Zhou Wenjiu: A brief discussion on the stages of the development of Chinese Marxist historiography theory

Author: Zhou Wenjiu

Source: "Historiography And Historiography" WeChat public account

The original article was published in the first volume of the Journal of Historical Theory and Historiography in 2021

Chinese Marxist historiography was born along with the spread of Marxism in China. It is not only an important part of modern Chinese historiography, but also closely linked to the cause of revolution and construction led by the Communist Party of China. Generally speaking, historical theory is the precursor to the development of historiography. Discussing the stages of the development of Chinese Marxist historiography theory is very beneficial to summarizing the laws of the development of Marxist historiography. This year marks the centenary of the birth of the Communist Party of China, and I would like to commemorate it with this article.

Theories of historiography in a broad sense generally include theories about objective history itself and theories about history. The former can be called historical theory, and the latter can be called historical theory (narrow sense). There are both connections and differences. The historiographical theory of any school (in the broad sense) mostly contains these two aspects. The historiographical theory discussed in this article refers to the theory of historiography in a broad sense.

I. Essentials of Historiography: The Theoretical Cornerstone of Chinese Marxist Historiography

The Essentials of Historiography was written by Li Dazhao, the founder of the Communist Party of China, and was published by the Commercial Press in 1924. Li Dazhao was a Japanese student, in the autumn of 1914, he entered waseda University to study politics, although he did not complete his studies due to political activities and other reasons, he accepted Marxism in Japan, became the young scholar who mastered Marxist theory the most at that time, he participated in the editing of "Jiayin", and also had a certain reputation in the literary world.

In 1918, Li Dazhao entered Peking University as the director of Peking University Library, the founder of Modern Library in China. His 1919 "My View of Marxism" was the earliest systematic introduction and interpretation of Marxism in China. When Li Dazhao wrote "Essentials of Historiography", he was a professor at Peking University. He taught two courses in the Department of History of Peking University, namely "Materialist View of History" and "History of Historical Thought". While teaching courses, he published articles in academic journals run by Peking University (such as New Youth, New Wave, Social Science Quarterly, etc.), most of which were closely related to the lecture notes he wrote for the course. In addition, he was invited to give academic lectures on historical theory at universities in Shanghai and Wuhan. Although the "Essentials of Historiography" is not large, it was written by Li Dazhao on the basis of his lectures, articles, and speeches, and it belongs to the work of thick accumulation and thin hair.

The "Essentials of Historiography" talks about six issues: first, what is history, second, what is history, third, the system of historiography, fourth, the position of historiography in science, fifth, the relationship between historiography and its related studies, and sixth, the study of modern historiography and the influence of attitudes towards life. These six issues are all discussed around "historiography", from the inside out, advancing layer by layer, with a strict structure and self-contained system.

First of all, the "Essentials of Historiography" makes a distinction between "history" and historical writings: history is the itinerary of human life, it is a living thing, it is a living thing; historical writing is a record of living history, a "microcosm of a part of living history, not the essence of this living history." Li Dazhao defined history and historiography respectively: "History is a life in constant change and a culture that is a product of it. "History is the study of social change, that is, the study of life in the midst of constant change and the culture in which it is produced." This distinction has a very important significance in the theory of historiography, getting rid of the long-term confusion between the concepts of objective history and subjective historical record, and laying the foundation for the establishment of a scientific historical epistemology.

Second, the Essentials of Historiography reveals the characteristics of historical understanding. Li Dazhao believes that once history occurs, it is "a trip to the past, there is no return", that is, "the real past is dead and gone; the things of the past are done and finished; the people of the past are dead for a long time, and there will be no return of all disasters; and it is impossible to change them." People's understanding of history, on the other hand, is constantly changing. "Metaphors are alive and progressive; therefore, historical facts are also alive and progressive." The Confucius in the minds of the Tang Dynasty people is different from the Confucius in the minds of the Han Dynasty, and the Confucius in the minds of the Song Dynasty is different from the Tang Dynasty. Because an era has a more progressive view of history, and an era has a more progressive knowledge of an era. The continuous progress of historical views and knowledge will inevitably lead to changes in people's interpretation of real facts. History is not afraid to change its work, and it must be changed at any time. The history of the transformation is closer to the truth than before.

