Author: Wang Haiyan

[Paper Keywords] Location; The whole; Social history; Political history

Abstract: Can social history study political history? How to study political history? This is a question being discussed in the field of history at present. Is it new to hold social history? Paradigm? Scholars believe that social history not only has the ability to study political history, but also can better study political history. The study of political history from the perspective of social history is to put the country's macro-politics in the historical scene of rural society and reinterpret the traditional political history. This new idea has changed the grand narrative framework of traditional political history? Label type? Only by paying attention to the study of macro-political evolution can we make the study of political history more detailed and meticulous and get closer to the truth of history.

Since the revival of social history in the1980s, as subversion? Traditional historiography? New? Paradigm? Up to now, historiography is constantly exploring and revising its own theories and methods, whether in opposing or divergent factional debates or in its own practice, so as to gradually mature itself. Before it came from where? The edge moves towards the center, and the feathers become more and more abundant? There are still some problems to be discussed and clarified in Sichuan today. One of them is? Social history? Can you learn or, more accurately, have the ability to learn? Political history? And how to study political history.

one

The answer to the former should be easy, because social history is not a branch of history, that is, it is not just? Social life history? Or? Lifestyle history? Or? History of social behavior? , but? A new research method, a new research attitude and a new research perspective? Is it a new one? Paradigm? . Since it is a new perspective and paradigm of historical research, why can't we study political history? As a new paradigm, social history, although opposed to traditional political history, does not mean that political history is not needed, which can be answered positively by social history scholars both in theory and in concrete research practice. As for social history, can you study political history? This is also a question that needs no further debate. Because it's not what some scholars think? Scholars who study political history pay attention to major events and people's activities, while scholars who study social history love the details of people's social life? ,? There is a clear gap between social history and political history on the issues of concern? . Obviously, this is the biggest misunderstanding of social history. Scholars who hold this view still understand social history as a branch of history, and what is more serious is a confession of disdain and contempt for social history. In fact, political history and social history have never been diametrically opposed. The two are inextricably linked in any historical stage, any region and any historical side. Discovering and studying this connection has expanded the research space for political and social history scholars and found the combination point? . Some scholars put forward more clearly? Right? Regional social history? Should we pay more attention to our own understanding? Politics? As a powerful form of spatial expression, it is related to. Local knowledge? Reached some kind of tension? . Even the early yearbook school never? Abandoning political history is just opposing the history with political history as the main body, so Georg? "The eagle in the 20th century history science? The international background review said that the works of the yearbook school, The country and even the economy are included in a wide range of social thinking. This does not mean that political factors have been ignored. However, the answer to the latter is not easy. Since social history can also study political history, how to study it? What methods and means are used to introduce people? In other words, how to find and study the connection between political history and social history, and how to find their combination point? At present, these problems are still being explored. Although there are some successful research examples of introducing human political history from social history, such as prasenjit duara's Culture, Power and State, Kong Feili's Call for the Soul and Wendy's Street Politics? The lower class, the reformed elite and the political culture of China in the early 20th century, but there is still no clear idea that everyone agrees with for researchers' reference. This requires the joint efforts of political historians and social historians.

Prasenjit duara's "Culture, Power and State" expounds the process of the continuous expansion of state power from the late Qing Dynasty to the Republic of China under the regional social situation in North China. ? Kong Feili's "Evocation of the Soul" also starts with the witchcraft storm in Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces, and then discusses the operation of the imperial bureaucrats and gets a glimpse of national politics from local events. Wendy's street politics? The underclass, reformed elite and political culture in China in the early 20th century also revealed the influence of politics on people's daily life through the investigation of street politics in Chengdu in the early 20th century. For us, the most enlightening thing about the above scholars' research is that they all put national politics in a regional society, and they all cut into people from the perspective of regional social history and then extended to the country? Cross-regional? Macro politics. Although their research is more or less inadequate (such as not paying enough attention to the complex situation of local society), their attempt has been groundbreaking. Because this method is completely different from the grand narrative framework of traditional political history? Is it full? Or? Label type? Only pay attention to the evolution of macro-politics, but ignore the research on whether and how politics affects the daily life of the local lower class people.

