明清广西方志“荆扬分野”问题探研

秦汉以降,广西分野经历由独属“扬州”到荆、扬两种分野类型并存的转变,实际上是广西走向高层政区之路的缩影,具有深刻的历史内涵。这一转变过程总体上呈现“荆州”分野南拓,“扬州”分野东缩的态势,最终形成了广西东部梧州府数县属“扬州”分野,其余西部府州县皆属“荆州”分野的特殊局面,这也正是天文分野理论与实际空间位置相适应的结果。包括南宋蔡戡在内的学者对“荆扬分野”进行了理论层面的建构,而后世的广西方志修纂者基本因袭旧说而不加创造。方志修纂者对于天文分野的态度不一,各自在志书中表达了关于天文分野归属的认识和态度。     

明代方志地图编绘意向的初步考察

在地理学史和地图学史的研究中,一般关注于古代地图的科学技术价值,而较少讨论其思想史意义,尤其较少讨论方志地图的思想史意义。因此,本文从思想史的角度对明代方志地图的编绘意向做了初步的考察。认为明代方志地图的编绘意向中突出地强调了舆图的政治功能,但是对舆图所具有的政治功能的认识存在着较为明显的差异。更值得注意的是,在此之外对区域地理景观自身的关注,反映了新的在一定程度上具有变革萌芽的知识兴趣。这些不仅在一定程度上反映了当时社会上一般的地理学观念与知识系统,同时表现出方志地图在地理学史和地理学思想史中所可能具有的地位和意义。     

一本有实用价值的好书——《方志资料审核论稿》

本文通过向读者推介《方志资料审核论稿》一书,抒发作者对做学问要有求真务实的精神和实事求是的态度的学术主张。本文认为时下理论研究中存在“膨化”现象,热衷于空洞的理论叙述,而对辨别资料真伪、考证史料正误工作不够重视,以至于影响了志书的质量。方志界对待志书中的错误有积极与消极两种态度。作者以《方志资料审核论稿》为例,论述了方志资料审核的目标、内容、要点。同时阐发了对首轮志书质量、主编的文化素质、修志工作者的职业道德的一些看法,并对志书资料工作中的经验教训以及造成入志资料出现谬误的原因进行了详细论述。     

“普天之下”:传统天文分野说中的世界图景与政治涵义

中国传统的天文分野是基于"在天成象,在地成形"的宇宙生成论而构建出来的一套天地对应学说,其中蕴涵着丰富的政治文化和思想文化内容,值得我们从思想史及观念史的层面去加以考察。本文着眼于中国传统天下观的视角,对历代分野说体现出来的世界图景及其与国家政治版图之间的密切关系进行了系统研究,揭示出分野学说"分野止系中国"的文化地理观念,以及象征国家疆域主权、宣示中国与周边藩国政治臣属关系的政治功能。这些思想文化与政治文化特征所折射出来的就是充满华夏中心主义意识的中国传统天下观,自宋代以后,一些先知先觉的知识分子开始对这种狭隘的世界观提出质疑和批判,从而构成了晚清以后中国传统天下观崩溃的一个远源。     

方志理论研究与运用的思考

方志理论研究与运用的思考云南省嵩明县史志办公室马金选在本届十余年的修志历程中,地方志理论研究长足发展,方兴未艾。它不仅卓有成效地丰富和发展了方志理论宝库,而且对修志实践起到了指导作用。在充分肯定方志理论在修志过程中的历史地位和作用外,还应该看到并承认...     

近代方志转型的视角:梁启超与方志学新论

梁启超首倡"方志学",其背景是近代方志发生重大转型。本文首先梳理梁启超方志学理论发展变化的动态过程,旨在探索梁氏运用现代学术方法考察方志学的研究理路,厘清近代方志转型时期方志学理论构建的历史脉络与渊源流变。以近代方志转型的视角,探析近代方志学产生的历史渊源和发展变化,对于当今方志学理论建设和方志学学科构建也具有重要意义。     

续谈我的学术新观点

笔者在《黑龙江史志》1994年第4期上发表《我的方志学观点》一文,概括叙述了我自1982年从事地方志工作到1994年在方志学基础理论、应用理论以及方志学史等方面的主要学术观点。时过十年,我又有了若干新的学术观点。还想归纳和概要叙述一下。因为其中的“志学”和社会主义方志事业理论已突破了方志学的界域。因此。就不再说“方志学观点”而改为“学术新观点”。     

