【澳门天天彩年结果新闻发布会】

【二四六玄机资料最新更新】

【204年新奥开什么今晚四十五期】

【澳门挂牌之免费全篇100】

【澳门正版资料大全有哪些】

【新奥免费料全年公开】

【澳门王中王免费资料十年老玩家】

【一肖12码中特期准】

【澳门王中王100%的资料三中三】

【澳门资料免费大全】

【新澳精准资料免费提供网站有哪些】

【奥门一肖一码免费知资料】

【澳门今日闲情免费资料】

【新奥门特免费资料大全】

【新澳门内部资料精准大全软件】

【澳门六开彩马会传真资料】

【香港二四六开彩资料大全302期】

【澳门一码一肖期期准中选料2024】

WRITING OF THE GLOBAL HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION AND COMMUNAL HISTORICAL NARRATION

全球文明史书写与共同的历史叙事

THE PRIMARY VERSION SEE: THE CHINESE SOCIAL SCIENCE , ISSUE7,2024

BY:吴晓群 | TRANS:梅重九 | REV:章闻哲

SUMMARY: In history, the human community has been constantly shaping and enriching the communal historical narration, such common historical narration, both exists objectively in the different period of the development of the human civilization, and the discourse of the great thinkers. In the age when the globalization has been a fact ,the more that we do need the historians’ positive teasing and exploitation of the common historical narration in the different development periods of the human civilization with consciousness, and thereby to more convincingly re-establish and intensify the common bond. Since the beginning of 21th century, there has shown some avoidable problems and dilemmas of the reality , while the writing of the history of the global civilization continues to thrive.In research of the global history of civilization ,an immediate need is to find a sort of more exclusive pattern of the common historical narration.

摘要：历史上，人类共同体不断形成并丰富了共同的历史叙事。这种共同的历史叙事，既客观存在于人类文明发展的不同时期，同时也存在于伟大思想家的论述之中。在这个全球化已成为事实的时代，更需要历史学家有意识地通过对人类文明发展不同阶段中的既有共同历史叙事主动梳理和发掘，从而更具说服力地重建并加强人类共同的纽带。21世纪以来，全球文明史的书写在继续蓬勃发展的同时，也开始显露出一些无法回避的问题和现实的困境。在全球文明史的研究中，为避免陷入形式主义的分析和假解释的死循环，处理好全球化与地方化、世界主义与民族主义等问题之间的张力，亟须找出一种更具包容性的共同历史叙事模式。

KEY WORDS:HISTORY OF THE GLOBAL CIVILIZATION ; COMMON HISTORICAL NARRATION; FUTURE CIVILIZATION

关键词：全球文明史 共同的历史叙事 未来文明

PRELUDE: A CHINESE STYLED CONCEPT AND ITS PRESENTATION

引子：一个中国式的概念及其提出

“History of the global civilization ” is a concept created in the Chinese context. Books published at present of such history in direct translation into Chinese respectively are The Global Experience :the World Civilization , and The Journey form the Ancient Time to Today:the World History . Obviously “ the history of the global civilization ”is a term from indirect translation. And the book that similarly been seen as having the vision of the history of the global civilization titled The History of Civilization, is originally a historical textbook written for the high school students. Which its first published version in 1963 named History and Civilization:the Contemporary World, the second version published in 1987 titled The Outline of the Civilization History, the version published in 1994 called The History of Civilization. Obviously, Braudel himself hasn’t ever used the term “ civilization history”. And historians represented by him, who also exert the writing of the civilization mainly of the compiling of the general history or the frame of teaching, not the realm of the monographic research . And the discussion on contents like concept, connotation and the manifestation form of the civilization ,and so on, is rather presented in multiple voices, nothing determined. The Chinese and foreign scholarship circle have undergone a long and complicated history of thoughts from the dividing of the concept, the concrete contents that it includes, to the formation of the paradigm and the variation of the significance, even to the variation between the singular and plural, and so on. It is because of the complication and variable attribution of the concept,of the precise value orientation and traps that probably could suffer from, whether it should be attributed to a specific realm of research, is up to now still a suspended problem in scholarly circle. Nevertheless, this is rather not an aim of the research of this article.

