This collaborative volume derives from a conference celebrating G. E. R. Lloyd’s eightieth birthday on January 25, 2013. Lloyd took a leading role in editing the book, which adds several papers (unspecified) that were not delivered at the original conference and omits some that were. As it would not be feasible to provide a full account of each chapter,1 I shall aim here to convey the overall strengths and weaknesses of the collection. Ancient Greece and China Compared contains several original and useful case studies preceded by many pages of general remarks that are less compelling.2 An example of the latter is Walter Scheidel’s chapter, “Comparing Comparisons” (40–58). Although his intentions are clearly laudable (he regards comparison as valuable, among other reasons, “as a way out of parochialism” [41], a phrase that he borrows from Lloyd and Nathan Sivin), he does not reflect on the reasons why scholars have been wary of comparative history. Much of the resistance, I suspect, stems from the perception that previous historians did it badly. I am referring not only to the growing dissatisfaction, in the Post-War years, with universalist narratives like those of Spengler or Toynbee,3 but also, in our
这本协作书源于2013年1月25日庆祝g.e.r. Lloyd八十大寿的会议。劳埃德在这本书的编辑工作中发挥了主导作用，书中增加了几篇未在最初会议上发表的论文(未指明)，并省略了一些在最初会议上发表的论文。由于不可能对每一章都作全面的介绍，我在这里的目的是传达该合集的总体优点和缺点。《古希腊与中国比较》包含了几个原始的和有用的案例研究，前面有许多页不那么引人注目的一般性评论后者的一个例子是沃尔特·沙伊德尔的章节，“比较比较”(40-58)。尽管他的意图显然值得称赞(他认为比较是有价值的，除其他原因外，“作为摆脱狭隘主义的一种方式”，这是他从劳埃德和内森·西文(Lloyd and Nathan Sivin)那里借用的一个短语)，但他没有反思学者们对比较历史持谨慎态度的原因。我怀疑，这种抵制很大程度上源于人们认为，以前的历史学家在这方面做得很糟糕。我指的不仅是战后人们对斯宾格勒或汤因比等人的普遍主义叙事日益增长的不满，而且是我们的
{"title":"G. E. R. Lloyd and Jingyi Jenny Zhao, eds., in collaboration with Qiaosheng Dong, Ancient Greece and China Compared. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.","authors":"P. Goldin","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.11","url":null,"abstract":"This collaborative volume derives from a conference celebrating G. E. R. Lloyd’s eightieth birthday on January 25, 2013. Lloyd took a leading role in editing the book, which adds several papers (unspecified) that were not delivered at the original conference and omits some that were. As it would not be feasible to provide a full account of each chapter,1 I shall aim here to convey the overall strengths and weaknesses of the collection. Ancient Greece and China Compared contains several original and useful case studies preceded by many pages of general remarks that are less compelling.2 An example of the latter is Walter Scheidel’s chapter, “Comparing Comparisons” (40–58). Although his intentions are clearly laudable (he regards comparison as valuable, among other reasons, “as a way out of parochialism” [41], a phrase that he borrows from Lloyd and Nathan Sivin), he does not reflect on the reasons why scholars have been wary of comparative history. Much of the resistance, I suspect, stems from the perception that previous historians did it badly. I am referring not only to the growing dissatisfaction, in the Post-War years, with universalist narratives like those of Spengler or Toynbee,3 but also, in our","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"42 1","pages":"333 - 335"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.11","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56562383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The present article explores questions about the composition, performance, circulation, and transmission of early Chinese poetry by examining a small number of poems from the received Mao shi and their counterparts in recently discovered manuscripts. Starting from a close examination of the poem “Xi shuai” (“Cricket”), the essay briefly discusses the problems we face in dealing with looted manuscripts