李维史学中的命运观念用fortuna、fatum等多种词汇形式表达,从而传递出不同状况下不同层面之内涵与意义.命运作为一种人类无法完全掌控的力量,在李维笔下源于诸神又超越于神意,其实质是以偶然性来展示历史进程中某种不以人类意志为转移的必然性因素.李维以通史之眼光,透过诸神或神意、人的行为与命运之互动,看到了pietas等德性力量,并试图以此来解释命运,表现出一种对罗马民族精神的内向观察以及一定时空场域而具有宗教伦理色彩的历史性反思.李维尝试以此相对不变之道德理性来解释历史变化,但面对历史之复杂性又无法完全化解.李维史学的命运观集中展现了这种具有内在张力的历史思想.
2022年12月17-18日,"2022年史学理论与史学史学术研讨会"在线上召开.本次会议由北京师范大学史学理论与史学史研究中心、北京师范大学铸牢中华民族共同体意识研究培育基地主办,计有60余所高校、科研机构和学术杂志的120余位学者与会.会议论题多元,范围所及,既有对历史发展与学科建设的关切,也有对中外史学发展历程及其所反映之时代特点的探讨,还有关于具体史家、史著、史学观点、史学思潮与流派的研究.现将会议主要内容概述如下.
柯林武德终其一生都在历史哲学的层面反思和批判西方历史思想中的实质主义和自然主义传统,从而倡导一种彻底的人文主义和历史主义思想.然而,在全球史学史的视野下,将柯林武德关于世界史学的探讨对勘黑格尔关于世界历史的讨论,可以发现柯林武德并没有从东方的中国或印度开始讨论历史学这一概念的发展历程,而是将希腊的希罗多德看作是科学历史学的开创者,不自觉地将自己预设的"科学历史学"的标准当作了一种实质,从而没有将历史主义思想贯彻到底,不免落入他自己所深刻批判的实质主义的陷阱之中,带有不可克服的欧洲中心论的色彩.当然,在柯林武德所处的时代,虽然已经出现了斯宾格勒、汤因比、雅斯贝尔斯等人对于欧洲中心论的批判,突破了黑格尔以来世界历史的线性进步史观,但关于世界史学的讨论还是凤毛麟角,由此也不应苛责前人.进一步而言,柯林武德在探讨历史哲学过程中所表现出来的勇于自我挑战、不断自我反省的精神,仍旧是全球史学语境下不可或缺的史学理论遗产.
辽代因修起居注而设记注官,但《辽史·百官志》南面朝官所列起居舍人、起居郎并不是记注官,所谓的"起居舍人院"也并不存在.辽代的记注官为使职化差遣之职,由牌印郎君、翰林都林牙等兼任.牌印郎君属于皇帝身边近侍,隶属于牌印局,翰林都林牙(总知翰林院事)属于朝官中的文官,可能隶属于大林牙院.辽代记注官皆以契丹文化人充任,这与辽代皇帝为中心的政务运作系统普遍使用契丹语有关.辽代记注官所编《起居注》失之于略,根源在于诸司供报送录制度不健全,以及记注官听闻议政的权力有限.辽代记注官之设,既弘扬相延数代的编修《起居注》传统,也具有多民族文化交融的特点.
宋元方志中的"乡里"类目源于更早时代的图经,而其中的地名解释、乡里风物等内容则是承袭了地记的传统.唐代图经记载"乡里"尚不普遍,且内容限于乡数,可能还有乡名.北宋方志记载"乡里"的情况已较普遍,其中祥符《州县图经》"统一体例"的编纂原则确立了"乡里"类目在方志中的地位,不过此时尚未以专门的类目统御之.南宋时,方志中的"乡里"部分进一步发展,表现在记录"乡里"方志的数量大增,"乡里"部分大多有了专门的类目,"乡里"内容大大丰富."乡里"类目的存在,除了资政以及满足官员基层治理的需求外,还具有教化功能.宋元方志中"乡里"类目的所属关系及编排方式之所以表现出层级差异大、统辖关系模糊等杂乱无章的特点,原因可归结为:方志资料的多元来源、方志编纂的时空差异性、编修者的变化、宋代基层管理体系的"在地化"特色和宋代基层管理体系与方志书写之间存在落差等因素.