Finally, the Essentials of Historiography deals with the tasks of historiography, the nature of science, and the disciplinary system of history. Li Dazhao said that the study of historiography roughly includes three levels: "First pay attention to each particular fact and determine it, record it; gradually pay attention to the interrelationship of facts, understand it in terms of individual situations, and explain it; and then go on to understand and explain the facts, and then summarize and deduce them, constituting a general theory of the system of their research." In nature, historiography is a science, although it involves human psychological elements, and the phenomenon of personnel is complex, and it is particularly difficult to study, but the theory of history exists, and since there is a "rational law", then historiography is essentially scientific. He designed the disciplinary system of history very grandly, believing that the broadest sense of history includes general history (history in the broad sense), special history, and philosophy of history (which should be attributed to the philosophical system), and ordinary history is divided into two parts: narrative history and historical theory, and special history includes "the part of narrative" and "the part of theory".

Although the ideological resources of the "Essentials of Historiography" are relatively rich, although it fully absorbs the achievements of Western and Japanese historical theories, the fundamental theory it adheres to is the materialist view of history. Li Dazhao said: "Marx advocated taking the economy as the center to examine the cause of social change, because economic relations can be like natural science to develop the law of cause and effect. In this way, history was elevated to the status of science. On the one hand, history and society are regarded as one and the whole; on the other hand, the culture of human life and its products is also regarded as a whole; and there is no room for a part to bequeath or to scatter the whole. With our people with a whole lively conception of history, we cannot but be grateful to Marx. ”

Although the "Essentials of Historiography" has the characteristics of pure academic theory, it uses the materialist view of history to discuss the basic problems of historiography and opens up a new path of historiography. As Li Dazhao said: "In recent times, few of the history professors in higher education institutions have been enthusiastic about creating a new kind of society without being influenced by the materialist view of history. Regarding the status of the "Essentials of Historiography," Mr. Bai Shouyi made a very accurate assessment: "Comrade Li Dazhao was the first founder of Marxist historiography on the mainland. His "Essentials of Historiography" is the first work on the mainland to systematically expound historical materialism and integrate it with some specific historical work, and it is a work that opens the way for Marxist historiography on the mainland. In the 1920s, although the specific results of using the materialist view of history to study history were still rare, Li Dazhao's "Essentials of Historiography" had laid the theoretical cornerstone for the emergence of Chinese Marxist historiography.

In addition, Qu Qiubai's "Introduction to Social Sciences" and Cai Hesen's "History of Social Evolution" have also made important contributions in translating and expounding the materialist view of history and the use of the materialist view of history to discuss Chinese history, which is also the result of Marxist historiography theory in this period.

II. The Course of Historical Philosophy: A Sign of the Initial Formation of Chinese Marxist Historical Theory

In the 1920s, papers on the study of Chinese social problems using the materialist view of history began to emerge, especially with the development of the Great Revolution, the combination of the materialist view of history and the study of Chinese history changed from theoretical advocacy to concrete practice. Guo Moruo's 1930 edition of Studies on Ancient Chinese Society was the first to use Marxism to study Chinese history. In the book "Self-Introduction", Guo Moruo revealed the different intentions of scholars of the "sorting out the country" school such as Hu Shi: "Our 'criticism' is different from their 'sorting out'. The ultimate goal of 'sorting out' is to 'seek truth from facts', and our critical spirit is to 'seek the truth in facts'. "What the method of 'sorting out' can do is 'know what it is', and our 'critical' spirit is to 'know why it is'." Sorting out the 'self' is a necessary step in the process of 'criticism', but it cannot be a step that we should limit. Some people commented that this passage "is really a confessional declaration of the Shaku school." This book made waves in the academic and ideological circles, and soon after, academic controversies on social history, ancient Chinese history, and the nature of Rural Chinese society emerged. Marxist historians actively participated in the controversy, and in the process forged a contingent of Marxist historians and achieved a number of achievements in Marxist historiography. Among them, the "Course of Philosophy of History" written by Zhai Bozan is one of the important achievements.

The Course of Philosophy of History was written in August 1938 by Zhai Bozan in the context of the outbreak of the War of Resistance against the background of the Great Controversy on Social History. In August of the following year, it was republished at the request of the Publishing House, and an additional "Preface to the Reprinting" was written, "The Masses, Leaders, and History."

