十九世纪前期西人对中国上古史的研讨与认识  

Western Discussion and Knowledge of Ancient Chinese History in the Early 19th Century

作　　者：吴义雄 Wu Yixiong

机构地区：[1]中山大学历史学系,教授广州510275

出　　处：《历史研究》2018年第4期55-74,189,共21页Historical Research

摘　　要：19世纪西人关于中国上古史的研讨和争议,既延续了此前欧洲学界的长期讨论,亦在新的时代背景下有所发展。19世纪初荷兰学者德胜和法国学者小德经对传统的中国上古史体系的质疑和否定,获得来华基督教传教士及英美学者的呼应,他们发表了众多相关著述。其中,郭士立提出的"孔子造史说"和时代愈后、中国古史年代愈长的说法,颇值得注意。但他们的观点遭到格鲁贤、克拉普罗特、杜尔班等法、德学人的辩驳。双方对《尚书》中史料的真伪问题、中国古代史学传统问题及《圣经》年代学体系的地位问题,都进行了较为激烈的争论。各方围绕中国上古史发表的观点相互参差,甚至明显冲突,但均为西方汉学史、中西文化交流史上的重要一页。Westerners’discussions and debates over ancient Chinese history in the early 19th century were not just an extension of European scholars’long-term interest in the subject;they represented a further development in a new era.At the beginning of the 19th century,the Dutch scholar Isaac Titsingh and the French scholar Chrétien-Louis-Joseph de Guignes doubted or rejected the traditional system of ancient Chinese history.Their work struck a chord with Christian missionaries in China and with British and American scholars,who published a number of related works.Among them,Karl Gutzlaff’s proposition that“Confucius fabricated history”and the view“the later the time of record,the earlier the start of ancient Chinese history was supposed to be”deserve note.However,French and German scholars such as AbbéJean Baptiste Grosier,Heinrich Julius Klaproth and Agricol-Joseph Fortiad’Urban disagreed with these views.The two sides had a heated debate on the authenticity of the historical materials in the Shang Shu,the Chinese historiographical tradition and the status of the biblical system of chronology.Although their viewpoints were different or even starkly opposed,they are still important for the history of Western Sinology and of Sino-Western cultural exchange.

关 键 词：中国上古史 小德经 郭士立 克拉普罗特 麦都思 史料与史观 

分 类 号：K21[历史地理—历史学]