【作者】 盖志芳；

【导师】 张书学；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 史学理论及史学史， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 新中国成立后,随着政治格局的变化,意识形态领域亦随之变迁。唯物史观由边缘走向中心,成为史学研究的指导思想。目前,建国后十七年史学的研究已逐渐成熟,学术界的前辈们从史学思潮、史学史等多个角度分析新中国史学发展的基本态势,成果斐然。但总体来看,宏观研究多于微观考察,整体论述强于具体分析。1954年创刊的《历史研究》集中体现了建国以来历史学发展的最高水平,深刻反映了马克思主义史学的发展历程。本文在深入了解新中国政治、经济、思想文化乃至外交领域巨大变迁的同时,从《历史研究》——一个史学刊物的视角切入,通过对1954—1966年《历史研究》十三年的文本及文本背后的内容研究,旨在探求建国后史学发展的历史脉络和基本特征,反思新中国成立之后史学发展与时代变迁的微妙关系,以便对新中国十七年史学做出科学地认识和合理地评价。作为一份史学刊物,《历史研究》是刊物、人、文章三方面的综合体。本文从刊物本身、组织群体、文本内容三个方面展开研究。论文首先对刊物创办前后的社会背景、学术大势作鸟瞰式论述,从而直观、形象地说明《历史研究》之创刊乃时代发展之要求,史学前进之呼唤。《历史研究》是在毛泽东“百家争鸣”的口号下直接创办的。其版面设置与新中国文化事业的发展一脉相承,栏目编排充分体现了不同时期史学发展的主要特点。透过刊物直观、形象的外在风格,论文继而系统研究了《历史研究》的编委群体和作者队伍。该部分对每一位编委、作者的生平、教育经历及社会职务进行了表格化的直观展示,可以一目了然的看到《历史研究》群体的学者水平、历史变动及发展特点。在此基础上,通过学者的信件、日记、回忆录等第一手可靠资料勘查《历史研究》编委群体在审阅稿件、读者交流等方面所付出的艰辛努力。同时从三百多位作者队伍中选取部分有代表性的人物,借以审视新中国史学研究队伍中的学者精神。本文通过对史学研究者的充分发掘,力图客观地展示新中国史学在面对社会变局、政治运动时的发展特点。作为新中国史学刊物的杰出代表,《历史研究》取得了卓越的成绩也作出了重要的贡献。本文在第三、四章集中论述了新中国史学在学术求真的追求下所取得的辉煌成果。作为宣传和弘扬唯物史观的先锋力量,《历史研究》在一系列马克思主义重大理论问题的讨论中或开风气之先,或推进高潮之实现,在农民战争史、资本主义萌芽、近代史分期、历史人物评价等重要理论问题上发表了大量有影响力的文章,极大的推进了唯物史观的应用和发展。而部分马克思主义史家在质疑苏联史学理论时所表现的学术勇气,为推进新中国史学教育所耗费的心力,都成为20世纪五六十年代史学发展历程中的珍贵财富。在运用唯物史观指导史学研究的同时,传统实证性史学依然得以保存和延续。近代考据学所专注的古文字研究、甲骨铭文考释也受到新中国史学界的重视。这些文章文辞严谨、考证得法,可谓深得乾嘉考据之三昧。而与历史事件及人物相关的时间、地点考证,少数民族族源、制度调查也是《历史研究》中耀眼的明珠。中国传统考证性史学在承袭近代史学脉络的同时,逐渐向纵深领域发展,形成了与唯物史观的融合与交流。在史学界开展的轰轰烈烈的“五朵金花”研究中,考释古典文献、解读甲骨铭文、实地考察等以传统治史方法为主要内容的史学论文占据了半壁江山。而“史料介绍”专栏的存亡更是印证了实证史学在新中国史学发展中的命运更迭。受史学自身特点以及时代环境的影响,《历史研究》的文章打上了深刻的时代烙印。这即是该文第五、六部分着重考察的内容,即史学在国内、国际时代背景的变迁下其内容、风格的演化特点。面对国内如火如荼的反右运动、“厚今薄古”、“红专辩论”,《历史研究》的重点也在不断变更之中。其中最突出的是对胡适、梁漱溟、雷海宗、吴晗等史学代表的批判。同时中国古代史、近现代史的研究也随着“厚今薄古”运动的开展出现了微妙的变化。关涉唯物史观的重大理论问题——历史人物评价,其标准也在历史主义、阶级观点、历史功过等诸多标准间反复。反映时代特色的史学语言同样成为五六十年代史学发展的最好见证。《历史研究》不但与国内的政治、经济运动遥相呼应,而且见证并记录着国际关系的变动。这以苏中关系的变化最为抢眼。以1962年为界,此前的中苏蜜月时期,史学论文、史学动态都以学习苏联、引用苏联学者的文献、发表苏联学者的文章、介绍苏联作品为荣耀,而此后非但俄文目录取消,苏联学者的著作、观点不再刊登,甚至一度出现了批判苏联史学的作品。史学研究中的冰火两重天,不得不归根于中苏关系的恶化。而以美国为代表的资本主义国家乃新中国排斥的对象,这一方面体现在其研究文章数量少,另一方面在这为数不多的文章中充满了对资产阶级学者、帝国主义侵略的憎恨。因西藏问题而有所变化的中印关系同样在《历史研究》中有所反映。总的来看,中外关系史的研究内容、评价标准与中国外交政策的取向趋于一致。时代为历史研究提供了许多有价值的选题,但受此影响史学界对中外关系及世界史的研究掺杂了太多非学术性的因素。基于以上研究,本文将五六十年代的史学分为三个阶段：1949年新中国成立后至《历史研究》创刊为第一阶段,乃马克思主义史学在中国传播、发展的时期；1954年至1962年,是马克思主义史学思想与非马克思主义史学思想的斗争时期。1964年之后,史学研究转变为政治斗争的工具。从史学求真与致用两大功用的角度出发,反思新中国十七年史学,我们发现,史学的致用功能是历史研究本身的应有之义,这是由史学研究的目的、研究的方法手段以及史学研究的主体所决定的。因此,在坚持史学求真的基础上,我们应该积极发展开拓其为社会服务的价值。而五六十年代的史学尽管打上了深刻的时代烙印,甚至一度被扭曲异化,但其珍贵的学术内核依然耀眼闪光,其史学成就亦值得后世研究者珍视。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the political changes in the pattern, the ideological field has also undergone changes since the founding of New China. Historical Materialism has been from edge toward center and become the guiding ideology of historical research. At present, the study of history in 17 years after the founding of the PRC has gradually matured. The study of historians, the basic trend of historiography and other point has gotten a successful result. However, Macro research has been more than micro research. Historical research which launched in 1954 has embodied the highest levels of history research since the founding of the PRC. This paper studied historical research (1954-1966) after understanding the new