[Back]

Aspects of Modern Chinese Historiography (20th century)

Historical Writing in early twentieth-century China demonstrated the profound impact of the West. Evolutionary and linear theories of history acted as antagonistic force to traditional concepts of Golden Age and cyclical history. The popularity of Marxian materialism fostered the growing importance of social and economic history whereas in the past, the court was the focus of attention. Besides, there was the emergence of a scientific and empirical approach to historiography. Behind this scene, one must be aware that nationalism was a determining force in enhancing the growth of historical writing.

Foreign encroachment since the nineteenth century brought much humiliation to China. The importation of western science, technology and philosophy, along with warships and canons, stimulated Chinese intellectuals to think of the question of the strengthening of China and the expulsion of foreign imperialism, and to search a new way for China to follow among the world of nations. They were so concerned about the future of their nation that they managed to save the country by various means and approaches. In this way, they usually turned to look at the past history of China, to see the reality of the Chinese past, to investigate into her weakness, as well as her good potential and essence.

K'ang Yu-wei (康有為) was a pioneer in reinterpreting Chinese confucian tradition as dynamic and evolutionary. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao (梁啟超) followed him to compare Chinese culture with those of the West and tried to sort out the merits and demerits of the two sides. Their thought showed an obvious influence of Social Darwinism which put forward a thesis that human history was progressive and full of competition. Liang stated in his "New History" published in 1902 that history was that which narrated the phenomenon of evolution of human society and sought the laws and principles thereof. These laws and principles, with a strong sense of historical inevitability, should guide future evolution so that Chinese civilisation could be perpetuated. Others like Chang Ping-lin (章炳麟) and Liu Shih-p'ei (劉師培) also urged by the concern of Chinese relevancy in modern world, put forward new theses in reinterpreting Chinese history. The theory of diffusion derived from La Couperie's work reflected their nationalist sentiment in concerning China's fate. Their anxiety led to an almost unconditional acceptance of unscientific assumptions, though later they altered their views.

It is noticeable that people like K'ang, Liang, Chang and Liu were not professional historians themselves. Their involvement in Chinese history stemmed from the genuine concern of the chaotic China. But there was always a group of historians who still held to traditional historiography. Wang Kuo-wei (王國維), Tung Tso-pin (董作賓) and Lo Chen-yu (羅振玉 ) were eminent figures of this group. The incorporation of archaeology and new materials into historical studies demonstrated another feature of twentieth-century historiography. The discovery of oracle bones proved that the Shang Dynasty was not entirely legendary. Information could be deduced from them which confirmed many statements in ancient texts. Tung showed that the bones confirmed in general the account of Shang Yin given by Ssu-ma Chien. Wang further showed that the list of Yin kings given by the bamboo books was generally accurate. In addition, it was possible to deduce a great deal concerning the political and social systems of China. Besides, the materials discovered at Tun Huang (敦煌) also produced evidence confirming existing texts, and provided the means of reconstructing local administration, law and customs. The group's importance was that it brought the technique of the k'ao-cheng (考證 ) methods to bear on the Classics in a twentieth-century context of new archaeological discoveries and of a far greater scope for historical hypothecation.

Another group of intellectuals also reverted to the study of Chinese history by evaluating it on the ground of pragmatic approach headed by Hu Shih (胡適) and Ku Chieh-kang (顧頡剛). They insisted that what was not relevant to the needs of the modern nation should be disposed of. Judgements of relevancy relied mainly on historical investigation which applied a genetic method to determine how a particular institution or idea was first developed. Knowing the original conditions and comparing them to conditions of contemporary China, it would be possible to make practical decisions. There was the concept of appropriateness (or suitability) which indicated the residual influence of Social Darwinism and expanding influence of American pragmatism. Thus, they considered the past histories were useless since they had been tools for imposing and perpetuating political values and interests of the ruling class. History should no longer be chained to the ruling class, but it should reflect life. Hence all aspects of society were worthy and necessary subjects for study. These were what the Movement of Reorganisation of the National Past aimed at. Moreover, Ku treated the National Studies as a branch of science which, though devoted itself to studies of the past, should show its relevance to the present.

The Movement of Reorganisation of the National Past (整理國故) manifested certain features of modern historiography. Firstly it advocated a critical attitude to traditional historiography and considered works such as biographies as merely data for interpretation but not truth. The implementation of the principle 'boldness in hypothesis, caution in proof' flourished a new brand of scientific history. Certainly Ku's insistence on the independent study of history separated from political affiliation promoted an impartial attitude in writing history. Secondly, its encouragement and attempt to broaden the subjects of study enhanced the growth of literary, social and economic histories in subsequent years. Moreover, the scholars' endeavour to reclassify the historical materials, collate new editions of ancient works with new commentaries, prefaces and punctuation, made ancient texts accessible to the general public who would then be able to understand more of their cultural heritage.

