“反民族”论述,还是“虚构故事”合集?——20世纪朝鲜正史《三国史记》研究综述

Anti-national Discourse or a Collection of Fabricated Stories?——Perspectives from 20th Century Scholars on The Historical Records of the Three Kingdoms,an Official Dynastic Record of Korean History

《三国史记》为高丽王朝时金富轼编纂、在现存的朝鲜历史书籍中最早的正史,然而几乎没有其他史书像《三国史记》一样遭受到如此相反的评价。鉴于此,本文作为推进《三国史记》政治思想学术研究的基础研究之一,将回顾韩国和日本的学者在20世纪对于《三国史记》研究的主要成果,试图厘清过去主要研究的问题意识、主要论点以及留下的一些问题。若将两国的研究相比我们可以发现,韩国的研究主要在朝鲜民族主义史观的价值观下评断其价值的倾向,故衍生了“金富轼=事大主义”一说;而日本的研究则墨守实证主义的文献研究,故得出了“上代虚构论”的见解。只是在1970年后的相关研究中,韩日学者均指向于克服此两者观点的问题意识上展开。

The Historical Records of the Three Kingdoms(hereafter,HRTK),compiled by Kim Bu-shik during the period of Koryo Dynasty,is the first official record for Korean dynastic history transmitted to the present day.However,no other historical records nor works have been as harshly criticized as the HRTK.Bearing this in mind,this article attempts to provide a bird-eyes view on perspectives and arguments of major researches conducted by Korean and Japanese scholars during the 20th Century.If we compare the characteristics of viewpoints on the HRTK between Korean and Japanese scholars,the former tended to take a nationalistic view to evaluate/devaluate the content of the HRTK,while the latter in general have concentrated on textual issues without weighing its value.As the result,Korean scholars maintained that Kim Bu-shik’s attitude should be regarded as an anti-national discourse because those three countries were described merely as vassal states to China.On the other hand,Japanese scholars suspected the historicity of the part concerning earlier events in the histories of the three kingdoms.In spite this fact,from the 1970s onwards,scholars of both countries have gradually been conscious of these issues and,thus been making efforts to overcome such bias by producing their new researches.