近代学术期刊的出现与史学的变化

学术期刊出现之后 ,重视反映史学研究成果和史学界动态的学术期刊主要有两类 :专门性史学期刊和高校学报类期刊。前者对历史学科的综合发展产生了十分积极的促进作用 ,后者则以发表高水准的学术论著而对史学研究产生重要影响。学术期刊适应了现代史学发展的要求 ,对史学发展的意义至关重要。     

赫西俄德的史学地位

赫西俄德是古希腊前史学时期的著名诗人 ,他的诗作《田功农时》和《神谱》中所反映出的历史思想在西方史学的起源上具有重要意义 ,他本人是希腊史学从萌芽状态走向完全形成长过程中的最后一位承上启下的人物     

论明焦的史学思想——兼评其《国史经籍志·史类》

焦是晚明著名的思想家 ,也是一位史学家 ,他的史学思想体现在他对史学功用、史学标准、野史的价值、史馆修史的认识等各个方面。焦提倡史书“彰善瘅恶”的借鉴作用 ,认为史著应当经世致用 ,有益教化风气 ;就史书标准而言 ,他表彰直书实录 ,提出了著史当“善恶并列 ,不必以人为断”、“贵贱?列 ,不必以位为断”的进步观点 ;焦肯定了野史的价值 ,主张用野史补苴国史之缺 ,还为改良明代史馆修史 ,提出了自己的见解 ,他的目录学著作《国史经籍志》之“史类”反映了他对史书的理解。     

贵州史学界的大家——论王燕玉的史学贡献

贵州沙滩文化的最后传人王燕玉：不固成说,挑战权威,开贵州古史专题研究之先河,对贵州地方历史和文化的研究作出了巨大贡献,成绩斐然。但贵州史学界对王先生的观点及研究成果一直未给予应有的重视,使得生长于贵州这块土地上的我们自己的史学大家几近湮没。     

关于西方古代史学“实质主义”的思考

英国著名哲学家柯林伍德的substantialism之substance,是古希腊哲学重要范畴ousia的英译,substance中译作实质。此两种译法均没有完整地表达ousia的原义。substance表达的是亚里士多德《范畴篇》中ousia是载体之意,而没有表达《形而上学》中ousia是形式的意思。substance译作实质,却超出了substance原义,而与ousia是形式有某些相合之处。本文乃采用中译名,遵循的是中文表述传统中的"名约"规则。柯林伍德的"实质主义"说,对西方古代史学理论研究有很大的影响。可是,柯林伍德仅提出此说,而没有用文字表述其全部的论证思路,所以在理解上有相当大的困难。要较好地理解实质主义涵义,应将此说有争议之范畴与主要范畴ousia联系起来思考,对柯林伍德有关实质主义的说法作出综合分析,并将理解中存在的问题置于其说之理论基础古希腊本体论和认识论中加以考察。所以,本文对实质主义的理解,不可能完全重现柯林伍德的原意,而只是对其说的一种诠释。     

"新史学"思潮的产生及其学术建树

梁启超的《中国史叙论》和《新史学》共同构成了"新史学"思潮的开端。《中国史叙论》表现为"建设"大于"批判";《新史学》表现为"批判"大于"建设"。两者都以建设中国的新史学为共同目标。"新史学"思潮涵盖了许多不同政治取向、却都看重史学的社会功能并且要求改变旧史学面貌的多数进步学人。"新史学"思潮以批判旧史学为特征,但是其构建"新史学"理论体系的努力和撰述新型中国通史的尝试等学术建树,亦不应被忽视。     

Rosario Romeo ( 1924–1987)

Abstract

Rosario Romeo (1924–87) made an original and outstanding contribution to the study of modern Italian history. He wrote extensively on the development of Italian capitalism and industrialization, developing his own concept of the ‘primitive accumulation of capital’ and drawing on theories of underdevelopment that became current after the Second World War to underline the particularities, the speed and breadth but also the limitations of Italy's economic growth. In his masterly biography of Cavour, as well as in numerous other essays, he confronted the questions of the birth of the Italian nation state, its origins, its political and moral tradition and its social life in the context of a deeply informed and penetrating vision of contemporary European history. The Risorgimento and Fascism, the nation and the nation state, liberal‐democratic values and class struggle, modernization and secularization are the essential themes in his historical writings that were marked by deep erudition and methodological rigour, and inspired by great conceptual and moral breadth. Through his work Italy became a paradigm of the fundamental dimensions of the modern world thanks to that passion for liberty which for Romeo (he was also a member of the European Parliament) was rekindled by the events of the twentieth century, among whose major historians he ranks.     

Expanding the discursive domain of research on the New Culture Movement: An incomplete review of studies on the New Culture Movement

ABSTRACT

The discussions revolving around the common subject of the New Culture Movement have experienced a complex and convoluted history, with a discursive domain ranging from the differentiation of new and old culture, to appeals for a scientific and democratic enlightenment, to the balancing of the cultural relationship between China and the West. The New Culture tends to be regarded as development in the direction of increasing rationality, liberality, and inclusiveness, in which the pursuit of an understanding between the Chinese and Western cultures is the only path by which Chinese civilization may gain future opportunities and development.     

From the government to the university: Efforts to write national history in the early Republic

ABSTRACT

From the controversies surrounding the National History Bureau in the early Republic to the short-lived National Historiography Office at Peking University, the traditional undertaking of writing dynastic history experienced many crises during the transformative Republican era. The National History Bureau was merged with Peking University as part of Cai Yuanpei’s efforts to separate the field of national historiography from the government and shift it toward universities, as well as his efforts to further reform the university system. In comparing the staff members and aims of the National History Bureau and the National Historiography Office of Peking University, the latter clearly represented an update in terms of concepts and methods. The purpose of the History Bureau’s shift from “dynastic” to “popular” history, which apparently intentionally imitated the German academic system, was to render national historiography and other related research independent of the government, cast off the traditional moral burden of “condemning evildoers and praising the virtuous,” and gradually move forward on the path of specialization for national historiography within the university system. The National Historiography Office’s various editing plans amply demonstrate this tendency. The many winding detours that the “national history” efforts took between dynastic and popular history both expressed the entanglement of new and old ideas within academic circles, and revealed the contemporary struggle between the government and universities.