民國時期的醫學革命與醫史研究─余巖(1879-1954)「現代醫學史」的概念及其實踐

A Study on the Medical Revolution and Medical History during the Early Republican Period – The Concept and Implementation of “Modern Medical History” by Yu Yan (1879-1954)

本文欲結合民國初年醫學研究和歷史研究之間可能的關係，來梳理當時醫者對醫學史的各方面看法。本文選定余巖的言論，這位民國初年的反中醫大將，相信一般治醫史者都不陌生。不過，他對中醫歷史究竟抱持什麼樣的態度，還值得探究。他曾提出「現代醫學史」的說法，來說明醫學史應具有彰顯醫學進步和科學觀的進展，這個傾向應該與當時新史學中提倡的進化論有關；其次，中國醫學史的成立，其背後之目的應該是為了科學實驗而預作準備，而且他也表明了對中國醫學史隨時代逐漸退化的看法。具有「現代」意義的醫學史，不應該像某些中醫所宣稱的，是為了彰顯古人的經驗，反而應作為一種破除迷信、邁向科學的一種工具。本文中也將分析余巖的醫史作品，來做為考察其思想的證據。中西醫對醫學史的看法，一為復古、一為進化，在二十世紀初展現了另一種多元的、對歷史發展與功用的論爭。

This study intends to probe into medical practitioners’ opinions on various aspects of medical history based on the possible relationship between medical studies and historical studies during the early Republican period of China. This study chose the opinions from Yan Yu as the subjects. Yan Yu was an anti-Chinese medicine medical practitioner in the early Republican period who has been well known by general historians of medical practice. However, his attitude toward Chinese medical history is worthy of investigation. He proposed the concept of “modern medical history” to point out that medical history should reflect the progress in medicine and scientific perspective. Such an inclination should be associated with the theory of evolution proposed by the new history at the time. In addition, the purpose of the establishment of Chinese medical history should be to prepare for scientific experiments in advance. He also expressed his opinions on the gradual degradation of Chinese medical history with the times. The purpose of medical history with “modern” meaning should not be to manifest the experiences of the ancients as claimed by some Chinese medical practitioners, but to eradicate superstitions, and should be used as a tool for scientific development. This study also intends to analyze Yan Yu’s writings about medical history as the evidences to inspect his thinking. Medical history is regarded as the doctrine of “back to the ancients” and “evolution” by Chinese medicine and western medicine, respectively, which led to another kind of diversified argument on historical development and functioning in the beginning of the 20th century.