It should be said that the "Course of Philosophy of History" is a theoretical masterpiece of the initial formation period of Chinese Marxist historiography. Zhai Bozan closely integrated the Marxist materialist view of history with Chinese and foreign history, not only made historical arguments for the materialist view of history, but also explained the materialist view of history, blended historical theories, and finally summed up the great controversy in social history; in connection with the situation of the War of Resistance, he specifically put forward some historical theories that were beneficial to the national war of resistance.

The "Philosophical Course of History" discusses the legality of historical development, the relevance of history, the practicality of history, and the adaptability of history. "The legality of historical development" refers to the regularity of historical development, which is manifested in the dialectical unity of the generality and particularity of history, the dialectical development of the negation of history and the negation of negation. "Historical relevance" refers to the interconnection of historical elements, including "the continuity of historical time, the interconnectivity of space, and the indivisibility of objective conditions and subjective creation." "The practicality of history" means that history is the result of the struggle of all human life and its creative practice in the past. "All societies that have existed in history, whether ancient, feudal or modern capitalist, can only be the result of the development of the relations of production and exchange created by man in his practical activity, and not as the realization of an 'absolute reason' predetermined by man." "Historical adaptability" refers to the dialectical unity of the economic base and superstructure of society, social existence and social consciousness.

The "Course in the Philosophy of History" attaches importance to the important role of man's subjective creativity in the development of history, expounds the relationship between objective conditions and the dialectical unity of subjective creation and the interrelationship between man and nature as the premise of historical events, profoundly explains the relationship between the masses and leaders, and the respective roles of the masses and leaders in promoting history, pointing out that "the strength and action of the masses are the forces that determine all historical actions in the past and the future", and the masses must become a great force in promoting history." Only through such a leading party or leading figure can the actions of the masses be regularized, organized, and centralized, and they can be guided to the historical position in accordance with the correct line. At the same time, a leading party or leading figure in historical action has become powerful because he represents the demands of the masses, wins the love of the masses, and symbolizes the totality of the power of the masses."

The Course of Philosophy of History explores the issues of historical philosophy in close connection with the situation of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the future of Chinese history. Zhai Bozan reiterated many times that he wrote this book to win the victory of the national war of resistance. He said: "When the great historical subject of the Chinese national liberation war is placed before us and reflected in the philosophy of history, so that the struggle of reality and the struggle of philosophy of history are combined into one, the struggle of philosophy of history becomes a necessary part of the struggle of reality. The critique of our philosophy of history, in its critique of the past, implies leading the present and indicating the future. In this book, Zhai Bozan mentions the class nature of the science of history, the unique scientific nature of the materialist view of history, and makes a political criticism of bourgeois ideology, showing a strong fighting character. This work takes a new level in the fusion of the scientific and revolutionary nature of historiography.

The central issue discussed in the Philosophy of History is the law of history, with a bias toward historical theory. The "Essentials of Historiography" focuses on historical theory and does not discuss historical theory much. In this regard, the "Historical Philosophy Course" makes up for the weak links in the "Essentials of Historiography" and promotes the further improvement of the theoretical system of Marxist historiography. After the edition of the "Historical Philosophy Course", it caused great repercussions at that time, not only in Changsha, which was sold out, but also in Guilin, Guiyang, Chongqing, Guangzhou, and Hong Kong in the distribution office. Some newspapers and periodicals have also published comments on it. For example, Fu Sheng (Hu Yuzhi's pen name) said, Zhai Bozan "used Marx's materialistic dialectics as a hint in the study of history; at the same time, he built the foundation of history's development on Marx's materialist view of history." Therefore, this book can be said to be a kind of science in which all of Marx's philosophy is applied to the study of history." After Zhai Bozan's death, Hou Wailu highlighted the book in an article commemorating him, saying: "Comrade Zhai Bozan has always paid attention to the theoretical construction of Marxist historiography, especially to the discussion of historical methodology. The "Course of Philosophy of History", which he wrote at the beginning of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, is a monograph on historical theories and methods. ”

In addition, Zhai Bozan has published many papers on historical methodology, such as "Chinese Historical Science and Experimentalism" and "A Brief Discussion on the Study of Chinese History". Other Marxist historians have also published works of the nature of historical research methods, such as Cai Shangsi's "New Research Method on Chinese History" and Wu Ze's "Chinese Historical Research Law". These papers and writings reflect the theoretical achievements of historiography in the initial development of Chinese Marxist historiography.

