陳寅恪對清代史學的評論及其相關問題

Chen Yin-ko's Commentary on Historiography in Qing Dynasty and the Related Questions

10.29439/FJHJ.200507.0003

戴晉新(Chin-Hsin Tai)

陳寅恪 ； 清代 ； 史學 ； 評論 ； Chen Yin-ko ； Qing Dynasty ； historiography ； commentary

輔仁歷史學報

16期（2005 / 07 / 01）

189 - 210

繁體中文

陳寅恪在〈陳垣元西域人華化考序〉一文中謂：「有清一代經學號稱極盛，而史學則遠不逮宋人」，此語引起學界許多議論與解釋。或謂陳說甚是，考據之學本不足以爲史學最高成就；或謂陳氏以考據學概括有清一代之史學，未免失之於以偏概全；或謂陳氏於中國史學向持揚宋抑清之論，例證甚多，此亦一證；或謂陳氏的史學是直承宋賢，與乾嘉諸老關係不大，此亦可證；或謂陳氏的史學在考證方法上不能不受乾嘉諸老影響，只是更上了一層；種種釋論，不一而足。這類討論不僅涉及對陳寅恪學術的認識，也關乎對清代史學的評價，本文就這兩方面牽涉的問題分爲四組：（一）關於〈陳垣元西域人華化考序〉一文的解讀，（二）關於揚宋抑清史學觀的解釋，（三）關於繼承宋賢史學抑乾嘉樸學的爭論。（四）關於如何評價清代史學，進行討論並申愚見。

Chen Yin-ko used to comment: ”The Qing Dynasty was known as the heyday in classical studies, but in history studies was far inferior to the Song Dynasty.” in Preface of Western and central Asians in China under the Mongols: their transformation into Chinese=[Yuan xi yu ren Hua hua kao] This comment caused many discussions and the explanations among academic circles. Some said Chen's comment was truly accurate, that philology could not be regarded as the highest achievement of history. Some said Chen was drawing conclusions from a part just to conclude history studies in Qing Dynasty by philology. Some observed that Chen in the Chinese historiography always esteems Song Dynasty to belittle the Qing Dynasty. This is one of the very many illustrations. Some commented that the Chen's history concept was straightly received from Song virtuously, not have much relations with the scholars under Ch'ien-lung and Chia-ch'ing Period. Of Qing Dynasty, this is also may be proved. Some remarked that Chen's history concept has no alternative but to: receive the influences of scholars in philological methods under Ch'ien-lung and Chia-ch'ing Period, he only made some progress. There were numerous discussions about it. This kind of discussion not only involves with the understanding of Chen Yin-ko's studies, also impacts the appraisal of the Qing Dynasty historic studies. This article divides the question, which involves on these two aspects into four groups. (1) Unscramble the ”Preface of Western and central Asians in China under the Mongols: their transformation into Chinese=[Yuan xi yu ren Hua hua kao]” (2) The explanations about esteeming Song Dynasty to belittle the Qing Dynasty study view. (3) The argumentations about inheriting the Song virtuous history to belittle the Ch'ien-lung and Chia-ch'ing Period Chinese philology. (4) The ways to appraise Qing Dynasty historic studies, carry on the discussion and express my opinion.

1. 陳寅恪，〈與妹書〉，《書信集》，頁1。
2. 陳寅恪，《隋唐制度淵源略論稿‧兵制》中央研究院歷史語言研究所專刊，無出版年月，頁98。
3. 陳寅恪，〈贈蔣秉南序〉，《寒柳堂集》，頁182。
4. 陳寅恪，《唐代政治史述論稿‧自序》中央研究院歷史語言研究所專刊，無出版年月，頁1。
5. 王永興(1998)。陳寅恪先生史學述略稿。北京:北京大學出版社。
6. 白壽彝(1986)。中國史學史。上海:上海人民出版社。
7. 牟潤孫(1990)。海遺雜著。香港:中文大學出版社。
8. 吳懷祺(1996)。中國史學思想史。合肥:安徽人民出版社。
9. 杜維運(1984)。清代史家與史學。臺北:東大圖書公司。
10. 汪榮祖(1997)。史家陳寅恪傳。臺北:聯經出版公司。
11. 殷祝勝(1998)。陳寅恪與乾嘉樸學和宋代史學之關係新論。廣西社會科學，1998(6)，93-96。
12. 高國抗(1985)。中國古代史學史概要。廣州:廣東高等教育出版社。
13. 許冠三(1986)。新史學九十年。香港:中文大學出版社。
14. 陳寅恪(2001)。金明館叢稿二編。北京:三聯書店。
15. 陶懋炳(1987)。中國古代史學史略。長沙:湖南人民出版社。
16. 逯耀東(1998)。胡適與當代史學家。臺北:東大圖書股份有限公司。
17. 劉節(1986)。中國史學史稿。臺北:弘文館。
18. 蔣天樞(1997)。陳寅恪先生編年事輯。上海:上海古籍出版社。
19. 蕭公權(1956)。陳寅恪元白詩箋證槁。清華學報，1(1)
20. 錢茂偉(2003)。明代史學的歷程。北京:社會科學文獻出版社。
21. 謝保成(2003)。史學史話。臺北:國家出版社。
22. 瞿林東(1999)。中國史學史綱。北京:北京出版社。
23. 羅志田(2000)。從歷史記憶看陳寅恪與錢嘉考據的關係。21世紀，59，99-104。