한국고고학의 연구방향

최성락(Choi Sung-rak) 역사문화학회 2004 지방사와 지방문화 Vol.7 No.2

In the last 60 years, Korean archaeology has largely developed externally. But the method and theory in Korean archaeology was not discussed to any extent internally. In this article, the following problems of the direction of studies in the Korean archaeology are discussed, Firstly, I considered the concept, the purpose, and the identity of archaeology. The concept and the purpose of archaeology have changed as the archaeology has developed. The first role of archaeology was to describe past cultures, but currently it is to explain them. And it was considered the purpose of Korean archaeology. One of the purpose of Korean archaeology is to reconstruct past culture through material remains which is same with general purpose. In addition to this, they are to study the origin and unique creation of Korean culture and to study the territory of Korea and the relationship with the foreign culture. Archaeology now does not belong to history or anthropology, but archaeology is archaeology itself. Secondly, some problems such as process of study, basic assumptions, and philosophical discussion are considered. One of the basic assumptions is that all types of human behaviors left material remains, others are the evolutional thinking as materials’ progress and the concept of uniformitarianism came from geology. The philosophical discussion in archaeology improved the level of explanation on the past culture, and reached almost same level with other disciplines. Lastly, I considered the direction of the studies in Korean archaeology on aspects of studies and reality. In aspects of studies, It was considered the establishment of the system in archaeological studies and the enlargement of subfield in archaeology. Specially understanding of archaeological studies and discussions about method and theory of archaeology are more needed. In aspects of reality, it was considered some subjects such as the role of institutions, conservation of sites, management of museums, and public archaeology. The cooperation between archaeological institutions and the participation to public activities should be needed. Until now, I think that Korean archaeology did not get out of the traditional archaeology. Therefore, It is more prudent ways to improve constantly the method and theory needed in Korean archaeology rather than to follow recklessly the trend of world archaeology.

한국고고학 디지털 사전구축 방안 연구

이초롱 국립문화재연구원 2023 헤리티지:역사와 과학 Vol.56 No.2

Although we have entered the era of digital transformation, there is currently no system that efficiently collects, manages, integrates, and services a large number of archaeological digital source materials produced as a result of cultural relics research, i.e., an intelligent integrated management and service platform for archaeological academic information. In this regard, the need to build a digital dictionary of Korean archaeology was confirmed by examining the problem of the Digital Encyclopedia of Korean Archaeology, which is currently available in PDF format on the web, the current status of the publication and use of the Dictionary of Korean Archaeology, and the cases of building digital platforms at home and abroad. Therefore, this paper aims to suggest a general direction for creating a digital encyclopedia of Korean archaeology based on the Dictionary of Korean Archaeology, which includes quality knowledge information, to reconsider the accessibility of archaeological data in conformity with data access limitations. The application of the series Dictionary of Korean Archaeology, published since 2001, and the necessity for digital transformation were examined, as well as the application of data from the archaeological data archiving platforms of Europe, the USA, Japan, and cases of establishing platforms corresponding to specialized encyclopedias from Korea. Based on these, a three-step implementation plan and detailed projects were suggested to create the Digital Encyclopedia of Korean Archaeology. Through this, we proposed the design of metadata for computerized records and the expansion to semantic (meaning-based) data that gives and shows the relationship information between the produced metadata as the implementation tasks to build the Digital Dictionary of Korean Archaeology. It is hoped that such research will help create an integrated intelligent management and service platform for archaeology, raise awareness, and provide a better understanding of Korean archaeology to the general public.

