Abstract The Ming History (明史 Mingshi) by Qing official historians took more than 90 years to complete, and Wan Sitong's 萬斯同 Draft Ming History (明史稿 Mingshi gao), Wang Hongxu's 王鴻緒 Draft Ming History, and the Ming History palace edition overseen by Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 were the most important histories of the Ming over its different stages of compilation. Wan Sitong gave much attention to the writing of history in the biographies from the Wanli Korea Campaign, Wang Hongxu did not give them much attention, and Zhang Tingyu repudiated and even negated them. In Zhang Tingyu's Ming History, the Annals of Shenzong (神宗本紀 Shenzong benji) set the tone of repudiating the Korea campaign. Due to their clan, the Bozhou Campaign (播州之役 Bozhou zhiyi), or the Liaodong Incident (遼東事變 Liaodong shibian), nearly none of the Ming generals from the eastern expedition to Korea were given biographies due to their participation in the Korean War. The History of the Choson (朝鮮傳 Chaoxian zhuan) gives a negative evaluation that denies or undervalues relevant people and battles. On the one hand, this was due to the influence of historical sources. Due to Yang Gao’s 楊鎬 responsibility for defeat in the Battle of Saerhu 薩 爾 滸 之 役, the compilers of the Veritable Records of Ming Shenzong (明神宗實錄 Ming Shenzong shilu) followed the account of Ding Yingtai 丁應泰 in their records and denied the accomplishments of Yang Gao and the Ming army in Korea. On the other hand, due to real political needs, as the commanders of the eastern expedition to Korea later became the military rival of the Later Jin in Liaodong, an attitude of denial had to be adopted against them to create legitimacy for the Qing dynasty. These were the two main factors that determined the way in which the Qing official Ming History wrote the history of the Wanli Korean War.

中文翻译：

---

清朝明史中万历朝鲜战役的历史叙述

摘要清代官方史学家完成了《明史明史》，历时90余年，万斯通的《明史稿明史高史》，王洪绪的王鸿绪《明史初稿》和《明史宫廷版》均受到监督。张廷玉的《张廷玉》是明代不同编纂阶段最重要的历史。万斯通十分重视万历大韩民国传记中的历史记载，王洪绪没有给予太多重视，张廷yu否定了甚至否定了历史。在张廷yu的《明史》中，《神宗本纪神宗本纪年刊》定下了否定朝鲜战役的基调。由于他们的宗族，播州运动（Bozhou Campaign）或辽东事变（Liaodong Incident），东部远征朝鲜的明朝将领中，几乎没有人因参加朝鲜战争而获得传记。朝鲜传朝贤专史（Chistor of the Choson）给予负面评价，否认或低估了相关人员和战斗。一方面，这是由于历史渊源的影响。由于杨高在萨胡（Saerhu）萨尔responsibility之役战役中的失败承担着杨镐的责任，明神宗实录（Ming Shenzong）的编纂者遵循了丁应泰丁应泰的记载，并否认了杨高和明朝在朝鲜的成就。另一方面，由于政治上的实际需要，东方远征军的司令官后来成为辽东后金人的军事对手，必须对他们采取否认态度，以建立清朝的合法性。这是两个决定清朝官方明史撰写万历朝鲜战争历史的方式的主要因素。