無論在大陸或者在臺灣，當學者討論現代歷史地理的成立時，他們總是遺忘了《地學雜誌》 (1910-1937)。學者的遺忘，原因是他們認定《禹貢半月刊》(1934-1937)是現代歷史地理的開端。但是，《地學雜誌》是否真是完全不科學、不現代呢？《地學雜誌》是否只是「沿革地理」的延續，一點都沒有現代歷史地理的成分呢？早期的《地學雜誌》究竟在那些地方與《禹貢半月刊》不同，導致到後來被排斥呢？本文的目的，就是要解答這幾個問題。為了行文方便，本文只討論 1919 年 一次大戰結束前《地學雜誌》的文章。儘管《地學雜誌》的文章作者，對具體歷史事實的看法不盡相同，但他們都是為了達到同一個目標而寫作。本文的重點集中於他們的共同目標，對於他們的細節差異暫不評論。

In current accounts, the founding of modern Chinese historical geography is often associated with the iconoclastic historian Gu Jiegang and his journal Yugong Bimonthy. As a discipline marking temporal and spatial boundaries, modern Chinese historical geography is widely understood as a “narrative of unfolding” to arouse Chinese nationalism in the midst of foreign invasion. Although accurate in describing Chinese sentiment during the 1930s and 1940s, current scholarship ignores other groups of historical geographers who held a different view of the discipline. In this article, I focus on the historical geographers of Dixue zazhi (1910-1937) who were unique in two aspects. First, they defined historical geographical broadly to include geology, meteorology, mining technology, economics, and political science. By historical geography, they literally meant the study of the earth (dixue). Second, despite the threat of foreign invasion, they were not interested in mobilizing the Chinese people to defend their nation. Instead, they focused on defining China’s role in the global system of capital. Accepting global capitalism as a Eurocentric world order, they stressed fairness and openness in competition for labor, markets, national power, raw materials, and trade routes. Popular before 1919, their view of the world was drastically different from views that dominated the 1930s and 1940s. As such, they represent a moment in modern Chinese history when nationalism and globalism were equally stressed.

歷史地理; 沿革地理; 地學雜誌; 禹貢半月刊; 現代; 世界系統; 中國地學會; 地質學; 地文學; 西來說

Chinese nationalism; global capitalism; high imperialism; historical geography; Sino-Babylonianism