民族地区政区调整与民族区域自治的实现路径--以20世纪50年代广西都安瑶族自治县设置为中心的探讨

20世纪50年代初期,以民族为名称的各层级自治区非均衡地建立,致使政府在已建立民族区域自治的地区与尚未建立区域自治的民族地区执行经济政策时出现偏差,经济政策偏差产生的优惠差异引发了都安瑶族群众谋求民族区域自治的问题。为了解决瑶族谋求民族区域自治问题,在采取经济政策调整和相应政治措施调整无果之后,为配合民族区域自治政策的落实,政府继而采取政区调整的方式,通过一系列行政区划调整的探索,最大限度地将瑶族纳入瑶族自治县内。最终,通过政区调整满足了少数民族对民族区域自治的需求,实现了民族地区各民族的和解与社会稳定。     

洛阳新发现唐天宝三载石幢考释

2016年8月,洛阳匾额博物馆前施工时挖出一件唐代石幢的幢身,据其刻铭可知,该石幢立于唐天宝三载(744年),为彭城县尉张悌所立,其上所刻经文为《佛说业报差别经·施灯明功德品》。经考证,该石幢应为唐代佛寺灯台的幢形灯身。此外,张悌为比丘尼之"养男"的身份也为同类刻铭中少见,为研究唐人的日常生活提供了重要的实物材料。     

河南焦作聂村商代晚期墓地人骨研究

通过对河南焦作聂村商代晚期遗址出土的人骨进行观察、测量和数据统计分析,结果表明,聂村商代晚期墓地所出人骨的死亡年龄主要集中在中年期,颅骨种族特征与古中原类型的殷墟中小墓(2)组最近似,成年男性居民平均身高为165.41厘米。在聂村商代晚期人骨上还发现筛状眶与多孔性骨肥厚、骨性关节炎等骨骼病理,两性在龋病患齿率上存在显著差异,女性明显高于男性。     

南宋进书仪探析——以圣政为例

南宋时,圣政修纂完毕后,须进呈皇帝和太上皇。在进呈过程中,宋廷制定了一套庄严肃穆而又极其烦琐的仪式。进呈皇帝之仪在皇帝和大臣处理日常政务的垂拱殿中完成。进呈给太上皇帝之仪在太上皇帝居所完成。在迎奉圣政和皇帝赴太上皇帝居所的环节中,秘书省道山堂和祥曦殿成为与进呈仪式紧密相关的空间。圣政的进呈仪式是由太上皇帝、皇帝、臣僚面向公众共同完成的两场表演,这种可视化表演具有浓厚的象征意义:对皇帝而言,是向天下臣民宣示自己总结和继承先朝的政治遗产,开启本朝的治道,并且以自身的实践教化臣民,传递"孝"的理念,倡导"孝";对臣僚而言,通过仪式表演,表达了他们致君"贤能"的愿望。圣政这种史籍的进书仪式为我们考察南宋官修史籍进书仪式提供了一个典型案例。     

重庆市云阳县大凼子墓群2014、2015年度发掘简报

大凼子墓群位于重庆市云阳县青龙街道复兴社区4组,重庆市文化遗产研究院等于2014年、2015年对该墓群进行了抢救性考古发掘,发掘面积共计805平方米,清理汉墓7座、隋墓1座、明墓3座,出土陶器、铜器、瓷器等近百件。此次发掘属三峡工程消落区发掘项目,是三峡工程文物保护工作的补充和完善。发现的东汉中晚期墓葬分布较为密集,疑似家族墓地。通过对这批墓葬的发掘为探讨这一地区东汉时期墓地选择、墓葬排列及在此基础上开展的人口规模、社会政治、经济发展状况等方面提供重要实物资料,另外墓葬中出土了完整的筒形排水管,为汉代墓葬排水系统研究提供重要实物资料。     

