透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.190.28.78
  • 學位論文

「本史跡以導政術」:柳詒徵的文化史書寫

Culture, Politics, and History: Liu Yi-zheng’s Historiography of Cultural History

指導教授 : 閻鴻中

摘要


本文旨在分析柳詒徵學術體系中的各種要素,說明這些相互周流的思想如何彙合為一個完整的「文化史」理念,成為柳氏與20年代學人對話的基礎。此一特殊的史學構想其來有自,既是清末民初「新史學」持續發展的結果,又直接受到一次大戰與新文化運動的震盪。相較於同時代其他的學人,柳詒徵嘗試解釋中國文化的長時段變遷,從中抽理出代表文化整體的「精神」,藉此統整各類型的專題史。尤有甚者,他還認為文化史的研究必須回應當代的公共議題,此即柳氏所謂「本史跡以導政術」的用意所在。就此而言,柳氏的文化史書寫不僅在民初學術思想史上具有一定的位置,更是一次重要的歷史事件;那是20年代學人重建文化認同的嘗試,同時也展開與現代學術不盡相同的另一條路。 本文分為緒論、第一、二、三、四章與結論等六個部分。緒論包含背景與研究回顧這兩點,首先將分析20年代文化史書寫的整體面貌,從中定位柳詒徵的位置;其次則進行研究回顧,確立本文主題與研究方法。第一章將以《中國文化史》為核心,配合柳氏發表在《學衡》、《國風》的政論,說明他在文化史書寫中的政治論述。這套政治論述是他討論中國文化的基本架構,既與他的學術思想相互結合,也成為他批判當代政治的起點。第二章則結合《國史要義》以及其他的單篇史學作品,說明柳氏史學思想的特色。在本章中,將特別以《周禮》這個向度切入柳氏的史學理論,從中當可看出柳氏的政治論述是如何與史學理論綰合,最後推衍出其獨門的歷史哲學。 前兩章關注柳氏內在的學術理路,後兩章則從外部取徑解析柳氏面對的學術環境。在第三章,將分析柳詒徵文化史與同時代學人──特別是疑古派──的異同,廓清他在現代學術版圖上的位置。柳氏對疑古派觀點的取捨,正顯示現代學術發展對文化保守學人造成的壓力。最後,第四章將具體闡述柳詒徵20年代以降的學術事業。本章將觀察柳氏在南方學術社群中的位置,並說明柳氏經手的各大學術事業,是如何體現其文化史的理念。經過本文的分析,將可使柳詒徵學術思想的各個要素得到適當且有層次的安放,呈現其文化史理念的具體內涵。如此一來,本文將能依次說明柳詒徵的文化史在建立新式文化論述的同時,是如何結合現實關懷,成為社會實踐的一部分。

並列摘要


In the 1920’s China, Cultural History had become a crucial current in historical thinking and writing. As one of the most influential cultural historians, Liu Yi-zheng (1880-1956), his historiography and career occupied a unique position in the modern Chinese intellectual history. Liu’s conception of Cultural History shaped both by the ‘New History’ proposed by Liang Qi-Chao (1873-1929) and by the intellectual turmoil aroused by World War I and New Culture Movement. In contrast to other scholars, Liu’s thinking on Cultural History features in explaining the long-term development of Chinese history, outlining the Chinese spirits through a holistic view, and reacting to contemporary public issues. To sum up, Liu’s historiography not only played a crucial role in intellectual world in 1920’s, but also showed a very different path apart from modern Chinese academia. In this thesis, I attempt to illustrate Liu Yi-zheng’s conception of Cultural History in five aspects: historical context, political discourses, historiography, rival criticisms, and his academic career. In introduction, I sketch the historical context of Liu’s historiography through a general survey of 1920’s cultural history, and give a critical review of recent studies on his work. Then in Chapter 1, I demonstrate Liu’s Cultural History in political aspect. In his well-known A History of Chinese Culture (Zhongguowenhuashi, 中國文化史) and other political essays, Liu built his culture discourse on the political principle observed in Chinese history. Furthermore, he also developed a remarkable theory of Chinese historiography. The theory, explicated in Chapter 2, consisted in his The Essence of Chinese Traditional Historiography (Guoshiyaoai, 國史要義). In this delicate book, Liu applied The Rites of Zhou (Zhouli, 周禮) to advocate for the utilities and duties that traditional historiography should bear in politics. Due to his sympathy with Confucian classics, Liu was censured as a cultural conservatist by doubting-antiquarians, such as Hu Shi(1891-1962). However, Liu’s viewpoint was not so incompatible with these sharp criticisms. Their similarities and dissimilarities will be analyzed further in Chapter 3. Finally in Chapter 4, the main theme is Liu’s academic career, especially his place in southern scholar community. Based on the idea of Cultural History, Liu built a school in Nanking to promote the study of Shi-Di (史地) during 1920’s to 30’s. In brief, all Liu‘s endeavors, whether intellectual or practical, were devoted to his historiography of Cultural History.

參考文獻


陳胤豪,《劉師培《周禮古注集疏》研究》。臺北:臺灣大學中國文學研究所碩論,2012。
杜維運、陳錦忠編,《中國史學史論文選集三》。臺北:華世,1980。
王晴佳,〈白璧德與學衡派──一個學術文化史的比較研究〉,《中央研究院近代史研究所集刊》第三十七期,2002。
胡楚生,〈柳翼謀《國史要義》中“春秋學”之成分及其特質〉,《興大人文學報》第四十期,2008。
周淑媚、謝金榮,〈學衡派翻譯研究〉,《東海中文學報》第18期,2006。

延伸閱讀