文献一覧: 東洋史研究 (雑誌)

This article deals with the reign of the Zangid ruler of Syria, Nur al-Din Mahmud (r. 541-569 AH/1146-1174AD) and attempts to analyze his policies towards his amirs who played important roles in the government and army. For this purpose, the author collected and organized information on individual amirs from contemporary documents, including their official positions, movements, iqta' (i. e. fiefs), and families, and confirmed trends in their activities and analyzed their participation in internal government affairs, which has not been dealt with in depth in previous studies. In the management of his amirs, Nur al-Din took account of an amir's family, its ties with others and internal order, not only of the amir himself. He emphasized the notion of "service of the family" by assuring transfer of a deceased amir's iqta' to his son (even if the son was still in his minority) and punishing the amir's family for the amir's misdeeds. He aimed to strengthen his leadership by adjusting the amir's family order in accord with his relationship with his amirs based on their service to the master. Nur al-din never had an amir killed for posing a threat to his reign but usually dealt with the unsettling matters by adjusting the amirs' positions and situations, for example, changing their iqta', or forcing them to participate in expeditions. His policies towards the amirs seems to have been effective in keeping the amirs and the soldiers in their charge in support of the regime by avoiding sudden, unreasonable executions. This rational order was based of the political and military steadiness of his regime. Occasionally, Nur al-Din was obliged to compromise with ambitious or disruptive amirs out of military necessity as in a series of battles against the Franks (Crusaders). Because of such circumstances and the fact that the amirs also could move to keep their independence within the framework of their services to their master, Nur al-Din faced a leadership crisis at the end of his reign. This is confirmed by the actual independence of the Ayyubids in Egypt who still operated within the framework of service to Nur al-Din.

2017-08-26 05:32:57
2 + 0 Twitter

2 0 0 0 IR ネットワークのなかの港町とそこにおける所謂「バニヤン」商人 : 19世紀ザンジバルにおけるカッチー・バティヤー商人の活動

著者: 鈴木英明
出版者: 東洋史研究会
雑誌: 東洋史研究 (ISSN:03869059)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.71, no.4, pp.794-766, 2013-03

2017-08-03 06:30:30
2 + 0 Twitter

2 0 0 0 IR 八王の乱の本質

著者: 福原啓郎
出版者: 東洋史研究會
雑誌: 東洋史研究 (ISSN:03869059)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.41, no.3, pp.p457-487, 1982-12

2016-09-24 23:19:45
2 + 0 Twitter

2 0 0 0 黎朝聖宗の目指したもの : 十五世紀大越ヴェトナムの對外政策

著者: 八尾隆生
出版者: 東洋史研究会
雑誌: 東洋史研究 (ISSN:03869059)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.74, no.1, pp.39-75, 2015-06

2016-07-22 04:24:08
2 + 0 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40020515308

2 0 0 0 モンゴル「獨立」問題と漢語概念 : キャフタ協定にいたる交渉を中心に

著者: 岡本隆司
出版者: 東洋史研究会
雑誌: 東洋史研究 (ISSN:03869059)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.73, no.4, pp.611-645, 2015-03

2016-07-22 02:25:38
2 + 0 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40020412377

2 0 0 0 IR モンゴル「獨立」問題と漢語概念 : キャフタ協定にいたる交渉を中心に

著者: 岡本隆司
出版者: 東洋史研究会
雑誌: 東洋史研究 (ISSN:03869059)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.73, no.4, pp.611-645, 2015-03

This paper aims to examine the diplomatic negotiations relating to Mongolia's "independence" and international status after the 1911 Revolution and clarifying the Chinese notion of the world order and its transformation. I first trace the process of the tripartite negotiations between Mongolia, Russia and China from the conclusion of the Russo-Mongolian Agreement in 1912 to the Kiakhta Treaty in 1915. Secondly, I focus on the language and actions of the Chinese and reexamine the correlation between Chinese interests and wording in the negotiations by chiefly conducting an special analysis of some Western concepts translated into Chinese, such as zizhu 自主/zizhi 自治[independence/autonomy], zhuquan 主權/zongzhuquan 宗主權[sovereignty/suzerainty], lingtu 領土/fanshu 藩屬[territory/ dependency], and so on. As a result, I clarify that although Russia and China recognized Outer Mongoliaʼs autonomy as a Chinese territory and Mongolia recognized Chinaʼs suzerainty in the treaty, both the Chinese and the Mongols were dissatisfied and imposed their own interpretations on such concepts as zongzhuquan [suzerainty], zizhi [autonomy], and so on. In addition, I point out that this not only necessitated Chinaʼs investiture, cefeng 册封, of "Bogd Khaan" and the abolition of Outer Mongoliaʼs autonomy only a few years later in 1919, but also brought about the conditions leading to the Mongolian Revolution in 1921. This historical process cannot be said to be unrelated to the concepts of "sovereignty" and "territorial integrity" that govern foreign relations in contemporary China. It can be regarded as a key source in examining the formation of nationalism in China and surrounding countries.