| As an academic field, history of geography is profit from some meta-sciences such as history of science, philosophy of science, sociology of science, geography of science (if allowed) etc. Especially, history of Chinese geography is a complex and contradictory field which is a typical cross-culture:include from of old until in now, and Chinese and world also, two transcultural types. So, the’legality’in historiography of Chinese geography is a fact can not be avoided, even a fundamental fact as we show. Based on so much and different kinds of contradictory in these views on the state of Chinese geography (especial for the ancient phase) among historians of Anglophone and Chinese, which make too much misunderstanding for the progress or shift of Chinese geography, an effective method was taken to review these contradictory states, i.e. a kind of historiographical research.First and foremost, the key concepts should be showed, i.e. we insist:①geography is so different in different places sand different times, which imply we should to avoid an inevitable or progressive "essentialist" historiography (本质主义编史学) which postulating what geography is as a science "in essence";②a history of geography should be concerned with the past for its own sake, which in this context must mean the ways in which geography was understood at the time, rather than the ways in which it can be understood in the light of the present-day practice of the subject.Pant I is a reappear of the contradictory views in the writings of geography, include Anglophone and Chinese’s, at the same time, based on these criticizes over the field of historiographical methods above-mentioned writings, we construct the key concepts, content and fragment of historiography of geography as an academic discipline.In chapter1, we use "HGi" to refer to the actual past of geography and "HG2" to refer to the writings of historians about that past, and the essence of historiography of geography is to examine how HGi record, explain HG2in its places and times rather than it "should be" today. We summarized, there are three types historiographical methods in HG2:positivisms disciplinary historiography such as The Nature of Geography, All Possible Words:a history of geographical ideas, which is an "essentialist" historiography that postulating what geography is as a science "in essence", and constructing geography’s history in this light; construcivism disciplinary historiography, such as contributions by Trevor J.Barnes, insist geography is constructived by society; historical contextualism disciplinary historiography, which is emphasized by England historian of geography Robert J. Mayhew who drawing on the ideas from so-called "Cambridge school" scholars such as Michael Oakeshott and Quentin Skinner etc, and the aim is to think how to write the histories of geographies, rather than history of geography. Both of Mayhew and Charles W. J. Withers insist geography is so different in different places sand different times, which imply we should to avoid an inevitable or progressive "essentialist" historiography which postulating what geography is as a science "in essence". Of course, historical contextualism disciplinary historiography have been related in Chinese works such as From Dynastic Geography to Historical Geography:A change in Perspective towards the Geographical Past of China (in English) and From Chaos to Order:Palaeoid Geographical Thought in China (in Chinese) which published by Tang Xiaofeng. Tang take it that a history of Chinese geography should be concerned with the past for its own sake, which in this context must mean the ways in which Chinese geography was understood at the time, rather than the ways in which it can be understood in the light of the present-day practice of the discipline. So, Tang constructed history of Dynastic Geography and explained it with Chinese ancient culture, words and concepts and, this is inherited by his outstandingdisciple Pan Sheng in his doctoral thesis Ideas, System and Interest in the Geography of the Sung Dynasties. Discussed results are given to show that, an effective way in disciplinary historiography progress is to take a choice among these methods, and we suggested:positivism disciplinary historiographical method is a good choice for modern history; historical contextualism disciplinary historiographical method is benefit to ancient and early modern history, especially to non-western or non-Anglophone places, like China.It’s worth nothing that, historical contextualism historiography of geography (HCHG), which is emphasized by England historian of geography Robert J. Mayhew, is helpful to change the trend of "whiggish historiography" in geography. According to Mayhew’s state, he drew on the ideas from so-called "Cambridge school" scholars such as Michael Oakeshott and Quentin Skinner etc, and the aim is to think how to write the histories of geographies, rather than history of geography. Both of Mayhew and Charles W. J. Withers insist geography is so different in different places sand different times, which imply we should to avoid an inevitable or progressive "essentialist" historiography which postulating what geography is as a science "in essence", and constructing geography’s history in this light. For much the reason, James and Martin’s All Possible Words:a history of geographical ideas, which makes a deeply influence to Chinese geographers is an’essentialist’ historiography else. In the view of HCHG, most of writings of Chinese geographies are whiggish history, what stated in these writings is "western or Anglophone geography in China", instead of "Chinese geography", and the exception is Dynastic Geography which emphasized the Dynastic tradition rather than "scientific" tradition in Chinese ancient geography.Part II is a historiographical research to history of Chinese geography. In chapter2, we discussed three kinds of paths (scientific history, intellectual history and social and cultural history) in the contributions of history of Chinese geography since the first contribution was published in1938by historian Wang Yong. The progress of these contributions can be separated into two main phases, i.e. the scientific history research stage from1940s to1980s, and the intellectual stage from1980s. Wang carded the geographical knowledge, as a result, he did not think there was a discipline of geography in ancient China. Hou Renzhi Wang Chengzu, Ju Jiwu,Yu Xixian and a team of geoscientific from Institute for the History of Natural Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences etc. admitted there was a discipline of geography in ancient China, and they discussed its intellective, theoretical and disciplinary system. After1980s, series works about geographical thought history were published by geographical historians Zhou Chunti, Yang Wuyang, Wang Hongwen, Liu Shengjia, Zhao Rong, Pan Yijun and Wang Aimin etc. which described the progress of geographical concept, assumptions, experiment, law, proposition, theory, method, research program or paradigm in