3. Mao Zedong's Outstanding Contributions to Historical Theory

Although Mao Zedong was not a professional historian, he had a profound sense of history. As the leader of the Communist Party of China, in the course of leading the cause of the Chinese revolution, he attached great importance to summing up historical lessons and lessons and to historical research and historical construction. Reality and history are closely related. In order to formulate the correct line, principles, and policies of the new-democratic revolution, we must have a clear understanding of the nature and class structure of modern Chinese society, and at the same time, we must also have a coherent and profound understanding of Chinese and foreign history. Mao Zedong's expositions on Chinese history, his instructions on historical work, and his expositions on the theories and methods of historical research are brilliant chapters in Chinese Marxist historical theory and have played a tremendous role in promoting the development of Chinese Marxist historiography. Lü Zhenyu said: "In the historiography of Marxism, we must first write about Comrade Li Dazhao, but since articles such as "Analysis of the Classes in Chinese Society," Marxist historiography has basically developed under the guidance of Mao Zedong Thought. "Fully affirmed Mao Zedong's contribution and influence on Chinese Marxist historiography."

First of all, Mao Zedong attached great importance to historical study and historical research. He raised the question of whether he had historical knowledge or not to the height of whether or not he could achieve revolutionary victory. He said: "A party guiding a great revolutionary movement cannot achieve victory without revolutionary theory, without historical knowledge, without a profound understanding of the actual movement. In the precarious situation of the War of Resistance Against Japan, Mao Zedong still entrusted the whole party with the task of studying and studying history. He said: "Our nation has a history of thousands of years, has its characteristics, and has many of its precious items. For these, we are still elementary school students. Today's China is a development of historical China; we are Marxist historians, and we should not cut off history. From Confucius to Sun Yat-sen, we should sum up and inherit this precious legacy. This is important for guiding the great movements of the day. ”

Second, he made incisive judgments on the social nature of ancient and modern society and the driving force of China's historical development. He said: "Since China broke away from slavery and entered the feudal system, its economic, political, and cultural development has been trapped in a state of slow development for a long time. This feudal system has continued for about three thousand years since the Zhou Qin. "Since the Opium War of 1840, China has gradually become a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society. Since the September 18 Incident in 1931, when Japanese imperialism invaded China militarily, China has become a colonial, semi-colonial and semi-feudal society. "The main contradiction in feudal society is the contradiction between the peasant class and the landlord class. In such a society, only the peasants and the handicraft workers are the basic classes that create wealth and culture. Mao Zedong pointed out that in China's feudal society, "only this class struggle of the peasants, the peasants' uprising and the peasants' war are the real driving force for historical development." "The people, and only the people, are the driving force behind the creation of world history." His exposition of the contradictions and contents of modern Chinese society, his analysis of the class structure, and the distinction between the new democratic revolution and the old democratic revolution have become the basic guidelines for building a Marxist disciplinary system of modern Chinese history.

Finally, he elaborated on the methodological principles of historical research. First, he stressed the need to possess material in detail, guided by Marxist theory. He said that in the study of history, "it is necessary not to rely on subjective imagination, not on momentary enthusiasm, not on dead books, but on objectively existing facts, to possess materials in detail, and to draw correct conclusions from these materials under the guidance of the general principles of Marxism-Leninism." Second, he pointed to the need to use the theory of class struggle to explain history. He said: "The class struggle, some classes have triumphed, some classes have been eliminated. This is history, this is the history of civilization for thousands of years. Those who interpret history from this point of view are called historical materialism, and the opposite of this view is historical idealism. "Third, he emphasized understanding history from a historicist point of view." Today's China is a development of historical China; we are Marxist historians, and we should not cut off history. "We must respect our own history and must not cut it off." But this respect gives history a certain scientific status, respects the development of historical dialectics, not praises the past and the present, and does not praise any feudal toxin. Fourth, he proposed that in dealing with historical heritage, it is necessary to distinguish between the best and the worst, eliminate the dross, and absorb the essence: "We must distinguish between all the decaying things of the ancient feudal ruling class and the excellent people's culture in ancient times, that is, somewhat democratic and revolutionary. ”

Mao Zedong's theory on Chinese history is rich in content and has important guiding significance for the study of Chinese history. His theory on historical research is the guideline for the work of Chinese Marxist historiography.

