Antiquarianism and national history. The emergence of a new scholarly paradigm in early modern historical studies*

Early modern Europe was marked by fundamental changes in its intellectual landscape. In the field of historiography, this led to the development of a new antiquarian current in historiography which marked a fundamental shift in the view on historical writings. While traditionally historiography had been considered a literary genre, the new scholars approached it as a ‘scientific’ discipline. On the basis of a comparative study of a number of northern European national histories, this paper analyses major transformations in two aspects of historical writing. Firstly, antiquarian historians extended the subject range of historiography to include a variety of cultural-historical topics. This innovation also had implications for the structure of their works. Secondly, the new current introduced a novel approach to the question of historical evidence to counter sceptic criticism and meet the new requirements occasioned by the rise of empirical models of research. Antiquarian scholars therefore introduced several new types of source materials: material evidence of the past, comparative studies of languages and customs, and documentary texts were added as sources of historical information. They furthermore subjected all historical sources to rigorous critical assessment.     

清末民初的世界史演义初探

演义体的史学作品作为史学的重要组成部分,在向下层民众传播历史知识的过程中发挥着重要作用。清末以降殆至民初,演义体的史学作品杂然纷陈,其中世界史演义的出现尤为醒目,演义域外新知,启迪下层民众,激发爱国热忱,成为世界史演义作者共同的创作意图。大量世界史演义作品的出现,既是此时期历史演义创作中的重要现象,也成为此时期的演义体史学一个重要特点。     

五德终始说与汉代史学的正统观念

中国古代的五德终始说,包括土木金火水五行相胜与木火土金水五行相生两个系统.作为一种解释王朝更替和历史变易的学说,五德终始说对于秦汉时期的政治有着重要的影响.同时,五德终始说提出的古史系统和内蕴的经世意识与正统观念,则对于以司马迁和班固为代表的汉代史学的历史撰述与史学思想都产生了深刻的影响.汉代史学构建的古史系统所蕴含的正统观念,以及以《汉书》为代表的中国正统史学的出现,与五德终始历史学说的影响是分不开的.     

班固的史学史论述与史学史意识

史学史的研究近年来已从文本与思想的讨论深掘到意识层面的探索,历史意识、史学意识乃至史学史意识都成为探讨的课题。对完成重要著作的史家而言,作品即思想的表现,常蕴含了他的史学史意识在其中,研究者经由史学史意识的分析,往往更能了解其史学的诉求。虽然在班固的时代,"史学"与"史学史"的名词都还没出现,就语境而言,讨论他的史学史论述与史学史意识未免唐突古人,但是使用现代学术语言作为分析工具,实乃不得不然。班固《汉书》的出现,不论从体例、内容还是思想方面观察,皆有其自我的认识,这个认识与他的史学史意识或学术史意识有密切关系。本文爬梳《汉书》中有关史学史的论述,探讨班固如何看待史官传统、史籍流传、《春秋》性质、以及自己著作的学术定位等问题,并于结论中指出班固史学史论述与史学史意识的特点与意义。     

《吴越春秋》说略

《吴越春秋》是一部很有特色的古代史学著作。是书有很高的史料价值,在编纂体例和历史文学方面都有一定成就,对于了解春秋时吴、越争霸历史,增长人们有关历史知识,从历史中吸取智慧是很有用的。作为汉代史著能流传到现在,这个事实本身似乎也可以说明它确有其存在价值。     

论史学理论与史学史之间的关系

史学理论与史学史在学科结构中属于同一个二级专业,这其中反映了二者具有紧密的内在联系。探索史学理论与史学史的关系,首先应当跨过一个理念的门坎,即区分“历史理论”与“史学理论”。确认史学理论是对历史学的概括和总结,而不是研究客观的社会历史。厘清这种概念上的区别与联系,大有利于史学理论与历史理论的研究。如20世纪80年代中历史认识论研究的兴起,即得益于此。这里,需要防止像西方某些史学流派那样割断史学理论与历史理论的关系,批判那种取消历史理论研究的说法。在当今,史学史研究的可靠成果,应是史学理论研究的基础。揭示史学发展的规律,是史学史学科与史学理论研究共同的任务,将二者结合在一起的探索,大有学术开拓、理论创新的广阔前景。     

当代中国历史学的学术转型与创新 --试论旧课题的改造和新课题的建立

以往中国历史学轰轰烈烈的专题讨论,不仅凝聚了史学界的绝大部分精力,而且形成了一整套的中国化马克思主义历史理论或历史解释系统。它决定着中国史学的研究与编纂,塑造和影响着人们的思维方式。当前的史学学术转型无论如何不可能回避这些旧课题。从史学学科体系的角度看,改造旧课题,将其转换成为新课题,应该,而且可以成为史学学术转型的突破口。     

在历史与现实之间——《盐铁论》史论初探

西汉昭帝时召开的盐铁会议,在西汉历史上有政策调整的意义.此次会议上双方辩论所形成的《盐铁论》一书,既是一部文学名著,也是一部历史著作和历史评论之书.该书史论的历史价值在于它深刻反思了汉武帝末年的有关政策,再现了那个时代人们对于历史和现实的种种思考,真实地反映了史学与社会的关系,它在内容和形式上都丰富了中国古代史论.     

