Zhai Bozan (1898-1968), Uyghur, Hunan Changde people. He is a famous historian, social activist, outstanding educator, and one of the important founders of The science of Marxist history in China. In his early years, Zhai Bozan participated in the May Fourth Movement and the Northern Expedition. He joined the Communist Party of China in 1937 and has been engaged in united front and theoretical propaganda for a long time since then. After the July 7 Incident, he served as a professor at the University of the Commonwealth of The People's Republic of China, which moved south, initiated the organization of the Hunan Branch of the Sino-Soviet Cultural Association and the Hunan Cultural Circles Anti-Enemy Support Association, and served as a permanent director to publish the book "Course in the Philosophy of History". In 1938, he organized the Hunan Branch of the Sino-Soviet Cultural Association in Changsha and actively participated in the anti-Japanese rescue work. In March 1939, he went to teach at the Minguo University in Pupu, Xiangxi Province, where he united progressive students and fought against the Kuomintang reactionaries. In February 1940, Zhai Bozan was appointed as the director of the General Council of the Sino-Soviet Cultural Association and the deputy editor-in-chief of Sino-Soviet Culture, and gave an academic lecture at the Cultural Work Committee presided over by Guo Moruo. In 1943, Zhai Bozan completed the "Outline of Chinese History" (Volume 1) and the "Collection of Chinese History" (Volume 1).
After the founding of New China, Zhai Bozan successively served as a member of the Cultural and Education Committee of the Government Council of the Central People's Government and a member of the Central Ethnic Affairs Committee. He was a professor and vice president of Peking University, a member of the Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, an editorial board member of The Journal of Historical Research and Archaeology, and was elected as a member of the First National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and a deputy to the First, Second and Third National People's Congresses. Zhai Bozan is one of the "Five Masters" of Marxist New Historiography (Guo Moruo, Fan Wenlan, Zhai Bozan, Lü Zhenyu, and Hou Wailu). His main works include "Course in the Philosophy of History", "Outline of Chinese History" (vols. 1 and 2), "Collection of Treatises on Chinese History", "Series of Treatises on Historical Issues", etc., and edited the "Outline of Chinese History".
Some scholars have proposed that in the genealogy of Chinese Marxist historiography, Guo Moruo, Fan Wenlan, Zhai Bozan, Lü Zhenyu, and Hou Wailu, who are revered by historians as the "Five Elders of Marxism and Leninism," constitute the first square. They are not only the pioneers, promoters and builders of Chinese Marxist historiography, but also have made outstanding achievements in different fields of historiography. The "five elders" are completely consistent in their fundamental management of learning, that is, they firmly believe in Marxism, adhere to the materialist view of history as their guide throughout their lives, and take the construction of Chinese Marxist historiography as their vocation. However, this does not mean that the "five elders" do not have their own characteristics and personalities in their studies. On the contrary, their academic characteristics and personalities are extremely distinct. It can be said that they are moving toward the same goal with different characteristics and personalities of their studies, and have formed a mutually reinforcing synergy for the construction of Chinese Marxist historiography. As far as Zhai Bozan is concerned, his academic characteristics and personality are clearly reflected in the theoretical construction tree. Zhai Bozan's historical thinking, combined with the reality of Chinese history, expanded the scope of historical materialism and promoted the depth of thinking on many issues. In particular, in the process of building Marxist historical theory in New China, Zhai Bozan made outstanding contributions. His exploration of topics related to the integration of historical materialism with Chinese history, his views and propositions on the relationship between Marxist historicism and class viewpoints, and his in-depth analysis and viewpoints on the issue of "historical relations" are not only valuable resources in the history of the development of Chinese Marxist historiography, but also have thought-provoking significance to this day.
A pioneer in the sinification of historical materialism
Chinese Marxist historiography was formally formed in the 1930s as a major controversy over Chinese social history. The Great Controversy of Chinese Social History is the first large-scale experiment in the application of Marxism to the study of Chinese history, and has initially shaped a new academic paradigm that is different from both traditional historiography and empirical historiography. Needless to say, although all the factions in the controversy claim to use the materialist view of history and dialectics as weapons, it is inevitable that the fish and dragons will be mixed. Even for sincere Marxists, it is difficult to avoid dogmatic and formulaic deviations. However, the achievements of the Great Controversy in Chinese Social History are the first, and their contribution to the comprehensive entry of Marxism into the field of Chinese historical research is the first. Therefore, Marxist historians attach great importance to this controversy and sum it up in a timely manner. Among them, the book "Course in the Philosophy of History" written by Zhai Bozan to sum up the lessons of polemics is the first Monograph on Marxist historiography theory. The book systematically expounds the Marxist concept of history, focusing on theoretical issues such as "the legality of historical development", "the relevance of history", and "the practicality of history", including topics such as "the dialectical unity of generality and particularity", "the dialectical unity of objective conditions and subjective creation", and "the dialectical unity of the lower foundation and the superstructure". This book has an important position in the history of the development of Chinese Marxist historical thought, has a very prominent philosophical color, deepens the Chinese Marxist historical thought laid down by Mr. Li Dazhao, and uses the method of dialectical materialism to push Chinese Marxist historical thought to a new height.
