古史可疑，古之定论更可疑，大概是不错的。概历史既长，所流传下来
必有限，其中难免有因传事之人个人喜好，或迫于时势而不得不有取舍者。
近世疑古之风盛行于乾嘉考据，把宋儒批的个狗血喷头。本世纪初，此风亦
未尝稍减，尤以陈独秀、鲁迅、钱玄同诸君为甚。甚至有人说古书必要先埋
入茅坑三年方可去读。而况宋史在二十四史中，确实属于编撰的比较差的一
部。公认修的比较好（即相对比较客观等）的是大抵有《前汉书》、《隋书
》、《明史》等。
其实莫说古史可疑，即便近史，在读时也不应拘泥陈见。这里浅举一例
，以证史之可疑。
近读两本关于二十世纪西方文化、哲学史的很不错的书，其一为
C.Delacampagne (1999) 的“A History of Philosophy in the Twentieth
Century”，另一是N.F.Cantor (1998)的“The American Century”。其中
都谈到了本世纪初一个叫Walter Benjamin(1892-1940)的很有名的德国哲学
家之死，但所提到其之死因，却大相径庭。这里把所提到之两段文字分别笔
录如下，读者即可知晓其中之差别。
在Cantor(1999)一书之第253页，作者写到:
"Walter Benjamin had a tragic end... In 1940, when the German
tanks rolled into Paris, he and a group of left-wing intellectuals
obtained American visas and fled to the Spanishborder, intending
to go from Spain, which was neutral, tothe United States. When they
reached the Spanish border,they were stopped by the guards who
refused them passage intoSpain. They were told to come back the
next day. Benjamindecided that the Spaniards would never admit him
and that hewould end up in Nazi hands. He returned to his hotel and
killedhimself... It TURNED OUT THAT THE PROBLEM ON THE SPANISH
BORDER HAD BEEN MERELY ONE OF BUREAUCRACY, and the nextmorning,
his companions were admitted to Spain..."
在这里，W.Benjamin是由于误会了西班牙边境官僚扣押之原因、以为将
要被押回纳粹手中而自杀的，起因乃是因为边境官员之官僚作风。但我们再
看看下面一段记录。
在Delacampagne (1999)一书之第136页中，作者写道：
"Worn down by anxieties as well as by material hardships Benjamin
finally decided in the fall of 1940 to quit Europeto rejoin his
Frankfurt friends in New York. By now it wastoo late. France had
fallen to the Germans. In order to finda boat going to the United
States it was necessary for himto get to Spain. On the evening of
26 September he was arrestedby Franco's police attempting to cross
the Spanish border at Port-Bou in Catalonia. He was allowed to spend
the nightin a hotel. KNOWING THAT HE WOULD BE SENT BACK THE NEXT DAY
TO A FRENCH CONCENTRATION CAMP, he resolved at dawn on 27September
to
take his life by swallowing morphine tablets."
在这里，作者以很肯定的口气认为W.Benjamin已知道他将被送往集中营
，因此自杀。这里，作者无疑认为西班牙弗兰哥当局确实是要将他交付于纳
粹之手。这个解释，和前述N.Cantor的解释是截然不同的。
N. Cantor和Delacampagne都是当代西方颇有名的严肃的学者，对他们
却对相去不远的事情所作出的解释却炯然各异：自杀是确定的，死因却完全
不同。作为对纳粹十分憎恶之人们来说，我们当然宁可相信后者之解释，那
样就可以把本世纪哲学史上最大的悲剧之一归罪于纳粹。但事实究竟如何，
我们却实在要糊涂的了。
不管怎样，他们两个人中，肯定有个人是错的。如果半个世纪前的时期
都搞不清，若再谈到几百年、几千年前的事情，则更就应怀疑了。前人有言
：“古史不足征，定论不足凭”，信乎！
11/23/1999
|
