论文部分内容阅读
要把史学写得信而有趣,不是件容易的事1840年是一个具有分水岭意义的年份,这年爆发的鸦片战争是中国近代史上具有权威性、标志性的断代事件。当然也有像萧一山这样的史家把明清之际传教士之进入中国,当作近代史之起始。史学家徐中约的《中国近代史》则把上述二者的观念加以折衷,而年轻学者傅国涌则径直把新教马礼逊来华传教的1807年当作中国近代史的肇端。我不是要在此来赞同或者反对谁的近代史分期更为恰切,我想说的是,尽管近代史的分期有所不同,但大家写史所据有的材料却基本是相同的,帝王起居注、断烂朝报、上层精英列传或者意
It is not an easy task to write a historiography letter. 1840 is a watershed year. The outbreak of the Opium War in that year was an authoritative and iconan dynastic event in modern Chinese history. Of course, there are historians like Xiaoyishan who made the missionaries into China during the Ming and Qing Dynasties as the beginning of modern history. Historian Xu Zhongyue’s “Modern Chinese History” compromises these two concepts, while young academician Fu Guoyong went so far as to consider the 1807 Protestant mission to China as the starting point of modern Chinese history. I do not want to approve of or oppose the modern history of the installment of the more appropriate, I want to say is that despite the different stages of modern history, but we write the history of the material is basically the same, the emperors Living Note, broken rotten newspaper, the upper elite column or meaning