“全球文明史”是在中文语境下创造出来的一个概念。目前国内两本被译作《全球文明史》的著作，书名直译分别应为《世界文明：全球经验》和《世界历史：由古至今的旅程》，显然“全球文明史”是意译而来的术语。同样被认为具有全球文明史视野的布罗代尔的《文明史》一书，最初是为高中生撰写的历史教材。该书1963年首次出版时名为《当代世界：历史与文明》（Le Monde actuel: Histoire et civilisations），1987年第2版再版时由其夫人改名为《文明史纲》（Grammaire des civilisations），1994年英译本出版时名为《文明史》（A History of Civilizations）。可见，布罗代尔本人并未使用“文明史”这一术语。以他为代表的史家，主要也都是将对于文明的书写运用于通史编纂或教学框架之中，并非专题性的学术研究领域。而对文明的概念、内涵、体现形式等的讨论也是众说纷纭，莫衷一是。中外学术界从对“文明”这一概念的界定、所包含的具体内容到其范式形成和意义变迁，甚至这一名词的单复数变化等，其间经历了一个漫长且复杂的思想历程。正是因其概念的复杂多变、明显的价值取向以及方法论上可能遭遇的种种陷阱，它能否作为一个专门的研究领域，至今学术界仍有不同看法。不过，这并非本文的研究主旨所在。

More over, from the rigorous aspects, to define the history of the global civilization , a distinguishing it from the general history, world history( including the new world history), the global history( including the new global history), transnational history, etc,is required yet. Whatever it is , the general history or the world history, however, are all related to the disciplinarization of the western historical research. In Haneda Masashi’s words, since Leopold von Ranke( the German historian in 19th century), the world history gradually has been getting into shape in which “ takes the Europe as the heart, the European measure as the criteria, and the modern nation and country as unit of combination ”.

此外，从严格意义上讲，要定义全球文明史，还需要与整体史（或总体史）、世界史（包括新世界史）、全球史（包括新全球史）、跨国史等概念相区分。然而，无论是整体史还是世界史都与19世纪西方史学学科化后的发展有关。用日本学者羽田正（Haneda Masashi）的话来说，自兰克以来，“以欧洲为重心、以近代欧洲价值尺度为标准、以现代民族国家为单位组合的世界史模式逐渐形成”。

In recent years, the “new world history” as a catchword has raised by him for distinguishing the history mentioned above from the global history in westernization. Nonetheless, discipline of the world history compiled by China has rather been in a different development venation, since 1949, the new China was established, and the discipline of the world history was formally established, yet only a less than 80 years’ history has it been. Therefore, it is both a new discipline, and an imported one. “ Basically uses other’s in terms of knowledge. ... among them, there are mainly two origins, one is from west, especially from England, and America; the other is the former Soviet Union”. There are quite lot of discussions about it, the most earliest rethinking of the Chinese scholarship circle on such topic started from the two man, Qi Shirong, and Wu yujin, both of them referred to the world history which from dispersion to the integration. But in summary, the exploration of the classification of disciplines or their naming are rather not the purpose of this article too, so to speak, this article do not care for the nuance between variety of concepts.

近年来，他为了与欧美化的全球史相区分提出了“新世界史”的口号。不过，中国的世界史学科则有着不同的发展脉络，自1949年新中国成立后世界史学科正式建立以来，只有不到80年的历史，因此它既是一个新学科，也是一个舶来品，“在知识体系方面基本上采用了别人的东西。……其中主要有两个来源，一个是西方的来源，特别是英国、美国的来源；另一个是前苏联”。有关这方面的讨论也相当之多，中国学术界最早的反思始于齐世荣、吴于廑两位先生，他们都提出了从分散到整体的世界史。但总的说来，对学科分类的探讨或命名也非本文主旨所在，本文不关注各种概念之间细微的差别。

The “the history of the global civilization ”in my opinion would be seen as the production of the combination of the recent years’ global history and history of civilization. On one hand, so to speak, the global history of civilization still belongs to the category of the global history, or the new vision of the global history, because the research covered by these two propositions can both be general and holistic; when we specifically refer to the global history of civilization, we’ll more be focusing on the progress of the development of the human history of civilization and the prospect that might reach in future , which therefore is not entirely equals the specific result of the global communication and the circulation of researching certain figure or stuff, on the other hand.In other words, the essence of the global civilization is still the history of the civilization ,however,doesn’t take the single civilization as the main object of cognition, but in possession of the vision of the global civilization, focusing on the progress of human which after formed the different civilizations,goes toward the human community through learning from each other and exchange. This is a progress of complication and diversity, civilizations in different time and areas both have the particular track of development, and integration with each other, and interplay,and the writing of the global civilization is just the present of such progress.Although many global histories which have monolithic vision also have a discussion of the progress described above,these writings only a part of the global history. Hence, the emphasis on which taking the civilization as a concerning point of the global vision, can more precisely to define the category of discussion of the global civilization.

what is the core significance of the fortune community ?