IV. Expansion and Deepening in the Popularization of Marxism: From the founding of New China to the outbreak of the Cultural Revolution

After the founding of New China, Chinese historiography entered a new stage. Studying Marxism and carrying out the ideological transformation of intellectuals was the basic academic ecology of the 1950s. In the field of historiography, most historians consciously accept the materialist view of history and strive to study and apply Marxism to conduct historical research. Marxist historiography flourished and became the mainstream of Chinese historiography. Due to the general improvement of the level of Marxist theory in the field of historiography, many issues that were debated in the past, especially during the great controversy of social history in the 1930s, have been revived, and even more issues have been discussed on this basis. Most of these problems are historical theories with macroscopic nature. Because with the progress of research, it is necessary to involve relevant historical theories. Unlike the 1930s, when the study of historical theory was based on academic developments and had little to do with politics or the current situation. Historical theory, on the other hand, is subject to certain political interference. It should be said that from the founding of New China to before the "Cultural Revolution", it was a period when Marxist historical theory was very active. During this period, the historical theoretical issues discussed included the problem of the periodization of ancient Chinese history, the problem of feudal land ownership in China, the problem of peasant war in China's feudal society, the problem of the budding of Chinese capitalism, and the formation of the Han nationality. These five questions are humorously called the "five golden flowers" of ancient history research. Related to them are the problem of the mode of production in Asia Minor, the reasons for the long-term continuation of China's feudal society, and the problem of staging in China's modern history. Historical theory includes the evaluation of historical figures, the relationship between historicism and class views, the relationship between historical theory, and the relationship between ancient and modern historical research.

Famous Marxist historians are often advocates in solving these difficult historical problems. For example, on the reasons for the long-term continuation of China's feudal society, Fan Wenlan wrote "On the Reasons for the Long-term Continuation of China's Feudal Society" in 1950, which opened the discussion on this issue. Since then, scholars such as Zhai Bozan, Yang Xiangkui, Wu Dakun, Wu Ze, Shang Yu, and Shu Shizheng have published long articles to discuss this. By the early 1960s, Xu Xusheng, Fu Yiling, Hu Rulei, etc., also had important achievements published in this regard. On the issue of the formation of the Han nationality, Fan Wenlan's "On the Reasons why China has become a unified country since the Qin and Han Dynasties" published by Fan Wenlan in 1954 can be described as the beginning of the work. The same is true of theoretical questions about the evaluation of historical figures. In the seventeen years before the Cultural Revolution, discussions on the evaluation of historical figures had two climaxes, first in the early 1950s and second in the late 1950s. On January 25, 1959, Guo Moruo published "On Cai Wenji's Eighteen Beats of Hu Di" in Guangming Daily, which for the first time raised the issue of re-evaluating Cao Cao. Soon after, Zhai Bozan published in the newspaper "Should Restore Cao Cao's Reputation" from the "Battle of Chibi" to Cao Cao", which fully affirmed Cao Cao, thus setting off a heated discussion on Cao Cao's evaluation. From Cao Cao's reversal of the case to the reversal of the case of other historical figures, for a time the "overturned" articles continued to appear, and various opinions were fiercely exchanged. Thus, theoretical discussions on the evaluation of historical figures began.

It is worth noting that in the seventeen years before the "Cultural Revolution", while discussing important academic issues, a series of academic criticism movements were also carried out, such as the criticism of the film "The Tale of Martial Arts", the criticism of the study of "Dream of the Red Chamber", the criticism of Hu Shi, the criticism of Hu Feng, the criticism of Yang Xianzhen's "theory of unity and oneness", Sun Yefang's theory of improving economic efficiency, and the criticism of Feng Youlan's abstract inheritance law. Most of these academic criticisms were carried out along with the development of political movements, and some of them exceeded the scope of academic criticism. When academic criticism is carried out normally, the principle of a hundred schools of thought contending and a hundred flowers blossoming has been implemented, and the discussion of historical theory and historical theory is often more active and in-depth. When academic criticism and political criticism are mixed together, academic debates often cannot be carried out normally.

