浙江宁波镇海鱼山遗址Ⅰ期发掘简报

鱼山遗址位于浙江省宁波市镇海区九龙湖镇河头村,东距现海岸线直线距离约7.3公里。2013至2014年,宁波市文物考古研究所等单位对其进行了Ⅰ期发掘,分别发现河姆渡文化、良渚文化、商周和唐宋等四个不同时期的文化遗存。其中河姆渡文化二、三期,良渚文化晚期和商周时期堆积之间的自然淤泥层,对于研究沿海地区史前至商周时期文化面貌、人地关系等基础性问题提供了一批重要资料。     

1998年鹤壁市、淇县晚商遗址考古调查报告

1998年7月,中国社会科学院考古研究所等对淇县境内和鹤壁市直接管辖区域内的一批晚商遗址进行了调查,以期从考古材料出发,寻找殷都朝歌遗存的线索,为今后围绕朝歌这一期望的目标所进行的考古工作提供科学依据。调查发现有新石器时代、商周遗址,但没有找到商代朝歌遗址及其切实存在的证据。     

试论夏商城市水利设施及其功能

本文就考古所见夏商城址内的水利遗存进行了分析,对夏商城市水利设施的种类、功能、渊源等相关问题进行了初步探讨。     

14C测定判别武王克商年代范围始末

武王克商年代是我国古代编年中的一个关键点,近年来^14C测定技术有了重要发展,我国^14C测年界在此基础上探讨了^14C方法应用于商周历史纪年的希望。1996年夏商周断代工程正式立项,利用^14C测定判别武王克商年代范围的任务得以实施。1998年初两个常规^14C实验室以3‰测定精度,前后开始对陕西丰镐遗址出土样品^14C测定,并于1998年10月6－7日先后公布了^14C数据,提出武王克商代范围应判别在公元前1050－1020年间。1998年下半年AMS室开始测定。三室测定数据对比结果基本相合,利用殷墟,琉璃河等遗址出土的样品系列作^14C测定得出的结果,与上述年代范围一致。1998年11月30日公布了天计算结果,与测定结果不谋而合,经多方面反复验证,历时近二年,都无法动摇已有的判别结果,具有较高的可信度。     

商鞅法哲学研究

法家学派在时间上有前期、后期之分,在地域上有齐法家和三晋法家之分。商鞅是前期法家名代表人物,其法学理论典型地体现于社会终极理想之中。他认为人类社会的历史可以划分为两大阶段：首先是法治化社会,以法治国,在社会高度法治化基础之上,人类有望进入其理想化阶段——道德自律社会。法的力量由中心退居边缘,伦理道德价值体系开始由边缘走向中心,道德价值体系成为人类社会最高原则。从“法治”到“德治”,这是商鞅法学理论的逻辑过程,也是商鞅法学理论的全部内涵。     

论"白家庄期"商文化

分布和影响地域广袤的"白家庄期"商文化,因时代接近于商代中期而在商文化中具有承前启后的地位.有关考古新发现显示,"白家庄期"商文化本身可以区分为三个不同的时间段.在其所代表的历史阶段中,郑州商城的衰颓与小双桥商都的兴建形成了鲜明对照.这一现象出现的历史背景是,有关文献所记商王朝此时所面临的内忧外患局面以及仲丁迁隞历史事件的发生.     

《春秋·庄公三十二年》伐邢之"狄"考

《春秋》所载伐邢之"狄"应为商人.在邢国墓葬考古中,发现有"毁墓"现象,由年代和情势判断,只能是对邢有"亡国"之恨的商人所为.狄也叫戎.戎在金文中写作" ",最初是商王小乙之子"子 "的氏族徽志.这个氏族一部分居于王畿北境,今河北新乐一带,负守土之责.周公东征后逃匿太行山中.狄也作翟.翟,《说文》云"山雉尾长者",《赵世家》云"子姓".图腾和族姓皆与商人相同.     

关于中国早期国家的几个问题

目前学术界对有关中国早期国家的概念存在着分歧.我们认为中国早期国家是指夏商周三代已具备公共权力,但社会仍滞留在居民血缘组织基础之上的政治组织.所谓中国在龙山时代就已出现了早期国家的说法是不能成立的.至于中国早期国家的产生,则是走的部落联盟酋长因其职务的“独立化“转变为“社会主人“这样一条路径.     

Enclaves in tourism: producing and governing exclusive spaces for tourism

Abstract

Exclusively planned tourism destinations, such as all-inclusive resorts, gated resort communities, private cruise liner-owned islands and privatized beaches, have increased over the last few decades. Researchers have analyzed these kinds of tourism environments as enclaves, which are typically driven by external forces and actors, strongly supported by globalization and the current neoliberal market economy. Existing research shows that tourism enclaves are characterized by active border-making, power issues and material and/or symbolic separation from the surrounding socio-cultural realities, leading to weak linkages with host communities and the local economy. Tourism enclaves involve power inequalities, injustices and unsustainable practices that often have serious negative impacts on local socio-economic development. The articles of the special issue focus on tourism enclaves in different theoretical and geographical contexts and they contribute to our understanding of how these exclusive spaces are created and transformed and how they shape places and place identities. The individual research articles are contextualized and discussed with the key theoretical perspectives and empirical findings on tourism enclaves. Future research needs include analysis of linkages and flows of labor, goods, ideas and capital in different scales; policymaking, planning and regulations; environmental impacts; and locals’ land and resource access in the respect of bordering, privatization and land grabbing. By focusing on these topics, the tourism industry could be guided towards more responsible and sustainable development path.     

Capitalist Formations of Enclosure: Space and the Extinction of the Commons

Despite their theoretical and political potential, recent debates on enclosure usually lack an effective consideration of how space is mobilized in the process of dispossession. This article connects the analysis of enclosure's general spatial rationality to a range of illustrations of its particular formations and procedures. Enclosure is understood as one of capitalism's “universal territorial equivalents”, a polymorphous technique with variegated expressions in time but also with a consistent logic that uses the spatial erosion of the commons to subsume non‐commodified, self‐managed social spaces. In response to the ever‐changing nature of commoning, successive regimes of enclosure reshape the morphologies of deprivation and their articulation to other state and market apparatuses in order to meet shifting strategies of capital accumulation and social reproduction. Through a spatially nuanced account of these phenomena, I outline a tentative genealogy of enclosure formations that allows tracking diverse geographies of dispossession across different scales and regulatory contexts in various historical stages of capitalist development.