카르트조를 통해 본 몽골 제국의 질서 변화와 속국 관계
Changing Order and Vassalage in the Mongol Empire: A Case Study on the Kart dynasty
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
To effectively oversee the regions of present-day Afghanistan and Pakistan, Chinggis Khan granted Rukn al-Din the authority to govern the Ghur region. Chinggis Khan's decree laid the foundation for Shams al-Din to succeed Rukn al-Din, enabling him to sustain and expand his influence. Essentially, Chinggis Khan established the Kart dynasty as a Mongol vassal state. However, during the reigns of Ögödei and Güyük, the rule over the Kartids by the Qa'an loosened, leading to an increase in influence for the Jochi Ulus and Chaghatai Ulus in that area. Möngke later assumed the Qa'an position from Ögödei's descendants and implemented a centralized system for himself and the Toluid family. He attempted to reinstate Qa'an's authority in the region through the Kartids. However, with Möngke's demise and the empire in turmoil, Qubilai, the new Qa'an, lost control of Western Asia. Instead, the Hülegü Ulus displaced the Jochi Ulus and Chaghatai Ulus, making the Kart dynasty their vassal. The relationship between the Mongols and their vassal states was not uniform, as demonstrated by the case of the Kart dynasty. The Mongols invited local ruling powers to submit to them; if accepted, these powers were assured their right to rule. Examples of this include the Uyghur and Koryo dynasties. Simultaneously, the Mongols created vassal states loyal to them by granting smaller yet friendly powers the right to govern vast territories and providing political and military support. In the absence of direct control, the Mongols sought to govern indirectly through these vassal states. Despite being subject to the Mongol Empire broadly, the loyalties of these vassal states varied based on circumstances. Notably, following the so-called 'dissolution' of the Mongol Empire, each Ulus aimed to expand its influence by gaining control over existing vassal states, resulting in the transformation of the Kart dynasty from a 'Qa'an’s vassal state' to a 'Khan’s vassal state.' Consequently, the relationship between the Mongols and their vassals evolved over time, aligning with changes in the Mongol world order. Furthermore, the area encompassing Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Kart dynasty was situated, was a pivotal point where the interests of various uluses within the Mongol Empire intersected. This region held its economic significance and served as a crucial gateway to Iran in the west, Central Asia in the east, and India in the south. Additionally, it functioned as a strategic base for controlling and defending the expansion of other uluses. The local ruling power, the Kartids, was thus of paramount importance to each ulus. Consequently, the shifting relationship between the Mongols and the Kartids reflected the changing hierarchy within the empire.
Abstract
To effectively oversee the regions of present-day Afghanistan and Pakistan, Chinggis Khan granted Rukn al-Din the authority to govern the Ghur region. Chinggis Khan's decree laid the foundation for Shams al-Din to succeed Rukn al-Din, enabling him to sustain and expand his influence. Essentially, Chinggis Khan established the Kart dynasty as a Mongol vassal state. However, during the reigns of Ögödei and Güyük, the rule over the Kartids by the Qa'an loosened, leading to an increase in influence for the Jochi Ulus and Chaghatai Ulus in that area. Möngke later assumed the Qa'an position from Ögödei's descendants and implemented a centralized system for himself and the Toluid family. He attempted to reinstate Qa'an's authority in the region through the Kartids. However, with Möngke's demise and the empire in turmoil, Qubilai, the new Qa'an, lost control of Western Asia. Instead, the Hülegü Ulus displaced the Jochi Ulus and Chaghatai Ulus, making the Kart dynasty their vassal. The relationship between the Mongols and their vassal states was not uniform, as demonstrated by the case of the Kart dynasty. The Mongols invited local ruling powers to submit to them; if accepted, these powers were assured their right to rule. Examples of this include the Uyghur and Koryo dynasties. Simultaneously, the Mongols created vassal states loyal to them by granting smaller yet friendly powers the right to govern vast territories and providing political and military support. In the absence of direct control, the Mongols sought to govern indirectly through these vassal states. Despite being subject to the Mongol Empire broadly, the loyalties of these vassal states varied based on circumstances. Notably, following the so-called 'dissolution' of the Mongol Empire, each Ulus aimed to expand its influence by gaining control over existing vassal states, resulting in the transformation of the Kart dynasty from a 'Qa'an’s vassal state' to a 'Khan’s vassal state.' Consequently, the relationship between the Mongols and their vassals evolved over time, aligning with changes in the Mongol world order. Furthermore, the area encompassing Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Kart dynasty was situated, was a pivotal point where the interests of various uluses within the Mongol Empire intersected. This region held its economic significance and served as a crucial gateway to Iran in the west, Central Asia in the east, and India in the south. Additionally, it functioned as a strategic base for controlling and defending the expansion of other uluses. The local ruling power, the Kartids, was thus of paramount importance to each ulus. Consequently, the shifting relationship between the Mongols and the Kartids reflected the changing hierarchy within the empire.
