The past 20 years of modern Chinese social history

Modern Chinese social history has played an important role in the general revival of Chinese social history. This essay will provide an overview of the major achievements of past 20 years with particular emphasis upon the field of modern social history, the growth of regional social history, and the new research that draws upon field studies. It will also consider the recent debates on “re‐examining political history” and provide an introduction to new works in medical history and environmental/ecological history.     

30年来的中国近代思想文化史研究

30年来的中国近代思想史研究,依据研究重心的变化可以分为三个阶段:一是1978年到80年代末,研究重点集中于思想家个案及政治思想史方面;二是80年代末到90年代末,研究重心逐渐转变为以社会思潮史及思想家个案为主;三是90年代末以来,研究重心集中于社会思潮史和学术思想史领域.正是在研究重心的逐渐转移过程之中,近代思想史研究的广度不断拓宽,研究深度亦渐次深化.改革开放之后中国学术界最引人注目的现象之一,是中国文化史研究的复兴;90年代以后中国文化史发展的新趋势,是社会文化史研究的勃然兴起.长期无人问津或受人冷落的研究领域,如近代科技文化、民间宗教、民间意识与观念、文化心态、公共空间领域、新词语与观念变迁等,受到学术界的广泛关注并出现了许多研究成果.近代社会文化史正在成为史学新观念和新方法的一个重要生长点.     

An overview of recent research on modern Chinese economic history

China formally adopted the policy of reform and opening up to the outside world in 1978. Since then, both economic practice and economic theory in China have undergone profound changes, and the academic study of modern Chinese economic history has been encouraged to expand its research horizons under the rubric of “liberating the mind and seeking truth in the facts”. A number of important monographs and essays have been produced and the study of modern Chinese economic history has entered a flourishing period. Current research focuses on two major topics: China's New Democratic economy and the planned economy during the period 1949–78; and, China's socialist market economy from 1978–2006. The study of these two areas shows numerous interconnections, points of comparison and causal links. The many and important lessons to be drawn from these studies both exhibit Chinese characteristics and have universal implications.     

陈独秀与中国近代史研究

陈独秀是中国早期的马克思主义者,他在五四时期对鸦片战争以来的中国近代史作了比较系统的研究,与同时期的李大钊一样是中国近代史研究的开创者.陈独秀以唯物史观为指导,从西方列强入侵中国和中国社会自身的变化来分析近代中国的社会性质,认为近代中国的生产方式发生变动,政治上成为"半殖民地",进而提出民主革命是近代中国社会的历史主题,反帝反封建是民主革命的基本任务.陈独秀还以"革命史"观看待近代中国的重大历史事件,对义和团运动、戊戌维新、辛亥革命、五四运动等历史事件在中国民主革命的历史地位进行了比较细致的研究,深化了对近代中国历史的认识.从中国近代史研究的近百年历程看,陈独秀对中国近代史的研究为近代史研究"革命史范式"的建立做了基础性的工作,是近代史研究"革命史范式"的重要开创者.     

Innovations of modern Chinese history studies since reform and opening-up

This paper reviews new developments in the study of modern Chinese history since 1979, especially key questions in modern Chinese history, together with innovations in content, structure and research methods. These new developments reflect the broadening of academic exchanges with foreign countries, the initiation of reforms, the influence of the modernization process, and far-reaching innovations in the discipline of modern Chinese history studies since the reform and opening-up of China.     

Predicament and responses: Discussions of history education in early modern China

ABSTRACT

Since the early modern era, following the abolishment of the imperial civil service exam and the rise of modern schools, the subject of history was included in education at all levels, from primary to tertiary. However, in comparison with traditional society, the degree of attention devoted to historical knowledge has in fact declined rather than improved. In the 1920s, many contemporaries vocally criticized and pondered the low level of historical knowledge among primary and secondary school students, and occasionally voiced dissatisfaction with history education at the university level as well. Critics primarily focused their discussions on the insufficient attention for history classes, imperfect standards formulated for history classes, poor history teaching materials, and lack of qualified, specialized teachers, forming a universal consensus among contemporaries on the failure of history education. However, the widespread opprobrium attached to history education was closely tied to two facts: first, the historians of early modern China had as yet failed to compile a general history of China acceptable to the majority, greatly disappointing many educators; second, historical resources failed to exercise the mobilizing effect on early modern Chinese society that contemporaries had hoped for, and history thus often became the scapegoat paying the price for practical setbacks and failures in the political arena.     

