聖王 堯舜의 연구사 궤적: 역사의 경계에서 문화적 기억까지 = Research Trajectory of Sage-rulers Yao and Shun: From the Boundaries of History to Cultural Memory

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In pre-modem East Asian literature, the figure of the sage-king (聖王) occupies a singularly authoritative role as a model of governance. Among these figures, Yao and Shun stand out as frequent exemplars, yet questions surrounding their historicity have fueled a longstanding scholarly debate since the advent of modem historiography. In traditional contexts, Yao and Shun were viewed as historical sage-rulers, but with the rise of the early 20th-century ’’doubting antiquity” (疑古) school, they came to be regarded as figures that occupy an ambiguous space between myth and history, lacking clear historical substantiation.
Influenced by this view, scholars in the West, Japan, and Korea have often approached Yao and Shun as mythic or legendary figures, or as elements of cultural memory, and have also explored how ancient texts employed the figure of the sage (聖人), including Yao and Shun, to convey deeper cultural and philosophical meanings. However, the mid-to-late 20th century saw a shift within Chinese academia, spurred by research on unearthed texts, toward efforts to substantiate the historical existence of Yao and Shun. Some interpretations have viewed Yao and Shun’s abdication of power as a reflection of political practices within tribal societies. Studies on the Records of the Grand Historian {Shiji), especially the ’’Annals of the Five Emperors(五帝本紀), have also been shaped by these perspectives. Since the 2000s, there has been an increasing trend of integrating archaeological findings with textual analysis in the study this chapter.
This paper introduces and critically assesses the diverse perspectives on Yao and Shun’s narratives, including debates over le chronology of their stories. Ultimately, apart from a limited amber of studies, analyses of Yao, Shun, and related ancient Chinese sage narratives have largely been conducted piecemeal within individual texts, often preoccupied with the difficult question of their historical existence due to the absence of direct archaeological evidence. Moreover, ongoing debates over the compilation dates of lese texts have complicated attempts to reconstruct the evolution of Yao and Shun narratives throughout the pre-Qin period. A comprehensive study of the Yao, Shun, and sage king traditions, which occupy a central place in the pre-modem East Asian literary canon, is both timely and necessary.