チベット史における年代基準の決定について
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Chronological inconsistencies in Tibetan historical records have been pointed out by such scholars as L. Petech, G. Roerich, and G. Tucci.One particularly obvious inconsistency occurs with regard to the year e Cags-bya (辛酉) of king Dar-ma's (Lan-tar-ma) persecution of Buddhists; that is, one tradition implies it to be 841 A. D., and another, 901.A Comparison of Tibetan records with Chinese records shows that they usually agree on the early Tibetan chronology, and it may be taken as true that King Darma (達磨=贊普) died in 841.The Hsin T‘ang Shio, for example, records his death in an entry during 842 (Vol. 216 b).However, in the Tibetan historical records there is no reliable material about the Chronology 841～978 such as that for the chronology 978～1042, found in rGyal-lha-kan.In this paper the writer tries to analyze stories about the ups and downs of Buddhism during the years 841～978, as recorded in d Pag-l-Sam-lJon- b Zaan and conculdes that sixty years should be added to the chronology after the birth of b La-cen (891).
- The Institute of Oriental Culture, University of Tokyoの論文