笔者把“全球文明史”视作近些年全球史与文明史两个研究领域融合会通的产物。一方面，可以说，全球文明史仍然属于全球史的范畴，或者说是全球史的新视野，因为这两种提法所可能涵盖的研究领域都可以是广泛和整体的；另一方面，当我们专门提及全球文明史时，则更关注人类文明史发展的过程及未来可能达至的愿景，因此不完全等同于研究某个人物或物品的全球交往与流通的具体结果。换言之，全球文明史的本质依然是文明史，但并不以单个的文明作为主要的认识对象，而是拥有全球史的视野，聚焦于人类在形成不同文明之后，通过交流互鉴走向人类共同体的过程。这是一个多元化且复杂的历史过程，各种文明在不同时间和地域中既有其独特的发展轨迹，同时也相互交融、相互影响，全球文明史的书写就是对这一过程的展现。尽管不少具有整体视野的全球史也探讨前述过程，但此类著述仅是全球史中的一部分。因此，强调“文明”作为全球性视角的关注点，可以更为明确地界定全球文明史的讨论范畴。

The common historical narration on the contrary, refers to which not only adopts the narrative mode of the new idea of the civilization history that puts emphasis on people’s relation , communication and association with each other, but also regards such narrative mode as a theory that consciously running through the all writing of the global civilization, and sees the different civilization units in history as the same important part of the human civilization, advocates the multiple tracked development of the civilization, refuses various “ centralism” of the past and the current day, thereby to split away the utterance mode of the binarism that has long inhabited the research of the civilization with distinction the highness from lowness, superiority from inferiority,the civilization from barbarism, progress from backwardness,and center from periphery, etc.

共同的历史叙事则是指历史学家在进行历史书写时，不仅采用一种强调人类彼此之间的联系、往来、交流为主体的新的文明史观的叙事模式，更是把这种叙事模式作为一种理论自觉贯穿于全球文明史的书写之中，将历史上不同的文明单元都视作同样重要的人类文明组成部分，提倡复线的文明发展观，拒绝以往和当下各种“中心论”，从而摆脱文明与野蛮、进步与落后、中心与边缘等这样一些长期盘踞文明史研究中带有高下优劣之分的二元对立思维的话语模式。

After the second world war, the globalization of the economy developed constantly, a number of new rising countries that had undergone the national emancipation movement emerged.In most time of this period, on one hand, the content of the historical writing though was controlled by the modern narrative mode which taking the west as its center, the historians from countries on the other hand, were recovering or started to construct their own nation or country’s special narration. Having entered the 21th century, the problem that such globalization of economy and the idea of historical writing do not march with each other on the level of the globalization is more obvious. Hence,if historians can not dispose those historical powers that were intertwining with each other, and without the height of theory, then the development problem of the discipline would also not to be dealt with well.

第二次世界大战以后，经济全球化不断扩展，诸多经历了民族解放运动的新兴国家大量出现。在此时段的大部分时间里，一方面，历史书写的内容虽然仍被以西方为中心的现代化叙事模式所主宰，但另一方面，各国的历史学家也已在重新复活或构建各自民族或国家的特殊叙事。进入21世纪之后，这种经济的全球化与历史书写观念全球化程度不匹配的问题更加明显。因此，如果历史学家无法理顺各种缠绕在一起的历史力量，缺乏一定的理论高度，便无法处理好学科的发展问题，更无法回应时代之问。

And the common mode of the historical narrative mode is a kind of theoretical strategy to respond the difficult described above, which reminds historians of which in their focusing on the conflict and communication, diffluence and connection, distinction and the consensus, and so on, in the progress of the development of the human civilization,do not stay on a superficial layer of the description only, but better to place it on the human cognition’s constant breaking of the various ego-centrism, reveal how can the human as a community of the fortune gradually expand the range cognition of the community to the human entirety driven by the two forces the destruction and construction. Such theory ,to me, both might help the historiography circle to break the current existing globalization and localization , universalism and nationalism , and so on so forth in the writing of the history of the global civilization , and locate for the human community of the fortune in future the purpose and orientation in facing of the challenge and risk.

