Modern Chinese Historiography

From 23 to 27 May 2001, scholars from a wide range of fields of research came together at the University of Heidelberg to exchange views on modern Chinese historiography. Since the first meeting in 1995, research on historiography has developed into one of the most vivid and innovative fields in modern China Studies, as underscored by the number of scholars who were interested to take part in the conference, the written contributions' outstanding quality, and the intensity of discussions during the workshop. This was the second symposium on Chinese historiography that the Chair of Modern Sinology, University of Heidelberg hosted this time in cooperation with the Chair of Modern China Studies, University of Leiden.

* By SUSANNE WEIGELIN-SCHWIEDRZIK & AXEL SCHNEIDER

Discussions clustered round three main themes: 'Between Universality and Particularity: Historical Thinking and the Quest for Identity, 'The Writing of History: Forms and Methods of Historiography', and 'The Making of Cultural Memory: Historiography and its Relationship to Individual and Communicative Memory'.The workshop's first aim was to trace the rise of modern Chinese historiography. To this end, the different sources of influence, which had coined modern Chinese historiography during the early twentieth century, were explored, and it soon turned out that the Japanese influence had been regrettably underestimated. In the context of other influences, a complex texture of reception still awaits careful decipherment. Familiarity with relevant writings by Kant and Ranke, for instance, is not sufficient to give full evidence of influence on Chinese theoreticians of historiography. Their understanding of Kant can lead to quite a number of Kants that are all different, caused not only by problems of transmission via language, but also by the context of reception that can evoke an interested interpretation very different from the context of origin.

Discussions concerning the second theme, 'The Writing of History: Forms and Methods of Historiography', revealed a similar situation in the field of theory construction and discussion of methods. In this field, however, it appears that the Japanese are not the only to have a functionally important influence. A continuation of indigenous traditions of Chinese historiography must be viewed as another very important criterion. The third focal point, 'The Making of Cultural Memory: Historiography and its Relationship to Individual and Communicative Memory', was devoted to the currently much-discussed topic of relations between memory and history. It could be observed that history, as a discursive field, is still a key cultural topic in Chinese communities. Yet, forms of historical writing and representations of history have considerably multiplied of late, which renders them increasingly more elusive to state control. The discussion also revealed how much, and how radically, basic patterns of historical interpretation have changed: in Taiwan, we meet with a new historiography, aiming at support for Taiwan's claim of independence; in China, a sense of glorious victory prevalent until the 1980s is now giving way to disenchantment and reflections on unfulfilled expectations. At present, unofficial and journalistic modes of historical writing, as well as literary and cinematic representations of history are tending to gain influence, whereas the so-called official or academic historiography appears much less dominant than it was two decades ago.

Three lectures and discussions deserve special mention, not only because they were arranged as additions to the structural workshop programme, but also because they triggered heated discussions on questions of contemporary relevance.

An evening lecture by Jörn Rüsen, Kulturwissenschaftliches Institut, Essen, opened the discussion on history and memory in a Chinese context by raising the example of German debates on mourning and commemoration of the history of the German Third Reich. He presented mourning, in this sense, as a strategy for surmounting traumatic experiences, and he came to the conclusion that this kind of collective mourning can be viewed as the starting point of all historical writing. Rüsen's thesis was met with extraordinarily vivid reactions by historians from mainland China, who contributed extensive and revealing commentaries to his lecture.

The round-table discussion on the renowned and, lately, much debated historian Chen Yinke brought together scholars who sought to revise conventional judgments about Chen's role in contemporary Chinese historiography. Chen has established a form of politically disinterested historiography which, in his view, should fulfill the task of careful preservation and creative continuation of China's national culture and traditions. It was agreed that this idea has recently not only received approval from, but has, in fact, become a guiding principle of a great number of contemporary Chinese historians who, at the moment, are losing their state privileges and making use of their newly achieved freedom by probing into new, marginal identities.

Paul Cohen, in his concluding keynote lecture, reflected on the problem of humiliation in recent Chinese history. Focusing on attempts by Chinese governments to build experiences of defeat and humiliation that had been brought about by the Western powers into grand national narratives, he discussed the commemoration of national humiliation by the state as a means of consolidating collective identity and solidarity. Responses by participants from China, who sensed a misunderstanding of their own legitimate causes of resistance to 'imperialist dominance', vigorously opposed Cohen's argument. This heated discussion made clear that political issues still largely resonate within the Chinese field of historiography.

The most important result of this conference is the founding of the online journal 'Historiography East and West'. Initiated by both organizers, a core group of editors was chosen from among the participants, thereby providing an organ for publication for the field on historiography. Judged by this organ's focus on comparative perspectives, it seems destined to act as a major stimulus for further developments in the field, as well as to enhance discussions among scholars of historiography beyond China's boundaries. *

The symposium was generously funded by the Asia Committee of the European Science Foundation, the German Research Association, and the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation, Taipei.