¸ñ Â÷
1. Àεµ ¼»ç½ÃÀÇ ±¸Àü ÀüÅë°ú Àü½Â¾ç½Äµé
1.1. Àεµ ±¸Àü ¹®ÇÐÀÇ Æ¯¼ö¼º
1. 2. ±¸Àü ¼»ç½ÃÀÇ À¯Æ÷ ÇüÅÂ
1.2.1. ÀÏ»óÀû ¿µÃ¢ ÇüÅÂ
1.2.2. ±×¸²ÀÚ ÀÎÇü±Ø
1.2.3 ºü¸®(Par) ¶Ç´Â ºü¶ó(Para)
1 2.4. ¹«¿ë±Ø
1.3. ¿©·¯ ±¸Àü ¼»ç½Ãµé
2. Àεµ ¼»ç½Ã ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ºÐ¾ßº° °æÇâµé
2.1. ¼»ç½ÃµéÀÇ ¼öÁý, ÆíÁý, ±×¸®°í ¹ø¿ª
2.2. ½ÅÈÇÐÀû ´ë»óÀ¸·Î¼ÀÇ ¼»ç½Ã ¿¬±¸
2.3. ¼»ç½ÃÀÇ Çؼ®°ú ¿¬Çà
3. ¸Î´Â ¸»
Àεµ ¼»ç½ÃÀÇ Àü½Â°ú ¿¬±¸µ¿Çâ
(°íÀü ¼»ç½Ã¿Í ¹Î°£ ±¸Àü ¼»ç½Ã »çÀÌÀÇ ±äÀå)
<³í¹®°³¿ä>
ÀεµÀÇ ¼»ç½Ã´Â, »óÃþ°è±ÞÀ̳ª ºÎÀ¯Ãþ¿¡¼ ÁÖ·Î À¯ÅëµÇ´Â ½Ñ½º²ô¸®¶ß ¼»ç½Ã¿Í, ÇÏÃþ ¹ÎÁß »çÀÌ¿¡¼ ÁÖ·Î À¯Æ÷µÇ´Â ¹Î°£ ¼»ç½Ã·Î ±¸ºÐÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù. ½Ñ½º²ô¸®¶ß ¼»ç½Ã°¡ ÁÖ·Î ¸¶ÇϹٶóµû³ª ¶ó¸¶¾ß³ª·Î ´ëÇ¥µÇ´Â °Í¿¡ ¹ÝÇØ, ¹Î°£ ¼»ç½Ã´Â ÀÌ µÎ °íÀü ½Ñ¾²²ô¸®¶ß¿¡¼ ÆÄ»ýÇÑ ¼»ç½Ã³ª ¼ö¸¹Àº ÅäÂø Áö¿ª °íÀ¯ÀÇ ¼»ç½Ã¸¦ Æ÷ÇÔÇØ ±× ¾çÀÌ ¹æ´ëÇÏ´Ù. ±×·¯³ª µÎ ºÎ·ùÀÇ ¼»ç½ÃµéÀº, ±× Àü½Â ÇüÅ·Πº¼ ¶§ ¸ðµÎ ±¸Àü ¼»ç½Ã·Î »ý°¢ÇØ º¼ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù.
ÀΡ¦(»ý·«)
|
res and their performances which are based on Sanskrit epics and folk epics both. Representatively, Shulman focused out his subject on the temple myths around Tamil from early seventies. His researches showed up well how could the element of sanskrit epics be changed in Tamil temple myths. With the tool of anthropology much critical researches on Indian folk epics launched around at seventies of 20th century. Again, the serial researches on the relationship between Mahabharata and its folk ritual variations by Hiltebeitel will be another food example to show how could some elements of Sanskrit epics be distorted in the folk cults or festivals that are full of regional hues in sex, caste, and culture.
Not too far from philological research circle of indian folk epics, Kinsley, Sax, Schechner, and Hess have focused on the dramatic representation of Sanskrit and folk epics, that is Lila. Kinsley dealt with Krsna Lila in 1972, and Hess, Schechner and Sax with Rama Lila from seventies to