China’s political, economic, culture and diplomatic environment. The paper paid attention to explore the basic characteristics of historiography and reflect the relations between historiography and times. Then we would make a rational assessment.As a journal on history, Historical research is a synthesis of three aspects, which are publications, people, and articles. This paper has studied the three aspects. Firs of all, it discussed social and academic backgrounds before 1954. And we found that its layout settings and column arrangement coincided with the development of culture in New China.Then, the paper concerned staffs and writers. It showed their life, educational experiences and social positions through tables. This paper was based on letters, diaries, memoirs and other first-hand documents. It selected several representative samples from more than 300 authors. We can find much psychic wealth that the outstanding scholars gave us.This paper discussed the excellent results that Historical research has achieved in ChapterⅢandⅣ. As a pioneer of history to propagate historical materialism, there were many articles on major theoretical issues in Historical research, such as peasant war, bud of capitalism, evaluating public figures and so on. A few of historians raised doubts about the soviet history theory. Positive historiography was maintained. The study of inscriptions and oracle bones were the major contents of Historical research from1954 to 1957.There were some other textual researchs, such as the where and when, national minorities and ancient institution. Positive historiography inherited modern history studies and developed to the depth. Historical research was influenced deeply by historiography and times. In ChapterⅤandⅥof this paper, it discussed the changes of contents and styles. Flowing Anti-Rightist Movement, movement of "houjinbogu", argument on red or special and so on, the key points of Historical research also changed. The evaluation criterion of historical figure and languages had been modified at different times. Historical research not only contacted with domestic, but also linked with the international environment. There were great changes in the research articles influenced by Sino-Soviet relations, Sino-U.S. relations and Sino Indian relations. Overall, the research content and evaluation criteria were in accord with China’s foreign policy. They got many valuable topics from times. However, historical studies were affected deeply by the times, which made historical studies lack of objectivity.Based on the above study, historiography in the 17 years after founding of PRC was divided into three phases. From 1949 to 1954, Marxist Historiography was spread in China. From 1954 to 1962, Marxist and non-Marxist Historiography struggled. After 1964, historical research became the tools of political struggle. In the perspective of truth, we found that the function of Zhiyong was determined by its purpose, methods and historians. Therefore, on the basis of upholding the truth of history, we should actively develop and expand its value to serve the community. Despite the historiography marked with a deep imprint, their achievements are worthy of treasuring to us.更多还原