동·서 올로스 반란에 대한 쿠빌라이의 대응 ― 나얀과 카이도의 난을 중심으로 ―
Qubilai's Reactions to Outbreak of Rebellion in Left and Right Wing Ulus ― Based on Nayan's and Qaidu's Rebellions ―
1
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The ‘rebellion’ of Nayan and Qaidu against Qubilai Qa'an is a historic issue that is often referred to as a symbolic event of so-called ‘the disruption of the Great Mongol Empire(Yeke Mongγol Ulus).’ Moreover, it is historically known that these two masterminds of rebellion raised rebellions against Qubilai in each region and confederated together with each other to attempt to double upon Qubilai. The purpose of this study was to compare Nayan's rebellion against Qubilai with Qaidu's in the reign of Qubilai Qa'an, both of which were typical rebellions in Left and Right Wing Ulus, so that it could make further examinations into how Qubilai reacted to their rebellions. And based on analysis about his reactions, this study sought to examine the reasons why there could be differences, if any, in the extent and way of reactions to these two rebellions. Methodologically, this study adopted possible diversified views of Tului family - referred to as ‘the winner in history’ - about Qubilai, and turned away from the stigma of ‘rebellion’ and ‘insurrection’ marked artificially on figures who are ‘historic losers’ confronted with Qubilai, but sought to take more objective approach to examination of historical situations surrounding those rebellions. First, it was found that Nayan's rebellion was realized through blitzkrieg and bold military operations. Owing to lessons learned from long years of combats against Qaidu, Qubilai could promptly and boldly defeat the rebellion of Nayan, the monarch of east Ulus which was not so much far from the capitol of Qa'an Ulus. Apart from Western historic records that demonstrate movements of Nayan to confederate with Qaidu, this study examined medieval Chinese historic documents, but the latter documents showed no evidence enough to match Western records. Qubilai took a bold approach of ‘blitzkrieg’ to reaction to Nayan's rebellion, but took a mild approach of 3 basic policies, i.e. ‘reconciliation’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘frontier defense’ to reacting to Qaidu's rebellion: Rather, Qubilai respected the authority of a monarch from Chinggis Khan's royal family. It is commonly known that from a collective league called ‘Talas Khuriltai(1269)’, Qaidu was elected as a ‘Qa'an’ who could stand for the power of steppe region to set up against Qubilai and took ‘adaptive and obedient’ attitudes to Qubilai even till the first half of 1280's, not attempting to overturn the ancien regime of Qa'an Qubilai's court over about 4 decades, and Qaidu's forces were absolutely inferior to Qa'an's ones in military aspect as well. This study focused on these points of history. However, Qa'an's forces abided largely by defense-oriented policies on the basis of stronghold around Mountain Altai, even though they already took absolute dominance of military power over Qaidu. Qubilai considered these political and military positions to keep his own political covenant with Qaidu - that is, a covenant that shall grant sovereign power to Alghu over central Asian abode of the Mongol Empire “from the Altai on the far side to the River Amudar'ja (Oxus).” Qaidu used the covenant ingeniously: He intended to re-establish and secure ‘Ögödei Ulus’, an extinct Ulus, in central Asian region.
Abstract
The ‘rebellion’ of Nayan and Qaidu against Qubilai Qa'an is a historic issue that is often referred to as a symbolic event of so-called ‘the disruption of the Great Mongol Empire(Yeke Mongγol Ulus).’ Moreover, it is historically known that these two masterminds of rebellion raised rebellions against Qubilai in each region and confederated together with each other to attempt to double upon Qubilai. The purpose of this study was to compare Nayan's rebellion against Qubilai with Qaidu's in the reign of Qubilai Qa'an, both of which were typical rebellions in Left and Right Wing Ulus, so that it could make further examinations into how Qubilai reacted to their rebellions. And based on analysis about his reactions, this study sought to examine the reasons why there could be differences, if any, in the extent and way of reactions to these two rebellions. Methodologically, this study adopted possible diversified views of Tului family - referred to as ‘the winner in history’ - about Qubilai, and turned away from the stigma of ‘rebellion’ and ‘insurrection’ marked artificially on figures who are ‘historic losers’ confronted with Qubilai, but sought to take more objective approach to examination of historical situations surrounding those rebellions. First, it was found that Nayan's rebellion was realized through blitzkrieg and bold military operations. Owing to lessons learned from long years of combats against Qaidu, Qubilai could promptly and boldly defeat the rebellion of Nayan, the monarch of east Ulus which was not so much far from the capitol of Qa'an Ulus. Apart from Western historic records that demonstrate movements of Nayan to confederate with Qaidu, this study examined medieval Chinese historic documents, but the latter documents showed no evidence enough to match Western records. Qubilai took a bold approach of ‘blitzkrieg’ to reaction to Nayan's rebellion, but took a mild approach of 3 basic policies, i.e. ‘reconciliation’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘frontier defense’ to reacting to Qaidu's rebellion: Rather, Qubilai respected the authority of a monarch from Chinggis Khan's royal family. It is commonly known that from a collective league called ‘Talas Khuriltai(1269)’, Qaidu was elected as a ‘Qa'an’ who could stand for the power of steppe region to set up against Qubilai and took ‘adaptive and obedient’ attitudes to Qubilai even till the first half of 1280's, not attempting to overturn the ancien regime of Qa'an Qubilai's court over about 4 decades, and Qaidu's forces were absolutely inferior to Qa'an's ones in military aspect as well. This study focused on these points of history. However, Qa'an's forces abided largely by defense-oriented policies on the basis of stronghold around Mountain Altai, even though they already took absolute dominance of military power over Qaidu. Qubilai considered these political and military positions to keep his own political covenant with Qaidu - that is, a covenant that shall grant sovereign power to Alghu over central Asian abode of the Mongol Empire “from the Altai on the far side to the River Amudar'ja (Oxus).” Qaidu used the covenant ingeniously: He intended to re-establish and secure ‘Ögödei Ulus’, an extinct Ulus, in central Asian region.
