A Historical Examination of the Law of Development through Exchanges and Mutual Learning among Civilizations – Based on a Critique of the Eurocentric Unilinear Historical View

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Civilizations become richer and more colorful through exchanges and mutual learning. Any civilization, no matter which country or nation’s social soil it grows from, is fluid and open. This is an important law of the spread and development of civilizations.”(1) The view of civilization in the New Era holds that all civilizations in the world are the crystallization of human labor and wisdom, emphasizes that civilizations are diverse and equal, and proposes that exchanges and mutual learning constitute the law of civilizational development. This important theoretical innovation is not only the basic guideline for the construction of Chinese civilization and civilizational exchanges in the New Era, but also a guiding principle for correctly understanding the history of world civilizational development. Guided by the view of civilization in the New Era, examining the role, conditions, and manifestations of the law of development through exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations in promoting the development process of various world civilizations, uprooting some deep-seated erroneous ideas, and further advancing the understanding of the history of human civilizational development, is an important academic task. Since the eastward spread of Western learning, Western philosophy and social sciences have been an important pathway for us to understand the world and to learn from and draw on the historical experience of Western modernization. However, the Eurocentric unilinear historical view(2) permeating Western philosophy and social sciences has also been unconsciously accepted by many people. The Eurocentric unilinear historical view describes European historical development as an independent, internally connected, and inevitable process; this historical process is the center of world history, independently creating human history and leading human history. The Eurocentric unilinear historical view is an important ideological root of the trend of historical nihilism. This article attempts, starting from the law of exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations, to critique the erroneous concept of the Eurocentric unilinear historical view that ignores exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations, and to examine the factors of exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations in the development process of European civilization and the important historical roles of these factors of exchanges and mutual learning.

习近平总书记指出:“文明因交流而多彩,文明因互鉴而丰富。任何一种文明,不管它产生于哪个国家、哪个民族的社会土壤之中,都是流动的、开放的。这是文明传播和发展的一条重要规律。”(1)新时代文明观认为世界各文明都是人类劳动和智慧的结晶,强调文明是多样的、平等的,提出交流互鉴是文明发展的规律。这一重要理论创新,不仅是新时代中华文明建设和文明交往的基本遵循,还是正确认识世界文明发展历史的指导原则。以新时代文明观为指导,考察文明交流互鉴发展规律在推动世界各文明发展进程中的作用、条件、表现,破除一些根深蒂固的错误思想,进一步推进对人类文明发展历史的认识,是一项重要的学术任务。西学东渐以来,西方哲学社会科学是我们认识世界,学习、借鉴西方现代化历史经验的重要途径。但是,西方哲学社会科学中渗透着的欧洲中心主义单线史观(2),也被很多人无意间接受。欧洲中心主义单线史观将欧洲历史发展描述为一个独立的、内在联系的、必然的进程,这个历史进程是世界历史的中心,它独立地创造人类历史,引领人类历史。欧洲中心主义单线史观是历史虚无主义思潮的重要思想根源。本文尝试从文明交流互鉴规律出发,批判欧洲中心主义单线史观无视文明交流互鉴的错误观念,考察欧洲文明发展进程中的文明交流互鉴因素以及这些交流互鉴因素的重要历史作用。

I. Basic Characteristics of Civilization and the Law of Development through Exchanges and Mutual Learning

一、 文明的基本特征和交流互鉴发展规律

The concept of civilization in the modern sense is linked to the ideas of human development and progress; civilization is a category measuring the state and historical process of human material and spiritual progress. The concept of civilization in the theoretical perspective of Marxism is used to refer to the positive material and spiritual wealth created by human activities. Marx and Engels did not specifically discuss the law of development through exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations. However, within the thought of Marx and Engels, there are highly insightful ideas on civilizational interaction. In *The German Ideology*, Marx and Engels regarded material production as the determining force of human history, holding that productive forces determine the interaction within a nation and between nations, and at the same time, interaction profoundly affects the development of a nation. Marx and Engels pointed out: “The whole internal structure of the nation itself depends on the level of development of its production and its internal and external interaction.”(3) In *The Communist Manifesto*, Marx and Engels pointed out that under the impact of capitalist industrial civilization, the regional and closed nature of material and spiritual production in traditional agricultural civilization is broken, and interaction and interdependence among civilizations and nations are continuously strengthened. In the drafts of his reply to Vera Zasulich in his later years, when considering Russia’s development path, Marx proposed that Russia could achieve a leapfrog development of social forms on the basis of drawing on advanced civilizations. Marx pointed out that because the Russian rural commune coexists with capitalist production, “it can therefore appropriate all the positive achievements of capitalist production without undergoing its terrible shocks.”(4) Guided by Marxist historical materialism, based on the practical requirements of coordinating the “two overall situations,” and integrating the traditional Chinese concept of “valuing harmony,” the view of civilization in the New Era proposes that all world civilizations embody the crystallization of human labor and wisdom. Through exchanges and mutual learning, these human wisdoms mutually confirm, stimulate, and complement each other, converging into a grander stream of human wisdom, continuously inherited and continuously developed.

现代意义上的文明概念是与人类发展、进步观念联系在一起的,文明是衡量人类物质与精神进步的状态和历史进程的范畴。马克思主义理论视野中的文明概念,是用来指称人类活动创造的积极物质财富和精神财富。马克思和恩格斯并没有专门论述过文明交流互鉴规律。但是,在马克思和恩格斯的思想中,包含着极富创见的文明交往思想。在《德意志意识形态》中,马克思和恩格斯把物质生产作为人类历史的决定力量,认为生产力决定着民族内部的交往和民族之间的交往,同时,交往也深刻地影响着一个民族的发展。马克思和恩格斯指出:“这个民族本身的整个内部结构也取决于自己的生产以及自己内部和外部的交往的发展程度”(3)。在《共产党宣言》中,马克思和恩格斯指出,在资本主义工业文明的冲击下,传统农业文明的物质生产、精神生产的地域性、封闭性被打破,文明间、民族间相互交往和相互依赖不断加强。马克思晚年在回复查苏利奇的信的初稿中思考俄国发展道路时,提出俄国在借鉴先进文明的基础上能够实现社会形态跨越式发展。马克思指出,由于俄国农村公社是和资本主义生产同时存在的东西,“所以它能够不经受资本主义生产的可怕的波折而占有它的一切积极的成果”(4)。新时代文明观以马克思主义唯物史观为指导,根据统筹“两个大局”实践要求,结合中华优秀传统文化“尚和合”的理念,提出世界各文明中都凝聚着人类劳动和智慧的结晶,通过交流互鉴,这些人类智慧相互印证、相互激发,相互补充,汇聚为更宏大的人类智慧之流,不断传承,不断发展。

1. Civilization is the Crystallization of Human Labor and Wisdom

1. 文明是人类劳动和智慧的结晶

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “All civilizations created by humanity are the crystallization of labor and wisdom.”(5) To survive and develop, humanity must continuously engage in social practice, continuously transform nature and society, and continuously create material and spiritual wealth, thereby forming the historical process of human civilization. Fundamentally, human social practice involves people, society, nature, and the relationships among the three. In social practice, humanity continuously understands and transforms nature, continuously understands and transforms society, and continuously understands humanity itself and perfects the human spiritual self. The understanding and transformation of nature form natural science and technology; the understanding of the relationship between humans and themselves (human development), the relationship between humans (social development), and the relationship between humans and nature (harmonious development of humanity and nature) forms a certain worldview, social-historical view, and outlook on life, forming a cognitive system of truth, goodness, and beauty. These embody humanity’s profound understanding of the external world and itself, as well as spiritual aspirations; they are the crystallization of human wisdom and the core of social spiritual wealth (culture in the narrow sense). These spiritual wealths are in turn transformed into material wealth through labor.

习近平总书记指出:“人类创造的各种文明都是劳动和智慧的结晶。”(5)人类为了生存、发展,要不断地进行社会实践,不断地改造自然,改造社会,不断地创造物质财富和精神财富,由此形成人类文明的历史进程。从根本上说,人类社会实践涉及人、社会、自然以及三者之间的关系。在社会实践中,人类不断地认识自然,改造自然,不断地认识社会,改造社会,不断地认识人自身,健全人的精神自我。对自然的认识和改造形成自然科学和技术,对人与自身关系(人的发展)问题、人与人的关系(社会发展)问题、人与自然的关系(人类与自然和谐发展)问题的认识,形成了一定的世界观、社会历史观和人生观,形成真、善、美认知体系。它们凝聚着人类对外部世界和自身的深刻理解以及精神指向,是人类智慧的结晶,是社会精神财富(狭义的文化)的核心。这些精神财富通过劳动又转化为物质财富。

2. Civilizations are Diverse

2. 文明是多彩的

The historical process of human civilizational development is formed by the convergence of civilizations created by different peoples. “Every civilization is rooted in its own soil for survival, embodies the extraordinary wisdom and spiritual pursuits of a country and a nation, and has its own value of existence.”(6) Each country and nation, facing different natural environmental challenges and different social problems, will propose its own responses based on its own conditions and historical heritage, form social practices with its own characteristics, and on the basis of practice, continuously deepen and perfect understanding, form a unique worldview, social-historical view, and outlook on life, form an understanding of truth, goodness, and beauty, form a civilization with its own distinctive characteristics, and form its own civilizational traits. Therefore, in this sense, every civilization is unique.

人类文明发展的历史进程是由不同民族创造的文明汇聚而成的。“每一种文明都扎根于自己的生存土壤,凝聚着一个国家、一个民族的非凡智慧和精神追求,都有自己存在的价值。”(6)每个国家和民族,面对不同的自然环境挑战,面临不同的社会问题,都会根据自身条件和各自的历史传承,提出自己的应对,形成带有自身特点的社会实践,并在实践的基础上,不断深化、不断完善认识,形成独特的世界观、社会历史观和人生观,形成对真、善、美的认识,形成带有自身鲜明特点的文明,形成自己的文明特性。因此,就此而言,每一个文明都是独特的。

3. Civilizations are Equal

3. 文明是平等的

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “All human civilizations are equal in value, each has its own strengths, and each has its own shortcomings. There is no perfect civilization in the world, nor is there a worthless civilization; there is no distinction between high and low, superior and inferior among civilizations.”(7) As far as civilizational development is concerned, different civilizations have differences in level, for example, in the understanding of natural laws, the level of science and technology, and the depth of aesthetics. However, from the broad perspective of human civilizational development, diverse civilizational origins, developments, and borrowings drive the development of human civilization. In this historical process, each civilization is a unique product of its environment and social-historical conditions, is the crystallization of the wisdom of the working people, and has irreplaceable value. In the process of development through exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations, whether ancient or modern civilizations, whether Asian, European, African, or American civilizations, each contributes its wisdom, plays its role, and has irreplaceable value in the development process of human civilization.