而共同的历史叙事模式则是应对以上难题的一种理论策略，它提醒历史学家在对人类历史的研究中，在关注人类文明发展过程中的冲突与交流、分流与接轨、差异与共识等特征时，不要仅仅停留在表层描述上，而更应该将其放在人类认知对各种自我“中心论”的不断突破上，揭示人类作为一个命运共同体是如何在破坏性与建设性两股力量的推动下，逐步扩大对共同体范围之认识直至全人类的认识上。这种理论自觉既有助于史学界突破目前全球文明史书写中存在的全球化与地方化、世界主义与民族主义等难题，又能为未来的人类命运共同体在面临挑战与危机时找到目标和方向。

IDEOLOGICAL SOURCE OF THE COMMUNAL NARRATION AND THE REAL DILEMMA OF THE GLOBAL HISTORICAL STUDY

一、共同体叙事的思想资源与全球史研究的现实困境

So to speak, in the past western and eastern thinkers’ idea,there had never been in lack of the theoretical self-consciousness about the human community. For example, the ideology of the materialistic history in its comprehension and construction of the common history of human rather has a precise self-consciousness and cognition of the theory. Although Marx hadn’t specifically referred to the problem of the civilization systematically, his theory of the world history is just the theoretical consciousness about the history from dispersion to the uniformity. Marx’s theory of the world history was developed on the basis of criticizing the Hegel’s “ world spirit”. Hegel in his History of the Philosophy talks of the the ultimate cause and impetus of the development of the human history,which named by him “the world spirit”,takes the progress of the human’s development and proceeding as the active course of the world spirit.Marx gives up the pure dialectic part of the philosophy of Hegel, the object of thought as the problem before being scientific is transformed by him into the scientific general problem . In 1845, in The Ideology of Deutschland , a proposition raised by Marx and Engels that “the transformation of the history into the world history”, supposes that “ the more thoroughly that the original closed state of nations are eliminated for the day after day the production pattern and communication having been perfected ,and thereby the labor division among nations formed naturally , the more the history would be the world history.” In 1848, Marx and Engels say in The Communist Manifesto: “keep on extending the needs of the production-sale market, drives the bourgeois running all over the world”, “the self-given and self-sufficiency ,and the past isolation state of the nation and locality , are replaced by the relying on and exchanging with each other in respects of nations”. This paragraph goes further “to foresee the inherent global effect of the capitalism”.Hence, Lynn Hunt thinks that: “ the globalization involves the two great research paradigms: the modernization and the Marxism, while to a great extent avoided the Annales School which as one of the four great research modes of the historiography. In fact, besides Marx and Engels, quite a few scholars( including Hegel) of the west also keep a progressed historical view, stressing the continuity and uniformity of the civilization development, who are mostly with a smack of theodicy, showing a sort of transcendental righteousness. More over, their views of the civilization have a disposition yet of the obvious “Euro-centrism”.

应该说，在过往的东西方思想家那里，从来不乏关于人类共同体的理论自觉。比如，唯物史观在理解和建构人类共同历史的问题上就有着明确的理论自觉和认识。马克思虽然并未专门系统地论及文明的问题，但他关于世界历史的理论就是对人类历史从分散走向统一的理论自觉。马克思的世界历史理论是在批判黑格尔“世界精神”的基础上发展起来的。黑格尔在《历史哲学》中提到一种人类历史发展的最终原因和动力，并将其称之为“世界精神”，他把人类发展进步的过程看作世界精神的活动过程。马克思摒弃了黑格尔哲学中纯思辨的部分，将思考的对象“由科学前的总问题转变为科学的总问题”。1845年，在《德意志意识形态》中，马克思恩格斯提出了“历史向世界历史的转变”这个命题，认为“各民族的原始封闭状态由于日益完善的生产方式、交往以及因交往而自然形成的不同民族之间的分工消灭得越是彻底，历史也就越是成为世界历史。”1848年，马克思恩格斯在《共产党宣言》中又说道：“不断扩大产品销路的需要，驱使资产阶级奔走于全球各地”,“过去那种地方的和民族的自给自足和闭关自守状态，被各民族的各方面的互相往来和各方面的互相依赖所代替了”。这段话进一步“预见了资本主义所固有的全球效应”。由此，林恩·亨特认为：“全球化在很大程度上绕过了作为四大史学研究范式之一的年鉴学派的同时，也收编了现代化与马克思主义这两大史学研究范式。”其实，除马克思恩格斯以外，还有不少西方思想家（包括黑格尔）也都秉持进步史观，强调文明发展的连续性和统一性，他们大都带有着神正论的色彩，体现了一种超验的正义。此外，他们的文明观还带有明显的“欧洲中心论”倾向。

