高麗末 조맹부체의 유입과 杏村 이암의 書體硏究

孫煥一 한국사상문화학회 1999 韓國思想과 文化 Vol.4 No.-

高句麗 廣開土大王碑 隸書가 新羅 書體에 미친 影響

孫煥一 고구려발해학회 2002 고구려발해연구 Vol.13 No.-

朝鮮初期의 조맹부체硏究

孫煥一 한국사상문화학회 1999 韓國思想과 文化 Vol.5 No.-

百濟木簡 <支藥兒食米記>와 <佐官貸食記>의 文體와 書體

손환일 신라사학회 2010 新羅史學報 Vol.0 No.18

『大唐三藏聖敎序』의 拓本과 臨摸本의 書體比較

손환일 한국문화사학회 2020 文化史學 Vol.0 No.53

『집자성교서』는 玄奘三藏法師(602~664)의 반야바라밀다심경 번역이 완성되었음을 기념하기 위하여 왕희지 글씨를 集字하여 세운 집자비이다. 그 후 이 석비는 집자비의 효시로 왕희지행서법의 교본이 되었다. 그동안 수없이 많은 탁본이 전하며, 임모본으로 1678년 李俁(1637~1693)가 임모한 <관란정 (이우임서본)>과 <익산본(개인소장본)>이 있다. <관란정(이우임서본)>은 서첩본이고, <익산본>은 권자본에서 서책본으로 개장하였고, 다시 38쪽의 서책본을 내용에 따라 48쪽의 절첩본으로 만든 것이다. 臨摸는 臨書와 摸書를 축약한 말이다. 臨書에는 意臨이, 摸書에는 背臨이 사용되었다. 意臨은 글자의 크기, 굵기, 위치, 기울기 등이 약간씩 다를 수 있다. 그러나 背臨은 글자의 크기나 위치, 필획의 굵기나 기울기 등이 모두 꼭 같다. 임서본인 <이우본>과 <익산본>의 서체를 비교하면, <이우본>은 금분을 아교에 개어 쓴 금니본이다. <이우본>은 전반적으로 필속이 빨라 생동감이 있지만, 필세의 점획과 결구에 있어서 원본에 충실하기보다는 일반적인 왕희지체의 필세를 따라 임서하였다. 반면에 <익산본>은 먹으로 쓴 묵본으로 왕희지 못지않게 잘된 글자들이 많이 있다. 필획이 단순한 글자는 자신감이 있어 점획이 튼튼하고 결구가 잘 짜여 졌으며, 필획의 운필에 필속이 빨라 생동감이 있기 때문에 왕희지를 보는 듯하다. 즉 <익산본>은 필세의 점획이 견실하며 결구가 잘 짜여 진 것이 장점이다. 단점은 필획이 복잡한 글자에서는 필속이 느려 생동감이 적다. 이런 점이 장점과 단점으로 지적되지만 전체적으로 대단한 가치가 인정되는 <집자성교서>의 임서본이다. 『Stele with inscription praising Buddhist scholar Xuanzang』 is the character-collectioninscription to celebrate the completion of Prajnaparamita hridaya Sutra(The Heart Sutra)translation by Xuanzang(玄奘 三藏 法師, 602 ~ 664), collecting Chinese charactersin Wáng Xīzhī handwritings styles from various references. This stele was the firstcharacter-collection inscription, has become the textbook of Wáng Xīzhī handwritingstyle. Thus far, there has been innumerable rubbed copies; In Korea, there were twoversion of reproduction(Immo, 臨摸) copy such as <Gwan-lan-jeong(a copy by Leewoo(李俁, 1637~1693) in 1678)> and <Iksan-bon (private collection)>. <Gwan-lanjeong(a copy by Lee woo)> is a scrapbook version; <Iksan-bon> was a scroll book,but it was redecorated to book style. After that, book of 38 pages was recomposed tofolding book version of 48 pages, according to the contents. Immo(臨摸) is the abbreviation word for Imseo(臨書:copy/write after observing theoriginal generally) and Moseo(摸書:copy the handwriting specifically as the original). For Imseo, Ui-lim(意臨) was used. (Ui-lim means the reproduction method to observethe overall characters and copy them.) From Ui-lim style, the characters of reproctionversion could have slight different size, stroke width, position or inclination as theoriginal text. However, for Bae-lim style, the characters are as same as the original one. To compare the handwriting style between <Gwan-lan-jeong(a copy by Lee woo)>and <Iksan-bon>. the first copy was written in gold powder, mixing glue withwater. <Gwan-lan-jeong(a copy by Lee woo)> has vividness with fast writing-speed; however, for dots and strokes of stroke-intensity and structure, it was not following theoriginal version, but following general Wáng Xīzhī style and replicating them. On thecontrary, <Iksan-bon> has sound dots and strokes with well-framed structure; but forcomplicated Chinese characters, it shows the slow writing-speed with less liveliness. This feature was marked as strengths and weakness at the same time, still this Imseocopy of <Stele with inscription praising Buddhist scholar Xuanzang> was with greatvalue.