디지털고고학 국외 사례 현황과 과제

최인화 (사)한국문화유산협회 2023 야외고고학 Vol.- No.48

최근 디지털 기술의 발달과 팬데믹의 영향으로 고고학 분야에도 다양한 기술을 활용하려는 시도가 이루어지고 있다. 국외에서는 이를 디지털고고학(Digital Archaeology)이라고 하며,고고학 조사, 연구, 분석, 보존, 복원, 활용 등 고고학의 한 분야로 활발히 연구되고 있다. 현재 한국의 디지털고고학은 고고학의 한 분야라기보다는 3D 측량, 가상현실 콘텐츠 제작 등 기술적 보조 수단에 국한되어 해당 기술을 충분히 활용하지 못하는 경향이 있다. 또한 우리는 다량의 데이터와 콘텐츠를 생산하고 있지만 이를 제대로 관리․활용하지 못하고 있다. 디지털고고학에 대한 정책과 제도, 교육, 이에 대한 전문 인력 또한 부족한 현실이다. 국외에서는 1960년대 비교적 이른 시기에 디지털고고학이 시작되어 다양한 문제에 대한 고민과 해결 방안, 새로운 연구가 시도되었다. 본 연구의 목적은 국외 디지털고고학의 개념과 분야, 관련 정책과 교육, 분야 및 기술별 대표 사례를 종합적으로 검토하여, 이를 국내에 적합한 연구, 정책, 제도, 교육, 기술 적용 방안으로 활용하기 위함이다. 이를 위해 관련 논문, 단행본 등 최신 자료 조사와 함께 영국 등 국외의 박물관, 전시관, 학회 등을 직접 방문하여 조사한 결과를 활용하였다. 분석 결과, 국외에서는 고고학 전공자들이 고고학 조사와 연구, 보존과 복원, 전시와 교육 등을 위해 관련 기술을 최대한 활용하여 다채로운 연구 성과물이 도출되고 있다. 또한 이를 위해 대학의 고고학과 등에서는 GIS, 3D 스캔, CAD 등의 기술 관련 강의를 개설하고 지속적으로 전문가를 양성하고 있다. 또한 국가 차원의 정책과 제도, 예산 등이 이를 체계적으로 뒷받침하여 디지털고고학 분야를 활성화하고 산학 협력을 유도하며, 이를 통해 대중 참여 확대와 일자리, 경제적 부가가치를 창출하고 있다. 디지털 기술은 고고학 분야의 스펙트럼을 넓히고 새로운 조사와 연구의 가능성을 열어줄 것이다. “디지털고고학”을 붙여 쓴 것은 대중고고학, 선사고고학처럼 하루빨리 고고학의 한 분야로 빠르게 자리 잡고 연구되기를 희망하는 마음에서이다. 본고의 여러 사례가 관련 연구자에게 유용한 참고가 되기를 바라며, 관계 기관의 정책과 제도, 예산, 교육 등의 추진에 원동력이 되기를 기대한다. Due to recent advancements in digital technology and the impact of the pandemic, various attempts to utilize technology have been made in the field of Archaeology. Overseas, this is referred to as “Digital Archaeology”, and it is actively researched as a field of Archaeology, such as excavation, investigation, analysis, preservation, restoration, and utilization. Currently, Digital Archaeology in South Korea tends to be limited to technical support tools such as 3D scanning and VR content, rather than being recognized as a field of Archaeology. Furthermore, although we produce a large amount of data and content, we struggle with management and preservation. The policies, regulations, and education regarding Digital Archaeology are also insufficient. Digital archaeology began relatively early in foreign countries and is actively being researched. This study aims to comprehensively examine the definition and fields of Digital Archaeology overseas, along with relevant policies, educational status, and representative cases. The goal of this study is to adapt this knowledge to suitable research, policies, regulations, education, and technological applications in Digital Archaeology of Korea. To achieve this, researching recent papers, publications, as well as field investigations in relevant conferences, museums, and organizations were conducted. According to the analysis results, archaeologists abroad are utilizing relevant technologies to the fullest extent in order to achieve diverse research outcomes in archaeological survey, analysis, preservation, restoration and exhibition. Additionally, several Universities has opened lectures related to technology to nurture experts. Furthermore, policies, regulations, and budgets are systematically supporting Digital Archaeology by promoting industry-academia collaboration, expanding public participation, and generating employment opportunities and economic value through this. Digital technology will broaden the research spectrum in the field of archaeology and open up new historical possibilities. It is hoped that the various cases presented in this paper will serve as a reference for archaeologists, as well as policies, regulations, budgets, and education from relevant organizations, will be gradually achieved.

