2018年1月17日 星期三

遊歷杭州鳳凰寺 巧遇文瀾滿文碑 Just updated.


年暑假參訪伊斯蘭杭州鳳凰寺的旅程中,驚喜巧遇西湖邊文瀾閣的滿文碑。文瀾閣收藏四庫全書等重要文化資產。清末藏書家丁申和丁丙兄弟對相關藏書的義行也傳為佳話。太平天國亂後,丁申和丁丙二人散盡家貲,重購及補鈔已散佚的文瀾閣四庫全書,使之得以留存後世。










滿文的譯漢,可以音譯,也可以意譯,漢文「文瀾閣」三個字,滿文念法為Wen Lan Asari ,從前兩字的音譯,明顯可看出未字為意譯,asari是名詞,為滿文閣樓的意思。文瀾閣建於清乾隆年間,當時滿人已經相當漢化,用asari翻譯漢文「閣」字,顯示滿人對自身文化的重視。

                 






短暫的杭州之旅,給筆者留下最深刻印象的,除了文瀾閣的滿文碑外,便是鳳凰寺旁邊牆上的阿拉伯文。牆上框在橢圓形內的阿拉伯文意思為《古蘭經》常見的:「奉至仁至慈的真主之名」( Bishillaahir rahmaanir rahiim),其下面積較大片的阿拉伯文意思就是重要的清真言:「萬物非主,惟有真主;穆罕默德,是主使者」( La illaha ill Allah, Muhammadar Rasul Allah)。



這些不同的文字和文化保存在杭州,代表杭州自古以來豐富的文化和對異文化的包容力。





(丁世宗,穆斯林,中正大學滿文研究班 、中正大學歷史所博士研究生)





2018年1月16日 星期二

雍正十三年







ISBN13:9787508680002
ISBN9:750868000
出版社: 中信出版社
作者:林乾
裝訂/頁數:平裝/406頁
出版日:2017/11/01


雍正王朝作為清代最神秘的王朝之一,人們對它關注多,誤解也多,研究也漸入死胡同。林乾教授在《雍正十三年》中依託豐富的一手史料,打開審視雍正王朝的全新視域,發現前人忽視的、耐人尋味的細節。他聚焦雍正君臣關係,注重剖析雍正及其身邊重要人物的心理,從而為破解雍正王朝的眾多謎案提供了全新思路。林乾教授厘清了康雍交際政壇上由君臣父子、主奴兒臣所構成的複雜高層網路,展現主要人物在天地之變中的抉擇,盡顯清代官場的波詭雲譎與人性的幽暗複雜。

雍正上位步步驚心,宮廷權力角鬥驚心動魄。《雍正十三年》提出了眾多以往大家未曾關注或關注不多史實,比如關注了在權力角鬥中,作為雍正作為皇子中的弱者,如何逆襲。雍正執政初期遇到的危機是一個非常重要的題目,過去沒有人提出。實際上,雍正前三年對國家的掌控力量遠遠沒有達到我們所認識的程度。他是如何開局,如何解困,如何破局……《雍正十三年》中未經刪改的雍正朱批奏摺原件等罕見史料重磅呈現,從歷史第一視角重構“逆襲皇子”內心世界,還原被誤讀的雍正。並將人物置於中國歷史的發展脈絡中進行討論,具有古今參照的現實意義。

影視劇中的雍正可能是:陰險刻薄,有仇必報;溫情四爺是個暖男;沉穩務實的好幹部。《雍正十三年》中,他豪邁磊落:“朕就是這樣漢子!” “硬漢皇帝”雍正其實有過兩次“讓位”之舉,而且他稱得上是貨真價實的 “暖男”……



壹 如此雍正
歷史誤讀多
大眾關注多
革除積弊多
歷史經驗多

貳 諸子爭儲
不甘心的廢太子
武藝高強的大阿哥
“公推太子”允禩

三 “富貴閒人”
胤禛的排行和出身
阿哥時代胤禛的兩個形象
國士戴鐸“三策”

肆 雍邸舊人
桀驁不馴的闊少
頗有作為的巡撫
扯進“三王爺門下”詐騙案
雍親王訓“惡少”

伍 默定
群臣三請立太子
議定太子儀注和許可權
康熙默立

陸 康熙之死
康熙的身體是否異常
康熙病情之謎
有沒有特別的事情發生
“古今未有”的喪禮

柒 即位之謎
康熙如何傳位
有沒有遺詔
遺詔有沒有被篡改

捌 千里奔喪
延信的秘密使命
不辱使命
帝夢成空

玖 太后之死
太后暴亡為哪般
撞鐵柱而死可能嗎
雍正的辯解可信嗎
太后為什麼“為難”雍正

拾 一箭三雕
拴住允禩
發配允禟
囚禁允禵

拾壹 年大將軍
對允禵的成功牽制
對允禟的成功看守
對青海叛亂的平定

拾貳 君臣變臉
君臣權力衝突
君臣性格衝突
君臣隱衷衝突

拾三 龍爭虎鬥
年羹堯散佈“明年四月有事”
雍正帝步步緊逼
步步驚心“三江口”

