ARE WE HARD‐WIRED TO THINK ABOUT HISTORY?

This book assumes that basic ways of thinking about history are hard‐wired in the brain. Since different styles of discourse with which we talk about the past are hardwired, Blum infers that a protohistorical consciousness is necessary for the existence of language. Historical logics reflect some preconceived part–whole relation. Blum discerns four kinds of part‐whole structure, which he terms continuity, quantum, continuum, and dialectic. Blum believes that these part–whole relations rest on universal, prereflective intuitions. He concludes that humans have different prelinguistic intuitions of time. Blum claims that people's variable innate temporality is expressed in their historical style. It follows that historical style antedates history as a genre. Hence we are not talking about historical style, but about how individuals apply their sense of the relation between parts and wholes to the problem of time. Our study of historical context becomes secondary to the assumptions we make about the interface between part–whole relations and time. The temporality of history is derivative of a phenomenon that is not historical. Certain conclusions are suggestive. First, modality precedes tense in evolution. Second, we ourselves are continuing to evolve. Blum believes that we are moving “towards a selection of abstract thinkers ruled by pure reason.” Instead of viewing cultures as organisms, it is more profitable to think of the evolution of structures of thinking, and to show that some are more prominent at present than they have been in the past. For Blum, historical thinking is a dependent variable. It depends on tense and modality, which are given before language and culture. Historical thinking reflects a primary experience, but it is not such a primary experience itself.     

美国早期史研究中的自我探索与历史叙事 --评《透过一块晦暗的玻璃》

《透过一块晦暗的玻璃》体现了美国早期史研究领域的较新的发展趋势。这本论文集从小历史的角度来论述了早期美国史研究中关于个人认同的自我探索与边缘化状态的问题,并较好地弥补了大历史的缺陷,使人们从历史叙述、文本细读和语言学转向这三个方面更新了对小历史长处的认识。     

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.     

Phenomenology and the Problems of Oral History

Abstract: In this article, the author argues that many of thebest practices of oral history reflect phenomenological thinkingeven though practitioners may not describe themselves as usingphenomenological methods. The author suggests that knowledgeand application of phenomenology can clarify or minimize suchpotential problems as interviewer bias and informant unreliabilityand can refute accusations that oral history is less reliablethan history taken from documents.     

中国现代经济理论史论纲

本文对 1 949— 1 999年半个世纪的中国经济理论发展过程作了全景式的勾勒 ,内容包括中国经济学者对马克思主义经济学的研究、对西方经济学的引进和研究、对中国现实经济问题的研究和构造“中国经济学”的理论尝试 ,整理了中国现代经济理论史的发展线索 ,给出了中国现代经济理论史的理论框架 ,并作了纲要式的分析评述。     

会通思想与历史编纂——论中国古代史学的一个特点和优点

"会通"思想作为一种古老的宏观考察社会历史变化的历史观念,经司马迁的深刻理解和《史记》的运用与彰显,在中国史学上产生了巨大而深远的影响。尤其是从中唐至元初五百年间几部不同撰述宗旨、不同体裁、不同内容的通史著作的面世,把会通思想发展到新的境界,使中国古代史学在通史撰述方面出现了异彩纷呈的局面,而马端临是评论这一宏大史学现象的第一人,他的史学批评方法论,至今仍有启示意义。     

Narratives and Bodies: Culture beyond the Cultural Turn

This article offers a fresh assessment of the current condition of ‘culturalist’ international history, exploring its achievements and limitations, taxonomising its key threads and charting an agenda for the future. It argues that at its heart lie two core concerns, one with narratives and the other with bodies. Thinking in this way allows us both to tie together work which initially appears disparate – endowing a bewilderingly diverse mass of scholarship with coherence and shape – and to better grasp the project's current trajectory. It analyses how these two issues rose to prominence, discussing not only the merits and failings of previous ‘culturalist’ work but also linkages with shifting debates in historical theory in the aftermath of the ‘postmodern’ turn. It explores the contours of the important work currently being conducted under these rubrics, drawing attention where appropriate to cognate scholarship in the discipline of International Relations with which international historians might profitably engage. Understanding the significance of these two core concepts provides vital orientation in contemporary intellectual debates within international history and enables us to push them on further.     

