宋代义理史学再评价

两宋时期的史学在中国史学发展史上占有重要地位,从史学思想的角度考察宋代史学的发展历程,可以发现一个突出的现象就是史学出现义理化的发展趋势.这一史学趋势的盛行,促使两宋史家对史学的内涵、性质与功能等问题重新加以思考,提出了一些不同于前代的史学范畴.如何评价宋代义理史学的利弊得失,不仅对于正确认识宋代史学至关重要,而且对于全面估量传统史学也具有重要意义.     

司马迁的史学贡献

司马迁被中国历代史家尊为史圣,是联合国教科文组织公布的世界历史文化名人。他对中国史学有开创性的贡献:一是创立了以纪传体为主要标志的五体体制;二是究天人之际,构建了他的历史哲学思想体系;三是通古今之变,阐发了他对治乱兴亡历史规律的卓越见解;四是成一家之言,完成了体大思精、彪炳千秋的名山事业,无愧史家之绝唱,无韵之离骚。     

Sport and the sociologist 1890–1914

This essay is a response to Paul Ward’s piece ‘Last Man Picked. Do Mainstream Historians Need to Play with Sports Historians?’ (The International Journal of the History of Sport (2012), doi:10.1080/09523367.2012.726617). While Ward admits that his work is a polemic and is inspired largely by events in his youth, this response nevertheless questions the decision to critique an entire sub-discipline based on childhood experiences. Ward’s criticisms, however, are also practice-based, and this response also critically examines the lack of fresh evidence to support Ward’s claims regarding sports history’s existence outwith mainstream historical academia, and its supposed privileged place within the wider world of leisure history. The author makes that case that not only does sports history to take part in a wider historical dialogue, but must necessarily look to engage with sports studies practitioners. Finally, in the face of Ward’s criticisms, this essay reiterates what makes sport a vital subject for historians, in regional, national and international contexts.     

Last Man Picked. Do Mainstream Historians Need to Play with Sports Historians?

This polemical essay explores whether ‘mainstream’ political and social historians need to engage with the history of sport. It recounts the coercive nature of the author's encounters with sports and sports history and suggests that greater integration of the history of sport into histories of Britain relies on a mutual understanding of the imperatives of academic historians, not least in the world of the Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact’ agenda.     

The Cups That Cheered – A History of the Sigerson,Fitzgibbon and Higher Education Gaelic Games

This article follows up on Adrian Harvey's piece ‘The emergence of football in nineteenth-century England: the historiographic debate’ [International Journal of the History of Sport 30, no. 18 (2013): 2154–2163]. It reviews the historiography of Scottish football on the period before the First World War. There is considerable literature on the topic, but it is not by any means evenly distributed to cover Scotland's geography, nor does it give balanced coverage to a wide-enough variety of thematic subjects. The author places this historiography into six broad categories which reflect the audience, research interests and methodology of the pieces, and offers a critical assessment of work still to be done in what is a disparate field.     

Form as Content,or, It's All Style

How we say what we say is a part of what we say. In this sense, the form and the content of a statement are inseparable. Style matters semiotically as well as aesthetically. These three assertions are supported by a series of examples from a wide range of verbal and non-verbal sports-historical texts. In accordance with the post-modernist emphasis on reflexivity, several of my examples are taken from my own efforts to ‘do’ history.     

Early Football and the Emergence of Modern Soccer,c. 1840–1880

The origins of the modern football codes have attracted considerable attention from historians of sport over the past two decades, resulting in a vigorous debate between the self-described ‘revisionists’, led by Adrian Harvey, and the followers of Eric Dunning, dubbed by their opponents as the ‘orthodox’ view. However, this article argues that both sides commit the same methodological errors: an overestimation of the importance of written rules, an ahistoric view of culture and continuity, and a tendency to view the past through the lens of the present. By re-examining the historical record of early forms of football and presenting a broader contextual perspective for the emergence of the football codes in the 1840 to 1880 period, the article aims to address some of the key historiographical issues that confront historians of sport today.     

20世纪西方新史学范式对外国教育史研究的启示

20世纪在西方史学中占主导地位的新史学范式具有研究范围扩展、采用跨学科研究方法、强调史学家的主体认识作用、用问题史学取代传统的叙述史学等特征 ,它至少在研究的领域、研究者的主体性、叙事体例三个方面对外国教育史研究具有方法论的启示。     

和而不同:教育史学与比较教育学辨析

教育史学科和比较教育学科是两个关系极为密切的学科。虽然两门学科在学科性质、研究目的、研究对象、研究内容、研究方法、研究时间维度上差异显著,但也存在着许多交叉之处。厘清教育史学科与比较教育学科的关系,探讨二者的联系和区别,对深入认识两个学科和加强基础理论研究具有重要意义。教育史学和比较教育学既应彼此借鉴研究方法,加强科际交流,同时又要创新研究范式,彰显学科特色。     

西史东渐中的坚守:刘咸炘的中国本位史学理论

刘咸炘生活于中国史学新旧转型的时代,他领悟中国传统史学家的思维习惯,运用传统史学理论范畴,体察时代的脉搏,形成了独具特色的中国本位史学理论。刘咸炘研究"前四史"与浙东史学,意在为传统史学表微,张扬中国史学的内在精神与活力。在西史东渐的大潮中,刘咸炘也关注西方史学理论与方法,但对鲁滨逊等西方史学家的所谓"新史学"不以为然。在中国史学走向世界,构建自身的理论话语体系之际,对刘咸炘的中国本位史学理论进行深入的研究,是一项有意义的学术工作。