博士 / 國立臺灣大學 / 歷史學研究所 / 104 / In this study, it focused on the genealogical trees of Chinggisids as the topic. The resources of the lineage I made use of are mainly written in ancient Chinese, Tibetan, New Persian (Farsi), Middle Mongolian, Manchu, ancient Uighur and other languages or scripts. From the ancient ancestors of Genghis Khan until the Mongolian nobilities in mid-Qing dynasty, selected typical cases were investigated for the "differences among records", and "the reasons for the variance or contradiction among the pedigrees", such as the impact caused by the diverse 1.formats of the genealogical charts/2.historical sources/3.historiographical traditions etc., or by different languages, which appeared in the contexts.
The importance of the historical records in Non-Chinese languages in this study is very essential and significant. Most of these non-Chinese sources are not the definitive or standard editions, but merely as original manuscripts or copies in the libraries all over the world. There are very large gaps between the manuscripts and the publications or translations of the literature. The editors or translators intentionally or unintentionally changed, generalized or over-corrected the originals so the published texts are not usually very accurate to the urtext.
This study demonstrated the so-called "tobčiyan" should not be treated as the traditionally recognized "secret history", but just the collective name for "general archives" or normal "historical books". The genealogical tables recorded in Yuan Shi are not necessarily the whole picture of the real lineage of Chinggisids. The Persian literature as "Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh" etc. and the Tibetan historical records must be examined directly from the important original manuscripts and be verified meticulously to meet the basic requirements of Philological approach. A variety of non-Chinese historical records were studied to reconstruct the unknown contents of the pedigrees and corrections based on these evidences, instead of the existing understanding primarily derived from Chinese records.
The study made use of the analysis of historical philology to read between the lines in order to extract the historical backgrounds beyond the literal meaning. Not only using "philological collation" as an analytical tool, also noting the distinct differences in the historical records, it took these varieties as clues to re-collate and inspect the literature to discuss the "origins of the historical sources" and "the interpretations and choices of the writers/editors. "
The Persian and Tibetan literature were particularly discussed to explain the problems in the lists of Genghis Khan''s ancestors and the discrepancy of the records of Khagan''s offspring in Yuan Dynasty. The Manchu and Mongolian documents and archives from Ming and Qing dynasties were analyzed to recount the codification and development of the written later Mongolian royal lineage. From the surveying and comparing of the genealogical trees, the documented Mongolian history of Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties were argued methodologically. Among the historical records with existing fixed explanations, enlightening new reasonable treatments were submitted by logically debating on the basis of the contents of the major Mongolian royal pedigrees.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TW/104NTU05493009 |
| Date | January 2016 |
| Creators | Kuo-Sheng Wu, 吳國聖 |
| Contributors | , 張廣達, 甘懷真 |
| Source Sets | National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan |
| Language | zh-TW |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | 學位論文 ; thesis |
| Format | 366 |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds