Between Embracing And Reijecting: The Attitude Towards Japanese Sinology From Chinese Historical Circle In Modern Times

In English, the term "Japanese Sinology" can be translated into Chinese as follows:(1) "Japanese sinology" or (2) "Japan's Chinese studies", but it is should be noted that its inclusion content may be far more than the two Chinese expression. It could stand for the Japanese scholars' researches on the Chinese history and culture, or the understanding and interpretation of Chinese academic classic from the perspective of Japanese. In addition, it maybe also stands for the unique manners and eyesight of Japanese to react to China avers civilization. In this research, I prefer to adopt and identity the first type, namely the Japanese researches on Chinese culture and history. Here the Japanese Modern Sinology covered the period from 1880s to 1940s, centring for "Asian Historical Studies"and "Chinese Historical Studies", which also contented some others researches China studies (mainly history studies). Furthermore, there has some differences in nature between the modern sense of Japan Chinese study and the traditional Japanese sinology, the former was a somewhat "national cultural studies"forming in the modernization tidy which marked as "Meiji Restoration". The most remarkable characteristics of it were targeted the"modern socialist" and "rationalism" as its academic orientation, getting rid of the traditional"Confucian doctrine".In early times, many scholars have had serious and careful academic researches to Japanese modern Chinese study. But when the "continental policy"was implemented by the Japanese government, Japanese elements were gradually occupying the guiding position in this study, While the crude and ideologically predetermined interpretations of the Chinese studies have been toned up, liking as "Japan's constitution sacred theory"and "ethnic theory", which all had a contemptuous attitudes toward China, and embraced a aim to serve for Japanese militarism in the directly or indirectly ways. Moreover, some researches were obviously deviating from the objectivism principle of historical science, even arbitrarily fabricated and misinterpret the history facts.Facing the Changes in Japanese modern studies form objectivism towards reactionary, the Chinese academic circle also had a distinct change from "listening and toddlers"to "academic independence"influenced by national awareness and cultural consciousness. In addition, they tended to take an embracing and rejecting manners towards the Japanese studies. Besides, some scholars in Japan who had academic independence spirit were being gradually marginalized just because of resisting the above academic tide in their own country, but unfortunately their academic achievements were ignored by the Chinese Scholars.The article divides into seven sections to interpretate the Chinese historical academic' reaction to Japanese Sinology:In Chapter one, we shall pay attention to the main development of Japanese Sinology, focusing its generation, development, reduced, and decline processing, and find out the series differentiates reaction of Chinese academic circle. The second part will centre on some books on"Asian Historical Studies"and "Chinese Historical Studies" and their translations, exploring the influences of Japanese Oriental Historiography to"the new historiography". In Chapter three we will take a brief look at the communication and interaction between Wang Guo—wei, Hu Shih and Positivism School, a branch in Japanese Modern Sinology, analyzing the Japanese influencing factors in the formation of the"Method of Dual Evidence"and "Rearranging the National Heritage". In the fourth part, we will make a further clarify on some correlation problems between "Debating on the Ancient History" movement and "Suspected on the Ancient History" in Japan, to confirm the theory "Stratified Version" have much been influenced by Shiratori Kurakichi'"Obliteration of many legends" and Naitou Konan'"With the principle". In the last two parts, this article will pay special attentions to the Chinese historical academic's rejecting and struggles to the aggression component in Japanese Modern Sinology. In one word, we will discuss the aggression historical views and the historical and geography researches on Manchuria of Japanese Sinologist; in the chapter Summary and Conclusions, it will show the significance of modern Sino Japanese academic exchanges, analyzing that the distinct different disposition and mentality between the scholars in two countries during their exchanges and interaction.To sum up, the research scope and investigation perspective of this article are different from the previous researches, namely it will look in detail the knowledge and response of Chinese academic circle to Japanese Modern Sinology from the end of nineteenth century to the first half of twentieth century. Only in this way can promote the academic paradigm from "exchange" and "dissemination" to the thought level, as well as getting back to the historic sites, in order to explore the changing of the Chinese academic subjectivity and its interaction with Japanese Modern Sinology.