杨志玖先生与马可·波罗来华的“世纪论战”

The Famous Historian Yang Zhijiu and the “Century Controversy” of the Authenticity of Marco Polo in China

著名历史学家杨志玖毕生倾注心血最多和成就最卓越的是马可·波罗研究。1941年,他利用《经世大典·站赤》一段公文资料,考证出《游记》所述马可·波罗伴随蒙古公主自泉州离华和经波斯返威尼斯是真实的,其来华也是真实的,还订正离华时间是1291年初。此项研究相继得到了英、美、法、日等国权威学者认可与肯定,进而又和法国著名汉学家伯希和、英国学者鲍埃勒等携手努力,竖起了马可·波罗来华肯定说的“大旗”。20世纪80年代到21世纪初,杨志玖撰文多篇且出版《马可波罗在中国》,先后与美国学者海格尔、中国学者王育民、英国学者克鲁纳斯、弗朗西丝·伍德展开两个回合的“论战”。晚年还发起并主持了“马可波罗与13世纪中国国际学术讨论会”,邀请世界范围内马可·波罗研究的主要代表人物莅会,特别是把怀疑、否定说集大成者伍德博士请来天津进行面对面的对话交锋。耐人寻味的是,蒙元史、中外交通史专家与一般文化学者分居这场论战的肯定说、否定说两营垒,泾渭分明。双方虽已增沟通理解,廓清了许多问题,但因术业有专攻等差别,争议正未有穷期。

The famous historian Yang Zhijiu devoted much of his life to the Marco Polo study which became one of his most outstanding achievements. In 1941, he made use of an official document in the Jamchi part of the Jingshi dadian to certificate the fact that Marco Polo departed China from Quanzhou accompanying the Mongol Princess to Persian and then returned to Venice, and the truth that he visited China. He also revised the time of the departure from China as early 1291. This research has been recognized and affirmed by authoritative scholars in Britain, United States, France, Japan and other countries, and along with contributions by the famous French sinologist Paul Pelliot and British scholar J.A. Boyle supports the authenticity of Marco Polo. From the 1980s to the beginning of this century, Yang Zhijiu wrote articles and published Marco Polo in China, debating with John W. Haeger, Wang Yumin, Craig Clunas and Frances Wood. In his later years, he also initiated and hosted the "Marco Polo and the 13th Century China International Academic Symposium", inviting the major representatives of Marco Polo Research around the world especially Dr. Frances Wood who epitomized the skeptic and negativist to Tianjin to a face-to-face dialogue. It is intriguing that the experts on the history of the Mongol-Yuan, East-West exchanges stand opposite to the general cultural scholars. Although communications between the two sides have been increased, many problems have been cleared up, the dispute has not come to an end because of academic specializations and other divergences.