【作者】 黄广友；

【导师】 王学典；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 史学理论及史学史， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 1949年新旧政权完成更替,马克思主义唯物史观派史学在此之前经历一段“在野”期后,终于取得正统和主流地位,并获得空前发展。一批在三、四十年代业已星光闪耀的马克思主义史学家此时更是光芒四射,这一群体大致是以郭沫若、范文澜为代表的第一代马克思主义史学家。当人们只将赞佩的目光注意他们或为他们的高言阔论所吸引之时,在他们身边却又有一批马克思主义史学家迅速成长起来,这一群体则是以刘大年、胡绳为代表的第二代马克思主义史家。这一代史家把学术作为一种志业,他们的学术历程和学术命运与新中国五十年风雨历程紧相关联。如果我们把新中国五十年作为一个学术时期,研究这一时期的马克思主义唯物史观派史学,分明可以看到,新中国成立后,前十七年是第一代马克思主义史学家的“天下”,“文革”后他们相继去世,以刘大年、胡绳等为代表的第二代马克思主义史学家接过“掌门”,坚守唯物史观史学阵地,薪火相传。比较第一代和第二代马克思主义史学家学术历程,第一代史家体验的是唯物史观史学从学术边缘走向学术中心的艰辛和喜悦,第二代史家除分享了唯物史观史学统领史坛的快乐外,还经历了唯物史观史学学术势力逐渐下沉的无奈。因此,后者的学术生态和学者的心境更加复杂,他们学术取向的变与不变,更具有迷人的魅力,更值得后人去探讨,因为它不仅仅属于已经逝去的时代,而且昭示着21世纪马克思主义史学的未来发展走向。因此,研究以刘大年为代表的这一代马克思主义史学家史学,对身处21世纪的史学界具有重要的现实意义。把刘大年史学作为一个学术史对象研究,有助于求索第二代马克思主义史学家史学的学术生态。英国史学家卡尔曾说,历史学家是个体,同时也是历史的产物、社会的产物；研究历史的人必须学会从这一双重的角度来看待历史学家。因此,对于刘大年这样有影响的史学家的研究仅仅停留在缅怀表彰式追忆上是不够的,而应该把刘大年史学作为学术史对象置入20世纪后半期中国马克思主义史学发展框架中进行综合研究。任何史学家的史学成长都离不开他生活的时代,我们首先从时代、史学与史家三者互动中分析与刘大年史学密切相关的生平、著述与学术交往。刘大年既是一名学者又是一名战士,早年革命战士的生活经历直接决定了他近代史研究的革命史品格的定位。刘大年一生大部分时间处在中国历史学界领导地位,亦学亦官,这使他在多次运动中往往处在一线。刘大年一生具有强烈的政治敏感性并认为史学应为政治服务,因此,其著述往往处在政治与学术之间,与政治意识形态挂得比较紧。刘大年又是一个有广泛学术交往的史学家。分析他与毛泽东的学术交往,可以看出他终生都在诠释毛泽东历史理论特别是关于中国近代史的理论,是毛泽东近代史理论的忠实捍卫者；刘大年与史学“五老”学术交往都比较密切,而与郭沫若、范文澜学术交往和工作生活交往尤多,郭老和范老对刘大年的学术影响更深；刘大年与胡绳也有广泛的学术交往,他们二者的学术交往属于同辈学人的互相促进。刘大年与国外学者交往也比较多,尤其是与日本井上清的交往甚深、交情甚笃,这是缘于他们共同的学术偏好；与齐赫文斯基交往特别曲折,由互相为敌到成为朋友,他们学术上的论战反映的是中苏那段特殊时期的意识形态论战对历史学术、对历史学家造成的影响。史学家的史学建树或史学成就是当代人或后代人研究其史学的主要载体,也是衡量其史学地位的主要凭依。刘大年史学成就巨大,撮其要归纳之：第一,刘大年在研究美国侵华史方面具有开创之功。紧随刘著《美国侵华简史》之后,研究美国和其他国家侵略中国历史的课题迅速展开,论著和文章大量涌现。这一方面反映了刘大年作为一名战士学者的为学旨趣,另一方面反映了建国前后一段时期学术与政治与意识形态的密切关联。此书奠定了刘大年在中国近代史研究中的重要地位。第二,刘大年一生专注中国近代史研究,在编撰中国近代通史方面做出了重要贡献。由他主撰的《中国史稿》第四册和后来在此书的基础上扩编为的《中国近代史稿》全三册,代表了他在这方面的最高成就。此著以“反帝反封建”为“红线”贯穿全书,对近代历史上的重大历史事件都有自己见解渗透其中。在近代史解释体系上完善了传统的革命史范式。全面反映了刘大年在近代通史编撰方面的重要成就。第三,致力于辛亥革命史研究。如果说刘大年在中国近代史方面有更专注研究的方面,则是辛亥革命史研究专题。他在辛亥革命与反满问题、辛亥革命的性质问题、孙中山研究等方面都做出了突出贡献,产生了广泛影响。第四,开拓抗日战争史研究。抗日战争史研究是刘大年晚年开拓的又一个重要研究领域,并做出了突出业绩。由于刘大年的奋力开拓,及胡乔木、胡绳的共同努力,抗日战争史在较短时间内得以大规模开展起来并取丰硕研究成果。第五,近代经学方面的研究。刘大年前后历经十年著《评近代经学》长文。这是刘大年在20世纪最后十余年时间里,面对“国学复兴”和文化保守主义的复活,对中国传统文化——经学做出的再认识,它凝聚了一个战士型学者对传统经学的理解。此文从传统文化深层解读近代中国社会变革与革命,极富创见。任何有成就的史学家在自己的著述中都体现着一定的史学观念和理论。有学者说,从1949年开始,几十年间,毛泽东的历史观点成为中国史学界的主题。学习、宣传、阐释毛泽东的史学思想成为中国史学界的主题。毛泽东的史学思想指导着、规范着、覆盖着中国史学界。可以肯定的是,刘大年这一代史学家的史学思想和史学理论主要来源于中国化的马克思主义——毛泽东思想。阶级斗争观点是刘大年史学理论最突出表现。刘大年始终坚信人类文明史就是阶级斗争史,在这一观念的支配下,或者说,将这一观念具体贯彻到历史研究中,就是认为要把社会关系及其运动作为历史研究的对象,研究私有制社会,就是把阶级、阶级关系和阶级斗争作为历史研究的对象；在毛泽东历史观的指导下,刘大年认为在阶级社会里下层劳动人民的革命与起义才是推动历史前进的直接动力；旧史书上劳动人民历史主体地位被颠倒了,事实上,劳动人民才是历史的主人,才是历史创造者,因此,劳动人民历史主体论是刘大年始终坚信不疑的观念并贯穿于其史学著述之中。与史家的史学理论一样,有成就的史家也往往都有自己研究历史的套路和认识历史的方法论。一般地说,史家的史学理论与史学方法是表里如一的。在阶级斗争观点指导下,刘大年在近代史研究中体现着传统的治史方法和路径或者说是史学方法论特色,这就是从革命时期开始构筑的革命史范式。这一范式从20世纪30年代开始酝酿,中经40、50年代到60年代最后完善。刘大年对完善这一解释体系起了非常重要的作用。直到“文革”结束前,革命史范式一直统领史坛,它把“革命”看作历史的最高价值,其突出的外在表现是把近代史叙事革命史化。“文革”后,中国社会向现代化重新定向,时代主题发生转换,现代化范式迅速崛起,传统的革命史范式遭到质疑和挑战。如何回应挑战成为刘大年在新时期思考的重要问题。两种范式在一系列问题上展开论辩,刘大年反对以资本主义发展作为中国近代史基本线索,强调研究近代史必须坚持以阶级斗争为基本线索。被刘大年引为同道的胡绳除仍坚持阶级斗争主线论外,同时也赞成用现代化作为一个线索串起来写中国近代史；在“民族独立”与“近代化”问题上,刘大年认为民族独立应该先行,然后才能实现近代化或现代化,胡绳在这一点上赞同刘大年的观点；两种范式另一个分歧点是如何认识近代革命与改良问题,刘大年认为革命是中国近代历史的脊梁和主旋律,改良道路在中国行不通。应当承认,两种范式都是解释中国近代史的有效模式,但由于方法论的局限,都不可避免地遮蔽了历史的某些侧面,只有多种范式互补方可有益于史学的发展。综观之,刘大年史学是那种与政治联系比较密切,强调阶级斗争观点,意识形态倾向比较突出的那一种史学。其史学革命意识形态是他学术与政治高度绾合的产物。长期以来,人们只认为政治意识形态与学术交织在一起必定损害学术。从刘大年一生学术实践来看,其实未必,如果正确处理二者之间的关系,政治意识形态对学术建设有不可低估的正面价值,当然,如果政治意识形态全面控制史学,产生的负面作用会非常之大。刘大年学术一生取得了巨大史学成就,从学术史意义上证明了这一点。刘大年这一代马克思主义史家经历了新中国五十年风雨历程,如同我们国家在这五十年经历了太多的曲折一样,马克思主义史学和史学家也经历了太多的曲折与坎坷。在这五十年里,最突出的变化是社会主题完成了由“战争与革命”向“和平与发展”的转换,马克思主义史学也因应社会主题的转换做出了相应调整并有新的发展。但是,由于各个史学家认识不一,在这一过程的每一个阶段中,其史学又表现了个体差异,有时认识甚至并不正确。因此,唯怀有不卑不亢之心,既不虚高,又不妄贬,客观探讨主要史家们的史学,才能准确了解刘大年这一代马克思主义史学家的学术生态,进而从整体上正确衡估这一代史学家的史学,这对21世纪马克思主义唯物史观史学的发展具有重要意义。更多还原

