Parliament,the Tories and Frederick,Prince of Wales*

The alliance between the tories and Frederick, Prince of Wales has usually appeared at best a passing interlude of opportunism in eighteenth‐century politics, dismissed alike by scholars upholding ‘jacobite’ or ‘Hanoverian’ constructions of the party's identity. This article offers a re‐examination of the relationship, assessing tory actions at Westminster against the larger hinterland of party literature and journalism. It argues that, especially after 1747, the association fronted a much more serious enterprise than is conventionally assumed, highlighting the continued political and ideological independence of the party into the 1750s and shaping the subsequent evolution of its identity. Intellectually, Frederick's image as a ‘Patriot King’ was driven by radical manifestos originating within the jacobite diaspora in Paris. Inside Westminster, his patronage changed the balance of power, bringing the tories to a point of primacy hitherto unmatched over the larger opposition. For four years, the promise of the prince of Wales provided the glue to hold the tory party together; his death threatened to unleash a process of fragmentation. The long‐term legacy of the alliance informed the direction of those who remained tories into the following decade, determining the section of the party that would gain the ascendancy within the reign of George III. By showing how a member of the ruling dynasty could be recast in a favourable and highly partisan political complexion, the pact with Frederick represented a decisive stage in the reinvention of English toryism, and its movement from mid‐century opposition towards rebirth as the loyalist champions of the house of Hanover.     

“社会国家”思想、公众舆论和政治家俾斯麦——近代德国社会保障制度的缘起

德国不是欧洲第一个实现工业化的国家,但却是第一个颁布社会立法的国家."社会国家"的思想在德国具有深厚传统.从19世纪下半叶开始,人们对社会公正与正义投入了极大关注."讲坛社会主义"、教会改革派、各种类型的工会组织,甚至工业企业家都从不同角度对社会问题提出了解决方案."国家救助"形成了强大的社会舆论,提上了政府工作日程.作为德国社会国家的奠基人,俾斯麦解决社会问题的思路影响巨大.德国的社会立法最终以社会保险的形式确立下来.     

突厥王冠与吐蕃王冠

一、突厥王冠的考古发现 2001年8月,一支由土耳其和蒙古考古学家组成的联合考察队在位于今蒙古国首府乌兰巴托以西45公里的鄂尔浑河畔突厥第二汗国毗伽可汗陵园内,发掘出土了数以千计的金银珠宝,被学术界称之为"毗伽可汗宝藏"(Treasure of Blige Khagan).这一发现后来由我国考古学家林梅村较为详尽的介绍给国内,从而也引起了国内学术界的广泛关注①.在这批宝藏当中,有一顶王冠十分华贵醒目,林梅村从蒙古国立历史博物馆编的<毗伽可汗宝藏说明>一书中转载了这顶王冠的照片②,使我们可以观察到它的一些细部特征:这顶王冠为一顶金冠,王冠冠沿为一长条形的带状金边,在这条金边的上下两条边缘上钻出若干小孔,可用来连缀其它金片,在这条金边的正中和左右两方各錾出一个大孔,可能原系用来镶嵌宝石之用.     

殷墟H3卜辞主人“子”为太子再论证

殷墟花东H3卜辞主人“子”身份的确定是H3卜辞研究的难点,目前有9家之言,其中,“子”为沃甲之后或武丁太子——孝己的观点影响最大。本文从马克思关于人的社会属性的观点出发,以“子”活动事项为依据,结合先秦文献中有关太子职责的记载,对“子”的身份为太子做进一步论证。     

National Frontiers,Great World Frontiers,and the Shadow of Frederick Jackson Turner

WILLIAM H. MCNEILL. The Great Frontier: Freedom and Hierarchy in Modern Times. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1983. Pp. 79. $13.95 (US).     

Monuments, Memory and Marginalisation in Adelaide's Prince Henry Gardens

Social and cultural dominance is (re)produced in the landscape by the exclusion or marginalisation of subordinate and minority groups. This paper illustrates the long-standing and ongoing exclusion of representations of indigeneity in and around Prince Henry Gardens, part of one of the most significant cultural and memorial sites in South Australia. Prince Henry Gardens is home to a large number of monuments and memorials that commemorate almost solely non-indigenous people and events. This is a selective and deliberate landscape of the dominant culture. It confirms a legacy of indigenous dispossession and is symbolic of ongoing marginalisation. While there have been recent compensatory initiatives by state and city agencies to create landscapes of reconciliation through symbolic gestures such as renaming parkland areas, these are argued to be contentious. They associate indigeneity with the city's margins, with violent places and public drunkenness, and perpetuate problematic associations between ‘real’ indigeneity and nature. The paper concludes with some ideas for new memorial landscapes intended to help construct a postcolonial Australian city.     

William Stubbs,Parliament and the Medieval English Constitution

The name of William Stubbs will forever be associated with the birth of modern scholarship on the late medieval English parliament. At the core of his Constitutional History, a three‐volume work published in the 1870s, is a brilliant synthesis of the development of the early parliament. Since its publication, however, Stubbs's work has generated varied reactions, as scholars have positioned themselves at different points on a sliding scale of praise through to criticism; that is, between praising the Constitutional History for its depth of scholarship and pioneering methodologies, on the one hand, to criticising the work for its present‐minded approach and whiggish agenda, on the other. The aim of this discussion is to strike a balance between these two extremes. While it acknowledges the undoubted flaws of Stubbs's narrative, it also argues for a more nuanced and holistic approach to his work. It suggests that the taint of whiggism has for too long acted as a barrier to a true appreciation of the scholarly merit of the work, merit that extends beyond simply acknowledging its ambition, originality and legacy. The discussion considers some key areas of parliamentary development between c.1290 and c.1406 and notes the continued synergies that exist between what Stubbs wrote 140 years ago and current interpretations and understandings.     

Crown,communication and the colonial post: Stamps,the monarchy and the British empire

This article investigates some of the possibilities for imperial history of using philatelic evidence. It explores the ways in which the British empire as a working world system was underpinned by the Imperial Penny Postage and the production and use of postage stamps bearing the images of successive British monarchs and other British imperial iconography. With particular emphasis on the reign of George V, who took an especially close interest in philatelic matters, it charts and discusses some of the ways in which British, dominion, Indian and colonial postage stamp issues (including their commissioning, design and public reception) reflected political and aesthetic judgments at home and overseas, and expressed sometimes unexpected notions of appropriate imperial, dominion and colonial imagery. It provides some cultural evidence supporting the contention that the apogee of the British imperial system may have occurred sometime in the middle years of the twentieth century.