1990년대 이후 몽골 역사학자들의 근현대사 서술동향
The Trend of Modern History Narration by Mongolian Historians after the 1990s
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study examines the trend of modern history research and narration by Mongolian historians and its features after the system transition of the 1990s. The Mongolians abandoned their socialist system in the early 1990s and embraced a market economy. The transition had a significant effect on the study of history and also led to a tremendous change in the study and narration of national history. Although a new perspective emerged across the whole spectrum of Mongolian history in terms of research and narration, the most substantial change occurred in the field of modern history. The study focused on this detail and considered the new trends of research on the modern Mongolian history and the characteristics of national history narration. The items discussed in the study are as follows. In Part 2, the question of the periodization of modern history, raised by various researchers after the 1990s, was discussed. The key points to note are the standard for the periodization and the issue of the scope of modern history. During the period of socialism, the Mongolian historians divided the period into the pre-modern period and the modern period based on the Mongolian Revolution of 1921. After the 1990s however, new historical events to divide the period of modern history, such as the independence from the Qing dynasty in 1911 and the pro-democracy movement of 1990, appeared and the period of 1911-1921, which was previously classified as part of the feudal age, was included into the period of modern history. As a result, the event of 1911 is currently the branch point for dividing the modern period and the pre-modern period. In Part 3, the features of the new trend in modern history narration were examined. The key point to note is the problem of evaluating the events of 1911 and 1921. During the socialist period, Mongolian historians assessed that the aristocrats leading the national liberation movement in 1911 were defending their own interests and that the resulting Bogd regime was a feudal reign that should have been overthrown through a revolution. After the 1990s, however, the event of 1911 was assigned a more active meaning, being evaluated as the “prelude to Mongol’s restoration,” and included as part of modern history. The historians of the socialist period also narrated the 1921 revolution wholly in relation to the Soviet and the Comintern but focused on the activities and roles of the Mongolians and national interest after the democratization. Other points to note regarding research on modern Mongolian history after 1990 include the publication of biographies on historical figures, 20th century social research using oral data, and the introduction of new historical terms. In Part 4, the discussion of researchers on the continuity and succession of key events of modern history, such as the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990, was examined. The main point to pay attention to in relation to this is the issue of correlation between the major events of 20th century Mongolian history, namely the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990. The Mongolian historians before the system transition narrated the events of 1911 and 1921 as events symbolizing feudalism and the modern era respectively but after 1990 started to narrate the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990 as a chain of events having continuity and succession. Thus, it was recorded that the event of 1921 was based on the event of 1911, the event of 1990 was based on the event of 1921, and the main goal of the three events was complete independence from foreign influence. In addition, the names of the three events are being set as the National Liberation Revolution (1911), National Democratic Revolution (1921), Democratic Revolution (1990).
Abstract
