比较史学的理论方法和实践

19世纪后半叶以来形成的比较史学流派至今仍方兴未艾。我国学术界在 2 0世纪 80年代曾掀起比较文化研究的热潮 ,这种 (中西 )文化的比较研究是我国历史学界把我国现代化进程与世界上其他国家现代化历史相联系而产生的。无论是现代化的比较研究还是文化的比较研究 ,两者都属于世     

Rethinking the History and Theory of Jus Publicum Universal: The Formation of China as a "Semi-Civilized" Legal Subject

Much of the existing scholarship on the universalization of nineteenth-century international law has framed it in terms of the imperial West's domination of non-Western societies.This article complicates and qualifies this conventional state-centric narrative by investigating the juridical,capitalist production of China as a "semi-civilized" international legal subject.It examines the foundational modem Sino-British/Westem commercial and extraterritorial treaties,as well as the treatises of a new professional class of British international lawyers-James Lorimer (1818-90),John Westlake (1828-1913),William Edward Hall (1835-94),T.E.Holland (1835-1926),Thomas Lawrence (1849-1920),and Lassa Oppenheim (1849-1920).The juridical production of China as a "semi-civilized" legal subject throws into relief the dual capitalist nature and significance of the universalization of nineteenth-century international law.On the one hand,this "civilized" legal discourse underwrote a novel liberal conception of a universal international law (jus publicum universal) within which China was formally included as a quasi-legal subject.On the other hand,it also underwrote a particularistic,Euro-centric international law,which excluded China from its global domain and denied it basic sovereign fights.In this way also,"civilized" international law justified both formal equality in Europeannon-European treaty relations,as well as the real substantive inequality of these international exchanges of rights and obligations.Building on the critical theoretical work of Evgeny Pashukanis (1891-1937),this article argues that a non-orthodox Marxist social theory of legal forms is best suited to explain the abstract,liberal universalism of nineteenth-century "civilized" international law and the contradictory forms of legal and jurisprudential discourse it made available and rendered normatively meaningful to international law practitioners.Through this Marxist theory,moreover,I shall relate said contradictory discourse to modern commodity exchange practices.     

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     

论党组织中权力与权利的关系

政党组织中权力与权利不同于一般意义上的权力与权利,因此＂权力本位论＂虽不足取,但也不能将＂权利本位论＂简单地套用于政党组织。不过,为了有效制约党组织中的权力,防止权力的异化和滥用,必须保持权力与权利的基本平衡。为此,中国共产党自成立以来,不断调整权力与权利的关系,但由于观念和制度等方面的原因,目前仍存在着一些不平衡,且造成了多方面的负面影响,因此必须解放思想,创新制度,逐步降低权力重心,以不断优化党内权力结构。     

我国个体和私营经济法律地位的历史演变

党和国家对个体私营经济法律地位的认识及保护,有一个不断发展并逐渐深化的过程。在经历了1949～1954年有限发展、1956～1978年几乎绝迹的时期后,自改革开放以来,我国经济体制发生了很大变化,个体和私营经济相应地也迎来了1978～1992年大力发展的时期和1992～2003年蓬勃发展的时期,其法律地位也发生了巨大的变化。     

Toward a Received History of the Holocaust

In this article, I examine both the problem of so-called postmodern history as it relates to the Holocaust and suggest the ways that Saul Friedlander's recent work successfully mediates between the somewhat overly polemicized positions of “relativist” and “positivist” history. In this context, I find that in his search for an adequately self-reflexive historical narrative for the Holocaust, Hayden White's proposed notion of “middle-voicedness” may recommend itself more as a process for eyewitness writers than as a style for historians after the fact. From here, I look at the ways Saul Friedlander's reflections on the historian's voice not only mediate between White's notions of the ironic mode and middle-voicedness, but also suggest the basis for an uncanny history in its own right: an anti-redemptory narrative that works through, yet never actually bridges, the gap between a survivor's “deep memory” and historical narrative. For finally, it may be the very idea of “deep memory” and its incompatibility to narrative that constitutes one of the central challenges to Holocaust historiography. What can be done with what Friedlander has termed “deep memory” of the survivor, that which remains essentially unrepresentable? Is it possible to write a history that includes some oblique reference to such deep memory, but which leaves it essentially intact, untouched and thereby deep? In this section, I suggest, after Patrick Hutton, that “What is at issue here is not how history can recover memory, but, rather, what memory will bequeath to history.” That is, what shall we do with the living memory of survivors? How will it enter (or not enter) the historical record? Or to paraphrase Hutton again, “How will the past be remembered as it passes from living memory to history?” Will it always be regarded as so overly laden with pathos as to make it unreliable as documentary evidence? Or is there a place for the understanding of the witness, as subjective and skewed as it may be, for our larger historical understanding of events? In partial answer to these questions, I attempt to extend Friedlander's insights toward a narrow kind of history-telling I call “received history”—a double-stranded narrative that tells a survivor-historian's story and my own relationship to it. Such a narrative would chart not just the life of the survivor-historian itself but also the measurable effect of the tellings—both his telling and mine—on my own life's story. Together, they would compose a received history of the Holocaust and its afterlife in the author's mind—my “vicarious past.”     