拾肆 將軍之死
追查財產
年羹堯桀驁不馴
蹊蹺的虎入年宅
重罪九十二條

拾伍 舅舅隆科多
隆科多如何取得康熙帝的信任
為什麼不招搖的隆科多也受到整肅

拾陸 “八佛被囚”
“讓位”鬧劇
嚴厲整肅
“八佛被囚”

拾柒 山雨欲來
令狐士義“救恩主”
蔡懷璽投書允禵
“八佛被囚,十月作亂”的傳播

拾捌 阿、塞之獄
雍正導演“議罪”
允祉被逼表態
難兄難弟

拾玖 驚天大案
總督署“盟誓”
雍正揮淚覽“逆書”
秘密大抓捕

貳拾 出奇料理
不查本案,深挖“來歷”
“皇帝辯書”,天下講讀
逆犯“有功”,呂氏株連

──────────────────
林乾,國家清史編纂委員會典志組專家,曾國藩研究會常務理事,中國法律史學會理事。現為教育部人文社會科學重點研究基地、中國政法大學法律史學研究院副院長、教授、博士生導師。在中央電視臺《百家講壇》主講“雍正十三年”。著有《康熙懲抑朋黨與清代極權政治》《清通鑒·康熙朝》《中國司法制度史》《雍正十三年》等。


2018年1月15日 星期一

2018年1月12日 星期五

雍和宮滿文檔案譯編






雍和宮滿文檔案譯編
作者:趙令志、 鮑洪飛、劉軍主編;趙令志譯.
出版社:北京出版社
出版時間:2016年12月
定價:RMB980.00



內容簡介

本書第一次對涉及雍和宮的滿文歷史檔案、文獻作了系統的翻譯梳理,這批滿文檔案,涉及僧俗各類事務,將其翻譯整理,既對研究清代的民族、宗教政策有較高學術價值,亦對目前我國之宗教事務管理及對雍和宮保護維修、佛事活動等方面,具有重要的參考價值。雍和宮檔案譯稿是該領域翻譯研究的傑作和精品,其信、達、雅之妙不同凡響,其歷史價值、學術價值等不可限量。雍和宮作為北京地區的重要標誌之一,在1983年被國務院確定為漢族地區佛教全國重點寺院。

作者簡介 
趙令志,1964年7月生於內蒙古赤峰市。1987年7月入中央民族學院研究生部,讀中國民族史碩士研究生。2007年,為中央民族大學歷史系教授、博士生導師。郭美蘭,中國第1歷史檔案館編研處研究員,曾翻譯滿文檔案《軍機處滿文準噶爾使者檔》,與趙令志教授合著《準噶爾使者檔之比較研究》。