鸟瞰当代方志学发展动态——读《新方志理论著述提要》札记

本文作者通读《新方志理论著述提要》一书,在全面了解20世纪80年代至2003年时段内我国方志学术研究的总体情况下,归纳出这些方志理论研究成果的几个特点,即：一、通论类著述,体现出方志学体系逐步完善;二、编纂学著述,体现出方志体例在继承中创新,对方志编纂的方法和技巧研究逐步深入;三、方志史分期的研究众说纷纭,大势基本明朗;四、志书评论和方志管理备受关注。作者还对涉及叙而有论、生人立传、盛世修志、突出地方特色、马克思主义方志学一些问题的不同观点作了归纳。同时作者通过一些有意义的统计,对修志队伍和理论研究进行了积极地探讨。     

《方志编纂学基础教程》出版

韩章训研究员继《普通方志学》(方志出版社 1999年版 )、《方志学基础教程》(天马图书有限公司 2 0 0 1年版 )之后 ,又有一部新著《方志编纂学基础教程》由方志出版社于2 0 0 3年 6月出版。该书运用现代哲学的生产理论 ,在理论与实践的结合上对方志编纂学进行了一次新的整合 ,使方志编纂学实现了从传统形态到现代形态的转化。该书按照基本知识、基本理论和基本方法相统一原则进行谋篇 ,全面涵盖和系统阐述了从地情信息到方志文本或方志编纂实践到方志编纂理论的全过程《方志编纂学基础教程》出版     

影像方志学理论阐释、基本内涵与实践路径研究

影像方志学是在马克思主义方志学理论发展进程中,基于全媒体技术广泛应用的大背景下,在影像方志实践基础上应运而生的,以研究影像方志的发生、发展规律和应用原理等为主要任务,是对传统方志学理论研究范式、思维方式等的突破与创新,是方志学理论适应全媒体时代创新发展的最新理论成果。     

分野的虚实之辨

分野是中国传统思想中“天、地、人”信仰秩序系统的有机组成部分, 其本质是建立起天秩序与地秩序之间的映射对应系统, 这里的天包括天体、星座、气象、时间等, 而地也极为丰富, 可以是大的区域、列国、州、郡、山脉、河流等等不一而足, 但最为常见的是天体与列国、州郡的对应关系。本文对分野与行政区划关系进行了考察, 发现分野思想的发展虽然依托于行政区划体系, 但西汉以后与行政区划之间逐渐疏离, 进而成为远古信仰秩序思想的象征。究其根本: 建构信仰秩序系统是分野之实, 而形式的繁杂与混乱, 并不为皇权拥有者所重视, 乃分野之虚。     

THE IMPLICATIONS OF ROBERT BRANDOM'S INFERENTIALISM FOR INTELLECTUAL HISTORY

Quentin Skinner's appropriation of speech act theory for intellectual history has been extremely influential. Even as the model continues to be important for historians, however, philosophers now regard the original speech act theory paradigm as dated. Are there more recent initiatives that might reignite theoretical work in this area? This article argues that the inferentialism of Robert Brandom is one of the most interesting contemporary philosophical projects with historical implications. It shows how Brandom's work emerged out of the broad shift in the philosophy of language from semantics to pragmatics that also informed speech act theory. The article then goes on to unpack the rich implications of Brandom's inferentialism for the theory and practice of intellectual history. It contends that inferentialism clarifies, legitimizes, and informs intellectual historical practice, and it concludes with a consideration of the challenges faced by inferentialist intellectual history, together with an argument for the broader implications of Brandom's work.     

THE CONTEST OVER CONTEXT IN INTELLECTUAL HISTORY

Recent articles critical of the use of context in contextual intellectual history have identified contextual method with the post‐1960s work of the “Cambridge School,” which is regarded as being grounded in a flawed theory of textual interpretation. Focusing on German cultural and political history, this article shows that a contextual historiography was already fully developed in seventeenth‐century ecclesiastical history, and a parallel version of this approach had developed in the field of constitutional history. The modern critique of context emerged only with the appearance of dialectical philosophical history in the first decades of the nineteenth century. The article argues that rather than representing a scholarly engagement with contextual historiography, the central plank of the dialectical critique of contextualism—the notion that contextual explication of thought is insufficient because context itself has transcendental conditions—is actually a cultural‐political attack on it launched on behalf of a hostile and incommensurable academic culture.     

批判与革新：南粤史家张荫麟历史哲学管窥

张荫麟是中国近代学术史上著名的史学家,他在历史哲学领域颇有建树,他批评目的史观、循环史观、进步史观、辩证法史观、演化史观等传统历史哲学观点,试图建立一套新的、完善的历史哲学体系,这是中国近代历史理论建设的重大创举。发掘与总结张荫麟在历史哲学研究方面的成就,不仅有利于考察20世纪前半期中国历史理论的演变,而且对于继承先哲学术遗产、创新史学理论学科发展亦大有裨益。     

The history of method and theory in the study of prehistoric puebloan pottery style in the American Southwest

The history of Americanist archaeology can be profitably approached through an examination of ceramic design studies in the puebloan region of the American Southwest. An intellectual tradition is represented throughout these studies, grounded in the assumption that ceramic design variation can be reflected, among other things, in prehistoric social groupings. Within this tradition, a number of differences in method, theory, and application can be distinguished, including (1) the classificatory systems employed, (2) the spatial and temporal scales at which ceramic design variation was studied, and (3) the potential functional role of stylistic attributes on pottery. The debates, both intellectual and social, surrounding the development of method and theory in the New Archaeology are clarified by this historical review, as are the transitions to Culture History and from the New Archaeology in the American Southwest.     