习近平总书记指出:“各种人类文明在价值上是平等的,都各有千秋,也各有不足。世界上不存在十全十美的文明,也不存在一无是处的文明,文明没有高低、优劣之分。”(7)就文明发展而言,不同的文明有高低之别,比如,对自然规律的认识、科学技术水平、审美的深度等。但是,从人类文明发展的大视野来看,多样化的文明起源、发展、借鉴,推动着人类文明的发展。在这个历史进程中,每一种文明都是其所处环境和社会历史条件下的独特产物,都是劳动人民智慧的结晶,具有不可替代的价值。在文明交流互鉴发展的进程中,无论是古代还是现代的文明,无论是亚洲文明、欧洲文明、非洲文明,还是美洲文明,都在人类文明发展进程中贡献自己的智慧,发挥各自的作用,具有不可替代的价值。

4. Civilizations are Inherited and Developed through Exchanges and Mutual Learning

4. 文明是在交流互鉴中传承发展的

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “History tells us that only through exchange and mutual learning can a civilization be full of vitality.” [8]8 Xi Jinping, “Carrying Forward the Spirit of the Silk Road and Deepening China-Arab Cooperation” (speech at the opening ceremony of the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum, June 5, 2014). Human civilization carries universal values and orientations, namely, human development, social development, and the coordinated development of humanity and nature. For a civilization to develop, it must not only inherit the wisdom of its own country and nation but also draw on the wisdom of other countries and nations. Different countries and nations have different natural geographical conditions, different social and historical conditions, and different perspectives on understanding humanity, nature, and society; thus, the wisdom crystallized in their civilizations also has different characteristics. This diversity forms a complementarity among civilizations. Drawing on the wisdom accumulated in other civilizations to supplement the deficiencies of one’s own civilization can rapidly “expand the capacity” of that civilization’s wisdom, enabling it to achieve leapfrog development. General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Chinese civilization is a civilization born on Chinese soil, and it is also a civilization formed through continuous exchange and mutual learning with other civilizations.” [9]9 Xi Jinping, “Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Conference on Dialogue of Asian Civilizations” (May 15, 2019). The civilizational exchanges between China and the Western Regions and South Asia around the turn of the Common Era, the exchanges between Chinese civilization and the civilizations of various countries during the Tang Dynasty, Zheng He’s seven ocean voyages during the Ming Dynasty and his civilizational exchanges with the peoples along the routes, and the spread of European knowledge of astronomy, medicine, mathematics, geometry, and geography to China in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties all greatly promoted the inheritance, development, and innovation of Chinese civilization. Similarly, Western civilization is no exception. “China’s four great inventions—papermaking, gunpowder, printing, and the compass—drove world change and promoted the European Renaissance. Chinese philosophy, literature, medicine, silk, porcelain, tea, and other items were introduced to the West, permeating the daily lives of Western people.” [10]10 Xi Jinping, “Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Conference on Dialogue of Asian Civilizations” (May 15, 2019).

习近平总书记指出:“历史告诉我们,只有交流互鉴,一种文明才能充满生命力。”(8)人类文明带有普遍性的价值和指向,即人的发展、社会的发展、人与自然的协调发展。一个文明要发展,不仅要传承本国家、本民族的智慧,还要借鉴其他国家和民族的智慧。各个国家和民族自然地理条件不同,社会历史条件不同,对人、自然、社会的认识角度不同,其文明中凝结的智慧也会有不同的特色。这种多样性形成了文明之间的互补。借鉴其他文明中积累的智慧,补充自身文明的不足,可以使一个文明的智慧迅速“扩容”,使该文明跃升式发展。习近平总书记指出:“中华文明是在中国大地上产生的文明,也是同其他文明不断交流互鉴而形成的文明。”(9)公元前后中国同西域和南亚之间的文明交流,唐代中华文明和各国文明的交流,中国明代郑和七次远洋航海与沿途各国人民的文明交流,明末清初欧洲的天文学、医学、数学、几何学、地理学知识在中国的传播,都极大地推动了中华文明的传承、发展、创新。同样,西方文明也是如此。“中国的造纸术、火药、印刷术、指南针四大发明带动了世界变革,推动了欧洲文艺复兴。中国哲学、文学、医药、丝绸、瓷器、茶叶等传入西方,渗入西方民众日常生活之中。”(10)

II. Main Views of the Eurocentric Unilinear View of History

二、 欧洲中心主义单线史观的主要观点

The Eurocentric unilinear view of history is a historical perspective that emerged with the rise of Western hegemony. Eurocentrism “regards Europe as the sole active planner of world history, to some extent the ‘source.’ Europe issues orders, and other places obey. Europe is active and proactive, while other places are passive recipients. Europe creates history, while other places have no history before contact with Europe. Europe is the center, and other places are the periphery. Only Europeans can lead reform and modernization; people in other places cannot.” [11]11 Samir Amin, *Eurocentrism*, trans. Russell Moore (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1989), p. vii. The Eurocentric unilinear view of history paints a historical picture for people: the Aegean Sea gave birth to ancient Greek civilization. In the fifth and sixth centuries BCE, ancient Greek civilization radiated a brilliance that illuminated the world, creating democracy, freedom, reason, and art. “Ancient Greece produced Rome, Rome produced Christian Europe, Christian Europe produced the Renaissance, the Renaissance produced the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment produced democratic politics and the Industrial Revolution. Industry meeting democratic politics then produced the United States, embodying life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” [12]12 John M. Hobson, *The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation* (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 1. This is a historical picture familiar to people. [13]13 This refers to the conventional narrative of Western history as a linear progression from ancient Greece to modern liberal democracy. Eurocentrism holds that this unilinear historical development process of Europe has universal world-historical significance; it is the center of world history, creating human history and leading human history. After the mid-twentieth century, the Eurocentric (unilinear) view of history was questioned and criticized. [14]14 This refers to postcolonial and world-systems critiques that emerged after the mid-20th century, challenging Eurocentric historiography. However, it still permeates Western philosophy and social sciences in various forms.

欧洲中心主义单线史观是随着西方霸权兴起而形成的历史观。欧洲中心主义“将欧洲视作世界历史唯一的积极谋划者,某种程度上是‘源泉’。欧洲发布命令,其他地方服从。欧洲主动积极,其他地方被动接受。欧洲创造历史,其他地方在与欧洲接触之前没有历史。欧洲是中心,其他地方是边缘。只有欧洲人才能引领改革和现代化,其他地方的人不能。”(11)欧洲中心主义单线史观给人们描绘了这样一幅历史图景:爱琴海孕育了古希腊文明。在公元前五、六世纪,古希腊文明绽放出照耀世界的光辉,它创造出民主、自由、理性和艺术。“古希腊产生罗马,罗马产生基督教的欧洲,基督教的欧洲产生文艺复兴,文艺复兴产生启蒙运动,启蒙运动产生民主政治和工业革命。工业遇上民主政治又产生美国,体现出生命、自由和追求幸福的权利。”(12)这是人们耳熟能详的历史图景(13)。欧洲中心主义认为,欧洲这个单线历史发展进程,具有普遍的世界历史意义,它是世界历史的中心,创造着人类历史,引领着人类历史。二十世纪中叶以后,欧洲中心主义(单线史观)受到人们的质疑和批判(14)。但是,它仍然以各种形式渗透于西方哲学社会科学。

The Eurocentric unilinear view of history contains the following four basic views:

欧洲中心主义单线史观包含着以下四个基本观点:

1. The European unilinear historical development process has inherent continuity and inevitability

1. 欧洲单线历史发展进程具有内在连续性和必然性

Eurocentrism holds that the history of the development of Western civilization is the history of the development of the human spirit. Ancient Greece is the true origin of European civilization. From this point, the human spirit continuously develops and enriches itself. The unilinear historical process of European civilization has inherent continuity and inevitability. Hegel’s philosophy of history is the most representative expression of the inherent continuity of European civilization. Hegel believed that history is the history of the absolute spirit. The absolute spirit externalizes itself, unfolds logically in time, continuously manifests its richness, continuously knows itself, and becomes identical with itself. This history moves from the “East” to the “West.” Each nation represents a different stage in the development of the “absolute spirit”: the East is the childhood of world history, ancient Greece is its youth, Rome is its adulthood, and the Germanic world is its old age, its mature completion. This history is essentially the history of humanity achieving freedom through reason. “The East knew and knows only that ‘one’ is free; the Greek and Roman world knew that ‘some’ are free; the Germanic world knows that ‘all’ are free. Thus, the first form we see in history is despotism, the second is democracy and aristocracy, and the third is monarchy.” [15]15 G. W. F. Hegel, *Lectures on the Philosophy of World History*, trans. H. B. Nisbet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), p. 54. The historical process of Europe has an inherent logic. As the origin of European civilization, the basic elements of European civilization, such as freedom, democracy, and reason, were already generated in ancient Greece. The historical process of Europe is the process of unfolding the potential of these civilizational characteristics, with inherent continuity and inevitability. Hegel said: “When we come to the Greeks, we immediately feel as if we were in our own home, for we have arrived at the ‘spiritual’ realm.” [16]16 G. W. F. Hegel, *Lectures on the Philosophy of History*, trans. J. Sibree (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1857), p. 223.

欧洲中心主义认为,西方文明的发展历史,就是人类精神发展的历史。古希腊是欧洲文明真正原点。人类精神由此不断发展、丰富。欧洲文明的单线历史进程有着内在的连续性和必然性。黑格尔的历史哲学是关于欧洲文明内在连续性最有代表性的思想表达。黑格尔认为,历史是绝对精神的历史。绝对精神外化,在时间中逻辑地展开,不断展现自己的丰富性,不断认识自身,与自身同一。这个历史从“东方”走向“西方”。各个民族代表着“绝对精神”发展的不同阶段,东方是世界历史的幼年时期,古希腊是青年时期,罗马是壮年时期,日耳曼世界是晚年,是成熟完满。这个历史本质上是人类通过理性实现自由的历史。“东方从古到今知道只有‘一个’是自由的;希腊和罗马世界知道‘有些’是自由的;日耳曼世界知道‘全体’是自由的。所以我们从历史上看到的第一种形式是专制政体,第二种是民主政体和贵族政体,第三种是君主政体。”(15)欧洲的历史进程有着内在逻辑。作为欧洲文明的原点,欧洲文明的基本要素,如自由、民主和理性,在古希腊已经生成。欧洲的历史进程就是这种文明特性的潜能展开的过程,有着内在的连续性和必然性。黑格尔说:“到了希腊人那里,我们马上便感觉到仿佛置身于自己的家里一样,因为我们已经到了‘精神’的园地。”(16)

2. Europe is the center of world history

2. 欧洲是世界历史的中心

The French thinker Condorcet, the German philosopher Hegel, and the German historian Leopold von Ranke are prominent representatives of this view. Condorcet’s *Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind* is a representative work of Enlightenment philosophy of history. Condorcet, using representative events of cultural development as markers, describes ten epochs of the progress of the human mind in a linear historical manner. After passing through the tribal, pastoral, and agricultural epochs, humanity enters the fourth epoch, the period of ancient Greece. From this point on, major events in the progress of the human mind, such as the classification of sciences, scientific progress, the revival of knowledge during the Crusades, the revival of science, the invention of printing, the emergence of the scientific method represented by Descartes and Locke, and the rise of the Enlightenment, all occurred in Europe. Hegel believed that the Mediterranean Sea, connecting the three continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa, is the heart of the world and the condition for the existence of the world. The Mediterranean gives life to the world. “Without the Mediterranean, ‘world history’ would be inconceivable.” [17]17 G. W. F. Hegel, *Lectures on the Philosophy of History*, trans. J. Sibree (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1857), p. 87. Only by being connected to the Mediterranean can one participate in world history. Europe is the main stage for the development of the “absolute spirit” and also the place where history ends. Ranke was an influential historian both in Europe and the world. His conception of history differed markedly from Enlightenment thought, and his positivist historical research method differed markedly from Hegel’s method of historical philosophy proceeding from theory or concepts. Yet he was equally a Eurocentrist, and his conception of universal history had a significant impact on historiography. However, “the core of Ranke’s world history is European history… In his plan for writing a universal history, Ranke excluded various cultures that the West had not inherited.” [18]18 Ernst Schulin, “Ranke’s Universal History and the Problem of Eurocentrism,” in *Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline*, ed. Georg G. Iggers and James M. Powell (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1990), p. 98.

