摘要： 19世纪国际法学的核心思维结构是“非政治"的实证主义。通过检视该时期国际法学文本中关于中国的表述，可以清晰地考察出这种思维结构的特征。界定中国等非西方国家是否拥有“国际法共同体"身份资格的“文明"标准，事实上是不清晰的。随着实证主义思维的渐趋得势，对于鸦片战争本身合法性的探讨，逐渐退出历史舞台。对不平等条约合法性的判别，仅限于依据契约法的形式规则，而忽略了国际间武力关系不对等的残酷现实。“文明"标准的晦暗不清，并未阻止这一话语本身被国际政治现实所利用，而日本则是这方面的最杰出学生。由于拒绝思考“政治"议题，国际法学对19世纪帝国主义在中国等国的扩张非但不能限制，反而在事实上予以默认。在对学科历史进行回顾的基础上，新时代国际法学家有必要对自身的方法论保持警醒，并更负责任地投入到“政治"议题中去。

关键词: 国际法, 实证主义, 非政治, 文明, 中国

Abstract: The basic structure of thinking of nineteenth century’s international jurisprudence is the “unpolitical” positivism. By examining the narrative of China contained in the texts of international law during that period, we can clearly see the features of this structure of thinking. The standard of “ civilization”，which played the role of defining the membership of “community of international law”，was in fact unclear. With the rising of positivism,the discussion of the legality of the two opium wars disappeared eventually. The judgment of the legality of unequal treaties was limited in terms of the formal rules of contract law, which ignored the cruel reality of the asymmetry of international violence. However, the unclarity of the standard of “civilization” did not prevent the discourse of “civilization” from being made use of by the reality of international politics，and Japan was the best student in this matter. Because of the refusing of the thinking of the “political” issues, international law in nineteenth century could not restrict but tolerate the expansion of imperialism into China. With the rethinking of the history of this discipline, it is necessary for the new generation of international jurists to remain vigilant in their methodology and to devote themselves to the “political” issues more responsibly.

Key words: International Law, Positivism, Unpolitical, Civilization, China