before advancing toward rethinking the patterns of early Chinese poetic composition and transmission. Instead of taking individual poems as discrete, reified objects in the form we encounter them in the Mao shi, it is suggested to read them as particular instantiations of circumscribed repertoires where the individual poetic text is but one of many realizations of a shared body of ideas and expressions. This analysis is informed by the examination of both manuscript texts and the received literature, but also by comparative perspectives gained from both medieval Chinese literature and other ancient and medieval literary traditions. In emphasizing the formation of poetry as a continuous process, it leaves behind notions of “the original text,” authorship, and the moment of “original composition”—notions that held no prominence in the early Chinese literary tradition before the empire. 提要 通過檢視部分傳世《毛詩》內容及其在近年所見出土文獻中的對應篇章，本文探究了關於早期中國詩歌成篇、表演、流通以及傳的問題。以對《蟋蟀》詩的細緻考察為起點，本文簡要討論了我們在處理盜掘寫本文獻時所面對的諸種問題，進而重新思考早期中國詩歌的成篇和傳播模式。學界通常將各首詩歌視為彼此分離且具象化的個體、以《毛詩》中所見的那種形式存在，與此立場不同，本文建議將它們視作有限素材庫的諸種特定實現。在這些素材庫中，作為個體的詩歌文本僅僅是某個包含多種理念和表達之共享整體的諸多具體實現之一。這一分析源自於對寫本文獻和傳世文獻的雙向考察，也得益於在中國中古文學與其它早期及中古文學傳統之間建立起的比較性視野。通過將詩歌形成強調為一種持續性過程，本文摒棄了諸如“原本”、“作者”以及“原作”時刻的概念，這些概念在前帝國時代的早期中國文學傳統中並不重要。
{"title":"“XI SHUAI” 蟋蟀 (“CRICKET”) AND ITS CONSEQUENCES: ISSUES IN EARLY CHINESE POETRY AND TEXTUAL STUDIES","authors":"Martin 馬丁 Kern 柯","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.1","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present article explores questions about the composition, performance, circulation, and transmission of early Chinese poetry by examining a small number of poems from the received Mao shi and their counterparts in recently discovered manuscripts. Starting from a close examination of the poem “Xi shuai” (“Cricket”), the essay briefly discusses the problems we face in dealing with looted manuscripts before advancing toward rethinking the patterns of early Chinese poetic composition and transmission. Instead of taking individual poems as discrete, reified objects in the form we encounter them in the Mao shi, it is suggested to read them as particular instantiations of circumscribed repertoires where the individual poetic text is but one of many realizations of a shared body of ideas and expressions. This analysis is informed by the examination of both manuscript texts and the received literature, but also by comparative perspectives gained from both medieval Chinese literature and other ancient and medieval literary traditions. In emphasizing the formation of poetry as a continuous process, it leaves behind notions of “the original text,” authorship, and the moment of “original composition”—notions that held no prominence in the early Chinese literary tradition before the empire. 提要 通過檢視部分傳世《毛詩》內容及其在近年所見出土文獻中的對應篇章，本文探究了關於早期中國詩歌成篇、表演、流通以及傳的問題。以對《蟋蟀》詩的細緻考察為起點，本文簡要討論了我們在處理盜掘寫本文獻時所面對的諸種問題，進而重新思考早期中國詩歌的成篇和傳播模式。學界通常將各首詩歌視為彼此分離且具象化的個體、以《毛詩》中所見的那種形式存在，與此立場不同，本文建議將它們視作有限素材庫的諸種特定實現。在這些素材庫中，作為個體的詩歌文本僅僅是某個包含多種理念和表達之共享整體的諸多具體實現之一。這一分析源自於對寫本文獻和傳世文獻的雙向考察，也得益於在中國中古文學與其它早期及中古文學傳統之間建立起的比較性視野。通過將詩歌形成強調為一種持續性過程，本文摒棄了諸如“原本”、“作者”以及“原作”時刻的概念，這些概念在前帝國時代的早期中國文學傳統中並不重要。","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"1 1","pages":"39 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.1","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56562255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract While research on Warring States, Qin, and Han manuscripts is flourishing, much less is known about the use of manuscripts during the earlier stages of Chinese history, for which material evidence has not been preserved. Based on the layout features and textual anomalies in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, this article explores the traces of use of