고고학 해석의 지평 넓히기 – ‘고고학 자료’에 대한 다양한 인식 검토 –

고일홍 서울대학교 인문학연구원 2012 人文論叢 Vol.68 No.-

The various approaches used to interpret the archaeological evidence are based on different perceptions of the archaeological record. This paper aims to examine the interpretative possibilities and limitations of culture-historical archaeology and the various approaches of processual (the New Archaeology, behavioral archaeology, and Darwinian evolutionary archaeology) and post-processual archaeology (contextual archaeology, phenomenological approaches to the landscape, and a ‘structuring’ archaeology) with focus on the way in which the archaeological record is perceived. In doing so, it is hoped that a better understanding of these approaches may be obtained, as well as the acknowledgement that, in the interpretation of a common data set, the dissimilar results produced by the various approaches should be regarded as being interpretations with different points of focus, rather than as being contrasting interpretations. It is suggested that this will help lay down the foundations for a more symbiotic relationship between the various archaeological approaches currently in use within Korean archaeology.

한국 중세 고고학 기초자료 데이터베이스 구축 과정 -한국 중세 역사학의 고고학 자료 이용 활성화-

홍영의 한국중세사학회 2013 한국중세사연구 Vol.0 No.36

Resources that the historians use in the study and writing of history are called historical resources. They are important clue to examine a history which includes documented resources, relics, remains, ruins, image resources like painting, oral history and transmission. Different from other literary works, excavation is a precious work to illuminate customs and culture of the time directly. History is a discipline to restore the image of the past through literary resources but archaeology is to restore the feature of the past by means of comprehensive understanding on material resources. Accordingly, ‘historical archaeology’ can be said as ‘archaeology of the historic period with literary records.”So far, historical archaeology mainly deals with the Three Kingdom’s period. From 1970s onward, the results of archaeological excavation began to be reflected to historical studies. While it is true that excavation results through historical archaeology have contributed to the restoration of the image of the past, the interests of historical archaeology and expansion of the study area to the period afterward seems to be neglected. Furthermore, the study on the medial period in Korea was mainly made with literary resources. However, it is hard to create further development only with those literary resources and such phenomenon is highly likely to be continued. Accordingly, it is necessary to find a promoting way of the medieval history in Korea by means of the interdisciplinary exchange with the medieval archaeology. In accordance with the extensive excavation results on the medieval archaeology from 1990 onward, the scholars on the medieval period in Korea expected a new way of researches. In particular, the interests in the medieval archaeology has been expanded through various excavations such as Manwoldae relics, the capital of Goryeo, Gaeseong Industrial Complex, life relics of Joseon and underwater relics of Goryeo. Some argue to incorporate the medieval history in Korea with the archaeology in terms of interdisciplinary manner, and the number of scholars on the medieval archaeology in Korea is increasing. However, there is a realistic barrier as the systematic assortment and utilization of the excavation reports are not plausible. Therefore it is urgent to seek a plan for active uses of those resources. The aim of this study is to review and analyze the contents of archaeological reports on the medieval period in Korea, to classify and systematize characters and conditions of relics and remains and to make a database. By means of such activities, this study attempts standardization of relics and remains of the medieval period of Korea, and also promotes active utilization of resources and communications between historians on the medieval period and archaeologists. By the expansion of research methodology through new data exploration, it encourages interdisciplinary exchange between history and archaeology to lay a new foundation of research. This study is significant in that it suggests a new direction of DB construction accessible by means of archaeology on the ancient period including prehistoric period.