法国思想家孔多塞、德国哲学家黑格尔和德国历史学家兰克是这一观点的突出代表。孔多塞的《人类精神进步史表纲要》是启蒙运动历史哲学的代表性著作。孔多塞以文化发展的代表性事件为标志,以线性历史的方式描述了人类精神进步的十个时代。经历部落、游牧、农耕三个时代之后,人类进入第四个时代,即古希腊时期。由此开始,人类重大精神进步事件,如科学分类、科学进步、十字军时期知识复兴、科学的复兴、印刷术的发明、以笛卡尔和洛克为代表的科学方法的出现、启蒙运动兴起等等,都发生在欧洲。黑格尔认为,地中海连接欧、亚、非三大洲,是世界的心脏,是世界成立的条件。地中海赋予世界以生命。“没有地中海,‘世界历史’便无从设想了”(17)。只有与地中海相联系,才能参与世界历史。欧洲是“绝对精神”发展的主要舞台,也是历史终结之地。兰克是在欧洲和世界都有重要影响的历史学家,他的历史观念与启蒙思想迥异,其实证主义历史研究方法与黑格尔的从理论或概念出发的历史哲学研究方法迥异,但他同样是欧洲中心主义者,其世界通史的观念对史学产生了重要影响。但是,“兰克世界史的核心是欧洲史……兰克在撰写世界通史的计划中排除了西方没有承袭的各种文化”(18)。

3. European civilization has incomparable superiority; it creates human history

3. 欧洲文明具有无比的优越性,它创造着人类历史

Eurocentrism holds that European civilization possesses immense creative power, constantly innovating and continuously turning new pages in history. “Most truly important historical events, i.e., ‘events that change history,’ occurred in Europe, or occurred only under the stimulus of Europe (‘Europe’ still refers to ‘Greater Europe’).” [19]19 J. M. Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History* (New York: Guilford Press, 1993), p. 1. The American scholar J. M. Blaut lists a series of such propositions in chronological order, including: the Middle East (or the Holy Land of Christianity) invented agriculture, and humans began settled life; the Middle East saw the earliest principalities, cities, organized religion, writing systems, and division of labor; the Middle East or Eastern Europe invented iron smelting, and the “Iron Age” first appeared in Europe; the Middle East first developed monotheism; ancient Greece first developed democracy; most pure sciences, such as mathematics, physics, history, and geography, emerged in ancient Greece; the Roman Empire was the first great empire, with a bureaucracy and legal system; feudalism, as another major advance in the form of human society, developed in Europe; Europeans in the Middle Ages invented a series of technologies that made them superior to non-Europeans; Europeans invented the modern state; Europeans invented capitalism; Europeans were particularly endowed with an “adventurous spirit” and were great explorers; Europeans invented industry and brought about the Industrial Revolution… [20]20 Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, pp. 1–2. Some of these views have been abandoned, while others have become historical “common sense.” In the Eurocentric view, Europe’s unilinear historical process has universal significance. Eurocentrism cannot completely deny the contributions of other civilizations; therefore, it treats other civilizations as a “prelude” to European civilization. Eurocentrism believes that the creativity of European civilization stems from some characteristic of European civilization, which forms the superiority of European civilization. Christianity, climate, geographical environment, trade, democracy, reason, race, and so on have all been regarded at various times as this characteristic of European civilization. This civilizational characteristic is often derived through comparison with an imagined “Orient.” Among these theories, the “Oriental despotism” theory of “Western (European) freedom – Eastern (Asian) despotism” is one of the representative theories.

欧洲中心主义认为,欧洲文明具有巨大的创造力,不断创新,不断掀开历史新篇章。“大多数真正重要的历史事件即‘改变历史的事件’都发生在欧洲,或者是由于在欧洲的刺激下才发生的(‘欧洲’仍指‘大欧洲’)。”(19)美国学者J.M.布劳特按照历史顺序列举了一系列这类命题,包括:中东(或基督教圣地)发明农业,人类开始定居生活;中东出现最早的公国、城市、有组织的宗教、书写系统、分工;中东或东欧发明冶铁,“铁器时代”最早出现在欧洲;中东最早出现单一神教;古希腊最早出现民主制度;大多数纯科学,如数学、物理、历史、地理等,出现在古希腊;罗马帝国是第一个伟大的帝国,出现了官僚体制和法律体系;作为人类社会形态的又一次重大进展的封建主义在欧洲得到发展;欧洲人在中世纪发明了一系列技术,使他们比非欧洲人优越;欧洲人发明了现代国家;欧洲人发明了资本主义;欧洲人特别富有“冒险精神”,是伟大的探索者;欧洲人发明了工业并且缔造了产业革命……(20)。这些观点,有些被放弃,有些已经成为历史“常识”。在欧洲中心主义看来,欧洲的单线历史进程具有普遍意义。欧洲中心主义无法完全否认其他文明的贡献,因此,他们把其他文明作为欧洲文明的“序幕”。欧洲中心主义认为,欧洲文明的创造性来源于欧洲文明的某种特性,这些特性形成了欧洲文明的优越性。基督教、气候、地理环境、贸易、民主、理性、人种等等都先后被视为这种欧洲文明特性。这种文明特性,又往往是通过与一个想象的“东方”相比较得出来的。在这些理论中,“西方(欧洲)自由——东方(亚洲)专制”的东方专制主义理论是代表性理论之一。

4. European civilization leads human history

4. 欧洲文明引领着人类历史

In the Eurocentric view, European civilization is forever advanced and forever progressive. Other civilizations of the world are backward and stagnant. European civilization is the center of the world, while other civilizations are the periphery. The central region leads, the peripheral regions lag behind; the central region innovates, the peripheral regions imitate the central region. European civilization creates human history and inevitably leads human history. European civilization continuously spreads civilization to backward peripheral regions, like light illuminating the dark peripheral areas. Within the Eurocentric perspective, as the leader of human history, Europe’s unilinear historical development process is universal; other parts of the world must repeat Europe’s historical process and “should” repeat this historical process. Therefore, Eurocentrism also manifests as a theory of European civilizational mission, namely, that when other peoples are still mired in a “barbaric” or “stagnant” state, Europe bears the “‘right and duty to civilize the uncivilized,’ i.e., the so-called ‘white man’s burden’ or ‘burden of civilization.’” [21]21 Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, p. 10.

在欧洲中心主义看来,欧洲文明永远先进,永远进步。世界其他文明则是落后的、停滞的。欧洲文明是世界的中心,其他文明则是外围。中心地区领先,外围地区落后;中心地区创新,外围地区则模仿中心地区。欧洲文明创造着人类历史,也必然引领着人类历史。欧洲文明向外围落后地区不断传播文明,就像光一样,照亮外围黑暗地区。在欧洲中心主义的视野中,作为人类历史的引领者,欧洲的单线历史发展进程具有普世性,世界其他地方要重复欧洲的历史进程,也“应该”重复这个历史进程。因此,欧洲中心主义又表现为欧洲文明使命论,即当其他民族还陷于“野蛮”状态或者“停滞”状态时,欧洲就负有“‘开化’‘不文明’的权利和义务,即所谓的‘白人的重担’或‘文明的重担’”(21)。

III. The Extremely Important Historical Role of Civilizational Exchange and Mutual Learning: A Critique of the Main Views of the Eurocentric Unilinear View of History

三、 文明交流互鉴极其重要的历史作用:欧洲中心主义单线史观主要观点批判

All civilizations of the world accumulate human wisdom. Civilizational exchange and mutual learning gather each other’s wisdom, driving the continuous development of human civilization. The error of the Eurocentric unilinear view of history lies in its disregard for the creativity of other peoples, its disregard for the diversity of civilizations, its intentional or unintentional neglect of the significant driving role of exchange and mutual learning between civilizations in the development of European civilization, and its attribution of major achievements resulting from the convergence of human wisdom to Europe, thereby constructing a history of European civilization that independently creates and leads human history. [22]22 Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, p. 10. Below, this article will start from critiquing the errors of the main Eurocentric views to reveal the important historical role of the factor of civilizational exchange and mutual learning in the development of European civilization.

世界各文明都积累着人类的智慧。文明交流互鉴,汇聚彼此的智慧,推动着人类文明不断向前发展。欧洲中心主义单线史观的错误就在于无视其他各个民族的创造性,无视文明的多样性,有意或无意地忽视文明之间的交流互鉴对欧洲文明发展的重大推动作用,将人类智慧汇集产生的重大成果归结为欧洲,构建出一个独自创造、引领人类历史的欧洲文明史(22)。下面,本文将从批判欧洲中心主义主要观点的错误出发,揭示文明交流互鉴因素在欧洲文明发展中的重要历史作用。

1. Diverse civilizations all contribute wisdom to humanity; European civilization is only one of them

1. 多彩的文明都在为人类贡献智慧,欧洲文明只是其中的一种

The development of civilization is not unilinear but multilinear; many civilizations have brilliant achievements. For the vast majority of time, Europe has not been the center of world history.

文明发展不是单线的,是多线的,很多文明都有辉煌的成就。在绝大多数时间里,欧洲并非世界历史的中心。

Ancient Greek culture was splendid and brilliant. However, ancient Greece cannot be called the center of ancient civilization. During the same period, the development of civilization in China and India was equally remarkable. It is precisely for this reason that Jaspers’ theory of the “Axial Age” has gained widespread recognition. Philosophy and science are important representatives of ancient Greek civilization. “In terms of philosophy, to say that ancient Greek philosophy was more advanced than the various doctrines of the Hundred Schools of Thought in China and the Indian philosophy of Buddhism, which was set against a background of highly developed thought, is difficult for those who understand the latter to accept.” [23]23 Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, p. 55. Greek geometry was ahead of China and India, but “Greek arithmetic and algebra lagged far behind those of contemporary India and China.” [24]24 Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, p. 55. From the perspective of modern medicine, comparing Bian Que’s theory of the five viscera and six bowels and four treatment methods with the nearly contemporaneous Hippocratic theory of the four humors of the human body, Bian Que’s theory was more advanced.

