초록 열기/닫기 버튼
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).
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
National History Narration, Periodization, National Liberation Revolution (1911), National Democratic Revolution (1921), Democratic Revolution (1990)
