“中华民族是一个”讨论背后的傅斯年与吴文藻  

Fu Sinian and Wu Wenzao Behind the Debate“There Is Only One Chinese Nation”

作　　者：娄贵品 LOU Guipin

机构地区：[1]云南大学历史与档案学院

出　　处：《湖北民族大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2022年第1期30-41,共12页Journal of Hubei Minzu University：Philosophy and Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大招标项目“中国历史上边疆与内地交往交流交融历程及其比较研究”(20&ZD215)。

摘　　要：傅斯年和吴文藻是1939年“中华民族是一个”讨论背后的主角。由于受到吴文藻组织云南省民族学研究会的刺激,傅斯年规劝顾颉刚撰写《中华民族是一个》,费孝通写信反驳顾颉刚,则加深了傅对吴的恶感。尽管费孝通未再应战,吴文藻则从未正面回应,但随着该会活动的开展,傅斯年在私下全面发泄了对吴的不满。因担心日本帝国主义分化中华民族的阴谋进一步得逞,傅斯年不惜在私德上攻击吴文藻,但所列难以取信于人。傅吴纠葛,其实与顾费之争一样,主要源于双方在学科背景、现实关怀及国家建构的路径选择和理论依据等方面的差异。Fu Sinian and Wu Wenzao were the protagonists behind the debate“There Is Only One Chinese Nation”in 1939.As Wu Wenzao organized the Yunnan Provincial Society of Ethnology,Fu Sinian advised Gu Jiegang to write“There Is Only One Chinese Nation”,and deepened his ill feeling towards Wu after Fei Xiaotong’s refutation.Although Fei did not answer back,and Wu never responded positively,Fu Sinian privately vented his frustrations with Wu as the society’s activities unfolded.Fearing the further success of the Japanese imperialist plot to divide the Chinese nation,Fu Sinian did not mind attacking Wu Wenzao on his personal morality,but it was hard for him to win people’s trust.In fact,the dispute between Fu and Wu,like the dispute between Gu and Fei,mainly stems from the differences between the two sides in the aspects of academic background,realistic concern,path selection and theoretical basis of national construction.

关 键 词：“中华民族是一个” 中华民族 傅斯年 吴文藻 

分 类 号：C95[社会学—民族学]