古希腊文化灿烂辉煌。但是,古希腊却不能称为古代文明中心。就在同时期,中国和印度的文明发展同样引人瞩目。也正因此,雅思贝尔斯的“轴心时代”之说才得到广泛认同。哲学和科学是古希腊文明的重要代表。“哲学方面,要说古希腊哲学比中国诸子百家的各种学说和以思想高度发展为背景的佛教的印度哲学思想先进,这对于了解后二者的人来说是很难接受的。”(23)希腊几何学领先于中国和印度,但是,“希腊的算术、代数与同时代的印度、中国相比远远落后”(24)。从现代医学来看,将扁鹊主张的五脏六腑说及四种治疗法与几乎同时代的希波克拉底的人体体液说相比较,扁鹊的学说更先进一些。

The Roman Empire had a profound influence in the Mediterranean region. At the same time, the Han Dynasty in China was equally powerful, and under the transportation conditions of the time, its influence radiated throughout East Asia, South Asia, and West Asia, exerting an important impact on the development of world history. After the Western Roman Empire fell under the impact of barbarian tribes, from the 5th century to the 15th century, various civilizations of the world developed along diverse paths. The Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire) continued the Roman Empire, maintaining great influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. The 8th to 10th centuries were the peak period of the Byzantine Empire, with highly developed culture, education, and art. Chinese civilization continued to develop, with the Tang Dynasty at its peak of national power and the Song Dynasty flourishing economically and culturally. In West Asia, the Arab Empire arose, forming an empire spanning Europe, Asia, and Africa, once occupying the Iberian Peninsula and Sicily, with influence radiating over much of the Mediterranean, strong national power, and flourishing culture.

罗马帝国在地中海区域影响深远。与此同时,中国汉代同样国力强盛,在当时的交通条件下,影响力辐射到整个东亚、南亚和西亚,对世界历史发展产生重要影响。西罗马帝国在蛮族冲击下灭亡后,从公元5世纪到公元15世纪,世界各文明沿着多样路线发展。拜占庭帝国(东罗马帝国)延续着罗马帝国,一直在东地中海保持着巨大影响力。公元8—10世纪是拜占庭帝国巅峰时期,文化、教育、艺术高度发展。中华文明继续发展,唐朝国力鼎盛,宋朝经济、文化繁荣。在西亚,阿拉伯帝国兴起,形成横跨欧亚非的帝国,曾一度占据伊比利亚半岛、西西里岛,影响力辐射多半个地中海,国力强盛,文化繁荣。

In stark contrast to the above civilizations, during this period, Latin Christian Europe was in the “Dark Middle Ages.” On the map of the Eurasian continent, from a geographical, economic, political, and cultural perspective, the Latin Christian region of Western Europe was a desolate “corner” of a large peninsula in the western part of Eurasia. In the 11th century, the Spanish Muslim scholar Sa‘id ibn Ahmad, in a book on peoples, introduced those peoples who had made significant contributions to civilization throughout history. He regarded Latin Christian Europe as northern barbarians, believing that “such peoples have not devoted themselves to science; they are more like beasts than humans.” [25]25 Sa‘id ibn Ahmad, *Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Umam* (Book of the Categories of Nations), cited in Blaut, *The Colonizer’s Model of the World*, p. 56. The author’s description is undoubtedly tinged with an “Arab” centrism. However, in the author’s evaluation, the degree of backwardness of Western Europe at that time can still be seen.

与以上各文明形成鲜明对比的是,在这一时期,拉丁基督教欧洲正处于“黑暗的中世纪”。在欧亚大陆版图上,从地理、经济、政治、文化来看,拉丁基督教的西欧地区是欧亚大陆西部一个大半岛的荒僻的“角落”。公元11世纪,西班牙穆斯林学者赛义德·伊本·艾哈迈德在一本关于民族的著作中,对历史上对文明作出过重大贡献的民族进行介绍。他将拉丁基督教欧洲视为北方蛮族,认为“这类民族没有在科学上下工夫,与其说是人类,不如说是野兽”(25)。这位作者的描述无疑明显带有“阿拉伯”中心主义。但是,在作者的评价中,仍然可以看到当时西欧的落后程度。

2. The vitality and creativity of European civilization come from civilizational exchange and mutual learning, not merely from some civilizational characteristic

2. 欧洲文明的生命力和创造力来自于文明交流互鉴,而不仅仅来自某种文明特性

Innovation and creation in civilization are not mysterious. Civilization is the crystallization of a people’s labor and wisdom. When a people inherits the wisdom of its ancestors, draws on the wisdom of other peoples, and, when facing new challenges, applies this wisdom, proposes new ideas and new methods in new social practices, forms new understandings and new concepts, and advances this wisdom one step further, this is innovation and creation. Therefore, without the accumulation and inheritance of a people’s wisdom, without the gathering and absorption of the wisdom of other peoples, brilliant civilizational achievements would be impossible.

文明的创新、创造并不神秘。文明是一个民族劳动和智慧的结晶。当一个民族继承先人的智慧,借鉴其他民族的智慧,在面对新的挑战时,运用这些智慧,在新的社会实践中提出新思路、新办法,形成新的认识、新的理念,将这些智慧推进一步,这就是创新和创造。因此,离开民族智慧的积累和继承、离开对其他民族智慧的汇集吸收,就不可能有辉煌的文明成就。

Eurocentrism regards ancient Greece as the origin of European civilization and views ancient Greek civilization as “original.” However, ancient Greek civilization did not develop independently; it was the product of intercivilizational exchange, mutual learning, and inherited development. The idea that ancient Greece originated from itself is a product of 19th-century European thought. Greeks of the classical and Hellenistic periods believed that “the rise of Greek culture was due to colonization; around 1500 BCE, Egyptians and Phoenicians civilized the indigenous inhabitants of Greece. Subsequently, the Greeks continuously and extensively borrowed from the cultures of the Near East.” [26]26 S. N. Eisenstadt, *The Origins and Diversity of Axial Age Civilizations*, trans. Zeng Guoyuan and Xu Xinyan, Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2023, p. 8. In *The Customs of the Nations*, completed in the mid-18th century, Voltaire even wrote: “The East is the cradle of all arts; the East gave everything to the West.” [27]27 Voltaire, *The Customs of the Nations*, trans. Liang Shouqin, Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1995, p. 1.

欧洲中心主义把古希腊视为欧洲文明的原点,将古希腊文明视为“原创”。但是,古希腊文明并不是独立发展的,而是文明交流互鉴和传承发展的产物。认为古希腊起源于自身,这是欧洲19世纪的思想产物。古典时代和希腊化时代的希腊人认为,“希腊文化的兴起是由于殖民化,大约公元前1500年,埃及人和腓尼基人使希腊本土居民文明化。进而,希腊人持续不断地大量借鉴近东诸文化。”(26)在十八世纪中期完成的《风俗论》中,伏尔泰甚至这样写道:“东方是一切艺术的摇篮,东方给了西方以一切。”(27)

The view that ancient Greece borrowed from Near Eastern civilizations more reasonably explains the sudden burst of civilizational brilliance in ancient Greece. Modern archaeology has found that between approximately 3000 BCE and 1200 BCE, several empires emerged in Egypt, the Near East, and the Aegean region. These empires engaged in close trade and cultural exchanges, forming an Eastern Mediterranean civilizational circle, of which ancient Greece was a part. Around 1200 BCE, due to climate and other factors, the Eastern Mediterranean civilization collapsed. Northern barbarian tribes entered the Greek region, and Greece entered a “Dark Age.” In the Near East, although empires rose and fell, cultures were transmitted in various forms. In the seventh century BCE, ancient Greek civilization rapidly recovered and developed, producing astonishing achievements in philosophy, geometry, physics, geography, medicine, and other fields. The creativity of civilization presupposes the accumulation of wisdom among peoples and the convergence of wisdom from various nations. The sudden flourishing of ancient Greek civilization cannot be understood solely from ancient Greece itself; it must also be understood from the recovery and development of the entire Eastern Mediterranean civilizational circle, from the transmission of human wisdom accumulated over millennia in that circle, and from the mutual stimulation generated by intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning in the Eastern Mediterranean region.

古希腊借鉴近东文明的观点更能合理地解释古希腊突然绽放出的文明之光。现代考古学发现,在大约公元前3000年到公元前1200年之间,埃及、近东、爱琴海地区已经出现了一些帝国,这些帝国之间存在着密切的贸易、文化交往,形成了东地中海文明圈,古希腊就是这个文明圈的一个组成部分。公元前1200年左右,由于气候等原因,东地中海文明崩塌。北方蛮族进入古希腊地区,古希腊进入“黑暗年代”。在近东地区,虽然帝国兴衰变换,但文化以各种形式传承。公元前七世纪,古希腊文明迅速恢复、发展,出现了令人惊叹的哲学、几何学、物理学、地理学、医学等文明成就。文明的创造力是以民族智慧传承积累和各民族智慧汇集为前提的。古希腊突然迸发的文明成就,不能仅仅从古希腊自身来理解,还要从整个东地中海文明圈的恢复、发展来理解,还要从几千年来东地中海文明圈所积累的人类智慧的传承和东地中海地区文明交流互鉴相互激发来理解。

3. Intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning are reciprocal, not a one-way dissemination from European civilization to other civilizations.

3. 文明交流借鉴是相互的,不是由欧洲文明单方面向其他文明传播

Since the 18th century, European civilization has risen, spreading outward, while other civilizations have diligently studied the achievements of European civilization. However, it must be recognized that Europe’s emergence from the “Dark Middle Ages” also benefited from other civilizations.

18世纪以来,欧洲文明崛起,欧洲文明向外传播,其他文明努力学习欧洲文明成果。但是,必须看到,欧洲走出“黑暗的中世纪”,也是得益于其他文明。

Since the advent of writing, translating the classics of a civilization has been an extremely important means of drawing on its wisdom. Between the 12th and 13th centuries, Latin Christian Europe experienced a “century-long translation movement.” During the Crusades, some Western European scholars became aware of their own culture’s extreme backwardness. Starting in the 12th century, some Western European scholars began translating Arabic academic works. The translation and transmission of Arabic academic works to Latin Christian Europe occurred in three main locations. The first was Antioch, on the northeastern coast of the Mediterranean. Some European scholars came here to study Islamic culture and translate Arabic scientific texts. For example, Adelard of Bath translated the complete *Elements*, al-Khwārizmī’s *Sindhind*, and Abū Ma‘shar’s *Introduction to Astrology*. The second location was Sicily, which was sympathetic to Islamic civilization. The third was Toledo on the Iberian Peninsula. Some Western European scholars came to the border regions of the Islamic Empire to study and translate Arabic philosophical and scientific texts. In 1236, Córdoba was captured by Christian forces, and a vast quantity of Arabic documents fell into their hands. Toledo became the center for translating Arabic documents into Latin. Gerard of Cremona was a representative figure. He and his team translated numerous medical textbooks and surgical manuals. “By the end of the 15th century, the content taught in European universities already covered Latin translations of all the works of Islamic masters, such as Ibn Sīnā, Ibn al-Haytham, Ibn Rushd, al-Rāzī, al-Khwārizmī, and so on, too numerous to list. Especially in medicine, European scholars were still studying and publishing translations of Arabic medical works until the 18th century.” [28]28 Jonathan Lyons, *The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization*, trans. Liu Xia and Chen Meng, Beijing: New Star Press, 2013, p. 12. It was precisely through borrowing and absorbing the scientific and philosophical achievements of Arab-Islamic civilization that the scientific and cultural level of Western European intellectuals rapidly improved, laying a solid knowledge foundation for the European scientific revolution. However, this important historical fact is rarely mentioned in European academic research.

