Before Columbia: The FWP and American Oral History Research

This article compares and contrasts the approaches of the NewDeal Federal Writers' Project and the Columbia Oral HistoryProgram in an effort to reconsider the paradoxical history oforal history research in the United States and its relationshipto how many oral historians today look at their work and thehistory of their field. As it turns out, the theoretical andsocial concerns of the FWP projects are closer to current theoreticalconcerns of oral historians than the work Allan Nevins conductedin the early years of the Columbia project. The article alsoshows how awareness of the history of the intellectual and culturalcurrents that affect oral history projects in general, and theFWP's work in particular—interviews with former slaves,tenant farmers, industrial workers, and members of ethnic minorities—canhelp us analyze and use those materials. It argues that an awarenessof continuity and discontinuity in the history of oral historymakes it possible for today's oral historians to have a productivedialogue with their predecessors in the field.     

"That Food of the Memory which Gives the Clue to Profitable Research": Oral history as a source for local, regional, and family history in the nineteenth and early twentieth century

Numerous local, regional and family historians in the nineteenthand early twentieth century collected oral narrations and conductedinterviews as a form to document information that otherwisemight have never been preserved. Family historians, in particular,not only practiced interviewing relatives for family histories,but also encouraged the practice in how-to-do manuals amongtheir peers. While advocating the practice, family historiansalso reflected about the value of "traditionary evidence" collectedthrough interviews and other means. These reflections by familyhistorians mirrored the discussions about the value of traditionsand memories as historical sources among several professionalhistorians at the time. These reflections were shaped by a modernizedunderstanding of tradition, which combined a reverential approachto the authoritarian element of tradition with a critical approachquestioning the validity of tradition. In this context, oralhistory was both a tool to negotiate the value of traditionand a mirror to the contemporary understanding of tradition.     

Method and Memory in the Midwestern "Lincoln Inquiry": Oral Testimony and Abraham Lincoln Studies, 1865 1938

This article narrates the role of oral testimony in the fieldof Abraham Lincoln studies from 1865 through the 1930s. Collectedin the form of letters, affidavits, and face-to-face interviews,this mounting body of "eyewitness evidence" dominated the discoursefor two generations and reflective, public practice culminatedin the organization of a "Lincoln Inquiry" in the Midwest duringthe 1920s and 1930s. For a time, practitioners successfullydefended themselves against increasing positivist assaults onthe credibility of oral testimony. Their interests and effortsresonate with later oral history practice and theory about method,authorship, performance, and memory, and their story highlightsthe contingency inherent in the development of oral historicalpractice in America.     

评近年来关于知识分子研究的几本史著

学术界近年来关于知识分子问题的研究呈现三大特点：一,“体验中的理解”,利用研究主客体在血脉、情感上的亲密关系,勉力进入先辈生存的精神家园,以理解他们的所思所言所行;二,“建构中的阐释”,力求在某种独特、精致的理论建构中提出假设,表达观点完成叙述;三,“批判中的反思”,通过广义上的学术批判,对古往今来的士之论士、儒之论儒、知识分子之论知识分子的成果进行反思。此外知识分子研究的方法论问题,也值得引起关注。     

Multiple Histories: Three Journeys through Academic Records,Medieval Yemen,and Current Anthropology's Encounters with the Past

This chapter sets out to reconsider the interrelation and non-identity between tribal and kinship relations in South-Western Arabia's history through three cumulative methodological steps that are in part inspired by renewed debates on kinship in anthropology, but also by the École des Annales and other historians such as David Sabaean. A first step identifies different legacies of interactions between history and anthropology in the Euro-American academic record after 1945, and specifies their relevance for today. In a next step, prevailing relations between tribal structures and kinship relations will be assessed through a long-distance comparison between the medieval constellations in the Zaydi highlands of Yemen and elsewhere in Asia for an eleventh century time horizon. Thirdly, the outcome of this comparative analysis should then provide some indicators for a fresh assessment of existing source materials through anthropological perspectives, with special emphasis on gender, kinship and hierarchies. The argument concludes with a discussion of “multiple histories”, and how to approach and write them.     

中国俄国史研究百年检视与思考

中俄交往始于蒙古西征和金帐汗国时代(1238-1480年),中国学人撰写俄国史自1878年刊印的鹭江奇迹人的《俄国志略》,到今天已经有整整140年的历史。中国的俄国史学科伴随民族命运、国家危机以及世界形势的变化而生,自诞生之日起即负有学人情怀、民族重任和学术职责三重使命。因此,俄国史学科在中国一直发挥着“知夷”和“盗火”的两大作用。中华人民共和国成立后,俄国史(包括苏联时期和俄罗斯联邦时期)研究获得了70年的巨大发展,主要成就有:1985年中国苏联东欧史研究会成立(1992年英文更名为中国俄罗斯东欧中亚史研究会),高等院校、社会科学院、党校、国家有关部委及党政机构纷纷设立俄国史或俄罗斯问题研究机构,建立了从历史学学士、俄国史硕士到俄国史博士的三级专业人才培养体系,俄国史和俄罗斯问题研究的专业期刊创立并连续出版,大量的俄国通史、中俄(中苏)关系史、专题著作、各类教科书、翻译著作(来自俄文、英法、法文、德文、波兰文等)出版,中国俄国史学者积极参与国际学术会议和国际合作研究,具有中国特色的中国“俄罗斯学”新学科正在建立过程中。     

唐玉门关地望新探——基于历史文献与考古遗存互证

在实地调查的基础上,根据传世典籍和出土文献的记载,结合年代测定、考古发现和遥感影像资料,通过空间分析,作者认为唐玉门关和墨离军驻地应在河西走廊西段的常乐故城,即今瓜州县“六工古城”遗址。这里是丝绸之路的交通枢纽,是西域出入口的重要关卡,亦即北魏时期新开伊吾道的起首。唐代玉门关地处疏勒河和榆林河下游洪积冲积扇缘的古绿洲,地貌和水资源等地理环境因素是制约关城选址的基础条件,而政治、军事等人文地理因素则是决定玉门关时空变迁的关键。     

The Past under the Shadow of the Present: The Case of the National Museum of Korean Contemporary History

The National Museum of Korean Contemporary History, which opened in 2012, has been the focus of a heated controversy between the progressive and conservative camps over the “proper” ways to represent South Korea’s turbulent history. I build on the relationship between heritage, collective memory and national identity, and argue that the division that typifies South Korean society has implications that extend beyond socio-political issues. Anchored within a broader discursive context, the museum became an important memory carrier involved in the process of debating the issue of national identity. Although no agreement has been reached regarding the “proper” historical narrative the site should exhibit, the museum has nevertheless offered an opportunity to shape a form of national identity that can embrace a more complex perspective on the country’s contemporary history. At present, though, this contentious site has demonstrated the extent to which the legacy of the conservative–progressive divide remains deep. I offer a discursive context that is useful for the study of current debates over heritage sites in South Korea, while the overall analysis illuminates the idea that the “present-centred” management of heritage in national museums can, potentially, play a part in the process of forming more intricate notions of national identity.     

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。