Abstract: Editorial Note: A prejudice can be found in Hegel's theory that the Oriental civilization is antique but standstill. In Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, he stated that Chinese history is the one without development, which provided the base for various wrong views on the Chinese history from west-centrism. Hegel's mistakes remain uncorrected, because the Chinses scholars of the Chinese history and the world history have little concern about each other's research fields as if there is an unbridged gap between different sub-disciplines. Since the reform and opening up, the study on the world ancient history in China has made tremendous achievements. Prof. LIN Zhichun holds that China and the west both experienced development of two stages, from city states to empires. Prof. WU Yujin points out that the world history witnesses a process from separated histories of various countries to the world history as oneness, and the lateral ties and longitudinal development are driving forces for each other. These opinions reveal the common rules in Chinese and the western ancient history development, which is significant in wiping out Euro-centralism. Is there any difference in the sameness? Is there a theoretical demonstration for the consistency in histories of all countries? Is there any change and development in Chinese history? Based on the predecessors' research and his own study and speculations in many years, Prof. LIU Jiahe points out that comparative study is both to search sameness from difference and then difference from sameness. He also thinks that the world history develops in the Aufhaben process from the ones of various countries to the one of the world. Chinese civilization shows its continuity in self-renovation and self-supersession, so it has become an inseparable part in the organic unity of the world history. Prof. Liu's views can be considered as the most meaningful theoretical answer to Hegel's challenge.

Key words: forty years of reform and opening up, the world history, Hegel, the ancient Orient, Chinese history, ‘a history without development’