【Abstract】 In 1949, the old regime being replaced by the new one, the Marxism historical materialism finally took a lead position, and gained unprecedented development after going through a period of "opposition" during the democratic revolution. A group of splendid Marxist historians who had been very successful during the democratic revolution consisted of the first generation, which mainly represented by Guo Moruo and Fan Wenlan. People’s attention was attracted not only by the first generation but also by the new group who have grown up rapidly under the guide of the first generation. The new group was represented by Liu Danian and Hu Sheng who were often named the second generation of Marxist historians. If we compare this generation of historians with the first one, we may safely find that they both take the academic research as a great career, their personal academic experience are related closely with the development of New China. If we take the fifty years of New China as an academic period, by studying its history of Marxism historical materialism, we can better understand that in the first seventeen years after the foundation of New China, the first generation of Marxist historians took lead in academic research but most of them died after The Cultural Revolution. After that, the second generation of Marxism historians represented by Liu Danian and Hu Sheng took over the "head" positions to continue the first generation’s standpoint of historical materialism.Comparing the academic history between the first and the second generation of Marxism historians, the former experienced the pain and joy of making the theory of historical materialism the most important one in Chinese historical research, and the latter, besides sharing the achievement of being the official theory, faced with the gradual decline of historical materialism. Therefore, the latter’s academic ecosystem was more complex. Their academic-oriented change was very significant not only because it belongs to the elapsed times, but also because it demonstrates the future development of direction of the historiography of Marxism in the 21st century. It is not enough for such an influential historian as Liu Danian to just memorize him. We should have a more comprehensive study by relating his historiography to the development of Chinese Marxist historians in the second half of the 20th century.We can not study nay historian neglecting the times he lived. Firstly, we analyze Li Danian from the flowing three interdependent elements:his era, his works and his academic communication. Liu Danian is not only a scholar but also a soldier. The revolutionary experiences of his early life determined the direction of his research of modern history. Liu Danian spent much time in Chinese history, and he achieved a lot in his life. At the same, Liu Danian was both a researcher and an officer. He has a strong political sensitivity and believes that the research of historians should serve the political need. Therefore, his writing often crossed between the politics and the academy, and sometimes even had a tight link with ideology. Liu Danian is a historian who has a wide range of academic exchanges. In this dissertation, we will examine his communication with other historians such as Mao Zedong, Guo Moruo, Fan Wenlan, Hu Sheng, Li Shu, and so on and so forth.Liu Danian’s achievements in historical studies was great. The main is as follows: First, Liu Danian has created the study of the history of American invasion to China. Followed his book "A Brief History of American invasion to China", this topic soon became a very heated discussion in Chinese history studies. This book has established Liu Danian’s important position in the research of Chinese modern history. During all his life, Liu Danian concentrates on the Chinese modern history