HARTOG,KOSELLECK, AND RICOEUR: HISTORICAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND THE CRISIS OF THE PRESENT

I enquire here into whether historical anthropology may serve to orient the critique of modes of temporalization under the conditions specific to what François Hartog designates as the contemporary regime of historicity. To this end, I bring Hartog into conversation with Paul Ricoeur: both arrive at a diagnosis of the crisis of the present on the basis of a parallel interiorization of the metahistorical categories of Reinhart Koselleck. Sharing a common interlocutor, the diagnoses at which they arrive are nevertheless quite different in nature, a result of the way in which these categories are inflected alternatively toward the anthropological perspective of fundamental temporalization and the semantic perspective of articulation at the level of “orders of time.” I suggest that the crisis of the present eludes the grasp of both and, with a view to gaining a more secure critical purchase over this crisis, propose a framework for bringing them into conversation.     

The Characteristics of the Theory of History in Ancient China

Historical studies in ancient China have left us many bountiful legacies. One of them is the theory of (objective) history, whose major characteristics can be loosely divided into the following categories: (1) a wide variety of literary forms, including theoretical remarks affixed to historical narratives and even special chapters and books on historical criticism; (2) continuity of research at many levels of historiographic theory; (3) reasoning through facts (i.e., basing theory on facts and offering arguments by following historical evidence); and (4) a wealth of masterpieces. Translated from Academic Research, No. 1, 2004     

PERFORMING HISTORY: HOW HISTORICAL SCHOLARSHIP IS SHAPED BY EPISTEMIC VIRTUES

Philosophers of history in the past few decades have been predominantly interested in issues of explanation and narrative discourse. Consequently, they have focused consistently and almost exclusively on the historian's (published) output, thereby ignoring that historical scholarship is a practice of reading, thinking, discussing, and writing, in which successful performance requires active cultivation of certain skills, attitudes, and virtues. This paper, then, suggests a new agenda for philosophy of history. Inspired by a “performative turn” in the history and philosophy of science, it focuses on the historian's “doings” and proposes to analyze these performances in terms of epistemic virtue. It argues that historical scholarship is embedded in “practices” or “epistemic cultures,” in which knowledge is created and warranted by means of such virtues as honesty, carefulness, accuracy, and balance. These epistemic virtues, however, are not etched in stone: historians may highlight some of them, exchange one for another, or reinterpret their meaning. On the one hand, this suggests a rich area of research for historians of historiography. To what extent can consensus, conflict, continuity, and change in historical scholarship be explained in terms of epistemic virtue? On the other hand, the proposal outlined in this article raises a couple of philosophical questions. For example, on what grounds can historians choose among epistemic virtues? And what concept of the self comes with the notion of virtue? In addressing these questions, philosophy of history may expand its current scope so as to encompass not only “writings” but also “doings,” that is, the virtuous performances historians recognize as professional conduct.     

浅议"文革"史研究中文献法与口述法的综合运用

文献法与口述法的结合运用,能够更大程度地赋予普通民众阐释自身历史的权力,推进宏观论证与微观调研、量化研究与质性分析的同步进行,不仅有助于挖掘新史料,还能够拓宽研究视野、提供新的研究方法。对“文革”史研究具有突破性的意义。     

历史与记忆

当代史学和历史哲学中关于记忆问题的探讨为我们关于史学的理解提供了新的视角。在这一视野下,记忆超越单纯个体心理的层次获得了作为脑外"文化记忆"的历史维度。在历史与记忆关系的层面上,历史记忆的多元性对历史记载的单一性提供了重要的补益,同时,史学文本的宏观视野对于历史记忆的微观局部性和片断性亦显示出认识上的优越性。在认识论维度之外,历史记忆诉诸历史正义的道义性是其十分显著的特质,于此凸显史学科学性与道义性维度复杂的张力关系,历史科学性不能成为漠视道义性的理由。最后,在历史与记忆关系上传统的历史本位立场之外,对人生有意义的历史终究要落实在人间的历史记忆中,从而彰显记忆本位的合理性,这或许是关注历史记忆所能带给我们的一点理论启示。     

试析20世纪40年代中国马克思主义史学家对史料和历史考证方法的重视

20世纪30年代,经过中国社会史论战而迅速扩大影响的中国马克思主义史学,存在着明显的教条化和公式化、轻视史料与考证的缺失。40年代的中国马克思主义史学家对此进行了积极的反思和纠正,而且还从理论上论述了史料及考证方法在历史研究中的重要性,阐述了理论观点与材料方法间的辩证关系,极大地促进了马克思主义史学的中国化和学术研究的中国化。     

THE CRITICAL THEORY OF HISTORY: RETHINKING THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY IN THE LIGHT OF KOSELLECK'S WORK

There are many ways to consider the philosophy of history. In this article, I claim that one of the most viable approaches to the philosophy of history today is that of critical theory of history, inspired by Reinhart Koselleck. Critical theory of history is based on what I call known history, history as it has been established and expounded by historians. What it contributes—its added value, so to speak—is a reflection on the categories employed to think about historical experience at its different levels, not only as a narrative but also as a series of events: their origins, contexts, terminology, functions (theoretical or practical), and, finally, eventual relevance.     

