world beyond because of their tragic death. The essence of Muenbotoke, and the hungry ghost`s existence that were emphasized on the Bon Festival, is apt to be considered as a mixture of outer factors likes Buddhism and traditional folklores. But, Yanagita Kunio explained Japanese`s spiritual concept by focusing on the theory of proper-belief which led to a denial of Buddhism and Japanese traditional view on the otherworld. This research points out that Yanagita`s hypothetical theory of proper-belief should be reappraised based on the direct field.

근대 동아시아의 크롬웰 변주: 영웅 담론,영국 정체(政體),프로테스탄티즘

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2012 大東文化硏究 Vol.78 No.-

칼라일이 On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History(1841)에서 소개한 다양한 인물들 중에서도 올리버 크롬웰에 대한 동아시아의 관심은 뜨거웠다. 일본에서는 첫 번째 크롬웰 전기인 『格朗알』(民友社, 1890)이 다케코시 요사부로(竹越與三郞)에 의해 나왔고 야나기다 쿠니오(柳田國男) 역시 『クロンウエル』(博文館, 1901)을 출간하게 된다. 다케코시의 경우, 기본적으로 대부분 칼라일의 입장을 이어받으나 영웅을 국민의 큰 열심과 소망이 응축되어 탄생하는 것으로 보았다는 점에서 하늘의 신성한 속성을 강조한 칼라일과 차별화 된다. 한편 『格朗알』의 서문에서 도쿠토미 소호는 크롬웰의 혁명 사업이 아닌 그의 정신을 본받을 것을 요청하였으며, 영국의 입헌체제와 일본의 제국헌법을 동일시하는 등 당시의 일본 정세를 적극 긍정하기도 했다. 야나기다는 시대가 영웅을 만든다는 입장으로, 지상에서의 노력 및 국가를 위한 희생과 헌신을 전제한다는 점에서 다케코시의 영웅론과 동궤에 있었다. 그러나 그는 도쿠토미와는 달리 크롬웰의 혁명 사업 자체를 적극적으로 조명했으며 당대의 현실에 비판적 태도를 보였다. 중국인 량치차오는 다케코시 및 야나기다의 텍스트 둘을 모두 활용하여 『신민총보』의 <전기>란에 「新英國巨人克林威爾傳」(1903~1904)을 연재하였다. 앞선 작업을 통하여 프랑스 혁명과 같은 방식에 대해 경각심을 심고자 했던 량치차오는 영국의 입헌체제 및 의회제도를 참된 모델로 제시하기 위해 크롬웰 전기를 기획하였다. 그러나 신앙인으로서의 크롬웰의 면모와 혁명기 활동의 급진성, 그리고 만년의 의회 탄압 등은 량치차오 본인의 준비한 메시지와 내적 충돌을 일으켰다. 오랜 중단끝에 새로운 전략을 세워 연재를 재개한 량치차오는, 의도했던 메시지만을 최대한 집필한 직후 「克林威爾傳」을 미완으로 종결짓는다. 한편, 야나기다의 『크롬웰』을 기본으로 한 『태극학보』의 「크롬웰傳」은 내부 사정으로 인하여 박용희로부터 김낙영까지 총 세 명의 필자가 참여했다. 이미 여러 편의 전기물을 연재해 온 박용희는 프로테스탄티즘을 구심점으로 한 정신적 제국주의를 제창하고자 크롬웰전을 기획했다. 그러나 박용희의 학회 활동 중단과 함께 중반 이후의 연재는 다른 이의 손에 의해 진행된다. 마지막회는 태극학회의 회장 김낙영이 집필했는데, 그는 한반도에도 시세가 임박함에 따라 하늘이 영웅을 내려줄 것이라는 영웅대망론을 펼쳤다. 크롬웰이라는 한 고정된 인물을 둘러싼 근대 동아시아 지식인들의 갖가지 의미 부여들은 다양한 변폭을 보인다. 또한 동아시아의 크롬웰 전기들이 말해주듯 비단복수의 저술(다케코시/야나기다)이 존재하지 않더라도, 개인의 해결책 모색(량치차오), 혹은 집필자의 교체(박용희/김낙영) 등 메시지 형성의 변수는 내적·외적으로 다양했다. 19세기 말에서 20세기 초의 번역 텍스트들은 집필 시기에 수용자 개개인이 품었던 현실 인식과 문제의식, 그리고 나름의 대안 설정들을 생생히 드러내준다는 점에서 적극적으로 조명될 필요가 있다. Out of various characters that Carlyle introduced in On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History(1841), Oliver Cromwell sparked the East Asia`s curiosity. In Japan, the first biography of Cromwell, 『格朗알』 (Minyusha, 1890) was published by Takekoshi Yosaburo(竹越與三郞), and also Yanagita Kunio(柳田國男) published 『クロンウエル』(Hakubunkan, 1901). In case of Takekoshi, he basically followed most of Carlyle`s position, but he is differentiated from Carlyle who emphasized heavenly sacred attributes, given that he regarded that hero was born out of the condensation from the nation`s enthusiasm and wish. Meanwhile, in the preface of 『格朗알』 Tokutomi Soho requested to emulate not Cromwell`s revolutionary business but his spirit, and also actively affirmed the Japanese situation like identifying English constitutional regime with Japanese imperial constitution. On the other hand, Yanagita Kunio was, as suggesting that the era shaped the hero, in the same track with Takekoshi`s theories of hero in that the earthly efforts, sacrifice and devotion for the country were premised. However, he actively affirmed the Cromwell`s revolutionary business itself apart from Tokutomi, and had a critical view on the reality of his age. A Chinese, Liangqichao(梁啓超) utilized both of Takekoshi and Yanagita`s texts to publish 「新英國巨人克林威爾傳」serially in the column of <biography> of 『新民叢報』. Through the precedent works, Liangqichao intended to arouse attention to the way like the French Revolution, and then designed the Cromwell chronicle to suggest the English constitutional regime and parliamentary regime as the real model. However, the message prepared by Liangqichao caused an inner conflict with Cromwell`s character as a believer, radicalism of his activities in the revolutionary period, and parliamentary oppression in his latter years. After a long halt, Liangqichao resumed a series of publication with a new strategy, and finished the works having 「克林威爾傳」incomplete right after he authored only his original message to the maximum. The biography of Cromwell of 『太極學報』 based on the Yanagita`s 『クロン ウエル』 was participated by total 3 authors such as Park Yong-hee(朴容喜), Kim Nak-young(金落泳) due to the inside affairs. Park Yong-hee, as he had published series of chronicles, designed the Cromwell chronicle to advocate the mental imperialism pivoted by Christianity. However, the serial publication after the latter half with a quit of his academic activity is taken over in another way by other`s hand. The last episode was written by Kim Nak-young, the chairman of Taekeuk society, and he stated ``great man theory`` that the Korean Peninsula also could have the hero from God as the time got imminent. Diverse variations are found in each different ascription of meaning around a stock character, Cromwell by the intellectuals in the modern East Asia. Moreover, as the Cromwell chronicles in the East Asia demonstrate, the variables forming the message were diverse internally and externally such as groping for individual`s solution (Liangqichao), or substitution of authors(Park Yong-hee/Kim Nak-young), even if there existed no plural writing(Takekoshi/Yanagita). The translated texts from the late 19th century to the early 20th century deserve to be positively shed light on, considering that they vividly reveal the individual perception of reality and critical mind as well as alternatives setting of its own at the time of translation.