区域史研究理论与近代东北区域史研究

从上世纪80年代以来,随着地方史研究的复兴,区域性历史研究也日益繁荣,并逐渐成为中国近代史学研究的一个新取向.在这种形势下,近代东北史的研究也逐渐突破了传统的地方史研究模式,兴起了一股区域史研究的浪潮.然而,在近代东北区域史研究中也存在着概念混淆、理论研究不足、研究方法单一等问题,只有解决好这些关键性的问题,才能更好地推动近代东北区域史研究工作向纵深方向发展.     

白璧德的文化史研究理论及其在中国的实践

作为新人文主义的大师,美国学者白璧德认为文化史发展的动力是具有“判别”功能的“想象”,他反对人们只是注重物欲,忽略精神的欲求,主张有节制的实现人的欲望;文化史研究的任务是在授予人们丰富知识的同时,培养人们的爱心,培养人们追求真善美的情怀;文化史研究的方法就是批评与实证。白璧德的文化史观经过吴宓、梅光迪影响了中国的学衡派。柳诒徵、陈登原在各自所著的《中国文化史》中,既注重精神、思想和伦理的作用,又注重研究并揭示民族文化精华和特性,同时采用批评与实证的方法,回应了新人文主义的思想,实践了白璧德的文化史研究理论。     

Trajectories for Greening in China: Theory and Practice

This edited volume argues that China's development poses the greatest ever environmental challenge for the modern world in terms of speed, size and scarcity. The volume is organized around the greening of the Chinese state and society: can the inclusion of sustainable development principles into governance, management and daily practices by social actors lead to sustainable development per se? This introduction sketches the different scholarly camps around greening and sustainable development, ranging from sceptical to radical environmentalism. The contributions demonstrate that China is showing clear signs of greening as new institutions and regulations are created, environmental awareness increases and green technologies are implemented. However, the question remains whether this is sufficient to effectuate long‐term sustainable development. The key factors here are the sheer speed of China's economic growth, the size of its population, and the relative scarcity of its natural and mineral resources. Chinese development presents compelling reasons for rethinking the viability of greening. It is necessary to move beyond both alarmist visions of an environmental doomsday, and optimistic notions that incremental changes in technology, institutions and lifestyles are sufficient for sustainability. It might be more fruitful — and not only for China — to consider ‘precautionary’ rather than ‘absolute’ limits to growth.     

庞卓恒先生的历史比较研究理论和实践

庞卓恒先生是我国著名历史学家,也是我国历史比较研究领域的代表人物之一。自20世纪80年代以来,他在历史比较研究理论与实践两方面进行了深入的探索,发表了大量的著述。历史比较研究的历史观与方法论、中西封建社会比较研究的理论与实践和中西历史文化比较研究的理论与实践,是他在历史比较研究领域重点探讨的几个方面。他的论著在二十多年来我国历史比较研究的发展历程中产生了广泛的影响。     

中国社会科学院召开第四届史学理论研讨会

2004年10月23日至25日,中国社会科学院历史研究所、近代史研究所、世界历史研究所、当代中国研究所、考古研究所、边疆史地中心、《历史研究》杂志社和地方志办公室,在广东省珠海市召开了第四届史学理论研讨会。与会者十分关注近年历史研究出现的新变化、在新特点、新问题,并从各自的研究领域出发,进行了内容广泛的交流,