目錄
1.內大臣海望傳著揀員管理雍和宮事務等之上諭雍正九年十月十七日
2.和碩莊親王傳著雍和宮二等侍衛侉色教練內府佐領兵丁之上諭雍正九年十二月初二日
3.著雍和宮頭等侍衛勞格補放鄭各莊城守尉之上諭雍正十年八月二十一日
4.和碩莊親王奏聞修繕柏林寺所需銀仍支領雍和宮銀兩應用事折雍正十一年六月初七日
5.西寧辦事大臣馬爾泰等奏聞派員護送果莽寺敏珠爾呼圖克圖進京事折雍正十二年三月十九日
6.大學士鄂爾泰等奏聞西寧辦事大臣馬爾泰派員護送果莽寺敏珠爾呼圖克圖進京事片雍正十二年四月初二日
7.大學士鄂爾泰等奏聞西藏送京喇嘛隨班禪額爾德尼使者業已起程片
雍正十二年六月十九日
8.侍郎馬爾泰等奏聞料理噶勒丹錫哷圖呼圖克圖自西寧起程前往京師折
雍正十二年六月二十四日
9.總管內務府奏請嵩祝寺番經廠佛像開光所需物件於何處開銷事折
雍正十二年十二月十五日
10.郎中黑德等來傳飭營造司以將海望所建房屋一座辟作藏經館事行文雍和宮
雍正十三年閏四月初一日
11.總管內務府為雍和宮後佛樓新添小道童等錢糧事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年閏四月二十三日
12.和碩莊親王奏聞議覆大行皇帝梓宮奉移雍和宮折
雍正十三年八月二十四日
13.著將御前侍衛富努監禁百日釋服之後再行請旨之上諭
雍正十三年八月二十七日
14.郎中楊作新傳大臣海望飭揀員照料雍和宮修繕工程文
雍正十三年八月二十八日
15.管理總管內務府事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏請釋服之日照例令噶勒丹錫哷圖呼圖克圖等於乾清宮念經事折雍正十三年九月初八日
16.管理總管內務府事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏聞梓宮奉移雍和宮簡派散秩大臣值守事折
雍正十三年九月初九日
17.管理總管內務府事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏請聖上前往雍和宮不必早去事折
雍正十三年九月十一日
18.宮殿監副侍李英差傳支給雍和宮太監等口糧事文
雍正十三年九月十一日
19.雍和宮值班內務府衙為調取蘇州織造海保履歷等事咨內務府文
雍正十三年九月十七日
20.雍和宮值班內務府衙為一併調取郎中海保等升補情形及其履歷事咨內務府文
雍正十三年九月十八日
21.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳甯壽宮皇貴妃前往雍和宮著照例備辦車轎鞍馬事文
雍正十三年九月十八日
22.雍和宮值班內務府衙為回執入值內務府總管人員名單等情事咨內務府文
雍正十三年九月十八日
23.內務府為備辦甯壽宮皇貴妃等前往雍和宮及皇太后皇后等回宮所需儀仗等事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年九月十八日
24.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳諭聖上前往雍和宮並妥辦應備事宜事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十日
25.雍和宮值班內務府衙為詢查世祖聖祖如何施恩奶母兩家等情事咨內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十一日
26.領侍衛內大臣為知照聖上前往雍和宮事咨總管內務府文雍正十三年九月二十二日
27.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳為甯壽宮皇貴妃等前往雍和宮著照例備辦車轎鞍馬事文雍正十三年九月二十二日
28.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳為皇太后皇后等前往雍和宮著照例備辦車轎鞍馬事文雍正十三年九月二十二日
29.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳旨聖上前往雍和宮事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十二日
30.總管內務府為皇后妃嬪前往田村仍照雍和宮例備辦車轎鞍馬事咨領侍衛內大臣文
雍正十三年九月二十四日
31.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳為皇后妃嬪前往田村仍照雍和宮例備辦車轎等事文
雍正十三年九月二十四日
32.總管內務府為王大臣飭辦聖上前往雍和宮日賞沿途兵丁等飯食事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
33.總管內務府為派員替換備辦聖上前往雍和宮日賞沿途兵丁等飯食官員事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
34.總管內務府為傳王飭辦賞神武門至雍和宮沿途兵丁飯食事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
35.總管內務府為傳王大臣等諭旨備辦聖上前往雍和宮沿途兵丁等飯食事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
36.總管內務府為傳大臣等遵旨飭辦聖上前往雍和宮日賞沿途兵丁飯食搭建大棚事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
37.總管內務府為傳王大臣等差員飭辦賞神武門至雍和宮沿途兵丁飯食事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
38.總管內務府為遣員照料聖上前往雍和宮日賞賜沿途兵丁做飯大棚事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
39.總管內務府為遣員替換備辦聖上前往雍和宮日賞沿途兵丁做飯大棚官員事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
40.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往田村及雍和宮事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十四日
41.總管內務府為派員備辦聖上前往雍和宮日賞沿途兵丁做飯大棚事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十四日
42.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳皇后妃嬪前往田村所需馬匹照前往雍和宮例備辦事文
雍正十三年九月二十四日
43.總管內務府為照新定尺寸搭建做飯大棚事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年九月二十五日
44.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳旨聖上前往雍和宮獻供事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十五日
45.值月鑲紅旗滿洲蒙古都統為上諭給奉移梓宮官兵加薪等情事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十五日
46.值班景運門前鋒統領為知照聖上前往雍和宮沿途兵丁執牌用飯等情事呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十五日
47.值班景運門前鋒統領為知照裁減聖上前往雍和宮沿途官兵人數事呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十五日
48.鑾儀衛為知照聖上前往雍和宮備轎校尉人數事呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年九月二十五日
49.總管內務府為傳王大臣等備辦神武門至雍和宮沿途兵丁飯食糧米事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年九月二十七日
50.總管內務府為傳王大臣等曉飭嚴肅紀律事致管理做飯大棚事務官員文
雍正十三年九月二十七日
51.總管內務府為傳王大臣等曉諭嚴肅紀律事致管理做飯大棚事務官員文
雍正十三年九月二十七日
52.總管內務府為奉宸苑人手緊缺召回調出備辦兵丁飯食人員事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年九月二十七日
53.管理總管內務府事務和碩莊親王允祿參奏老格偷竊雍和宮供奉金盞事折
雍正十三年九月二十八日
54.以和碩莊親王等員丟失雍和宮金盞著嚴加議處之上諭
雍正十三年九月二十八日
55.內閣抄出以鑲白旗人員看護雍和宮等差務之上諭
雍正十三年九月二十九日
56.賞賜乾清宮念經噶勒丹錫哷圖呼圖克圖等喇嘛緞匹銀兩單
雍正十三年九月
57.總管內務府為重申雍和宮大行皇帝供獻等項事宜致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年十月初一日
58.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳旨前往雍和宮供獻事咨內務府文
雍正十三年十月初一日
59.步軍統領衙門為分撥涼棚用飯兵丁事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月初二日
60.吏部為開單議敘雍和宮工程效力人員事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月初三日
61.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳旨聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨內務府文
雍正十三年十月初三日
62.總管內務府為急速增員辦理雍和宮田務事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年十月初四日
63.領侍衛內大臣為知照聖上前往雍和宮供獻並瞻禮佛樓事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月初五日