research. He has made significant contributions in compiling the Chinese modern general history. His main works in this aspect deserved being mentioned. They are:the forth volume of The Manuscript of Chinese History and the whole three volumes of The Manuscript of Chinese Modern history. And this book gives him a very high reputation in historical research in modern China. If we say that Liu Danian has more dedicated research in modern Chinese history, that is, the topic of 1911 Revolution. He made the outstanding contributions and widespread influence in this question. He made a firm foundation for Chinese historians about how to study this kind of problem, for example, the process and the nature of this Revolution, the study of Sun Zhongshan, etc. the Fourth, he developed the studies of Chinese Anti-Japanese War. Chinese Anti-Japanese War was one of his main domains in his old age and he also made outstanding contributions. Finally, what is worth mentioning in the research of Liu Danian is that he made a great deal of research of traditional Jingxue.It is sure that the source of Liu Danian’s theory is from and Marxism with Chinese characters, that is, the thinking of Mao Zedong. His most famous theory is the class struggle. He always believes that the history of all mankind is just the history of class struggles. Under this kind of belief, he uses this theory to guide all his research. He thinks that historians should study the class, the relationship among all classes and the class struggles to better understand the society of private ownership. Guided by the historical thinking of Mao Zedong, Liu Danian thinks that the direct force to push forward the history is the revolution and revolt of the working people with a very low social position. In fact, working people are both the masters of history and the creators of the history. Therefore, the theory of the working people as the historical subject is his firm belief and his main researching practice.Like most of the successful historians, Liu Danian has his creative researching method and theory. Guided by the theory of the class struggle, his researches embody Chinese traditional historical theory, that is, the revolutionary paradigm which has been built from the beginning of the democratic revolution. Liu Danian worked together with other historians to build and to improve this researching paradigm. Until the end of The Cultural Revolution, the revolutionary paradigm was still the most important one in the history research in China. This paradigm takes the revolutions as the highest value of history. It is admitted that two paradigms are valid paths and models to explain modern Chinese history. Because of methodological limitations, both paradigms have their own shortcomings in historical research. Only many kinds of models can supplement each other and give us an all-side view of the historical research.In collusion, Liu Danian’s historical research has a close relation with the politics, putting much emphasis on the class struggle, ideology. This revolutionary ideology is a combination of his academic research and the politics in the times he lived. For a long time, it was thought that if political ideology interferes with the academic research, it will do harm to the latter. From the perspective of academic practice of Liu Danian during all his life, however, it may not always be the case. If we correctly grasp the relationship between them, the political ideology has a very positive value to the academic construction. Of course, when the political ideology totally controls the academic research, it will result in negative effects. Liu Danian has made great achievements in his historical research and, this, to a certain degree, has proved what we have concluded above to prove to be true.更多还原