论20世纪20年代的中国近代史研究

20年代的中国近代史研究呈现出一种畸形的发展状况。近代史研究不被时人看重,但却有不少近代史著述出版。到1928年,通过对近代史史料的整理工作,由斯而发,罗家伦明确提出了要科学地研究中国近代史,开启了近代史研究的新局面;从史学史的角度对这些近代史著述的特点作出总结,知人论世,可以窥见20年代近代史研究的状况。     

回顾与展望: 中国大陆地区的民国史研究

近30年来,中华民国史(1912-1949)的学术研究在大陆地区从无到有,有了巨大的发展,已经成为一个成果丰硕、相对完整的学科。大陆民国史研究的主导史观大致经过了从革命史观到民族主义史观、现代化史观的历程。进入21世纪后,民国史研究更呈现多元化的趋势,表现为新研究领域的开拓与新史料的运用。民国史研究若要进一步发展,需要对研究对象与范围进行重新界定,构建新的解释体系与加强国际学术界的合作与交流。     

Crisis,challenge and choice: recent theoretical trends of anti-modernism and Western studies in Chinese history

During the last three decades, so-called “postism” (a Chinese non-professional, invented referent to postcolonialism, postmodernism and poststructuralism) has powerfully criticized and challenged the hegemonic ideology of the long-standing Euro–American centralism and the authoritative discourse of modernism in Western intellectual and academic circles, albeit it with various different resonances in Chinese and other non-Western societies. By tracing the trajectory of Western conceptual ideas from classical “rational” interpretations of history, this article tries to construct the inner connections and evolution between these conceptions and ways of thinking, and to summarize their impacts on and reactions from the field of Chinese historical studies. This article suggests that these new trends have definitely cast light on macro ideological and perspective concerns but have been less fruitful in concrete historical studies.     

文献发掘与学术史的研究问题--兼谈王宁先生有关学术史研究的一些看法

学术史的研究要注重献发掘,王宁先生对此有深入的思考：要发掘第一手献资料;要注重断代史的研究;注意把握学术史的发展脉络;客观评价学术史人物。     

论陈独秀对中国近代农民的认识

在1938年前,陈独秀对近代农民作用的认识的总体思想趋势经历了一个由否定而肯定的转变过程,但他的肯定是留有余地的,他将农民的作用限定在一定的范围内.之所以如此,坚守十月革命的城市道路是一个根本的原因.他对农民的缺点始终有清醒的认识,这是他认识近代中国农民的思想主线.为克服农民的缺点,他一方面主张以解除农民痛苦、改善农民生活作为他们参加抗战的前提,另一方面主张联合中小农民或称参加劳动的"贫农",坚决地反对富农和游民无产阶级.这些观点构成了大革命失败后他的托派思想基础.但他对农民缺点的正视亦具有一定的借鉴意义.     

第二届中国近代思想史国际学术研讨会综述

近期召开的“第二届中国近代思想史国际学术研讨会”围绕“中国近代史上的民族主义”这一主题,就民族主义思潮的概念定义、学理渊源、发展脉络、层次类型、思想内涵、个案对象、价值评判、研究方法以及民族主义与其他思潮的关系等问题展开讨论.既是对前十多年这一问题研究的回顾与总结,也将对今后深化与拓展“中国近代史上的民族主义”的研究起到推动作用。     

从学术史看华侨华人研究的学科发展

本文试图从学术史角度探讨华侨华人研究的学科建设。从国内外研究华侨华人的历史看 ,涉及的学科包括历史学、政治学、经济学、法学、社会学、人类学等诸多方面 ,尤其是西方对于华侨华人的学术研究 ,从一开始就不是历史学或经济学、政治学之类的单一学科的研究 ,而是综合性、全方位的研究 ,其覆盖面甚广。其特点在于研究对象的单一性 ,而不是学科或研究方法的单一性。因此 ,欲建立华侨华人学 ,必须包括诸学科的研究 ,即历史、经济、文化、政治、社会等各方面。尤其重要的是 ,这些多学科研究并非单指研究对象的改变 ,而是指研究的方法和手段 ,特别是研究的理论架构方面必须有所变化 ,以建立综合性的华侨华人学。     

