지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
It is astonishing to find in the Benji (Basic Annals) of Yuanshi very few remarks on the situation in Mongolia and the northeastern frontiers. For example, it is very difficult to follow the events surrounding the confrontaion between the armies of Qubilai Qa’an and Qaidu. This prompted our investigation about the nature and the source of the Shilu (Veritable Records) which became the basis of the Benji. What follows are some of the major points revealed by our research.
(1) The compilation of Shilu in the Yuan period was started at first by the memorial of Wang E (王鄂) in 1261, and just before January of 1287 the Taizu leizhao shilu (The Veritable Records of Chinggis Khan and Succeeding Emperors) was completed. Based on this, a Mongolian translated version written in Uighur scripts was made and it was read before Qubilai in the year of 1288. He made some comments on it and they understook revisioning the Mongolian version. Finally, in 1296, the revised Mongolian Shilu of Taizhong (Ogedei), Xianzhong (Mongke) and Shizu (Qubilai) were presented to Temur Qa’an. In this way, the Shilu (from Chinggis Khan up to Qubilai) in the Yuan period was made at first in Chinese and then translated into Mongolian, which was later considerably revised.
(2) Although we cannot find the mention on the Mongolian Shilu after the compilation of Shizu Shilu, we find instead several remarks on tuobuchiyan. It is a transcription of a Mongolian word tobchiyan which means “abridgement, summary, total”. This seems to have been a term designating the Mongolian Shilu from Chinggis Khan down to Qubilai, as well as historical records written in Mongolian from the reign of Temur Qa’an.
(3) At present, there is not a single surviving shilu of the Yuan times whether in Chinese or in Mongolian, including the shilu of Chinggis Khan. However, if we compare three different historical materials ? Shengwu Qinzhenglu, D?st?n-i Ching?z Kh?n in J?mi` at ?tav?r?kh, and Taizu benji in Yuanshi, it is apparent that the first two are based on the revised Mongolian version of Taizu shilu, while the last one is based on the Chinese version. A detailed comparison of these two versions, we can discover the fact that the first two shows a ‘Mongolian’ point of view while the third reflects a ‘Chinese’ perspective.
(4) The lack of records pertaining to the northeastern frontiers as mentioned above was exactly because all the Benji in Yuanshi were based on the Chinese Shilu. In the Yuan times the Chinese Shilu was compiled utilizing various sources. The most important ones are Shizhengji (時政記) and Qijuzhu (起居注), but these are not extensive records of Qa’an’s daily utterance and activities but a collection of memorials and edicts written only in ‘Chinese language’, which were stored in Hanlin and National History Academy. Military reports were mostly written in Mongolian only and responded by Qa’an and high officials in Mongolian too. These materials were considered as secret and even the Censorate were generally not allowed to investigate into these. Moreover, only the matters which were associated with Chinese people were written in Chinese. If an incident took place among the Mongols themselves, there was no need to report it in Chinese. Thus, only the matters which involved Chinese or those between Chinese and non-Chinese were written in Chinese language. The peculiarity of chacellery system in the Yuan times prevented the matters related with military as well as non?Chinese affairs from being reported in Chinese, and they were completely excluded when Chinese Shilu were compiled.
The above findings made it sufficiently clear that the Benji in Yuanshi cannot properly represent the reality of the Yuan imperial rule. It is a reflection of only a partial picture viewed from Chinese side and perspective. The compilers of Yuanshi in the early Ming times did not and could not utilize Mongolian materials which were stored in the imperial archive of the Mongol empire. They utilized only Chinese materials which contained just a part of the whole story.
(1) The compilation of Shilu in the Yuan period was started at first by the memorial of Wang E (王鄂) in 1261, and just before January of 1287 the Taizu leizhao shilu (The Veritable Records of Chinggis Khan and Succeeding Emperors) was completed. Based on this, a Mongolian translated version written in Uighur scripts was made and it was read before Qubilai in the year of 1288. He made some comments on it and they understook revisioning the Mongolian version. Finally, in 1296, the revised Mongolian Shilu of Taizhong (Ogedei), Xianzhong (Mongke) and Shizu (Qubilai) were presented to Temur Qa’an. In this way, the Shilu (from Chinggis Khan up to Qubilai) in the Yuan period was made at first in Chinese and then translated into Mongolian, which was later considerably revised.