Chronology of Chinese and Foreign History
In order to deepen Marxist historical theory and make it more scientific to play its role in guiding the study of Chinese history, Zhai Bozan analyzed and criticized the research tendency of mechanism in the book. Mechanists equate historical development with economic development, "completely denying the reaction of ideology and even political forms to the real social economy, and the interaction between political forms and ideologies." In the relations of historical development, the creative role of living human consciousness is eliminated, and the development of human history is regarded as the development of rigid socio-economic naturalism that has nothing to do with human beings", thus returning to the "old age of evolution". Zhai Bozan pointed out that mechanism and conceptualism lead to the same end. Ideologically, the conceptualist separates consciousness from existence and inverts their role; the mechanist obliterates the effect of consciousness on existence. Their views, though different or even opposite, ignore the same aspect of existence as the adaptability of consciousness. Obviously, Zhai Bozan not only insisted on materialism, but also emphasized dialectical materialism. Only dialectical materialism is Marxism. Obviously, it is wrong to reduce the materialist view of history to a purely economic view of history. In fact, this is not a problem for Marxism. Engels once made a clear and serious criticism of the idea of understanding Marxism simply as economic determinism. However, given the specific circumstances of the time, the tendency of mechanical materialism was difficult to avoid. Therefore, Zhai Bozan's exposition has the significance of calibrating the direction, which is of constructive and positive significance for comprehensively and scientifically grasping Marxism and for the smooth advancement of Marxism in the field of historiography.
Following the 1938 "Course in the Philosophy of History", Zhai Bozan published an article in 1943 entitled "A Brief Discussion on the Study of Chinese History", which once again showed the wisdom and profundity of the Marxist method and reflected the standard of Chinese Marxist historians in applying the materialist view of history. For example, Zhai Bozan attaches great importance to the connection and interaction between the han nationality and the history of other ethnic groups, proposing that "the true history of China is the sum of the historical activities of the Han chinese and other ethnic groups in China outside it." He also emphasized the connection between Chinese history and world history, on the one hand, "the changes in Chinese history often affect the development of world history", on the other hand, "Chinese history is to world history, just as the cells are to the human body". He pointed out that the general must be combined with the particularity, and that in studying Chinese history, it is necessary to find out its particularity from the general law of development; at the same time, it is also necessary to discover the general law of its development from the particularity. He suggested that the analysis of the relationship between the two hostile groups should not be taken as a satisfaction, but that attention should be paid to the relationship between the middle social groups and the two major groups. He paid more attention to the internal contradictions of the ruling clique, such as the scuffle of the clan and the dictatorship of foreign eunuchs. He also attached great importance to the transformation of internal and external contradictions, and the entry of frontier nationalities into the society of the Central Plains was triggered by external factors that triggered the social and economic changes in the Central Plains. He proposed that the way to examine the development of ideology is to reduce the thinking (such as philosophy and religion) that evaporate from the socio-economic basis to their starting point, and to evaporate into thinking from the thinking and then solidify into images (literature, painting, sculpture, etc.). Zhai Bozan's article skillfully applies the basic principles of Marxism, and with in-depth theory and sharp style, reflects the maturity and perfection of Marxist historical methodology, so it has been widely praised.