世纪之交中国大陆学术界关于华侨华人的研究

世纪之交中国大陆学术界关于华侨华人的研究进入一个新的阶段。研究队伍的发展和许多有代表性的著作的出版 ,说明中国华侨华人研究不但在学术成果的数量和质量上已有显著的提高 ,而且研究领域扩大 ,视角拓宽 ,华侨华人研究作为一门新兴学科正在崛起。但中国大陆学者须看到与国际学术界的差距 ,加强对华侨华人的研究 ,在新的世纪把中国大陆的海外华人研究推向国际学术领域的前沿。     

关于目前华侨华人研究若干问题的观察与思考--中国社会科学院"海外华人研究国际学术研讨会"述评

2002年11月15-16日,中国社会科学院海外华人研究中心举行了"海外华人研究国际学术研讨会".笔者有幸参加了这一具有较高学术水准的研讨会,现将会议的研讨成果与本人的思考心得作一总结,以飨读者,并求共同切磋.     

A summary of the past two decades' research on non-governmental forces in modern China

Recent research on non-governmental forces in modern China, during its inception in the early 1990s, bore obvious influences from Western theories of civil society and the public sphere. By the late 1990s, this research began to pick up new momentum: the scope was expanded, findings were increased, essays and empirical studies came forth incessantly. During the first decade of the twenty-first century, research by Chinese scholars on the topic grew at an even greater rate. Aside from those academics who continued to borrow theories of civil society and public sphere, more scholars began employing the analytical framework of “society and state” to tackle the many issues within the non-governmental sectors of modern China.     

试论历史人类学与中国近代史研究中的几个问题

兴起于20世纪80年代中后期的历史人类学,尽管从学术传承上分属于两个不同的学科,但它的出现为消融历史学与人类学的边界,促成两个学科的交叉与融合,起到了不可低估的作用。在历史学内,“历史人类学”的形成亦经历了一个从社会史、社会文化史到历史人类学的演变过程。而在中国近代史领域,历史人类学已经展开一些研究实践,但是尚需进一步提倡。这种提倡表现在三个方面:底层视角、区域经验、文本与田野互动。历史人类学会对中国近代史研究产生有益的影响,会成为一种介于宏大叙事与经验性实证研究的“中层理论”。从历史学科的本位出发,历史人类学对人类学的吸收借鉴颇多,但是不能轻易放弃历史学科本位。     

从环境的历史到环境史——关于环境史研究的一种认识

By and large, there are three kinds of research on environment: the history of environment as a field of natural history studies, the history of environment as within the scope of history of society studies, and environmental history as the study of the relationship between human and nature. The methodological perspective of the relationship between humanity and environmental distinguishes the third from the previous two. From this perspective, when we probe the mutual effects between human and nature, we will stress on their interactions. The new era and the realities of contemporary society foster the rise of environmental history, which has not only theoretical values but also practical significance. Translated from Xueshu Yanjiu 学术研究 (Academic Research), 2006, (9):12–22     

Pre-1949 Chinese IR: an occluded history

Chinese scholars have achieved a comprehensive consensus on the disciplinary history of International Relations (IR) in China. However, this collective understanding of the evolution of Chinese IR is problematic because it denies the existence of pre-1949 Chinese IR and mistakenly sets the starting point of Chinese IR to be the mid 1960s, thus providing a progressive image of the IR discipline in China which is historically untenable. This essay rectifies this misunderstanding by reconstructing the history of Chinese IR before 1949. It verifies the existence of pre-1949 Chinese IR by reviewing the IR-relevant institutional setting in Chinese universities before 1949 and comparing the situation before 1949 with that in the mid 1960s, when the three IR departments were established. Further, the essay tentatively explains why pre-1949 Chinese IR has disappeared in the mainstream discourse of the history of Chinese IR. It argues that the interruption of the evolution of IR in China in the early 1950s and the specific power–knowledge interaction mode established in Chinese IR in the late 1950s are the two main causes responsible for the absence of pre-1949 Chinese IR in the history of the IR discipline in China.     

华侨华人学的学科定位与研究对象

本文力图从国际学术界传统学科体系的分解与整合这一角度来分析建立华侨华人学的现实性 ,并从局限性、可行性、研究对象的定位及辨识标准、研究范围、挑战与机遇等五个方面进行了分析。由于其特定的研究对象和无法进行科学抽象的特征 ,从传统的学术分类来看 ,华侨华人研究不可能成为独立的学科。然而 ,学术史的演变表明 ,一些多学科或跨学科的研究领域日益独立出来 ,这为华侨华人学的建立提供了条件。作者对“华侨华人学”下了定义 ,并提出了建立作为学科分支的华侨华人学的两种可能途径。