THE VERTIGO OF HISTORICAL ANALYSES IN A GLOBALIZING WORLD

In this anthology, Joan Scott reconfigures her understanding of feminist history and thus contributes to a long overdue theoretical discussion on how we can write feminist history in a globalizing world. She traces both the history of gender history and the history of feminist movements. Scott's main source of inspiration is the French version of psychoanalysis following Lacan. In a further development of her pioneering 1986 article, “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis,” she points out that gender is neither a mere social construction nor a somehow biological referent (such as “sex”). Integrating the constructive criticism of her approach elaborated prominently by Judith Butler during the 1990s, Scott argues instead that gender is a historically and culturally specific attempt to resolve the dilemma of sexual difference. Sexual difference, for its part, is also far from referring simply to physically different male/female bodies. Sexual difference is, for Scott, a permanent quandary for modern subjects, a puzzle to which every society or culture finds specific answers. My reading of her book concentrates on two main questions that run like a thread through her considerations: First, how can we bridge the gap between a subject and a group? Second, how can we overcome binary oppositions and/or fixed categories and entities—a challenge that becomes even more important every day in a rapidly globalizing world. I broadly discuss the benefits and shortcomings of the pivotal role Scott ascribes to fantasy. Although the concept of fantasy is powerful and striking, particularly with reference to the concepts of “imagined communities” and “invented traditions,” coined by Eric Hobsbawm and Benedict Anderson, I find the Lacanian tone to be less convincing.     

论20世纪20年代的中国近代史研究

20年代的中国近代史研究呈现出一种畸形的发展状况。近代史研究不被时人看重,但却有不少近代史著述出版。到1928年,通过对近代史史料的整理工作,由斯而发,罗家伦明确提出了要科学地研究中国近代史,开启了近代史研究的新局面;从史学史的角度对这些近代史著述的特点作出总结,知人论世,可以窥见20年代近代史研究的状况。     

古文字考释中使用通假方法的历史回顾--从晚清至二十世纪中叶以前起

古字考释中常常要遇到通假现象．本从学术史的角度出发,追溯古字考释中使用的通假方法．这种方法的使用有其产生的相关学术背景,经历了从不自觉的实践到理论的提出,至反过来用理论指导实践这一过程．     

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.     

The coming of age of the history of archaeology

Publications and organizational developments relating to the history of archaeology from 1989 until June 1993 are critically examined. Attention is paid to the changing motivations for producing such publications, their shifting intellectual orientation, controversies, especially as they relate to internal vs external approaches and the epistemological status of explanations, problems of verification, and the status of these studies as a subfield within archaeology.     

试析上古时期的历史记忆与历史记载

上古时期口耳相传的历史记忆是后世历史记载的源头.在相关的历史记载中还可以看到其某些影子.出现于早期历史记忆中的"人"多为"英雄"或"圣人",而非普通的人.逐渐剥落掉神的身影,而呈现出真正的"人"面貌,已经是野蛮与文明之际的事情.但是即使在这个时期,人--神之间仍然有着千丝万缕的联系.历史记忆是古代文明出现上升的阶梯.     

唐代监修国史制度考

唐代监修国史初设于贞观三年 ( 62 9) ,之后遂形成定制 ,直至唐亡。唐代监修国史的职责大体包括以下内容 :奉诏引进史馆修撰人员负责史书编修工作 ;裁断疑难 ,审正史稿。唐代监修国史制度在漫长的岁月中曾经历过一些变化。太宗贞观时期实行的是一相监修制 ,终太宗之世 ,担任监修国史的只有房玄龄一人。高宗、武则天、中宗、睿宗及玄宗开元前期 ,实行的基本上是多相监修制。自玄宗开元后期起以迄唐亡 ,实行的又是一相监修制。唐代监修国史者绝大多数都是宰相 ,但偶尔也有其他人员充任。玄宗以前 ,监修国史之称号恰如其名 ,玄宗至德宗时 ,改称“修国史” ,德宗之后又恢复旧称。     

The Italian resistance between history and memory

Abstract

Since the 1960s the Resistance has held pride of place in public ceremonial, political debate and to a point also in historcial writing in Italy. The emphasis on its popular and national character transformed the Resistance into the struggle of the whole country to rid Italy of the German invaders and the small number of Italian fascists who remained their allies, but in ways that took no account of the complexity of people's reactions and the different ways in which Italians experienced the years immediately after the fall of fascism. In the last decade, however, numerous accounts have been published that contradict the images of the Resistance that for 30 years have constituted the ‘official’ memory of the Italian Republic. As a result, the Resistance offers a classic example of the ‘public use of history’, in which historical interpretation has served primarily to justify party political, instutitional and idelogical ends. It is now clear, however, that the supposed unity against fascism was more the result of agreement that there were limits beyond which political differences could not be pressed rather than of a deeper political unity that might have provided the basis for the political and institutional reform of the Italian Republic. The contrasting memories and interpretations of that period that have recently re-emerged for the same reason make it more difficult to project a new Italian democracy for the future.     