북한선사고고학의 패러다임

이기성(Yi, Kisung) 중부고고학회 2015 고고학 Vol.14 No.3

북한고고학을 바라보는 한국고고학의 시선은 이중적이다. 남한의 선사시대를 설명하기 위해서는 반드시 북한 지역의 고고자료에 대한 검토가 필요하지만, 북한고고학의 연구 결과물에 대한 불신에서 단편적인 자료 인용만이 있을 뿐이다. 한국고고학이 북한고고학을 바라보는 또 하나의 입장은 학사적인 검토로 북한고고학이 어떠한 발전 과정을 거쳐왔는지를 확인하고자 하는 것이다. 본고에서는 북한선사고고학의 흐름을 학사적으로 정리하고 북한선사고고학의 패러다임을 검토하였다. 우선 북한고고학의 연구 기관 및 간행물의 현황을 정리하고, 북한선사고고학의 연구 흐름을 6기로 구분하였다. 각 시기의 구분은 정치적인 사건을 기준으로 하였으며, 이는 북한고고학의 특성상 지속된 연구 결과의 누적으로 연구 경향이 변하는 것이 아니라 정치적 입장의 변화가 고고학의 학문적 영역에 매우 큰 영향을 주었기 때문이다. 북한선사고고학은 학문적 성격을 정립하는 시기를 거쳐 ‘과학’으로서의 고고학, ‘도구’로서의 고고학, ‘계몽’의 고고학, ‘선전’의 고고학으로 그 성격이 점차 변하게 되었으며 이러한 성격의 변화는 누적된 연구 결과에 의해 고고학 전반의 패러다임이 변한 것이 아니라 주체사관의 틀에 한반도의 과거를 끼워 맞추고자 하는 시도의 결과물이었던 것이다. 그러나 실제 주체사관의 내용은 결국 민족의 우수성과 단일성을 증명, 강조하고자 하는 민족주의로, 지금의 북한선사고고학은 민족주의의 패러다임 아래에 있는 것이다. 남한과 북한의 고고학은 전혀 다른 방향을 향하고 있으며, 이러한 연구 경향은 통일 후 한반도의 과거 를 규명하는데 큰 장애가 될 것이다. 지금 북한고고학을 보다 구체적으로 검토, 이해하는 작업은 그러한 장애를 최소화할 수 있는 기초적인 작업이다. The viewpoint of Korean archaeology on the North Korean archaeology is twofold. In order to explain the prehistory of South Korea, the review of the archaeological materials of the north region is needed. But, in distrust of North Korea’s archaeology, only feragmentary data is quoted. Another position of Korean Archaeology is the examination of the history of North Korean archaeology. In this article, the history and paradigm of North Korean archaeology were examined. First of all, research institute and publications of North Korean archaeology were summarized. And research trend of Notrth Korean Archaeology was divided into six steps on the basis of political events. Through the period of establishing the scientific nature, archaeology as ‘science’. archaeology as ‘medium’, archaeology as ‘enlightenmnet’, archaeolgy as ‘propaganda’ , the academic nature was changed gradually. This is not a change of paradigm by the accumulated research. It is the result of which was an attempt to put the prehistory of Korean peninsula into the frame of ‘Juche Ideology’. But the actual contents of ‘Juche Ideology’ is nationalism which prove and emphasize the national unity and the excellence. The North Korean prehistoric archeology now is under the paradigm of nationalism. The Archaeology of South Korea and North Korea are all headed in different directions. These study trends will be an obstacle to understand Korean prehistory after Unification of Korea. The Understanding of North Korean archaeology can minimize these barriers.