有文字以来,翻译一个文明的经典,是借鉴这个文明智慧极其重要的手段。在公元12世纪到13世纪,拉丁基督教欧洲出现了“百年翻译运动”。在十字军东征中,一些西欧学者意识到自身文化的极度落后。从12世纪开始,一些西欧学者开始翻译阿拉伯学术著作。阿拉伯学术著作向拉丁基督教欧洲的翻译传播有三个主要地点。第一个地点是处于地中海东北沿岸的安提阿。一些欧洲学者来到这里,学习伊斯兰文化,翻译阿拉伯科学典籍。如巴斯的阿德拉翻译了完整的《几何原本》、花剌子密的《信德及印度天文表》、阿尔布马札的《占星学入门》。第二个地点是亲伊斯兰文明的西西里岛。第三个地点是伊比利亚半岛的托莱多。一些西欧学者来到伊斯兰帝国边界地区,学习、翻译阿拉伯哲学和科学典籍。1236年,科尔多瓦被基督教军队攻占,巨量的阿拉伯文献落入基督教军队手中。托莱多成为阿拉伯文献翻译为拉丁文的中心。克雷莫纳的杰拉尔德是其中的代表性人物。他和他的团队翻译了大量医学教科书和外科手术手册。“到15世纪末,欧洲大学讲授的内容已经涵盖了所有伊斯兰巨匠作品的拉丁文译本,如伊本·西拿、伊本·海赛姆、伊本·路世德、拉齐、花剌子米,等等,不胜枚举。尤其在医学方面,直到18世纪都还有欧洲学者在研究和刊印阿拉伯医学作品的译本。”(28)正是对阿拉伯—伊斯兰文明中科学和哲学成果的借鉴吸收,迅速提高了西欧知识界的科学和文化水平,为欧洲科学革命打下了坚实的知识基础。但是,在欧洲学术研究中,这一重要历史事实却很少提及。

Chinese civilization has had a profound and enormous impact on Western civilization. Marx pointed out: “Gunpowder, the compass, and printing—these are the three great inventions that heralded the arrival of bourgeois society. Gunpowder blew the knightly class to pieces, the compass opened up the world market and established colonies, and printing became a tool of Protestantism, in general a means of scientific revival, and the most powerful lever for creating the necessary prerequisites for spiritual development.” [29]29 *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 47, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2004, p. 427. From the 17th century onward, on the one hand, Western learning spread eastward, and the influence of Western civilization on China is widely known. On the other hand, Eastern learning spread westward, and the enormous influence of Chinese civilization on Western civilization has been overlooked. Chinese classics, language, and literature were translated into Western languages, significantly impacting Western scholarship. Chinese artworks, garden architecture, Chinese-style motifs, and Chinese science, technology, and practical techniques were welcomed in the West. In the 18th century, a “China fever” emerged in the West, especially in France.

中华文明对西方文明产生了深刻的、巨大的影响。马克思指出:“火药、指南针、印刷术——这是预告资产阶级社会到来的三大发明。火药把骑士阶层炸得粉碎,指南针打开了世界市场并建立了殖民地,而印刷术则变成新教的工具,总的来说变成科学复兴的手段,变成对精神发展创造必要前提的最强大的杠杆。”(29)17世纪以降,一方面,西学东来,西方文明对中国的影响广为人知。另一方面,东学西渐,中华文明对西方文明的巨大影响却被人们所忽视。中国的典籍、语言文学翻译到西方,对西方学术产生重要影响。中国的艺术品、园林建筑、中国情调、中国的科学技术和实用技术等受到西方的欢迎。在十八世纪,在西方,尤其是在法国形成了“中国热”。

4. The internal coherence and inevitability of European civilization is a historical fiction that ignores the important nourishment other civilizations have provided to European civilization.

4. 欧洲文明的内在联系性和必然性是一种历史虚构,它无视其他文明对欧洲文明的重要滋养

The unilinear historical view of Eurocentrism constructs a history from ancient Greece to modern Europe (including the United States). This history is a process of the unfolding of some inherent characteristic of European civilization, possessing internal continuity. This civilizational characteristic forms the superiority of European civilization. Therefore, this history is also a process of demonstrating the superiority of European civilization, possessing inevitability. The unilinear historical view of Eurocentrism intends to outline a pure “lineage” of civilization, untainted by external influences. However, this unilinear historical picture of Europe faces the enormous historical problem of the thousand-year-long “Dark Middle Ages.” Thus, Eurocentrists construct a “rebirth” of classical culture: ancient Greek civilization created all the actual and potential elements of European civilization. However, civilizational development was interrupted by barbarian invasions. As the spark of European civilization, ancient Greek texts were “preserved” and “guarded” by the Arabs. During the Renaissance, Latin Christian Europe retrieved the lost ancient Greek civilization from the Arabs, the spark of European civilization was rekindled, bursting forth with great vitality and creating modern civilization.

欧洲中心主义单线史观构建了一个从古希腊到现代欧洲(包括美国在内)的历史。这一历史是欧洲文明的某种内在特质不断展开的进程,具有内在的连续性。这种文明特性形成欧洲文明的优越性。因此,这个历史也是欧洲文明优越性展现的过程,具有必然性。欧洲中心主义单线史观意图勾勒一条纯粹的、未被外部“污染”的文明“脉络”。但是,欧洲中心主义单线历史图景面临着长达千年的“黑暗的中世纪”这一巨大历史难题。因此,欧洲中心主义者构建了一个古典文化的“复兴”:古希腊文明创造了欧洲文明各种现实的和潜在的要素。不过,文明发展被蛮族入侵打断。作为欧洲文明火种的古希腊典籍被阿拉伯人“保存”“守护”。到了文艺复兴时期,拉丁基督教欧洲从阿拉伯人那里找回遗失的古希腊文明,欧洲文明火种重燃,爆发出巨大活力,创造现代文明。

From the perspective of the world history of intercivilizational exchange, mutual learning, and development, the unilinear historical view of Eurocentrism provides a distorted historical picture. Ancient Greek civilization inherited and borrowed from Eastern Mediterranean civilizations; it was not an original creation. What Latin Christian Europe obtained from the Arabs was not the achievements of ancient Greek civilization, but new civilizational achievements that integrated the achievements of many ancient civilizations and were innovatively developed in practice. Ancient Greek civilization has been discussed above and will not be repeated here. Only the issue of Arab civilization is discussed here. Arab scholars were not, as Eurocentrists claim, simply “guarding” ancient Greek classics. During the “century-long translation movement” of the Arab Empire, with the support of caliphs such as al-Ma’mūn, Arab scholars made every effort to collect classical texts from ancient Greece, Persia, and India, translating them into Arabic, correcting, collating, comparing, studying, commenting on, developing, and innovating them, advancing philosophy, geometry, geography, astronomy, chemistry, and other fields to new heights. By the second half of the 10th century, original Arabic works had replaced classical texts. “In fact, some of the greatest Greek texts, such as Ptolemy’s *Almagest*, were no longer considered cutting-edge research but were replaced by more complex and sophisticated astronomical works.” [30]30 Jonathan Lyons, *The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization*, trans. Liu Xia and Chen Meng, Beijing: New Star Press, 2013, p. 11.

从文明交流互鉴发展的世界文明历史来看,欧洲中心主义单线史观提供的是一幅被扭曲的历史图景。古希腊文明传承借鉴东地中海文明,并非自身独创。拉丁基督教欧洲从阿拉伯人那里得到的,并非古希腊文明成果,而是融合众多古代文明成果,在实践中创新发展的新的文明成果。关于古希腊文明,前面已有论及,不再赘述。这里只讨论阿拉伯文明问题。阿拉伯学者并非如欧洲中心主义者所说的那样“守护”古希腊经典。在阿拉伯帝国的“百年大翻译”运动中,在以马蒙为代表的哈里发的支持下,阿拉伯学者千方百计搜集古希腊、古波斯、古印度时期的古典文献,将它们翻译成阿拉伯文,对它们校正、整理、比较、研究、评注、发展、创新,将哲学、几何学、地理学、天文学、化学等发展到新高度。到了10世纪下半叶,原创阿拉伯文著作取代了古典文献。“事实上,一些最伟大的希腊文本,比如托勒密的《天文学大成》已不再被视为最前沿的研究,而是被更为复杂精细的天文学著作所取代。”(30)

IV. The Role of the State in Promoting Intercivilizational Exchange and Mutual Learning: A Critique of the Theory of Oriental Despotism

四、 国家对文明交流互鉴的推动作用:东方专制主义理论批判

The theory of Oriental despotism is an important theoretical pillar of the Eurocentric unilinear view of history; it has been widely disseminated and has had a profound influence. This theory holds that “freedom” makes the West (Europe) full of creativity, while “despotism” makes the East (Asia) lifeless and mired in stagnation. This is the fundamental reason why, since ancient Greece, the West has been able to become the center of world history, continuously innovating and continuously leading human history. However, this theory is ahistorical. It uses abstract “freedom” as a standard to measure complex history, ignores the different stages of development of state forms, and overlooks the important historical role of state governance capacity in consciously promoting exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations.

东方专制主义理论是欧洲中心主义单线史观重要的理论支撑,广泛传播,影响深远。该理论认为,“自由”使西方(欧洲)充满创造力,而“专制”使东方(亚洲)死气沉沉,陷于停滞。这是古希腊以来西方能够成为世界历史的中心、不断创新、不断引领人类历史的根本原因。但是,这一理论是非历史的,它以“自由”为抽象标准来衡量复杂历史,无视国家形态发展的不同阶段,忽视国家治理能力在自觉地推动文明交流互鉴过程中的重要历史作用。

The theory of Oriental despotism arose during the European Enlightenment. During this period, European economy and society developed rapidly; by comparison, the empires of Asia were utterly lacking in vitality and mired in stagnation. As far as the intellectual circles of the time were concerned, most European scholars still acknowledged that Eastern civilizations had profoundly influenced Western civilization. What caused the stagnation of the East? And what caused the vitality of the West? Scholars attributed the cause to the “despotism” of the East and the “freedom” of the West; the former led to superstition and ignorance, leading to the degeneration of knowledge, while the latter contributed to the development of human reason and knowledge.

