本文透過日本中國學東京學派始祖白鳥庫吉所創東洋史學，討論中國研究科學化的意義。白鳥力主以科學方法研究中國，進而掌握普遍法則，超越歐洲學界只能從西洋看中國的侷限。不過，白鳥的問題意識與他所反對的漢學傳統之間，仍未見各種聯繫，他的身世與師承出自漢學傳統，因此不能擺脫漢學議程上朱子學與反朱子學的互動脈絡; 白鳥也分享了同時代中國學者躍躍欲試想與西方競爭的氣氛，所研究的對象更是帝國活動的舞台所在，因此與國學派所思所辯輝映。無論問題意識的來源或從事知識活動的動機，科學與漢學都不是對立的。

Shiratori Kurakichi's initiative to establish “Oriental historiography” was the first attempt to apply social science methods to China studies in Japan. He believed that Japan was in a better prepared posittion than its Western counterpart in their common pursuit of universal laws of behavior. This is because Japan understood both the West and China while the West was restricted by its own historical experiences when approaching China. 

This paper connects Shiratori's scholarship to classic Sinology in late medieval Japan by placing his research agenda within the context of debates among different classic schools of thoughts. Apparently, “Oriental historiography” cannot just be universal knowledge because it was responsive to the Western views as well as embedded in the Chinese classics. In brief, science as political knowledge is not independent from China scholars' own research agenda or their purpose.