日本“东洋史学”对中国史学的正负评价

Positive and Negative Evaluation of Japanese Historiography on Chinese Historiography

日本“东洋史”学家对中国史学及其学术方法做出不同的判断与评价。内藤湖南最早在京都大学开设“中国史学史”课程,高度肯定了中国史学传统及其方法论上的现代价值,是中国传统史学的肯定派。相反地,津田左右吉认为中国历史只是王朝的历史,并且只是“史料”而非真正的“历史”,从而完全否定了中国传统史学的价值;桑原骘藏则对于中国现代史学予以有限的肯定,总体上却以不懂“科学方法”、不知“比较研究”为由而加以否定。对中国史学的正负两方面的评价,是东洋史学价值观念与立场方法的体现,也表明了日本东洋史学与中国史学的深刻关联,体现了近代中日两国学术文化的竞争与互动。

Japanese historians have made different judgments and evaluations on Chinese historiography and its research methods.Naito Konan is the first person who offers the course of“History of Chinese Historiography”in Kyoto University,which highly affirms the modern value of Chinese historiography tradition and methodology.He is a supporter of Chinese ancient historiography.On the contrary,Tsuda Soukichi,denying the value of traditional ancient historiography completely,believes that Chinese history is only the history of dynasties and"historical materials"rather than the real“history”.Sanghara kikukura has limited affirmation of modern Chinese historiography,but negates it on the whole by claiming it lack of“scientific method”and“comparative study”.The positive and negative evaluation of Chinese historiography is the manifestation of value,standpoint and method of Japanese historiography,and also shows the deep connection between Japanese historiography and Chinese historiography,and reveals the competition and interaction between Chinese and Japanese academic cultures in modern times.