- 期刊
民國史學發展的一個側面－呂思勉（1884-1957）對歷史功用與讀史門徑之認識
Aspect of Historiographical Development in the period of Republic of China - A Preliminary Investigation on Lu Simian's (1884-1957) Understanding of Function of History and Approaches to Reading History
摘要
民國初年的史學發展的脈絡，已有不少學者加以梳理。不過，學術性專著大多聚集在探討幾位大師的身上，例如胡適、傅斯年、陳寅恪、梁啟超、顧頡剛等國學大師，大概探索民初的史學史，也不致遺忘這些知名的學者，但是卻少有人關切呂思勉的史學思想與其對歷史研究之看法，這或許和這些大學者集中任教在幾所名校，如北京、清華、燕京等校有關。呂氏從沒有在這些名校任教過，但其著作等身、學問淵博，可謂專精、通俗兼而有之；其著作不僅有斷代之專史、更有求貫通的通史類著作。而且他的經歷非常特別，教過中學、職業學校、一般師範院校、大學專業歷史系，也當過編輯、小說家，可謂見多識廣、閱歷豐富。本文考察這樣一個史學家，首先著眼於他對歷史功用和歷史研究發展的看法，著重他在當時時代脈絡下的個人思維探究，除了可以補足過去史學史研究僅偏重在少數幾位大師的缺失，也藉由探討一個具備教學閱歷豐富、學生素質差異範圍極大，以及寫作筆法多元，專通兼備的史家，是如何看待歷史的功用與當時史學的發展。除了和過去民國史學史的重要發展加以對照、比較外，本文也希望梳理史家如何將歷史放在更廣闊的閱讀階級中被接受、被學習，並且如何可能地成就在當時氛圍中，一些關於歷史學真實價值的呈現。
並列摘要
Many scholars have investigated and organized the historiographical development in the early years of Republic of China. However, academic studies have focused on the investigation on several masters in sinology, such as Hu Shih, Fu Si-nian, Chen Yin-ke, Liang Qi-chao and Gu Jie-gang. In general, these famous scholars were not skipped in the investigation on history of historiography in the early days of Republic of China. However, only a very few scholars probed into the historiographical thinking of Lu Simian and his opinions on historical research. The reason might be that those famous scholars were employed in famous schools, such as Beijing University, Tsinghua University, Yanjing University. By contrast, Lu was never employed in any of these schools. However, he exhibited his abundant knowledge in his writings, and was rich in both common and specialized knowledge. His writings included specific dynastic history, as well as general history. In Addition, his life experiences were extraordinary. He taught in junior high school, occupational school, general normal college, and department of history in university. He worked as editor and novelist. He was experienced and knowledgeable. This study investigated this historiographer. First, this study focused on his opinions on functions of history and development of historiographical research, especially on his personal thinking at that time. In addition to making up the deficiency that the past historiographical research only focused on several masters, this study also investigates how an experienced and knowledgeable historiographer with abundant experiences in teaching various students, producing diverse writings, and rich in both common and specialized knowledge viewed the functions of history and the development of historiography at that time. In addition to comparing the important development of historiography in the early period of Republic of China, this study intended to compile how historiographers increase the public's acceptance and learning of history, as well as how they reflected the actual value of historiography under the atmosphere at that time.