古史辨的贡献和局限与上古史的重建

The Contribution and Limitation of Ku Shih Pien and the Reconstruction of Ancient History

站在一百年后的今天来反思,古史辨派有贡献亦有局限,贡献与局限每每交织在一起。例如,顾颉刚说组合的“三皇”出现在秦汉以来的文献是对的,然而组合中的“三皇”里的一个个“古帝”式人物却出现在战国时期,并非从秦汉才开始叠加上去的。再如,古史辨派说五帝并非一系是对的,但对《国语·鲁语》《礼记·祭法》乃至《史记·五帝本纪》为何要把有虞氏和夏后氏等都说成是以黄帝为其远祖并没有做出科学的解释。实际上这主要是春秋战国时期华夏民族融合造成的,五帝所代表的族群属于自夏代以来的华夏民族的组成部分,在民族共同体的意义上他们都同属于华夏民族成员,只是有一个形成过程而不是自古一系而已。顾颉刚“四个打破”中“打破地域向来一统的观念”,说真正的“大一统”出现在秦汉是对的,但对夏商西周时期多元一体的复合制国家形态结构所显现的王朝国家的“统一性”是没有认识的。在古史人物究竟是人还是神以及“神化”和“人化”问题上,古史辨派没有考虑到古史人物中人名、族名、图腾名、神名是可以同一的,也没有考虑古史人物及其族群名号的沿袭性和神话传说故事的“时间深度”问题。总的来说,古史辨派“破有余而立不足”,当今学界在分析古史辨派的贡献和局限的同时,有必要提出重建中国上古史的系统考虑。

Looking back on Ku Shih Pien after one hundred years,we can say that its contribution intertwines with the limitation.For instance,Gu Jiegang is right to judge that the combined“three emperors”emerged in literature since the Qin-Han period,yet the characters in this combination emerged in the Warring States period.Gu is right to judge that the“five sovereigns”did not come out of one system,yet he failed to provide scientific explanation for the reason that Discourses of the States,The Book of Rites,and Records of the Grand Historian all took the Yellow Emperor as the remote ancestor of the clans of Youyu and Xiahou.Gu is right to say that the real sense of“grand unification”appeared in the Qin and Han dynasties,yet he did not recognize the uniformity showed in the composite form and structure of states in the period of Xia,Shang,and Western Zhou.On the problem of the characters recorded in documents on ancient history being human or God,as well as the problem of their apotheosis and humanization,Gu neither took into account that the name of man,clan,totem,and God can be the same,nor considered the continuity of names of ancient characters and their groups,as well as the time depth of legends.In brief,we should propose overall assumption for the reconstruction of ancient Chinese history while analyzing the contribution and limitation of Ku Shih Pien.