이덕무의 청대고증학 수용

권정원 ( Jung Won Kwon ) 한국한문학회 2015 韓國漢文學硏究 Vol.0 No.58

李德懋는 조선후기 博學으로 널리 알려진 학자이다. 그의 박학적 면모는 30대 이후보이는 고증학적 성향이 농후한 저술에서 확인된다. 그리고 이러한 이덕무의 학문 성향은 청대고증학의 영향으로 이해되어 왔다. 그러나 과연 그러한가? 이덕무는 20대 중반에 청대고증학자 黃宗羲를 접했고, 30대 전후하여 고증학자들의 서적을 열독하였으며, 30대 중반 이후의 저술에 적극 활용함을 확인할 수 있었다. 따라서 이덕무가 청대고증학에 큰 관심을 가졌고, 그들로부터 영향 받았음은 틀림없다. 하지만 이덕무가 접한 청대고증학자는 黃宗羲, 顧炎武, 毛奇齡, 朱彛尊, 徐乾學으로, 이들은 청대 초기 고증학 형성기에 활동한 학자들이다. 청대고증학의 전성기에 활동한 戴震, 錢大昕, 章學成 등에 대한 언급은 그의 문집 어디서도 찾아볼 수가 없다. 이덕무는 청대고증학 전체의 흐름을 꿰뚫을 수 있는 입장은 아니었고, 다만 청대 초기 고증학의 일부만을 접하고 수용할 수 있었다. 이덕무는 청대고증학자 중 顧炎武의 영향을 가장 많이 받았다고 알려져 있다. 하지만 이덕무가 열독한 서목과 인용한 내용을 통해 모기령, 주이준, 서건학 등의 영향도 적지 않았음을 확인할 수 있다. 그런데 이들 학자들은 학문적 지향과 삶의 행적이 판이하다. 顧炎武가 대명의리를 지킨 절의의 인물이자 주자 학문을 옹호하는 측면이 강했던 반면, 毛奇齡은 청에 벼슬한 이력이 있을 뿐만 아니라 대명의리를 지킨 인물을 논박하기까지 했으며, 주자를 철저히 비판한 반주자학자였다. 이덕무는 대명의리와 주자 옹호적 입장을 중시했음에도 불구하고 모기령과 주이준의 박학과 고증학적 학문방법을 대단히 높이 평가하였다. 이는 이덕무가 청대고증학을 수용함에 있어서 ‘치밀한 考據를 바탕으로 한 考證學的 학문방법’을 중요시했음을 의미하는 것이라 하겠다. 이덕무는 유년시절부터 名物學에 대한 관심이 지대했고, 考據.辨證을 중요시 하는 학문 자세를 지녔으며, 20대 시절에는 鄭樵와 馬端臨을 본받아 백과사전식 類書를 만들고자 기획하기도 했다. 이는 이덕무가 청대고증학을 접하기 이전에 이미 名物度數學에의 깊은 관심과 고거.변증하는 학문방법을 가지고 있었음을 말해준다. 그리고 이덕무는 30대 전후하여 청대고증학을 수용하면서 특히 고증학적 학문방법에 깊은 공감을 보였는데, 이는 이덕무가 평소 지향하던 博學과 考據.辨證의 학문방법과 잘 맞아떨어졌기 때문일 것이다. 따라서 이덕무 학문의 고증학적 성향은 청대고증학의 수용만으로 이해하기 보다는, 타고난 꼼꼼함과 유년시절부터 지니고 있던 명물도수학에의 관심과 고거ㆍ변증을 좋아하던 성향이 청대고증학의 수용과 결합되어 나온 결과라 이해하는것이 타당할 것이다. Lee Deok-Mu is a scholar well known for erudition in the late Joseon period. His erudite aspect is identified in his writings with a strong documental archaeological tendency in his 30s and thereafter. Lee Deok- Mu``s academic tendency as such has been understood as a result of the effects of Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology. However, is it really so? Lee Deok-Mu encountered Hwang Jon-Hee, a scholar specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology in his mid-20s and enthusiastically read the books of scholars specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology including Goh Yeom-Mu and cited the contents in his writings in his mid-30s thereafter. Therefore, the fact that Lee Deok-Mu was greatly interested in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology and enthusiastically read the books of scholars specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology is indisputable. However, scholars specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology encountered by Lee Deok-Mu were Hwang Jong-Hee, Goh Yeom-Mu, Mo Gi-Ryeong, Ju Ee- Jun, and Seo Geon-Hak who acted in the early part of the Qing Dynasty Period when documental archaeology was being formed. Mentions about Dae Jin, Jeon Dae-Heun, and Jang Hak-Seong who acted in the prime of documental archaeology in the Qing Dynasty Period cannot be found anywhere in the collection of his works. Given Lee Deok-Mu``s birth and death date, it is natural that the documental archaeology accessed by Lee Deok-Mu is part of the documental archaeology during the period of Qianlong in the early part of the Qing Dynasty Period. Therefore, although Lee Deok-Mu was greatly interested