彭慕兰(Kenneth Pomeranz),美国加利福尼亚大学尔湾分校历史系主任、历史和东亚语言文学教授,加州大学系统世界史研究组主任。其大部分著作围绕着中国和比较经济发展、农村社会变革、环境变革及政府的形成等展开研究,但也著有民间宗教史和家庭结构及性别角色史方面的著作。
The Great Divergence brings new insight to one of the classic questions of history: Why did sustained industrial growth begin in Northwest Europe, despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia? As Ken Pomeranz shows, as recently as 1750, parallels between these two parts of the world were very high in life expectancy, consumption, product and factor markets, and the strategies of households. Perhaps most surprisingly, Pomeranz demonstrates that the Chinese and Japanese cores were no worse off ecologically than Western Europe. Core areas throughout the eighteenth-century Old World faced comparable local shortages of land-intensive products, shortages that were only partly resolved by trade.
Pomeranz argues that Europe's nineteenth-century divergence from the Old World owes much to the fortunate location of coal, which substituted for timber. This made Europe's failure to use its land intensively much less of a problem, while allowing growth in energy-intensive industries. Another crucial difference that he notes has to do with trade. Fortuitous global conjunctures made the Americas a greater source of needed primary products for Europe than any Asian periphery. This allowed Northwest Europe to grow dramatically in population, specialize further in manufactures, and remove labor from the land, using increased imports rather than maximizing yields. Together, coal and the New World allowed Europe to grow along resource-intensive, labor-saving paths.
Meanwhile, Asia hit a cul-de-sac. Although the East Asian hinterlands boomed after 1750, both in population and in manufacturing, this growth prevented these peripheral regions from exporting vital resources to the cloth-producing Yangzi Delta. As a result, growth in the core of East Asia's economy essentially stopped, and what growth did exist was forced along labor-intensive, resource-saving paths--paths Europe could have been forced down, too, had it not been for favorable resource stocks from underground and overseas.
周锡瑞老师以前的1500字命题作文,我就不介绍书了。 十年之后,当彭慕兰先生《大分流》一书仍被不断提及和争论时,即便是持反对意见的学者,也不会不承认此书的经典意义。诚如许多学者已经提出的批评那样,我认为彭氏在此书中即便不是刻意“抬升”了中国各方面与西欧不相伯仲...
评分2017年3月29日晚,金陵读书会海外中国研究系列专场的第二场沙龙——关于美国学者彭慕兰的《大分流》一书的讨论沙龙如期举办。本期沙龙由钱竹林老师主讲,金陵读书的九位常务理事当中,有五人到场参加讨论,因而讨论气氛相当热烈。包括本书出版方——江苏人民出版社的钟志勤女士...
评分 评分 评分文明演进类似物种进化——在没有强烈的外力推动下,文明体不可能出现跳跃式的发展,而是渐进地从一种文明形态转化到另一种文明形态。这种转型能否成功,在于文明体是否突破了某些关键的“阈门”。在15世纪以后的历史中,欧洲比中国更早地走向了工业化的资本主义,正因为前者...
视角很新颖,史料很详实,但读起来真是无聊啊
评分归根结底,【王国斌 彭慕兰 Goldstone 李中清】 vs 【Elvin 黄宗智 Bryant】的战争核心是不是“结构 与 事件”之争呢?前者重视的是东西方短时段“结构”中的相似性,并赋予“事件”关键性的意义,而后者更偏重长时段“结构”的作用和其中体现的东西方发展轨迹的根本差异。
评分He wants to provide some "surprising" answer after rejecting previous explanations, but his answer is banal.
评分视角很新颖,史料很详实,但读起来真是无聊啊
评分作为史学家,写出一部横跨两大洲、糅合了经济史、社会学的书,委实不易。307页是书的一个小缩影,提出了几个有趣设想,扑张蔓延,阐之不尽是个遗憾。翻成中文本怕是很多人读着要不喜欢了。
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小哈图书下载中心 版权所有