高句麗 廣開土大王碑 隸書가 新羅 書體에 미친 영향

손환일 고구려발해학회 2002 고구려발해연구 Vol.13 No.-

『경우궁(景祐宮)도형』과 편액(扁額)

손환일 한국건축역사학회 2022 한국건축역사학회 학술발표대회논문집 Vol.2022 No.11

<요계관방지도(遼芥關防地圖)>의 서체 고찰 - 이이명(李이命)의 서체를 중심으로

단군학회 2011 고조선단군학 Vol.24 No.-

<P>"There was a postface of Lee I Meyong in <Yogyegwanbangjido/First Draft> which was recently discovered.</P><P> The postface is the same model as <Yogyegwanbangjido/Korea"s Treasure No. 1541/Collection of Kyujanggak>.</P><P> In addition, it was the same handwriting of Lee I Myeong, at the postface and the record with pictures of both versions.</P><P> There was an evidence of correction in <Yogyegwanbangjido/First Draft>, so it was considered to the former written version.</P><P> First draft of <Yogyegwanbangjido> followed the way of calligraphy of <Jincho Thousand-Character Classic>, and the other version of <Yogyegwanbangjido> as the Korea"s Treasure No. 1541 and Collection of Kyujanggak, followed the calligraphy of <Jipjasunggyoseo (the book for gathering the letters and holy teaching)> written by Wang Xizhi.</P><P></P><P></P>

壬申誓記石의 書體考

손환일 국립중앙박물관 2000 미술자료 Vol.- No.64

The purpose of this study is to compare the style of an handwriting in those days with that of Im-sin-Soegisuk(壬申誓記石, a monument stone with a written pledge) and then found out the dates of its creation. The vertical line has wider spaces than the cross line and also the former are in order while the latter are not. This is the general style of handwriting in Im-sin-Soegisuk and we call this style 긅eng Seo(行書, semi cursive style of chinese handwriting)'. Look into the character of the stone, we can find out that the each letter was written correctly not in the running style so the lines of the strokes are simple. Compare the characters in Im-sin-Soegisuk with Jeokseongbi(赤城碑), the strokes are very similar with each other and through this, we could realize that the style of the writings were in the same period. Moreover, we could find the construction of a regular tetragon which was already shown in Gwang-gae-toewang- bi(廣開土王碑) and Jung-won-bi(中原碑) of Goguryu(高句麗) and also see the influence of 'Hae-Soe(楷書, square style of chinese handwriting)' from Buk-wi(北魏). However, there are also many written styles from Yeoseo(隷書, ornanmental seal characters). For example, a character of 'Jeon(前)'show us a penmanship of Jeonseo(篆書, seal characters). This means it was near to the age of Yeoseo(隷書, ornamental seal characters). Classify the characters in their types, there are 20 characters with the penmanship of Joekseongbi(赤城碑), 12 characters from Gwang -gae-toe-wang-bi(廣開土王碑), unique characters from its own(Im-sin-Soegisuk) and 7 characters from the style of Buk-wi(北魏). Through this research, Im-sin-Soegisuk in the period of activating interchanges between Goguryu(高句麗) and Buk-wi( 北魏). Furthermore, there are about 10 unique characters which were usually used in the everyday life at the period of 500∼560 A.D. In this reason, Im-sin-Soegisuk was made in the age of 552 A.D.

