A New Diplomatic History and the Networks of Spanish Diplomacy in the Baroque Era

Diplomatic history has undergone profound alterations during the last century. According to the old model built by Mattingly in 1955, diplomatic history was the analysis of international and political relations within a national context. Subsequent studies analysed how diplomacy evolved towards a more institutionalised and professional scheme (established in eighteenth-century European diplomacy). However, was this conclusion an inevitable one for Early Modern and Baroque diplomacy? This essay intends to retrace the steps that have been taken towards a new history of diplomacy, by early-modern historians in general, and by Spanish historiography in particular, as well as to assess the idea that what made a difference for Spanish Baroque diplomacy was the extent of networks that allowed cultural transference, the capacity to influence others, rather than the institutional extent of connections and practices. Which people or processes promoted the circulation of ideas, information, and culture, within and outside the Spanish monarchy, during the seventeenth century? This question will form the focus of the second part of this essay, in which the author analyses several specific cases of Spanish ambassadors in Europe: their networks of communication, their building of stereotypes, their informal diplomatic practices, and their use of ceremonial practices.     

Tropical Footprints: Joining Environmental and United States Diplomatic History

Book reviewed in this article:
Richard P. Tucker, Insatiable Appetite: The United States and the Ecological Degradation of the Tropical World     

中国近代的外交与外交礼仪

19世纪70年代,清廷各级外交人员出国后,认知、认同、接受了西方国家的外交观念及其礼仪惯例,并开始了逐渐与其接轨的近代化进程,但同时也出现一些礼仪对接中的错位现象.出于外交的需要,清廷初步确定了清国的国旗、国歌.这一时期清廷外交理念及外交活动的变化是巨大而深刻的,功不可没.但中国在政治上付出的代价也是巨大的,惨重的,其教训也同样是不可忘记的.     

“道义外交”与国民政府对日外交策略

1934年底开始被中、日两国政府提倡,而在1935年上半年盛行一时的中日“亲善外交”(或称“道义外交”),在当时即扑朔迷离。此后研究大多对其持否定态度。本从外交策略的角度,阐述了国民政府在“道义外交”实施前所面临的外交困境以及国民政府为改变中日外交状况而实施“道义外交”的策略思路;对日本外务部门和关东军对“道义外交”的不同回应也进行了分析;对国民政府由于“道义外交”开展而面临日本军部和外务省两方面压力的状况作了描述。指出,从外交策略上看,不能排除它是国民政府对日外交政策和策略的一种主动积极的调整,而不能将其完全视为本质性的卖国外交政策和策略。但是,它的实施和失败,既使国民政府的外交重新陷于了被动,也使国民政府的民族代表性遭到质疑。     

Making History, Talking about History

Making history—in the sense of writing it—is often set against talking about it, with most historians considering writing history to be better than talking about it. My aim in this article is to analyze the topic of making history versus talking about history in order to understand most historians' evident decision to ignore talking about history. Ultimately my goal is to determine whether it is possible to talk about history with any sense.
To this end, I will establish a typology of the different forms of talking practiced by historians, using a chronological approach, from the Greek andRoman emphasis on the visual witness to present-day narrativism and textual analysis. Having recognized the peculiar textual character of the historiographical work, I will then discuss whether one can speak of a method for analyzing historiographical works. After considering two possible approaches—the philosophy of science and literary criticism—I offer my own proposal. This involves breaking the dichotomy between making and talking about history, adopting a fuzzy method that overcomes the isolation of self-named scientific communities, and that destroys the barriers among disciplines that work with the same texts but often from mutually excluding perspectives. Talking about history is only possible if one knows about history and about its sources and methods, but also about the foundations of the other social sciences and about the continuing importance of traditional philosophical problems of Western thought in the fields of history and the human sciences.     

东方外交史研究初探

东方外交史是东方文明史的重要组成部分。在以往推出的众多外交史著作当中,尚无一部完整意义上的东方外交史。不仅如此,外交史的体系与分析模式都程度不同地受到"欧洲中心论"的影响。编写完整的外交史,东方学者必须置身其中,发挥主体作用。本文①提出开展东方外交史研究,以宏观的视角审视历史,尤其对古代与近代东方大国外交给予足够的重视。当前的形势发展不断对学术提出新问题,在更深的层次上对过去的东方外交史作出概括与总结已成为当务之急。战后以来,东方国家在国际舞台上的地位整体提高,国内外学术机构对东方历史与现实研究的热度有增无减,因此我国的历史研究也应该开辟新的领域。     

Environmental History versus History of Science

Moran, Emilio F., ed. The Ecosystem Concept in Anthropology. Boulder, Co.: Westview Press, 1984. xiv + 320 pp. including index. $28.50 cloth.     

环境史和环境史研究的生态学意识

本文从三个方面探讨了环境史和环境史研究的生态学意识以及环境史研究的发展趋势。环境史是在战后环境保护运动的推动下产生的 ,是意识变革的产物 ;现代生态学为环境史研究提供了新的视角和方法论 ;生态学研究的发展对环境史研究产生了影响。     

环境史续论

环境是指人类周围的空间范围,即人类赖以生存的物质世界。它包括自然环境和人工环境,但是不包括社会环境。生态中心论的提法忽视了人类的主动性和创造性,有些矫枉过正。环境恶化和环境污染,是环境史研究的两大重点。历史地理学、农史林史水利史的部分内容属于环境史,它们与环境史各有侧重,不能等同为一。考古学扩大了环境史研究的视野。环境史与上述学科的关系,体现了环境史跨学科的特点。