长时段历史视野下的Hindu族群建构与印度历史书写  

The Construction of Hindu Ethnic Identity and Indian History Writing:From a Longue-Durée Perspective

作　　者：张忞煜 Zhang Minyu(Research Center of Eastern Literature,Peking University,Beijing 100871,China)

机构地区：[1]北京大学东方文学研究中心,北京100871

出　　处：《北京大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2022年第2期99-109,共11页Journal of Peking University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：北京大学区域与国别研究学术基金项目青年项目“现代政治语境中的Hindu概念史研究”。

摘　　要：20世纪90年代以来,知识界围绕如何界定印度教徒身份、印度教徒身份是古已有之还是殖民知识体系的现代建构等问题的争论不断。尝试在长时段历史视野下,探讨对Hindu身份的不同理解与不同历史时期的历史书写之间的关系,这包括殖民前的印度波斯语史书、梵语和地方语言的历史书写以及殖民史学、民族主义史学,以及印度独立后兴起的马克思主义史学和达利特史学。印度在殖民前已经形成了将族群身份与历史挂钩的书写模式以及一种由上层知识精英界定的“印度教徒”身份。殖民史学和民族主义史学进一步确立了“印度教徒民族”身份和以印度教徒共同体为重要主体的民族史书写模式,但也因为推崇种姓制度而引发低种姓思想家的批判,形成了与印度教徒民族身份和民族史对立的达利特大众身份和达利特史学。Since the 1990s,the intelligentsia has been continuously debating over how to define a Hindu and whether Hindu identity(“印度教徒”身份)is an ancient legacy or a modern construction of the colonial knowledge system.From the longue-durée historical perspective,this paper examines the relationship between various understandings of Hindu identity and history writings made in different historical periods,which include pre-colonial Indo-Persian chronicles,Sanskrit and vernacular history writings,colonial historiography,nationalist historiography,post-independence Marxist historiography,and Dalit historiography(达利特史学).In pre-colonial India,the pattern of history writing that connected ethnic identity to history took shape,along with Hindu identity defined by the upper-class intellectual elites.Colonial historiography and nationalist historiography further established Hindu nation identity(“印度教徒民族”身份)and the national history writing pattern that regarded the Hindu community(印度教徒共同体)as the major subject.However,their praise of the caste system provoked critique from low-caste thinkers,giving rise to the concept of Dalit-Bahujan identity(达利特大众身份)and Dalit historiography in opposition to Hindu nation identity and its national history.

关 键 词：族群身份 历史书写 印度教徒 印度史学史 

分 类 号：K351[历史地理—历史学]