政治史在民国史研究中的位置

Positioning Political History in the History Studies of the Republic of China

政治史在传统历史撰述中曾居主导地位,但在西方新史学排斥政治史的取向影响下却滑至边缘。新史学拓展了历史研究领地,也带来了需要正视的"碎片化"问题。历史研究中的学科整合有多种选择,但就转型中的民国而言,由于政治在民元之后38年间已构成无处不见其身影的存在,套用"一切历史都是思想史"的极端表述法,似乎也可以用"全部民国史都是政治史"来强调民国政治史研究的重要性。加上与其他历史部类的内在关联,政治史尤其是民初15年的政治史可望作为整合已呈"碎片化"趋势的民国历史研究、使之形成一个有机整体的学术进路。但政治史学者也不应坐享前人的恩惠,不思进取。前些年国外政治史在多学科交叉的基础上翻"新",并对政治史的本色保持必要的学科认同,由此形成的"新政治史"取径,或许预示了民国政治史研究的希望。

Political history used to take a dominant position in history studies,and yet was marginalized in the wake of the western new historiography’s exclusion.While expanding the scope of history studies,the latter has brought forth the problematic fragmentation in studies,which deserves serious treatment.There are many roads to the disciplinary integration in history studies.As for the political factors ubiquitous in the first 38-year history of the Republic of China,the necessity of history studies of politics can be found in the following quotations: 'The whole history of the Republic of China is a political one' or even 'All the histories are those of thoughts'.Thanks to the cross-disciplinary interrelationship within history studies,the political history holds itself promising as a way to integrate into an organized whole the cross-disciplinary findings within the history studies of the Republic of China.