perishable writing supports in the process of the production of bronze inscriptions in this period and reconstructs their functions and physical qualities. Based on the surveyed evidence, the article posits that two distinct exemplar manuscripts were used in the inscription-making process: an original “master copy” that was kept aside for proofreading purposes and a secondary “blueprint” that was employed directly in the technical process of inscription-making. A single blueprint would be used consecutively by several craftsmen to produce a set of inscriptions on different types of vessels. The word count and layout of many inscriptions were already carefully planned during the process of their composition, and any study of a bronze text should therefore begin with the evaluation of its visual qualities. Moreover, this probe provides unambiguous evidence for the use of tube-lining in the inscription-making process and reconstructs the complete chaîne opératoire of bronze inscription production in the Late Western Zhou period. The article also offers insights into the level of literacy and the division of labor in bronze workshops, and touches upon the display function of bronze epigraphy during the Western Zhou period. 提要 近年來，戰國秦漢簡牘研究已成爲熱潮。相比之下，戰國以前寫本由於出土材料的闕失，其使用情況知之甚少。本文根據西周銅器銘文的佈局特徵及異常現象，對銅器銘文製作過程中使用易腐材質寫本的痕跡進行了探討，並對其物理性質及在銘文製作過程中的具體作用進行了復原。基於分析，本文指出在銅器銘文製作過程中使用了兩種不同的寫本：一種是用於審閱的“原稿”；一種是用於銘文實際製作過程的“藍本”。製作一套同銘器時（包括不同器類的器物），工匠們會輪流使用同一份藍本。不少銘文的起草過程中已對銘文字數、文字佈局進行了細心設計，因此，每一篇銘文的釋讀工作應該從考察銘文的視覺特徵入手。此外，本文爲泥條堆塑法在銘文製作過程中的應用提供了明證，復原了西周晚期銅器銘文製作的全部流程。再者，本文還關涉到西周時期銅器作坊中工匠的讀寫能力、勞動分工以及西周時期青銅銘刻的展示功能等問題。
虽然对战国、秦朝和汉朝手稿的研究正在蓬勃发展，但对中国历史早期手稿的使用却知之甚少，这方面的物证也没有保存下来。本文以西周青铜器铭文的布局特征和文字异常为基础，探讨了这一时期青铜器铭文制作过程中易腐文字支架的使用痕迹，重构了其功能和物理性质。根据调查的证据，文章认为在铭文制作过程中使用了两种不同的范例手稿:一种是原始的“主副本”，用于校对目的，另一种是次要的“蓝图”，直接用于铭文制作的技术过程。一幅蓝图将由几个工匠连续使用，在不同类型的容器上制作一套铭文。许多铭文的字数和布局都是在制作过程中精心设计的，因此，对青铜文字的任何研究都应该从评估其视觉质量开始。此外，这一探索为铭文制作过程中使用管衬提供了明确的证据，并重建了西周后期青铜铭文制作的完整的cha ne opacimatire。文章还对西周时期青铜器作坊的文化水平和劳动分工进行了探讨，并对青铜器铭文的展示功能进行了探讨。提要 近年來，戰國秦漢簡牘研究已成爲熱潮。相比之下，戰國以前寫本由於出土材料的闕失，其使用情況知之甚少。本文根據西周銅器銘文的佈局特徵及異常現象，對銅器銘文製作過程中使用易腐材質寫本的痕跡進行了探討，並對其物理性質及在銘文製作過程中的具體作用進行了復原。基於分析，本文指出在銅器銘文製作過程中使用了兩種不同的寫本：一種是用於審閱的“原稿”；一種是用於銘文實際製作過程的“藍本”。製作一套同銘器時（包括不同器類的器物），工匠們會輪流使用同一份藍本。不少銘文的起草過程中已對銘文字數、文字佈局進行了細心設計，因此，每一篇銘文的釋讀工作應該從考察銘文的視覺特徵入手。此外，本文爲泥條堆塑法在銘文製作過程中的應用提供了明證，復原了西周晚期銅器銘文製作的全部流程。再者，本文還關涉到西周時期銅器作坊中工匠的讀寫能力、勞動分工以及西周時期青銅銘刻的展示功能等問題。
{"title":"WRITING BEFORE INSCRIBING: ON THE USE OF MANUSCRIPTS IN THE PRODUCTION OF WESTERN ZHOU BRONZE INSCRIPTIONS","authors":"Ondřej 安瑞 Škrabal 石","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.9","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While research on Warring States, Qin, and Han manuscripts is flourishing, much less is known about the use of manuscripts during the earlier stages of Chinese history, for which material evidence has not been preserved. Based on the layout features and textual anomalies in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, this article explores the traces of use of perishable writing supports in the process of the production of bronze inscriptions in this period and reconstructs their functions and physical qualities. Based on the surveyed evidence, the article posits that two distinct exemplar manuscripts were used in the inscription-making process: an original “master copy” that was kept aside for proofreading purposes and a secondary “blueprint” that was employed directly in the technical process of inscription-making. A single blueprint would be used consecutively by several craftsmen to produce a set of inscriptions on different types of vessels. The word count and layout of many inscriptions were already carefully planned during the process of their composition, and any study of a bronze text should therefore begin with the evaluation of its visual qualities. Moreover, this probe provides unambiguous evidence for the use of tube-lining in the inscription-making process and reconstructs the complete chaîne opératoire of bronze inscription production in the Late Western Zhou period. The article also offers insights into the level of literacy and the division of labor in bronze workshops, and touches upon the display function of bronze epigraphy during the Western Zhou period. 