본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
22대 대한민국 국회 국회정보길라잡이 국회의원검색
회원가입 로그인
HOME

정보검색

소장정보 검색

국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

고급검색

인명/단체명

저자정보 상세정보
인명/단체명을 입력하세요.

키워드

  • 대표어

  • 외국어

-

목차보기

목차

원대의 한문실록과 몽문실록 : 『원사』 「본기」의 중국중심적 일면성의 해명을 위하여 / 金浩東 1

1. 서론: 불가사의한 『원사』 「본기」 1

2. 한문실록, 몽문실록, 탈복적안(tobchiyan) 4

3. 한문실록과 몽문실록의 내용상의 차이 17

4. 한문실록의 일면성 29

5. 결론 43

[요약] 47

초록보기

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.

권호기사

권호기사 목록 테이블로 기사명, 저자명, 페이지, 원문, 기사목차 순으로 되어있습니다.
기사명 저자명 페이지 원문 목차
前漢 更卒의 徵集과 服役 方式 :松柏木牘 47호의 분석을 중심으로 李成珪 pp.1-93

보기
秦漢代의 郵傳기구와 문서전달체계 吳峻錫 pp.95-140

보기
元代의 漢文實錄과 蒙文實錄 :『元史』「本紀」의 中國中心的 一面性의 解明을 위하여 金浩東 pp.141-189

보기
제1차 세계대전 이후 중국 대외무역과 중국경제의 변화 朴正鉉 pp.191-224

보기
1926-1935년 重慶의 '內的'·'人的' 요소와 도시근대화 金希信 pp.225-277

보기
商業統制總會의 綿紗布 收買政策 再論 金志煥 pp.279-310

보기
근세 쵸슈(長州)·사츠마(薩摩)의 朝鮮語通詞와 조선정보수집 許芝銀 pp.311-358

보기

참고문헌 (56건) : 자료제공( 네이버학술정보 )

