An Analysis of the Political Significance of Huang Taiji’s Acquisition of "The Imperial Seal" of the Mongolian Empire in 1635

Studies in Qing History

An Analysis of the Political Significance of Huang Taiji’s Acquisition of "The Imperial Seal" of the Mongolian Empire in 1635

ZHONG Han

College of History and Culture, Minzu Univ. of China

Online:2021-01-15 Published:2021-01-15

试析1635年皇太极获取“制诰之宝”的政治意义——以传国玉玺与成吉思汗哈斯宝的性质比较为中心

钟焓

中央民族大学历史文化学院教授

作者简介:钟焓（1976 －），男，中央民族大学历史文化学院教授，北京 100081；zhonghancq@sina. com

Abstract

Abstract:

Many foreign scholars hold the opinion that Huang Taiji's acquisition of the so-called Lin Danhan imperial seal in 1635 symbolized the inheritance of the political legacy of the Mongolian Yuan Empire. In fact, Hong Taiji's manipulation and use of the imperial seal was mainly focused on the need to deal with internal affairs and to begin the process of transforming the khanate government into the centralized imperial system. Thus, Hong Taiji’s possession of the imperial seal did not contribute to attracting the Mongol or Han allegiance to the Manchus.

Key words: imperial seals, transmission of imperial seals, Chinggis Khan’s imperial seal, political legitimacy

摘要：

近来不少国外学者将1635年皇太极获得所谓林丹汗的传国玉玺的意义定性为继承了蒙元帝国政治遗产的统治合法性。本文认为，皇太极对玉玺事件的操控与利用主要还是着眼于其处理内政的需要，即加速实现将原有汗权统治体制改造升级为中央集权化的帝制模式，从而满足自己对君权扩张的政治需求。它并不意味着皇太极由此拥有了统治蒙古或内地的君权合法性,且从实际效果来看对该玉玺的占有也未促使尚在后金控制区域之外的漠北蒙古和内地汉人前来归顺或大量投诚。

关键词: 制诰之宝, 传国玉玺, 成吉思汗哈斯宝, 统治合法性

ZHONG Han. An Analysis of the Political Significance of Huang Taiji’s Acquisition of "The Imperial Seal" of the Mongolian Empire in 1635[J]. Studies in Qing History.

钟焓. 试析1635年皇太极获取“制诰之宝”的政治意义——以传国玉玺与成吉思汗哈斯宝的性质比较为中心[J]. 清史研究.

References

Aalto, P. “Qaš buu tamaγa und chuan-kuo hsi” (Qaš buu tamaγa and chuan-kuo hsi), in H. Franke ed. Studia SinoAltaica. Festschrift für Erich Haenisch zum 80. Geburtstag (Studia Sino-Altaica. In Honour of Erich Haenisch in his 80. birthday), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1961. Bischoff, F. A. and K. Sagaster. “Das Zaubersiegel des ?inggis-Khan” (The Jewellery Seal of ?inggis -Khan), in W. Heissig etc eds. Gedanke und Wirkung. Festschrift zum 90. Geburtstag von Nikolaus Poppe (Thinking and Effect. In Honour of N. Poppe in his 90 Birthday), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989. Crossley, P. K. A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology, Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1999. Ho Kai-lung. “Mengyuan he manqing de chuanguo yuxi shenhua” (The Myth of the Seal Transmitting the State in the Yuan and Qing Dynasties). Xin shixue (New History) 1 (2008). Okada, H. “The Yüan seal in the Manchu Hands: The Source of the Ch’ing Legitimacy”, in G. Bethlenfalvy etc eds. Altaic Religious Beliefs and Practices: Proceedings of the 33rd Meeting of the Permanent International Altaistic Conference (Budapest, June 24-29 1990), Budapest, 1992. Okada, H. “The Imperial Seal in the Mongol and Chinese Tradition”, in G. Stary ed. Proceedings of the 38th Permanent International Altaistic Conference Kawasaki Japan, August7-12, 1995, Weisbaden: Harrassowitz, 1996. Tsai Ming-che. “Chuanguo yuxi yu qingchao zhengtong lun de jige wenti” (The Chuanguo Imperial Seal and the Legality of Qing Dynasty) , Qingshi yanjiu (Qing History Studies) 3 (2020). Weiers,M. “Die historische Dimension des Jade-Siegels zur Zeit des Mandschuherrsches Hongtaiji” (The Historical Dimensions of the Jade-Seal during the Period of the Manchus ruler Hong Taiji), Zentralasiatische Studien (Central Asian Studies) 24 (1994).