傅斯年、顾颉刚中山大学语史所时期矛盾考论  

AN EXAMINATION ON THE CONFLICTS BETWEEN FU SSU-NIEN AND KU CHIEH-KANG DURING THE PERIOD OF THE INSTITUTE OF PHILOLOGY AND HISTORY AT CHUNGSHAN UNIVERSITY

作　　者：刘召兴[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学历史学系,北京100871

出　　处：《云梦学刊》2006年第6期14-20,共7页Journal of Yunmeng

摘　　要：学界多认为,学术见解的歧异是傅斯年与顾颉刚在中山大学语言历史研究所时期产生矛盾的深层次原因。实际上,治学异趣在这一冲突中的“份量”究竟有多大,却值得考析。从北大国学门到中山大学语史所再到中研院史语所,其旨趣是一脉相承的,疑古思潮并非这些研究机构的集众旨趣,而“疑古”的顾颉刚却多参与其中。同时,后来竖起“史料学派”大旗的傅斯年,其早年学术性格恰在“疑古”与“考信”之间,他由疑古转向考信,可以说是其学术思想的内在发展,不必有意与顾颉刚立异,更何况顾颉刚学术思想之发展也是“始于疑,终于信”。The academia mostly thought the differences of academic opinions between Fu Ssu-nien and Ku Chieh-kang as the internal reason of their conflicts, which appeared during the period of the Institute of Philology and History at Chungshan University. In fact, it is absolutely necessary in doing textual research into this discussion .Form the Chinese National Culture College of Peking University to the Institute of Philology and History of Chungshan University, and to the Institute of History and Philology of Academia Sinica, among these institutes there were the same spiritual tendency of scholarship, and the thought ofyi gu （suspecting ancient history） was not the academic manifesto of these institutes. However, Ku Chieh-kang ever joined in them. At the same time, Fu Ssu-nien, who later lifted the flag of Historical Materials School, his academic personality was justly between the yi gu and kao xin （verification） in the earlier times, so his transformation fi＇om yi gu to kao xin was the inner development of his academic thoughts, and not deliberately criticizing and denouncing Ku Chieh-kang. At this point, the academic thoughts development of Ku Chieh-kang was also begin with doubt, end with verification.

关 键 词：傅斯年 顾颉刚 语史所 疑古 

分 类 号：K25[历史地理—历史学]