傅斯年、史语所与现代中国史学潮流的离合

发布时间：2018-05-15 08:37

本文选题：“新史学” + “新汉学”　；参考：《清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2010年03期

【摘要】：20世纪上半期是西方史学从兰克式传统史学向新史学过渡的前夕,与此同时,中国史学也正面临着一场深刻变革,"新史学"与"新汉学"的消长起伏构成此时的一道重要景观。"新史学"以社会史、民众史为主体,以社会科学为辅助方法,梁启超的"新史学"思潮、唯物史观派史学以及后来的会通史学都是这一范式的代表;植根乾嘉、外接西学的"新汉学"则重客观实证,以史料为中心,以胡适倡导的整理国故运动为主体。"新史学"与年鉴派不谋而合,代表着一种富含生机的新潮流;"新汉学"与兰克史学同调,绝非现代新潮。傅斯年主持的史语所,揭橥科学的大旗,反对发扬国学、汉学,但在学术路向上,它侧重史料搜考,传导实证学风,实质上仍归属"新汉学"的谱系。由于知识背景、门户之见和派系利益诸方面的原因,以致史语所最终与现代史学的新潮流失之交臂。
[Abstract]:The first half of the twentieth Century was the eve of the transition from the traditional history of the western historiography to the new historiography. At the same time, the Chinese historiography was facing a profound change. The "New Historiography" and the "new Han learning" became an important landscape at this time. "New history" is the main body of social history, public history, and social science as the auxiliary method, Liang Qi. The "new history" trend of thought, the historical materialism history and the later history of history are the representative of this paradigm, and the "new Han learning", which is rooted in Qianlong and Jia, takes the historical material as the center, and is the main body of the arrangement of the national ancient movement advocated by Hu Shi. "New Historiography" coincides with the Yearbook school, representing a new trend of vitality. "New Sinology" is not a modern tide. It is not a modern tide. Finally, the historical language and the new trend of modern historiography lost.

【作者单位】：山东大学文史哲研究院;
【基金】：教育部人文社会科学研究项目(09YJC770044)
【分类号】：K092

【参考文献】