In the east, Chinese had their ideal about “World in the Same Fortune”,since the ancient time, Documents on Rite. Conduction of the Rite reads: “ when the practice of the great thoughts starts, the whole world will serve the public and righteousness, select who has virtue and capability, good credit and keeping harmonious, hence, one should not only keep an affiliation with his relatives, and his children, but should make the aged people have their good end of the life, the middle aged have their opportunity to serve the society, the little children have their good environment to grow up healthily, the widows and widowers ,the disabled people all have their serene later years without worry; men are all responsible for the home and country, women have their own happy home, goods mustn’t be hidden by oneself, though disgust people of being thrown onto the ground, powers hated of being not given by oneself but rather need not for himself certainly. Hence, the strategy ends and no growing, thief and robber do nothing of their own business; therefore, the gate would not be closed for ever, these can be regarded as Da Tong (the whole world in the same one).” Kang Youwei on the basis of this thoughts ,went further more absorbed the resources like European Utopian Socialism , and so on, to write The Book of Da Tong. So to speak, the thought of Da Tong is not only the wisdom of the Chinese traditional culture, the expression of significance and recognition of the Chinese ancient people on the world, but also represent human’s good expectation of the future civilization ,and a positive significance of ideology in pushing forward the construction of the human’s community of fortune.

在东方，中国人自古就有关于“天下大同”的理想，《礼记·礼运》曰：“大道之行也，天下为公，选贤与能，讲信修睦，故人不独亲其亲，不独子其子，使老有所终，壮有所用，幼有所长，鳏寡孤独废疾者皆有所养；男有分，女有归，货恶其弃于地也不必藏于己，力恶其不出于身也不必为己，是故谋闭而不兴，盗窃乱贼而不作，故外户而不闭，是谓大同。”之后，康有为在古代圣贤大同思想的基础上，又吸取了欧洲空想社会主义等思想资源而作《大同书》。可以说，大同思想既是中国传统文化的智慧，是中国古人对世界的知识体认和意义表达，同时也代表着人类对未来文明的美好憧憬，而且对当今推动构建人类命运共同体有着正面的思想意义。

To the historiography circle, having entered the mid-to-late of the 20th century, with the constant deepening of the extent of the economical globalization, the western academic circle’s rethinking of the “ Euro-centrism” was deeper and deeper too, historians strove to split away from the restraint of the ideological and the religious stance , wrote objectively the communal history in different periods of human, thereby the concept of the global history was raised. What is recognized by the academic circle ,the publishing of the book The Rising of the West by William H. McNeill , the historian in 1963, is the mark of the birth of the global history, and then , quantities of the discussions on this topic emerged.

具体到史学界，进入20世纪中后期，随着经济全球化程度的不断加深，西方学术界对“欧洲中心论”的反思也越来越深入，历史学家们也力图摆脱意识形态以及宗教立场的束缚，尽量客观地书写人类不同阶段的共同历史，由此提出了全球史这一概念。学术界普遍公认的是，1963年美国史家威廉·麦克尼尔（William H. McNeill）《西方的兴起》一书的出版是全球史诞生的标志，之后出现了大量相关主题的讨论。

In 1990s, the Chinese scholars started to touch and realize the general situation of the foreign research of the global history, till the beginning of the 21th century the relevant arguments were immediately carried out. In recent decade,the superior fruits of the research of the global history harvested by the international academical circle constantly, have influenced the Chinese academic circle quite greatly. suggestion“the human community of the fortune”,makes the Chinese scholars more passionately embraced and invested in the research of the global history,the relevant research institutions of various universities start to establish one after another.