After the founding of New China, bathed in the spring breeze of New China, Zhai Bozan was full of vigor and threw himself into the construction of historiography of New China with a more exalted mental state. In 1961, Zhai Bozan wrote the outline of the "Outline of Chinese History" for the History Department of Peking University, "Preliminary Opinions on Handling Several Historical Issues", combined with the concerns of the historians, and once again put forward his own systematic ideas on how to use the materialist view of history and materialistic dialectics to guide the study of Chinese history for the reference and discussion of historians. Zhai Bozan's intention is to establish a Marxist historical discourse system suitable for New China as soon as possible and to construct a new historical paradigm. It should be said that this is the embodiment of the spirit of responsibility of a Marxist historian. To this end, he gave systematic and in-depth thinking on many fundamental issues involving the development of historiography, and hoped that the historians would discuss and form a consensus on these issues, so as to establish the Marxist historical form of New China as soon as possible. Zhai Bozan positively expounded on the eight aspects of "how to deal with class relations in history", "how to deal with ethnic relations in history", "how to deal with international relations in history", "how to treat the viewpoint of development", "how to treat the comprehensive viewpoint", "the masses of the people and individual historical figures", "politics, economy and culture", and "theory, historical materials and articles". These 8 questions are not only embedded in Marxist historiography, but also rooted in the actual context of New China, and are theoretical problems that need to be solved in advance in rewriting the general history of China. It should be said that many of Zhai Bozan's thinking is very in-depth, touching on some deep-seated issues. For example, with regard to the historical peasant uprisings, peasant wars, peasant class consciousness, etc., Zhai Bozan proposed that the peasant war cannot be equated with a proletarian revolution; the peasants oppose feudal oppression and exploitation, but they do not and cannot realize that feudalism is opposed as a system; the peasants are opposed to the landlords, but they are not and cannot be conscious of opposing the landlords as a class; the peasants are opposed to the emperor, but they are not and cannot be conscious of opposing the imperial power as a single doctrine. Zhai Bozan affirmed the enthusiasm and progressiveness of peasant revolt in history, but did not forget the limitations and even backwardness of its times. He advocated a comprehensive view of history with two eyes, seeing both the light side and the dark side. Darkness is always the main historical content in a society ruled by exploiting classes, he said; conversely, in any dark age, there can be no glimmer of light. Zhai Bozan also proposed that in conducting research, it is necessary to combine analysis with synthesis, and "analysis is not afraid of being meticulous and profound; otherwise, it cannot reveal the essence of historical events, and synthesis is not afraid of being comprehensive and summarized; otherwise, the whole picture and clues of history cannot be revealed." When analyzing, it is necessary to drill into individual historical events and use microscopes to discover problems; when synthesizing, it is necessary to stand outside individual historical events and use telescopes to observe the historical situation. Zhai Bozan's views have aroused widespread concern in the field of historiography and aroused people's in-depth thinking. Although people's understanding of Zhai Bozan's views is not the same, zhai bozan's spirit of active exploration, sincere attitude toward Marxism, and the academic style of Marxist historians are all admirable.
Preach Marxist historicism
In the theoretical system of historiography, "historicism" is a rather ambiguous concept. There is bourgeois historicism and there is also Marxist historicism. Marxist historicism has its specific meaning and direction. The historicism preached by Zhai Bozan undoubtedly belongs to Marxist historicism. However, as far as Marxist historicism is concerned, how to understand and apply it is not a simple matter. In 1951, Fan Wenlan reflected on the problem of "borrowing the past to say the present" in his Compendium of General History of China, and had already touched on the basic issue of how to scientifically understand and apply the principles of Marxist historicism. The following year, Zhai Bozan published an article entitled "Some Issues in the Commentary on Historical Figures", which clearly raised the issue of historicism in theory.
Outline of Chinese History
Jabzan criticized two non-historicist tendencies that emerged in the evaluation of historical figures at the time. One is to demand historical figures out of the concrete historical conditions and by the standards of the modern working class. Zhai Bozan pointed out that this tendency violates the principle of Marxist historicism, because to evaluate a historical figure from the perspective of Marxist historicism is to "make a specific analysis in strict connection with the historical era and historical conditions in which this historical figure is located." Another tendency is to unprincipledly exalt positive historical figures in history, especially representatives of the working class, and even to use modern words to describe them, so as to modernize and idealize those historical figures. According to Jabzan, neither of these non-historicist tendencies is consistent with the scientific principles of Marxism.
Proceeding from the marxist principle of historicism, Zhai Bozan admonished that the ruling class and its outstanding figures should not be negated on the basis of simple class components, but should be given their due historical status and proper evaluation according to their role in history and the size of their contribution to history. Moreover, in dealing with the peasant war, do not forget that the peasant war took place in the feudal era, do not forget that the peasants are small owners, and do not forget that the peasants do not represent the new productive forces, and that the peasant war should be treated with historicism.
In terms of giving play to the social and political functions of historiography, Zhai Bozan pointed out that we should not try to stuff the party's policies, calls and slogans into ancient history, and should not use the current policy of national equality of the party and the state to describe the ethnic relations in feudal society. Zhai Bozan said: We must properly handle the relationship between policy and theory, clearly understand the epochality, particularity, and concreteness of policies, scientifically handle well the relationship between historical research and the role of reality, and avoid arbitrarily rewriting history.