In the past seventeen years, great achievements have been made in the study of Marxist historical theory, expanding and deepening in the twists and turns, and leaving many lessons and lessons.

In the past seventeen years, the teaching of historical theory has not been included in the teaching plan of the history department of the university. In 1961, the Ministry of Education organized a conference on liberal arts textbooks, and did not include historical theory textbooks in the plan. However, some colleges and universities have opened a course on introduction to history, the content of which is mainly about historical materialism. Mr. Bai Shouyi recalled: "In the fifties, when comrades talked together and brought up the introduction to historiography, they all thought that such a book should be written under the guidance of the basic principles of Marxism; at the same time, they also believed that this course should be opened in the history department of higher education institutions. As for how this book should be written and what this course should talk about, everyone can't think of a way to do it for a while. Year after year, this issue has not been seriously discussed. Later, I opened this course in the history department of Beijing Normal University, which mainly talked about historical materialism. But I don't think that's true. Because I think that if we only talk about historical materialism, this course should be called historical materialism, not an introduction to historiography. I have been uneasy about the content of this course for many years. In the 1960s, the Department of History of Shandong University established the Introduction to Historiography Group and compiled the "Outline of Historiography Syllabus", which indicates that the university also opened an introduction to history course.

From discipline consciousness to Chinese style: from reform and opening up to the end of the 20th century

After the fall of the "Gang of Four", especially after the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, under the new situation of emancipating the mind, the study of historical theory became increasingly active. The year 1983, known as "the year of transformation, was the beginning of the awakening and construction of the field of historical theory." In June of the same year, World History published a commentator article titled "Let the Flower of Marxist Historiographical Theory Bloom in the Wind." The article pointed out that the general principles of historical materialism cannot be equated with Marxist historical theory, and the construction of history's own theory must be strengthened. In 1983, two textbooks on historical theory were published, namely "Introduction to Historical Science" edited by Ge Maochun and Xie Shushu and "Introduction to Historiography" edited by Bai Shouyi. Since then, the objects, contents and tasks of the study of historical theory courses or "Introduction to Historiography" have once become the hot topics of discussion in the entire historical community. A large number of translated foreign historical theories and academic dynamic information have made the historical circles feel fresh after years of closure, especially young scholars once admired Western historical theories, which further enhanced the popularity of historical theories. The so-called "old three theories" (system theory, cybernetics, information theory), "new three theories" (dissipative structure theory, synergy theory, mutation theory), "quantitative historiography" and so on are very fashionable. With the support of the State Education Commission, some colleges and universities and research institutions with a good foundation in historical theory have held seminars or workshops on introduction to historiography. Related works, series of books, and foreign translations have been published one after another. According to the author's opinion, by the end of the 20th century, there were at least 13 works with the titles "Introduction to Historiography" or "Introduction to Historiography". In addition to the two books mentioned above, the "Introduction to Historiography" edited by Wu Ze, the "Introduction to Historiography" co-authored by Jiang Yihua and Qu Lindong, and the "Introduction to Historiography" edited by Pang Zhuoheng are also more influential. In addition, books such as "Theories and Methods of History" have been published in large numbers. These achievements show that Marxist historical theory has broken away from the umbilical cord of historical materialism and established its own independent disciplinary system.

In fact, works on introductions to historiography and general theories of historiography were published in many editions in the 1920s and 1930s, but the introductions to historiography written in the 1980s and 1990s rarely drew on them, or even mentioned them very much. The reason for this is that, first, in the 1920s and 1930s, there were few historical materialisms that really ran through, and the theoretical requirements since the founding of New China were far away, and the older generation of scholars from the Republic of China period were unwilling to use this academic resource and rarely told students. Second, the weak study of the history of the history of the Historiography of the Republic of China over the years has led to a lack of understanding of the historical theoretical achievements of that period among the historians trained in New China. This fault in the compilation of introductory works on historiography reflects the great changes in the historiography of the two stages before and after the 20th century.

In the 1990s, another important feature of the development of historical theory was that the theory of historiography and the history of historiography were more closely linked. Scholars are aware that historical theory did not arise out of thin air, but was summed up in the long-term practice of historiography. The history of historiography contains rich historical theoretical components, and attention should be paid to excavating and refining historical theories from historical works of previous dynasties. As a result, the trend of shifting from historical theoretical research to historiography has emerged.