关于《宋史》中的若干问题

本文主要是对中华书局校点本《宋史》中的一些史实进行考辨,同时对《宋史》中的个别标点错误予以纠正。《宋史》是记录宋代史事的最权威资料,但山于其编纂仓促,流传时间亦久,难免有些失实之处。本文作者长期研究宋代文献,其作此文的目的,也是为使《宋史》中的某些讹误得以廓清。     

陈独秀与中国近代史研究

陈独秀是中国早期的马克思主义者,他在五四时期对鸦片战争以来的中国近代史作了比较系统的研究,与同时期的李大钊一样是中国近代史研究的开创者.陈独秀以唯物史观为指导,从西方列强入侵中国和中国社会自身的变化来分析近代中国的社会性质,认为近代中国的生产方式发生变动,政治上成为"半殖民地",进而提出民主革命是近代中国社会的历史主题,反帝反封建是民主革命的基本任务.陈独秀还以"革命史"观看待近代中国的重大历史事件,对义和团运动、戊戌维新、辛亥革命、五四运动等历史事件在中国民主革命的历史地位进行了比较细致的研究,深化了对近代中国历史的认识.从中国近代史研究的近百年历程看,陈独秀对中国近代史的研究为近代史研究"革命史范式"的建立做了基础性的工作,是近代史研究"革命史范式"的重要开创者.     

History of Psychology in China: Contributions,Challenges, and Future

The history of psychology makes three major contributions:(1) promoting the development of psychology in China;(2) establishing the history of Chinese psychology as an academic discipline;(3) playing an important role in training the next generation of Chinese psychologists.This effort faces numerous challenges,including the reduction in undergraduate teaching hours,declining enrolments at the postgraduate level,limited innovation in research,and a lack of financial support.These challenges stem largely from changes in the Chinese academic assessing system,the greater weight placed on experimental psychology,and a fewer opportunities for researchers.To address these concerns the history of psychology in China should make the history of Chinese psychology its research priority,while also presenting its findings to the public,and developing innovative teaching and research approaches.     

The past 20 years of modern Chinese social history

Modern Chinese social history has played an important role in the general revival of Chinese social history. This essay will provide an overview of the major achievements of past 20 years with particular emphasis upon the field of modern social history, the growth of regional social history, and the new research that draws upon field studies. It will also consider the recent debates on “re‐examining political history” and provide an introduction to new works in medical history and environmental/ecological history.     

近30年来中国社会史研究的方法论意义

在充分了解和理解已有社会史研究成果的基础上,本文意欲探讨近30年来中国社会史研究业已展示出来的方法论意义.其一,不论其最初是以"历史学中的一个分支学科"还是"范式"意义的面貌出现,社会史在今天已然承载了推进旧史学研究方法向新史学方向转变的历史重任.其二,伴随着新旧"范式"的转换,社会史对传统政治史主题令人耳目一新的研究,揭示了研究视角转换背后蕴含的方法论意义.其三,随着研究视角转换和研究视野扩大,社会史在拓展史料范围的基础上生发出解读不同史料的不同方法,如果把它放在"历史即史料学"的脉络下看,其方法论意义尤为深刻.     

30年来的中国近代思想文化史研究

30年来的中国近代思想史研究,依据研究重心的变化可以分为三个阶段:一是1978年到80年代末,研究重点集中于思想家个案及政治思想史方面;二是80年代末到90年代末,研究重心逐渐转变为以社会思潮史及思想家个案为主;三是90年代末以来,研究重心集中于社会思潮史和学术思想史领域.正是在研究重心的逐渐转移过程之中,近代思想史研究的广度不断拓宽,研究深度亦渐次深化.改革开放之后中国学术界最引人注目的现象之一,是中国文化史研究的复兴;90年代以后中国文化史发展的新趋势,是社会文化史研究的勃然兴起.长期无人问津或受人冷落的研究领域,如近代科技文化、民间宗教、民间意识与观念、文化心态、公共空间领域、新词语与观念变迁等,受到学术界的广泛关注并出现了许多研究成果.近代社会文化史正在成为史学新观念和新方法的一个重要生长点.     

