Abstract
The Bunhuangsa stone pagoda, constructed in AD. 634, National Treasure no. 30, has been named as 'brick-copied pagoda' since the Japanese-ruling period by scholars. It is said that the Chinese brick pagoda was its precedent model, however the Bunhuangsa Pagoda is the oldest of all the Chinese-style brick pagodas except one, the Sungaksa Pagoda. The Chinese pagoda cannot have been a precedent model to copy due to its complex detail of wood vestige, as the Bunhuangsa pagoda is simple form without ornament. Domestic brick pagodas cannot have been a precedent model to copy as well, because all the domestic brick pagodas are younger than the Bunhuangsa Pagoda. Therefore, the terminology 'brick-copied pagoda' is a fallacy; it is rather that later brick pagoda copied the precedent the Bunhuangsa stone pagoda. The Bunhuangsa Pagoda is simply a piled-up pagoda of thick or thin, big or small slates of stone, facing only one smooth side and therefore needing nothing to relate to brick. The originality of the pagoda is more related to simple piled-up Indian stone stupa rather than Chinese brick pagoda. The roof form of its gradually stepped projection comes from the harmika of the summit of Indian stupa. Contrary to general history, old Silla Dynasty imported Buddhism directly from India by sea. From written national history and by temple foundation history, the Indian Buddhism evangelist possibly made influence to the erecting of temple and pagoda. The original wrong terminology has made a harmful effect gradually to the naming of mass-styled stone pagoda of only carved stepped-roof form after brick-copied pagoda. The false term 'brick-copied pagoda' should be discarded, which comes with superficial observation based on toadyism to China and colonialism to Japan. Instead of the fallacious term, this paper suggests multi-storied 'piled-up pagoda with slate stone.'
