本文探討十八世紀歐洲所謂的「啟蒙史學」及其政治意涵。藉由蘇格蘭啟蒙運動著名史家威廉．羅伯遜(William Robertson, 1721-1793)的著作《古印度史論》(Historical Disquisition of Ancient India, 1791)為切入點，本文分析《古印度史論》的論述脈絡，以理解啟蒙時期的文人如何藉由歷史書寫作為一種政治思辨的媒介，使史學在十八世紀歐洲成為一種特殊的政治論述。本文指出，《古印度史論》與十八世紀末英國最重要的政治事件黑斯廷大審(The Impeachment of Warren Hastings)，共享相同的論述脈絡。兩者同時援用十七世紀的古憲法論爭，與十八世紀東方專制政治的論述，來分析印度的政治文化，並針砭十八世紀英國對待印度的態度是否合宜。本文繼而指出，這兩種蘊含政治論述的歷史書寫，表現出法國史家孟德斯鳩(Montesquieu, 1689–1755)之於十八世紀英國歷史書寫與思想文化的影響。以此為基礎，本文論證，這種以歷史書寫作為政治論述的現象，體現了啟蒙史學的特質，也表現出史家約翰．波考克(J. G. A. Pocock)所強調的「史學作為政治思想」的論旨。

This article is about Enlightenment historiography and its political implications. In particular, it examines William Robertson’s least celebrated work, Historical Disquisition of Ancient India (1791). By exploring the discursive contexts of the Historical Disquisition, the paper argues that historiography was a distinct form of political discourse in Enlightenment Europe. The paper argues that the Historical Disquisition shared two discursive contexts with debates during the impeachment of Warren Hastings, the first governor-general of Bengal Presidency. These were the languages of ancient constitution and oriental despotism, and both were employed in attempts to characterize the nature of Indian political culture. The paper further demonstrates how both contexts were affected by Montesquieu’s politicohistorical writings. Having established the discursive contexts of the Historical Disquisition, the paper advances the argument that the Historical Disquisition embodies the notion which the historian J. G. A. Pocock calls “historiography as political thought.”

 威廉．羅伯遜;孟德斯鳩;古憲法;東方專制;啟蒙史學

William Robertson; Montesquieu; Ancient Constitution; Oriental Despotism; Enlightenment Historiography