三国圣地明良千古--武侯祠1780年回首(上)

回顾成都武侯祠走过的1780年岁月：始建于蜀汉兴修惠陵、汉昭烈庙之时,南北朝时武侯祠迁入,唐宋时已成著名景区,许多诗人前来拜谒,留下佳作,同时形成了新任地方首脑一到成都就先拜祭武侯祠的习俗,明初分开的三个景点合为一体。本文首次指出：在这漫长的岁月中,儒家文化与兵家文化相结合,逐步成为该景点的主题思想。     

"三国文化"主题思想初探--兼论成都武侯祠的主题思想

本研究了“三国化”的主题思想：即儒家化与兵家化相结合,并对三国化的主要特征作了阐述。在过去1780年的岁月中,武侯祠逐步突出了这一主题思想。     

全国现存武侯祠初步对比研究

古代典籍文献中,特别是地方志中记述的武侯祠不胜枚举,其数量之多、地域分布之广,史上少有。随着时代的变迁、城市建设的发展,武侯祠多数已消失不见。目前全国现存具有一定规模的武侯祠大约不超过20座,其中成都武侯祠、勉县武侯祠、祁山武侯祠等九座武侯祠最具有代表性。这九座武侯祠在分布区域、建筑形制、文化内涵等方面具有诸多共性,亦各具特色。特别是成都武侯祠,以其君臣合祀的独特文化内涵区别于其他武侯祠,成为现存武侯祠中最引人瞩目的一座。     

刘沅与成都武侯祠

刘沅是清代四川有名的教育家、思想家。他主持了清道光年间成都武侯祠塑像的调整,在祠内刻建了大量的碑碣,并有《明良志略》等有关武侯祠的作,还积极关心当时在成都西郊所发现黄忠墓的保护。在他的影响下,一百多年以来其后裔都非常关注武侯祠的物保护,并积极出力。     

有效保护 加强管理 大力发展文化产业

成都武侯祠是国务院公布的第一批全国重点文物保护单位,是成都历史文化名城的重要组成部分,也是四川省、成都市青少年爱国主义教育基地和成都对外开放的重要窗口。据统计,1999年全馆总收入是1992年的6倍,2000年是1992年的8倍。武侯祠的产业发展如此迅速,首先得益于国家改革开放、     

成都武侯祠讲解词举隅

简介 成都武侯祠由汉昭烈庙即刘备庙、诸葛亮武侯祠、刘备墓惠陵、三义庙和园林区五个部分所组成,并在三个不同的历史时期修建而成的。     

成都武侯祠近十年建设发展概述

新中国建立以来,成都发生了巨大变化,尤其是改革开放的二十年,应该说是武侯祠最辉煌的年代;九十年代,武侯祠在古建的保护、维修及新景点的开发方面作了大量工作,通过近十年的建设,武侯祠已发展成为一座涵盖内容十分丰富的博物馆。     

明嘉靖《诸葛武侯祠堂碑记》释读

成都武侯祠内《诸葛武侯祠堂碑记》碑,俗称明碑,是武侯祠最重要的碑刻之一,由明嘉靖年间四川巡抚张时彻撰。其记载了昭烈庙、武侯祠从立庙以来的历史沿革,并对时人对武侯祠历史的几处误解作了更正,价值极高。本对此碑做了注释、翻译,并对中内容加以评述。     

南阳武侯祠的历史沿革及其保护发展历程

据《明嘉靖·南阳府校注》记载,南阳武侯祠始建魏晋时期,兴盛于唐朝,唐朝时期的南阳武侯祠、诸葛草庐已经名扬天下,出现在文人雅士的大量诗作佳篇中,宋金对峙时遭到严重的破坏,曾一度不复存在,元朝,南阳武侯祠得到了大规模的修建和增建,在元延佑四年(1317年)河南平章政事何玮受朝廷之命到南阳武侯祠宣诏书,命名为:"武侯祠",南阳武侯祠有了法定的地位。明清时期在元的基础上进行了大规模的修建和增建新中国成立后,党和政府重视对祠宇的保护并不断进行修葺。把五十年代进行土地改革,武侯祠祭祀田分给周边佃户耕用的、六七十年代诸葛书院作企业职工的家属院居住人家和作为武侯祠完整的一部分景点的龙角塔,进行了征收和翻修维护,尤其近些年在南阳市委、市政府的高度重视和关怀下,我们立足新的历史时期发展观,明确提出诸葛亮文化概念,更好地传承中华民族历史的优秀文化,弘扬诸葛亮文化精神,在卧龙岗附近征收120亩的自留地,南阳市博物馆的领导还对卧龙岗武侯祠进行了大面积的硬件投资建设,先后投入二千多万元,完善武侯祠基础设施,抢修文物古建使今日的武侯祠焕发着勃勃生机。     

三义庙考

成都三义庙原址在提督街,后迁建于成都武侯祠内。本对“三义”的源起,三义庙的流传,成都三义庙的沿革加以介绍。     

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.     

History of Science or History of Learning

This essay presents analogies between the development of historical writing and of physical science during the early modern period. Its necessarily spotty coverage runs from the mid sixteenth century to the beginning of the eighteenth. The analogies include arising from practical concerns; preferring material documents and experimental inquiries over texts; making use of mathematical auxiliary sciences; distinguishing between primary and secondary elements; establishing new fundamental principles; undermining the traditional world system; and devising methods to control rapidly multiplying knowledge. A history of learning that meets today's standards of historical scholarship should identify and exploit such parallels, not only because of scholarly interest and responsibility, but also because an understanding of the historical importance of linkages between distant branches of learning may help redress the increasing imbalance in resources among the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities in our higher schools and universities.     

Intellectual History and the History of Philosophy

Summary

The issue which I wish to address in this paper is the widespread tendency in Anglophone philosophy to insist on a separation between the history of philosophy and the history of ideas or intellectual history. This separation reflects an anxiety on the part of philosophers lest the special character of philosophy will be dissolved into something else in the hands of historians. And it is borne of a fundamental tension between those who think of philosophy's past as a source of ideas and arguments of interest to the present, and those who hold that the philosophy of the past should be studied on its own terms, in relation to its immediate context, without reference to the present. The challenge, then, is to re-historicise the history of philosophy, and to keep the philosophers onside.     

大历史与历史研究

大历史是历史研究与教学的新领域,它是指从各种可能的规模甚至宇宙的规模来探究一切事物的历史。大历史也是一种跨学科研究。它与世界史存在关联,也是对传统史学的一种补充。大历史探究也满足了人们的精神、心灵和社会需求,有利于人们更好地认识自我。     

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.     

当代中国史研究与口述史学

当代中国史是历史学家族中最年轻的一门学科,也是目前最有活力、发展最快的研究领域之一。口述史学的出现适应了时代的需要,也顺应了国史变革的方向。寻求二者的最佳结合途径能使二者相得益彰,“合之则两美,离之则两伤”。当代中国史研究需要通过开展口述史来拓展研究视野,活跃研究思路,并弥补与修正史料之不足,以最大程度地发挥其面向社会公共教育和启迪的功能。