참고문헌 (35)
- "元史", 中華書局
- 김호동, "부족지" (2005), 사계절
- 김호동, "칭기스칸기" (2004), 사계절
- 김호동, "칸의 후예들" (2005), 사계절
- 김호동, "일 칸들의 역사" (2017), 사계절
- ʻAbd Allāh ibn Fazl Allāh, "bi-ihtimām-i Muhammad Mahdī Isfahānī" (1853)
- ʻAbd al-Muhhammad Āyatī, "Tahrir-i Tarikh-i Vassaf" (1967), Bonyad-i Farhang-i Iran
- Boyle, J. A, "Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror" (1997), Manchester University Press
- Ghulām Riza Tabātabā’ī Majd, "Taʾrīkhnāmah-i Harāt" (2007), Intishārāt-i Asātīr
- Muḥammad Qazvīnī, "Tārīkh-i Jahān-gushāī, 3 vols" (1958), E. J. Brill
- Muhammad Rawshan, "Jāmi ‘al-Tavārīkh, vol. 1・2" (1994), Nashr Alborz
- Muhammad Taqī Bahār, "Tārīkh-i Sīstān" (2002), Mo’in
- 김호동, "몽골제국과 고려 : 쿠빌라이 정권의 탄생과 고려의 정치적 위상" (2007), 서울대학교 출판부
- 김호동, "몽골제국과 세계사의 탄생" (2010), 돌베개
- 김호동, "아틀라스 중앙유라시아사" (2016), 사계절출판사
- 스기야마 마사아키, "몽골 세계제국" (1999), 신서원
- 이개석, "고려(高麗)-대원(大元)관계 연구" (2013), 지식산업사
- 劉迎勝, "察合台汗國史硏究" (2006), 上海古籍出版社
- Allsen, Thomas T., "Mongol Imperialism: The Policies of the Grand Qan Möngke in China, Russia, and the Islamic Lands, 1251~1259" (1987), University of California Press
- Browne, Edward Granville, "A Literary History of Persia, vol. 3: The Tartar Dominion (1265~1502)" (1956), The University Press
- Dashdondog, Bayarsaikhan, "The Mongols and the Armenians (1220~1335)" (2010), Brill
- Lane, George, "Early Mongol Rule in Thirteenth Century Iran : a Persian Renaissance" (2003), RoutledgeCurzon
- Mahendrarajah, Shivan, "A History of Herat : from Chingiz Khan to Tamerlane" (2022), Edinburgh University Press
- Manz, Beatrice Forbes, "The Mongol World" (2022), Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
- Vernadsky, George, "The Mongols and Russia" (1953), Yale University Press
- 고병익, "麗代 征東行省의 硏究(上・下)", 歷史學報, 14・19 (1961)
- 김석환, "몽골제국 초기 勅令制度의 형성과 그 특징", 중앙아시아연구, 24(2), pp.59~81 (2019), 중앙아시아학회[DOI]
- 김석환, "알 탐가와 알툰 탐가를 통해 본 훌레구 울루스의 印章制度", 역사문화연구, (79), pp.285~324 (2021), 역사문화연구소[DOI]
- 김석환, "아시아를 상상하다: 닫힘과 열림" (2023), 진인진
- 김호동, "近世 東아시아의 國家와 社會" (1998), 지식산업사
- 조원희, "뭉케 카안 즉위 과정의 재검토를 통해서 보는 『集史』의 편향성", 몽골학, (67), pp.183~212 (2021), 한국몽골학회[DOI]
- 本田實信, "モンゴル時代史硏究" (1991), 東京大學出版會
- Allsen, Thomas T, "China among Equals : The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th-14th Centuries" (1983), University of California Press
- Kempiners, Russell G., "The Struggle for Khurasan: Aspects of Political, Military, and Socio-Economic Interaction in the Early 8th", 14th Century, The University of Chicago, 1985
- Potter, Lawrence Goddard, "The Kart Dynasty of Herat: Religion and Politics in Medieval Iran", PhD, pp.1992
