何为制度——中国古代政治制度研究的三种理路  

What Is System: Three Research Approaches to the Ancient Chinese Political System

作　　者：孙正军[1] Sun Zhengjun

机构地区：[1]首都师范大学历史学院

出　　处：《中国社会科学评价》2019年第4期54-67,140,141,共16页China Social Science Review

摘　　要：20世纪90年代以来,学界先后出现多种中国古代政治制度研究的理路,邓小南倡导的“活”的制度史、阎步克主张的制度史观以及侯旭东提倡的日常统治研究,即为其中代表。“活”的制度史聚焦政治社会中实际发挥作用的制度,提出应从过程、关系、行为视角关注制度运作的路径和流程;制度史观立足法定成文制度,致力于挖掘政治体制在中国古代社会中的巨大意义,以及中国历史发展的延续性;日常统治研究瞩目作为国家统治基调的日常活动,强调从文化人类学视角进入观察,揭示以往或被忽视的制度现象。三种制度研究理路既存在联系又有不同,其差异核心源自对何为制度的认识,由此在观察视角、研究取向上各有侧重。Since the 1990s,many approaches have emerged in the study of ancient Chinese political systems in academia,such as the“living”institutional history advocated by Deng Xiaonan,Yan Buke’s institutional history view,and the daily governance study advocated by Hou Xudong.The first of these focuses on a functional system in the political society,and it proposes to concentrate on the path and procedure of system operation from the dimensions of process,relationship and behavior.The second is based on statutory and written systems,and it is devoted to exploring the great significance of the political system in ancient Chinese society and the continuity of the development of Chinese history.The third pays attention to the daily activities of national governance,emphasizing observation from the perspective of cultural anthropology and revealing the institutional phenomena that have been or are ignored.The three research approaches are connected but different mainly in their understandings of the concept of system,so they have different emphases in terms of perspectives and research preferences.

关 键 词：制度 研究理路 “活”的制度史 制度史观 日常统治研究 

分 类 号：C[社会学]