摘要
中国新史学中最常见的两种历史研究方式是科学实证与文化阐释,前者旨在建立历史事实之真或寻求历史演变之理,后者则以探寻历史之意义或彰显切实之史识为目标,此二者可谓中国新史学之"双轨"。中国新史学正是沿此"双轨"向前发展的。从新史学之"双轨"着眼,并依据"新异性的标准",中国新史学界应有"八大家",他们分别是:梁启超、王国维、陈寅恪、胡适、顾颉刚、傅斯年、郭沫若和钱穆。科学实证与文化阐释,这两种不同的历史研究取径,展示了中国新史学研究的多元面相,二者之间是相互融通的,并无根本性的冲突与对垒,其在治史观念与方法上亦可做到相互补益,相得益彰。许冠三在《新史学九十年》中因陷入"科学"迷思的褊狭"新史学观",以科学实证拒斥文化阐释,故而未能将钱穆基于"文化"视角来研究历史的文化史学视为新史学。钱穆的新史学特质主要表现为:在继承中国传统史学遗产之基础上,注重历史研究主体与客体的统一,以文化为本位,以阐释为取径,其典型表现是"以士释史";以中国为立场,注重探寻本国历史文化之意义,探求与本国历史文化相符合之史识,强调历史学的经世致用功能。钱穆的新史学观与后现代主义在批判科学主义历史学、反对文化一元论和西方中心主义历史观等方面多有契合之处,但其以"于客观中求实证"为基础的历史认识论与走向历史虚无主义的后现代主义有着本质的区别。
Scientific verification and cultural interpretation are the two most common research approaches in Chinese new historiography.The former aims to discover the truth of historical facts or the principle of historical evolution,while the latter intends to explore the significance of history or manifest the true historical knowledge.These two ways of research constitute the dual tracks of Chinese new historiography.It is along these dual tracks that Chinese historiography develops.In light of the dual tracks of Chinese new historiography,and the standard of novelty,there are eight schools in the new historiography of China,which are respectively represented by Liang Qichao,Wang Guowei,Chen Yinque,Hu Shi,Gu Jiegang,Fu Sinian,Guo Moruo and Qian Mu.Scientific verification and cultural interpretation,the two different ways of historical study,manifest the diversification of Chinese new historiography.These two ways are compatible and complementary to each other in historical perspectives and methods,thus having no fundamental conflicts and oppositions.Xu Guansan,who rejects cultural interpretation with scientific verification,excludes the cultural historiography advocated by Qian Mu from the category of new historiography in his Ninety Years of New Historiography,because his narrow conception of new historiography is trapped by the myth of Science.Qian Mu’s new historiography has some characteristics,such as inheriting Chinese traditional historiography,emphasizing the coordination between research subjects and objects,and taking culture as research basis and interpretation as the method.This is typically manifested in his proposition of"explaining history by the study of literati".Besides,he takes the stand of China,explores the significance of Chinese history and culture,seeks the true historical knowledge in conformity with Chinese history and culture,and stresses the practical utility of history.Qian Mu’s conception of new historiography has some similarities with post-modernism in criticizing scientism historiography and objecting to culture monism and west-centrism’s view of history.But based on pursuing true history,Qian Mu’s historical epistemology possesses some essential differences from the standpoints of postmodernism which lead to historical nihilism.
出处
《史学月刊》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第3期79-93,共15页
Journal of Historical Science
基金
东北师范大学哲学社会科学校内青年基金项目“现代性与现代中国史学的演进”(11QN053)
教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“史学与社会--当代亚洲四国史学演变比较研究”(13JJD770006).
关键词
科学实证
文化阐释
《新史学九十年》
新史学八大家
钱穆
Scientific Verification
Cultural Interpretation
Ninety Years of New Historiography
Eight Schools of New Historiography
Qian Mu