摘要
1768年的叫魂案,曾因海外汉学家孔飞力的写作而广为人知,《叫魂》一书也颇受好评.但是,通过史料再梳理,与类似案件再对比,可以发现,孔飞力所言的乾隆借叫魂案以整肃官僚的立论并不存在,它不过是同时代君主介入大案的一个缩影,且叫魂案的处理,整体上也是成功的.可以说,不是乾隆制造了叫魂案,而是孔飞力心中的理论前见制造了《叫魂》的写作.孔飞力的论调,反映了小历史写作中的局限,也提醒我们在阅读海外汉学著作时应当保持必要的清醒和鉴别力.
Abstract
The soul stealing case of 1768 was made famous by the writings of the overseas sinologist Philip A.Kuhn,whose Soul Stealers:The Chinese Sorcery Scare of 1768 has received wide acclaim.However,a review of the historical material and a comparison with similar cases reveals that there is no evidence for Kuhn's argument that the Qianlong emperor used the soul stealing case to purge the bureaucracy;this was merely a microcosm of the contemporaneous monarch's intervention in a major case,and the handling of this case was,on the whole,successful.It could be argued that it was not Qianlong who created this case,but rather the theoretical presupposition in Kuhn's mind that created Soul Stealers.Kuhn's argument reflects the limitations of minor historical writing,and reminds us that we should maintain a necessary sobriety and discernment when reading the writings of overseas sinologists.
维普
万方数据