This study examines the trend of modern history research and narration by Mongolian historians and its features after the system transition of the 1990s. The Mongolians abandoned their socialist system in the early 1990s and embraced a market economy. The transition had a significant effect on the study of history and also led to a tremendous change in the study and narration of national history. Although a new perspective emerged across the whole spectrum of Mongolian history in terms of research and narration, the most substantial change occurred in the field of modern history. The study focused on this detail and considered the new trends of research on the modern Mongolian history and the characteristics of national history narration. The items discussed in the study are as follows. In Part 2, the question of the periodization of modern history, raised by various researchers after the 1990s, was discussed. The key points to note are the standard for the periodization and the issue of the scope of modern history. During the period of socialism, the Mongolian historians divided the period into the pre-modern period and the modern period based on the Mongolian Revolution of 1921. After the 1990s however, new historical events to divide the period of modern history, such as the independence from the Qing dynasty in 1911 and the pro-democracy movement of 1990, appeared and the period of 1911-1921, which was previously classified as part of the feudal age, was included into the period of modern history. As a result, the event of 1911 is currently the branch point for dividing the modern period and the pre-modern period. In Part 3, the features of the new trend in modern history narration were examined. The key point to note is the problem of evaluating the events of 1911 and 1921. During the socialist period, Mongolian historians assessed that the aristocrats leading the national liberation movement in 1911 were defending their own interests and that the resulting Bogd regime was a feudal reign that should have been overthrown through a revolution. After the 1990s, however, the event of 1911 was assigned a more active meaning, being evaluated as the “prelude to Mongol’s restoration,” and included as part of modern history. The historians of the socialist period also narrated the 1921 revolution wholly in relation to the Soviet and the Comintern but focused on the activities and roles of the Mongolians and national interest after the democratization. Other points to note regarding research on modern Mongolian history after 1990 include the publication of biographies on historical figures, 20th century social research using oral data, and the introduction of new historical terms. In Part 4, the discussion of researchers on the continuity and succession of key events of modern history, such as the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990, was examined. The main point to pay attention to in relation to this is the issue of correlation between the major events of 20th century Mongolian history, namely the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990. The Mongolian historians before the system transition narrated the events of 1911 and 1921 as events symbolizing feudalism and the modern era respectively but after 1990 started to narrate the events of 1911, 1921 and 1990 as a chain of events having continuity and succession. Thus, it was recorded that the event of 1921 was based on the event of 1911, the event of 1990 was based on the event of 1921, and the main goal of the three events was complete independence from foreign influence. In addition, the names of the three events are being set as the National Liberation Revolution (1911), National Democratic Revolution (1921), Democratic Revolution (1990).
참고문헌 (50)
- 岡洋樹, "モンゴル史硏究-現狀と展望" (2011), 明石書店
- 岡洋樹, "歴史の再定義-旧ソ連圏アジア諸国における歴史認識と学術・教育-" (2011), 東北大学東北アジア研究センター
- 橘誠, "モンゴル史硏究-現狀と展望" (2011), 明石書店
- O. バトサイハン, "20世紀モンゴル史硏究の現狀と若干の問題", 早稻田大學モンゴル硏究所紀要, 4 (2007)