提要 近年來，戰國秦漢簡牘研究已成爲熱潮。相比之下，戰國以前寫本由於出土材料的闕失，其使用情況知之甚少。本文根據西周銅器銘文的佈局特徵及異常現象，對銅器銘文製作過程中使用易腐材質寫本的痕跡進行了探討，並對其物理性質及在銘文製作過程中的具體作用進行了復原。基於分析，本文指出在銅器銘文製作過程中使用了兩種不同的寫本：一種是用於審閱的“原稿”；一種是用於銘文實際製作過程的“藍本”。製作一套同銘器時（包括不同器類的器物），工匠們會輪流使用同一份藍本。不少銘文的起草過程中已對銘文字數、文字佈局進行了細心設計，因此，每一篇銘文的釋讀工作應該從考察銘文的視覺特徵入手。此外，本文爲泥條堆塑法在銘文製作過程中的應用提供了明證，復原了西周晚期銅器銘文製作的全部流程。再者，本文還關涉到西周時期銅器作坊中工匠的讀寫能力、勞動分工以及西周時期青銅銘刻的展示功能等問題。","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"42 1","pages":"273 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.9","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56563453","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this study I take men from Donghai, a region of northeast China, as a case study for examining models of success in the Western Han (206 b.c.e.–9 c.e.). Employing digital tools to mine data from The Grand Scribe's Records (Shi ji) and The History of the Western Han (Han shu), I explore the social networks and career patterns of men from a region that enjoyed a reputation for producing a remarkable number of high officials and celebrated Ru. I focus on three questions. First, what was the social mechanism that enabled people to distinguish themselves at both the local and the imperial levels? Second, did these celebrated men from Donghai serve as bridges connecting the local to the capital, directing resources back to their hometown and helping their local fellows achieve success? Third, did their positions in the central government remove them from local society by transforming them into capital-dwelling elites primarily concerned about the success of their families in the central court? In addressing these questions, I probe the dynamics between bureaucratic hierarchy, social networks, and the flow of talent and resources. I investigate various understandings of prestige and the strategies for climbing the ladder of success. Furthermore, I ask which forms of social prestige—for example, academic reputation, wealth, social networks—could bypass the hierarchical system imposed by the imperial bureaucracy, providing direct access to lofty positions. Did the patterns of success seen in the Donghai group reflect a bias built into the sources, constitute a regional variation, or provide a universal model for success in early imperial China? 提要 西漢時期，數量可觀的高層官員和儒生來自東海郡。以他們為研究中心，本文旨在探討西漢儒生的成功模式（公元前 206 年—公元前 9 年）。 利用數字人文挖掘《史記》和《漢書》中人物傳記的數據，本文重現了來自東海地區官員和儒生的社交網絡和仕途模式。在本文中，我專注於三個問題。首先，什麼樣的社會機制能夠讓沒有顯赫家庭背景的人取得政治上的成功， 爬上權力的金字塔。 第二，這些來自東海的官員和儒生是否成爲連接當地與京城的橋樑，是否將資源引向家鄉，並幫助同籍貫的人取得成功？第三，東海官員在中央朝廷任職之後， 是否逐漸脫離了地方社會，而成爲以京城為中心的精英。通過回答這些問題，我探討了官僚等級制度，社交網絡，以及人才和資源流動之間的動態關係。本文研究了西漢時期各種對資源的理解以及攀登成功階梯的策略，探尋哪種形式的社會資源—學術聲譽，財富，社交網絡 –可以幫助西漢儒生跨越官僚等級制度，直接進入高層職位。最後本文討論了東海集團的成功模式是否僅僅反應了一個地區的特例，還是提供了早期帝國儒生成功的普遍模式？
{"title":"RU SCHOLARS, SOCIAL NETWORKS, AND BUREAUCRACY: DONGHAI 東海 MEN AND MODELS FOR SUCCESS IN WESTERN HAN CHINA (206 b.c.e.–9 c.e.)","authors":"Liang 亮 Cai 蔡","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.8","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this study I take men from Donghai, a region of northeast China, as a case study for examining models of success in the Western Han (206 b.c.e.