참고문헌 목록에 대한 테이블로 번호, 참고문헌, 국회도서관 소장유무로 구성되어 있습니다.
번호 참고문헌 국회도서관 소장유무
1 『高麗史』 미소장
2 『圭塘小藁』 미소장
3 『紀年纂要』 미소장
4 『金華黃先生文集』 미소장
5 『明實錄』 미소장
6 『牧菴集』 미소장
7 『部族志』 미소장
8 『秘書監志』 (高榮盛 點校, 浙江古籍出版社, 1992) 卷1, pp.29-30. 미소장
9 『元史』 미소장
10 『元史新編』 (揚州 : 江蘇廣陵古籍刻印社, 1990), ｢凡例｣. 미소장
11 『元典章』 미소장
12 『全元文』 미소장
13 『集史』 미소장
14 『秋澗先生大全文集』 미소장
15 『칭기스 칸紀』, p.27. 미소장
16 『憲臺通紀 (外三種)』 (王曉欣 點校, 杭州: 浙江古籍出版社, 2002), pp.43-44, 미소장
17 E. Blochet, Introduction a l'histoire des Monols (Leyden: E. J. Brill, 1910), p.95. 미소장
18 The Historicity of The Baljuna Covenant 네이버 미소장
19 H. Franke, “Could the Mongol Emperors Read and Write Chinese?” Asia Major, new series, vol. 3, part 1 (1953), pp.28-41. 미소장
20 Igor de Rachewiltz tr., The Secret History of the Mongols (Leiden: Brill, 2004), vol. 1 미소장
21 J. É. Kowalewski, Dictionnaire Mongol-Russe-Français (Kasan: Imprimeie de l'universite, 1849), vol. 3, pp.1821-23. 미소장
22 N. Poppe, The Mongolian Monuments in ḤP‘ags-pa Script (J. R. Krueger tr., Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1957), p.5 미소장
23 P. Pelliot and L. Hambis, Histoire des campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou Ts'in-tseng lou (Leiden: Brill, 1951). 미소장
24 ANALECTA: ZUR MONGOLISCHEN UEBERSETZUNGSLITERATUR DER YUAN -ZEIT 네이버 미소장
25 The Transmission of The Book Known as The Secret History of The Mongols 네이버 미소장
26 *Jambhala: An Imperial Envoy to Tibet during the Late Yuan 네이버 미소장
27 賈敬顔, 『聖武親征錄斠本』, 綴言. 미소장
28 宮紀子, 『モンゴル時代の出版文化』 (名古屋: 名古屋大學出版會, 2006), p.101 미소장
29 金浩東 譯, 『마르코 폴로의 동방견문록』 (사계절, 2000), pp.363-65. 미소장
30 吉田順一･齊木德道爾吉, 『ハラホト出土モンゴル文書の硏究』 (東京: 雄山閣, 2008), pp.3-4. 미소장
31 吉川幸次郞･田中謙二, 『元典章の文體』, 校定本元典章刑部 第一冊 附錄, 京都: 京都大學人文科學硏究所, 1964 미소장
32 The Seasonal Migrations of the Mongol Emperors and the Nomadic Customs 소장
33 羅常培･蔡美彪 編著, 『八思巴字與元代漢語 (增訂本)』 (北京: 中國社會科學出版社, 2004), pp.9-10. 미소장
34 達倉宗巴･班覺桑布 著, 『漢藏史集』 (陳慶英 譯, 西藏人民出版社, 1986), pp.152-53. 미소장
35 On the Tehran Manuscript of the Jami' al-tavayakh of Rashid al-Din (Kitabkhanah-i Majlis-i Shuray-i Milli, MS no. 2294) 네이버 미소장
36 杉山正明, ｢モンゴル命令文硏究導論｣, 『モンゴル帝國と大元ウルス』 (京都: 京都大學出版會, 2004), pp.382-83 미소장
37 徐一虁, 『始豐考』 (文淵閣 四庫全書本) 미소장
38 蕭啓慶, ｢元代的通事與譯史｣, 『元史論叢』 (元史硏究會編), 第6輯 (1997), pp.35-67. 미소장
39 蘇天爵, ｢三史質疑｣, 『滋溪文稿』 (陳高華･孟繁淸 點校, 北京: 中華書局, 1997), p.425. 미소장
40 時培磊, ｢試論元代官方史學的兩重體制｣, 『漢學硏究』 第26卷 第3期(2008). 미소장
41 亦隣眞, ｢元代硬譯公牘文體｣, 『元史論叢』 (元史硏究會編), 제1집(1982), pp.164-78. 미소장
42 王國維, 『蒙古史料四種』 (臺北: 正中書局, 1962). 미소장
43 王明蓀, ｢元代之史館與史官｣, 『第三屆史學史國際硏討會論文集』 (臺中 : 靑峰出版社, 1991), pp.403-20. 미소장
44 王愼榮 主編, 『元史探源』 (長春: 吉林文史出版社, 1991). 미소장
45 王惲, 『秋澗先生大全文集』 미소장
46 袁樞, 『淸容居士集』 미소장
47 劉曉의 『元史硏究』 (福州: 福建人民出版社, 2006), pp.287-88 미소장
48 李逸友 編著, 『黑城出土文書: 漢文文書卷』 (北京: 科學出版社, 1991), pp.5 미소장
49 李治安, 『元代政治制度硏究』 (北京: 人民出版社, 2003), pp.5-36. 미소장
50 李涵･楊果, ｢元樞密院制度考略｣, 『蒙古史硏究』 第3輯 (1997, 呼和浩特), p.62. 미소장
51 張帆, ｢元代實錄材料的來源｣ (『史學史硏究』, 1988年 第1期) 미소장
52 張帆, ｢元代翰林國史院與漢族儒士｣, 『北京大學學報』 1988년 제5기, 75-83 미소장
53 錢大昕, ｢答問十ㆍ論史｣, 『潛硏堂文集』 (臺北 : 臺灣商務印書館, 1968) 卷13. 미소장
54 中村淳･松川節, ｢新發現の蒙漢合璧少林寺聖旨碑｣, 『內陸アジア言語の硏究』 第8號(1993), p.63. 미소장
55 陳高華, ｢『元史』纂修考｣, 『陳高華文集』 (上海: 上海辭書出版社, 2005), pp.469-490 (原載: 『明史硏究』 第1輯, 1991). 미소장
56 蔡巴․貢噶多吉, 『紅史』 (陳慶英․周潤年 譯, 西藏人民出版社, 1988). 미소장

추천서가 (다양한 추천 자료를 만나보세요)

권호기사보기

권호기사 목록 테이블로 기사명, 저자명, 페이지, 원문, 기사목차 순으로 되어있습니다.
기사명 저자명 페이지 원문 기사목차

권호

기사명 원문보기 기사목차
닫기