20世纪上半叶中国本位史学理论的形与神  

Form and Spirit of Chinese Centered Historiography Theory in the First Half of the 20th Century

作　　者：刘开军[1] Liu Kaijun

机构地区：[1]四川师范大学历史文化与旅游学院

出　　处：《四川师范大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第5期165-172,207,208,共10页Journal of Sichuan Normal University(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地北京师范大学史学理论与史学史研究中心重大项目“中国近代史学与中华民族精神研究”(19JJD770005)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：20世纪上半叶,经过清季“史界革命”洗礼的中国传统史学快速转向现代史学。伴随域外史学理论与方法迅猛地传入国内,中国史学界积极接纳新说,并提出了不少新理论与新观念,此举可视为域外学说的中国回响。与主要依靠吸收外来思想而构建的新史学理论形态不同,陈垣、柳诒徵、刘咸炘、宋慈抱等人立足中国,从传统出发,亦曾在史学理论建设上有所作为。中国本位史学理论是指凭借中国本土学术资源,在学术立场、史学观点、著述形式和话语系统诸方面,自觉地传承传统,回应时代,具有浓郁中国传统学术风格与神韵的史学理论形态。它虽不曾主导史学潮流,却是今人绘制中国现代史学理论版图时不可或缺的一部分。中国近现代史学大致经历了一个求新求变求用的演进过程,若在古今关系的角度下观察,往往给人一种抛弃传统、跨越传统的印象。然而,他们构建中国本位史学理论的灵感仍源于传统史学,他们探讨的许多问题也能在传统史学那里找到源头,他们撰写的史学论著亦大体沿用旧有体例、语汇、文风,这些均表现出他们对中国传统史学的赓续与认同。他们对域外学术,并非闭目塞听;对旧史学,抱持一种自信与敬意。学界惯以“文化保守派”指称上述学者。在某些语境中,“保守”总被涂抹上消极、落伍的色调,同时对立着一个“先进”的他者标准。需要强调的是,刘咸炘、宋慈抱等人并非一味赞美旧史学,中国本位史学理论不是传统史学理论的现代复制品。他们不是在旧史学的王国里徘徊不前,迷失自我,而是对旧史学也执行着自觉的检讨。只有中国本位,才有真正意义上的中国化。中国本位史学理论的提出,不是要刻意拔高它的学术地位,否定在域外学术刺激下中国现代史学理论取得的成就,也不是要简单粗暴地强行回到传统中去。中国本位史�In the first half of the 20th century, Chinese traditional historiography, after the “Historiographical Revolution” at the end of the Qing dynasty, rapidly transitioned to modern historiography. With the rapid influx of foreign historiographical theories and methods, the Chinese historiographical community actively embraced new ideas and proposed many new theories and concepts, which can be seen as the Chinese response to foreign doctrines. Unlike the new historiographical theories primarily built on absorbing foreign ideas, scholars like Chen Yuan, Liu Yizheng, Liu Xianxin, and Song Cibao, rooted in China and starting from tradition, also made significant contributions to the construction of historiographical theory. Chinese centered historiographical theory refers to a historiographical theoretical form that consciously inherits tradition, responds to the times, and possesses a strong Chinese traditional academic style and charm, relying on local academic resources in academic stance, historiographical viewpoints, writing forms, and discourse systems. Although it never dominated the historiographical trend, it is an indispensable part of the modern historiographical theoretical landscape in China. Modern Chinese historiography has generally undergone a process of seeking innovation, change, and practical application. Observed from the perspective of the relationship between ancient and modern, it often gives the impression of abandoning and transcending tradition. However, the inspiration for constructing Chinese centered historiographical theory still originates from traditional historiography. Many of the issues they explored can also be traced back to traditional historiography. Their historiographical writings largely follow old formats, vocabulary, and styles, reflecting their continuity and recognition of Chinese traditional historiography. They were not blind to foreign scholarship;they held a sense of confidence and respect for old historiography. Scholars often refer to them as “cultural conserva

关 键 词：中国本位史学理论 形与神 陈垣 柳诒徵 刘咸炘 宋慈抱 

分 类 号：K092[历史地理—历史学]