20世纪90年代，中国学者开始接触并了解全球史的国外研究概况，到了21世纪初相关讨论便随即展开了。近十年来，国际学术界有关全球史研究的优秀成果不断涌现，对中国学术界产生了不小的影响。“人类命运共同体”理念的提出，使中国学者更加热情地拥抱并投入全球史研究之中，各大高校也纷纷成立相关的研究机构。

No matter it is the west or the China’s research of the global history, both of them have supports of related thought resources, in the exact research of the historiography, there also presents a more rich discussion space, provides a more great potentiality for the more broad historical writing and the formation consciousness of the new human community of the fortune. Nevertheless, to further on, if we want to write the development history of the whole human civilization , the current base, theory , approach and content haven’t got enough yet to support such pursuing of the scholarship. Because, on one hand, the writing of the global civilization history is different from the monograph or the research of single case, it can not only choose those figures or objects which characterized by globalization, nor can it only to expand the range of the writing object, or emphasize the similarity only , ignoring the negative result caused by the opposite ideology; in the present world which the conflict between reality and ideology takes place constantly, especially in face of the inspection of various nationalism, the past theory about the integration gradually disordered by events which reverses the globalization, can no longer interpret the current complicated situation. This rather makes the writing of the global history of the civilization encountered the unprecedented dilemma, if without acknowledgement of the common history of human, without a kind of common historical narrative mode, then with the time moves forward, the writing of the global history of the civilization would probably stay on a level of slogan only,become a “victory of the rhetoric”, which brilliant in language form, but hollow in content, no convincing power, thereby has to be involved in the dead circulation of the analysis of formalism and “false interpretation”. Hence, the historiography nowadays,needs to re-pose the consciousness of theory,rebuild the global history of the civilization based on the common historical narration of human.

无论是西方的还是中国的全球史研究，都有着相关思想资源的支撑，在实际的史学研究中也呈现出愈发丰富的讨论空间，为一种更加广阔的历史书写和新的人类命运共同体意识的形成提供了更大的可能性。但是，若要进一步书写整个人类文明的发展史，既有的全球史研究基础、理论、方法以及内容都还不足以支撑这样的学术诉求。因为，一方面，由于全球文明史的书写不同于专题研究或个案研究，它既不能只选择那些已具有全球化特征的人或物进行书写，或仅仅扩大写作对象的空间范围；也不能只强调相似性，而无视反向的思想观念所带来的负面结果；另一方面，在当今现实与思想冲突不断的世界里，特别是面对各种民族主义的检视时，过往关于人类一体的理论逐渐为各种逆全球化的事件所打乱，已无法再解释现有的复杂局面。这使得全球文明史书写面临前所未有的困境，如果不承认人类共有的历史，没有一种共同的历史叙事模式，那么，随着时间的推移，全球文明史的书写恐怕会逐渐流于口号，成为一种“修辞的胜利”，言辞动人，内在却空洞无物，缺乏说服力，从而陷入形式主义的分析和“假解释”的死循环。因此，现在史学界需要重提理论自觉，重建基于人类共同历史叙事之上的全球文明史。

In fact, human as a kind of social animal, has never needed a sort of common narration to engage with each other. In the ancient time, when people use the myth and legend to talk of the “history”that experienced in the past time, such “ divine narration of the traditional society” not only provided the social group some interpretation of the mysterious phenomenon, but also made its social members have an feeling of attribution to the collection, and unconsciously inherit the tradition and concept that would have been held commonly. As soon as a commonly worshiped god emerges in a certain social group ,certain important binder would then effect , and then certain feeling of identity and mode of narration be constituted. The knowledge gained from myth is not a historical knowledge on sense of entity, however, as the difference of the predecessors and deities embraced by social groups, there then comes with different historical narrations in form of primitive ecology,and different spiritual appearances and way of comprehension the world would be shaped.