in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology and wanted to obtain and read the books of scholars specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology, he was not in a position to completely understand the stream of the entire Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology but could accommodate only part of the documental archaeology at the beginning of Qing Dynasty Period. Lee Deok-Mu is known to have been affected the most by Goh Yeom-Mu among scholars specialized in Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology. However, though the titles of books enthusiastically read by Lee Deok-Mu and the contents cited by them, it could be identified that the effects of Mo Gi-Ryeong, Ju Ee-Jun, and Seo Geon-Hak were not small. However, the academic orientation and course of life of Goh Yeom-Mu /Seo Geon- Hak and those of Mo Gi-Ryeong/Ju Ee-Jun are completely different. Whereas Goh Yeom-Mu was royal to Ming Dynasty and strongly advocated neo- Confucianism, Mo Gi-Ryeong not only had been in government service for Qing Dynasty but also argued against those who were royal to Ming Dynasty and thoroughly criticized Chutzu. Despite that Lee Deok-Mu was royal to Ming Dynasty and regarded the position of advocating Chutzu as being important, he evaluated highly, the erudition and documental archaeological academic methods of Mo Gi-Ryeong and Ju Ee-Jun. This should mean that when Lee Deok-Mu was accommodating Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology, he regarded important, the ‘documental archaeological academic methods based on elaborate historical evidence.’ It is said that Lee Deok-Mu had a habit to think over history for notes and seek for historical evidence for doubtful contents from when he was young, had wide knowledge as he read diverse books, in particular, had profound knowledge of studies of grass and trees, birds and beasts, mountains and rivers, and customs, and carefully sought for historical evidence and demonstrated when he was writing books. He planned to write encyclopedic books such as <Tongji> of Jeong Cho and, <Munheontonggo> of Ma Dan-Rim when he was young. Through this, it can be seen that Lee Deok-Mu already had deep interest in and affected by speciality studies before he encountered Qing Dynasty Perioddocumental archaeology. When he was accommodating Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology in his 30s, Lee Deok-Mu deeply sympathized with documental archaeological methods in particular probably because these methods were well consistent with erudition and the academic methods of seeking historical evidence and demonstrating that he pursued at normal times. Therefore, the documental archaeological tendency of Lee Deok-Mu``s studies should be understood as a results from the combination of his meticulousness and tendency toward seeking historical evidence and demonstrating that he had from when he was young and his accommodation of Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology rather than just a result of accommodation of Qing Dynasty Period documental archaeology.