64.署理戶部尚書事務內大臣海望口奏以雍和宮頭等侍衛常保等補放圓明園總管等事文
雍正十三年十月初十日
65.正黃旗滿洲為轉行上諭給奉移梓宮官兵加薪等事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月初十日
66.關防處為調整雍和宮等處官差人員事呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十一日
67.署理戶部尚書事務內大臣海望奉旨以雍和宮頭等侍衛常保等補放圓明園總管事文
雍正十三年十月十一日
68.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十一日
69.總管內務府為員外郎濟保仍于雍和宮錢糧事務上行走事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年十月十二日
70.總管內務府為另遣他員查辦雍和宮事務事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年十月十三日
71.領侍衛內大臣為知照聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十三日
72.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳備辦皇太后皇后等前往雍和宮所需車轎等事文
雍正十三年十月十三日
73.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十五日
74.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十七日
75.內閣抄出總理事務莊親王奏議大行皇帝誕辰之日仍著喪服行禮等事折
雍正十三年十月十七日
76.總管內務府為濟保仍于雍和宮查辦事務上行走事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年十月十八日
77.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月十九日
78.總管內務府奏請賞給皇宮與雍和宮間行走引導等員雙薪事折
雍正十三年十月二十日
79.吏部為開單議敘辦理喪儀效力人員事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月二十日
80.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳備辦皇太后皇后前往雍和宮所需車轎等事文
雍正十三年十月二十二日
81.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳備辦甯壽宮內主子等前往雍和宮所需車轎等事文
雍正十三年十月二十二日
82.入值散秩大臣永謙等為奏事郎中張文彬傳旨聖上前往雍和宮事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月二十五日
83.入值散秩大臣瑪哈達為聖上前往雍和宮照例備辦事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十月二十八日
84.總管內務府為遣員替補參領赫達色入值巡察事致都虞司劄付
雍正十三年十月二十九日
85.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛等差傳備辦皇太后皇后前往雍和宮所需車轎事文
雍正十三年十月二十九日
86.雍和宮坐班內務府衙為遣員替補員外郎薩蘭泰事咨呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月初一日
87.內閣抄出總理事務和碩莊親王等奏聞遵旨議處和碩誠親王等守靈失職事折
雍正十三年十一月初二日
88.領侍衛內大臣為奏事郎中張文彬等傳旨聖上前往雍和宮供獻事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月初四日
89.總理事務和碩莊親王為給柏林寺等處筆墨銀仍于雍和宮支給等事之堂諭
雍正十三年十一月初五日
90.雍和宮坐班內務府衙為調員入值雍和宮管理掃雪等事咨呈總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月初六日
91.宗人府為知照內閣抄出總理事務和碩莊親王等遵旨議處和碩誠親王等守靈失職事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月初八日
92.和碩莊親王等奏請照例支給萬壽寺等處香供銀兩事折
雍正十三年十一月初九日
93.正黃旗為回覆知照和碩莊親王允祿參奏老格偷竊雍和宮供奉金盞折事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月初十日
94.禮部為知照上大行皇帝尊號之日皇帝儀禮等情事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月十一日
95.總管內務府參奏順貞門門禁正黃旗內府護軍統領伊福曠班折
雍正十三年十一月十四日
96.吏部為核實雍和宮工程議敘人員職名文稿事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十一月十四日
97.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛等差傳每日上詣田村仍照前往雍和宮例備辦太監等所需馬匹等事文
雍正十三年十一月二十日
98.元旦前往雍和宮行禮之上諭
雍正十三年十一月二十四日
99.總管內務府奏聞察議順貞門門禁正黃旗內務府護軍統領伊福曠班事折
雍正十三年十一月二十四日
100.領侍衛內大臣為聖上前往雍和宮祭祀事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十二月初三日
101.領侍衛內大臣等為知照議處乾清門行走領侍衛內大臣常明等失職事咨總管內務府文
雍正十三年十二月初三日
102.總管內務府奏請採辦雍和宮供奉所用羊只事折
雍正十三年十二月初七日
103.總管內務府為傳和碩和親王等派員飭辦雍和宮欠項銀兩事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年十二月初八日
104.總管內務府為傳和碩和親王等派員飭辦雍和宮欠項銀兩事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年十二月初八日
105.總管內務府為傳和碩和親王等派員飭辦雍和宮欠項銀兩事致各該處劄付
雍正十三年十二月初九日
106.總管內務府奏請御前侍衛富努違制監禁百日期滿折
雍正十三年十二月初十日
107.和親王傳旨以侍郎劉保暫行幫辦雍和宮內務府總管事務之堂諭
雍正十三年十二月十一日
108.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳明日聖上行禮火神廟仍照前往雍和宮例備辦馬匹事文
雍正十三年十二月十四日
109.宮殿監侍領侍蘇培盛差傳備辦隨駕前往雍和宮太監等所用馬匹事文
雍正十三年十二月十五日
110.總管內務府為大臣劉保等傳明日于雍和宮備蒙古醫士一名事致上駟院劄付
雍正十三年十二月二十日
111.總管內務府奏聞以丟失雍和宮供奉金盞案內失職大臣丁皂保等降級補用事片
雍正十三年十二月二十四日
112.總管內務府為知照丟失雍和宮供奉金盞案內失職大臣丁皂保等降級補用事咨吏部文
雍正十三年十二月二十六日
113.坐班雍和宮內務府為傳和碩和親王等飭已屆年底嚴加警戒事咨內務府文
雍正十三年十二月二十六日
114.管理總管內務府事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏請聖上於正月初二日前往雍和宮行禮事片
雍正十三年
115.管理總管內務府事務訥親等奏請清理雍和宮所存什物數目事折
乾隆元年正月二十一日
116.總理事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏聞核查雍和宮各類人員事折
乾隆元年正月二十一日
117.管理內務府總管事務訥親等奏請清理雍和宮所存物件交付各處事折
乾隆元年正月二十一日
118.總理事務和碩莊親王允祿等奏聞安置雍和宮各類人員事折
乾隆元年正月二十二日
119.管理內務府總管事務訥親等奏請雍和宮所屬打牲烏拉朱軒達所得珍珠交廣儲司銀庫折
乾隆元年三月初八日
120.管理內務府總管事務訥親等奏請雍和宮所屬打牲烏拉朱軒達所得珍珠交廣儲司銀庫折
乾隆元年三月初八日
121.總管內務府奏覽雍和宮所屬打牲烏拉朱軒達所得珍珠事折
乾隆元年三月十六日
122.總管內務府奏請按品補用雍和宮歸入上三旗佐領侉塞等員事折
乾隆元年四月初四日
123.總管內務府奏為對品補用雍和宮歸入上三旗佐領侉塞等員事折
乾隆元年四月初四日
124.總管內務府為知照將雍和宮內管領五十等以六品內副管領對品補用事咨吏部文
乾隆元年四月初八日
125.總管內務府奏請安置雍和宮侍衛官員護軍校等事片
乾隆元年四月十六日
126.總管內務府奏請雍和宮莊園頭人等已遵旨賞給和親王事折
乾隆元年四月十六日
127.總管內務府奏請雍和宮莊園頭人等已遵旨賞給和親王事折
乾隆元年四月十六日
128.總管內務府奏請對品補用雍和宮歸入上三旗護軍校瑪希圖等事片
乾隆元年四月十八日
129.總管內務府為知照將雍和宮歸入上三旗護軍校瑪希圖以主事對品補用事咨吏部文
乾隆元年四月二十二日
130.總管內務府奏請將雍和宮歸入上三旗羊群頭目班第以催總對品補用事片
乾隆元年七月二十六日
131.總管內務府奏請將雍和宮歸入上三旗羊群頭目班第以催總對品補用事片
乾隆元年七月二十六日
132.總管內務府為將雍和宮歸入上三旗羊群頭目班第以催總對品補用事咨吏部文
乾隆元年七月二十八日
133.禮部為知會皇上萬壽節謁雍和宮行禮之儀注事咨總管內務府文
乾隆元年八月十一日
134.總管內務府奏請將雍和宮歸入上三旗六品內管領王保對品補用事片
乾隆元年八月三十日
135.總管內務府奏請雍和宮歸入上三旗六品內管領王保以內副管領對品補用事片
乾隆元年八月三十日
136.賞賜皓月清風亭子念經之噶勒丹錫哷圖呼圖克圖等喇嘛緞匹銀兩單
乾隆元年八月
137.總管內務府為知照對品補用雍和宮歸入上三旗內管領王保事咨吏部文
乾隆元年九月初五日
138.總管內務府奏聞甯壽宮內廷等位前往雍和宮揀員引導事片
乾隆元年十月初八日
139.總管內務府奏為甯壽宮內廷等位前往雍和宮揀員引導事片
乾隆元年十月初八日