东方专制主义理论兴起于欧洲启蒙运动时期。这一时期欧洲经济社会迅速发展,相较而言,亚洲各帝国则毫无活力,陷入停滞。就当时思想界而言,大多数欧洲学者还承认东方文明曾深刻地影响了西方文明。是什么造成了东方的停滞?又是什么造成了西方的生机勃勃?学者们将原因归之于东方的“专制”和西方的“自由”,前者导致迷信和愚昧,导致知识的退化,后者有助于人类理性和知识的发展。

Oriental despotism refers to the political system of Asia. The theory of Oriental despotism imagines a political picture of the East. This theory holds that in Oriental despotic regimes, the monarch stands above the entire society and rules over everyone. Except for the monarch, everyone is a slave. The state has no laws (or only very few laws), and the monarch rules the state according to his own opinions and will. The monarch possesses everything, and the people have no property rights. The nature of a despotic regime requires absolute obedience; the principle of a despotic regime is terror, “one must use terror to suppress all courage in people, to stifle all ambition” [31]31 Montesquieu, *The Spirit of the Laws*, Part 1, Chapter 9, “On the Principle of Despotism.”. In despotic states, the role of religion is to increase fear; it is the monarch’s most important tool of rule. Despotism is often accompanied by superstition. “Those whose interests lie only in deceiving people will soon become disgusted with the pursuit of truth. They are satisfied with the docility of the people and believe that no new methods are needed to ensure its (knowledge – author’s note) continuation.” [32]32 Condorcet, *Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind*. Therefore, a despotic regime inevitably hinders the progress of science, leads to the stagnation of science, and even causes the knowledge accumulated in previous centuries to continuously disappear; the human spirit falls into superstition and prejudice, sinking into ignorance. Consequently, the great empires of Asia are bound to head toward stagnation and lose their vitality.

东方专制主义是指亚洲的政治体制。东方专制主义理论想象出一幅东方政治图景。该理论认为,在东方专制政体中,君主个人在整个社会之上,统治所有人。除君主外,每个人都是奴隶。国家没有法律(或者只有很少的法律),君主根据自己的意见和意愿统治国家。君主拥有一切,人民没有财产权。专制政体的性质要求绝对服从,专制政体的原则是恐怖,“就要用恐怖去压制人们的一切勇气,去窒息一切野心”(31)。在专制主义国家,宗教的作用是增加恐惧,是君主最重要的统治工具。专制主义往往与迷信相伴。“那些其利益只在于骗人的人们,很快地就会厌恶对真理的追求的。他们满足于人民的驯服,并相信不再需要新的办法来保证它(知识,本文作者注)的延续。”(32)因此,专制政体必然阻碍科学的进步,导致科学的停滞不前,甚至以前各个世纪积累的知识也会不断消失,人类精神陷于迷信和偏见,沦为愚昧。因此,亚洲各大帝国必然走向停滞,失去活力。

The theory of Oriental despotism holds that, contrary to the East, the West is free. The opposition between a free West and a despotic East has existed since the time of ancient Greece; the Greco-Persian Wars were the “freedom” versus “despotism” war that determined the fate of the West. It is precisely freedom that gives the West unparalleled vitality and creativity. Condorcet believed that the politics of ancient Greece were free. Within ancient Greek society, there was no formation of a priestly caste monopolizing knowledge, as in the Eastern empires, nor its system of preaching that maintained despotic rule. “All people have equal rights to know the truth. Everyone can strive to discover the truth, in order to communicate it to all people, and to communicate to them the whole and complete truth.” [33]33 Condorcet, *Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind*. Freedom enabled the ancient Greeks to further develop knowledge originating from the East.

东方专制主义理论认为,与东方相反,西方是自由的。自由的西方与专制的东方的对立,从古希腊时期就已经存在,希波战争是决定西方命运的“自由”与“专制”之战。正是自由使西方具有无与伦比的活力和创造力。孔多塞认为,古希腊的政治是自由的。在古希腊的社会内部,没有形成东方帝国中垄断知识的祭司团体及其维护专制统治的说教体系。“所有的人对于认识真理都拥有平等的权利。人人都可以力求发现真理,以便向所有的人交流真理,并向他们交流全部的完整的真理。”(33)自由使古希腊人能够将源自东方的知识进一步发展。

The theory of Oriental despotism cannot withstand the test of historical facts. Regarding the transmission and development of science and culture during the Golden Age of ancient Greece, it was not the West but the East that truly pushed them to their peak. The first instance was the Ptolemaic dynasty. It brought ancient Greek science and culture to a high point. However, the Ptolemaic dynasty was, in the strict sense, a so-called “Oriental despotic” state. “The Ptolemies continued the Egyptian tradition; they were the owners of the land and all property, and they were sacred and inviolable. The king is the state.” [34]34 M. Rostovtzeff, *The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World*, Vol. 1. The second instance was the Arab Empire. From the 8th to the 13th centuries AD, the scientific achievements of ancient Greece, ancient Persia, and ancient India were advanced to new heights by the Arab Empire. In stark contrast, “free” Latin Christian Europe was sinking into the “Dark Middle Ages.” This dark period lasted as long as a thousand years.

东方专制主义理论禁不起历史事实检验。就古希腊黄金时代科学与文化的传承发展而言,真正将其推向巅峰的,不是西方,而是东方。第一次是托勒密王朝。它将古希腊科学和文化推向高峰。但是,托勒密王朝却是严格意义上的所谓“东方专制主义”国家。“托勒密诸王延续了埃及的传统;他们是这块土地和一切财产的拥有者,而且他们是神圣不可侵犯的。君王即是国家。”(34)第二次是阿拉伯帝国。在公元8世纪至13世纪,古希腊、古波斯和古印度的科学成果被阿拉伯帝国推进到新的高度。与此形成鲜明对比的是,“自由”的拉丁基督教欧洲正陷入“黑暗的中世纪”。这个黑暗时期竟长达千年。

The theory of Oriental despotism contains two main theoretical errors.

东方专制主义理论存在两个主要理论错误。

First, using abstract “freedom” as a yardstick to measure state forms makes it impossible to correctly understand the history of the development of state forms. These thinkers took “freedom” as the standard, using the degree of freedom as the degree of state development. Hegel thereby regarded the East as the infancy of world history, ancient Greece as youth, Rome as maturity, and the Germanic world as old age; Eastern despotism was the initial stage of history, while Western “freedom” was a higher stage of the historical logic. However, from the perspective of the history of human social development, in various parts of the world, the small states with few people in early human societies, and the corresponding individual freedom, were a universal phenomenon. Within the Persian Empire on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, there existed a large number of democratic city-states. Jack Goody argued: “There was no significant difference between Oriental despotism and city-state democracy, whether Greek or Phoenician. And in Mesopotamia, city-states were numerous.” [35]35 Jack Goody, *The Theft of History*. “The evolution of state forms always proceeds from small to large, moving toward globalization. In European history, the only empires that can truly be called globalized are the Macedonian Empire and the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was the peak of European history. Rome learned from Macedonia, Macedonia learned from Persia. The Greek city-states were not the high end of state evolution, but the low end.” [36]36 Reference to a Chinese scholarly argument contrasting the evolutionary stages of state forms in East and West. Therefore, from the perspective of the historical process of state form development, the ancient Greek city-states, the Italian city-republics, and the early feudal states of Western Europe were all formed after the collapse of great empires and the influx of backward peoples; they were primary forms of the state. Although Eastern states experienced dynastic rises and falls, when backward peoples entered, they would actively accept the existing state governance system. The Oriental despotic states were, on the contrary, a higher form of state development. Historically, Western Europe also evolved from a forest of small early feudal states toward absolutist feudal states. This evolutionary process was undoubtedly a historical progress. It is only because of the rise of the modern capitalist state that many people have overlooked the historical role of absolutist states.

第一,以抽象的“自由”作为尺度来衡量国家形态,无法正确认识国家形态发展的历史。这些思想家以“自由”作为标准,以自由的程度作为国家发展的程度。黑格尔由此将东方视为世界历史的幼年时期,将古希腊视为青年时期,将罗马视为壮年时期,将日耳曼世界视为晚年,东方的专制是历史的最初阶段,而西方的“自由”是历史逻辑的更高阶段。但是,从人类社会发展历史来看,在世界各地,人类早期社会的小国寡民,以及相应的个人自由是一种普遍现象。在地中海东岸的波斯帝国境内,存在大量的民主制城邦。杰克·古迪认为:“东方专制主义和城邦民主之间,无论是希腊还是腓尼基都没有显著区别。而在美索不达米亚,城邦众多。”(35)“国家形态的演进,总是由小到大,走向世界化。一部欧洲史,真正可以称为世界化的帝国只有马其顿帝国和罗马帝国。罗马帝国是欧洲历史的巅峰。罗马学马其顿,马其顿学波斯。希腊城邦并非国家进化的高端,而是国家进化的低端。”(36)因此,从国家形态发展历史进程来看,古希腊城邦、意大利的城市共和国、西欧的早期封建国家,都是大帝国崩溃后,落后民族涌入后形成的,是国家的初级形式。东方国家虽然王朝兴衰,但落后民族进入后,都会主动接受既有的国家治理体系。东方专制主义国家反而是国家发展的更高形态。从历史来看,西欧也是从小国林立的早期封建国家向绝对主义封建国家演变。这个演变进程毋庸置疑是历史的进步。只是由于资本主义现代国家的兴起,很多人忽视了绝对主义国家的历史作用。

Second, using abstract “freedom” as a yardstick to measure state forms makes it impossible to correctly understand the important historical role of state governance capacity in promoting exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations. The theory of Oriental despotism, in an ahistorical manner, emphasizes the opposition between “freedom” and “despotism,” while neglecting the development of state governance capacity and governance systems. In history, due to the limitations of state area and resources, the state governance capacity of city-states and city-republics was vastly weaker than that of unified monarchical states. The ancient Greek city-states were defeated by the barbarian Macedonian Empire; the Roman city-republic evolved into the Roman Empire; the Italian city-republics were defeated by emerging absolutist feudal states such as Spain, England, and France. The fundamental reason for this was that absolute monarchical states could form a stronger state governance capacity.

第二,以抽象的“自由”作为尺度来衡量国家形态,无法正确认识国家治理能力在推动文明交流互鉴过程中的重要历史作用。东方专制主义理论以非历史的态度强调“自由”与“专制”的对立,忽视了国家治理能力和治理体系的发展。在历史上,城邦国家、城市共和国由于国家的面积和资源的限制,其国家治理能力极大地弱于统一的王权国家。古希腊城邦败于野蛮的马其顿帝国,罗马城市共和国演化为罗马帝国,意大利城市共和国败于西班牙、英国、法国等新兴的绝对主义封建国家,其根本原因,就在于绝对王权国家能够形成更强大的国家治理能力。

Exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations enable a nation to rapidly acquire the wisdom accumulated by humanity, promoting the rapid leapfrog development of a civilization. Exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations can be spontaneous, or they can be consciously promoted by the state through state power. Relatively speaking, unified Eastern monarchical states possessed stronger state capacity, enabling them to mobilize more resources to promote exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations and to promote rapid civilizational development. The Ptolemaic dynasty’s promotion of scientific and cultural development during the Hellenistic period, and the Arab Caliphs represented by al-Ma’mun’s promotion of the “Century of Translation” movement, are prominent examples of this.