–9 c.e.). Employing digital tools to mine data from The Grand Scribe's Records (Shi ji) and The History of the Western Han (Han shu), I explore the social networks and career patterns of men from a region that enjoyed a reputation for producing a remarkable number of high officials and celebrated Ru. I focus on three questions. First, what was the social mechanism that enabled people to distinguish themselves at both the local and the imperial levels? Second, did these celebrated men from Donghai serve as bridges connecting the local to the capital, directing resources back to their hometown and helping their local fellows achieve success? Third, did their positions in the central government remove them from local society by transforming them into capital-dwelling elites primarily concerned about the success of their families in the central court? In addressing these questions, I probe the dynamics between bureaucratic hierarchy, social networks, and the flow of talent and resources. I investigate various understandings of prestige and the strategies for climbing the ladder of success. Furthermore, I ask which forms of social prestige—for example, academic reputation, wealth, social networks—could bypass the hierarchical system imposed by the imperial bureaucracy, providing direct access to lofty positions. Did the patterns of success seen in the Donghai group reflect a bias built into the sources, constitute a regional variation, or provide a universal model for success in early imperial China? 提要 西漢時期，數量可觀的高層官員和儒生來自東海郡。以他們為研究中心，本文旨在探討西漢儒生的成功模式（公元前 206 年—公元前 9 年）。 利用數字人文挖掘《史記》和《漢書》中人物傳記的數據，本文重現了來自東海地區官員和儒生的社交網絡和仕途模式。在本文中，我專注於三個問題。首先，什麼樣的社會機制能夠讓沒有顯赫家庭背景的人取得政治上的成功， 爬上權力的金字塔。 第二，這些來自東海的官員和儒生是否成爲連接當地與京城的橋樑，是否將資源引向家鄉，並幫助同籍貫的人取得成功？第三，東海官員在中央朝廷任職之後， 是否逐漸脫離了地方社會，而成爲以京城為中心的精英。通過回答這些問題，我探討了官僚等級制度，社交網絡，以及人才和資源流動之間的動態關係。本文研究了西漢時期各種對資源的理解以及攀登成功階梯的策略，探尋哪種形式的社會資源—學術聲譽，財富，社交網絡 –可以幫助西漢儒生跨越官僚等級制度，直接進入高層職位。最後本文討論了東海集團的成功模式是否僅僅反應了一個地區的特例，還是提供了早期帝國儒生成功的普遍模式？","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"42 1","pages":"237 - 271"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56563444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The death of Li Xueqin is a great loss to international sinology and the field of Early China studies. There can be few readers of Early China who have not read any of his work, which is often cited in the articles published herein. He also contributed articles to the journal and participated in our forums. Moreover, Early China 35–36 (2012–13), guest-edited by Xing Wen 邢文, was dedicated to Li in honor of his eightieth birthday and included “Interviews with Li Xueqin” by Wang Tao and Sarah Allan, in which he discussed his life and work.1 Li Xueqin was one of the first Chinese sinologists to travel abroad when China opened up after the Cultural Revolution, visiting Australia in 1979 and the United States not long afterwards. He was already well known outside of China from his publications. Li was unusual among his generation of Chinese sinologists in having serviceable English. Like so much else that he knew, his English was largely self-taught, from reading books in English. This reading also gave him unusual sophistication about Western society and he adapted easily, making a number of friends from a generation that we have been losing one by one, including K. C. Chang, Noel Barnard, David Nivison, and David Keightley. Others, fortunately still with us, included Michael Loewe and Léon Vandermeersch. From the time of these first visits on, Li Xueqin played an important role in promoting international scholarly cooperation and collaboration through institutional exchanges, international conferences and publications. He also often introduced Western scholarship in his teaching and writing. I met him in 1981 and had the extraordinary good fortune of collaborating with him on numerous projects over the subsequent decades. Many other Western scholars were also the beneficiaries of his friendship and intellectual generosity.