Marxist historical theory is also embodied in the practice and writing of specific historical research. The results in this regard are even more reflective of the level reached by Marxist historical theory in this period. These theories can be summarized as follows.

-- The theory of the coexistence of multiple relations of production in Chinese history. This was proposed by Mr. Bai Shouyi in the introduction to the first volume of the General History of China. He said: "In every specific social formation, it is often not a single production relationship, but most of the two or more production relations coexisting at the same time. Although these relations of production have a certain influence on the changes and development of society, not all production relations become the economic basis of society and determine the nature of society. Among them, only the relations of production that occupy a dominant position in society constitute the economic basis of this society and determine the nature, social outlook and development direction of society. This thesis is based on the basic principles of Marxism and drawn from the reality of Chinese history. The theory of the coexistence of multiple modes of production has special significance for the study of Chinese history, because China is a multi-ethnic country with a vast territory and uneven political, economic and cultural development. The theory of the coexistence of multiple modes of production is of fundamental guiding significance for understanding the richness and particularity of Chinese history.

-- The concept of one-yuan multi-line historical development. This was proposed by Luo Rongqu through his investigation of world history, especially through the study of the problem of world modernization. He believes that the macro framework of historical development should be "one yuan and multiple lines". In the final analysis, the development of human history revolves around the central axis of economic development with the development of productive forces as the core. This is the Marxist historical monism, that is, the meaning of the "unity" of social development. "Multi-line" refers to the development of different societies in the same state of great productive forces, which are widely different due to the influence of complex natural and social factors, but can be summarized into different stages of development, different development models and different development paths; any mode of production and social form is not one-dimensional, static, but multi-dimensional and dynamic. This is the "multi-linearity" of social development. Unity is the commonality of social development, and multilinearity is the particularity of social development. The two form a unity of commonality and particularity in a specific historical process.

——The theory of comprehensive factors in the process of feudalization in ancient Chinese society. The Outline of the General History of China edited by Bai Shouyi and the Introduction to the First Volume of the Multi-volume General History of China are advocated in this way. He believes that when examining the historical periodization of China's feudal society, it is necessary to focus on comprehensive factors, specifically, including five aspects: the development of social productive forces, changes in class relations, the development of class struggle, the degree of feudalization in ethnic minority areas, and the development of Sino-foreign relations.

——The metabolism theory of modern Chinese society. This is Chen Xulu's theoretical contribution to the study of modern Chinese society. "Metabolism" is a term used in life sciences. To explore the metabolism of modern Chinese society is to regard modern Chinese society as a living organism, which is the specific application of Marx's theory of social organism in the field of modern Chinese history research. Chen Xulu believes that the development and changes of Modern Chinese society are to a large extent due to the successive external shocks, and through the unique social mechanisms, they become internal, promoting ethnic conflicts and class confrontations, manifesting themselves as one wave of change after another, twisting and turning toward modernization, pushing the old and republican democracy of feudal absolutism, and pushing the closure of the conservative Chen and the new of enlightenment and opening up.

The above achievements are the crystallization of Chinese Marxist historians after years of exploration and reflection, with distinct national characteristics and Chinese style, showing the creativity of Chinese scholars in applying the materialist view of history in historical research.

VI. Integrity and Innovation: Understanding and Reflection on Marxist Historical Theory since the 21st Century

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the development of Marxist historical theory has, on the one hand, been manifested as a continuation of the academic trend of the 20th century, especially in the first few years, and has continued to produce a large number of achievements in continuing the trend of academic review and summarization of the century that emerged after 1995. On the other hand, historians have higher expectations for the development of Marxist historical theory in the 21st century. On the basis of adhering to the basic tenets of Marxism, how to have new developments and new breakthroughs has become a problem that many scholars think about and even worry about.

In the 21st century, the older generation of Marxist historians has gradually withered away, and the middle-aged and young generation of Marxist historians shoulder the mission of the times of integrity and innovation.