(2) Although we cannot find the mention on the Mongolian Shilu after the compilation of Shizu Shilu, we find instead several remarks on tuobuchiyan. It is a transcription of a Mongolian word tobchiyan which means “abridgement, summary, total”. This seems to have been a term designating the Mongolian Shilu from Chinggis Khan down to Qubilai, as well as historical records written in Mongolian from the reign of Temur Qa’an.
(3) At present, there is not a single surviving shilu of the Yuan times whether in Chinese or in Mongolian, including the shilu of Chinggis Khan. However, if we compare three different historical materials ? Shengwu Qinzhenglu, D?st?n-i Ching?z Kh?n in J?mi` at ?tav?r?kh, and Taizu benji in Yuanshi, it is apparent that the first two are based on the revised Mongolian version of Taizu shilu, while the last one is based on the Chinese version. A detailed comparison of these two versions, we can discover the fact that the first two shows a ‘Mongolian’ point of view while the third reflects a ‘Chinese’ perspective.
(4) The lack of records pertaining to the northeastern frontiers as mentioned above was exactly because all the Benji in Yuanshi were based on the Chinese Shilu. In the Yuan times the Chinese Shilu was compiled utilizing various sources. The most important ones are Shizhengji (時政記) and Qijuzhu (起居注), but these are not extensive records of Qa’an’s daily utterance and activities but a collection of memorials and edicts written only in ‘Chinese language’, which were stored in Hanlin and National History Academy. Military reports were mostly written in Mongolian only and responded by Qa’an and high officials in Mongolian too. These materials were considered as secret and even the Censorate were generally not allowed to investigate into these. Moreover, only the matters which were associated with Chinese people were written in Chinese. If an incident took place among the Mongols themselves, there was no need to report it in Chinese. Thus, only the matters which involved Chinese or those between Chinese and non-Chinese were written in Chinese language. The peculiarity of chacellery system in the Yuan times prevented the matters related with military as well as non?Chinese affairs from being reported in Chinese, and they were completely excluded when Chinese Shilu were compiled.
The above findings made it sufficiently clear that the Benji in Yuanshi cannot properly represent the reality of the Yuan imperial rule. It is a reflection of only a partial picture viewed from Chinese side and perspective. The compilers of Yuanshi in the early Ming times did not and could not utilize Mongolian materials which were stored in the imperial archive of the Mongol empire. They utilized only Chinese materials which contained just a part of the whole story.
목차
1. 序論: 不可思議한 『元史』 「本紀」
2. 漢文實錄, 蒙文實錄, 脫卜赤顔(tobchiyan)
4. 漢文實錄과 蒙文實錄의 內容上의 差異
4. 漢文實錄의 一面性
5. 結論
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
元雜劇에 수용된 蒙古語 語彙 분석
외국학연구
2018 .01
-
문어몽골어의 소위 전통전사에 대하여
언어학
2018 .12
-
基干短語的漢蒙機器번譯轉換規則硏究
알타이학보
2004 .01
-
蒙古名短的建
알타이학보
2006 .01
-
內蒙古大學的蒙古語言文字硏究
알타이학보
2002 .01
-
Unknown treasures hidden in lines of Mongolian Buddhist literature: In the case of Mongolian versions of the Lotus Sutra
알타이학보
2011 .01
-
Unknown treasures hidden in lines of Mongolian Buddhist literature: In the case of Mongolian versions of the Lotus Sutra
알타이학보
2012 .01
-
蒙古社言科方向建略
알타이학보
2006 .01
-
元雜劇에 투영된 蒙古語 語法 특징
외국학연구
2019 .01
-
The initial framework of developing semantic knowledge base of Mongolian idioms
알타이학보
2012 .01
-
음향 실험을 기초로 한 몽골어와 한국어의 단모음 대조분석
말소리와 음성과학
2010 .06
-
鲁迅的遗言和Chinese Characteristics
한국중어중문학회 학술대회 자료집
2015 .11
-
쿠빌라이와 고려
역사비평
2010 .02
-
Recognizing Basic Verb Phrases in Mongolian Corpus
알타이학보
2010 .01
-
중국인과 몽골인 학습자의 한국어 과거 시제 표현 사용 오류에 대한 계량적 비교
언어학
2015 .04
-
2007년 개정 漢文科 敎育課程의 구체적 내용 분석
漢文敎育論集
2007 .01
-
古代满蒙语言接触历程探究
알타이학보
2020 .01
-
≪滿文老檔≫과 ≪滿洲實錄≫의 만주문 대조 연구
알타이학보
2015 .01
-
解決漢語漢字入門難的有效方式-語文分開
漢字漢文敎育
2013 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-910-002082148