（《求索》2023年第2期）乾嘉考据学秉承“实事求是”的治学宗旨，讲求言必有据，无征不信，在传统学术史上具有重要地位，并且深刻影响了近代学术，是“新历史考证学”的基础。新中国成立后，考据学传统在新的历史条件下得到了传承与发展。
清代学术思想史自清末以来即为近代史家所重视.在20世纪三四十年代,清代学术思想史领域又出现了不少新的成果,其中谭丕模所著《清代思想史纲》即当时较有特点的一部.该书之成一方面得益于当时北京师范大学文史学科对于清代学术思想史的重视,另一方面则是由唯物史观的传播所促成.该书大体赓续章太炎、梁启超对于清代学术思想史论述的思路,从中可以明显看到大学教育影响的痕迹;但在一些具体问题上,该书则不乏新见,这主要由唯物史观所赋予.在唯物史观和时势变化等因素的共同影响下,思想史的写法开始兴起,并逐渐取代学术史的写法,成为20世纪三四十年代学术思想史领域的主流.以《清代思想史纲》一书为中心展开的相关讨论,一方面呈现了以大学教学、研究活动为媒介,近代史学研究推陈出新的具体过程,另一方面亦反映了近代以来史学研究与社会现实之间的复杂关系.
（《北京大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第1期）陈寅恪“思想囿于咸丰同治之世，议论近乎曾湘乡张南皮之间”之言，为学人熟知，理解各有不同，但其实反映了他对中外文化交流，抱持“中学为体、西学为用”（此处“西学”亦指“虏学”）的基本态度。由此立场出发，陈以魏晋、隋唐史为专攻，希图以史为鉴，指出文化交流的“一致性”：“一方面吸收输入外来之学说，一方面不忘本来民族之地位。”
宋洪迈《容斋随笔》所撰千余则随笔中,包含着涉及历代史著、史家方面的讨论,内容涵盖先秦秦汉、魏晋南北朝、隋唐五代、两宋四个阶段.本文通过对《容斋随笔》有关史学的零散随笔进行纵向的梳理考察,并对其中重要者作深入分析,于细碎之间抽绎出洪迈学术体系中的史学识见及其思想价值之所在.借助对洪迈论史学笔记资料之二重性的运用,反思其对于认识中国史学之特质的价值.
正史《循吏传》研究首先以文本为要,文本研究须明确其入传标准及内容特点.笔者近两年通读19部正史《循吏传》,发现正史《循吏传》不仅传名各有变化,或曰《循吏》,或曰《良吏》《良政》《能吏》,其入传标准及内容特点前后亦有变化. 《史记》首设《循吏传》,列于类传之首.《史记·循吏传》记载了春秋时期的5位循吏.孙叔敖为楚国相,功绩卓著,司马迁仅记其"施教导民""政缓禁止"①等事迹,以及"三相楚而心愈卑"②的人品修为.曰其为治"吏无奸邪,盗贼不起"③,百姓"各得其所便,民皆乐其生"④.郑子产"为相一年,竖子不戏狎,斑白不提挈,僮子不犁畔.二年,市不豫贾.三年,门不夜关,道不拾遗.四年,田器不归.五年,士无尺籍,丧期不令而治."⑤可谓社会善治典范.鲁相公仪休拒收遗鱼,司马迁由此特别强调"食禄者不得与下民争利,受大者不得取小"⑥之官德.楚相石奢,"坚直廉正,无所阿避."⑦晋国法官李离"过听杀人",以身"正国法"⑧.5位循吏,4人为相,1人为法官,皆为"奉法循理"之典型,或善治邦国,或官德高尚,或伏法献身,故被写入《循吏传》.