근대 서양 학문의 도입과 메타모포시스 - 중국 증사주의적 고고학의 성립 -

김정열 숭실사학회 2020 숭실사학 Vol.0 No.45

중국 고고학에는 독특한 지향성이 있다. 그것은 고고학을 역사학의 한 분과학문으로 취급하며, 그 학문적 목적을 실물자료를 통해 역사 복원에 이바지 하는 것으로 간주하는 데 잘 나타난다. 중 국의 고고학에는 분명히 역사벽(癖)이 있다. 이른바 ‘증사주의(證史主義)’라 불리는 이 경향성은 물질문화를 통해 인류문명의 발전 맥락을 보편적 시야에서 살펴보고자 하는 서양의 고고학과는 분명히 다르다. 고고학은 19세기를 거치면서 서양에서 발전한 학문이다. 그것이 중국에 처음 소개 된 것은 19세기 말엽부터의 일이지만, 중국인에게 그것은 여전히 낮선 학문이었다. 따라서 그것은 중국에 수용되는 ‘과정’을 필요로 했다. 1920년경 빠른 속도로 진행되기 시작한 고고학의 수용 과 정에는 그 시대의 역사적, 사회적, 문화적 환경이 작용했다. 이 시기에는 전통체제의 붕괴가 본격적으로 진행되고, 이를 대신할 새로운 가치와 이념이 성장 했다. 신문화운동은 민주와 과학을 지상의 가치로 하여 서양 문화의 수용을 촉구했다. 이 무렵 진 행된 서양 학자들의 고고학적 조사 활동은 중국인의 눈에, 거짓으로 가득 차 있던 전통적 역사체 제를 대신할 수 있는 절호의 대체재로 인식되었다. 그런 의미에서 중국인의 시야에 비친 고고학은 역사학과 다르지 않았다. 고고학을 수용할 수 있는 주체는 외국 유학을 경험한 자나 구래(舊來)의 학자를 막론하고 여전히 중국인이었다. 이들은 과학적인 방법을 통해 진실된 역사를 건설하고자 했지만, 전통체제 하에서 성장한 그들은 여전히 중국적인 시각에서 서양의 고고학을 이해했다. 전 통적 학문인 금석학과 서양의 고고학은 유사한 학문으로 인식되고, 그로 말미암아 양자는 뒤섞이 기 시작했다. 금석학의 역사학적 지향성은 이 과정에서 고고학에 유입되었다. 중국 고고학의 역사학적 지향성은 은허 발굴을 통해 지울 수 없는 낙인으로 자리 잡게 되었다. 1928년 시작된 은허 발굴은 상 왕조의 존재를 증명했을 뿐만 아니라 전래문헌이 완전히 허구로 가득 찬 것은 아니라는 점도 입증했다. 은허 발굴은 서구 열강의 침략 아래 유린된 유구한 역사와 민족적 자긍심을 회복할 수 있도록 함으로써, 중국인에게 모범적인 고고학이란 역사를 복원하는 데 기여해야 한다는 인식을 심어 주었다. 고고학 수용의 과정에 작용한 각종 환경은 중국의 고고학에 증사주의적 경향을 덧씌웠다. 서양 의 고고학은 중국으로 건너와 ‘변용’되었다. 중국 사회에 수용된 서양의 학문은 타자로 존재하지 않고 자아로 변모했지만, 자아가 되는 것은 그것을 둘러싼 환경과 접촉하고 변모하는 과정을 필요로 했다. Chinese archaeology has a unique direction. This is evident in the fact that archaeology is treated as a part of history science and its academic purpose is to contribute to the restoration of history through physical materials. Chinese archaeology clearly has a historical barrier. This tendency, so-called History oriented Archaeology, is clearly different from Western archaeology, which seeks to explore the context of human civilization from a universal perspective through material culture. Archaeology developed in the West in the 19th century. It was first introduced to China around the end of the 19th century, but it was still unfamiliar to the Chinese. Therefore, it needed a process that would be accepted by China. The acceptance process of archaeology, which began rapidly in 1920, was influenced by the historical, social and cultural environment of the period. During this period, the collapse of the traditional system was in full swing, and new values and principles were developed to replace it. The New Culture Movement encouraged the acceptance of Western culture with democracy and science as the value of the earth. The archaeological research by Western scholars at this time was recognized as a great alternative to the traditional history system that was false to the Chinese eye. In this sense, archaeology in the Chinese perspective was no different from history. Those who accepted archaeology, regardless of whether they had studied abroad or were traditional researchers, remained Chinese. They tried to build a true history through scientific methods, but they grew up under the traditional system and still understood Western archaeology from a Chinese perspective. In China, traditional studies such as epigraphy and Western archaeology in the West were recognized as similar studies, and the two began to mix. The historical orientation of epigraphy flowed into archaeology in the process. The historical orientation of Chinese archaeology has become a stigma that cannot be wiped away by the excavation of Yinxu. The excavation of the Yinxu, which began in 1928, not only proved the existence of the Shang dynasty but also proved that the traditional literature was not completely full of fiction. The Yinxu excavation strongly gave the Chinese the impression that it should contribute to restoring the history of archeology by restoring the perpetual history and national pride that was trampled upon under the invasion of Western powers. Various environment that influenced the process of accepting archaeology has added an the trend of vindicating textual records to Chinese archaeology. Western archaeology has transformed in China. Western studies, accepted by Chinese society, did not exist as others and transformed into me, but to become me required a process of coming into contact with and transforming the environment surrounding me.

