试论年鉴条目标题的设立原则

年鉴条目标题的设立原则为完整原则、主题原则、动态原则、确定原则和亮点原则,并对这5个原则作了简单论述。     

继往开来,求实创新,做好江河水利志编修工作

2001～2006年底,水利部成立江河水利志工作指导委员会并组织指导完成了首轮江河水利志的修编工作。文章针对首轮江河水利志编修工作的评价与问题进行探讨,分析新时期的形势和任务,提出做好江河水利志续修续编工作的要求。     

Against War! Regional Identity Across a National Border in Late Medieval and Early Modern Scandinavia

During every war between Denmark and Sweden from at least 1505 to 1676 popular peace treaties were concluded by common men on both sides of the national border. These treaties were negotiated in contrast to the aggressive policy of the political leaders and to the nationalistic discourse of the elite. The aim of this article is to use archaeology to give an economic, social, and mental background to these treaties, and to the regional identity across the border that they presuppose. Above all a specific building tradition seems to have given the peasants a mental affinity across the border.     

Revue d’histoire des sciences humaines

Vie Scientifique

Revue d’histoire des sciences humaines     

Singulières archives

Archives, although fundamental to historical research, are rarely appreciated in terms of their place in epistemology. The concept of «archive»-usually given in the singular-has, however, been treated by several philosophers, including most recently Paul Ric?ur. This paper focuses on Ric?ur's latest work,La Mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli, to analyse Ric?ur's use of the term «archive» and its resonances with the work of Michel Foucault and Michel de Certeau. It investigates, as well, how the concept of archive, closely linked to that of witnessing or testimony, presents certain difficulties from the vantage point of historical epistemology, and proposes another use of the term, one involving greater attention to the historicity and materiality of the «archive» in the interests of a more textual and hermeneutic interpretation.     

Views and Commentaries: Composed Versus Simple Pasts: About Archaeologists and Their Partners

Partnership is an equitable exchange of knowledge. In fact, the very nature and indisputability of imported and taught knowledge—the scientific one and here archaeological—question the nature of the traditional and ordinary knowledge of peoples concerned. These two kinds of knowledge differ in the nature of the facts recognized by each of them: scientific facts or tacit common knowledge facts built differently, and in the number and strength of the external allies they succeed in mobilizing. Even if they remain translatable one into the other at a certain cost, they are engaged in a race. The result seems lethal for traditional knowledge unless powerful nonscientific allies, opposed to this leveling standardization, get involved with researchers aware of the stake for the South but also for the North, committed for some centuries to a rationalization supported by science, its technics, and the socioeconomic powers able to fund them.Le partenariat est un échange équitable de savoirs. En réalité, la nature et l'indiscutabilité du savoir importé et inculqué—le savoir scientifique et ici archéologique—met en cause la nature du savoir ordinaire et traditionnel des peuples concernés. Ces deux formes de savoirs diffèrent par la nature des faits reconnus par chacun d'eux: faits scientifiques ou faits du savoir observationnel ordinaire, construits différemment, et par le nombre et la force des alliés extérieurs qu'ils réussissent à se donner. S'ils sont traduisibles l'un dans l'autre à un certaincoût, une course est néanmoins engagée entre eux. L'issue en semble fatale aux savoirs traditionnels à moins que des alliés puissants non-scientifiques, opposés à ce nivellement uniformisateur, s'engagent à leurs côtés avec l'appui des chercheurs conscients d'un enjeu qui concerne certes le Sud, mais aussi le Nord engagé depuis quelques siècles dans une rationalisation appuyée sur la science, ses techniques et les puissances socio-économiques capables de les financer.