唐代政治斗争对武士彟形象塑造产生了重要的影响,武士彟形象随着政局的演变而变化.在"废王立武"的皇后废立政治斗争取得胜利之后,武则天为了巩固自己的政治地位,通过赠官、加爵等一系列措施,不断推高武士彟的政治地位,令其配享唐高祖庙,武士彟被许敬宗塑造成太原元谋功臣的核心人物.武周革命之后,武士彟被尊奉为武周太祖,为了论证武周政权的合法性,李峤将武士彟建构成舜、禹一样的圣王,其完美形象被推至顶峰.李唐复辟之后,武士彟的政治地位陡然下降,其形象也跌至谷底,最终被史官塑造成"迂诞取媚"的平庸之辈.武则天在政治斗争中的成败,直接地影响着武士彟政治地位的升降,进而影响到官方对武士彟形象的塑造与书写.
张舜徽先生一生钟情于历史文献学的思考与研究,所作日记蕴含有丰富的校雠学、目录学、校勘学等分支学科的分析与思考.张氏初步建构的历史文献学体制,对改变中国历史文献学研究偏狭而单一的状况,恢复历史文献学"辨章学术,考镜源流"的传统,进而推动历史文献学学科发展起到了重要的作用.张氏的学术思想形成于民国时代.他对学术本原的追求、识见为高的求索、学术经世的倡导以及博学会通的强调等,都具有鲜明的特色.张氏以史学家的批评视角来评析学术发展中的得失利弊,形成独有的学术批评话语和方法.在张氏的学术思想中,历史文献学是基础,学术批评是其学术品性的表征.
乔治·芬利是苏格兰启蒙运动和德意志大学教育共同塑造的一位重要历史学家.他在其巨著《希腊史》中提出了古典文明于公元3-8世纪期间缓慢衰亡的学说,认为专制政府强加给普通民众的沉重财政负担是导致这场衰亡的本质原因,并在总结其历史教训的基础上,提出了针对现实与未来的历史预言.乔治·芬利对早期基督教客观历史作用的理性分析修正了前辈学者爱德华·吉本的偏颇观点.他关于罗马帝国后期与拜占庭时代早期社会经济史的研究同著名的皮朗命题存在相通之处.他试图将历史经验教训与现实决策紧密联系起来的历史预言写作模式则为阿诺德·汤因比的文化形态史观提供了重要启示.
范晔《后汉书》(以下简称"范书")是关于东汉历史最为重要的基本史书,历来为学者重视,研究成果浩如烟海.作为一部后出的东汉史著述,范书从成书到跻身"三史",其传播和地位历经了一个过程.①而在范书的早期流传中,刘勰与刘孝标对于范书的缺载值得注意. 一、二刘对范晔《后汉书》的缺载 刘勰在《文心雕龙·史传》中有一段关于汉晋史书的总结,其文曰: 至于后汉纪传,发源东观.袁张所制,偏驳不伦;薛谢之作,疏谬少信.若司马彪之详实,华峤之准当,则其冠也.及魏代三雄,记传互出.阳秋魏略之属,江表吴录之类.或激抗难征,或疏阔寡要.唯陈寿三志,文质辨洽,荀张比之于迁固,非妄誉也.②
Historical comments is a feature of ZUIWEILU which is a biographical history of Ming by Zha Jizuo. There are general comments in front of every book and different comments in every book, so historical comments comprise substantial proportion of the whole book and can be viewed as a clue to learn structure, content and the thoughts of the history. Zha Jizuo expressed his views on the political situation and the big change in historical comments. The emperors’ fates, country’s fate and the fate of modern are the main content of comments. It’s believed that these fates are mutual related, and it reflects that Zha Jizuo’s thoughts were influenced by the traditional Confucianism and Yin-yang theory, so he used the destiny and virtue to explain the end of the Ming Dynasty. Besides that, Zha Jizuo paid attention to other factors such as incompetent ministers, political disputes and economy, which reflected his progressive historical thoughts.
