|
注释： ①邓小南：《宋代政治史研究的“再出发”》，《历史研究》，2009年第6期，第4－10页。 ②罗志田：《近三十年中国近代史研究的变与不变——几点不系统的反思》，《社会科学研究》，2008年第6期，第142页。 ③和卫国：《中国政治史研究的反思》，《北方民族大学学报》，2009年第2期，第108－109页。 ④包伟民：《“地方政治史”研究杂想》，《国际社会科学杂志》，2009年第3期，第153页。 ⑤上文所引各说，所论仅涉及中国史家对中国政治史的研究，而不包括中国史家对外国政治史的研究。从国内最具影响力的史学刊物《历史研究》的发文比重来看，它在1981年刊发的111篇各类文章中，可以明确归入政治史范畴的有67篇，占总数的60％；在30年后的2011年登载的76篇各类文章中，相对肯定地属于政治史领域的文章有35篇，占总数的46％。同时，该刊2011年发表的社会史、文化史和经济史论文数量，三项相加，占总数的30％。可见，虽然政治史论文的比重在30年间有明显的下降。但新兴领域还没有达到与政治史平分秋色的地步。另据2013年5月17日从“中国高校人文社会科学信息网”(http://www.sinoss.net)获取的材料计算，在“普通高校人文社会科学研究优秀成果奖”历届评出的41项一等奖成果中，政治史12项，历史地理6项，经济史3项，社会史1项，思想史1项，通史和文集等综合性著述18项。这些数据说明，政治史的领地确实有所收缩，经济史、社会史和文化史正在成长，但政治史作为中国史学领头羊的地位，并未发生根本的动摇。 ⑥参见何芊、邵声翻译整理：《美国史研究的新题材、新方法和新取向》，《史学月刊》，2013年第4期，第7、8－9、10－11、15－17、23页。 ⑦Samuel H. Beer, Lee Benson, et al., "New Trends in History," Daedalus, Vol. 98, No. 4(Fall, 1969), p. 891. ⑧Theodore S. Hamerow, Reflections on History and Historians, Madison, Wis.: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1987, p. 32. ⑨Hugh Davis Graham, "The Stunted Career of Policy History: A Critique and an Agenda," The Public Historian, Vol. 15, No. 2(Spring, 1993), p. 29. ⑩David Christian, "The Return of Universal History," History and Theory, 49(December, 2010), p. 14. (11)Peter N. Steams, "Social History and History: A Progress Report," Journal of Social History, Vol. 19, No. 2(Winter, 1985), pp. 319-334; Peter N. Steams, "Social History Present and Future," Journal of Social History, Vol. 37, No. 1, Special Issue(Autumn, 2003), pp. 9-19. (12)Lynn Hunt, ed., The New Cultural History, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989; Victoria E. Bonnell, and Lynn Hunt, eds., Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the Study of Society and Culture, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999; Lawrence B. Glickman, "The 'Cultural Turn'," in Eric Foner, and Lisa McGirr, eds., American History Now, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2011, pp. 221-241. (13)关于“硬”问题(如市场、人口、物价、工资等)和“软”问题(如权力的效果、道德、认知、价值、记忆、情绪等)的说法，来自Florencia E. Mallon, "Time on the Wheel: Cycles of Revisionism and the 'New Cultural History'," The Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol. 79, No. 2(May, 1999), p. 334。 (14)参见［美］乔伊斯、阿普尔比、林恩·亨特、玛格丽特·雅各布著，刘北成、薛绚译：《历史的真相》，上海人民出版社2011年版，第172－201、209－233页。 (15)Samuel P. Hays, "Society and Polities: Politics and Society," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 15, No. 3(Winter, 1985), pp. 481-482. (16)Graham, "The Stunted Career of Policy History," p. 30. (17)Cordon Craig, "Political History," Daedalus, Vol. 100, No. 2(Spring, 1971), p. 323. (18)William E. Leuchtenburg, "The Pertinence of Political History: Reflections on the Significance of the State in America," The Journal of American History, Vol. 73, No. 3(Dec., 1986), p. 585. (19)J. Morgan Kousser, "Toward 'Total Political History': A Rational-Choice Research Program," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 20, No. 4(Spring, 1990), p. 521. (20)美国学者罗纳德·佛米萨诺指出，当社会史势头正盛的时期，史家普遍看重“政治的社会基础”；在新文化史蔚然成风以后，许多史家转而强调“政治文化”。社会史和文化史对政治的塑造性影响，于此可见一斑。参见Ronald P. Formisano, "The Concept of Political Culture," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 31, No. 3(Winter, 2001), pp. 393-426，重点参见第395页。