포스트미디어 시대 예술로서의 미디어고고학과 정크미디어

권수진 문학과영상학회 2023 문학과영상 Vol.24 No.1

The article discusses ‘Media Archaeology’ in the 1980s to understand ”media archaeology as art” and its interrelationship between post-media theory and media archaeology today. Also, discuss what ”media archaeology art” is in terms of post-media art that how media archaeology and junk media borrow repeated recycling, reproduction, and archiving to write the history of art, proving that they are various technology uses, development, or practice (painting, sculpture, video, film, literature, etc). For the core discussions, Robert Rauschenberg’s combine art and Paul Demarinis’s media art Pygmy Gamelan (1973) as methodologies and ideas have discussed the relationship between junk media and post-media art, which considers and experiments with the art of the post-media era as a media archaeological methodology. The first is a conceptual discussion of ’Junk Aesthetic’ in post-media and media archaeological terms. The second is the possibility that media archaeology and art can be defined as ’media archaeology art’ beyond methodology through analysis and discussion of media artworks by media artist Paul DeMarinis. In conclusion, present ideas for future research on media art are considered from the perspective of media archaeology in the post-media era, suggesting ideas on how these two similar concepts from different eras in post-media and media archaeology can be presented simultaneously in junk art form.

일본 고고학 형성기의 식민지 고고학 : 초기 대만 고고학을 중심으로

이기성(Yi, Kisung) 백산학회 2020 白山學報 Vol.0 No.118

19세기 후반부터 본격적인 학문의 체계를 갖추게 된 일본 고고학은 초기부터 대만, 조선등의 식민지 고고학과 함께 시작되었다. 그리고 당시 일본 고고학에서 시작된 선사시대에대한 관심과 여러 학술적 논쟁들, 고분 발굴이 제한되어 있는 일본 고고학의 한계 등으로인해 대만과 조선은 일본 고고학에 있어 절호의 고고학 필드였다. 그러한 과정에서 일본 고고학은 동아시아에서 학문적 패권을 차지하기 위한 ‘제국주의 고고학’과 식민지배의 정당성을확보하기 위한 ‘식민지 고고학’의 성격을 모두 가지게 된다. 그러나 일제강점기에 실시된 고고학 조사는 대만과 식민지 조선에서 모습이 전혀 다르다. 조사의 결과는 식민지 고고학의 전형이지만 역사적 관계를 가지고 있어 완전한 ‘타자’ 일수는없었던 식민지 조선, 역사적 관계가 전혀 없기에 결국은 일본의 관학 고고학에서 관심이 멀어지고 일반인의 조사가 중심을 이루게 된 대만 등, 당시 일본 고고학의 관심 및 일본 고고학이식민지를 바라보는 시각에 따라 식민지 고고학의 모습이 결정된 것이다. 그렇기에 일본의 제국주의 고고학의 전체 모습을 구명하기 위해서는 이러한 다양성의 배경과 그 흐름을 종합적으로 살펴보아야 할 것이다. 본고에서는 대만 고고학의 형성과정을 일본고고학과의 관계 속에서 살펴보아 일본 제국주의 고고학, 식민지 고고학이 가지고 있던 다양성을 검토하였다. In Japan, a study of archaeology began as an independent discipline since the late 19th century, and from the beginning, took on imperialistic nature. From the formative years of archaeological study in Japan, archaeological investigations started in the colonial Taiwan and Joseon, and these experiences had an immense influence on establishment of archaeological study in Japan. However, archaeological investigation of a colony showed widely different developments between Taiwan that had no historical link with Japan and Joseon that has forged a close historical tie with Japan since the ancient era. Since Taiwan became colonized by Japan in 1895, archaeological investigations by the Japanese began in Taiwan. It is noteworthy that the early investigations mostly focused on the stone ages in Taiwan and were conducted by ordinary people, not professional archaeologists. Also, the investigations did not delve deep enough to reach cultural interpretations, and remained at the level of merely introducing historic relics and sites. In the 1920s and afterwards, archaeological investigation in Taiwan began to drift away from the interest of Japanese imperialistic archaeology. However, the results of archaeological investigations conducted in Joseon greatly affected substance of archaeology in Japan, and even investigative methods, and the archaeological investigation by the Japanese Government-General continued until Japan lost the war. Archaeological investigations in Taiwan only aimed for efficiency of the colonial ruling, while it attempted to prove ‘historical view of colonialism’ in Joseon based on the historical ties, and these demonstrate diverse facets of imperial archaeology of Japan.