Integrity and innovation are dialectically unified, and the relationship between the two needs to be handled well. On the one hand, innovation must be carried out on the basis of integrity, otherwise innovation will deviate from the track. On the other hand, if there is no innovation, no dare to explore new theories and new problems, and if we are self-contained, Marxist historical theory will lose its vitality. On the basis of studying and studying Marxist texts, we should constantly combine research practice with new social practices and propose new historical theories and historical theories in order to enrich the treasure house of Marxist historical theories.

For more than a decade, researchers of Marxist historiography on the mainland have closely linked themselves with the reality of mainland historiography, constantly opened up new fields, and paid attention to the international academic frontiers, showing a broad academic vision. The theoretical issues of historiography discussed are generally the theory of global history, the theory of new Qing history, the theory of social history research, and the theory of public history. He has translated, analyzed and commented on Western historical philosophy, postmodern historical theory research, and postmodern historical theory research. Judging from the degree of specialization of research topics, there has been a great improvement compared with the past.

However, we must see that the current development of historical theory is problematic. First, the status and influence of historical theory has declined compared with the 1980s and 1990s. In recent years, historical theory has been closely linked to the history of historiography, and it seems that it has lost its independent status and has become a vassal of the history of historiography. Historical theory and historiography were originally two disciplines, because they were both about history and both were studies of history, so they were grouped together in the classification of disciplines. In fact, the tasks of the two are different. At present, there are more scholars engaged in the study of historiography and history, but very few are mainly engaged in the study of historical theory. Scholars who were originally good at the field of historical theory also changed their focus on the study of historiography. Fewer purely historical theoretical articles have been published, and even fewer systematic historical theoretical works have been published. The second is to present the professional division between Chinese historical theory and Western historical theory. There is indeed a difference between Chinese and Western historiography, which was reflected in the 1997 edition of the discipline catalog when "Historical Theory and Historiography" was regarded as a secondary discipline. However, after the promulgation of the 2011 edition of the discipline catalog, the original second-level discipline "Historical Theory and Historiography" was divided into two and divided into two first-level disciplines, Chinese history and world history. Under "Chinese History", it is called "Historical Theory and the History of Chinese Historiography"; under "World History", it is called "Historical Theory and History of Foreign Historiography". In this way, the distinction between Chinese and foreign historiographical theories is even more obvious. Scholars who study traditional Chinese historical theories are less concerned about foreign historical theories, and scholars who study foreign historical theories rarely get involved in traditional Chinese historical theories. The same historical theoretical research has become two different majors. This is very detrimental to the development of the discipline of historical theory. Third, due to the excessive specialization of historical theory research, historical theory is not closely related to ordinary historical research practice. In this way, it is difficult for historical theory to play a guiding role in historical research.

Building a discipline system of Marxist historiography theory with Chinese characteristics is an important proposition at present, and it is also an inevitable requirement for the development of the discipline of historical theory in the new era. In this regard, there are three points to pay attention to.

1. It is necessary to strengthen the independent status of historical theory. Although it belongs to the same category as historiography in terms of discipline classification, the tasks and systems of the two are different. The importance of historical theory cannot be weakened, and the results of historical research can be sublimated into historical theory, but it cannot replace historical theory.

2. It is necessary to strengthen the integration of ancient and modern, Chinese and foreign historical theories. Scholars who study Chinese historical theory must also understand some foreign historical theories; scholars who mainly study foreign historical theories must also understand Chinese historical theories; contemporary historical theories should pay attention to drawing on traditional Chinese historical theories. From the perspective of comparison, it is necessary to use the ancient for the present and the foreign for the Chinese, and build a historical theoretical system that conforms to the development of contemporary society and the development of historiography.

3. It is necessary to create new concepts and new categories of historical theories with national characteristics, and make efforts to create a discourse system of historical theories with national characteristics. Concepts and categories are the basic elements of constructing a discourse system. The refinement of concepts should be rooted in the soil of ethnographic historiography and should also rely on the beneficial ideas of the historiography of other countries. The discipline system of historiography theory with Chinese characteristics is inseparable from the discourse system with national characteristics. Therefore, we must be good at refining the concept of identity that has both Chinese colors and can be understood and accepted by the international community.

The author, Zhou Wenjiu, is a professor at the School of History, Beijing Normal University

Comments from omitted, the full version please refer to the original text.

Editor: Xiang Yu

Proofreader: Water Life

Official subscription number of the Chinese Academy of History

Historical China WeChat subscription account