공렬토기의 기원과 편년에 대한 학사적 검토

Abstract

In this article, the research history of the origin and chronology of rim-perforated pottery since the 1960s was reviewed to examine the changes in perception and research trends of origin, typology, and chronology in the study of the Bronze Age. rim-perforated pottery was recognized as an earthenware with cultural continuity that appeared from the end of the Neolithic Age as it was exported together with the comb-pattern earthenware from the ruins of Hogok-dong, Musan. Under this background, rim-perforated pottery in the 60s and 80s has been treated as a material culture representing the early Bronze Age along with Garakdong-style earthenware. Then, after the 90s, as a number of large-scale settlement sites of the Bronze Age were investigated, data from the early period, including stone gate earthenware, were accumulated. For this reason, different views on the origin and timing of the emergence of rim-perforated pottery began to be presented. Regarding the lower limit date of rim-perforated pottery, researchers tend to space between researchers, but the aspects of material data in the early South Korean region, such as stone gate earthenware, square earthenware, double-headed earthenware, etc., are different, so there is not a small difference of opinion among researchers on the genealogy, chronology, and development process of Gongryeol earthenware surrounding it. The proposal of cultural types has great academic significance in discussing the development process of the Mumun pottery era in South Korea. The cultural type is the result of organizing material culture and putting it in a certain time and space, and is also understood as a branch itself. As for the initially proposed cultural type, the contents continued to be changed, subdivided, and inclusive as data were added so far. As Rim-Perforated Pottery was also established as an Yeoksam-dong type, it underwent changes in many parts of the origin and chronology. Since the cultural type is a series of material complexes completed by itself, it has a problem that it is difficult to grasp the layered and dynamic aspects of the data under this concept. In order for the discussion on rim-perforated pottery to proceed, it is not necessary to grasp it as an element of the completed cultural type earthenware from the beginning, but to deal with the entire process of being established as an Yeoksam-dong type in the earthenware at the first sight. Only at this time will we be able to examine the temporal location of rim-perforated pottery, regional variations, and the usefulness of the devised Yeoksam-dong type.