尤庵 宋時烈의 書體

손환일 한국사상문화학회 2008 韓國思想과 文化 Vol.42 No.-

The origin of Song Si Yeol’s calligraphy is related to characters of his father: Song Gap Jo and his master: Kim Jip and so on. Also, it shows that ‘The Thousand Chinese Character Classic with the big character’ written by Han Ho would give an influence to the formation of Song’s calligraphy. Song Si Yeol also represented at that time by his sentences, and “sentence of Uam (Song Si Yeol’s pen name), the character of Dong Chun (Song Jun Gil’s pen name), the head writing of Mun Gok (Kim Su Hang’s pen name)” were the best honor then. His aspiration is big and deep, so Uam isn’t a person satisfied with such a government position. There is such loyalty in his calligraphy. The calligraphy of Uam, which represents history, thought and politics in the 17th century, is all with the reason and a courtesy. The contents and the outward form were also magnificent naturally, because it aimed at only a sense of morality and honor. Heroic, vigorous and sturdy stroke and structure were used in calligraphy and it expressed the natural greatness of a soul. It isn’t to be particular about a design of a letter, and only the reason why it was written is important. He did not only try to ornament a stroke, but also set a structure to the form. In spite of the big and small character, the letters were written in the stroke with all his might and structure having full of vigor. Therefore, there is his spirit in the character of Uam. This point is the difference between Uam and other people; the meaning of Uam’s calligraphy is respecting aspiration. The calligraphy of Uam gave an influence to the people tied with a privately made relation; Nam Gu Man, Min Yu Jung, Gwon Sang Ha, Kim Chang Hyeop, Min Jin Hu, Min U Su, Lee Chae and so on. 송시열 서체의 근원은 아버지인 송갑조(宋甲祖)와 스승인 김집(金集) 등의 필적과 관계가 있으며, 한호(韓濩)의 대자천자문은 전적으로 우암의 서체형성에 영향을 주었을 것으로 파악된다. 우암 송시열(1607~1689)은 “문장우암 명필동춘(文章尤菴 名筆同春)”이라는 말이 있듯이 당시를 대표하였다. 그래서 “우암찬 동춘필 문곡전(尤菴撰 同春筆 文谷篆)”은 당시 최고의 영광이었다. 우암은 뜻이 컸다. 다만 ‘인통함원 박부득이(忍痛含寃 迫不得已)’하게 살았다. 글씨에서도 보아 알 수 있듯이 구구하게 벼슬에 만족하는 인물이 아니다. 그의 글씨에서도 그런 대의를 엿 볼 수 있다. 17세기 사상과 정치를 대표하는 우암의 서예세계는 ‘기운생동(氣韻生動)’ 그대로이다. 그의 서법은 단순한 미사여구가 아니라, 모두가 도리와 의례와 유관한 내용이다. 그 까닭은 언제나 도의심(道義心) 뿐이었기 때문에 자연히 내용과 외형도 웅장하였던 것이다. 웅장하고 호방하며 건장한 필획과 결구를 운용하여 호연지기(浩然之氣)를 표현하였다. 북송의 소동파(蘇東坡)와 황산곡(黃山谷)이 주창했던 “불구형사 귀유고의(不求形似 貴有古意)”의 취지를 몸소 실천하였다. 자형의 형사에 구애됨이 없고, 다만 의취만이 있을 뿐이다. 필획을 꾸미려 하지 않았고, 결구를 형식에 맞추려 하지 않았다. 대소문자를 불문하고 혼신이 서린 필획과 기백이 강조된 결구로 글씨를 썼다. 그래서 우암의 글씨에는 그의 혼백이 배어있다. 이 점이 다른 사람과 구별되는 점으로 상의(尙意)가 우암 글씨의 근간이 되었다. 우암의 글씨를 이은 계열은 대개 사제관계로 맺어진 사람들이다. 남구만(南九萬, 1629~1711)ㆍ민유중(閔維重, 1630~1687)ㆍ권상하(權尙夏, 1641~1721)ㆍ김창협(金昌協, 1651~1708)ㆍ민진후(閔鎭厚, 1659~1720)ㆍ민우수(閔遇洙, 1694~ 1756)ㆍ이채(李采, 1745~1820) 등을 들 수 있다.