Transforming History: The Making of a Modern Academic Discipline in Twentieth-Century China

5. The Impact of the Linear Model of History on Modern Chinese Historiography

Chapter 5 The Impact of the Linear Model of History on Modern Chinese Historiography Wang Fan-sen Since the late nineteenth century, the language, methods, and theoretical underpinnings of Chinese historiography have undergone dramatic change. The rise of the linear model of history was an extremely significant aspect of this development, one that rendered it impossible for historians to continue to write history in the traditional manner. The “linear model of history” was a Western concept, and difficult to define precisely. In a sense, a linear model of history had already existed within Chinese traditions of history writing.1 However, the occasional unconscious appearance of a linear model of history was quite different from making deliberate use of this model in writing history. As used here, the “linear model of history” is a relatively broad concept that can be contrasted with cyclical or degenerative models of history. It holds that historical development is linear, purposeful, progressive , and irreversible—history advances but never regresses. Even though multifarious versions of linear history emerged in the late Qing, in complex relation to each other, we can simplify them as follows. First, Kang Youwei’s 康有為 (1858–1927) Three Ages Theory, based on New Text Confucianism, interpreted history as a progression from “the age of disunity” (juluan shi 據亂世), through “the age of rising peace” (shengping shi 昇平世), to “the age of great peace” (taiping shi 太平世). This was a relatively early example of a historical theory based on a model of linear development. However, Kang’s Three Ages Theory was really part of a political debate, and its influence on historiography was relatively limited.2 Second, a wide variety of teleological schemes offered appraisals of historical periods, such as ancient, medieval, and modern.3 Third, there was the “civilizational history” (wenming shi 文明史) that had its 136 · Wang Fan-sen origins in the work of François Guizot (1787–1871) and Henry Buckle (1821–61) and which entered China via Japan. Fourth and finally, there were theories of social evolution in a progressive mode. Kang’s views are well treated in the existing scholarship, so this chapter will briefly discuss the next two views of linear history, before focusing on theories of social evolution.4 In an article on modern linear historical models in China, Kuang Zhaojiang (Luke Kwong) points out that even before Yan Fu’s 嚴復 (1854– 1921) translation of Evolution and Ethics and Liang Qichao’s 梁啟超 (1873–1929) famous advocacy of a “new historiography” (xin shixue 新史 學), scholars such as Xue Fucheng 薛福成 (1838–94), Wang Tao 王韜 (1828–97), Zheng Guanying 鄭觀應 (1842–1922), and Chen Zhi 陳熾 (1855–1900) had all adopted different approaches to the periodization of Chinese history. These historians proposed frameworks within which the past, present, and future could be arranged to demonstrate that China was progressing from one historical stage to another.5 It is still difficult to judge how much influence these scholars actually had on the history writing of their time. The Japanese historian Kuwabara Jitsuzō’s 桑原騭藏 (1873–1931) Essentials of Oriental History (Tōyō shiyō 東洋史要) divided Chinese history into four stages: high antiquity, middle antiquity, recent antiquity, and modern. Since it served as the basis for Chinese history textbooks of the late Qing, we can conclude it was extremely influential.6 However, we cannot ignore the work of other Japanese historians who adopted a range of roughly similar periodization schemes, which were also influential in translation. Civilizational History Civilizational histories were very influential in Meiji Japan and then in late Qing China. In the 1870s several Western historical works had been translated into Japanese, including François Guizot’s Histoire générale de la civilisation en Europe (translated in 1872) and Henry Buckle’s History of Civilization in England (translated in 1875). Their style of historical writing was very different from preexisting Chinese and Japanese historiographical forms, and they had an enormous influence in Japan, where this form was called “civilizational history.” Fukuzawa Yukichi 福澤諭吉 (1835–1901) and Taguchi Ukichi 田口卯吉 (1855–1905) were among the leaders of this scholarly movement in Japan. Civilizational history emphasized a historical narrative that highlighted cause-and-effect The Impact of the Linear Model of History · 137 relations. It was critical of past historical studies that focused mostly on monarchs and neglected the rest of society, or emphasized political and military history to the exclusion of economics, religion, arts, and culture. These Japanese historians believed that Western history was like a rearview mirror that countries...