초록
최근 남북관계의 변화에 따라 북한 문화유적에 대한 남한 고고학자들의 관심과 조사 열망이 고무되고 있다. 하지만 북한에 있는 문화유적, 비무장지대(Demilitarized Zone : DMZ)와 남한 지역에 분포하고 있는 문화유적에 대하여 얼마나 파악하고 있는지 의문스럽다. 태봉국 철원성은 남북 분단이라는 상황에서 고고학적 조사가 진행되기에는 한계가 있어 일제강점기 조사 자료를 중심으로 철원성에 대한 조사 상황을 살펴보았다. 세키노 다다시(關野貞), 도리이 류조(鳥居龍藏), 오가와 케이키치(小川敬吉) 등이 진행한 자료를 중심으로 살펴본 결과, 궁성 남쪽에 석등 1기, 외성 남벽 동쪽에 치우친 부분에 고려 태조가 창건한 봉선사와 관련된 석등 1기가 존재하였다는 것을 확인하였다. 하지만 석등의 위치 비정은 가능하지만 철원성(궁성, 내성, 외성)의 구체적인 양상은 파악하기 어렵다. 향후 실질적인 조사가 진행되기 전에 태봉국 철원성의 전체 경관을 파악하기 위하여 남방한계선 이남에 분포하고 있는 관방유적, 생활유적에 대한 조사가 필요하다. 급속한 개발과 경작지에 대한 대구획정리는 철원성과 도성 방어 체제에 대한 경관 복원을 어렵게 할 가능성이 높다. 실제로 경원선이 복원되는 과정에서 철원성 또는 봉선사지의 심각한 훼손 가능성이 확인되었다. 이러한 면에서 철원성과 도성의 경관을 복원하기 위하여 관계기관의 유기적인 협조와 고고학적 양상에 대한 사전 자료 축적이 선행되어야 한다.
Recent changes in inter-Korean relations have encouraged South Korean archaeologists' interest in northern cultural heritage and their desire to conduct research. However, it is doubtful how much the South Korea really knows about the cultural ruins in North Korea and the cultural ruins to be found in the DMZ. In Korea, research data on the Japanese colonial period is scattered amongst national institutions and it is not possible to to collect, identify and document the data available in each institution. Typically, the data of Keiichi Ogawa(小川敬吉) is difficult to understand in its printed from. In addition, Ogawa has collected data from several national government agencies, and work is underway to collect architectural data and construct digital archives. This situation will not occur if we publish the data collected so far in digital form. Therefore, there is an urgent need to fully disclose the data related to Cheolwon which is owned by national institutions. If this data is analyzed, sufficient archaeological information can be obtained without excavation. On the other hand, one must wonder if the whole landscape of Cheolwon castle of Taebongguk cand be understood by investigating the interior of Cheolwon castle. This effort should be preceded by a survey on the ruins and the remains of the southern part of the southern boundary line. Rapid development and large-scale arrangement of cultivated land are likely to make it difficult to restore the external landscape related to the tillage demand that is required by the current situation. In the process of restoration of the actual Gyeongwon Line, it has been confirmed that serious irregularity has caused damage and the landscape has been transformed. In order to minimize these risks, it is urgent that we investigate the relics scattered in the southern part of the country, and not devote ourselves to the investigation of Cheolwon. In this regard, how much military, roads, excavation and archaeologists are prepared, centered on Cheolwon and scenery is an important question. I am curious as to how much preparation is provided to the Chulwon-gun and Gangwon-do in terms of administrative assistance, and how much archaeologists and excavation agencies are aware of the archaeological information of the inside and the southern part of the DMZ. Furthermore, how long have people been aware of the archaeological remains on the North Korean side? In order for da iscussion on Cheolwon and scenery to progress, it is necessary to carry out a precise investigation and accumulation of data on the remains in South Korea.