中国灾害史研究的历程、取向及走向

正现代学术意义上的中国灾害史研究,约萌发于百年之前。中华人民共和国成立之后,中国灾害史研究才得到长足发展。从20世纪50年代开始,灾害史研究总体上是由自然科学工作者主导了最主要的研究进展,自然演变取向成为灾害史研究的主流。改革开放以后,大批历史学者加入灾害史研究的行列,社会变迁取向逐步成为该领域的另一个重要方向。21世纪以来的灾害史研究,随着研究队伍的不断壮大,该领域覆盖的范围得到极大扩展,灾害史     

“历史视野下的灾害文化与灾害治理”国际学术研讨会综述

正2020年10月10—11日,由中国灾害防御协会灾害史专业委员会、云南大学西南环境史研究所、中国人民大学清史研究所暨生态史研究中心、中国水利水电科学研究院水利史研究所联合主办的中国灾害防御协会灾害史专业委员会第十七届年会暨"历史视野下的灾害文化与灾害治理"国际学术研讨会在云南大学召开,来自海内外70余所高校和科研院所的150余位专家学者与会。由于刊物的宗旨要求,本文侧重介绍与中国古代史研究有关的内容。     

回归灾害本位与历史问题:中古灾害史研究的范式转变与路径突破

近年来,以文本为研究基础的中古灾害史陷入程式化与碎片化的困境。许多研究忽视了古今灾害之间话语体系、评价标准与历史背景的差异,而套用现代灾害学的理论与方法,导致研究中概念不清、逻辑混乱;或因循前人的固有模式,造成篇章结构相似、观点结论雷同的弊病。要实现灾害史研究的范式转变与路径突破,首先应从重大灾害事件与历史问题切入,缀合灾害发生的区化与时段,透视文本深处的社会问题,构建灾害与社会的多维层域,并引入大数据、新技术、整体史观与全球史视域等新方法,回应灾害与王朝兴衰、文明演进、制度变迁等一系列重大问题,以此彰显研究的历史意义与现实价值。     

中国农业灾害史研究综论

虽然农业灾害史研究长期以来并未从灾荒史之中分化出来 ,但因古代社会自然灾害侵袭的对象主要是农业生产 ,大部分灾荒史研究文献一般都涉及农业灾害问题。因此 ,灾荒史研究是农业灾害史的主要源头。2 0世纪初 ,许多学者已关注中国古代的灾害问题并进行初步研究。他们发现 ,中国古代灾害发生极为频繁 ,于是对中国古代的灾害史料逐一统计 ,计算灾害发生频次。《二千年来之荒歉次数》(《农林新报》192 4年卷 6 )、竺可祯《中国历史上气候之变迁》(《东方杂志》192 5年卷 3)、邓云特 (邓拓 )《中国救荒史》(商务印书馆 1937年 )等等论著得出各种…     

中国灾害史专业委员会第十届年会暨灾害与边疆社会国际学术研讨会综述

2013年6月29日-7月2日,由中国灾害防御协会灾害史专业委员会、中国水利学会水利史研究会、中国人民大学清史研究所暨生态史研究中心、中国可持续发展研究会减灾专业委员会、新疆师范大学历史与民族学学院联合主办的中国灾害史专业委员会第十届年会暨灾害与边疆社会国际学术研讨会在新疆乌鲁木齐隆重召开。     

大数据与生态史:中国灾害史料整理与数据库建设

本文在系统回顾有史以来中国灾害史料之发掘、整理和数据化过程的基础上,从人与自然交互作用的生态史角度,借鉴目前流行的大数据思维,对历史时期,尤其是建国以来国内灾害史学者业已进行的大规模史料整理与数据库建设展开批判性分析,一方面充分肯定这些工作对推进中国灾害史研究做出的重大贡献,另一方面则分析其内在局限与诸多不足,进而以清代为例,提出有关中国灾害历史数据库建设的最新构想,以为打造一个服务于国内外中国灾害史研究者的可持续扩展的公共学术交流平台而张本。     

“商业史研究的理论与范式”学术研讨会召开

正2019年4月6日,"商业史研究的理论与范式"学术研讨会暨《浙江商业通史》编撰论证会在浙江工商大学举行。来自中国社会科学院、清华大学、北京师范大学、南开大学、厦门大学、华中师范大学、浙江大学、浙江省社会科学院、杭州师范大学的专家学者参加了会议。与会学者就商业史研究的理论与范式等问题进行了深入的讨论。一、关于商业史研究的理论与范式问题。中国社会科学院赫治清研究员认为中国商业史是中国历史学与商业经济学的交叉学科,应运用历史学与经济学     

从经注与史注的变奏看裴松之《三国志注》的学术史地位

在中国学术发展史上,史学是作为经学附庸的地位出现的,这时史注附属于经注;伴随着史学从经学的附庸地位摆脱出来,成为一门独立学科,史注也逐渐打破此前经注研究范式,探索适合史学这门学科本身特点的研究范式;裴注正是对这些探索成果的吸收和总结,并继承了经注研究范式的优长之处;裴注对后世的史注形式产生了深远的影响,并在近代获得了新生,它的出现标志着史注研究范式的确立;这种新的研究范式,反过来又影响了其所脱胎的经注研究范式。仔细研究二者关系的变化,就会发现其与学术史上经史关系的变化有着某种规律性的联系。     

