“事律”与“民法”之间——中国“民法史”研究再思考

Between“Acting Law”and“Civil Law”——Reconsideration of the Study of “History of Civil Law”in China

自晚清法律改革,民、刑分立观念扎根中土,在中国旧地寻觅民法踪迹的旅程便已开始。这种尝试,在不同时期,因了不同需求,或受不同刺激,而有不同的表现。在历史研究中使用现代概念、范畴和分类既不可避免,也是必要的和有益的,但应明确区分事实与规范、功能与意义两个层面,如果运用不当,这种研究很容易变成当代人的偏见甚至研究者个人好恶在历史中的投射,而产生对历史的遮蔽和扭曲。为此,在非西方历史研究中,研究者应该把源自西方的现代概念视为具有认识意义的参照,而非用来解释历史的标准。应超越各种非此即彼、黑白分明的历史叙述,面对高度复杂、微妙的历史与社会现象,既能深入其中,又能出乎其外,通过审慎的比较和深入的分析,辨析不同传统的同中之异、异中之同。

Since the late Qing legal reform, the concept of sepration of civil and criminal matters had taken root in China, initiating the journey to find the traces of civil law. At different times, clue to different needs, or by different stimulations, these attempts have different expressions. The use of modern concepts, categories in historical research is both inevitable, necessary and useful, but it should be clearly differentiated between the facts and norms, the function and the meaning of two levels, if used improperly, this research can easily become the historical reflection of the prejudice even personal preferences of modern people, resulting in obscuring and distorting the history. To this end, in non - western historical studies, researchers should regard modern concepts derived from the West as a reference for cognition, rather than the standards to interprete. We should surpass the various historical narratives which clearly distinguish non -or other, black and white, in the face of highly complex, subtle historical and social phenomena, both in -depth and macroscopic analy- sis are required, through careful comparison and in - depth analysis, we can discover the differences and simi- larities among distinct traditions.