The core of Li Dashi’s principle of compiling history is to compile a chronicle imitating WUYUECHUNQIU, he wanted to record the history of Southern and Northern Dynasties while praised the history of the Northern Dynasties highly in books. Li Yanshou inherited and developed his father’s plan for compiling history. Skillfully integrating the style of SHIJI and WUYUECHUNQIU, he took the biographical style to record the history of the Southern and Northern Dynasties. Praising the history of Northern Dynasties and belittling history of the Southern Dynasties are not only because of authors’ political statement that legitimated the reign of Sui and Tang, but because of inspiration coming from WUYUECHUNQIU. Influenced by cosmopolitanism and the thoughts of universal history in WUYUECHUNQIU, Li Dashi and Li Yanshou wanted to compiling a historical book including the history of the Southern and Northern Dynasties.
李涛为唐朝皇族之后,一生仕宦历经五代宋初:后汉拜相、后周封莒国公、宋初拜兵部尚书.其子孙多入仕于宋,为当时显赫的仕宦家族.关于其祖先,《旧五代史》《新五代史》《辽史》①中均无载,《宋史·李涛传》②记为"唐敬宗子郇王玮十一世孙".③由于唐朝皇族后裔的身份对李涛家族入仕发展增益颇多,故其后世子孙在墓志中也提及其为唐朝宗室之后的身份以显尊荣.④目前,学界在对李涛五世孙、六世孙的研究中⑤,直接引用《宋史·李涛传》的记载,将其祖先上溯至唐朝"郇王玮十一世孙".由于《宋史》中关于唐朝"敬宗郇王玮"的记载非常简略,《旧唐书》《新唐书》中也有矛盾之处,相关研究没有进行厘清,因此下面就李涛的祖先唐"敬宗子郇王玮"进行考辨.
Zhu Qianzhi had written quite a lot on historical theory and historical philosophy, and made many achievements. By transplanting and integrating western theories, especially Hans Driesch’s new vitalism and Bergson’s philosophy of life, Zhu Qianzhi formed his vitalist historical view, with a complete and unique system. It seems that his theory conflict with historical materialism, but in fact it was influenced by the latter. He emphasized that historians should bear social responsibility and historical research should be realistic with aim of examing the present day. His comments revealed the shortcomings of the historiography in the Chinese Republican period, and had a value before his time.
While as a famous Christian scholar in the fifth century, Theodoret’s historical writings draw less scholarly attention. By examining the materials used in his representative work the Ecclesiastical History, it is possible to say that Theodoret’s main agenda is to construct the historical legitimacy of the “orthodox doctrine”. He prefers those primary sources which are seemingly authentic and authentic in order to enhance the persuasiveness of his work. In the text, he deliberately chooses and arranges references from various perspectives so that he can articulate the orthodox position of the Nicene Creed from the very beginning. At the same time, via definite comments on documentary quotations, Theodoret further guides his readers to establish a literary contrast between ‘orthodoxy’ and ‘heresy’. When the Nicene Creed was legalized as the only ‘state religion’ of the Roman Empire, Theodoret seems to have applied the Church historical writing to some practical functions, such as to explain the official belief and to converge ideological conflicts.
The study of historical theories during the Chinese Republican period had undergone the process from the inputting, transplanting and introduction of western historical theories to the gradual understanding and tentative creating of Chinese local historical theories. There were mainly two approaches for it to proceed. One approach was to accept and synthesize those modern western historical theories and then to create Chinese local historical theories, based on those western works of historical theories. The other was to find, by comparing western historical theories with Chinese traditional historical studies, those factors in Chinese traditional historical studies which could be suitable for modern western historical theories and then to create local historical theories with Chinese characteristics. Under the enormous influence of modern western positivist historical studies and taking the scientification as the major goal of creating historical theories, the study of historical theories during the Chinese Republican period was to create positivist and scientific historical theories. Due to the scientific historical studies, the emphasis on textual research in history and seeking for historical facts, the dedication to the scientification of historical studies, the stress on historical methods and on scientific methodologies, passions for historical methods and methodologies arose gradually during the Chinese Republican period. The tendency of methodology fever could be found during the process of conscious learning from natural and social scientific methods and then applying them, and also could be found during the process of concentrated researches of those practical methods in the study of historical data. Thus, localization, scientification and methodology fever could be regarded as the basic tendency of historical theories’ study during the Chinese Republican period.
