中国马克思主义史学的形成与社会史论战//[The Formation of Chinese Marxist Historiography and the Debate on Social History]

Guo Moruo and others first attempted to apply historical materialism to the holistic research of Chinese history.Historiography of Historical Materialism in China first took shape when Dushu magazine initiated the debate on Chinese social history. Study on Ancient Chinese Society authored by Guo Moruo and the debate on Chinese social history initiated by Dushu magazine followed two different approaches: the former centered on the “why”question and the latter attempted to study social history through exploring the nature of the Chinese society. Guo based his arguments on the unearthed archaeological findings and tried to ascertain the appropriate boundaries of materialism. In contrast,participants in the Chinese social history debate explored the logic behind history based on their analysis on the nature of the Chinese society.Both represented the conscientious efforts to examine the the development of Chinese history and the nature of the Chinese society at different historical stages through the lens of historical materialism. The debate on Chinese social history stemmed from concerns for concrete issues on the ground,but it was manifested in the approach of “embedding historical materials into theories”. Such an approach was incongruent with the academicism tradition in history study which concentrated on historical materials and advocated “seeking truth ” in historiography. It was no wonder that it was not recognized by mainstream historians for quite a while.
郭沫若等人最早尝试用唯物史观对中国历史做整体研究。中国马克思主义史学初步形成于《读书杂志》发起的中国社会史论战时期。郭沫若的《中国古代社会研究》和以《读书杂志》为中心展开的中国社会史论战,虽分别基于"知其所以然"和从社会性质深入到社会史的两种研究路径而发起,表现为"根据地下发现的实物"探求"唯物论的适应度"和为了考察社会性质而去追索其"逻辑发生"的"史的生成"这两种研讨形式而展开,却都是有意识地运用唯物史观考察、解释中国历史发展过程及其不同发展阶段的社会性质。社会史论战本身既是由现实问题而来,又全然表现为将史实"嵌入"理论的研究方式,看上去便与从史料出发并标榜史学"求真"的学院派史学之间存在着...