Dokham

Le Dokham (tibétain : མདོ་ཁམས, Wylie : mdo khams, THL : dokham), parfois écrit Do-Kham, est un terme qui désigne conjointement les deux régions du Tibet oriental de l'Amdo et du Kham^[1].

La conception dominante chez les Tibétains en exil d'une division du Tibet en trois régions que seraient l'Ü-Tsang, l'Amdo et le Kham est relativement récente. Au milieu du XVII^e siècle, les trois divisions étaient le Ngari Korsum, l'Ü-Tsang et le Dokham (comprenant l'Amdo et le Kham)^[2].

Description

La région est traversées par différents cours d'eau dont les Salween, Mékong, Yangtse et Yalong^[1].

Dans la culture géographique traditionnelle tibétaine, le Tibet est divisé en trois régions, le Tibet occidental ou Tibet septentrional appelé Ngari Korsum (tibétain : མངའ་རི་སྐོར་གསུམ, Wylie : mnga' ri skor gsum, THL : ngari korsum), l'aire central du Tibet-Tsang Ü-Tsang (tibétain : བར་དབུས་གཙང་རུ་བཞི, Wylie : bar dbus gtsang ru bzhi, THL : bar ütsang ru shyi), incluant les vallées et villes de Lhassa, Yarlung, Shigatsé et Gyantsé, et enfin le Tibet oriental et méridional, le Dokham (tibétain : སྨད་མདོ་ཁམས་སྒང་དྲུག, Wylie : smad mdo kham sgang drug, THL : mé dokham gang druk), composé de l'Amdo et du Kham)^[3].

Histoire

Une région au nom similaire est décrite comme une des cornes orientales de l'Empire tibétain (629 – 877)^[4].

Selon l'« Histoire des Ming », écrit sous la dynastie Qing, c'est une région sous le contrôle de la commanderie itinérante du Dokham (朵甘衛都指揮使司), sous la dynastie Ming (1368 – 1644)^[5]^,^[6]

Annexes

Notes et références

↑ ^{a et b} (en) Andreas Gruschke, Excerpt of The Cultural Monuments of Tibet's Outer Provinces: Amdo, vol. 1 The Qinghai Part of Amdo (Northeastern Tibet), White Lotus Press, Bangkok : « While the designations Amdo and Kham have become widely used in modern times, it is less known that until the 19th century Tibetan sources only used the composite Tibetan term Do-Kham. As mdo khams it may be found in Tibetan, as duo gansi in Chinese sources, starting in the Mongol-Chinese Yuan dynasty (1274-1368).8 Eastern Tibet, i.e. the region beyond the Central Tibetan provinces of Ü and Tsang, is then generally referred to as Do-Kham Gang-sum (mdo khams sgang sum), or Do-Kham Gang-drug (mdo khams sgang drug): that is to say the 'three, or six, mountains [of] mDo [and] Kham'.9 The term sgang is meant to designate the pasture grounds on the high upland between the great river systems of Salween, Mekong, Yangtse, Yalong Jiang, and their tributaries.10 As a toponym Do-Kham thus seems to represent a comprehensive concept of the eastern part of the Tibetan Plateau or realm, as is stated in Das' Tibetan-English Dictionary: [mdo khams] Mdo and Khams, indicates Am do, the province of Tibet S.E. of KököNor, and Kham.11. »
↑ (Yeh 2003, p. 508) « While the division of Tibetan cultural geography into the three ‘provinces’ of U-Tsang, Kham and Amdo now dominates exile discourse, this is a relatively new representation. An earlier scheme, in use in the mid-seventeenth century, conceived of the three regions as being Ngari Korsum, U-Tsang, and mDo-Kham (including both Kham and Amdo) »
↑ (Gelek 2003) « In traditional Tibetan cultural geography, Tibet is divided into three regions: West Tibet or Upper Tibet, called To Ngari Korsum in Tibetan; the middle area of Tibet-Tsang (Bur Dbus Gtsang Ru-zhi) including the central Tibet cities and valleys of Lhasa, Yarlung, Shigatse, and Gyantse; and East Tibet or Lower Tibet-Dokham (Amdo and Kham, Smad Mdo Kham Sgang Drug). Eastern Tibet is traditionally divided into the regions of Kham and Amdo, and these are now are incorporated into parts of Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, and Yunnan provinces. »
↑ (en) Sam van Schaik, « The Old Tibetan Annals: An Annotated Translation of Tibet’s First History, With an Annotated Cartographical Documentation by Guntram Hazod », European Bulletin of Himalayan Research, Londres, School of Oriental and African Studies, n^o 37,‎ 2010 (lire en ligne)
↑ Mingshi-Geography I «明史•地理一»: 東起朝鮮，西據吐番，南包安南，北距大磧。
↑ Mingshi-Geography III «明史•地理三»: 七年七月置西安行都衛於此，領河州、朵甘、烏斯藏、三衛。

Bibliographie

Cette section est vide, insuffisamment détaillée ou incomplète. Votre aide est la bienvenue ! Comment faire ?