喩としての「海上の道」:詩的言語の空間想像力

鵜戸 聡 비교민속학회 2013 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.52

Kunio Yanagita’s famous notion “Road on the Sea” represents his trial to conceive a “Rice Road” on the East China Sea as the insular pathway between the Continent and the Japanese Archipelago, which implies his pursuit of the origin of the Japanese ancestry. This poetic terminology tends to evoke one straight road that attributes the Japanese Nation to only one determined origin, but, in reality, his imaginative argument is based on unpredictable complexity of tidal ways (roads on the sea) rather than linearity of the road on the ground. 야나기타 구니오의 대표적인 저작 『해상의 길』은 그의 일본 조상의 기원에 대한 탐색에 적용한, 도작 경로의 대륙과 일본 군도 사이의 섬 경로로서 동중국해를 확신하려는 시도였다. 이러한 시적 용어는 일본 민족의 유일한 결정적 기원이 아니라 사실 그의 상상적 주장이라 할 수 있는 하나의 길로서 환기시키고자 하는 의도로 보이는데, 이는 땅의 길로부터 선으로 이어진다기보다는 조수 경로의 예측할 수 없는 복잡성에 기반하고 있다.

제국일본에서 민속학적 이론의 전개 - 고유신앙과 동조론(同祖論) 중심으로 -

조규헌 중앙대학교 외국학연구소 2013 외국학연구 Vol.- No.24

It is worthy of notice that Yanagita kunio’s folklore has a unique character which assimilate discriminative colonial race into yamato’s. Single nature folklore which established in 1930’s Japan aimed at unified, single race theory, whose contents was to assimilate ryukyu to yamato race. The unique comparative folklore which compared with different race who has different background originated from this viewpoint. This comparative folklore supports the Emperor system of Japan which has the character of race unification. It applied in the method of understanding the shamanism of Chosen in some scholar’s theory of folklore such as Akiba Takashi and Murayama Chijun.

柳田国男と『海上の道』

梁川英俊(Hidetoshi YANAGAWA) 비교민속학회 2013 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.52

From December of 1920 to February 1921, Kunio Yanagita took a trip around the Amami and Okinawa Islands. Forty years later, he published his last book Kaij? no Michi (SeaWays) where he sought the origin of the Japanese people around these islands and South China. However his speculations were not easily accepted by other researchers. In those days, the theory of a dynasty conquered by equestrian people had an influence on the academic world. Yanagita’s theories are reevaluated today, and Japan-South Korea joint research will be expected to develop his original vision all over East Asia.