在近期的中国史学界也出现了类似苗头。参见赵世瑜：《社会史研究向何处去》，《河北学刊》，2005年第1期，第62－70页。 (21)J. Morgan Kousser, "Restoring Politics to Political History," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 12, No. 4(Spring, 1982), p. 569. (22)Lynn Hunt, Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004；［美］林·亨特著，郑明萱、陈瑛译：《法国革命时期的家庭罗曼史》，商务印书馆2008年版；林·亨特著，沈占春译：《人权的发明：一部历史》，商务印书馆2011年版。 (23)Gordon Wood, The Purpose of the Past: Reflections on the Use the History, New York: The Penguin Press, 2008, pp. 2-5, 8-12. (24)Mark H. Left, "Revisioning U. S. Political History," The American Historical Review, Vol. 100, No. 3(Jun., 1995), p. 829. (25)美国历史学家迈克尔·朱克曼在谈到研究殖民地时期的优势时说，这时没有国家，也没有总统，因此可以不必管国家政治，也不必同总统打交道，甚至可以让政治出局。迈克尔·朱克曼：《美国早期史在中国：现实中的往昔》，《史学月刊》，2008年第2期，第18页。 (26)Craig, "Political History," pp. 323-324. (27) Leuchtenburg, "The Pertinence of Political History," p. 586. (28)Left, "Revisioning U. S. Political History," p. 834. (29)［法］弗朗索瓦·多斯著，马胜利译：《碎片化的历史学：从〈年鉴〉到‘新史学’》，北京大学出版社2008年版，第40、47页。 (30)Jacques Le Coll, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" Daedalus, Vol. 100, No. 1(Winter, 1971), pp. 2, 4. (31)Susan Pedersen, "What Is Political History Now?" in David Cannadine, ed., What Is History Now? New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002, pp. 37-38. (32)Graham, "The Stunted Career of Policy History," p. 32; Meg Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment: New Directions in American Political History, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003, p. 5. (33)Sean Wilentz, "American Political Histories," OAH Magazine of History, April 2007, p. 23. (34)Left, "Revisioning U. S. Political History," p. 830. (35)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, p. 3. (36)有美国学者指出，在政治史整体上处于“不景气”状况的20世纪60－80年代，美国政治史家从政治学那里得益尤多。Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, p. 351. (37)［古希腊］亚里士多德著，吴寿彭译：《政治学》，商务印书馆1997年版。 (38)一些澳大利亚学者倡导新型政治史，但遇到了一些阻碍，主要是人们不肯放弃对政治的狭隘的理解，即把政治视为“掌握权力的男性精英通过国家权力的政治制度而行使权力”。参见Stuart Macintyre(University of Melbourne), "The Rebirth of Political History," Australian Journal of Politics and History, Volume 56, Number 1, 2010, p. 3。 (39)Geoff Eley and Keith Nield, "Why Does Social History Ignore Politics?" Social History, Vol. 5, No. 2(May, 1980), p. 268. (40)Samuel P. Hays, "The Social Analysis of American Political History, 1880-1920," Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 80, No. 3(Sep., 1965), p. 374. (41)Hays, "Society and Politics: Politics and Society," pp. 486, 487-489, 498-499. (42)从权力着眼来界定政治，并不仅仅是美国史学界的趋向。法国学者雅克·勒高夫在1971年谈到，在年鉴学派一统天下的时代，法国政治史开始谋求复兴，借助社会学和人类学关于“权力”以及“与权力相关的事实”的概念，取代原来对“国家”和“民族”的关注，以此作为政治的主要内涵，从而使政治史变成了“权力史”，得以突破表面，进入深层。参见Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" pp. 4-5。 (43)Thomas Bender, "Wholes and Parts: The Need for Synthesis in American History," The Journal of American History, Vol. 73, No, 1(June 1986), p. 126. (44)Alice Kessler-Harris, "Social History," in Eric Foner, ed., The New American History, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1997, p. 249. (45)John Garrard, "Social History, Political History and Political Science: The Study of Power," Journal of Social History, Vol. 16, No. 3(Spring, 1983), pp. 105-121. (46)Elizabeth Fox-Genovese and Eugene D. Genovese, "The Political Crisis of Social History: A Marxian Perspective," Journal of Social History, Vol. 10, No. 2, (Winter, 1976), p. 219. (47)Kessler-Harris, "Social History," in Foner, New American History, p. 249. (48)Daniel T. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998, pp. 2-3, 20-32；中译文见［美］丹尼尔·T. 罗杰著，吴万伟译：《大西洋的跨越：进步时代的社会政治》，译林出版社2011年版，第2－3、14－26页。 (49)Daniel Rodgers, "The Age of Social Polities," in Thomas Bender, ed., Rethinking American History in a Global Age, Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 2002, p. 252. (50)阿伦特谈到，政治是自由唯一可以存活的领域，而社会则是受到必需性支配的世界，政治一旦逸出边界进入社会领域，或者把政治问题转化为社会问题，必然使自由受到威胁乃至丧失。［美］汉娜·阿伦特著，陈周旺译：《论革命》，译林出版社2007年版。 (51)法国史学界的情况可以作为佐证。雅克·勒高夫在总结法国“新政治史”的特点时说，它用“阳性政治(le politique)”的历史取代了“阴性政治”(la politique)的历史。法语中“政治”一词从阴性变成阳性，实际上是政治定义的扩展：“阴性政治”是狭义的政治，主要涉及与权力斗争直接相关的政治活动及政治制度，如选举、司法、战争、议会、政党等；“阳性政治”不仅包含上述内容，而且还扩展到同政治相关的一些制度、事务和行为，如货币、住房、环境保护、食品安全、社会保障、文化活动、新闻媒体以及网络世界等。这就是说，政治史的题材得到了极大的扩充。参见吕一民、乐启良：《政治的回归——当代法国政治史的复兴探析》，《浙江学刊》，2011年第4期，第125页。 (52)Garrard, "Social History, Political History and Political Science," p. 107. (53)Leuchtenburg, "The Pertinence of Political History," pp. 589-590, 600. (54)"Interchange: The Practice of History," The Journal of American History, Vol. 90, No. 2(Sep., 2003), p. 609. (55)See Woody Holton, "American Revolution and Early Republic," in Eric Foner, and Lisa McGirr, eds., American History Now, Philadelphia: Temple University, 2011, pp. 24-51；李剑鸣：《意识形态与美国革命的历史叙事》，《史学集刊》，2011年第6期，第8－23页。 (56)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, p. 4. (57)Peter N. Stearns, "Social and Political History," Journal of Social History, Vol 16, No. 3(Spring, 1983), p. 4. (58)Jane Sherron De Hart, "Women's History, Gender History, and Political History," The Public Historian, Vol. 15, No. 4(Autumn, 1993), pp. 77-78. (59)Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings; David Armitage, The Declaration of Independence: A Global History, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2007. (60)1971年，勒高夫针对传统史学的缺陷，结合年鉴学派的史学实践，描绘了一个“新政治史”的“梦想”：这种“新政治史”不同于“旧政治史”的地方，在于它关注结构、社会分析、符号学和权力研究。Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" p. 12. 不难看出，他说的这种“新政治史”是把当时年鉴学派在经济史、社会史和心态史中尝试过的理念和方法投射到政治领域的产物，在一定程度上确实预示了后来法国政治史的发展方向，也能反映美国政治史的某些特点。 (61)Kousser, "Toward 'Total Political History'," pp. 526, 560. 法国学者罗桑瓦龙也有构建以政治概念史为核心的“总体史”的雄心。参见吕一民、乐启良：《政治的回归》，第129页。 (62)［德］德罗伊森著，胡昌智译：《历史知识理论》，北京大学出版社2006年版，第113页。 (63)原文为"History is past Politics and Politics present History"。因亚当斯反复引用这句话，别人误以为是他自己说的。参见Leff, "Revisioning U. S. Political History," p. 830。 (64)Beer, Bensen, et al., "New Trends in History," p. 897. (65)费弗尔的原话是：“没有经济或社会史这样的东西，有的只是历史。”语见Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone pf History?" p. 13。 (66)Don E. Fehrenbacher, "The New Political History and the Coming of the Civil War," Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 54, No. 2(May, 1985), p. 117. (67)James Harvey Robinson, The New History: Essays Illustrating the Modern Historical Outlook, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1912；中译本参见［美］詹姆斯·哈威·鲁滨孙著，齐思和等译：《新史学》，商务印书馆1964年版。 (68)转引自［法］费尔南·布罗代尔著，刘北成、周立红译：《论历史》，北京大学出版社2008年版，第143页。 (69)Wilentz, "American Political Histories," p. 24. (70)Frederick Jackson Turner, The Frontier in American History, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1920. (71)Charles A. Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, NeW York: The Macmillan Company，1913；中译本见［美］查尔斯·比尔德著，何希齐译：《美国宪法的经济观》，商务印书馆1949年版。 (72)Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Age of Jackson, Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1945. (73)Thomas C. Cochran, "The 'Presidential Synthesis' in American History," The American Historical Review, Vol. 53, No. 4(Jul., 1948), pp. 748-759. (74)Jacob, et al., The Democratic Experiment, pp. 381-382; Wilentz, "American Political Histories," p. 25. (75)Lee Bensen, "Research Problems in American Political History," in Mirra Komarovsky, ed., Common Frontiers of the Social Sciences, Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1957, pp. 113, 114. (76)Allan G. Bogue, "The Quest for Numeracy: Data and Methods in American Political History," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 21, No. 1(Summer, 1990), p. 95. (77)Benson, "Research Problems in American Political History," p. 117. (78)Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New York as a Tea Case, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961. (79)Bogue, "The Quest for Numeracy," pp. 97 -98. (80)Allan G. Bogue, "United States: The 'New' Political History," Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No. 1(Jan., 1968), pp. 5-27. (81)See Darrett B. Rutman, "Political History: The New and the Pseudo-New," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 2, No. 3(Winter, 1972), pp. 305-306. (82)Paula Baker, "The Midlife Crisis of the New Political History," Journal of American History, Vol. 86, No. 1(Jun., 1999), p. 158. (83)Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" p. 12. (84)William G. Shade, "'New Political History': Some Statistical Questions Raised," Social Science History, Vol. 5, No. 2(Spring, 1981), pp. 171-196. (85)Baker, "The Midlife Crisis of the New Political History," p. 158. (86)Ronald P. Formisano, "Review of The Democratic Experiment," The Journal of American History, Vol. 91, No. 4(March 2005), p. 1419. (87)关于“政治文化”的概念及其在政治史研究中的运用，参见Lowell Dittmer, "Political Culture and Political Symbolism: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis," World Politics, Vol. 29, No. 4(Jul., 1977), pp. 552-583; Lucian W. Pye, "Political Culture Revisited," Political Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 3(Sep., 1991), pp. 487-508; Ronald P. Formisano, "The Concept of Political Culture," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 31, No. 3(Winter, 2001), pp. 393-426。 (88)Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution, Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1967; Gordon S. