Links Between East and West 46 The History Subject 东西方的连接46 - 历史学

History is the rational process through which societies develop and advance closer to a state of collective peace and freedom. The last article expanded on this definition using multiple examples and perspectives. However, history’s power to shape the development of human society can only be amplified if societies direct attention to this concept itself. The study of history, historiography, can be defined as man’s reinterpretation of their past. 

The first element to examine in this definition is the idea of “reinterpretation.” For many, the study of history, at a certain moment, only entails a one-round examination of past events or phenomena. It is hard to understand the element of reinterpreting these events or phenomena. But one should approach this study from a more critical lens. They should view the recordings and previous interpretations of history critically and continuously aim to bring a contemporary context into examinations. This is where reinterpretation comes in. A competent historian who attempts to provide an accurate account and introduce fresh findings should build on the ideas of predecessors and mix them with personal observations. For example, Thucydides was exactly such a historian. He studied the past recorded by historians before him, namely Herodotus, and found inspiration in their work. Nevertheless, when he began writing his own works of history, such as The History of the Peloponnesian War, he brought his unique methodologies that transformed history into a more scientific subject, effectively critiquing the less prudent approaches devised by historians before him. He attempted to prove his claims by using quotes from speeches from the leaders of Athens and Sparta, and he even incorporated quite precise numbers in his narratives. Thucydides was a typical historian who demonstrated the meaning of “reinterpretation” in this subject. His predecessors inspired him, but he built upon their work and introduced new conventions to this subject.

In the previous paragraph, the concept of “reinterpretation” has been looked at from the perspective of a critical history. However, this concept can be viewed from another angle - the view of original history. Original historians base their recordings on what they see and think about in reality. An example of an original historian is Herodotus, often regarded as the father of this subject. Herodotus wrote the bulk of his Histories from the knowledge he acquired through the stories of others or his own investigations. Original history can be pertinent when trying to understand the element of “reinterpretation” because the materials in front of an original historian are usually unlike those worked upon by previous historians. Different time periods present different kinds of society, different diplomatic events, and different shifts in the balance of power in a region. Thus, original historians can always find unique elements in their historical context, and introduce novel perspectives to look at past events. This idea that original history allows historians to reinterpret the past is best seen in oral history. Although oral history is often criticized for its inability to present accurate narratives, it is still valuable in helping historians construct a vivid image of the past through its inherently various perspectives. This value stems from the nature of oral history as an original kind of history rooted in its creators' real-time observations. 

A second element to examine in the definition of the study of history is “the past.” The past is often solely perceived through the lens of time. People claim that if some event occurred in the past, for instance, it must have occurred long ago. This quantitative measurement of the past is arbitrary. In history, the past should not be thought of only as a timeline or continuum but rather as a collection of phases or cycles. As outlined in the last article, human history is rational and, hence, predictable to an extent. Then, the past can be shaped by general cycles that fit into this rationality. For example, when one thinks about past conflicts, what should come into mind is not that World War I lasted from 1914 to 1918 or the Vietnam War from 1955 to 1975. Rather, they should think about past conflicts from a more holistic point of view, as countless cycles of warfare that the inherent complexities of human nature can explain. Defining the past as a collection of patterns makes it easier for a historian to examine the grander picture and grasp societal behaviors in history.

Now that the definition of the study of history is elaborated upon, there is a more intrinsic question: Since civilization's dawn, why have societies continued to reinterpret the past? The German philosopher Nietzsche explained how “history serves life.” Indeed, the study of history has an unfathomable potential to alter the decisions of individuals and the spirit of a culture. This field has first served monumental figures and world-changing individuals. History can provide inspiration and act as a powerful fuel for action for these heroic figures. For instance, the Chinese revolutionary Mao Zedong began his communist reforms partially because he was strongly impacted by the ideas of Li Dazhao, a prominent scholar and social activitist who made significant contributions to the field of communism when Mao was a teenager. His writings incentivized Mao to initiate such a powerful revolution that eventually resulted in the birth of modern China. In the case of Mao, his study of history, notably the historical figure Li, provided him with inspiration and motive for action. 

