论文部分内容阅读
对于中西古代文明研究中的诸多问题,刘家和认为,中国古代虽有夷夏之别,但夷与夏可以互相转化,这种夷夏互转的过程,就是华夏化发展的过程。在中国古代,以中原为中心的对流活动有效地推进了以华夏族为主体的多民族共同体的形成。晁福林认为,从远古到夏商时期,人们的历史观念的主干是对于氏族传承关系的记忆。周代的历史观念与史书体裁依然没有越出氏族史、宗族史的藩蓠,真正意义上的具有完备体例的国家史在秦汉帝国时代才得以出现。杨共乐对国家起源问题进行了再思考,认为恩格斯所说的“经济利益相互冲突的阶级”、“不可调和的对立面”并非是指奴隶主和奴隶,在国家起源的原因问题方面,恩格斯虽然更多地强调了阶级斗争的作用,但其从未断言这是国家产生的唯一根源。蒋重跃认为,周代封国与希腊城邦间的相似之处表现有四,即古代中国的“国”字与古希腊文的“城邦”一词在含义上有相通之处;殖民活动;小国寡民与独立性。二者间的不同之处有二,即两重性与单一性之不同及发展前景不同。易宁以秦汉帝国与罗马帝国为代表,对古代帝国形成过程的“异”中之“同”与“同”中之“异”进行了探讨,认为统一与征服是区分古代帝国性质的重要依据。刘林海对罗马帝国的命运问题进行了重新思考,认为无论是从历史层面还是从认识层面上,罗马帝国的命运都是既断又续,断续并存(转型)的。
For many problems in the study of ancient civilizations in both China and the West, Liu Jiahe holds that although the ancient Chinese did not differ from Yixia, Yibin and Xia could be transformed into each other. The process of reciprocal Yixia is the development of Huaxia. In ancient China, the convection centered on the Central Plains effectively promoted the formation of a multi-ethnic community with Huaxia as the main body. Chao Fulin believes that from the ancient times to the Xia and Shang Dynasties, the backbone of the people’s historical concepts is the memory of the clan’s inheritance relations. The concept of history and the history books in the Zhou Dynasty still did not surpass the clan history of the clan history and the clan history. In the true sense, the complete history of the national history appeared in the Qin and Han dynasties. Yang Gongle rehearsed the issue of the origin of the country. According to Engels, “the class of conflicting economic interests” and the “irreconcilable antithesis” do not refer to the slave-owners and slaves. Although Engels more The role of the class struggle was emphasized, but it had never been asserted that this was the only source of statehood. According to Jiang Zhongyue, there are four similarities between the seal state and the Greek city-states in the Zhou Dynasty: that is, the “country” in ancient China is similar in meaning to the term “city-state” in ancient Greek; colonial activities; People and independence. The differences between the two are twofold: the differences between duality and unity and the different development prospects. With the representatives of the Qin and Han empire and the Roman Empire, Yi Ning explores the differences between the “same” and “same” in the process of the formation of the ancient empire and holds that unity and conquest are the important bases for distinguishing the nature of ancient empires . Liu Linhai rethought the question of the fate of the Roman Empire, holding that the fate of the Roman Empire is both continual and intermittent (transitional), both historically and epistemically.