司马彪《续汉书》考辨

在晋人所撰的诸家东汉史中,西晋史家司马彪所撰纪传体《续汉书》是史学价值较高、较有特色的一部,亦因此得到了后人如刘勰、刘知几、唐太宗等的充分肯定。概括而言,《续汉书》的史学特色及价值主要表现在以下三方面:一,在史书体例方面,所设志目较前史既有延续又有进一步的发展和完善,设立了能反映其撰述动因、史学思想的较有特色和价值的《序传》;二,在史料来源、史料价值方面,司马彪广泛参考了《东观汉记》及各种相关档案、文献,使《续汉书》史料丰富详实,从而使该书不仅成为范晔撰《后汉书》的参考之一,而且可在一定程度上弥补范书、《东观汉记》及《后汉纪》等书记载的简、缺、误等不足;三,《续汉书》所体现的重谱系、天人感应的社会历史观等可折射出晋代史学思想之一斑,有助于借此把握时代特色。     

History, Time, and Knowledge in Ancient India

The lack of interest in history in ancient India has often been noted and contrasted with the situation in China and the West. Notwithstanding the vast body of Indian literature in other fields, there is a remarkable dearth of historical writing in the period before the Muslim conquest and an associated indifference to historiography. Various explanations have been offered for this curious phenomenon, some of which appeal to the supposed currency of certain Indian philosophical theories. This essay critically examines such "philosophical explanations."
I argue that it is not true that there was no history in ancient India, and it is not surprising that there was no developed historiography or scientific history. It is both true and surprising that there was no real importance attached to history in ancient India. An adequate philosophical exxplanation for this historica phenomenon, however, is not to be found in appeals to the influence of indigenous metaphysical theories about time and the self. A much more plausible philosophical explanation appeals instead to certain features of classical Indian epistemology.     

2. ON ISLAMIC TIME: RETHINKING CHRONOLOGY IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF MUSLIM SOCIETIES

This article argues that the academic representation of Islamic history as a single timeline, which was established in the nineteenth century and continues to predominate to the present, is a primary issue restricting fruitful readings of Islamic historical materials. Utilizing insights in thinking about history that favor multiple temporalities, I suggest that scholars in Islamic studies can expand the possibilities of their work by paying attention to the diversity of ways in which time is conceptualized within original materials. As illustrations for the rethinking I advocate, I provide readings of the structures and literary affects of three Persian works in different genres, produced circa 1490–1540 ce . I suggest that a foundational reorientation in the field of Islamic historiography has the potential to help us break out of binds identified in the critique of orientalism provided by Edward Said and others and would lead to better ways to approach developments in Muslim societies.     

“刘言史法，吾言史意”——章学诚与刘知几史学歧异探析

“史法”与“史意”是章学诚的重要学术术语,是研究章学诚与刘知几史学异同关系的关键,也是把握章学诚史学思想的关键。本从章学诚所界定之“史学”涵义入手,认为“史意”是针对一家述而言,“史法”是针对馆局纂修而言,“史法”与“史意”能够体现出章学诚与刘知几的分歧所在。     

3. THE QUESTION OF HISTORY IN PRECOLONIAL INDIA

This essay considers an important and enduring problem in the writing of Indian history: how do we historians approach precolonial narratives of the past? A rich and suggestive new study of South Indian modes of historiography, Textures of Time: Writing History in South India 1600–1800, by Velcheru Narayana Rao, David Shulman, and Sanjay Subrahmanyam, has positioned itself at the center of this debate. For a variety of reasons, precolonial narratives have been demoted to the status of mere information, and genres of South Indian writing have been dismissed as showing that South Indians lacked the ability to write history and indeed lacked historical consciousness. Textures of Time responds to this picture by proposing a novel historical method for locating historical sensibility in precolonial narratives of the past. The authors ask us not to judge all textual traditions in India, especially narratives of the past, on the basis of the verifiability of facts contained in them. Rather they suggest a radical openness of the text, and they argue that a historical narrative is constituted in the act of reading itself. They do this by examining the role of genre and what they call texture in precolonial South Indian writing. This essay examines the strengths and limitations of their proposal. It does so by examining the formation of colonial archives starting in the late‐eighteenth century in order to understand the predicament of history in South Asia. Colonial archives brought about a crisis in historiographical practices in India; they not only transformed texts into raw information for the historian to then reconstruct a historical narrative, they also delegitimized precolonial modes of historiography. A better understanding of these archives puts one in a better position to assess the insights of Textures of Time, but it also helps to highlight the problems in its solution. In particular, it reveals how the book continues to use modern criteria to assess premodern works, and in this way perhaps to judge them inappropriately.     