two

Although some scholars admit it? Other history? He has made great contributions to the reinterpretation of political history, but he is worried that local history will be redrawn from their respective local horizons and contexts. Overall history? From this map? So how do you clean up the mess, reassemble an overall image of political history and make it different from? Revolutionary historical narrative? Is the traditional interpretation under the rule still an interesting subject to be completed? . Although acknowledging local history? The mediator of research method will undoubtedly answer the abstract questions in people's minds more effectively? Politics? How to play a role in the concrete behavior of some ordinary people in China? But at the same time worried about local history? It's hard to answer why politics has changed the whole life world in such an unprecedented way in a trans-regional scope. . ? In short, they just think that social history is difficult to complete the historical mission of discipline integration. Obviously, the essence of these worries is to deny that social history is a research method and a perspective of observing history, and still regard social history as a branch of history, so it is natural to draw the conclusion that social history cannot explain political history. First of all, we still believe that social history is a new historical research method and a new perspective to observe history. Whether it is local history or cross-regional overall history, social history as a methodology has the ability to control cross-regional macro-politics. One of the most basic reasons is that some topics themselves are interpreting the overall evolution track of cross-regional national politics. As mentioned above, prasenjit duara, Kong Feili and Wendy's three works, although concerned about the region, are ultimately about the country's macro-politics. Their research is remarkable because their social history perspective is different from traditional thinking. Secondly, judging from the realistic requirements of social history for political history research, this kind of worry is even more unnecessary. To interpret the macro-politics of the whole country from the local society is actually to examine the implementation and evolution of the macro-politics of the country in this place from their respective local historical scenes and through the analysis of specific local historical events. Due to China's vast territory, numerous ethnic groups, complex terrain, unbalanced economic and cultural development and great regional differences, it is impossible for national macro-politics, including laws and regulations, various measures and systems to be implemented uniformly in various places, even in modern times when national politics strongly penetrated into the lives of ordinary people? Gangs? To the same extent, it will always make some appropriate adjustments according to the actual situation in various places. The research results of social history in recent years undoubtedly prove this point. So? What is the difference between social history and traditional political history? Politics? It is no longer an isolated grand narrative framework divorced from specific historical situations and social changes, but is developed one by one based on specific time and space coordinate points? Soul case? . Using the new research idea of interpreting political history from the perspective of local history can fully show the specific implementation of national overall politics in various places, and then conduct comprehensive research on this basis, thus revealing the overall development of national macro-politics. Based on what? The other side? At the same time, constantly? Beyond the place? . In contrast, the traditional political history in the past lacked such microscopic and meticulous investigation, and the filling research under the grand narrative framework of specific historical scenes was due to? Lack of explanatory power and narrative charm? In this way, it is difficult to avoid sameness and rigidity. A diagram of mechanical dogma? The shortcomings of the situation, resulting in? In the expression of political history, apart from a series of events and mechanical institutional descriptions, people can't feel the relationship between the vagaries of China's political operation and people's daily life? . Studying political history from the perspective of social history can just change this situation. Putting the country's macro-politics into the specific historical context of a region (or place) to understand, through the vision of each place, we can not only spy on the map of the overall political history, but also see the map of the overall history more colorful and more authentic than before. As for how to clean up the mess and reassemble an image of the whole political history, it needs comprehensive research and theoretical perfection, which is an important topic that historians should strive to explore in the future.

Admittedly, on the other hand, the concerns of the above-mentioned scholars are not completely unreasonable, because in academic research, no matter which discipline, the proposal and practice of a new methodology will always be accompanied by setbacks, confusion, confusion and even deficiencies. As a new research method and perspective to interpret political history from local history, it will naturally encounter the same problems without exception. However, we should not give up our innovative efforts. How do you know if you don't try anything? Today, when historical research is facing difficulties, the sense of innovation is particularly important. Sticking to the traditional model can only stay forever, which will not bring prosperity to history, but will probably lead to self-destruction. As to whether local history can interpret political history and how to interpret it, since it is an interesting and valuable topic, historians need to establish confidence, devote more energy to research, explore a practical method, and gradually make it mature and perfect.

