经史分合:民国时期《中国史学史》的两种写法

发布时间：2018-02-03 11:43

本文关键词： 中国史学史金毓黻蒙文通经史关系　出处：《社会科学战线》2012年08期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：1930年代,蒙文通、金毓黻由经入史,撰述《中国史学史》,今人以现代学术分科的视角,视此为中国史学史学科初步形成的重要标志。然而,蒙文通、金毓黻学术旨趣迥异,蒙文通由经今文学入史,以经御史,以《春秋》之义区分"撰述"与"记注",意在弘扬儒学义理史学;金毓黻服膺清儒考据学,以史代经,视中国旧史为史料,以兹编修新通史,发扬国光。编纂《中国史学史》一事,蒙文通、金毓黻多有交涉,考察二人撰写《中国史学史》的本意,梳理民国时期《中国史学史》的不同写法,探讨近代学术的"变"与"不变",或为突破分科治学的有效途径;避免以现代分科体系格义学人旨趣,呈现近代学术转型的内在理路,是为寻求中国学术本位的初步。
[Abstract]:In the 1930s, Meng Wentong and Jin Yufu wrote the History of Chinese historiography from the perspective of modern academic division, and regarded it as an important symbol of the initial formation of Chinese historiography. The academic purport of Jin Yufu is very different, and Mongolia Wentong has entered history from the classics and present literature, and distinguished "writing" from "annotation" with the meaning of "Spring and Autumn", in order to carry forward the Confucian theory of justice and history. Jin Yufu was bound by the Confucian textual criticism of the Qing Dynasty, regarded the ancient Chinese history as historical materials, compiled a new general history and carried forward the Guoguguang. The compilation of the History of Chinese historiography, Mengwentong and Jin Yufu had negotiations. This paper investigates the original intention of the two men in writing History of Chinese historiography, combs the different writing methods of History of Chinese historiography in the Republic of China period, and probes into the "change" and "invariance" of modern academic study, or the effective way to break through the division of subjects and research. In order to seek the Chinese academic standard, it is necessary to avoid using the modern branch system as the purport of learning people and to present the internal rational way of the modern academic transformation.
【作者单位】：浙江大学历史学系;
【分类号】：K092
【正文快照】： 晚清以降,西学东渐、中学式微,分科之学渐有整体取代经学之势。民初整理国故运动旨在结束经学,使经学自变为史学。在创新史学的旗帜下,借镜西法整理国史成为民国学界共识,介绍西方史学理论的著作层出不穷,撰写《中国史学史》更迫在眉睫。此时,蒙文通、金毓黻皆由经入史,开始

【参考文献】