China, trying to card and foresee the key problems in geographical thought. From Dynastic Geography to Historical Geography:A change in Perspective towards the Geographical Past of China, which is written by Tang Xiaofeng, is an original work which discover that the primary characteristic of Chinese ancient geography was distinct humanistic concern reflected in its research content and methodology.In chapter3, different kinds of contradictory in these views on the state of Chinese geography (especial for the ancient phase) among historians of Anglophone and Chinese were reappeared, which make too much misunderstanding for the progress or shift of Chinese geography. We concluded that, there was a Whig interpretation(辉格 解释)in foreign geographers works, but they powerless to render assistance. It’s worth noting that, foreign geographers’expectation just confined to their positivism tradition, humanistic tradition for Chinese geographies above and less than. Chinese geographers followed foreign positivism tradition conduced an Reverse Analogical Interpretation(反向格义)seemed, but their original intention was Analogical Interpretation格义).Historians Tang Xiaofeng etc. devoted themselves to a humanistic history for Chinese ancient geographies, that’s a new history, and contributed to propose a new content system for future histories of geographies. In any case, both positivism and humanistic traditions were essential content and phases for new geographies in the future, that need a Communication(会通)manner. So, there are, and will be three challenges in the research of Chinese histories of geographies at present and in the future, communication for:ancient and modern; China and foreign; and the interdisciplinary strategy.In chapter4, we inspected the "geographical traditions" in geographical literature, and concluded that:what termed "geographical traditions" include ontological and methodological content, such as geography as human ecology, map tradition, man-land tradition, space tradition, geoscience tradition, area tradition, historical tradition, and Dynastic Geography(王朝地理学,especially in Chinese ancient geography) etc. Based on these traditions, we inspect the distribution of geographical knowledge in Chinese ancient government bibliographies and their relationship with the shift of geographical traditions in China. Of course, we still give out an introduction to the difference with Anglophone geographical traditions. In an view of historiographies of geography, we summarize the content and progress of Chinese geography (of course compare to Anglophone geography in a way), i.e.①the scientific (research nature) tradition and humanistic tradition which were differences in the amount but qualitative differences before Shangshu Yugongy《尚书·禹贡》);②from Yugong to Ming Dynasty (明代),about for long2000years, Dynastic Geography was theoretical to an important government knowledge department made a qualitative difference with Anglophone mathematical geography which is began from the ancient Greeks famous geographer Eratosthenes(埃拉托色尼),but the scientific tradition still development slowly;③from the late Ming Dynasty, followed the effort from some positivism geographers in China and Anglophone geographical literature introduced into China, especially the Dynasty disintegrated, Dynastic Geography was distinguished in the late Qing Dynasty(清代), and from then on, there is just the differences in the amount with Anglophone geography, i.e. modern geography. Part III, i.e. chapter5, is a case which used to illustrate how to writing history of geography in the modern and contemporary age. Based on Understanding the Changing Planet:Strategic Directions for the Geographical Sciences(UCP), which is published by the National Research Council (USA), and its comments in The Professional Geographer, we discussed that uppercase and plural "Geographical Sciences"(GS,“地理科学”)is the strategic direction for geography in the future. According to these comments, UCP valued technologies and tools excessively ("task"), and did not pay much attention to methodology ("discipline"). Actually, both "task" and "discipline" are geographical wings, especially in the time of "big science" Enlightenment from UCP and its comments is the strategic direction should be balanced between "task" and "discipline", GS should be a three-dimensional construct of a disciplinary system, methodology, and technologies and tools, and this system should be scientific humanism based on scientific spirit and directed by humanism. During the last60years, Chinese geographers devoted themselves to GS, including practice and theory. Obviously progress and outlook are proposed as interdisciplinary GS, Earth Surface Sciences (ESS,’‘地球表层学”)and Geographical Construction(GC,“地理建设”)The disciplinary system of GS is very complex, and is composed of such human knowledge domains as sciences, technologies, engineering, and philosophy. The main mission is to research the open, complex, and macro earth system (not only scientifically, but also humanistically), and one significant methodology is "comprehensive integration of qualitative and quantitative means"(CIQQM,“定性与定量综合集成法”)At the same time, another changing direction in Chinese geography is Human-Economic Geography (H-EG,"人文-经济地理学”).Based on this chapter, we concluded that the situation between China and Anglophone is changing which is largely different from the past, as we pointed out, we are in a Communication phase.At the final chapter, discussed results are given to show that Chinese historians of geography always contribute themselves to a kind of constructive history of Chinese geography. And we suggested, the research of history of Chinese geography should be pay much attention to the relationships among academic, society and culture in China in the future, to create a kind of "geographical Well-being"It’s worth nothing that, we believe, what the people of China have done since earliest times, and what they have in common with all known civilizations, in their various ways of making sense of the natural and humanistic world were reasonable. It’s just like what Trevor Barnes said in a review to UCP in The Professional Geographer,"there was never a single disciplinary route to get from here to there. There was never a single royal road to the truth." So, we believe, as an academic discipline, history of geography is constructed by historians in many ways or view, so there need a new contextualism to evaluate these written history even geography itself.Following the revolution of paradigm in science and technology, as an inter discipline and a representative of e-Science, there will be a charge for GS to show her lofty aspirations, which just as the situation described by American geographer Nigel Thrift:"the times are on our side:things are becoming’more geographical" Whatever, we approve the suggestion which proposed by American physical geographer Antony R. Orme in1980:"What done is done and cannot be undone, yet we can learn from past events in planning the future"... |
PDF Full Text Request