three

In the eyes of social historians, the state? Macro politics? The performance of each region (or you can call it? Execute? On the other hand, if you want to understand the politics of a country with a vast territory, many nationalities and unbalanced economic and cultural development, you can't study it in isolation from the specific historical situation. National politics, including every small rule and system to the occurrence of major events, has different reactions in different places. In other words, the political power of the country has different reactions to the power network in different places. ? There are policies above and countermeasures below? This is a phenomenon in many historical periods. On the other hand, national politics will also make some adjustments according to different places and local conditions in order to maintain its normal ruling order, which has formed? Country? With what? Place? The interaction between the two. Local society and its individuals will certainly have their own completely different performances and experiences in the process of experiencing a major national political event. As Zhao Shiyu said in Reflections on the Study of Social History? The rise and fall of dynasties is the product of drastic social changes. Not only princes and princes, but everyone who has experienced all this will have a personal feeling about it, will participate in this change in different capacities and to different degrees, and will also affect the process of change. Even for different regions, the social changes of the country will have different meanings for them. Events that affect the whole country or across regions have different performances in different places, and conversely, local performances have different influences on great history? . By who? Microscopic? Arrive? Macro? By? Place? Arrive? The whole? This research method of investigating national macro-politics from the perspective of regional society will avoid the disadvantages of traditional methods to some extent, that is, observing the evolution of national politics through the investigation of local social history, so that the research of political history tends to be more intensive and detailed, and can be closer to the historical truth.

Although the traditional political history paradigm lacks explanatory power and narrative charm, it does not mean that everything is a failure. It should be admitted that it still has advantages in some issues, such as the study of important issues such as the replacement of dynasties and the relationship between emperors and generals. In other words, the political history from the perspective of social history has not completely replaced the traditional political history, but has changed the traditional research mode of political history, taking its strengths and removing its shortcomings. Especially in the later research practice, for some questions, such as: how did the infiltration of state power into local society affect the people in different historical periods? At the same time, how do local societies respond to national politics? Such questions should not only be answered by social historians or political historians alone, but also need their full cooperation, positive thinking and practice. Only in this way can these questions be answered satisfactorily. To accomplish this task, we must completely abandon social history and political history? Binary opposition? We should establish a platform for communication and dialogue between the two sides, explore useful ways of contact between the two sides and find a suitable combination point. Make the study of political history really take a new path.

Looking back on the social history research in recent years, scholars pay more attention to some prominent problems that are opposite to national politics, and a large part of the achievements still emphasize people's behavior of opposing politics in the form of various cultural and social symbols? So some scholars are worried about local knowledge? Too much emphasis on rural society can easily make people think that the tradition of rural society must be in a state of complete opposition to the values of the upper class and represent the countryside? Local knowledge? Representing the elite? Popularize knowledge? Anti-control resources of relative resistance? . This is a good reminder. Du scholars should seriously reflect on the previous research and find out the shortcomings in order to pay attention to perfection in future research. In fact, a new research method will inevitably have some shortcomings at the beginning of its use because it is in the exploratory stage. What is important is that as long as social historians always have the consciousness of reflection and constantly pursue perfection, they can make fewer detours and make new methods mature gradually. What needs to be clarified and emphasized here is that interpreting political history from the perspective of social history does not mean only paying attention to those forces that oppose national politics in local society, but also paying attention to those who are willing or unwilling to live under national political norms in local society. What kind of mentality are these people taking and what kind of actions are they taking to obey national politics? Social historians are equally interested in this. In short, as a social history in the sense of methodology, it will not limit its own vision and delimit its own research scope in the study of political history, and it has made a mistake of standing still. Paint the ground as a prison? This mistake.

In addition, it should be pointed out that some scholars have one-sided understanding? Place? And then what? The whole? These two concepts set the relationship between them against each other. Although as a micro? Place? When determining the research object, you often choose research? Point? Small, but its approach is still holistic. Zhao Shiyu's passage in his paper "Reflections on the Study of Social History" is very convincing. ? It seems to be a misunderstanding to oppose the pursuit of the whole history with a more microscopic local study, because the whole history does not necessarily simply mean the history of the scientific structure of Braudel society, because Raduri's Montayou can also be understood as a masterpiece of the whole history, and the whole history in the sense of regional history does not necessarily mean the pursuit of universality? . Chuancong? Place? Can you see it? The whole? And then what? The whole? Must include? Place? ,? The whole? Is based on. Place? Based on. What is the lack of traditional political history? Place? Vision, leading to its pale explanation of the event. Finally create political history? The territory of this empire? Hurry up? Cultural history? And then what? Social history? And other emerging disciplines, and eventually become marginal disciplines? . ? Social history? As one of the emerging disciplines, is it okay? Swallow it? And then what? Political history? , explain? Social history? Your own? Political history? An advantage you don't have. It can be seen that methodology also embodies the natural law of survival of the fittest.

?

Anyway, from where? Place? Arrive? The whole? This new idea of studying political history from the perspective of social history will bring a new look to the traditional political history research. Of course, as a new method, the study of political history from the perspective of social history is still in an immature stage, and this garden needs the cultivation of historians.