李雪芹的逝世是国际汉学和早期中国研究领域的重大损失。《中国早期》的读者很少没有读过他的作品，这些作品经常被引用在这里发表的文章中。他还为杂志投稿，参加我们的论坛。此外，邢文文主编的《早期中国35-36(2012-13)》(Early China 35-36(2012-13))是为纪念李学勤八十大寿而专门为他撰写的，其中包括王涛和莎拉·艾伦的《李学勤访谈录》，其中讨论了他的生活和工作李学勤是文革后中国开放后第一批出国的中国汉学家之一，1979年访问澳大利亚，不久之后访问美国。他的作品在国外已经很有名了。李在他那一代中国汉学家中是不寻常的，他的英语很实用。就像他知道的许多其他事情一样，他的英语很大程度上是自学的，通过阅读英语书籍。这些阅读也让他对西方社会有了不同寻常的了解，而且他很容易适应，结交了许多我们正在一个接一个失去的一代人的朋友，包括k.c. Chang、Noel Barnard、David Nivison和David Keightley。幸运的是，其他人还在我们身边，包括迈克尔·洛伊(Michael Loewe)和莱姆森·范德米尔施(lsamon Vandermeersch)。从这些第一次访问开始，李学勤通过机构交流、国际会议和出版物，在促进国际学术合作和协作方面发挥了重要作用。他还经常在教学和写作中介绍西方学术。我在1981年认识了他，并有幸在随后的几十年里与他合作了许多项目。许多其他西方学者也受益于他的友谊和知识的慷慨。
{"title":"LI XUEQIN 李學勤 (1933–2019)","authors":"Liu Guozhong, E. Ryden","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.12","url":null,"abstract":"The death of Li Xueqin is a great loss to international sinology and the field of Early China studies. There can be few readers of Early China who have not read any of his work, which is often cited in the articles published herein. He also contributed articles to the journal and participated in our forums. Moreover, Early China 35–36 (2012–13), guest-edited by Xing Wen 邢文, was dedicated to Li in honor of his eightieth birthday and included “Interviews with Li Xueqin” by Wang Tao and Sarah Allan, in which he discussed his life and work.1 Li Xueqin was one of the first Chinese sinologists to travel abroad when China opened up after the Cultural Revolution, visiting Australia in 1979 and the United States not long afterwards. He was already well known outside of China from his publications. Li was unusual among his generation of Chinese sinologists in having serviceable English. Like so much else that he knew, his English was largely self-taught, from reading books in English. This reading also gave him unusual sophistication about Western society and he adapted easily, making a number of friends from a generation that we have been losing one by one, including K. C. Chang, Noel Barnard, David Nivison, and David Keightley. Others, fortunately still with us, included Michael Loewe and Léon Vandermeersch. From the time of these first visits on, Li Xueqin played an important role in promoting international scholarly cooperation and collaboration through institutional exchanges, international conferences and publications. He also often introduced Western scholarship in his teaching and writing. I met him in 1981 and had the extraordinary good fortune of collaborating with him on numerous projects over the subsequent decades. Many other Western scholars were also the beneficiaries of his friendship and intellectual generosity.","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"62 1","pages":"15 - 24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.12","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56562405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"REMEMBRANCES OF LI XUEQIN (1933–2019)","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.13","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"42 1","pages":"25 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.13","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56562450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines the attitudes of Warring States textual witnesses to the increase in presence of and reliance on bamboo manuscripts in communicating knowledge. Based on a rereading of transmitted materials and four manuscript texts (*Wuwang Jianzuo A and B, *Baoxun, and the Zhou Wuwang you ji) from the Warring States period, I analyze how contemporaries dealt with questions about the status of (manuscript) texts, their use and transmission, their trustworthiness, and their ability to preserve knowledge. These are texts that talk about themselves. They remark upon the physicality of text and the act of writing, the problem of oral and written transmission, and the differences in the ability of memory and manuscripts to store, hide, and reveal knowledge. I argue that these different reflections reveal a change in the predominant medium of communicating knowledge towards an increased reliance on bamboo manuscripts gradually and partially replacing traditional knowledge practices. 提要 本文探討戰國時期文本對寫本廣泛使用的反思。基於重讀傳世文獻和四篇出土文獻（分別為：上博簡《武王踐祚》甲、乙本，清華簡《寶訓》和《周武王有疾周公所自以代王之志》），本文討論戰國時期人如何看待寫本和文本的地位、它們保存信息的功能和可信度，以及寫本的使用與流傳、傳授。這些文本的特點呈現在“自我反思”。它們的內容正是講述自己作為寫本的物質性、書寫、口頭和書寫傳授的問題，以及記憶和寫本在保存、隱藏和傳達信息能力上的區別。我認為這些“反思”呈現了傳達信息的主要媒體的轉變：從傳統意義下的知識實踐到逐漸依賴寫本載體。
