探源与传衍:近代中国史家的兰克论述  

Source and Dissemination:Modern Chinese Historians’s Discussion on Ranke

作　　者：李孝迁[1,2] Li Xiaoqian

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学历史学系,上海200241 [2]中国历史研究院左玉河工作室,北京100101

出　　处：《学术研究》2021年第8期141-153,188,共14页Academic Research

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费项目华东师范大学精品力作培育项目(2020ECNU-JP006)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：德国史家兰克在近代中国史学界知名度颇高,但中国史家的兰克论述,绝大部分只是从外国流行的西洋史教科书、史学理论与史学史之类著作中转述而来,甚至是经过多重转引,引述者未必清晰了解兰克的思想脉络,人云亦云、寻章摘句是较为普遍的现象,而直接阅读兰克原著者寥寥无几。中国史家在课堂或著作中偶尔提及兰克,并不能说明后者对前者产生如何影响,也不能说明前者一定对后者有实质性的认识。兰克对中国近代史学有影响,但两者关系是间接的,没有实质性的联络,其中西方史学史、史学方法著作起到中介作用,他的史义被抛弃,史法被保留,并与中国传统考据学相接榫,在中国史学界大行其“法”。Ranke,a German historian,is well known in modern Chinese historical circles.For Chinese historians,the vast majority of discussion on Ranke are simply paraphrased from foreign popular western history textbooks,works on theory of historiography and history of historiography.After multiple citations,the recitator may not have a clear understanding of historiography of Ranke,and it is a common phenomenon to seek for words and sentences without independent opinions.For those who read Ranke’s works directly,this is rare.The fact that Chinese historians occasionally mention Ranke in class or in their books does not mean that they are influenced by him.Nor can it be said that they have any substantial knowledge of Ranke.Ranke had only indirect influence onChinese modern history,among which western works on theory of historiography and history of historiography played an intermediary role.His historical meaning was abandoned,and his historical method was preserved.This was in line with the Traditional Chinese textual criticism,which was popular among Chinese historians.

关 键 词：兰克 傅斯年 鲁滨逊 史学方法论 史学史 

分 类 号：K091[历史地理—历史学]