2018年1月10日 星期三

“國際滿學青年學者論壇” 2015







作者: 劉小萌 主編
出版社: 中國社會科學出版社
出版年: 2017-6
頁數: 510
定價: 128.00元
裝幀: 平裝
ISBN: 9787520305662

【內容簡介】
2015年9月,“國際滿學青年學者論壇”成功舉辦。本次會議具有以下三個特點:一是國際性,二是以青年為主體,並與前輩學者展開積極對話,三是參會學者對挖掘利用滿文檔案等新史料的高度共識。由劉小萌主編的《國際青年學者滿學研究論集(2015)》精選該次會議論文25篇,結集出版。
本書收錄了《論清代吉林義學》《域外收藏滿文天主教文獻三種》《清初蒙古多羅特部的政治變遷》《清末民初呼倫貝爾治邊政策的轉型》《論滿洲瓜爾佳氏索爾果家族之旗分》等文章。

【目錄】
“惇親王綿愷囚禁多人案”中的下五旗包衣——兼論《閑窗錄夢》作者的旗人身份
論清代吉林義學
清代八旗駐防協領芻議
域外收藏滿文天主教文獻三種
蟠桃宮滿、漢合璧《太平宮碑》考述
清初蒙古多羅特部的政治變遷
“清書庶起士”考析
加恩舊臣:清代內務府的包衣蔭生
《欽定滿洲祭神祭天典禮》是否規範滿族薩滿教考辨
清末民初呼倫貝爾治邊政策的轉型
透過儀禮看皇太極時期對蒙關係以及“外藩”概念的形成
清初堂子祭祀沿革及其意涵——崇德朝政治文化的再思考
論滿洲瓜爾佳氏索爾果家族之旗分
《西洋藥書》及其解毒方探析
從“歸附漢人”轉到“漢軍旗人”——以“盛京出生”者為中心
清代琿春巡查南海問題初探
清代柳條邊外城鎮火災研究——以滿文檔案為中心
清初“紀錄”小考
論東北民間滿族譜牒的歷史演進及其特徵
乾隆二十八年京口駐防漢軍出旗撥補與伊犁駐防
生息銀兩政策與內庫銀借貸——以內務府的生息銀兩運作為例
民國時期清理河北旗地過程中撥補租地初探
吉林滿族伊爾根覺羅趙氏譜單初探
清代熱河總管的職權及其功能
清代滄州駐防的設立、本地化與覆滅