The study of history not only empowers the monumental individuals, but can also deliver a lasting impact on the average citizen or scholar. The study of history allows people to bond with the past. More specifically, they can establish connections with their city and culture through the platform of history. For example, by learning the complex history of Beijing, one can understand the current city's various sections better and be curious to explore these sections in person. Gradually, a bond with Beijing will begin to grow. The same idea applies to the relationship between an individual and a culture. By delving into the history of a culture, an individual can witness the evolutionary paths that culture has taken and hence interpret the current aspects of it with greater precision and affection. Cultivating connections with a culture through propaganda is difficult, as these connections are usually superficial. Like how trees are only linked closely through a root system underground, people and their cultures are bonded intimately through studying history.

This essay will end with a discussion of objectiveness in the study of history. Unlike the sciences, in which objectiveness can be achieved with logical deductions and proofs, history is a subject that hails many contradicting perspectives and pieces of evidence. Competent historians understand that objectiveness in history is relative sometimes and falls between the accounts of multiple sources. When Herodotus was writing his Histories, he could not ensure that existing evidence could corroborate every bit of his account. When encountering such an issue, he would list all the potentially relevant sources in his text, leaving the reader to decide where the truth lies. This is not an irresponsible action of the historian, but an attempt by them to be as careful as possible and show their realization that objectiveness may lie in the combination of different sources. If history, like the sciences, becomes a subject totally determined by the testing and examination of facts, then it would lose its purpose to bridge the gap between individuals and their societies, as well as its power to alter the course of civilizational development with its engaging epics of the rise and fall of nations.

历史是社会发展与进步的理性过程，通过这一过程，社会更接近于集体和平与自由的状态。上一篇文章通过多个实例及视角对这一定义进行了阐释。然而，只有当社会直接关注“历史”这一概念本身，发展“历史学”时，历史能够塑造人类社会发展的力量才能被释放。对历史的研究，即历史学，可以定义为人类对其过去的反复重新诠释。

在这一定义中，首先要研究的是 "反复重新诠释 "这一概念。在许多人看来，历史研究在某一时刻只是对过去的事件或现象进行一轮审视，他们很难理解重新解释这些事件或现象的概念。但是，人们应该以一种更具批判性的视角来看待历史叙事与历史学。也就是说，他们应该批判性地看待记录的方式、手段与以往社会对历史的解释，并不断致力于将当代背景带入考查。这就是重新诠释的意义所在，一个有能力的历史学家，如果试图提供准确的叙述并引入新的发现，就应该以前人的观点为基础，并将其与个人的观察相结合。修昔底德正是这样一位历史学家。他研究了在他之前的历史学家，即希罗多德所记录的历史，并从他们的著作中找到了灵感。然而，当他开始撰写自己的历史著作（如《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》）时，他引入了自己独特的方法论，将历史变成了一门更加科学的学科。他试图通过引用雅典与斯巴达领导人的讲话来证明自己的主张，他甚至在叙述中加入了相当精确的数字。修昔底德是一位典型的历史学家，他证明了 "重新诠释 "在这一学科中的意义。他的前辈启发了他，但他在前辈工作的基础上，为这一主题引入了新的惯例。

在上一段中，"重新诠释 "的概念是从批判历史的角度来看待的。然而，人们可以从另一个角度--原始史的角度--来看待这一概念。原创历史学家以他们在现实中看到与想到的现象或思考为基础进行记录。希罗多德就是原创历史学家的一个典型按例，他通常被视为这一学科之父。希罗多德的著作《历史》大部分内容都是根据他从别人的故事或自己的切身调查中获得的知识写成的。在试图理解"重新诠释 "这一要素时，原创历史可能具有相关性，因为摆放在原创历史学家面前的材料通常与前人所研究的材料不同。不同时期呈现出不同的社会类型、不同的外交事件以及一个地区势力平衡的不同变化。因此，原创历史学家总能在其历史背景中发现独特的元素，并引入新的视角来看待过去的事件。原创历史允许历史学家重新解释过去，这一观点在口述历史中体现得淋漓尽致。尽管口述历史常常因其无法呈现准确的叙事而受到批评，但它在帮助历史学家通过其固有的各种视角构建过去的生动形象方面仍然很有价值。这种价值源于口述历史作为一种原始历史的性质，一种植根于创作者实时观察的历史。