文明交流互鉴能够使一个民族迅速获得人类积累的智慧,推动一个文明迅速跃升发展。文明交流互鉴有自发的,也有国家通过国家力量自觉地推动文明交流互鉴。相对而言,东方统一的王权国家具有更强大的国家能力,能够调集更多的资源来推动文明交流互鉴,推动文明快速发展。托勒密王朝推动希腊化时期的科学和文化发展、以马蒙为代表的阿拉伯哈里发推动“百年翻译”运动,就是其突出代表。

After the fall of Athens, Alexandria in Egypt became the new center of science and culture. The Ptolemaic dynasty, to meet the needs of state rule (including governance), used state power to fund the creation of a scientific research institution — the Museum of Alexandria. The Museum of Alexandria was a complex comprising research institutes, a library, and colleges. The rulers of the Ptolemaic dynasty went to great lengths to collect a vast number of papyrus documents and parchment manuscripts, and they recruited the most famous scientists and scholars of the Mediterranean region at generous remuneration to manage it, attracting scholars from various places with favorable treatment, high social status, and convenient research conditions. Relying on the Museum, scholars carried out various academic activities, and ancient Greek science and culture were pushed to the pinnacle of the classical era.

雅典灭亡后,埃及的亚历山大成为新的科学文化中心。托勒密王朝为了国家统治(包括治理)需要,以国家力量资助创建科学研究机构——亚历山大博物馆。亚历山大博物馆是由研究机构、图书馆和学院组成的联合体。托勒密王朝的统治者千方百计搜集了大量的纸草文献和皮纸抄本,以优厚报酬招揽当时地中海区域最著名的科学家和学者来管理,以优厚的待遇、很高的社会地位、便利的研究条件吸引各地的学者。学者们依托博物馆开展各项学术活动,古希腊科学和文化被推向古典时代的巅峰。

During the Abbasid Caliphate of the Arab Empire, the empire was politically relatively stable, with a prosperous economy and trade. Rulers represented by Caliph al-Ma'mun vigorously promoted the development of science and culture. The House of Wisdom founded by al-Ma'mun preserved the Greek, Persian, and Indian scientific documents collected by the empire, gathered outstanding scholars from within the empire, who engaged in translation, research, and discussion. The House of Wisdom became a "research center for original science," "closer to a genuine academic research institution" [37]37 The original Chinese note number (37) refers to a source cited in the author's full text; the specific reference is not provided in the given paragraphs.. Al-Ma'mun initiated large-scale state science projects, funding and following up on project progress [38]38 The original Chinese note number (38) refers to a source cited in the author's full text; the specific reference is not provided in the given paragraphs.. Al-Ma'mun established three major state scientific research projects: first, building the first observatory in the Islamic world, using observational results to critically evaluate Ptolemaic astronomy, improve Ptolemy's *Handy Tables*, and compile new astronomical tables, including data on the positions of the sun, moon, and planets, the rising and setting of planets, and solar and lunar eclipses; second, organizing scientists to measure the Earth's circumference; third, drawing a new world map based on the geography and other scientific achievements of the time. These major projects were simply beyond the capacity of any individual to undertake; they could only be completed with state funding, assembling large teams of outstanding scholars from multiple disciplines, continuously conducting field surveys, and constantly innovating scientific methods and theories. It was these state-organized major scientific research projects that advanced ancient science to new heights. In contrast, during the Middle Ages, Western European feudal society was characterized by numerous small states and constant warfare. These small states lacked the capacity to mobilize resources, and although they had "autonomy" and "freedom," they were unable to absorb the outstanding achievements of other civilizations on a large scale or to promote the development of science and technology.

在阿拉伯帝国的阿拔斯王朝时期,帝国政治较为稳定,经济、贸易繁荣,以哈里发马蒙为代表的统治者大力推动科学和文化发展。马蒙创建的智慧宫保存了帝国搜集来的希腊、波斯、印度的科学文献,云集了帝国内部优秀的学者,他们进行翻译、研究、探讨。智慧宫成为“原创科学的研究中心”,“更接近于一个真正的学术研究机构”(37)。马蒙开创了国家大科学项目,资助并跟进项目进展(38)。马蒙设立三个大型国家科学研究项目:第一,在伊斯兰世界建立了第一座天文台,根据观测结果,对托勒密天文学进行批判性评价,改进托勒密的《实用天文表》,编制新的天文历表,包括太阳、月亮、行星的位置,行星的升降,日食、月食的数据等;第二,组织科学家测量地球周长;第三,根据当时的地理学和其他科学成果,绘制新的世界地图。这些重大项目,单个人根本无力承担,只能由国家提供资金,调集多学科的优秀学者组建庞大的团队,不断进行实地探测,不断进行科学方法和科学理论的创新才能完成。正是这些国家组织的重大科学研究项目,将古代科学推进到新的高度。与此相反,在中世纪,西欧封建社会小国林立,战乱不断。这些小国缺乏调动资源的能力,虽然有“自治”和“自由”,却无法大规模吸收其他文明的优秀成果,无法推动科学技术、发展。

Because it neglects the historical development of state forms and the enormous role of state capacity in promoting intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning, the theory of Oriental despotism cannot explain the leapfrog development of Eastern state civilizations, nor can it convincingly explain the long-term historical state of stagnation in Christian European civilization.

由于忽视了国家形态的历史发展和国家能力在推动文明交流互鉴中的巨大作用,东方专制主义理论无法解释东方国家文明的跃升式发展,也无法令人信服地解释基督教欧洲文明长期沉寂的历史状态。

Conclusion

结 语

Exchange and mutual learning are the laws of civilizational development. The Eurocentric unilinear view of history fabricates a picture of European civilization developing independently and leading human history. Based on a critique of the Eurocentric unilinear view of history, it can be seen that during both the ancient Greek golden age and the rise of modernity in Western civilization, their civilizational development followed the law of intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning, benefiting from the exchange and borrowing of human wisdom accumulated in other civilizations, greatly enhancing civilizational vitality and creativity in the process of converging human wisdom. In the New Era, we should adhere to and expand the research perspective on the laws of development in intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning, deeply study the history of world civilizations and world history, while simultaneously deepening and expanding historical materialism, to construct an independent knowledge system for the history of Chinese civilization and world history. In the practice of civilizational construction in the New Era, we must follow openness and inclusiveness, promote intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning, be as inclusive as the ocean that receives all rivers, converge human wisdom, and push Chinese civilization to new heights.

交流互鉴是文明发展的规律。欧洲中心主义单线史观虚构出一条欧洲文明独自发展并引领人类历史的图景。基于对欧洲中心主义单线史观的批判,可以看到,西方文明的古希腊黄金时期和现代性兴起时期,其文明发展都遵循交流互鉴文明发展规律,都得益于通过交流借鉴其他文明中积累的人类智慧,在汇聚人类智慧的进程中极大增强文明活力和创造力。在新时代,我们应坚持、拓展文明交流互鉴发展规律的研究视角,深入研究世界文明史和世界历史,同时深化、拓展唯物史观,构建中华文明史和世界文明史自主知识体系。在新时代文明建设实践中,我们要遵循开放包容,推动文明交流互鉴,海纳百川,汇聚人类智慧,将中华文明推向新的高峰。

Notes

注释

(1) Xi Jinping, *Speech at the International Symposium Commemorating the 2565th Anniversary of Confucius' Birth and the Opening Ceremony of the Fifth Congress of the International Confucian Association* (Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2014), pp. 9-10.

(1)习近平:《在纪念孔子诞辰2565周年国际学术研讨会暨国际儒学联合会第五届会员大会开幕会上的讲话》,北京:人民出版社,2014年,第9-10页。

(2) Generally speaking, the "Europe" of Eurocentrism refers to Western European countries represented by England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc. Since the 17th century, with colonial expansion, colonies of these countries were formed in North America and Australia, giving rise to countries such as the United States, Canada, and Australia. These new countries have essentially the same institutions and culture as the Western European countries, and together with the traditional Western European countries, they are collectively referred to as the "West." The "West" is an expanded version of "Western Europe." Therefore, this article treats Eurocentrism and Western-centrism as the same concept. In the text, the concepts of "Europe" and "the West" will be used according to the content of the discussion and people's linguistic habits.

(2)一般来说,欧洲中心主义的“欧洲”是指以英、法、德、荷等为代表的西欧国家。17世纪以来,随着殖民扩张,在北美洲和澳洲形成了这些国家的殖民地,形成美国、加拿大和澳大利亚等国家。这些新国家与西欧国家具有本质上相同的制度和文化,它们和传统的西欧国家被统称为“西方”。“西方”是扩展版的“西欧”。因此,本文将欧洲中心主义和西方中心论主义作为相同的概念来使用。本文在行文中,将根据上下文论述内容和人们的语言习惯来使用“欧洲”和“西方”这两个概念。

(3) *Collected Works of Marx and Engels* (Vol. 1) (Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2009), p. 520.

(3)《马克思恩格斯文集》(第1卷),北京:人民出版社,2009年,第520页。

(4) *Collected Works of Marx and Engels* (Vol. 3) (Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2009), p. 571.

(4)《马克思恩格斯文集》(第3卷),北京:人民出版社,2009年,第571页。

(5) Xi Jinping, "Speech at the Headquarters of UNESCO," *People's Daily*, March 28, 2014, p. 3.

(5)习近平:《在联合国教科文组织总部的演讲》,《人民日报》 2014年3月28日,第3版。

(6) Xi Jinping, "Deepen Intercivilizational Exchange and Mutual Learning to Build an Asian Community with a Shared Future — Keynote Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Conference on Dialogue of Asian Civilizations," *People's Daily*, May 16, 2019, p. 3.

(6)习近平:《深化文明交流互鉴共建亚洲命运共同体——在亚洲文明对话大会开幕式上的主旨演讲》,《人民日报》2019年5月16日,第3版。

(7) Xi Jinping, "Speech at the Headquarters of UNESCO," *People's Daily*, March 28, 2014, p. 3.

(7)习近平:《在联合国教科文组织总部的演讲》,《人民日报》 2014年3月28日,第3版。

(8) Xi Jinping, "Speech at the Headquarters of UNESCO," *People's Daily*, March 28, 2014, p. 3.

(8)习近平:《在联合国教科文组织总部的演讲》,《人民日报》 2014年3月28日,第3版。

(9) Xi Jinping, "Speech at the Headquarters of UNESCO," *People's Daily*, March 28, 2014, p. 3.

(9)习近平:《在联合国教科文组织总部的演讲》,《人民日报》 2014年3月28日,第3版。

(10) Xi Jinping, "Speech at the Headquarters of UNESCO," *People's Daily*, March 28, 2014, p. 3.

(10)习近平:《在联合国教科文组织总部的演讲》,《人民日报》 2014年3月28日,第3版。

(11) S. Conrad, *Global History: An Introduction*, trans. Chen Hao (Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2018), p. 130.