2018年1月4日 星期四

滿洲史言學刊 第3號




滿洲史言學刊

 第3號






羅依果教授專號

1. Obituary: Igor de Rachewiltz (1929–2016)
2. Remembering Igor — Our Secret History
3. Igor de Rachewiltz: Education, Professional Experience &    Publications

附錄
4. The Term “Mongγol” Revisited (蒙古一詞再議)








台灣   嘉義
國立中正大學
滿洲史言中心
2018.1



──────────────────────────
蒙古一詞再議〉一文,在2017年末出版。文章刊出前,我把初稿寄給羅依果教授訂正。他給了我一些寶貴的意見。文章刊出後,我原打算把拙著再寄給他,後來驚覺201673他和我最後通信後數星期就去世了。羅依果教授的去世是學界的一大損失,謹以本專號紀念這位以研究蒙古語文著稱的傑出學者。

 

Obituary: Igor de Rachewiltz (1929–2016)






Igor de Rachewiltz, April 11, 1929 – July 30, 2016, of Italy, born in Rome to a family with Longobard and Tatar ancestry, started his academic career with law, yet soon switched to Oriental studies (Naples, Italy) and earned his PhD in Australia (Australian National University, Canberra) in 1961. His subject at that time nominally was Chinese history, but his perception of the subject was much broader and shifted to Mongolia. If, in any conceivable case, there were an idea of something like a last word in science, then his acclaimed translation of “The Secret History of the Mongols” (published over 14 years from 1971 to 1985, and finally published in one piece 2004) deserves this merit.

Being an occasional contributor to the PIAC, he enjoyed the command of a renaissance mind enlightened and honed by a unique combination of Western and Oriental civilizations; thus he was able to combine fields seemingly widely apart into one treatise, like the title of his paper of 1985 “Dante’s Aleppe: A Tartar Word in Tartarus?” demonstrates. He was awarded the Indiana University Prize for Altaic Studies in 2004.

Those who had the priviledge to meet him praise his charming and warm-hearted personality. He never really could hide his youthful curiosity and humour, making conversations with him a lasting memory.



Oliver Corff, August 19th, 2016.




2018年1月1日 星期一

Remembering Igor — Our Secret History







Remembering Igor:Our Secret History

Geremie R. Barmé



Igor de Rachewiltz played a key role in my life at The Australian National University (ANU) and in my near thirty-year career at that institution, including therefore the creation of the Australian Centre on China in the World (CIW) from 2009 and the building that houses the Centre. His devotion to scholarship on Mongolia, his vast learning, linguistic genius and uncompromising erudition has for many decades offered me inspiration and caution. His abilities and personal qualities made him a man of legend and achievement in a field that is notoriously difficult; it is a field that remains recondite although vitally interesting and important.

In 1988, I presented a seminar on Chinese confessional culture in the Department of Far Eastern History, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies (RSPAS). Igor was particularly enthusiastic during the Q&A session at the end of my talk. I had been interested in confessions and the topic of renewal since the end my student days in China in the late 1970s. As Maoist China collapsed and recanting the past and rehabilitating those wronged became a feature of life on Mainland China from late 1976 up until the early 1980s, I had become fascinated with how thinkers and writers were reflecting on confession and redemption.

Over those years, I traced the rise of the personal essay and memoirs of those recanting the past, or at least reflecting on it. In 1982, my version of Yang Jiang’s Six Chapters on a Cadre’s School Life 幹校六記 appeared; an expanded new edition was published in Australian in 1989 under the title Lost in the Crowd 陸沉. And, in 1984, I published a translation of the first volume of Ba Jin’s confessional Random Thoughts 隨想錄. The personal essay had been the subject of a speech I presented at the Jinshan International Conference on Chinese literature and translation officiated over by Wang Meng 王蒙, the Minister of Culture, and convened outside Shanghai in 1986. For my talk, I’d expanded on these ideas to include the topic of confessions: those influenced by Taoist and Buddhist traditions, Tan Sitong’s ‘An Exposition of Benevolence’ 仁學 and the calls for national repentance and renewal from the late nineteenth century. In my 1988 seminar presentation (or what, I would later realise, would be an informal part of a job application), I referred to recent Chinese scholarship on how Cultural Revolution struggle sessions reflexively employed elements of Taoist exorcism, on the use of Buddhist terminology in Communist party criticism and self-criticism culture from the early 1940s and the nexus between ritual, performance and politics in contemporary China. I discussed how writers — novelists and poets — used religious themes in work that reflected an underlying culture of self-reflection; I also touched on the Ledgers of Achievements and Failures 善惡功過格 popular in the Ming dynasty among literati interested in measuring their lives according to the metrics of their day. (After the events of June Fourth 1989, this work would take new form in my study of Liu Xiaobo and the protest movement, Confession Redemption and Death.)

