评苏成捷《中华帝国晚期的性、法律与社会》

美国斯坦福大学历史系苏成捷（Matthew H．Sommer）教授致力于研究中国古代有关性犯罪领域的问题。他的专著《中华帝国晚期的性、法律和社会》（Sex,Law,and Society in Late Imperial China,Stanford University Press,2000）,侧重从法史和社会史的角度,研究中国古代性犯罪问题。     

Regulating Church Property in Late Imperial China

In recent years,religion in China has attracted increased attention,both domestically and internationally.A core aspect of this attention has been the role of church real estate,a contemporary issue with historical origins.After the Second Opium War,France—the self-proclaimed protector of Catholicism—took on the cause of obtaining additional rights and freedoms for Western missionaries in China,albeit with only mixed results.Constant disagreements between China's central and local governments made it difficult to implement nation-wide regulations.     

韩国高僧在泰山

泰山是中国的山,也是世界的山。在历史长河之中,泰山不仅对中国产生过重大影响,而且也影响到与中国关系密切的域外邦国;与此同时,一些外来文化也融汇了泰山。     

"民主"一词在近代中国的再生

本文从历史语义学的角度 ,首先考察了“民主”和“民本”在汉语语境中的古典含义及其在中国传统政治思想格局中的位置。在此基础上 ,细致地分析了近代以来“民主”一词如何在西方思想的刺激下 ,通过传教士和中国思想家的共同努力 ,被重新发掘出来 ,并在重新诠释的过程中 ,从“民之主” (君主 )走向自己的反面“人民群众当家作主”的过程。     

Frugality and Luxury: Morality,Market, and Consumption in Late Imperial China

This article contributes to a wider critique of the use of European capitalist, patterns of industrialization in studies of the economic history of modern China—patterns commonly assumed to be universally valid. This sort of analytical framework denies not only the value of alternative economic models, but also that of Chinese independent economic thought. In this context, the present article argues that most of the intellectual changes of seventeenth-century Europe that led to the formulation of liberal capitalism—resistance to government intervention, support for luxury consumption as well as a new understanding of the market and of the relationship between private interests and morality—had taken place in China more than a century earlier. The background against which the two processes emerged, however, varied significantly, leading to distinctive ramifications. Unprecedented population growth and a widening gap between hinterland and coastal economies led Chinese officials and intellectuals to discard ideas of free market and focus instead on solutions for increasing production, maximizing the circulation of resources, and fighting poverty. It was not, therefore, a lack of a “scientific” understanding of the economy that led China to turn away from European-style laissez fare, but rather an evaluation of the Empire’s circumstances, raising questions on whether the European model is indeed universally applicable regardless of local conditions.