참고문헌 (74)
- "元史" (1976), 中華書局
- "元朝名臣史略" (1996), 中華書局
- 李修生, "全元文" (2004), 鳳凰出版社(原江蘇古籍出版社)
- 虞集, "句容君王世績碑, In 道園學古錄 卷23" (1990), 臺灣 商務印書館
- "Rashīd ad-Dīn", 이스탄불 톱카프 도서관 소장본 : Revan Köşkü 1518, ~
- 라시드 앗 딘, "칸의 후예들" (2005), 사계절
- Wheeler. M. Thackston, "Jami'u't-Tawarikh Compendium of Chronicles A History of The Mongols, 3 vols" (1998), Harvard University. Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations
- 余大鈞, "史集 三冊" (1997), 商務印書館
- J. A. Boyle, "The Successors of Genghis Khan" (1971), Columbia Univ. Press
- 周良霄, "成吉思汗的繼承者" (1992), 天健古籍出版社
- Ata-Malik Juvaini, "Genghis Khan: the history of the world conqueror" (1997), Manchester University Press : UNESCO
- Hammer-Purgstall, "Geschichte Wassaf's, persisch herausgegeben und deutsch übersetzt, Band.Ⅰ" (1856), Wien
- Khvāndamir, "Habibu's-siyar" (1994), Dept. of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University
- 마르코 폴로, "동방견문록" (2000), 사계절
- Jamāl Qarshī, "賈瑪爾․喀爾施和他的 『蘇拉赫詞典補編』下", 元史及北方民族史研究集刊, (11) (1987)
- 邱樹森, "元史辭典" (2002), 山東敎育出版社
- 김호동, "몽골제국과 고려–쿠빌라이 정권의 탄생과 고려의 정치적 위상-" (2007), 서울대학교 출판부
- 杉山正明, "몽골 세계제국" (1999), 신서원
- 劉迎勝, "察合台汗國史硏究" (2006), 上海古籍出版社
- 李治安, "忽必烈傳" (2004), 人民出版社
- 本田實信, "モンゴル時代史硏究" (1991), 東京大學出版會
- 杉山正明, "モンゴル帝國と大元ウルス" (2004), 京都大學學術出版會
- Badarch Nyamaa, "The Coins of Mongol Empire and Clan Tamgha of Khans (XIII-XIV)" (2005), Private Publication
- Gerge Lane, "Early Mongol rule in the thirteenth century Iran : a Persian renaissance" (2003), Routledge Curzon
- J.W. Dardess, "Conquerors and Confucians : Aspect of Political Change in Late Yüan China" (1973), Columbia Univ. Press
- Morris Rossabi, "Khubilai Khan : his life and times" (1988), Univ. of California Press
- Michal Biran, "Qaidu and the Rise of the Independent Mongol State in Central Asia" (1997), Curzon Press
- T.J. Barfield, "The Perilous Frontier" (1989), Basil Blackwell
- Thomas T. Allsen, "Mongol imperialism : the policies of the Grand Qan Möngke in China, Russia, and the Islamic lands, 1251-1259" (1987), Univ. of California Press
- V.V. Barthold, "Four Studies on the History of Central Asia, vol. Ⅰ" (1956), E. J. Brill
- W. Barthold, "Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion, Philadelphia, The Trustees of the “E.J.W.Gibb Memorial” ＆ Messrs" (1968), Luzac and Company LTD
- 고명수, "潛邸시기 쿠빌라이의 漢地경영과 세력형성 -그의 漢化문제에 대한 재검토-", 몽골학, (31), pp.87~120 (2011), 한국몽골학회
- 김석환, "14세기 초 두아의 중앙아시아 패권 장악과 그 의의", 석사, 동양사학, pp.2010
- 김장구, "쿠빌라이 칸 정권과 몽골제국의 발전", 동국사학, 41 (2005)
- 김호동, "구육(定宗)과 그의 時代｣, 근세 동아시아의 국가와 사회" (1998), 지식산업사