汉儒理念与价值观研究的方法论问题之理论篇

臧知非《两汉之际儒生价值取向探微》(《史学集刊》2003年2期)的立论,和我近年考析汉儒的文字针锋相对,感觉有必要对考论汉儒所牵涉的一些史学理论和方法提出来讨论。本文“(一)理论篇”讨论法国“年鉴学派·心态史回转到人类文化历史学”的新趋向;这是转向到美国人类学大师罗拔·列德夫(Robert Redfield,1897—1958)所重视的文化“大传统”——对整体文化发展变化的多元和全面意义的理解,综合为文明史的研究——“人文·精神文明”。以中国传统观念来说,聚焦于文化“大传统”,是以“君子”的“价值”理念,来理解和批判两汉儒生;聚焦于文化“小传统”,是以“小人”的“行径”来体认两汉儒生。顾炎武以“大义”、“节义”等理想理念来评论《两汉风俗》;吕思勉、蒙文通(以及臧文未指名的钱穆师和我)则以汉儒“要改正当世社会组织”(传统谓之“济世淑世”)的“志士仁人之公意”、“洪流”来解释新莽政权之兴起;这都是从儒学的“人文精神”“淑世理想”和“学术理念”(文明“大传统”的价值理念)着眼;因而成为聚焦于文化“小传统”价值取向的臧文批评的标的。本文续“考论篇”将进一步讨论在历史考证和分析上研究汉儒的实际问题。     

The Millennial of Castile (1943): the historical culture of Spanish Fascism

The creation of new symbols and historical myths were common practices of nationalist politics, especially in Fascist regimes. In 1943 the Franco regime organized the most impressive historical commemoration celebrated in post-war Spain: the Milenario of Castile. With its heterogeneous mixture of history and spectacle, the Milenario of Castile was by far the greatest historical commemoration promoted by the State during the 1940s. Taking the commemoration of the Milenario as a case study, this article examines the historical culture of Spanish Fascism, as well as the attempts of the Falangist intellectual elite to impose a concrete national narrative in post-war Spain. At the same time, the article analyses the historical discourses and aesthetics displayed throughout the commemoration, underlining its Fascist character, and consequently the transnational dimension of the Fascist politics of the past. Finally, the article reflects on the scope and limits of the process of Fascistisation in Franco's dictatorship, especially in its commemorative culture.     

历史事实:史学家建构过去的图景

中外历史哲学界对“历史事实”存在严重的争论,主要问题是关于历史事实的应用范围与含义上的分歧。其实,“历史事实”只能限制在历史认识论的范围内才有意义,而历史事实与史料中的事实也不能等同。从历史学家与“历史事实”的关系来看,历史事实依历史学家的存在而存在,“历史事实”是史学家建立的关于过去的图景,是一个关于过去历史实际的知识体系。     

The Study of Chinese Historiography from the Perspective of Intellectual History

To promote historical research today, one needs to create a vigorous environment for historiographic criticism, to summarize the progress and state of all fields and topics of history, and to enhance the study of historiography. All these three aspects, which share similar characteristics, can be called “historiography.” Their essence is the basic method for deepening the study of historiography as a whole and refining its branches from the perspective of intellectual history. They can help us to form a healthy scholarly mechanism to review historical achievements, which would be crucial to the development of academic research. Translated from Nankai Journal (Philosophy, Literature and Social Science Edition), No. 2, 2004     

古史辨派的史学遗产与中国上古史体系的建设

以顾颉刚为首的古史辨派是我国20世纪20-40年代古史研究的主要派别,对我国史学尤其是上古史研究影响深远。疑古精神、对进步史观的积极追求与接纳的态度、对古史资料考信而后用之的原则、注重历史与考古研究结合的治史方法,以及建设新古史体系的设想,是古史辨派留给我们的史学遗产。新古史体系的建设道路并不平坦,搞好新古史体系建设较为根本的对策就是在总结和继承古史辨派优秀史学遗产的基础上,坚持理论创新,切实加强考古学家与历史学家的沟通与合作。     

正确看待马克思主义史学的历史发展——访林甘泉研究员

应该以历史的眼光看待马克思主义史学在建国以来50年的发展。应该以实事求是的态度对待过去史学的发展。要科学地看待社会经济形态理论的价值,它是唯物史观的基石。不同学术思想的学者应该在互相尊重的前提下开展百家争鸣;研究方法应该多样化。马克思主义史学要以实证研究为基础。大师级的史学家一定会在21世纪出现。