事实上，人类作为一种社会性的动物，从来都需要某种共同的叙事来让彼此结合在一起。远古时代，当人们用神话和传说来讲述过去的经历即“历史”时，这种“关于传统社会的神圣叙述”不仅给社会群体提供某些有关神秘现象的解释，更使其成员产生一种集体认同感，让他们在无意识中继承了所共同秉持的传统与观念。一旦某个社会群体出现了共同的神灵，这个群体便获得了某种重要的黏合剂，进而形成某种共同的认同感及叙事模式。经由神话所获得的知识并非一种实体性的历史知识，但由于各个社会群体所信奉的先祖和神灵不同，继而产生各自不同的原生态历史叙事，塑造出各自不同的精神面貌与理解世界的方式。

After narration of myth, the emergence of the genealogy,history of the builder, legend of hero, chronicle, and the history of nation , are all emphasizing that, in progress of seeking for the identity of racial group and distinguishing from others,being weaved a shared historical narration by different social groups. Here’s an example of Europe, since the work History written by “the father of history” Herodotus, “non-Greek”was called barbaroi, and from than on, through a historical writing of the barbarian and barbarous race over a long time, European consciously confirmed and completed their own identity distinguished from “barbarians”,which is so called the western civilization. Till the recent ages, a basic way was formed, which taking the Europe as its center in diplomacy,while domestically taking the nation and country as its historical narration, that is used to constitute the Euro-centrism and respective national identities and country identity. At the same time, the whole world was divided into two parts: the world of Euro-centrism, the world outside of Europe. Such confining, implied that the Europe was progressed, and the area outside Europe was unenlightened and suspended. And this narrative mode based on the global expanding of the European civilization, more deepened the separation between thoughts of the west,east and Latin American countries.

神话叙事之后，历史书写中的谱系学、建城者历史、英雄传奇、编年史，直至民族国家史的出现，都是在强调族群认同与他者辨异的过程中，编织着由不同的社会群体所共享的历史叙事。以欧洲为例，从“历史之父”希罗多德的著作《历史》开始，“非希腊人”都被统称为“异族人”（barbaroi），此后，欧洲人通过长期对“野蛮人”和“蛮族”的历史书写，有意识地确立并完成了其自身区别于“野蛮”的群体身份认同，即所谓的西方“文明”。直到近代，形成对外以欧洲为中心、对内以民族国家为历史叙述的基本方式，并以此来构建“欧洲中心论”及各自民族身份与国家认同。同时，整个世界被划分为两部分：以欧洲为中心的世界、欧洲以外的其他世界。这种划分，暗示着欧洲地区是先进的，欧洲以外的地区则是停滞和落后的。而这种基于欧洲文明全球扩张的叙事模式，更加深了西方与东方以及拉美国家在思想层面上的分裂。

Of course, we can see, that the west scholars’ narrative mode of the history of civilization from “I”to “we”, “individual”to “the great self”, has a leap of cognition, indicating two clear lines in the writing of the two thousand years’ western history of the civilization: the first is ,confirmation and the constant breaking of the center of ego ; the second is ,the confrontation between the ego and the others, and the category expansion of the racial group . Such variation of the common narrative mode concerning the history, also applies to non-western historical writing and its cognition of the civilization.

当然，我们也应该看到，西方学者这种从“我”到“我们”、从“小我”到“大我”的文明史叙事模式，有着一种认识上的飞跃，昭示了两千多年西方文明史书写中的两条清晰线索：其一，自我中心的确立和不断突破；其二，自我与他者二元身份的对立与族群认识的扩大化。这种有关历史的共同叙事模式的变化，也基本适用于非西方的历史书写以及对文明的认知。

We can say that,people’s cherishing the peace, thirsty for the richness, interest in the culture of other nations and pursuing the commonality,are always be the inextinguishable main line of the human history of the civilization. Even if under the background of the cool war in those years, we still can see quite a few points of glitter.For example, the SU and US, the two super countries that ever been hostile, finally successfully eliminated the smallpox, just through close cooperation in the frame of the world hygienic organization, and practical fostering by both of sides. In May 8, 1980, the 33th world hygienic session formally declared that : people from nations that all over the world have won ,the smallpox is eliminated now. In December9, 2020, the Future of Life Institute in America, did not forget to confer “Annual Award of the Fortune of Life”on William Foege the American epidemiologist, and Viktor Zhdanov , the deceased virologist from SU, so as to praise their contribution to the extinction of smallpox. In spite of the cooperation between SU and US in the reality, it is by no means to indicate that a common historical narrative mode has emerged between them, however, this case at least reveals to the world that potentiality and necessity of certain common action. What historians need to do is , with a theoretical consciousness of the common historical narration, going further step to discover and dig out these cases, and put these facts of history that human tides over difficulties together, proceeds hand in hand into the writing of history of the global civilization, so that it can be human’s selection of self-consciousness when encountering the challenges and difficulties in human’s development of the civilization.

