|
楼主 |
发表于 2007-3-18 22:38:38
|
显示全部楼层
五、小结
从对疑古辨伪、考古研究、古史重建及文明探源的思考与讨论中,可以得出以下三点认识:
第一,美国文化唯物论学者哈里斯(M.Harris)指出:“科学是西方文明的一项独特与宝贵的贡献,这并不否认其他文明对科学知识的贡献。但是只是在西欧,科学方法的独特规则被最早确立和予以清晰的表述,并系统地应用于整个无机的、有机的和文化的现象。我们也应该认识到,这不是从种族优越感来肯定科学是一种认知方法,它对全人类都具有卓越的价值。在整个人类史上,只有一种认知方法鼓励其本身的参与者怀疑自己的前提,并系统地将自己的结论呈现给怀疑者进行有敌意的审视。”[27](P27)这种科学态度和思辨精神,要求学者们不但要重视对研究客体真实性的梳理,而且还强调对研究者本人的立场、知识背景、学术能力以及各种影响其主观判断的社会影响和价值观进行严格审视的必要性。因此。“善思”和“善疑”应该是我们从事研究必备的基本科学素质。
第二,我们应该超越传统学术方法,从国际水准来审视我们这项工作的现状。考古学探索的范围远不止文化和事件的历史编年。从某种意义而言,考古学的历史重建处于一个人文科学和自然科学汇合的聚合点。考古学本身的发展和提高越来越依赖于其他社会科学的理论和自然科学手段的帮助,而它也成为其他社会科学和自然科学全方位研究人类发展的一个信息库。考古学的学术定位应当是整个人文学科和社会科学的组成部分,它和历史学不是依附的关系,也不是仅仅为编史学服务的工具,而同是以了解人类自身历史和社会发展历程的独立研究领域。
第三,我们的古史重建和文明探源应该超越三代国家的纪年、地点和文献记载的真实性,来探索文明和社会发展具体轨迹并阐释其原因。我们还要了解中国文明起源的动力是否和其他文明古国有类似之处,或寻找我国文明起源与其他国家不同的原因和动力机制。只有在对中华文明起源具体过程和规律认识的基础上,我们才能构建一部科学的古代史,才能使我国的文明探源研究跻身世界学术之林。
参考文献:
[1]张京华.20世纪疑古思潮回顾学术研讨会综述[J].中国文化研究,1999,春之卷(总第23期).
[2]众议疑古思潮[A].张京华编.疑古思潮的回顾与前瞻[C].北京:中国书店,京华出版社,2003.
[3]张光直.序言[A].[加]布鲁斯·特里格.时间与传统[M].蒋祖棣,刘英译.北京:三联书店,1993.
[4]Adams,R.McC.Complexity in archaic states.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology,2001,20:345—360.
[5][英]格林·丹尼尔.考古学一百五十年[M].黄其煦译.北京:文物出版社,1987.
[6]张光直.考古学与“如何建设具有中国特色的人类学”[A].中国考古学论文集[M].北京:三联书店,1999.
[7]李济.安阳:殷商古都发现、发掘、复原记[M].苏秀菊,聂玉海译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1990.
[8]李学勤,郭志坤.中国古史寻证[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2002.
[9]Thomas,D.H.Archaeology.Third edition,Wadsworth,Thomson Learning Inc,1998.
[10]余英时.顾颉刚、洪业与中国现代史学[A].顾潮编.顾颉刚学记[C].北京:三联书店,2002.
[11]Collingwood,R.G.An Antobiogaphy.Oxford,Oxford University Press·1939.
[12]Trigger,B.G.A History of Archaeological Thought.Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,1989.
[13]谢维扬.中国早期国家[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社,1995.
[14]傅斯年.史学方法导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[15]吕振羽.史前期中国社会研究:上[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,2000.
[16]林定夷.科学逻辑与科学方法论[M].成都:电子科技大学出版社,2003.
[17]林定夷.科学研究方法概论[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社,1986.
[18]廖名春.试论古史辨运动兴起的思想来源[A].原道:第四辑[C].北京:学林出版社,1998.
[19]王铭铭.人类学是什么[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.
[20][美]托马斯·库恩.科学革命的结构[M].金吾伦,胡新和译.北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[21][英]戴维·克拉克.考古学纯洁性的丧失[A].中国历史博物馆考古部.当代国外考古学理论与方法[C].西安:三秦出版社,1991.
[22]杨豫,胡成.历史学的思想和方法[M].南京:南京大学出版社,1999.
[23]Stein,G.J.Heterogeneity,power,and political economy:some current research issues in the archaeology of Old World complex Societies.Journal of Archaeological Research,1998,6(1):1—44.
[24]Smith,M.E.and Schreiber,K.J.New World states and empires:economic and social organization.Journal of Archaeological Research,2005,13(3):189—229.
[25]Smith,M.E.and Schreiber,K.J.New World states and empires:politics,religion,and urbanism.Journal of Archaeological Research,2006,14(1):1-52.
[26]Trigger,B.G.understanding Early Civilization.Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,2003.
[27]Harris,M.Cultural Materialism.New York,Random House,1979.
Doubt of the old, archaeology and historical reconstruction
Chen Chun
(Department of Cultural Heritage and Museology, Fudan University, Shanghai,200433)
Abstract:Historical skepticism in the early 20th century had great influence on the beginning of modern Chinese archaeolo- gy, and also played a decisive role in its academic orientation. The quintessence of scientific archaeological method lies in exceeding the textual documents, as well as refining social and cultural information from the silent material legacies. Meanwhile, the greatest preponderance of archaeology is just the overall analysis of the diachronic evolution of primitive societies in the long term from the aspects of ecological environment, living style, technical economics, social structure and even the ideology, and carding the variables and influencing factors critical to the evolution of civilization. "Doubt of the old" or textural criticism must be a basic element of scientific research. Archaeology has long been an independent discipline, and not merely an implement to provide historians with writing records. Viewed from the paradigm revolution, the Western history and archaeology both have made transformation toward sociology and anthropology, which advocate to exceed the categories of political and aristocratic' history, and to take the bottom-up vision in studying every aspect of the whole society. In the historical reconstruction and the study of the origin of early civilization, Chinese scholars should free themselves from historiographical and documentary perspectives and make every endeavor to understand and explain social processes and causality.
Keywords: doubt of the old; methodology; paradigm revolution; documents and archaeology; origin of civilization |
|