Visual and aural intellectual histories: an introduction

ABSTRACT

If the subject matter of intellectual history is the study of past thoughts, the intellectual history of the visual arts and music may be characterised as the study of past thoughts as they were expressed visually and aurally. Yet this is not always how an intellectual history of art and music has been practiced. More attention is often paid to verbal texts about art or music, rather than to the visual or the aural per se. If we accept that ideas can have visual and aural, as much as verbal form, then the histories of art and music are significant repositories of thoughts of individuals and networks of individuals (creative artists, patrons, institutions) within a given culture and period. But the ways in which those thoughts are articulated as aural or visual “texts”, and the ways in which they can be accessed by those who seek to understand them, will be specific to each art form, and represent a distinctive kind of intellectual activity in each field.     

Tang-Song or Song-Ming: The Significance of a Perspective Shift in Chinese Cultural and Intellectual History

Discussions on the contrast between the Tang and Song dynasties are common in Chinese cultural and intellectual history. Will it make more sense if the continuity between Song and Ming are emphasized instead? This shift in research perspective will have multiple effects. Instead of paying exclusive attention to the elites and classics, we will focus on common knowledge, thoughts, and beliefs. As a result of this shift in the core of our research interests, the process by which ideas and cultural novelties are institutionalized, popularized, and “conventionalized” will become an important focus of historical research. Shifting our concern from the “original thinking“ of the Tang and Song to the “compromise thinking“ of the Song and Ming will cause an increase in the kinds of documents about cultural and intellectual history. Such changes in periodization and research perspective can stimulate fundamental changes in the study of Chinese cultural and intellectual history.     

Gendered spheres: theorizing space in the English printing house

The English printing house was initially conceived, legally, as a printing house, with public work taking place in a private setting. This private space emphasised the traditional hierarchies of political and legal order: Women’s work that took place within the printing house thus fell into the traditional role of household labours. This erasure of labour is one that foregrounds the erasure of women’s writing from history; women who worked in essence as publishers, as printers and booksellers, are very clearly present in the historical records but invisible in our narratives of book history. How did this erasure happen, and why is their presence, and work, overlooked? If we consider the language of space in theory and reread Moxon’s Mechanickal Exercises closely, we see the ways in which the ideas of space itself can be implicitly gendered, and how this might shape our idea of the printing house.     

WHAT TYPE OF HISTORIAN? CONCEPTUAL HISTORY AND THE HISTORY OF CONCEPTS: A COMPLEX LEGACY AND A RECENT CONTRIBUTION

Javier Fernández Sebastián's edited collections of essays, Political Concepts and Time, is both a critical homage to the monumental work of Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006) and an important contribution to the methodology of history‐writing. Centered on the polysemic nature of concepts, which are read as “‘vehicles for thought’” studied in their pragmatic and communicative applications in society, Political Concepts and Time provides a stimulating analysis of the role, weight, and future of conceptual history. Its thirteen essays offer an account of problems, questions, and debates on the interplay of words and concepts, meaning and historical change, context and discourse. They endeavor to clarify the complicated and perennially unresolved relationship between theory and practice. In order to do so, Fernández Sebastián has assembled a scholarly composite and broadly international group of specialists from a variety of disciplines and research fields. With the intellectual legacy of Koselleck's Begriffsgeschichte looming large, this book rethinks the ways in which not just historians but also social scientists and philosophers study the past as the expression of contingent, ever‐changing, and revocable semantic units shaping the culturally plural worlds we inhabit. Informed by the idea that history is porous, Political Concepts and Time also deals with the perhaps obvious but no less challenging issue of our approach to time as everyday experience and through its representation(s). Together with exploring the volume's specific historical topics, this essay will highlight some of its limitations and, above all, will respond to its criticism of intellectual history. The following pages will thus argue the case for the latter methodological perspective by reflecting on the type of historian it delineates. Claiming that in their investigation of past meanings intellectual historians make use of creative imagination, the essay will suggest that this model of history‐writing leads to a better understanding of multiple sources and that it might ultimately help overcome some of the inconsistencies and often simplistic divisions between various branches of the historiographical tree. In particular, a small proposal to reconcile conceptual and intellectual history will be advanced.     

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.