{"title":"A SELF-REFLEXIVE PRAXIS: CHANGING ATTITUDES TOWARDS MANUSCRIPT AND TEXT IN EARLY CHINA","authors":"Rens 致知 Krijgsman 武","doi":"10.1017/eac.2019.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2019.2","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the attitudes of Warring States textual witnesses to the increase in presence of and reliance on bamboo manuscripts in communicating knowledge. Based on a rereading of transmitted materials and four manuscript texts (*Wuwang Jianzuo A and B, *Baoxun, and the Zhou Wuwang you ji) from the Warring States period, I analyze how contemporaries dealt with questions about the status of (manuscript) texts, their use and transmission, their trustworthiness, and their ability to preserve knowledge. These are texts that talk about themselves. They remark upon the physicality of text and the act of writing, the problem of oral and written transmission, and the differences in the ability of memory and manuscripts to store, hide, and reveal knowledge. I argue that these different reflections reveal a change in the predominant medium of communicating knowledge towards an increased reliance on bamboo manuscripts gradually and partially replacing traditional knowledge practices. 提要 本文探討戰國時期文本對寫本廣泛使用的反思。基於重讀傳世文獻和四篇出土文獻（分別為：上博簡《武王踐祚》甲、乙本，清華簡《寶訓》和《周武王有疾周公所自以代王之志》），本文討論戰國時期人如何看待寫本和文本的地位、它們保存信息的功能和可信度，以及寫本的使用與流傳、傳授。這些文本的特點呈現在“自我反思”。它們的內容正是講述自己作為寫本的物質性、書寫、口頭和書寫傳授的問題，以及記憶和寫本在保存、隱藏和傳達信息能力上的區別。我認為這些“反思”呈現了傳達信息的主要媒體的轉變：從傳統意義下的知識實踐到逐漸依賴寫本載體。","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"42 1","pages":"75 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2019.2","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56563231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As the title suggests, Michael Hunter’s Confucius Beyond the Analects aims to debunk the traditional view of the received Lun yu as the most authoritative source of early Confucian teachings associated with the historical figure of Confucius. Hunter makes the case that our received Lun yu was assembled in the Western Han, probably around the time of the accession of Emperor Wu in 141 b.c.e. He further demonstrates that patterns of Kongzi references in our received corpus, as well as textual parallelisms, suggests that there was no authoritative written source of early Confucian teachings that circulated in the pre-Han period. PreHan authors drew widely from a variety of written sources when invoking Kongzi, whereas texts dating to the latter part of Wu’s reign tend to focus on our received Lun yu, suggesting the relatively sudden appearance on the scene of a newly canonical text. Most radically, he further argues that the material found in our received Lun yu was composed in the Western Han; the content and arrangement of this text reflects the particular needs and interests of the Western Han compilers, rather than being an expression of a Warring States (let alone early Warring States) tradition associated with Confucius and his disciples. “Wherever it came from, whenever it was compiled,” Hunter argues,
{"title":"Michael Hunter. Confucius Beyond the Analects. Leiden: Brill, 2017.","authors":"E. Slingerland","doi":"10.1017/eac.2018.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eac.2018.12","url":null,"abstract":"As the title suggests, Michael Hunter’s Confucius Beyond the Analects aims to debunk the traditional view of the received Lun yu as the most authoritative source of early Confucian teachings associated with the historical figure of Confucius. Hunter makes the case that our received Lun yu was assembled in the Western Han, probably around the time of the accession of Emperor Wu in 141 b.c.e. He further demonstrates that patterns of Kongzi references in our received corpus, as well as textual parallelisms, suggests that there was no authoritative written source of early Confucian teachings that circulated in the pre-Han period. PreHan authors drew widely from a variety of written sources when invoking Kongzi, whereas texts dating to the latter part of Wu’s reign tend to focus on our received Lun yu, suggesting the