李重夏与“土门”、图们“两江说”  

Li Chongxia (李重夏)and the Hypothesis of “Tumen (土门)and Tumen(图们) are Two Rivers”

作　　者：陈慧[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学清史研究所

出　　处：《中国边疆史地研究》2012年第1期49-55,148,共7页China's Borderland History and Geography Studies

基　　金：2009年度国家社会科学基金项目"中朝图们江界务研究"(项目批准号:09CZS033);中国博士后科学基金第三批特别资助项目"中朝图们江边界史研究"(项目批准号:201003199)的阶段性研究成果;韩国韩国学中央研究院提供资助(项目批准号:AKS-2009-MB-2001)

摘　　要：19世纪末,朝鲜王朝向清王朝提出穆克登碑文所标示的界河"土门"不是图们江,而是海兰河(后来改为黄花松沟子),中朝两国应以"土门"分界。为此,双方进行了两次界务谈判。谈判中,朝鲜李重夏虽然坚决主张"土门"非今图们江的"两江说",但其实知晓这一观点是错误的。界务谈判后,李重夏以"别单"形式几次撰文上奏政府,阐述了他对"两江说"的真实看法,论证了"土门"即图们江、图们江自朝鲜王朝初年就已是中朝两国界河的史实,揭露了"两江说"的策划者是鱼允中,被朝鲜称为"分界江"的布尔哈通河与现实界河毫不相关等。At the end of the 19th century, the Joseon king claimed to Qing emperor that the boundary river Tumen on Mukedeng tablet (穆克登碑)was not the Tumen river but Hailan river(海兰河) which later changed to Huanghuasong Gouzi(黄花松沟子)and the dividing line between China and Korea should be Tumen. Therefore, the two sides had a couple of boundary negotiations. In that course, Korean official Li Chongxia insisted the hypothesis of 'Tumen and Tumen are two rivers' , although he knew his fault. After the negotiations, Li Chongxia stated his honest opinion on the hypothesis by Biedan(别单) he presented to the authorities for several times. He demonstrated that the Tumen was really Tumen river which was the dividing line between China and Korea from the early of Joseon Dynasty, the mastermind of the hypothesis was Yu Yunzhong, the Buerhatong river which was considered as boundary river by Korean was wide of the mark.

关 键 词：土门 图们江 李重夏 

分 类 号：K256[历史地理—历史学] K312.4[历史地理—中国史]