For Chinese Marxist historiography, the core theoretical question that historicism needs to answer is its relationship with class viewpoints and class analysis methods. As we all know, Marxism holds that the history of class society is the history of class struggle. This is the view that Marx and Engels insisted on all their lives and has never changed. However, it is also unscientific to regard the class point of view as the only view of materialistic history, and to regard the theoretical system of historical materialism as only a method of class analysis, and does not conform to the reality of historical materialism. In this respect, the Great Leap Forward in Historiography or the "Revolution in Historiography" of 1958 saw the misunderstanding and abuse of the class view. In this regard, a large number of Marxist historians at that time expressed their disapproval and criticized it. In this way, the question of how to understand the relationship between Marxist historicism and class views arises. Zhai Bozan's views on this issue have aroused widespread attention and discussion, and are regarded as representatives of advocating historicism.
Zhai Bozan, of course, was not opposed to the class point of view and the method of class analysis, and he believed that the class view did not conflict with historicism, because the two were originally combined. Since classes are historical classes, it is natural to use the Marxist historicist point of view to analyze the class situation in history. In this regard, it is precisely Marx who sets an example for future generations. He said that if there is only a class point of view and forgetting historicism, it is easy to one-sidedly negate everything; only historicism and forget the class point of view is easy to one-sidedly affirm everything. Only by combining the two can we make a comprehensive and fair judgment on historical facts. Without historicism, it is by no means Marxism. Zhai Bozan criticizes the one-sidedness of the class viewpoint, and once it is one-sided, it will overthrow all the exploiting classes and exploiting systems in history. He said that some people, based on the understanding that ancient history is the history of class society, "describe the whole history of ancient China as a dark mess, as a pile of garbage, as a pile of evils", which is obviously "non-historicist" and belongs to the attitude of nihilism. In response to the practice of "breaking the dynastic system" at that time, Zhai Bozan stressed that no matter what system the general history of China was written according to, the title of dynasty should not be deleted from Chinese history. He was not opposed to "breaking the dynastic system", but stressed that "'breaking the dynastic system' is to break the emperor-centered ideological system, not to eliminate the title of dynasty from history." Dynasties are historical beings that should not be destroyed, nor can they be eliminated. ...... Historians have no right to expel specific facts from history on the basis of their own love and hatred." Obviously, Jabsizan's claim is correct.
Facts have shown that the great discussion between historicism and class viewpoints has promoted the deep understanding of the materialist view of history in Chinese historians and enhanced people's understanding. At that time, the two sides participating in the discussion fully expounded their respective propositions in order to pursue the truth. This is a discussion within Marxist historiography, and there is no essential disagreement, so they all contribute together to the development of Chinese Marxist historiography. Among them, the contribution of Mr. Zhai Bozan should not be forgotten by future generations.
A model of the combination of "history" and "theory"
In a certain sense, Chinese Marxist historiography has grown and expanded in competition with empirical historiography and non-Marxist schools. Marxist historiography has always emphasized theoretical guidance and opposed the view that "historical materials are historiography". Around this theme, Marxist historians have published many treatises to clarify it.
Among Chinese Marxist historians, Zhai Bozan's investigation of the relationship between theory and historical materials is very comprehensive and profound, so it has a great influence. First of all, Zhai Bozan opposed the relegation of historiography to the study of historiography, and regarded examination as history, especially in the midst of cumbersome examination. He believes that cumbersome examination is bound to confuse the law of historical development, because in the course of history, there are often some subtle events sandwiched in it, and if every subtle event is examined, it is inevitable to leave the main context of historical development in order to notice many insignificant materials. As a result, people cannot see the whole picture of history, the backbone and context of history, the driving force of historical development and development, the pulse of historical beating, and the law of historical development. It will limit man's mind to the narrowest scope, make it rigid, and deprive man of the ability to grasp the overall situation of history. He reminded that if not liberated from this tedious examination, historians would be entangled in an endless number of subtle events and would not be able to get out, and they would drill narrower and narrower like bulls, and the final result would be that the road was not open.