relatively sudden appearance on the scene of a newly canonical text. Most radically, he further argues that the material found in our received Lun yu was composed in the Western Han; the content and arrangement of this text reflects the particular needs and interests of the Western Han compilers, rather than being an expression of a Warring States (let alone early Warring States) tradition associated with Confucius and his disciples. “Wherever it came from, whenever it was compiled,” Hunter argues,","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"41 1","pages":"465 - 475"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/eac.2018.12","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48728990","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-01DOI: 10.1017/S0362502800007422
G. Boileau, Marc Kalinowski
Sophia-Karin Psarras M U S Shared Imagery: Eastern Zhou Decors and Iconographies Recent studies in Chinese archaeological analysis have tended to focus on the characteristics that set one region of China apart from others. While such a development allows for a more complex view of Chinese history, it obscures identification of unifying traits. In terms of material culture alone, interregional similarities are as revealing as regional distinctions. Examination of specific patterns of vessel ornamentation as well as specific vessel forms from the northern and southern Chinese states reveals extensive sharing, particularly of decors, between the two regions. Indeed, examples of identical decors extends to iconographies incorporating supra-human figures generally identified with the southern state of Chu. These iconographies, derived from the Near Eastern animal master, appear in both northern and southern China in different guises. The manner in which these iconographies are rendered and the position they occupy culturally distinguish north from south more effectively than do any differences in object form and decor. In other words, northern and southern China are closely bound by the Chinese vocabulary of object form and ornamentation, but distinguish themselves in their reactions to foreign influence.
Sophia Karin Psarras M U S共享图像：东周装饰和图像学最近中国考古分析的研究倾向于关注中国一个地区与其他地区不同的特征。虽然这样的发展允许对中国历史有一个更复杂的看法，但它掩盖了统一特征的识别。单就物质文化而言，区域间的相似性就像区域差异一样具有启示性。对中国北方和南方各州的特定器皿纹饰以及特定器皿形式的研究表明，这两个地区之间有着广泛的共同点，尤其是花色。事实上，相同花色的例子延伸到了包含超人类人物的图像，这些超人类人物通常被认为是南方楚国。这些图像来源于近东动物大师，以不同的形式出现在中国北部和南部。这些图像的呈现方式和它们在文化上所处的位置比物体形式和装饰上的任何差异都更有效地区分了南北。换言之，中国北方和南方都与中国的实物形式和装饰词汇紧密相连，但在对外国影响的反应上却各不相同。
{"title":"Abstract","authors":"G. Boileau, Marc Kalinowski","doi":"10.1017/S0362502800007422","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0362502800007422","url":null,"abstract":"Sophia-Karin Psarras M U S Shared Imagery: Eastern Zhou Decors and Iconographies Recent studies in Chinese archaeological analysis have tended to focus on the characteristics that set one region of China apart from others. While such a development allows for a more complex view of Chinese history, it obscures identification of unifying traits. In terms of material culture alone, interregional similarities are as revealing as regional distinctions. Examination of specific patterns of vessel ornamentation as well as specific vessel forms from the northern and southern Chinese states reveals extensive sharing, particularly of decors, between the two regions. Indeed, examples of identical decors extends to iconographies incorporating supra-human figures generally identified with the southern state of Chu. These iconographies, derived from the Near Eastern animal master, appear in both northern and southern China in different guises. The manner in which these iconographies are rendered and the position they occupy culturally distinguish north from south more effectively than do any differences in object form and decor. In other words, northern and southern China are closely bound by the Chinese vocabulary of object form and ornamentation, but distinguish themselves in their reactions to foreign influence.","PeriodicalId":11463,"journal":{"name":"Early China","volume":"23 1","pages":"vii - vii"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0362502800007422","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48620374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：