***

I was nearing the end of my doctoral work with Pierre Ryckmans (who had left ANU for Sydney in 1986) and W.J.F. Jenner when I applied for two post-doctoral positions, both in the Research School. Igor was, I later learned, along with the Republican historian and George E. Morrison expert Lo Hui-min 駱慧敏, a champion of my application for the fellowship with Far Eastern History. I’d known of Igor and his work from my undergraduate years at ANU (1972-1974) and remember well my friend Daniel Kane, a PhD scholar who went on to become a Kitan expert, speaking of him in awe, so I was delighted when I was awarded the job. I started my formal, well, at least salaried, academic career in March 1989 as Igor’s junior colleague. Three years later, when the position came up again, he would once more play a crucial and outspoken role, along with our colleague the Japan historian Gavan McCormack and Gerard Ward, Director of the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, in guiding me through the thicket of obfuscation surrounding the position and helping me secure a second appointment which, after some further drama in that era of short-term, non-continuing contracts, would eventually lead after ten years as a contract employee to a permanent job.

Among my duties as a junior colleague in the old Far East, I was asked to take over the editorship of Papers on Far Eastern History. From 1990, I had the honour to publish Igor’s work on many occasions. In 1996, I had the thrill of being able to reprint his 1971 George E. Morrison Lecture, Prester John and Europe’s Discovery of East Asia, still essential reading for any serious historian of China; and, in 2006, the penultimate year of my editorship of the journal after fifteen years at the helm, we carried three pieces by Igor including Confucius in Mongolia and a note on the family tomb of Yelü Chu 耶律鑄 at the Summer Palace 頤和園 in Beijing.

Papers on Far Eastern History, which I edited for a year before Mark Elvin, head of the department and my editorial assistant, Helen Lo, and I transformed it into East Asian History, was the journal Igor had chosen to serialise his monumental, annotated The Secret History of the Mongols with commentary from 1973-1985 (later published by Brill in two volumes in 2003 and now available online in a concise edition). I learned in no uncertain terms about his punctilious attitude to editing, the complexities of Mongolian orthography and the spelling of Mongolian names and words, as well as his eagle-eye for editorial infelicities: I once allowed a few typographical errors to creep into an article of his (a long text that was dizzyingly replete with diacritics, non-English fonts, spellings and arcane expressions). As a result, Igor’s characteristic good humour and Mediterranean affability melted away and, in a mood of polite but pointed high dudgeon, he resigned from the editorial board of the journal and refused to publish with us until he felt that I had spent a suitable period confined to the ‘cold palace’ 冷宫 of his disdain. As our friendship evolved, he also shared with me his work on and insights into Altaic languages, something that in part inspired me to spend a summer studying Manchu with the noted Qing historian Mark Elliott and a small group of specialists at Harvard in 2010. That was a fateful year in many ways.

I’d been amused by Igor’s description of the emeritus offices near Sullivan’s Creek, next to the old Faculty of Asian Studies building, that he shared with a number of other Research School colleagues. He called it ‘The Departure Lounge’. I apologised to him when I selected (or rather fought for) and was allocated by the university that very site for the building of our Australian Centre on China in the World which I founded with Kevin Rudd in April 2010. The squat green (and very much non-heritage) bungalows of the Departure Lounge were demolished to make way for the Gerald Szeto-designed CIW building. It was with the greatest pleasure that I was able to invite Igor to return to the site. From 2014 until his passing last week he could often be found in his office there.

***

Igor unwittingly played an early role in the creation of the new Centre. In 2006-2007, I proposed and worked with colleagues to create an ANU China Institute as part of a longer-term plan, encouraged by my friend Mandy Thomas, an anthropologist of Vietnam and one of the university leaders, to develop an Australian Research Council bid for an ANU-based Centre of Excellence on New Sinology. In arguing for a China Institute there was the usual doleful split between narrow social scientists who wanted a Contemporary China Institute that would pursue their disciplinary obsessions, and those with a broader perspective on Chinese Studies that embraced a far more generous understanding of scholarship, the humanities and things Chinese. I was able to press the case for this more expansive vision with then-vice-chancellor Ian Chubb on many occasions, crucially including the time when Igor was presented with an Order of the Polar Star, the highest honour bestowed by the Mongolian parliament in mid 2007, by representatives of the Mongolian State Great Khural (Улсын Их Хурал). It was that year that Igor became an emeritus professor and, as the senior serving survivor of the old Department of Far Eastern History, I was asked to help officiate and speak at the award ceremony.