历史研究定义的第二个要素是 "过去"。人们往往只从时间的角度来看待过去。例如，人们声称如果某些事件发生在过去，那么它一定发生在很久以前。这种对过去的量化衡量是武断的。在历史学领域，过去不应仅被视为一条时间线或连续线，而更应被视为一个阶段或周期的集合。正如上一篇文章所述，人类历史是理性的，因此在一定程度上是可以预测的。那么，过去可以被符合这种理性的一般周期所塑造。例如，当人们思考过去的冲突时，脑海中浮现的不应该是第一次世界大战从 1914年持续到 1918 年，越南战争从 1955 年持续到 1975 年等时间数据。相反，他们应该从更全面的角度来思考过去的冲突，将其视为可以用人性固有的复杂性来解释的无数次战争循环。将过去定义为各种模式的集合，历史学家就更容易审视全局，把握历史上的社会行为。

既然已经阐述了历史研究的定义，那么就有一个更本质的问题需要考虑： 自人类文明诞生以来，社会为何不断重新解释过去？德国哲学家尼采解释了 "历史如何服务于生命"。的确，历史研究在改变个人决定与文化精神方面具有深不可测的潜在力量。这一领域首先服务于不朽的人物与渴望改变世界的个体。历史可以为这些英雄人物提供灵感，并成为他们行动的强大动力。例如，中国革命家毛泽东之所以开始共产主义改革，部分原因是他受到了李大钊思想的强烈影响。后者是一位杰出的学者与社会活动家，在毛泽东青少年时期就为共产主义领域做出重大贡献。他的写作激励毛泽东发起了一场声势浩大的革命，最终导致了现代中国的诞生。就毛泽东而言，他对历史的研究，特别是对历史人物李大钊的研究，为他提供了灵感与行动动力。

历史研究不仅能赋予英雄历史人物力量，也能对普通公民或学者产生持久的影响。历史研究让人们与过去结缘。更具体地说，他们可以通过历史这个平台与自己的城市及文化建立联系。例如，通过学习北京复杂的历史，人们可以更好地了解现在这座城市的各个部分，并产生亲自探索这些部分的好奇心。渐渐地，与北京的感情就会开始加深。个人与文化之间的关系亦是如此。通过深入研究一种文化的历史，研究者可以见证这种文化的演变轨迹，从而更准确、更富有情感地解读它的当下状态。通过粗暴宣传来培养与一种文化的联系是相当困难的，因为这些联系通常都是表面且肤浅的。就像树木只有通过地下的根系才能紧密相连一样，只有通过对历史的研究，人与文化才能紧密联系在一起。

本文最后将讨论历史研究的客观性。与可以通过逻辑演绎与证明实现客观性的科学学科不同，历史学科是一门蕴含着大量相互矛盾的观点和证据的学科。有能力的历史学家明白，历史的客观性有时是相对的，它介于多种来源的叙述之间。希罗多德在撰写《历史》时，无法确保他的每一点叙述都能得到现有证据的证实。当他遇到这样的问题时，他会在文中列出所有可能相关的资料来源，让读者自行决定真相何在。这不是历史学家不负责任的行为，而是他们尽可能谨慎的一种尝试，表明他们认识到客观性可能在于不同来源的结合。如果历史与科学一样，成为一门完全由检验与审查事实决定的学科，那么它就会失去弥合个人与社会之间差距的目的，也会失去以引人入胜的国家兴亡史诗改变文明发展进程的力量。