“差等”还是“齐一”——浅谈中国法律史研究资料之价值

发布时间：2019-04-10 18:45

【摘要】：自20世纪初期中国法律史作为一门独立学科产生以来,前辈学者在继承中国传统史学的基础上,借鉴西方实证史学的研究方法,形成了各类研究资料存在清晰的价值差等的共识。近年来,中国法律史研究领域出现将各类研究资料价值齐一化的倾向,可能会对法律史学一贯追求"求真"的研究目标产生妨碍。这种现象的出现,与研究者的后现代史观、单纯从问题入手找材料的问题意识以及过于求新猎奇的治学风气紧密相关。重提研究资料价值差等的"常识",关键在于承认法律史学研究中正史、文集、回忆性文字等,应低于律例典章、地方法规、司法档案、案例汇编、家法族规、乡约行规、方志、契据家谱、政书、讼师秘本、日用类书等,应高于野史笔记、文学作品等。青年研究者应在此基础上,重视常见资料和实物资料,充分审视和灵活运用新资料。
[Abstract]:Since the emergence of Chinese legal history as an independent discipline in the early 20th century, on the basis of inheriting the traditional Chinese historiography, the older scholars have used the research methods of western empirical historiography for reference. It has formed the consensus that all kinds of research data have clear value difference and so on. In recent years, the tendency to unify the value of all kinds of research materials in the field of legal history research in China may hinder the pursuit of "seeking truth" by legal historiography. The emergence of this phenomenon is closely related to the researchers' post-modern view of history, the problem consciousness of simply looking for materials from the point of view of problems and the academic atmosphere of seeking too much novelty and wonder. The key to recounting the "common sense" of the poor value of research materials is to admit that in the study of legal historiography, orthodox history, anthologies, memorabilia, etc., should be lower than decrees and decrees, local laws and regulations, judicial files, case compilations, family laws and clan rules, and country conventions. Local chronicles, deed genealogy, political books, court master's secret books, daily books, etc., should be higher than wild history notes, literary works, and so on. On this basis, young researchers should attach importance to common and physical data, fully examine and flexible use of new data.
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院;
【分类号】：D929

【共引文献】