(en) Lobsang Gelek, « The Washul Sethar », Chinese Sociology and Anthropology, vol. 35, n^o 1,‎ automne 2003, p. 3-20 (ISSN 0009-4625, DOI 10.2753/csa0009-462535013)
(en) Emily T. Yeh, « Tibetan Range Wars: Spatial Politics and Authority on the Grasslands of Amdo », Development and Change, vol. 34, n^o 3,‎ 2003, p. 499–523 (DOI 10.1111/1467-7660.00316)
(ja) 沈衞榮, « 元、明代ドカムのリンツァン王族史考證 : 「明實録」チベット史料研究 (一) », 東洋史研究, 東洋史研究會, vol. 64, n^o 4,‎ mars 2003, p. 660-698 (DOI 10.14989/155450, lire en ligne) (Sur l'histoire de la principauté de Gling tshang du Mdo khams pendant les dynasties Yuan et Ming)
(zh) 黄维忠 et 王维强, « 藏文mdo gams和mdo khams考 », 民族研究, 北京市, 中国藏学研究中心历史研究所副研究员, n^o 1,‎ 2004, p. 87-91 (lire en ligne)
- Traduction en anglais : (en) Huang Weizhong et Wang Weiqiang, « A Textual Study of ”Mdo gams” and ”Mdo khams” in Tibetan literature », Ethno-national Studies, n^o 1,‎ 2004 (présentation en ligne)
(zh) 黄维忠, « 关于唐代吐蕃军事占领区建制的几个问题 », 大学学报：哲学社会科学版, 北京, 中国藏学研究中心《中国藏学》编辑部, n^o 4,‎ 2010 (lire en ligne)
(en) F. W. Thomas, « Tibetan Documents concerning Chinese Turkestan. II: The Sa-cu Region. », Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland, vol. 60, n^o 01,‎ 1928, p. 63–98 (DOI 10.1017/s0035869x00059736) (« Continued from 1927, p.844 »)
(en) Jamgon Kongtrul, Yeshe Tsogyal, Erik Pema Kunsang et Erik Hein Schmidt, Light of Wisdom, vol. 1, Shambhala, 1995, 352 p. (ISBN 962-7341-37-1), p. 239

Articles connexes

Amdo
Kham

[Gruschke-1] {a et b} (en) Andreas Gruschke, Excerpt of The Cultural Monuments of Tibet's Outer Provinces: Amdo, vol. 1 The Qinghai Part of Amdo (Northeastern Tibet), White Lotus Press, Bangkok : « While the designations Amdo and Kham have become widely used in modern times, it is less known that until the 19th century Tibetan sources only used the composite Tibetan term Do-Kham. As mdo khams it may be found in Tibetan, as duo gansi in Chinese sources, starting in the Mongol-Chinese Yuan dynasty (1274-1368).8 Eastern Tibet, i.e. the region beyond the Central Tibetan provinces of Ü and Tsang, is then generally referred to as Do-Kham Gang-sum (mdo khams sgang sum), or Do-Kham Gang-drug (mdo khams sgang drug): that is to say the 'three, or six, mountains [of] mDo [and] Kham'.9 The term sgang is meant to designate the pasture grounds on the high upland between the great river systems of Salween, Mekong, Yangtse, Yalong Jiang, and their tributaries.10 As a toponym Do-Kham thus seems to represent a comprehensive concept of the eastern part of the Tibetan Plateau or realm, as is stated in Das' Tibetan-English Dictionary: [mdo khams] Mdo and Khams, indicates Am do, the province of Tibet S.E. of KököNor, and Kham.11. »

[2] (Yeh 2003, p. 508) « While the division of Tibetan cultural geography into the three ‘provinces’ of U-Tsang, Kham and Amdo now dominates exile discourse, this is a relatively new representation. An earlier scheme, in use in the mid-seventeenth century, conceived of the three regions as being Ngari Korsum, U-Tsang, and mDo-Kham (including both Kham and Amdo) »

[3] (Gelek 2003) « In traditional Tibetan cultural geography, Tibet is divided into three regions: West Tibet or Upper Tibet, called To Ngari Korsum in Tibetan; the middle area of Tibet-Tsang (Bur Dbus Gtsang Ru-zhi) including the central Tibet cities and valleys of Lhasa, Yarlung, Shigatse, and Gyantse; and East Tibet or Lower Tibet-Dokham (Amdo and Kham, Smad Mdo Kham Sgang Drug). Eastern Tibet is traditionally divided into the regions of Kham and Amdo, and these are now are incorporated into parts of Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, and Yunnan provinces. »

[4] (en) Sam van Schaik, « The Old Tibetan Annals: An Annotated Translation of Tibet’s First History, With an Annotated Cartographical Documentation by Guntram Hazod », European Bulletin of Himalayan Research, Londres, School of Oriental and African Studies, n^o 37,‎ 2010 (lire en ligne)

[geographyI-5] Mingshi-Geography I «明史•地理一»: 東起朝鮮，西據吐番，南包安南，北距大磧。

[geographyIII-6] Mingshi-Geography III «明史•地理三»: 七年七月置西安行都衛於此，領河州、朵甘、烏斯藏、三衛。

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]