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1969. (89)Robert E. Shalhope, "Toward a Republican Synthesis: The Emergence of an Understanding of Republicanism in American Historiography," William and Mary Quarterly, 3[rd] Ser., Vol. 29, No. 1(Jan., 1972), pp. 49-80; Daniel T. Rodgers, "Republicanism: The Career of a Concept," The Journal of American History, Vol. 79, No. 1(Jun., 1992), pp. 11-38. (90)Edmund S. Morgan, Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America, New York: W. W. Norton, 1988; David Hackett Fischer, Liberty and Freedom, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. (91)学界有时将贝林和伍德等人的政治文化研究与“剑桥学派”相混淆。昆廷·斯金纳曾对自己的路径和方法做过交代，声称自己关注理论文本形成的“更一般的社会和智性基质”，关注思想意识形成和传播的语境；然则他所处理的仍然是思想精英的政治写作。See Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1978, pp. x-xv；中译文见［英］昆廷·斯金纳著，奚瑞森、亚方译：《近代政治思想的基础》上册，商务印书馆2002年版，第3－9页。 (92)Jesse Lemisch, Jack Tar vs. John Bull: The Role of New York's Seamen in Precipitating the Revolution, New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1997. (93)Sean Wilentz, Chants Democratic: New York City and the Rise of the American Working Class, 1788-1855, New York: Oxford University Press, 1984. (94)Joyce Appleby, "Republicanism and Ideology," American Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 4(Autumn, 1985), pp. 462-463. (95)Kousser, "Toward 'Total Political History'," pp. 522-523. (96)在“法国政治史的复兴”中，带有政治文化特征的“政治概念史”独张一军，并且显示了构建以政治为基础的新总体史的雄心。参见吕一民、乐启良：《政治的回归》，第126－129页。 (97)Samuel P. Hays, "Theoretical Implications of Recent Work in the History of American Society and Politics," History and Theory, Vol. 26, No. 1( Feb., 1987), p. 15. (98)用勒高夫的话说，这是一种“侧重社会学的政治史”。See Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" p. 11. (99)Hays, "The Social Analysis of American Political History, 1880-1920," pp. 373, 374. (100)借用澳大利亚学者亨斯·弗兰克·邦吉欧诺的话说，这种社会政治史可以叫做“来自下层的政治史”(a political history from below)。See Macintyre, "The Rebirth of Political History," p. 1. (101)李剑鸣：《意识形态与美国革命的历史叙事》，《史学集刊》，2011年第6期，第8－23页。 (102)Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877, New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1988. (103)Lizabeth Cohen, A Consumers' Republic: The Politics of Moss Consumption in Postwar America, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003. (104)Elaine Tyler May, Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era, New York: Basic Books, 1st edition, 1988; revised and updated edition, 2008, see especially pp. 11-12. (105)勒高夫说，“教育就是一种权力和一种权力的工具”；又说，在艺术的领域也可以运用政治分析的方法。他的设想对于开拓政治史的题材和路径有一定的启示。Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" pp. 9, 10. (106)Nancy Siegel, "Cooking Up American Politics," Gastronomica: The Journal of Food and Culture, Vol. 8, No. 3(Summer, 2008), p. 54. (107)这方面的代表性著作是Richard E. Neustadt and Ernest R. May, Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision Makers, New York: The Free Press, 1986。 (108)关于政策史的形成和特色的讨论，参见Graham, "The Stunted Career of Policy History," pp. 15-37; Donald T. Critchlow, "A Prognosis of Policy History: Stunted: Or Deceivingly Vital? A Brief Reply to Hugh Davis Graham," The Public Historian, Vol. 15, No. 4(Autumn, 1993), pp. 50-61; Julian E. Zelizer, "Introduction: New Directions in Policy History," The Journal of Policy History, Val. 17, No. 1(2005), pp. 1-11; Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, pp. 4-5。 (109)Critehlow, "A Prognosis of Policy History," p. 61. (110)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, pp. 3-4. (111)Lynn Hunt, Inventing Human Rights: A History, New York: W. W. Norton, 2007. (112)Beer, Benson, et al., "New Trends in History," p. 897. (113)Elizabeth Fox-Genovese and Eugene D. Genovese, "The Political Crisis of Social History: A Marxian Perspective," Journal of Social History, Vol. 10, No. 2(Winter, 1976), p. 217. (114)Eley, and Nield, "Why Does Social History Ignore Politics?" p. 268. (115)Rebecca Edwards, "Politics as Social History: Political Cartoons in the Gilded Age," OAH Magazine of History, Vol. 13, No. 4(Summer, 1999), p. 11. (116)Leuchtenburg, "The Pertinence of Political History," pp. 587-588. (117)Stearns, "Social and Political History," pp. 3-5. (118)Kessler-Harris, "Social History," p. 249. (119)中国社会史初步发达的时期，政治的缺失以及社会史如何处理同政治史的关系等问题，也引起了关注。参见赵世瑜：《社会史研究向何处去》，《河北学刊》，2005年第1期，第66－68页。 (120)Alon Confino, "Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method," American Historical Review, Vol. 102, No. 5(Dec., 1997), p. 1395. (121)Elizabeth McKillen, "Introduction: Workers, Labor, and War: New Directions in the History of American Foreign Relations," Diplomatic History, Vol. 34, No. 4(September, 2010), pp. 641-642. (122) Craig, "Political History," p. 325. (123)［荷兰］F. R. 安克斯密特著，周建漳译：《历史表现》，北京大学出版社2011年版，第282、287页。 (124)Le Goff, "Is Politics Still the Backbone of History?" p. 13. (125)Kousser, "Restoring Politics to Political History," pp. 569-595; Paul F. Bourke and Donald A. DeBars, "Restoring Politics to PoliticalHistory," The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 15, No. 3(Winter, 1985), pp. 459-466. (126)J. Morgan Kousser, "Are Political Acts Unnatural?" The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 15, No. 3(Winter, 1985), p. 468. (127)Kousser, "Are Political Acts Unnatural?" p. 479. (128)Scan Wilentz, The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, New York: W. W. Norton, 2005, p. xx. (129)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, pp. 6, 8. (130)法国史学界的情况可以作为佐证。虽然复兴的政治史“在视野和方法上已打上了年鉴学派的深刻烙印”，但它并不仅只是对年鉴学派的借鉴与模仿，而是极力强调和坚持政治的自主性。例如，勒内·雷蒙就强烈反对年鉴学派的唯物史观，反对把社会经济史凌驾于政治史之上。参见吕一民、乐启良：《政治的回归》，《浙江学刊》，2011年第4期，第126页。 (131)See Bruce Levine, "The History of Politics and the Politics of History," International Labor and Working-Class History, No. 46(Fall, 1994), p. 60. (132)吕一民、乐启良：《政治的回归》，《浙江学刊》，2011年第4期，第127页。 (133)Wilentz, "American Political Histories," p. 23. (134)有的中国学者主张回到汉语“政治”的本义来思考政治史，关注国家(政府)政策的制定(“政”)与执行(“治”)，反对通过社会史的介入和改造来振兴政治史(参见和卫国：《中国政治史研究的反思》，《北方民族大学学报》，2009年第2期，第110页)。这里需要留意的是，中国政治史的状况与美国大不一样，美国政治史家呼吁“把国家找回来”，恢复政治史的自主性，是因为美国政治史经过社会史、文化史的反复冲击而呈七零八落的局面，国家几乎从政治史中消失；而中国政治史虽然也受到了社会史和文化的冲击与挑战，但其中的社会和文化元素仍然十分稀少，许多新的学术主张还停留在理念的层面，而没有转化为治史的实践；而且国家也一直是关注的焦点，国家和精英仍然是政治史的主角，这时提出“把国家找回来”。排斥社会史和文化史的介入，似乎缺乏必要的针对性。 (135)Kathryn Kish Sklar, "The New Political History and Women's History: Comments on The Democratic Experiment," The History Teacher, VoL 39, No. 4(Aug., 2006), pp. 509-514. (136)David Montgomery, "Trends in Working-Class History," Labour/Le Travail, Vol. 19(Spring, 1987), pp. 13-14. (137)［英］E. P. 汤普森著，钱乘旦等译：《英国工人阶级的形成》，译林出版社2001年版。 (138)刘军：《政治史复兴的启示——当前美国政治史学发展述评》，《史学理论研究》，1997年第2期，第86－96页。 (139)2006年11月在巴黎召开的一次政治史学术会议，即以该书为参照来讨论欧洲政治史的状况及前景。参见Romain Huret and Pauline Peretz, "Political History Today on Both Sides of the Atlantic," The Journal of Policy History, Vol. 21, No.3(2009), p. 298。 (140)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, p. 1. (141)Todd Shepard, "'History Is Past Politics?' Archives, 'Tainted Evidence,' and the Return of the State," The American Historical Review, Vol. 115, No. 2(April, 2010), pp. 476-477. (142)2006年11月在巴黎举行的一次政治史会议上，与会者提出了以下问题：能否把工人、少数群体和妇女整合进政治史的框架？当今国家和政治制度还具有与19世纪相同的意义、目标和力量吗？在仍以国家为中心的政治叙事中是否给外交政策留有余地？在一个认识模式发生危机的时代，能否在欧洲写出新的政治史以复兴这一领域而不重返过去的叙事形式？欧洲政治史学者对这些问题的思考，从一个侧面印证了美国政治史的现状。Huret and Peretz, "Political History Today on Both Sides of the Atlantic," p. 298. (143)多斯：《碎片化的历史学》，第56、78页。 (144)Alan Brinkley, "Writing the History of Contemporary America: Dilemmas and Challenges," Daedalus, Vol. 113, No. 3(Summer, 1984), pp. 124-125. (145)记忆研究的一个重要贡献，是探究借助发明(invention)和欣赏(appreciation)的过程而进行的关于过去的建构，是如何影响社会中的权力关系的。在关于记忆的研究文献中，"politics of memory"(有时是"politics of identity")成了一个重要的主题。简单地说就是：谁要求谁去记住什么以及为什么。但这种路径有一个后果，就是将记忆这个在根本上是文化性的概念，变成了一个政治概念；而且容易忽略其社会性的含义。从政治层面研究记忆的学者，往往没有谈及记忆对于社会文化关系的组织、分级和安排有何作用。参见Confino, "Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method," p. 1393。 (146)美国有学者运用"body politics"的概念分析奴隶制时代奴隶主和黑人对于奴隶身体的争夺，前者力图控制奴隶的身体以榨取其劳动，而黑人则力图通过对自己的身体的支配(如秘密聚会、跳舞)以抵制奴役。参见Stephanie M. H. Camp, "The Heasures of Resistance: Enslaved Women and Body Politics in the Plantation South, 1830-1861," The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 68, No. 3(Aug., 2002), pp. 533-572。 (147)"identity politics"或"politics of identity"是20世纪80年代以后出现于美国的一种政治策略，号召以“身份群体”(按族裔、宗教、性别、性取向等划分的群体)的名义争取和维护自身权益，通常不涉及更为普遍的社会目标。但在政治史研究中，“身份政治”是否能成为一个有效的分析范畴，美国学者中间存在争议。参见Wendell E. Pritchett, "Identity Politics, Past and Present," International Labor and Working-Class History, No. 67(Spring, 2005), pp. 33-41。 (148)关于现代社会的消费问题，本是社会史(消费方式的演变)和文化史(消费文化的形成和演变)的课题，但在政治学和(政治)经济学理论中，却也是一个与政治制度、政治过程和政治权利密切相关的问题，因此，采用政治分析的方式对历史中的消费和消费者进行讨论，可以看出消费在国家构建和公民权利演变中的突出意义。这种“消费者政治”(consumerist politics)的研究取径。产生了一系列有影响的研究成果，也开辟了政治史研究的新路径。参见Sheryl Kroen, "A Political History of the Consumer", The Historical Journal, Vol. 47, No. 3(Sep., 2004), pp. 709-736。 (149)"ethnic politics"包括两个方面：美国各个族裔为争取和维护本族裔的文化、经济和政治权利而进行各种政治活动；各个族裔作为政治力量在政治竞争和选举中扮演重要的角色。所谓“族裔政治”不仅涉及少数族裔与盎格鲁－撒克逊白人的权力分配，而且涉及不同族裔之间的权力关系。有的史家运用这个概念来分析地方政治变迁。参见James J. Connolly, "Reconstituting Ethnic Politics: Boston, 1909-1925," Social Science History, Vol. 19, No. 4(Winter, 1995), pp. 479-509。 (150)"gender politics"关注性别之间基于历史和文化而形成的社会政治区分和权力关系，强调历史中男性对女性的控制和压迫，声张女性争取独立和平等的正当性。运用“性别政治”的概念进行历史分析的例子，参见Elaine Forman Crane, "Abigail Adams, Gender Politics, and 'The History of Emily Montague': A Postscript," The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 64, No. 4(Oct., 2007), pp. 839-844。 (151)Jacob, et al., eds., The Democratic Experiment, p. 2. (152)Wilentz, "American Political Histories," p. 23. (153)据一个研究英国现代史的学者观察，最近几十年英国政治史的“理论和分析的趋向”，把研究“高层政治”(high politics)的“右倾史家”和研究大众政治的“左倾史家”拉得越来越近。这种观察大体上也适合美国史学界的情况。Pedersen, "What Is Political History How?" in Cannadine, ed., What Is History Now? p. 38. (责任编辑：admin) |