历史灾害研究中的若干前沿问题

<正>中国灾害史研究已经走过百年历程,在学科界定和理论探索、研究方法创新突破、资料积累、多学科交融的综合研究等领域都取得了长足进步,有值得肯定的成绩,也有需要反思的一系列问题。初步梳理,这4个问题或许与当前灾害史研究动态相关:1.过去所做的工作并取得了哪些共性认识?2.哪些问题需要进一步深入研究?3.哪些方面属于填漏补缺?4.我们需要关注的热点问题是什么?一、灾害史研究的共识性问题。过去2000年内,见之于正史《五行志》以及方     

灾害史研究的文化转向

20世纪以来,中国灾害史研究在史料整理及研究、荒政制度、区域灾害史、灾赈实践等领域硕果累累。①随着研究的推进及现实价值的凸显,灾害史研究似乎陷入了瓶颈,大多数研究都是就灾害说灾害,集中在灾害个案及赈济史实梳理的层域对灾害背景(原因)及影响、官民救灾及其机制和措施、思想、灾后重建等问题的讨论,或是对断代、区域、特别案例的探讨,对具体路径及方法等问题修修补补,研究思路及叙事框架无意识中形成了固有的路径及模式,重要创新及突破性成果不多,理论及跨学科视域的创新性研究也略显不足。     

形而下之器:古代中国疆域史研究的方法与取径

当下古代中国边疆研究应建立起以区域史观、断代史观与整体史观三维度三变量相互联结的以时间与结构为核心的研究方法体系。区域史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究长时段之规律、特征的抽象与断代史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究的短时段的内地族群与边疆族群互动与交融的特性之归纳,都属碎片化的古代中国疆域史研究,唯有以区域史观、断代史观为基础的整体史观视阈下古代中国疆域史研究,才能将碎片化的古代中国疆域史各种材料议题之问题意识与科学实证有机地统合起来,才能实现古代中国疆域史之特殊性、普遍性、规律性认知的可能性,达成中国学者话语体系下的具有“中国化”的古代中国疆域史的学术认知。     

From the government to the university: Efforts to write national history in the early Republic

ABSTRACT

From the controversies surrounding the National History Bureau in the early Republic to the short-lived National Historiography Office at Peking University, the traditional undertaking of writing dynastic history experienced many crises during the transformative Republican era. The National History Bureau was merged with Peking University as part of Cai Yuanpei’s efforts to separate the field of national historiography from the government and shift it toward universities, as well as his efforts to further reform the university system. In comparing the staff members and aims of the National History Bureau and the National Historiography Office of Peking University, the latter clearly represented an update in terms of concepts and methods. The purpose of the History Bureau’s shift from “dynastic” to “popular” history, which apparently intentionally imitated the German academic system, was to render national historiography and other related research independent of the government, cast off the traditional moral burden of “condemning evildoers and praising the virtuous,” and gradually move forward on the path of specialization for national historiography within the university system. The National Historiography Office’s various editing plans amply demonstrate this tendency. The many winding detours that the “national history” efforts took between dynastic and popular history both expressed the entanglement of new and old ideas within academic circles, and revealed the contemporary struggle between the government and universities.     

The dynastic triangle in international relations: Modena,England, and France, 1678–85

This article is a case study of how dynastic marriages in the early-modern period were wont to disappoint the participants. In this era, ruling dynasties frequently sought to marry suitable members of their family networks to well-placed clients in other states. These marriages were frequently intended to cement friendship or bind political wounds caused by previous conflicts. In 1673, the marriage between James Stuart, Duke of York, and Maria Beatrice d’Este, sister to the Duke of Modena, was sponsored by Louis XIV, King of France, thus giving rise to what one might term a ‘dynastic triangle’. This article, written from the Este perspective, demonstrates how the Duke of York and the King of France each subsequently failed, on two occasions, to support Francesco II d’Este's geopolitical objectives in northern Italy. For York, and his brother King Charles II, the failure to assist the Duke of Modena was as a result of their political inability to do so. On the other hand, Louis XIV's refusal to help Modena was because of conflicting French objectives in Italy. The negative Este reaction was both an indication of the Italian states’ fear and distrust of France, and a reminder that small states had ambitions and goals which were difficult to attain when not sponsored by a larger power. But these goals were often pursued when such sponsorship appeared likely, and were often unrealistic. The strains in dynastic relationships usually resulted from realisation that certain goals were irreconcilable.     