- 김호동, "몽골제국과 ‘大元’", 역사학보, (192), pp.221~253 (2006), 역사학회
- 류병재, "카이두 올로스 성립에 있어 탈라스 코릴타의 역할", 몽골학, (18), pp.169~199 (2005), 한국몽골학회
- 尹銀淑, "쿠빌라이칸의 중앙집권화에 대한 東道諸王들의 대응―‘나얀 반란’을 중심으로―", 중앙아시아연구, 8, pp.2~52 (2003), 중앙아시아학회
- 윤은숙, "옷치긴家 타가차르의 활동과 쿠빌라이의 카안위 쟁탈전", 몽골학, (22), pp.223~263 (2007), 한국몽골학회
- 심호성, "몽골제국기 동부 중앙아시아 역참 교통로의 변천", 석사, 동양사학, pp.2011
- 賈叢江, "海都與窩闊台汗國的創建", 西域硏究, (4) (1999)
- 黨寶海, "元代火州之戰年代辯正", 歐亞學刊, 3 (2002)
- 姚大力, "乃顏之亂雜考", 元史及部分民族史研究集刊, (7) (1983), 南京大學出版社
- 葉新民, "斡赤斤家族與蒙元朝廷的關係", 內蒙古大學學報;哲社版 (1988)
- 魏國忠, "乃顏之亂, In 東北亞研究：東北民族史研究（二）" (1994), 中州古籍出版社
- 劉迎勝, "從北平王到北安王—那木罕二三題—", 元史及民族與邊疆研究集刊, 21 (2009)
- 劉迎勝, "論塔剌思會議", 元史論叢, 4 (1992)
- 劉迎勝, "元代蒙古諸汗國間的約和及窩闊台汗國的滅亡", 新疆大學學報, (2) (1985)
- 劉迎勝, "阿剌脫忽剌兒忽裏台大會考", 西域硏究, (4) (1995)
- 劉迎勝, "蒙哥卽位風波中的察合台, 窩闊台系諸王, In 內陸亞洲曆史文化硏究—韓儒林先生記念文集—" (1996), 南京大學校元史硏究室
- 李治安, "元代的宗王出鎮", 元史論叢, 4 (1992)
- 李治安, "馬可波羅所記乃顏之亂考釋", 元史論叢, 8 (2001)
- 任崇嶽, "從兩通元代碑文看“ 海都之亂”的性質", 中州學刊, (5) (1996)
- 陳得芝, "元嶺北行省建置考(中), In 蒙文史研究叢稿" (2005), 人民出版社
- 叢海平, "‘黑城出土文書’所見海都之亂時期亦集乃路的軍糧供給", 雲南師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版), (04) (2009)
- 畢奧南, "乃顏-哈丹事件與元麗關系", 內蒙古社會科學, (03) (1997)
- 堀江雅明, "ナヤンの反亂について(上)", 東洋史苑, 34․35合 (1990)
- 吉野正史, "ナヤンの亂における元朝軍の陣用", 早稲田大學大學院文學研究科紀要, 54 (2009)
- 吉野正史, "元朝にとってのナヤン·カダアンの亂", 史観, (161) (2009)
- 杉山正明, "クビライ政権の東方三王家-鄂州の役前後再論", 東方学報, 54 (1982)
- 杉山正明, "ふたつのチャガタイ家, In 明淸時代の政治と社會" (1983), 京都大學 人文科學硏究所
- 松田孝一, "ユブグル等の元朝投降", 立命館史學, 4 (1984)
- 田村實造, "アリブカの亂について-モンゴル帝國から元朝へ-", 東洋史硏究, 14(3) (1955)
- 村岡 倫, "シリギの亂-元初モンゴリアの爭亂-", 東洋史苑, 24․25合 (1985)
- 村岡 倫, "海都與突兒斯坦 ; 再論塔剌思忽里台大會", papers Contributed to the Symphosium for the History of the Yuan Dynasty - Abstrict, pp.189~192 (1986)
- 村岡 倫, "カイドゥと中央アジア-タラスのクリルタイをめぐって-", 東洋史苑, 30․31合 (1988)
- 村岡 倫, "オゴデ=ウルスの分立", 東洋史苑, 39 (1992)
- 村岡 倫, "オルダウルスと大元ウルス-<カイドゥの亂>․<シリギの亂>をめぐって-", 東洋史苑, 52․53合 (1999)
- 김호동, "Mongols, Turks, and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World" (2005), E. J. Brill
- Hodong Kim, "The Unity of the Mongol Empire and Continental Exchanges over Eurasia", Journal of Central Eurasian Studies, 1 (2009)
- J.W. Dardess, "From Mongol Empire to Yüan Dynasty", Monumenta Serica, 30 (1972)
- Michal Biran, "The Battle of Herat(1270): A Case of Inter-Mongol Warfare, In Warfare in Inner Asian History" (2002), Brill Leiden Boston Köln
- Peter Jackson, "The dissolution of the Mongol Empire", Central Asiatic Journal, 22(3·4) (1978)
- Thomas T. Allsen, "The Yüan Dynasty and the Uighurs of Turfan in the 13th Century, In China among Equals" (1983), Univ. of California