The success of the Russian Revolution, the friendly policy of the Russian counterpart towards China, the disappointment of western democracy after 1920 and the failure of the Chinese Revolution inspired the Chinese intelligentsia to turn to Communism. The importation of historical materialism dawned a new epoch on the history of historiography, partly because it resembled a new philosophy of history, partly because the materialists were more explicit in admitting to a relationship between political advocacy and historical interpretation. Historical materialists in the 1920's were anxious to understand the past for they believed that history stored the secret of dynamics of contemporary society, a society whose destiny was fervently concerned by them who moreover, regarded history as both functional and eminently practical, not a mere pastime and scholarly enterprise. The split of the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party after 1927 provided chances for the application of materialism in explaining Chinese history, thus bringing along a controversy on social history between the two sides, primarily based on their commitments to different goals and strategies of revolution.

In general, three essential features can be observed in the application of historical materialism centred upon the Social History Controversy (社會史論戰). In the first place, strong political motivation emerged during this time in historical studies chiefly due to the struggle for dominance between the KMT and CCP. This contrasted with Ku Chieh-kang's insistence of impartial scholarship in academic pursuit. In the second place, it fostered the growing awareness and acceptance of social forces as determinants of politics and culture and hence of political change and cultural transformation. The application of class struggle theory to the analysis and periodization of the Chinese past nourished the development of social and economic history. In the third place, it reflected that Chinese intellectuals attempted to fit Chinese history into a certain model (predominantly Marxian) of development of society. They compared the changes of Chou Dynasty to the emergence of capitalism in Europe and concluded from the non-development of capitalism in China that imperial society had been a stagnant transitional phase. The idea of 'transitional phase' was a compromise between the universal Marxian" laws" and China's particularities which the social historians encountered in their practice of history. The popularity of such views in the twentieth century was to a large extent due to the lack of alternative mode of explanation and their patronization by major political sects.

Historical writing in chaotic China could hardly be developed into a completely scholastic, impartial and independent academic discipline, immune from the influence of current political trends. Nor could the period of wars provided any stable environment for historians to pursue studies. The final triumph of the communists over the KMT after 1949 nevertheless rejuvenated the life of historical writing. Unfortunately, the discipline under the new regime could not escape from serving the state and politics.

The communist historians tended to study a limited number of topics related to the problem of constructing a new past, to replace the discarded confucianist interpretation and justify the materialist mode of historical explanation. The goals of the communists to treat topics such as peasant rebellions, foreign imperialism and origins of Chinese capitalism was to "fit Chinese history into a Marxist suit of clothes."

The concept of class struggle was particularly emphasized in communist historiography. The communist victory over the nationalists, as they alleged, was largely the result of the successful mobilisation of the peasants according to the theory of class struggle. Aiming at justifying the communist legitimacy, much effort was spent on the study of peasant wars in Chinese history. Since China not only lacked a significant labour movement which could serve as the genesis of the communist movement, but also did not have a revolutionary bourgeois period as in Europe, the peasants were therefore the only candidates for a revolutionary working class in Chinese history. The study of the peasant movements provided the most obvious historical documentation of the theory of class struggle.

As a result, an eminent feature of communist historiography was that it replaced the confucian view of history which stressed harmony and the Golden Age of the past with a linear progressive view of history which, on the contrary, emphasized continuous struggle between classes, finally leading to a classless society. In short, the confucian view prejudiced against rebellions as threats to the harmonious social order and the ruling dynasty while the communists glorified the peasant rebellions by the term "righteous uprisings of the peasants." (Nung-min ch'i-yi 農民起義)

By and large, before the fall of the Gang of Four, what communist historiography aimed at was the popularisation of party policies and education. The desire to inculcate a belief in class struggle superseded the desire to investigate historical truth." It attempted to show that the strivings of mankind were the driving force of history; the emphasis on peasant wars was to propagate the belief in class struggle and the realisation that there was a way out only through class struggle.

In sum, we can observe a number of essential features of modern Chinese historiography. Nationalism was a big stimulus. New philosophies of history were emerging. Social Darwinism which stressed evolution of society was later accompanied by the rise of historical materialism which emphasized economic forces in human history. New subjects of study were also introduced. Though many so-called historians except a few ones were not well-trained in the discipline, they showed a growing interest in social and economic history. New methodology was put forward by the pragmatic historians and the improvement of classical methods. Political motivation played an essential part in many historical works which were devoted to political propaganda, not written for history's sake. Though the communists have revolutionised the traditional view of history, still one historiographical tradition has been maintained: "The inexhaustible energy with which the Chinese have pursued the writing of history and especially the writing of history in the service of the state."

Footnotes are omitted. [Back]

@TK Chung, 1985

Home | History | ICT in Education | Forum | Contact

Copyright © 2000-2007 TheCorner.org