ArticlesKangxi (1722) with a preface by the author; Man Han tong wen lei ji (Chinese title: Tong wen wu ming lei ji), thought to have been produced in the Kangxi years; Qing wen dian yao, third year of Qianlong (1738) new print; Liu bu cheng yu (Manchu title: ninggun jurgan I toktoho gisun i bithe), seventh year of Qianlong (1742) print. There is not enough space to show the details, but there are major discrepancies among these lexical publications in terms of how they translate Manchu terms into Chinese and vice versa. There is an urgent need to produce separate indices and an overall index of these terms. If such indices are produced, the benefit they will bring to the study of Qing history will be immeasurable.ConclusionI have discussed the nature and significance of the documents written in Manchu, the primary official language of the Qing dynasty, but unfortunately, I could not quite bring the matter to a clear conclusion. It is, I fear, another case of a promising start ending in anticlimax, for there remain too many unsolved questions and problems. I plan to discuss the matter again in the future after having conducted a further examination.Notes (1) Yoshizawa Seiichiro, Qing and the Modern World: The Nineteenth Century, Papers on Chinese Modern History (1), Iwanami Shoten Publishers, 2010, 22–28 (吉澤誠一郎『清朝と近代世界 19世紀』シリーズ中国近代史). (2) Please refer to my own humble works: “Theory of the Manju Dynasty: Forward to Theory of the Qing State,” Key Issues in the History of the Qing Dynasty, 1997 (石橋崇雄「マンジュ(manju, 満洲)王朝論―清朝国家論序説」『明清時代史の基本問題』), ibid., “Theory of the Qing State,” Iwanami World History 13, 1998 (石橋崇雄「清朝国家論」『岩波講座世界歴史』), and ibid., “On the Multi-ethnic State of the Qing Dynasty: Focusing on its Historical Positioning, Chronological Classification, Command Structure, and Legitimacy,” History and Geography: World History Studies 179, 1999 (石橋崇雄「多民族国家清朝をめぐって―歴史上の位置付け・時代区分・支配構造・正統性の問題を中心として」『歴史と地理:世界史の研究』) etc. (3) Regarding the issues between the Manchu language and the system of rule during the Qing era, please refer to Miyazaki Ichisada, “An Aspect of the Language Issues during the Qing Era,” Collection of Essays on Oriental History No. 1, 1947 (宮崎市定「清朝における国語問題の一面」『東方史論叢』). For more on the translation examination, please refer to Higashigawa Tokuji, “The Old Translation Examination for Manchu and Mongolian Bannermen,” Oriental Cul-ture 98, 1932 (東川徳治「満洲蒙古の旗人に対する旧特制繙訳科挙」『東洋文化』), Ishibashi Takao, “On the ‘Translation Examination’ of the Qing Dynasty,” History and Geography: World History Studies 135, 1988 (石橋崇雄「清朝の「繙訳科挙」をめぐって」『歴史と地理:世界史の研究』), Murakami Nobuaki, “The Translation Examination during the Reign of the Qianlong Emperor and the Entrance of the Mongolian Bannermen Bureaucrats,” Sociocultural-Historical Studies 43, 2002 (村上信明「乾隆朝の繙訳科挙と蒙古旗人官僚の台頭」『社会文化史学』), and ibid., Mongolian Bannermen during the Qing Era: How They Really Were and What Their Duties Were under Imperial Rule, Fukyo-sha, 2007 (村上信明『清朝の蒙古旗人―その実像と帝国統治における役割』). (4) Kanda Nobuo, “Research on the History of the Qing Era and the Imperial Archives,” Sundai Historical Studies 50, 1980 (神田信夫「清代史の研究と案」『駿台史学』), ibid., Various Aspects of the Qing Era Archives Extant in Japan, Toyo Bunko, 1994 (神田信夫編『日本所在清代案史料の諸相』) etc. (5) Kawachi Yoshihiro & Zhao Zhan (eds.), “Catalogue of Manchu Documents in Tenri Central Library,” Biblia 84, 1985, 184 (河内良弘・趙展編「天理図書館蔵満文書籍目録」『ビブリア』). (6) The National Library of Peiping/ Library of the National Palace Museum, 1933. (7) Chinese Association for Ancient Scripts of National Minorities, 1983.013