在与西方文明的相遇中，汉字圈国家要确立作为现代制度的“美术”，并令美术为现代民族国家的确立作贡献，美术史叙述变得重要。冈仓觉三（号天心，1862-1913）为日本“美术”这一制度事实上的确立者。其《日本美术史》（明治二十三年[1890－1892]讲义，1922年付印），为日本第一部现代意义上的美术史叙述，且多论及中国美术史。本文将聚焦于本书，探讨冈仓天心美术史叙述与印度学、明治日本中国史研究之间的关系。冈仓天心与印度学与明治中国学（明治日本的“支那学”①，尤其所谓“东洋史学”）的关系一直未被留意。本文认为，探讨冈仓美术史叙述与印度学、中国学的关系不仅是分析冈仓美术史叙述的重要角度，同时也是探讨欧洲印度（佛教）学、明治印度学与明治日本中国学起步之间关系的角度，进而也是探讨这两门学科在明治学术史思想史中位置、性质的角度。本文将聚焦于十九世纪中期欧洲印度学代表麦克斯・缪勒（F. Max Müller）与明治中期的日本美术史学、日本东洋史学之间的复杂关系。%The mid-Meiji is also the time when Japan attempts to establish its new historiography which contributes to formatting its new cultural identity in the process of nation-building. Among them,Nihon Bijushitsushi [Japanese Fine Art History] is the ifrst Japanese ifne art history in a modern sense appeared in 1890, a lecture script written by Okakura Kakuzō (also known as Okakura Tenshin, 1862 – 1913), a leading art historian and an inlfuential cultural leader for Meiji’s ifneart. On the other hand, Meiji’s Sinology and Okakura’s art history have been regarded as being irrelevant to each other. In this paper, however, the author argues that Meiji-Japan’s rediscovery of Buddhism through European Oriental studies, has bridged these two ifelds of Japanese art history and Japanese Sinology (or exactly speaking,Tōyōshi.East Asian history, especially the studies of Chinese history from Mid Meiji Japan). Furthermore, the author also argues that it is Japanese rediscovery of Buddhism through Friedrich Max Müller (1823 –1900), a German-born scholar as one of the founders of Comparative Religion and Indology at Oxford University, that made the studies of Indian Buddhism from the mid-Meiji appear ifrst and then madeTōyōshi appear later. In other words, the author proves that, to a certain degree, the appearance of Japanese Sinology and even the narratives of Japanese art history in the Mid-Meiji as well, were directly or indirectly under the inlfuences of Max Müller.
展开▼
