高句麗 柵城 遺址 三考

Abstract

In 1985, the author published “the Reconsideration on Koguryo Zhacheng Relics”(高句麗柵城遺址). He denied the relics of Hunchun Baliancheng(琿春八連城) of today’s our country, that is, Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu(渤海東京龍原府) [it is called Zhachengfu(柵城府)]. At the same time he negated the traditional opinion of the academe that was affirmed to correspond to Koguryo Zhacheng Relics. And he newly put forward the view that the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng would be built, Chengzishanshancheng(城子山山城) was combined with Tuchengcuntucheng(土城村土城) (Later Xingangucheng (興安古城) was attached). After that Fang Xuefeng(方學鳳) and Li Zongxun(李宗勛), and so on, professors denied that the author’s view and protested that Koguryo Zhacheng Relics belonged to the Wentehebucheng(溫特赫部 城) near Hunchun Baliancheng. It appears that this kind of different view that we produced, of course, would be able to have all kinds of reasons. However, among them the most important reason that we believed is that if we have different understanding about the related to the record of events of Xintangshu Balhae biography(新唐書∙渤海傳), it seems as if we had different understanding of being affiliated with the region of Beiwoju(北沃沮). Setting out from the view, the article will bring forward the author’s preliminary opinion related to two problems, focusing on the latest article of Prof. Fang Xuefeng and Prof. Li Zongxun, and I’m going to discuss it with many readers myself. 一．Fang Xuefeng(方學鳳)：After Reading the Investigation about the Location of“ Koguryo Zhacheng”(高句麗柵城) The author has ever pointed out in the reconsideration on Koguryo Zhacheng relics that it is necessary for him to analyse that in Xintangshu Balhae biography there is such a sentence that the place where Huimo(濊貊) lived once was Dongjing, and said it was Longyuanfu, and said that it was also called Zhanchengfu“( 濊貊故地爲東京, 曰龍原府, 亦曰柵城府”). In fact, it was why the place where Huimo lived once didn’t conform it, and so, of course, it would be replaced with the old site of Beiwoju. Therefore, the sentence mentioned above should be written“ the place where Beiwoju lived once was Dongjing, and said it was Longyuanfu, and said that it was also called Zhachengfu. The author recognizes that it was right that the old Site of Koguryo Zhacheng should be found not only inside the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu but also in the wider region (including the place where Beiwoju lived once), which was its groundwork. However, Prof. Fang claims that it was naturally and rationally formed becacuse the region of today’s Yanbian(延邊) was the place where Huimo lived once, the statements mentioned above in Xintangshu Balhae biography completely conformed the historical fact. And it was appropriate contents. The former name of Huimo had been formed before Beiwoju occupied it. According to his advice, Prof. Fang claims that the first half of Xintangshu Balhae biography(the place where Huimo<Beiwoju> lived once was ongjing) was neglected and while only be based on the last part (Dongjing, and said it was Longyuanfu, and said that it was also called Zhachengfu, the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng must be discovered inside the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu(Now it is the jurisdiction of Hunchun(琿春), without discovering outside the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu). Prof. Fang’s opinion does not conform with the matter of history. As a result, the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu(Now it is Hunchun is not the place where Huimo lived once. Obviously, that is why it is the place where Beiwoju lived once. The fact is that the historical materials of ancient books, which the old name of Huimo can be proved before Beiwoju occupied it, don’t exist anywhere. Prof. Fang recognizes that according to the analysis of the record of events of the related to the history of Liao(􃛜史)∙the records of geography(地理誌) (Kaiyuanxian(開遠縣) was the place of Zhacheng, Koguryo was the town of Longyuan(龍原), and Balhae was the same as Koguryo), we can know that the town of Longyuanxian(龍原縣) of the age of Koguryo is the same region as that of the age of Balhae and that it is in existence in the town of Longyuan of Zhacheng(柵城龍原縣). In a word, the Fang’s advice doesn’t also conform with the matter of history. It is why that was described as the inner region of the town of Kaiyuanxian and it is why the related to the affairs of the history of Liao∙the records of geography, which upper limit was traced back to the age of Koguryo, are not completely right. Obviously, Prof. Fang set up the town of Koguryo Longyuan which doesn’t exist in the area of today’s Hunchun according to the wrong history of Liao∙the records of geography, and it is regarded as the reason that the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng existed. In addition, Prof. Fang recognizes that the reason, which the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng must be discovered inside the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu, is that Koguryo Zhacheng is the same name as Balhae Zhachengfu(Dongjinglongyuanfu). But this kind of advice doesn’t also persuade people. There is 800- year-old time difference between them, and the kingdom has been converted, and therefore, it is hard to recognize that the center of the rule of Zhacheng(柵城)has never been changed. 二．Li Zhongxun(李宗勛): After Reading the Discrimination about the Relics of Koguryo Zhacheng As for Prof. Li’s advice about the relics of Koguryo, when we see it from the largest range, there is much more similar points to the one of Prof. Fang. Under this circumstance, he’ll enclose the problems, which are distinguished and recognized each other by the two people, to explain them. Prof. Li expresses his agreement with the author’s advice that it was right for him to recognize that the place where Huimo lived once would be replaced by the place where Beiwoju lived once. However, he recognized that it was not enough that the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng(高句麗柵城) was discovered near today’s Yanji(延吉). It is obvious that he has two important reasons. Firstly, the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng must be discovered inside the jurisdiction of Balhaedongjinglongyuanfu(渤海東京龍原府). Because the region of Yanji(延吉) belongs to Balhaexiandefu(渤海顯德府), it is wrong that the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng were discovered here. Secondly, the region of Yanji doesn’t include in the region of Beiwoju(北沃沮). I don’t repeat the first reason here, because I have specified it above during the analysis of Prof. Fang’s advice. The second reason, that is, what the region of Yanji doesn’t include in the region of Beiwoju doesn’t also conform with the real fact of history. As a result, Beiwoju doesn’t belong to the region of Hunchun of the lower reacher of Doumanjiang(豆滿江) and while it belongs to the whole district of today’s Yanbian(延邊), including Hunchun(琿春) and Yanji(延吉), and even it includes the wider region than it. It will be proved not only in the recordation of many ancient books but also according to the archaeological remains , and today it is fact that many scholars in our country admit it. Prof. Li also points out that if the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng exist near Yanji, it doesn’t conform with the recordations of ancient books which are written Koguryo “Dongzhi Zhacheng(高句麗“東至柵城”)(It is why there were a lot of jurisdictions of the Koguryo in the southeast of Yanji). And also he protested that Zhachng(柵城) was a city which was built with MuZha(木柵), and that the concave part of the centeral part of the southern rampart in the Hunchun Baliancheng(琿春溫特赫部城) was the trace that the people of Koguryo built MuZha. It is obvious that it is hard for these suggestions to persuade people. All the facts that are discoursed above can be proved that the relics of Koguryo Zhacheng(高句麗柵城) denied the traditional opinions of the academe, which was confirmed to belong to Hunchun Baliancheng. As a result, the author’s advice that is recognized that Chenzishanshancheng(城子山山城), Tuchengcuntucheng(土城村土城), Xingangucheng(興安古城) near Yanji(延吉) are recombined together is not fault. On the contrary, it is the sound one that is combined with the matter of history