文献发掘与学术史的研究问题--兼谈王宁先生有关学术史研究的一些看法

学术史的研究要注重献发掘,王宁先生对此有深入的思考：要发掘第一手献资料;要注重断代史的研究;注意把握学术史的发展脉络;客观评价学术史人物。     

Buddhist temples and ancestral halls: The reconstruction of native official rituals in western Yunnan

Abstract

In the process of abolishing the native officialdoms of southwest China, the Ming court justified its actions by citing violations of ethical and ritual principles. During the Zhengtong 正統 period, offices of native officials in Heqing 鶴慶 were abolished and replaced with an office for centrally appointed imperial officials. These imperial officials turned Buddhist temples into Confucian schools and attacked local beliefs regarding living Buddhas. At the same time, local Confucian scholars advocated orthodox ritual in the name of doing away with improper ritual practice. In response, nearby native officials began cautiously handling political issues, and sought to legitimize the foundations for their status by conducting rituals in the classical Confucian tradition. The author examines the history of Lijiang 麗江 and Menghua 蒙化 Prefectures in Yunnan 雲南 and discusses how their native officials used the statuses of ancient nobles as they sought to establish Confucian rituals and temples corresponding to their status within the Ming bureaucracy. Several strategies are identified, including (a) building Buddhist temples, ancestral halls, and official shrines; (b) transforming mythical figures into protective deities by creating mountain and river rituals that conformed to ritual orthodoxy; and (c) establishing official genealogies and using textual methods to incorporate clan myths and legendary lineages into orthodox historical narratives, thereby strengthening the superiority of border native official lineages. By analyzing a series of actions of native officials in this process, the author explores the cultural strategies adopted by native officials to safeguard their prestige and local interests.     

Writing about a different kind of medical history: a critical review of Zaizao bingren by Yang Nianqun

After the implementation of China's Reform Policy and the dissolution of the Cold War system, the conditions in Japan for conducting scholarly research on China's modern history changed drastically. We can categorize Japanese research on China's modern history since the 1980s into two components: the relativization of the Chinese Revolution and a rediscovery of the uniqueness of Chinese society. Some historians, however, continue to point out that an alternative vision of history that integrates detailed research results already achieved within individual areas of history has not yet replaced the conventional revolution‐based paradigm. It is indisputable, as they emphasize, that breaking away from the so‐called revolution‐based viewpoint of history in Japan has created diverse visions of history and has contributed to a more substantial body of work pertaining to China's modern history. The question of what kind of new vision we should search for, however, remains unanswered. Recent overviews of modern Chinese history in Japan were expected to answer this question. This paper is intended as a general review of recent trends and expected developments in Japanese research on China's modern history by introducing the most important overviews written by Japanese scholars. We are not concerned here with individual case study research.     

Predicament and responses: Discussions of history education in early modern China

ABSTRACT

Since the early modern era, following the abolishment of the imperial civil service exam and the rise of modern schools, the subject of history was included in education at all levels, from primary to tertiary. However, in comparison with traditional society, the degree of attention devoted to historical knowledge has in fact declined rather than improved. In the 1920s, many contemporaries vocally criticized and pondered the low level of historical knowledge among primary and secondary school students, and occasionally voiced dissatisfaction with history education at the university level as well. Critics primarily focused their discussions on the insufficient attention for history classes, imperfect standards formulated for history classes, poor history teaching materials, and lack of qualified, specialized teachers, forming a universal consensus among contemporaries on the failure of history education. However, the widespread opprobrium attached to history education was closely tied to two facts: first, the historians of early modern China had as yet failed to compile a general history of China acceptable to the majority, greatly disappointing many educators; second, historical resources failed to exercise the mobilizing effect on early modern Chinese society that contemporaries had hoped for, and history thus often became the scapegoat paying the price for practical setbacks and failures in the political arena.     

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 Indian nation and selective amnesia: representing conflicts and violence in Indian history textbooks

‘Unity is always obtained by means of brutality’ wrote Ernest Renan. Following this idea, this article investigates how social conflicts and violence are included or muted in national history. This is done by comparing the successive series of history textbooks used in India in the postindependence period. The historical narratives contained in the textbooks were influenced by different conceptions of the Indian nation, and these variations allow us to observe and better understand what is remembered or forgotten in the national narrative. We will see that conflicts and violence are referred to when they involve the nation against its ‘other’ but depictions of conflicts within the nation as it is imagined are avoided. Thus, certain violent episodes of the past find a place in the national historical narrative, yet violence in itself is never described.