I only know (although not personally) of two other people who have received the Order of the Polar Star. One is Owen Lattimore, whose work featured in another journal I edited, and the other is the prominent US lawyer Eugene E. Theroux. His ‘para-legal’ activities beyond the serious concerns as a counsel with Baker & McKenzie included his hobby as a cartoonist which would lately be important to me: his whimsical illustrations for The Wall Street Journal and China Business Review helped inspire Karin Malmstrom and Nancy Nash to write The Man with the Key is not Here, a modest text about the China that lies in open view but behind the most obvious and simple expressions in the Chinese language. That small book features in the Heritage Glossary of this site. Theroux, brother of travel writer Paul and uncle to popular TV presenter Louis, established the first law firm in Beijing and worked with Mongolia for decades, and hence his Polar Star. Igor had his own adventures in the Mongolian world and I followed with curiosity his participation in a horse-back expedition that set out in search of the site of Genghis Khan’s tomb, and his subsequent comments on the controversy surrounding Burkhan Khaldun, a site he visited on the expedition, debating later attempts to identify it as the great khan’s burial place.

This was all a decade after Igor published one of his most popularly renowned works: a crushing refutation of Frances Wood’s 1995 best-selling book Did Marco Polo Go to China? Wood, a student from my days in China in the mid 1970s and eventually Curator of Chinese Collections at the British Museum, had something of a history of sensationalism and playing fast and loose with texts (John Minford had previously reviewed her translation of Dai Houying’s 戴厚英 novel Humanity 人,啊人! — published in English under the title Stones in the Wall — for Far Eastern Economic Reviewand found it marred by numerous errors and deleted literary references), so I was not surprised to learn that her blockbuster proved to be more bluster than scholarship.

In 1996, Igor shared with me the draft of his sixty-page review-essay of Wood’s book. After reading it, I recall discussing it with him outside the ANU Menzies Library. A mischievous smile played on his face and there was a steely glint in his eye as he told me that he had sent Ms Wood a copy of the review prior to publication so as to afford her an opportunity to comment on and correct his critique. In the event, he didn’t hear back from Wood and the review was duly published under the definitive title ‘Marco Polo Went to China’ (see Zentralasiatische Studien 27 (1997): 34-92; for a précis, see: here). Igor’s voice rings clarion clear in his conclusion:


I regret to say that F.W’s book falls short of the standard of scholarship that one would expect in a work of this kind. Her book can only be described as deceptive, both in relation to the author and to the public at large. Questions are posted that, in the majority of cases, have already been answered satisfactorily … her attempt is unprofessional; she is poorly equipped in the basic tools of the trade, i.e., adequate linguistic competence and research methodology…and her major arguments cannot withstand close scrutiny. Her conclusion fails to consider all the evidence supporting Marco Polo’s credibility.

It was because Igor’s devastating analysis (I naïvely thought such a forensic critique would be something of a career-killer) had but scant impact on that particular house of cards — in fact, Wood’s Marco Polo potboiler later inspired a TV ‘documentary’ — that it first dawned on me that we were living into what, long before the rise of Trumpismo, Farhad Manjoo early on called a ‘post-factual society’ (see his 2008 book True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-fact Society and the author’s lecture on ‘truthiness’ here), one that resembled the mendacious Cultural Revolution China of the 1970s, which I had experienced as an exchange student two decades earlier.

Igor’s magisterial debunking of Wood led me over the years to gather in a piecemeal fashion material for what I hope will eventually be a volume in our China Heritage Annual series on the theme of ‘Fakes, Phoneys, Forgeries and Follies’.

***

It was around that time that, while going through old family papers, I discovered that Igor and I were possibly related by marriage. My great aunt, Harriet Stewart Dawson (née McNab) would, following the death of her Scottish-Australian husband the jeweller, night club owner and property magnate David Stewart Dawson (who, among other things, was a presence in Wellington before WWI), retired to their villa in Monte Carlo. It was there that she sought out, and found, a titled man to marry. He was Prince Radziwill (1870-1955), ‘Ordynat’ (entailed estate holder) of the Palace and estate of Antonin in Ostrow County, Poland. I think Igor, an elegant man of noble carriage, was rather nonplussed at the thought of this coincidental link; from mixed stock and confused heritage myself, I could only be amused.

I am profoundly grateful for Igor’s decades of support and encouragement; indebted to him for his understanding and appreciation of New Sinology, something that I first proposed in 2005. It was that formulation for the study of the Chinese world, past and present, that formed the basis, rationale and vision for the Australian Centre on China in the World. I will miss his profound scholarship and gentlemanly guidance. During my own recent illness from 2014-2015, I shared with Igor some rather obscure material I had been pursuing on Bolshevism and utopian socialist expeditions to Tibet and Mongolia in the 1920s, and he introduced me to his latest project, a translation of a Mongolian version of the Tibetan Saga of King Ge-sar of gLing (Geser Khaan). He suggested that I might like to serialise the translation in the virtual pages of The China Story Journal of which I was the founder and main editor until late 2015. After I relinquished my editorship, and as that online journal went into desuetude, Igor fortunately found a more appropriate home for his last work.

Igor came to ANU as a doctoral student in 1955, the year after I was born. He has passed away a month before I would leave Canberra, a place I called home for three decades.

I knew it was time to go.


6 August 2016
(Revised August 2017)

─────────────────────────────
This essay was written shortly after the death of Igor de Rackewiltz on 30 July 2016. It was initially circulated among friends and former colleagues. This is a revised version of that memoir and it should be read in tandem with Of Tartar Princesses, Poetry and Mongol Khans, also published by China Heritage.
 The Editor, China Heritage
3 August 2017