可以说，人们对和平的珍视、对富足的向往、对他文化的兴趣和对共性的追求，始终是人类文明史不可抹灭的主线之一，即便是在当年冷战的背景下，仍能看到不少闪光点。比如，苏联和美国这两个曾经敌对的超级大国，就在世界卫生组织的框架下紧密合作过，双方务实推进，最终成功消灭了天花。1980年5月8日，第33届世界卫生大会正式宣布：“世界各国人民赢得了胜利，根除了天花。”2020年12月9日，美国生命未来研究所（Future of Life Institute）还不忘向仍在世的美国传染病学家威廉·费耶（William Foege）和已故的苏联病毒学家维克多·兹达诺夫（Viktor Zhdanov）颁发“生命未来年度奖”，以表彰他们在消除天花上作出的贡献。虽然，现实中的苏美合作并不一定意味着当时他们彼此之间已经产生了一种共同的历史叙事模式，但是这一事例至少向世人揭示了某种共同行事的可能性和必要性。历史学家要做的就是，带着一种共同历史叙事的理论自觉，进一步发现、发掘这些事例，并将这种人类历史上共渡难关、携手并进的史实写入全球文明史中，使之成为人们在未来面对人类文明发展中所遭遇之挑战和难题时的一种自觉选择。

To make general survey of the human history, the cohesion of the human collection mostly depends on whether there are certain communal historical narrations. The communal historical narration not only determines the ideology and conduct form of the special community, also does it determine which how do the members of the community comprehend the current situation and the writing of fortune. The human collectives without communal historical narration, can’t deliberately face the risk and challenge. Hence ,we can foresee that , the history of the human civilization in future must on one hand to acknowledge that different value and custom both have their own justice, deserve to be valued and peacefully treated; on the other hand, should firmly believe that there are certain commonness in the experiences of different people , which therefore a deep introspection on the various “centrism” and weakening of it consciously was required. Whereby human would no longer to be defined by the distinction, but fundamentally to care for the variety of the across-border activities such as association and interplay, alternation and type-conversion, integration and creation , and then to build a set of completely new history of the global civilization with a communal historical narration. In deed, this is just what the politician with rich insight had ever expounded: “every civilization has its exclusive charm and profound connotation, and is the spiritual treasure of human. Different civilizations need to learn from others’ merits to offset their short, and to advance together, at the same time , to make the exchanging and learning civilization from each other become an impetus of promotion the development of the human society, and the bond sustaining the peace of the world.” And now , rather comes the problem of how can this ideology be practised by historians in this writing of history.

纵观人类历史，人类集体的凝聚力很大程度上取决于是否拥有某种共同的历史叙事。共同的历史叙事不仅决定了特定共同体的思想观念与行动方式，也决定着共同体成员如何理解现状及书写未来。没有共同历史叙事的人类集体，是无法从容面对危机与挑战的。因此可以预见，未来的人类文明史必须一方面承认不同的价值观和习俗都具有其自身的正当性，值得被尊重和平等对待；另一方面，也坚信不同的人类经历具有某种普遍的共通性，需要对各种“中心论”抱持深刻反思，并有意识地加以弱化。由此，人类将不再被差异所定义，而是会从根本上注重各种跨越边界的关联与互动、交错与转型、整合与创新，进而构建出一套拥有共同历史叙事的全新的全球文明史。事实上，这也正是富有洞察力的政治家所阐述的：“每种文明都有其独特魅力和深厚底蕴，都是人类的精神瑰宝。不同文明要取长补短、共同进步，让文明交流互鉴成为推动人类社会进步的动力、维护世界和平的纽带。”现在，则是历史学家如何将此思想实践于历史书写之中的问题。

返回搜狐，查看更多

责任编辑：

【2024澳门天天开好彩大全免费】 【新澳天天开奖资料大全最新】

【2024年天天开好彩资料】 【新澳天天开奖资料大全最新54期】

【2024澳门天天开好彩大全53期】 【澳门天天开彩期期精准】

【2024全年资料免费大全】 【新澳天天开奖资料大全】

【澳门内部最精准免费资料】 【2024澳门天天开好彩大全】

【2024年新奥门天天开彩免费资料】 【新澳2024今晚开奖资料】 【香港内部资料精准大全】