- 小長谷有紀, "モンゴルの20世紀-社會主義を生きた人びとの證言" (2004), 中央公論新社
- 이평래, "20세기 중기 몽골 역사가들의 민족사서술 분석", 몽골학, (43), pp.59~83 (2015), 한국몽골학회
- 靑木雅浩, "モンゴル史硏究-現狀と展望" (2011), 明石書店
- ヘレイドㆍL. ジャムスラン, "モンゴル史硏究の改革槪要", 日本モンゴル學會紀要, 26 (1995)
- ボルジギンㆍブレンサイン, "モンゴル国における新しい国家通史編纂事業をめぐる諸問題-人間文化セミナーの報告", 人間文化: 滋賀県立大学人間文化学部研究報告, 22 (2007)
- Baasandorj, Ts, "Mongolyn shine tüükhiin üechleliin tukhaid", Acta Historica, 9 (2008)
- Batsaikhan, O., "1911 ony Mongolyn ündesnii khuv’sgal bolon uyaldaa, kholboony asuudal", Tüükhiin sudlal, 31 (1999)
- Batsaikhan, O., "Mongol ündesten büren erkht uls bolokh zamd 1911-1946" (2005), Admon
- Belov, E.A., "Rossiia i Mongoliia" (1999), IV RAN
- Bira, S., "Mongolian Historiography", The XII Intarnational Congress of Historical Sciences (1965)
- Bira, Sh, "BNMAU-yn Tüükh, soyol, tüükh bichlegiin asuudald" (1977), Shinjlekh ukhaany akademiin khevlekh üildver
- Bira, Sh, "BNMAU-d Tüükh bichlegiig kherkhen sudalj baigaa tukhai", Tüükhiin sudlal, 15 (1980)
- Bira, Sh., "BNMAU-yn Tüükh" (1984), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Boldbaatar, Ch., "Mongolyn tüükhiin üechlel" (2014), Admon
- Boldbaatar, J, "Chingis sudlalyn önöögiin chig khandlaga", Tüükh, 7 (2006)
- Boldbaatar, J., "Mongol ulsyn tüükh bichleg: shinechilel, chig khandlaga. 1990-eed onoos edügee khürtel" (2008), Admon
- Boldbaatar, J., "XX zuuny mongol ulsyn tüükh sudalgaa, tüükh bichleg" (2009), Soyombo
- Boldbaatar, J., "Mongol ulsyn tüükh, Tavdugaar bot' XX zuun" (2003), Admon
- Boldbaatar, J., "Mongol ulsyn tüükh" (2010), Ochir töv
- Choibalsan, Kh., "Mongol ardyn ündesnii khuv‘sgalyn ankh üüsej baiguulagdsan tovch tüükh" (1979), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Dashdavaa, Ch, "Ulaan tüükh" (2003), Bembi-San
- Delgerjargal, p., "Mongol ulsyn tüükh" (2017), Soyombo
- Erdenetuyaa, N., "Mongolyn gurvan khuv’sgal" (2000), Orbis
- Gerelbadrakh, J., "Mongolyn tüükhiin üechlel" (2014), Admon
- Grekov, B.D., "BNMAU-yn Tüükh" (1954), Ulsyn khevlel
- Jamsran, L., "Mongolyn sergen mandaltyn ekhen 1911-1913" (1992), Soyombo
- Khishigt, N., "Mongolyn khuv’sgal 1921" (2011), Bembi-San
- Khüükhenbaatar, D., "XX zuuny Mongolyn tüükhiin zarim asuudlal" (1999), MUIS-iin tüükhiin tenkhim
- Khüükhenbaatar, D, "Mongolyn ündesnii khuv’sgalyn tüükhiin asuudal" (2002)
- Lkham, p., "Niigem jurmyn daraakh Mongolchuud-XXI zuuny ekhny üeiin Mongolchuudyn am’dralyn tüükh" (2011), Soyombo
- Lonjid, Z., "XX zuuny Mongolyn tüükhiin zarim asuudlal" (1999), MUIS-iin tüükhiin tenkhim
- Lonjid, Z., "Mongolyn ündesnii khuv’sgalyn tüükhiin asuudal" (2002)
- Natsagdorj, Sh, "Manjiin erkhsheeld baisan üeiin Khalkhyn khuraangui tüükh 1691-1911" (1963), Ulsyn khevleliin khereg erkhlekh gazar
- Natsagdorj, Sh, "BNMAU-yn soyolyn tüükh(1921-1940) Tergüün bot'" (1940), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Natsagdorj, Sh, "BNMAU-yn soyolyn tüükh(1941-1960) Ded bot'" (1960), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Nyamaa, A., "Mongol ardyn khuv’sgalt namyn tüükhend kholbogdokh barimt bichgüüd 1920-1940, Negdügeer devter" (1966), Ulsyn khevleliin khereg erkhelekh khoroo
- 1921-1990, "XX zuuny Mongolyn tüükhiig shineer ergen kharakhui", pp.2003, Otgonjargal, S.
- Otgonjargal, S., "Mongolyn 1921 ony khuv’sgal ba orchin üeiin tüükhiin sudalgaa" (2012), Soyombo
- Punsaldulam, B., "Mongolyn tüükh bichleg sudlal" (2009), Sogoo nuur
- Puntsagnorov, Ts, "Mongolyn avtonomit üeiin tüükh" (1955), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Rossabi, Moriss, "Modern Mongolia-From Khans to Commisars to Capitalists" (2005), University of California press
- Sanjdorj, M., "Khor'dugaar zuuny Mongol" (1995), Tüükhiin khüreelen
- Shirendev, B., "BNMAU-yn Tüükh, Gutgaar bot'" (1969), Ulsyn khevleliin khereg erkhelekh khoroo
- Tuya, S, "Mongol ulsyn khögjiliin bodlogo, üzel barimtlal: khuv’sgal, ööchlölt XX zuun" (2008), Soyombo
- Urangua, J., "Mongolyn tüükhiin üechlel" (2014), Admon
- Zaankhüü, J., "1990 ony ardchilsan khödölgöönii tüükhend kholbogdokh barimt bichgüüd" (2004), Soyombo