论通史

在中国 ,“通史”是一个常用且易解的词。中国学者写的关于中国史、世界史的书常题名为“中国通史”、“世界通史”。而英国人写关于世界史或英国史的书就叫“世界史”或“英国史” ,其中并无一个“通”字。西方语言里有好几个看来与“通史”相近的词 ,但其真实含义并非“通史”。西方的普世史传统来自古希腊 ,据柯林武德分析 ,这种传统与“实质主义”思想有关。中国的通史传统来自先秦诸子的富有历史倾向的思想 ,这种思想恰好是反实质主义的。中国的“通史”精神就在于通古今之变     

以形象为主导的区域旅游产品体系开发研究——以重庆市铜梁县特色旅游项目策划为例

在区域旅游产品体系的开发过程中旅游形象作为旅游目的地的识别要素,对旅游形象本身的策划研究至关重要,然而旅游形象更多的是要通过区域旅游产品体现出来,所以在旅游形象与旅游产品之间存在内在联系。本文以铜梁县旅游产品开发为例,提出旅游产品开发的关键环节有两个方面:围绕形象的旅游景区主题策划及围绕主题的特色旅游项目设计,并对以形象为主导的区域旅游产品体系开发程序和方法进行了研究,建立了相关模式。     

苏北地区可持续发展中的资源环境问题研究

通过苏北与苏南的对比分析、资源环境现状与开发利用潜力评价、以及资源环境与发展关系的定量分析评价,表明苏北资源有较大优势,开发利用潜力大,具有对区域发展的较强支撑能力;资源利用效率不高、承载能力下降过快,环境负荷过重,问题较多,已构成对区域可持续发展的约束与限制;区域发展中的经济增长速度不快,资源-环境-经济大系统不够协调。提出了资源环境系统调控与支撑能力建设的科学对策。     

The historical narrative of the Wanli Korean campaign in the Qing Official Ming History

Abstract

The Ming History (明史 Mingshi) by Qing official historians took more than 90 years to complete, and Wan Sitong's 萬斯同 Draft Ming History (明史稿 Mingshi gao), Wang Hongxu's 王鴻緒 Draft Ming History, and the Ming History palace edition overseen by Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 were the most important histories of the Ming over its different stages of compilation. Wan Sitong gave much attention to the writing of history in the biographies from the Wanli Korea Campaign, Wang Hongxu did not give them much attention, and Zhang Tingyu repudiated and even negated them. In Zhang Tingyu's Ming History, the Annals of Shenzong (神宗本紀 Shenzong benji) set the tone of repudiating the Korea campaign. Due to their clan, the Bozhou Campaign (播州之役 Bozhou zhiyi), or the Liaodong Incident (遼東事變 Liaodong shibian), nearly none of the Ming generals from the eastern expedition to Korea were given biographies due to their participation in the Korean War. The History of the Choson (朝鮮傳 Chaoxian zhuan) gives a negative evaluation that denies or undervalues relevant people and battles. On the one hand, this was due to the influence of historical sources. Due to Yang Gao’s 楊鎬 responsibility for defeat in the Battle of Saerhu 薩 爾 滸 之 役, the compilers of the Veritable Records of Ming Shenzong (明神宗實錄 Ming Shenzong shilu) followed the account of Ding Yingtai 丁應泰 in their records and denied the accomplishments of Yang Gao and the Ming army in Korea. On the other hand, due to real political needs, as the commanders of the eastern expedition to Korea later became the military rival of the Later Jin in Liaodong, an attitude of denial had to be adopted against them to create legitimacy for the Qing dynasty. These were the two main factors that determined the way in which the Qing official Ming History wrote the history of the Wanli Korean War.     

A.F. Pollard*

A.F. Pollard is now better remembered for founding the Institute of Historical Research than he is for his scholarship. In his heyday, however, Pollard was a formidable and prolific historian, primarily of parliament and the Tudor period. Pollard has been characterised both as a modernist and as a whig historian. Rejecting romantic invocations of liberty, he extolled instead the sovereign nation state, pinpointing the 16th century as the moment when it was achieved. Pollard rejected anachronistic accounts of parliament's development: for him, the assembly had grown by accident (out of the medieval king's council), rather than by design. This adaptability had ensured parliament's longevity and would preserve it into the future. Pollard revered the English parliament all the more for its embodiment of this national good fortune. Pollard helped to professionalise the discipline of history, but his own writings could be found wanting when measured against the standards that he had advocated. Criticism of his approach and assumptions comes easily now. Yet, upon reacquaintance, historians of parliament may find enduring interest in Pollard's shrewd and extensive work.     

论《儒藏》"史部"的分类问题

《儒藏》是儒学文献的大型丛书。由于儒学自古无“藏”,因此儒学文献也还没有自己的著录体系。四川大学所承担的国家“211工程”、“985工程”以及中国孔子基金会重大项目“《儒藏》编纂”,采用“三藏二十四目”的《儒藏》分类体系,对儒学史文献进行全面的省察和系统归类,对《儒藏》“史部”文献则用“孔孟类”、“学案类”、“碑传类”、“史传类”、“年谱类”、“别传类”、“杂史类”来进行分类编纂。     

Hugh Trevor-Roper and the history of ideas

A wave of recent publication connected to Hugh Trevor-Roper offers cause to take stock of his life and legacy. He is an awkward subject because his output was so protean, but a compelling one because of his significance for the resurgence of the history of ideas in Britain after 1945. The article argues that the formative period in Trevor-Roper's life was 1945–57, a period curiously neglected hitherto. It was at this time that he pioneered a history of ideas conceived above all as the study of European liberal and humanist tradition. Analysis of the relative importance of contemporary and early modern history in his oeuvre finds that, while the experience of Hitler and the Cold War was formative, it was not decisive.Trevor-Roper was at heart an early modernist who did not abjure specialization.However, he insisted that specialized study must be accompanied by “philosophical” reflection on the workings of a constant human nature present throughout history, a type of reflection best pursued by reading classical historians such as Gibbon and Burckhardt.Yet this imperative in turn fostered purely historical research into the history of historical writing – another branch of the history of ideas.