Zhai Bozan expounded his views in the article "The Struggle of two lines on the Historical Scientific Front". "Historical data is to historiography, just as bricks and tiles are to houses, cloth is to clothes, we can say that no bricks and tiles can not build a house, no cloth can not make clothes, can we say that bricks and tiles are houses, cloth is clothes? From historical materials to historiography, just like from bricks and tiles to houses, from cloth to clothes, a series of complex labor processes are also experienced in the middle. ...... And this kind of kung fu is an extremely meticulous thinking process, and only through this process can we create a system of concepts and theories, can we turn materials into theories, and can we turn historical materials into history. He believes that the collection of historical materials is only to prepare materials for historical research, not the ultimate purpose of historiography. The task of historiography cannot always be to compile a compendium, but it should be a science of analyzing historical materials. Therefore, we should learn to analyze historical materials and turn historical materials into history. Zhai Bozan has repeatedly stressed that without correct theory to analyze research, historical data is equal to waste. Data is a wild horse that cannot be harnessed without Marxist-Leninist theory. According to Deng Guangming's recollection, Zhai Bozan often suggested that teachers of the History Department of Peking University who were middle-aged or older learn more theories, saying that historical materials are like a pile of copper coins, and theory is like a rope for stringing money, and marxism-Leninism must be used to string together scattered historical materials so that they can form a system and be used to clarify the essence and truth of historical problems.
In addition, Zhai Bozan attaches great importance to the work of historical materials. He pointed out that research must spend a lot of time collecting data, identifying data, thoroughly grasping data, and analyzing those identified and thoroughly grasped large amounts of data with materialistic points of view and dialectical methods, and then we can make generalizations or conclusions about a historical problem, and they are not necessarily correct generalizations or conclusions. In Zhai Bozan's view, "Only by mastering a richer historical material can The history of China, in the sum of the historical materials, show his general trend, in the analysis of the historical materials, show his details, and in the sublimation of the historical materials, show his development law." He also believes that if historical materials are applied from a Marxist-Leninist point of view, the richer the historical materials, the better, and the richer the historical materials, the more correct the conclusions drawn. In 1956, summing up the discussion on the issue of the periodization of Chinese history at the annual meeting of young sinologists in Paris, Zhai Bozan said: "The difference of views and positions does not hinder the discussion of the same issue. Because in any case, we have one thing that is the same, and that is the historical data. In other words, historical data is the basis for academic discussion. Zhai Bozan also published articles specifically expounding on historical materials, such as "A Brief Discussion on historical Materials in Chinese Philology", "The Collection and Identification of Historical Materials", and "A Brief Discussion on the Method of Collecting Historical Materials", discussing related issues, and the level of insight and level was extremely high.
Regarding the slogan of "leading history with theories" that once appeared, Zhai Bozan expressed his disapproval and put forward the idea of "combining history and theory". He said: "History is the science of concreteness. To argue about history, we must not proceed from concepts, but must proceed from concrete historical facts and draw conclusions from the scientific analysis of specific historical facts. Don't come up with conclusions first and impose them on concrete historical facts. "For general theories and concepts are only guiding principles for the study of history, not the point of departure. Theories and concepts are conclusions drawn from the study of specific historical facts. If we start from theories and concepts, don't we start with conclusions and then arbitrarily judge history according to them? Isn't it from theory to theory, from concept to concept, from abstract to abstract? This method of research is not dialectical but metaphysical. Therefore, "taking history with arguments" will only lead historical research astray. He also said: "The formulation of 'bringing history with arguments' means that the study of history should proceed from theories and concepts, not from concrete facts. Zhai Bozan criticized the tendency at that time to cite classic works as a matter of ability, it seems that the more sentences in classical works are quoted in historical papers, the higher the theoretical nature, and the whole task of historians is to select the sentences in the classic works, to repeat them repeatedly. Zhai Bozan believes that the correct approach is to "dissolve the historical data in the theory, or to embody the theory in the historical data, so that the viewpoint and the material are unified." Of course, the organic combination of theory and historical data is not the kind of formal combination of "writing a theory and writing another historical material" or "writing a historical material and writing another theoretical period". The "combination of historical theory" proposed by Zhai Bozan has provided guidance for the development of historical research according to a healthy path, and it is still a rule that most historians believe in. Because of this, Zhai Bozan has been called by historians as a giant who integrates the "two major academic genealogies" of historical views and historical materials.
At present, the prosperity of historiography has far exceeded that of Jabzan's time. From the perspective of the development trend of modern Chinese historiography, Marxist historiography is the mainstream and destination of the development of modern Chinese historiography, condensing and carrying the wisdom and knowledge of a group of advanced scholars, and full of rational thinking and achievements related to the fundamental issues of historiography. Jabezin's theoretical legacy is an important part of these theoretical reflections and achievements, and it is worth revisiting continuously.
(This paper is a phased result of the key project of the National Social Science Foundation of China " Research on the Construction and Rise of the Paradigm of Chinese Marxist Historiography " (19AZS002))
(The author is a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study of Confucianism, Shandong University)
Source: China Social Science Network - China Social Science Daily Author: Chen Feng