开出一派“新考证学”——梁启超“新史学”对民国新历史考证学派的影响

Influence of Liang Qichao’s“New Historiography”on the New Historical Textual Criticism during the Republic of China

今人在考察梁启超“新史学”与民国新历史考证学时,多将梁启超重通史以求致用的思想与新历史考证学派偏专题史以求真的理念加以比较,强调二者之“异”,隐蔽了梁启超“新史学”中“求真”的一面以及新历史考证学派“致用”的倾向和对“通史”的追求,以错位的参照系人为制造了学术发展脉络中的“断裂”与假象。梁启超不仅对胡适、顾颉刚、傅斯年等新历史考证学派个人治学产生了多维影响,而且开启了此派拓展历史研究领域、扩大史料搜集范围、注重多学科方法治史的面相,体现了学术的渐次推进与内在理路。从中国史学近代化的整体历程来看,无论是梁启超倡导的“新史学”,还是民国时期兴起的新历史考证学,二者走在同一条大路上,均以西方新学理为利器,并从中国传统学术中提取“科学”资源,借此推动中国传统史学的近代转型。

When examining Liang Qichao’s“New Historiography”and the New Historical Textual Criticism of the Republic of China,we often compare Liang Qichao’s thought of generalizing history for practical use and the concept of seeking truth in special history of the New Historical Textual Criticism,emphasizing the difference between the two,which conceals the truth-seeking aspect of Liang Qichao’s“New Historiography”,as well as the practical tendency and the pursuit of the general history of the New Historical Textual Criticism,and artificially creates the fracture and illusion in the context of academic development with a misplaced reference system.Liang Qichao not only has a multidimensional influence on scholars of the New Historical Textual Criticism such as Hu Shi,Gu Jiegang,and Fu Sinian,but also expands its field of historical research,its scope of historical data collection,and multidisciplinary methods to research history,reflecting the gradual advancement of academics and internal logic of process.From the overall process of the modernization of Chinese historiography,whether it was the new historiography advocated by Liang Qichao or the new historical textual criticism that emerged during the Republic of China,the two were largely the same in using the new western theories and extracting scientific resources from traditional Chinese academics to promote the modern transformation of traditional Chinese historiography.