民国史学现代化的另一维面——以蒙文通与陈寅恪的对话为线索  

Another Dimension of Historical Modernization in the Republic of China——Take the dialogue between Meng Wen-tong and Chen Yin-que as a clue

作　　者：王云燕 傅正 WANG Yunyan;FU Zheng(Teaching and Research Department of Party History and Party Construction,Wuhan Municipal Party School of the CPC,Wuhan Hubei,430000,China;Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Bei jing,100732,China)

机构地区：[1]中共武汉市委党校党史党建教研部,湖北武汉430000 [2]中国社会科学院哲学研究所,北京100732

出　　处：《安庆师范大学学报（社会科学版）》2023年第1期111-117,共7页Journal of Anqing Normal University：Social Science Edition

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目“近代史学转型视野下的赵翼史学传播接受研究”(19CZS001)。

摘　　要：蒙文通1930年代任教北大时,曾与陈寅恪有过面谈,且主要涉及宋代史学问题。陈氏强调北宋史学成就,蒙文通则推崇南宋浙东学派。观点分歧的背后实际暗含当时中国史学建设的根本问题,同时还牵涉傅斯年和朱希祖两人。傅斯年主张对史料做纯粹客观研究,朱希祖重视社会科学的综合应用。蒙文通对浙东史学的推崇与傅斯年的“新史学”形成鲜明对比,也有对蜀学的重新定义,更代表中国史学现代化的另一面相,对矫正今日史学的“碎片化”不无裨益。In the middle of 1930s,Meng Wen-tong taught at Peking University.During this time,there was a discussion about historiography in Song Dynasty between Meng Wen-tong and Chen Yin-que.Chen held that the achievement of historiography in Northern Song Dynasty was at its height.But Meng argued that the research of Eastern Zhejiang School in Southern Song Dynasty more successful.The argument was related to some basic problems about the construction of modern history science.Behind this argument,there was radical disagreement over disciplinary development of Peking University Historical Department between Fu Si-nian and Zhu Xi-zu.The former claimed that history is the historical materials.But for the latter,new history science should be covered by various social sciences.That’s not only just where Meng fundamentally disagree with Fu,but also referred to Meng’s definition of Sichuan School.Meng’s idea presented one aspect of modernization of historiography which very different with Fu’s historical materials,and would be helpful for studies in today.

关 键 词：蜀学 浙东史学 六经皆史 史料学 史学现代化 

分 类 号：K250.6[历史地理—历史学]