The rise of ‘auxiliary sciences’ in early modern national historiography: an ‘interdisciplinary’ answer to historical scepticism*

In response to the rising popularity of empirical models of scholarship and an increasingly sharp sceptic criticism against historiography, early modern historiographers strived to place their reconstruction of the past on a more ‘scientific’ basis through a new approach to historical writing. Their strategies included the mobilization of various other scholarly disciplines, such as geography, chronology, linguistics, ethnography, philology, etc. that came to function as ‘auxiliary sciences’ of early modern historiography. These came to fulfil three main roles in historical writing. Firstly, they supplied knowledge on cultural-historical topics that were newly introduced into the subject range of historiography. Secondly, they offered new solutions to the problem of reliable historical evidence by opening up new sources of historical information. And thirdly, they proved helpful in deciding scholarly discussions among historical writers. Through a detailed study of the use of ‘auxiliary sciences’ in seminal texts from the new current in historical writing, I will shed light on the range of scholarly disciplines that were enlisted in early modern historiography and how they contributed to the development of a new, more ‘scientific’ approach to the reconstruction of the past.     

社会政治变动与西周晚期的历史表述

西周晚期至东周之初是早期史学发展过程中的一个重要节点。受西周晚期社会政治变动的影响,该时期的历史表述产生了诸多重要变化。其一为表述主题发生转变,由原来侧重表述天命、族群及周王朝的发展,转而侧重贵族家族或诸侯功业等主题,开东周诸侯国史述作之风。其二为历史表述的内容与主旨渐趋丰富多元。西周衰亡刺激时人反思历史,审视时政,开始就历史动因提出不同的解释模式,实即私人述史的一个开端。其三为述作群体扩大,人数较多的中下级贵族及普通士阶层开始成为历史表述的主体。部分贵族士大夫摆脱旧观念的约束,就历史与政治发表看法或讴歌主君,"君子作歌"之风由此而起,实为春秋家史兴盛局面的滥觞。     

Rapin,Hume and the identity of the historian in eighteenth century England

Paul de Rapin-Thoyras's History of England (1725–1731) has hitherto occupied a marginal position in most accounts of eighteenth-century historiography, despite its considerable readership and influence. This paper charts the publication history of the work, its politics and style, and the methods through which Rapin's British translators and booksellers successfully proposed the work as the model for new historical enquiry, and its author as the model for a modern historical writer. It is further argued that David Hume's writings and letters relating to his History of England (1754–1763) suggest a direct and critical engagement with Rapin's work, and with the identity of the historian, as it had been constructed through Rapin's success. By focussing on the mechanisms of production and circulation, and the impact which these had on the practice of historical writing in the eighteenth century, the paper aims to demonstrate the value of applying social–historical methods to the study of historical writing.     

HERBERT BUTTERFIELD AND THE ETHICS OF HISTORIOGRAPHY

相似文献   

雅克·勒高夫对新传记的探索

20世纪后期法国出现的传记回归对年鉴学派提出了挑战。雅克·勒高夫对此进行回应,倡导把结构分析方法与传记体裁融为一体的"新传记",并撰写了《圣路易》。勒高夫通过解构史料把握圣路易与历史表征或"典范"的辩证统一关系,进而在圣路易与社会环境的互动中解释和呈现"真实的"圣路易。《圣路易》赢得学界诸多赞誉,但也提出新问题,即,如何实现科学的史学方法与个体化的叙述方法的有机融合,又能同时保持传记的生动性和趣味性。无论如何,《圣路易》是史家进一步探索新传记的重要基点。     

赫西俄德的史学地位

赫西俄德是古希腊前史学时期的著名诗人 ,他的诗作《田功农时》和《神谱》中所反映出的历史思想在西方史学的起源上具有重要意义 ,他本人是希腊史学从萌芽状态走向完全形成长过程中的最后一位承上启下的人物