黄河中下游地区史前二层台墓研究

黄河中下游地区40余处遗址的400多座二层台墓资料显示,生土二层台墓的数量在仰韶中晚期以前较熟土台墓多,龙山时代式微。该变化的背后是棺椁的逐渐成熟,生土台墓中小部分带有盖板或原始棺椁,同时熟土台并非判断墓葬带有棺椁的充要条件。通过生土台高度和墓葬深度的二元变量分析,墓葬开挖时预留生土台并未考虑稳固墓室,而应该与构建殓尸空间(或椁室)、进行一系列丧葬活动有关,在台面上放置随葬品的情况存在一定的时空差异。二层台墓的分布具有集中埋葬的倾向,采用二层台墓的群体并无明显的性别和死亡年龄指向,从仰韶中期以来,其所代表的社会群体占据着更为优越的社会财富。     

成都博物馆藏东汉陶仙山插座初探

成都及周边地区东汉晚期墓葬中出土有一种明显为仙山造型的陶质插座,倾向于为摇钱树的树座。其整体的三山、平台、洞穴造型及其上较为丰富的人物、羽人、伏羲、女娲、西王母形象应是当时观念中以昆仑、西王母为中心的神仙信仰的表现。将其制作为专门的丧葬用品,一方面反映了当时丧葬文化中的神仙信仰成分和超越死亡的升仙愿望,另一方面也再次印证了西南地区流行的摇钱树的主要内涵应与升仙有关。     

“The Old New-Intellectuals” in the May Fourth New Cultural Movement*

During the May Fourth New Cultural Movement, three debates on new/Western and old/Chinese cultures were respectively carried out between the journal New Youth and Lin Qinnan, Chen Duxiu and Du Yaquan, as well as Zhang Dongsun and Fu Sinian. New Youth, Chen Duxiu and Zhang Dongsun were regarded as the “new school,” whereas their opponents “the old new-intellectuals.” The difference between them lies in their attitudes towards traditions instead of their new or old knowledge. After three heated debates, New Youth won a total victory in big cities, because the so-called “urban youths” needed a radical cultural reform plan and a simple guide for action. On the contrary, “town youths” who lived in small cities and towns did not care about the attitudinal difference of two sides. They paid more attention to absorbing new knowledge from both sides and were more sympathetic to tradition.     

魏晋十六国北朝关中侨置武都郡研究

前秦时关中氐人分布的武都是指侨置武都郡。侨置武都郡始于曹魏。曹魏为与蜀汉争夺陇右,将武都氐人迁徙至关中,并先后在小槐里和美阳设置武都郡以进行管理。西晋江统的《徙戎论》反映出此时关中武都氐聚居的地方未置武都郡。十六国初期屠各刘氏和羯族石氏先后统治关中,将大量氐羌迁往关东,因此这一时期在关中侨置武都郡缺乏现实基础。苻健立国关中后,在战略要地宝鸡附近侨置武都郡,是其氐人本位政策的体现。北魏时侨置武都郡始领县级行政单位,统治范围扩大,标志着氐人的关中化,同时它也是太武帝平定盖吴叛乱时分化关中南道氐人的重要战略举措。西魏北周立国关中后受政区滥置影响,武都郡领县减少。隋开皇间侨置武都郡在当权者废郡、保留州县的地方行政政策的影响下消失于历史舞台。     

Negotiating Germanness: National Socialist Germanization policy in the Wartheland

ABSTRACT

Given the crucial importance of the notion of Volksgemeinschaft in Nazi Germany, one might assume that there existed a common understanding about who did or did not belong to it. Before the war, the Nazis clearly prioritized the latter, with the Volksgemeinschaft taking shape in a process of excluding those deemed to be enemies of the people. When German troops crossed into Poland, the balance shifted. Conquering land that could only be turned into German living space when settled with Germans, the occupation authorities were suddenly confronted with the opposite. Establishing the German Volksgemeinschaft in multinational territories now meant sifting through the local population and separating Germans from Poles. One might have thought that it should be easy enough to answer what was a simple enough question: who is German in annexed Poland? It was not easy, however, as I will show by looking at the selection procedure set up by the provincial government in the Wartheland, the so-called German People’s Register. Given the polycratic nature of the Nazi regime, it was to be expected that this would quickly descend into a bitter dispute with rival power factions with rather different ideas about how to define Germanness. What is surprising, however, is that it was loyal behaviour and not, for example, ‘racial suitability’ that emerged as the primary criterion. Surprising, too, is the extent to which the native population subjected to this process was able to influence its outcome by using every opportunity to convince the provincial government of its German credentials.