【摘要】 2016年3月出版的张继龙著《阿勒坦汗与土默特》一书,对《土默特史》(2008年9月)的研究结论提出异议,涉及了多个方面,因此必须给予正面回应。在张继龙书中,对其他学者对"土默特"名称的研究发生了误解,偷换了概念;毫无根据地说:"秃马惕人因当年叛乱而受到镇压,所以把他们称为‘茂人’,即坏人,分到茂明安部";认为"‘土默特’一称出现较晚"、"‘土默特’并没有实质所指"、"土默特也就是万户、国家、领地很多的意思"等等,逻辑混乱,前后结论自相矛盾。本文通过辨析指出:他对"土默特"名称及相关问题的"研究"是缺乏史实依据的,其结论也是错误荒谬的。更多还原

【Abstract】 In his book Altan Khan and the Tumed published in March 2016,ZHANG Jilong raised objections to the academic conclusion made in the book History of Tumed published in September 2008.Because his argument referred to many points,we must give direct response.In his book,ZHANG Jilong misunderstood explanations of the name"Tumed"by other scholars and secretly substituted the definition of the concept with other one.In his opinion,because Tumats had been suppressed after rebellion,they were called as Muu hun,e.g.bad men,and was allocated to Muu-mingan tribe,and by his thinking,the name"Tumed"emerged considerable later,it has no real signification but referring to"one thousands houses","country","domain"and or so.In his book,he was confused in log-ic and argued against himself in conclusion.In this paper,we analyzed and examined related sources and pointed out that ZHANG Jilong’s research of the name"Tumed"and other issues lacks of historical evidences,and so his conclusion is wrong and absurd.更多还原