(11)S.康拉德:《全球史导论》,陈浩译,北京:商务印书馆,2018年,第130页。

(12) Eric R. Wolf, *Europe and the People Without History*, trans. Jia Shiheng (Beijing: Democracy and Construction Publishing House, 2018), p. 5.

(12)埃里克·R.沃尔夫:《欧洲与没有历史的人》,贾世蘅译,北京:民主与建设出版社,2018年,第5页。

(13) This historical picture has also changed somewhat over time. In the early twentieth century (and before), this historical picture also included the birthplace of Christianity. Semites created cities and empires in the Fertile Crescent of the Near East, creating monotheism and Christianity. But after that, the Eastern empires fell into stagnation. Freedom-loving Aryans migrated into Europe from southeastern Europe or southwestern Asia, creating Greek civilization, which was a truly civilized society. "History moved from the 'Orient' (the Christian Holy Land) to Athens, to Rome, to feudal France, and finally to modern England — a great road from the East to the West." This picture is permeated with obvious racism. See: J.M. Blaut, *The Colonizer's Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History*, trans. Tan Ronggen (Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2002), p. 4.

(13)这幅历史图景随着时代发展也有一定的变化。在二十世纪初(以及以前),这幅历史图景还包括基督教的起源地。闪米特人在近东新月沃土地带创建了城市和帝国,创造了单一神教和基督教。但是,在这之后,东方帝国陷入停滞。热爱自由的雅利安人从欧洲的东南部或亚洲的西南部移入欧洲,创造了希腊文明,这是真正的文明社会。“历史从‘东方’(基督教圣地)走向雅典,走向罗马,走向封建的法国,最后走向现代的英格兰——一条由东方通向西方的大道。”这一图景中渗透着明显的种族主义。参见:J.M.布劳特:《殖民者的世界模式:地理传播主义和欧洲中心主义史观》,谭荣根译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002年,第4页。

(14) Briefly, these critiques can be divided into the following categories: Marxist classical writers and scholars, from the standpoint of colonial national liberation, critique the hierarchy of civilizations and the theory of Western superiority that serve colonialism and imperialism; postcolonial scholars represented by Edward Said critique the “Orientalism” produced by Eurocentrism; in historical research on the origins of Western modernity, some scholars no longer proceed from some European particularity but instead study from the perspective of intercivilizational interaction. Henri Pirenne’s *Mohammed and Charlemagne* is a pioneering work of this type. This book treats the entire Mediterranean as a whole, explaining the formation of European feudalism from the rise of the Arab Empire and the division of the Mediterranean economic sphere. Andre Gunder Frank, starting from the interaction of various components of the global economic system, explains the rise of Europe and has had great influence; some scholars study the enormous influence of Asian and African civilizations on European civilization; Martin Bernal’s *Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization* and John M. Hobson’s *The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation* are representative works; the constructivist school holds that historical knowledge and theory are not a reflection of history but an “invention,” a product of the contestation of various forces in the historical process. Eric Hobsbawm’s *The Invention of Tradition* is a representative work. These Western historical academic works titled with “invention” and “creation” critique the myth of Europe’s “internal continuity.”

(14)简略地说,这些批判可以分为以下几种:马克思主义经典作家、学者从殖民地民族解放的立场出发,批判为殖民主义和帝国主义服务的文明等级论和西方优越论;以赛义德为代表的后殖民主义学者批判由西方中心主义产生的“东方学”;在关于西方现代性起源的历史研究中,一些学者不再从某种欧洲特性出发,而是从文明互动的视角进行研究。亨利·皮朗的《穆罕默德和查理曼》是这类研究的开创性著作。该书将整个地中海视为一个整体,从阿拉伯帝国兴起、地中海经济圈的分裂解释欧洲封建主义的形成。贡德·弗兰克从全球经济体系各个组成部分的相互作用出发来解释欧洲的兴起,具有很大影响;一些学者研究亚、非文明对欧洲文明的巨大影响,马丁·贝尔纳的《黑色雅典娜:古典文明的亚非之根》、约翰·霍布森的《西方文明的东方起源》是代表性著作;建构主义学派认为历史知识和理论不是对历史的反映,而是一种“发明”,是历史进程中各种力量博弈的产物。霍布斯鲍姆的《传统的发明》是代表性著作。这些以“发明”“创造”为题目的西方历史学术著作批判了欧洲的“内在连续性”神话。

(15) Hegel: *The Philosophy of History*, trans. Wang Zaoshi, Shanghai: Shanghai Bookstore Publishing House, 2006 (reprinted 2022), p. 96.

(15)黑格尔:《历史哲学》,王造时译,上海:上海书店出版社,2006年(2022年重印),第96页。

(16) Hegel: *The Philosophy of History*, trans. Wang Zaoshi, Shanghai: Shanghai Bookstore Publishing House, 2006 (reprinted 2022), p. 209.

(16)黑格尔:《历史哲学》,王造时译,上海:上海书店出版社,2006年(2022年重印),第209页。

(17) Hegel: *The Philosophy of History*, trans. Wang Zaoshi, Shanghai: Shanghai Bookstore Publishing House, 2006 (reprinted 2022), p. 81.

(17)黑格尔:《历史哲学》,王造时译,上海:上海书店出版社,2006年(2022年重印),第81页。

(18) Leopold von Ranke, eds. Stefan Jordan and Jörn Rüsen: *The Epochs of History: Selected Writings of Leopold von Ranke, Volume One*, trans. Yang Peiying, Beijing: Peking University Press, 2010, p. 25.

(18)利奥波德·冯·兰克著,斯特凡·约尔丹、耶尔恩·吕森编:《历史上的各个时代:兰克史学文选之一》,杨培英译,北京:北京大学出版社,2010年,第25页。

(19) J.M. Blaut: *The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History*, trans. Tan Ronggen, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2002, p. 8.

(19)J.M.布劳特:《殖民者的世界模式:地理传播主义和欧洲中心主义史观》,谭荣根译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002年,第8页。

(20) See: J.M. Blaut: *The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History*, trans. Tan Ronggen, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2002, pp. 8-9.

(20)参见:J.M.布劳特:《殖民者的世界模式:地理传播主义和欧洲中心主义史观》,谭荣根译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002年,第8-9页。

(21) Brett Bowden: *The Empire of Civilization*, trans. Du Fuxiang, Ji Cheng, and Wang Cheng, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2020, p. 160.

(21)布雷特·鲍登:《文明的帝国》,杜富祥、季澄、王程译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2020年,第160页。

(22) From the perspective of intercivilizational exchange and mutual learning, it is first necessary to discuss that civilizations are diverse. Therefore, to maintain clarity of argumentative logic, the analysis of “the internal continuity and inevitability of Europe’s unilinear historical development process” is placed at the end of this section.

(22)从文明交流互鉴的角度看,首先要论述文明是多彩的。因此,为了保持论述逻辑清晰,“欧洲单线历史发展进程具有内在连续性和必然性”辨析放在本节最后论述。

(23) Xie Shihui: *The Transformation of World History – A Challenge to Eurocentrism*, trans. Jiang Lifeng, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1989, p. 10.

(23)谢世辉:《世界历史的变革——向欧洲中心论挑战》,蒋立峰译,北京:人民出版社,1989年,第10页。

(24) Xie Shihui: *The Transformation of World History – A Challenge to Eurocentrism*, trans. Jiang Lifeng, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1989, p. 10.

(24)谢世辉:《世界历史的变革——向欧洲中心论挑战》,蒋立峰译,北京:人民出版社,1989年,第10页。

(25) Bernard Lewis: *The Muslim Discovery of Europe*, trans. Li Zhongwen, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2018, p. 63.

(25)伯纳德·刘易斯:《穆斯林发现欧洲:天下大国的视野转换》,李中文译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2018年,第63页。

(26) Martin Bernal: *Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, Volume I: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985*, trans. Hao Tianhu and Cheng Ying, Nanjing: Nanjing University Press, 2020, p. 27.

(26)马丁·贝尔纳:《黑色雅典娜:古典文明的亚非之根(第一卷)编造古希腊:1785—1985》,郝田虎、程英译,南京:南京大学出版社,2020年,第27页。

(27) Voltaire: *An Essay on Universal History, the Manners, and Spirit of Nations* (Volume 1), trans. Liang Shouqiang, Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1994, p. 231.

(27)伏尔泰:《风俗论》(上册),梁守锵译,北京:商务印书馆,1994年,第231页。

(28) Jim Al-Khalili: *The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance*, trans. Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 281.

(28)吉姆·哈利利:《寻路者——阿拉伯科学的黄金时代》,李果译,北京:中国画报出版社,2020年,第281页。

(29) *Marx and Engels Collected Works* (Volume 8), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2009, p. 338.

(29)《马克思恩格斯文集》(第8卷),北京:人民出版社,2009年,第338页。

(30) Jim Al-Khalili: *The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance*, trans. Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 58.

(30)吉姆·哈利利:《寻路者——阿拉伯科学的黄金时代》,李果译,北京:中国画报出版社,2020年,第58页。

(31) Montesquieu: *The Spirit of the Laws* (Volume 1), trans. Zhang Yanshen, Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2019, p. 31.

(31)孟德斯鸠:《论法的精神》(上册),张雁深译,北京:商务印书馆,2019年,第31页。

(32) Condorcet: *Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind*, trans. He Zhaowu and He Bing, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1998, p. 37.

(32)孔多塞:《人类精神进步史表纲要》,何兆武、何冰译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1998年,第37页。

(33) Condorcet: *Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind*, trans. He Zhaowu and He Bing, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1998, p. 41.

(33)孔多塞:《人类精神进步史表纲要》,何兆武、何冰译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1998年,第41页。

(34) George Sarton: *Hellenistic Science and Culture in the Last Three Centuries B.C.*, trans. Lu Xudong, Zhengzhou: Elephant Press, 2012, p. 20.

(34)乔治·萨顿:《希腊化时代的科学与文化》,鲁旭东译,郑州:大象出版社,2012年,第20页。

(35) Jack Goody: *The Theft of History*, trans. Zhang Zhengping, Hangzhou: Zhejiang University Press, 2009, p. 55.

(35)杰克·古迪:《偷窃历史》,张正萍译,杭州:浙江大学出版社,2009年,第55页。

(36) Li Ling: *Our Road: The History of Persia* (Volume 1), Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2019, p. 20.

(36)李零:《波斯笔记》(上),北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2019年,第20页。

(37) Jim Al-Khalili: *The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance*, trans. Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, pp. 93-94.

(37)吉姆·哈利利:《寻路者:阿拉伯科学的黄金时代》,李果译,北京:中国画报出版社,2020年,第93-94页。

(38) Jim Al-Khalili: *The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance*, trans. Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 95.

(38)吉姆·哈利利:《寻路者:阿拉伯科学的黄金时代》,李果译,北京:中国画报出版社,2020年,第95页。

Author’s bio: Liang Xiao (born 1970), Researcher at the Academy of Marxism, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Doctor of Philosophy from Renmin University of China.

作者简介：梁孝(1970—),中国社会科学院马克思主义研究院研究员,中国人民大学哲学博士。

Online editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