本文選題：井田 + 井田制�。� 參考：《河南社會科學(xué)》2016年01期

【摘要】：20世紀20年代自胡適否定井田制存在,開啟井田有無之辨大討論后,學(xué)術(shù)界對井田有無的總體傾向從20年代有無對壘、各持一端,到30年代對壘格局漸次打破、以否定為主,再到40年代在專業(yè)歷史學(xué)家的積極參與下肯定論漸居上風(fēng),井田有無之辨不斷沿著科學(xué)理性的軌道向前推進。從1949—1979年,在馬克思主義唯物史觀的指導(dǎo)下和中國古代社會形態(tài)與古史分期問題討論的推動下,井田制度的研究進入了一個全面展開與深化的嶄新階段。在政治因素的主導(dǎo)下,除了極個別否定論者艱辛固守外,絕大多數(shù)學(xué)者都肯定井田制的存在。在特殊的政治背景下,學(xué)術(shù)界對胡適《井田辨》的批判,融入了更多帶有時代烙印的非學(xué)術(shù)因素。20世紀80年代以來,井田制的研究逐漸擺脫了新中國成立后政治主導(dǎo)下種種非學(xué)術(shù)因素的干擾和影響,逐漸向著縱深方向推進。該階段的井田有無之辨大體上呈現(xiàn)出肯定論者不斷實現(xiàn)理論突破和否定論由沉寂再度趨于"活躍"兩個頗為鮮明的特點,從而再度打破20世紀50年代以來在政治因素主導(dǎo)下井田制肯定論"漸趨統(tǒng)一"的格局。部分學(xué)者關(guān)于井田、井田制名實之辨的理性反思,頗有助于重新審視20世紀20年代以來井田有無之辨長期難以打破僵局、未能取得根本性突破的癥結(jié)之關(guān)鍵所在。在今后的井田制研究中,學(xué)術(shù)界應(yīng)深入系統(tǒng)地清理20世紀20年代以來井田有無之辨的學(xué)術(shù)思路,在馬克思主義唯物史觀科學(xué)理論的指導(dǎo)下,對前人已有的豐富研究成果進行科學(xué)地批判與吸收,并不斷發(fā)掘新材料,創(chuàng)新研究方法,以求最終科學(xué)破解井田有無問題的歷史真相。
[Abstract]:Since Hu Shi negated the existence of well and field system in the 1920s and opened the debate on the existence or absence of the well field, the overall tendency of academic circles on the existence or absence of the well field has changed from whether there was a confrontation between the two sides in the 1920s, to the gradual breaking of the pattern of opposing bases in the 1930s, with negation being the main trend. In 1940s, with the active participation of professional historians, the affirmation theory gradually gained the upper hand, and the distinction between the existence and absence of the minefield continued to advance along the track of scientific rationality. From 1949 to 1979, under the guidance of Marxist historical materialism and the discussion of ancient Chinese social formation and ancient history staging, the study of mine field system entered a new stage of comprehensive development and deepening. Dominated by political factors, the vast majority of scholars affirmed the existence of well-field system except for a few negatives. Under the special political background, the criticism of Hu Shi by the academic circles has incorporated more non-academic factors with the imprint of the times since the 1980s. The research of well-field system gradually got rid of the interference and influence of various non-academic factors under the political domination after the founding of new China, and gradually advanced in the deep direction. The difference between the existence and absence of mine fields in this stage shows, in general, two distinct characteristics, namely, the continuous breakthrough of the theory of positivism and the tendency of the theory of negation from silence to "active" again. Thus, the pattern of "unification" of the affirmation theory of well-field system under the guidance of political factors has been broken again since the 1950s. Some scholars' rational introspection on the distinction between the name and reality of the well field system is quite helpful to re-examine whether the mine field has existed since the 1920s it is difficult to break the deadlock for a long time and the crux of the failure to make a fundamental breakthrough lies in the crux. In the future research on well and field system, the academic circles should thoroughly and systematically clean up the academic thinking of whether the well fields have been distinguished since the 1920s, under the guidance of Marxist scientific theory of historical materialism. This paper criticizes and absorbs the existing rich research achievements scientifically, and constantly excavates new materials and innovates research methods, in order to solve the historical truth of whether there is any problem in the mine field in the end.
【作者單位】： 蘇州大學(xué)社會學(xué)院;
【基金】：蘇州大學(xué)第三批東吳學(xué)者資助計劃項目(R5103001) 蘇州大學(xué)2013年度“卓越人才培養(yǎng)計劃”項目高水平新課程建設(shè)項目(5832003813)
【分類號】：K258
，

本文編號：1816164