全球史视野与国家史观念:近代边疆史研究的两个维度

近代边疆研究日益引起学术界广泛关注,既是学术研究内在学理自然发展之结果,也与当代社会各界关注边疆问题的历史性反思有着密切关联。对近代边疆史的研究,既不能割裂其与古代边疆史的延续性,也不能拘泥于断代史的话语诠释;既不能忽略边疆问题的殊相,也不要陷入地方史的思维;既要有纵向的深入思考,也要有横向的宽广视野。须从整体思维出发,在全球史视野下审视近代中国边疆问题与全球化进程中国际秩序重构的复杂关系,以国家史观念从全局上把握近代边疆问题与中国国家建设之间密切不可分割的互动关系。     

梁启超《过渡时代论》与当代"过渡期历史观"的构造

对梁启超历史观的评价一般有两种意见,一种观点认为梁启超是中国现代史学的开创者,其主要贡献是把中国历史纳入到世界史的解释框架之内,用线性的因果关系替代了王朝更替的历史观。另一种观点认为梁启超从欧洲归来后完全放弃了他所倡导的“进步史观”,而成为了一个文化保守主义者。实际上,梁启超所采取的是一种过渡期的历史观,这种历史观既强调历史的进步是不可阻挡的一种趋势,又主张解释历史不能仅仅依赖于纯粹科学方法,而尚需运用直觉的手段,同时他又强调文化积淀而不仅仅是物质更新在文明演进中的作用,这样的阐释方法使我们有可能超越西方历史观对我们思维的长期制约,也可避免“现代”与“后现代”两种极端解释取向所造成的偏颇后果。     

A Core-Periphery GIS Model of the Historical Growth and Spread of Islam in China

Abstract

This study presents the methodology and results of a core-periphery GIS model of the historical growth and spread of Islam in China based on a dataset of 1,774 mosques. These sites were organized into data subsets according to their founding dates during five major dynastic periods in Chinese history: Tang/Song, Yuan, Ming, Qing, and Republican. Core areas were identified and mapped based on where mosques clustered during each period. North China was the paramount core region in all periods. Not until the late Qing and Republican periods did the Northwest and Yunnan compare with North China, while coastal China never developed into a core area.     

An Archaeology of History: The Wang Mang Nine Temples from Early Imperial China as Reconstructed by History and by Archaeology

In this paper, I examine the relationship between the construction of history by the textual history of early imperial China and by Chinese archaeology in the second half of the twentieth century, considering how these two fields of scholarship were directed by ideologies of the Chinese government. The locus for this investigation is the complex of imperial ancestral temples constructed by the emperor Wang Mang (r. 9–23 CE) for his brief interregnum dynasty. Although this group of buildings is described in the official dynastic history, compiled only fifty years after its construction, as having nine temple buildings with specific ancestors ascribed to each, its archaeological excavation in the late 1950s instead revealed twelve temples in a carefully organized plan. The discrepancy between the original construction of the temple complex and its subsequent revision in textual history is revealing in terms of the relationship between received tradition and individual action in the context of establishing imperial legitimacy, whereas the modern attempts to reconcile the discrepancy between textual history and excavated history are indicative of the relationship between Chinese archaeology of that period and the nationalist revision of history.     

乌鲁木齐早期人类活动与城市形态演变

通过文献记载与考古研究成果,分析了乌鲁木齐早期人类活动的空间分布和唐代轮台城的兴废,并探讨了清代以来乌鲁木齐城市形态演变的规律和原因。认为军政职能是清代城池建筑的主要原因,商业贸易发展是城市形态变异的内动力,现代工业发展是形态突变的根本原因。     

改革开放30年的先秦史研究

自1978年十一届三中全会确立解放思想、实事求是的思想路线以来,中国的先秦史研究取得了丰硕的成果。其表现首先是围绕着一系列考古发现的新材料,得出了对于先秦历史文化的新认识;其次是靠了思想观念的转变及理论的更新,在走出古史分期讨论的窄胡同以后,学者们的视野更开阔了,研究领域也更广泛了。新时期先秦史研究所取得的成就是巨大的,然而无论在专题研究还是在断代史研究方面,都还存在很多不足,还有一系列的课题需要继续开拓。为此,今后一是要继续坚持解放思想、实事求是的思想路线,坚持反对教条主义和公式主义。二是增进开放意识,加强对西方史学、考古学、文化人类学有关理论的学习和引进。三是加强历史学与考古学的联系,实现二者的整合。四是增进学风建设,提倡扎实稳重的治学方法和治学精神。     

The Cyclical Views of Human History in Thucydides’ Archaeology and Sima Qian’s Historical Records

Many previous thinkers have imagined that there was a glorious or harmonious period in the past better than the world of their own time, but Thucydides and Sima Qian do not describe the early stages of human society as a Golden Age. I suggest that Sima Qian marks a separation between the mythical stories and the historical spirit in China, just as Thucydides did in Greece. Further, they both presented a modified cyclical view of human history. For a better understanding of the basic characteristics of Greek and Chinese historiographies, this paper discusses the cyclical views of human history underlying ancient Greek and early Chinese historiographies through a comparative study of Thucydides’ and Sima Qian’s texts. I analyze some similarities and differences between the two great historians’ conceptions of historical process, and I conclude that Thucydides believes human intelligence develops through a historical spiral, while Sima Qian focuses on dynastic cycles with a strong moral concern.