In the twentieth century, the study of history in China began to move in a new direction. This movement was seen by Chinese historian Liang Qichao, who perceived the spatial change in the world, which was brought up by the arrival of Western powers and the rise of Japan1. Liang began his change by attacking the traditional style of Chinese historiography, not only because it was an ill-conceived spatial arrangement of the world, in which all continents in the world outside of Asia were ignored, but also because it failed to acknowledge the idea of anachronism – the concept of historical time that differentiated the past and the present, and therefore, the need to update one’s knowledge of history2. This post will discuss the idea of the Chinese nationalist historiography, that is, paradoxically, also transnational.
Liang’s new history would have to address the nationalist concerns of a trans-nationalist age. Liang recognized that his country was, for lack of a better word, weak – or, just as likely, he perceived a weakness in his country in the modern age that needed to be fixed3. While Liang was going to somewhat continue with the ways of traditional historiography, he also needed to update the formula, so to say. This update came in the form of the inclusion of the “other” – that is, other countries that were not a part of Asia, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and others3. This also extended to Japan, which traditionally had been ignored Chinese historiography. In other words, this new Chinese historiography would have to include ideas and concepts of transnationalism3. This is shown in Liang’s enthusiasm for Western and Japanese historiographical work and techniques, which he incorporated into his own works, before passing those techniques down to his students3.
Like all forms of nationalist ideologies, Chinese nationalism has some distinctive features that they share with others, while also having some features that are unique to them alone4. These features arose due to Chinese national historiography rising at the same time as global capitalism3. Chinese nationalist historiography is characterized by its intense radicalism. It is also colored by Liang’s fondness for Western and Japanese historiography, the techniques of which are spread throughout Liang’s work.
The primary way in which this is shown is through Liang – and by extension his students like Hu Shi – is through his fascination with looking through Chinese history and tradition for Western scientific practices5. This was actually carried out, mostly, by Hu Shi. Hu was inspired by Liang’s work, and while he studied at Cornell, began to delve into furthering Liang’s theories5. In Hu’s early life, his education was populated by a study of the Classics, and it was here that he looked for how his theory could be proven. Hu looked throughout Chinese history and tradition for examples of the universality of the scientific method, as per Dewey’s scientific theory, which he believed was transnational6.
What Hu found was nothing short of a confirmation of his beliefs. In 1921, Hu wrote on the evidential scholarship of Qing scholars whilst exposing his belief that the scientific method was not confined to any one nation or region of the world7. His study confirmed this belief, thus validating his and, by extension, Liang’s work7. By proving that the scientific method was universal and thus, transcended nations, Hu was able to boost the national standing of China, bringing it onto a similar playing field as the West and Japan.
In conclusion, the revision of Chinese historiography, an effort started by Liang Qichao and carried out by Hu Shi and others, was able to strengthen the national standing of China, as it showed that certain ideals held by civilized society were transnational ideas.