著者

山中 仁美

出版者

一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_14-175_26, 2014

---

This article explores how the theories and concepts of 'nationalism' were incorporated into the newly introduced study of International Relations (IR) in Britain, arguing that scholars' theoretical attempts to limit the 'hostility of nationalism' eventually gave way to the empirical reality of international politics during the inter-war period. It will focus on a report by a research group at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), whose official aim was to provide a 'scientific examination' of the contemporary developments of nationalism that had dominated Europe since the end of the nineteenth century and were believed to 'threaten the very future of civilisation'.<br>During the inter-war years, nationalism was heavily criticised as being a regressive political ideology deemed to be a decisive factor of war. Its dramatic growth became a major issue for the IR academics who were studying the bankruptcy of internationalism. They decided to initiate a collective, comprehensive, and scientific study of nationalism within the newly established London think tank. The debate adopted an early modernist and functionalist approach to the concept of nation and national identity with a historical perspective on the stages of nationalism as an account of the economic and social developments of the nation and nationality. At first, the members of the research group sought to provide a theoretical perspective on the limitation of nationalism. As the international situation became increasingly tense, however, they came to accept the concept of nation and nationalism as a fact, no longer assuming that nation states would disappear nor that nationalism should be condemned as the sole cause of discontent and instability.<br>The group's theoretical studies were highly responsive to the challenges of a deteriorating international environment and theory was gradually reconciled with the empirical reality of international politics. This will defend a historically sensitive approach to the classification of international theories during this period of crisis, avoiding reducing a broader political and social debate to the ahistorical utopian-realism dichotomy of the 'First Great Debate'. Special attention needs to be paid to a wide variety of institutional settings and collective studies that gave rise to the substantive debates on international affairs in inter-war Britain marking a sharp contrast with the situation in the US where IR debates mainly took place in the academic circles of Political Science.

著者

西村 邦行

出版者

一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_41-175_55, 2014

---

Scholars of international studies in Japan have repeatedly reflected on their excessive susceptibility to the Western academia; they have rigorously "imported" theories from America and Britain whereas they have failed to develop their own. However, few researchers have exemplified how this "importation" has actually been played out. Given that the Japanese recipients of Western theories have not shared academic and other contexts with their original bearers, it is possible that the "importation" have led to idiosyncratic interpretations of these theories.<br>This article examines in which context and in what way Japanese scholars in the middle-war and the early post-war periods read the works of E. H. Carr, the oft-claimed pioneer of Western international relations theory. In the Anglophone international studies academia, scholars have usually labeled Carr realist who had rejected interwar liberal internationalism. His first readers in Japan did not embrace such view. They, in fact, did not read Carr exclusively as international theorist. Carr, for early Japanese scholars, was an empiricist social thinker who attempted to transcend the modern ways of (both domestic and international) politics.<br>Among Carr's writings, the one that first won the heart of Japanese scholars was not<i> The Twenty Years' Crisis</i>, the now acclaimed classic of international relations theory, but <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, its more utopian-oriented sequel. They, in addition, virtually ignored the book's second part, in which Carr provided his prescriptions for the new world order; they rather focused on the first part, in which he discussed the limits of modern political thought. Finishing <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, furthermore, they moved on to <i>The Soviet Impact on the Western World</i>, yet another book on the crisis of the modern European political system. Only after this series of reception, <i>The Twenty Years' Crisis</i> caught a spotlight. As a result, Japanese scholars read the book not so much as an advocacy of power politics as a stepping stone for the future governance of the still antagonistic relationship among states.<br>Thusly, early Japanese recipients of Carr read his works against the backdrop of their own concern about the deadlock of modernity. This insight provides us an alternative way to approaching the history of Japanese international studies.

著者

西村 邦行

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_41-175_55, 2014

---

Scholars of international studies in Japan have repeatedly reflected on their excessive susceptibility to the Western academia; they have rigorously "imported" theories from America and Britain whereas they have failed to develop their own. However, few researchers have exemplified how this "importation" has actually been played out. Given that the Japanese recipients of Western theories have not shared academic and other contexts with their original bearers, it is possible that the "importation" have led to idiosyncratic interpretations of these theories.<br>This article examines in which context and in what way Japanese scholars in the middle-war and the early post-war periods read the works of E. H. Carr, the oft-claimed pioneer of Western international relations theory. In the Anglophone international studies academia, scholars have usually labeled Carr realist who had rejected interwar liberal internationalism. His first readers in Japan did not embrace such view. They, in fact, did not read Carr exclusively as international theorist. Carr, for early Japanese scholars, was an empiricist social thinker who attempted to transcend the modern ways of (both domestic and international) politics.<br>Among Carr's writings, the one that first won the heart of Japanese scholars was not<i> The Twenty Years' Crisis</i>, the now acclaimed classic of international relations theory, but <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, its more utopian-oriented sequel. They, in addition, virtually ignored the book's second part, in which Carr provided his prescriptions for the new world order; they rather focused on the first part, in which he discussed the limits of modern political thought. Finishing <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, furthermore, they moved on to <i>The Soviet Impact on the Western World</i>, yet another book on the crisis of the modern European political system. Only after this series of reception, <i>The Twenty Years' Crisis</i> caught a spotlight. As a result, Japanese scholars read the book not so much as an advocacy of power politics as a stepping stone for the future governance of the still antagonistic relationship among states.<br>Thusly, early Japanese recipients of Carr read his works against the backdrop of their own concern about the deadlock of modernity. This insight provides us an alternative way to approaching the history of Japanese international studies.

著者

新谷 崇

出版者

日伊協会

雑誌

日伊文化研究 (ISSN:02881802)

巻号頁・発行日

no.52, pp.77-91, 2014

著者

砂山 充子

出版者

専修大学人文科学研究所

雑誌

人文科学年報 (ISSN:03878708)

巻号頁・発行日

no.44, pp.33-63, 2014

著者

鈴木 鉄忠

出版者

中央大学文学部 ; 1954-

雑誌

中央大学文学部紀要 = Journal of the Faculty of Letters (ISSN:05296803)

巻号頁・発行日

no.253, pp.161-181, 2014-03

著者

鈴木 鉄忠

出版者

中央大学文学部

雑誌

中央大学文学部紀要 = Journal of the Faculty of Letters (ISSN:05296803)

巻号頁・発行日

no.253, pp.161-181, 2014-03

著者

古川 高子

出版者

東欧史研究会

雑誌

東欧史研究 (ISSN:03866904)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.36, pp.3-25, 2014

著者

古川 高子

出版者

東欧史研究会

雑誌

東欧史研究 = The Journal of East European studies (ISSN:03866904)

巻号頁・発行日

no.36, pp.3-25, 2014-03

著者

南 直人

出版者

大阪大学西洋史学会

雑誌

パブリック・ヒストリー (ISSN:1348852X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.11, pp.1-16, 2014

著者

北村 昌史

出版者

日本西洋史学会

雑誌

西洋史学 = The studies in Western history (ISSN:03869253)

巻号頁・発行日

no.253, pp.50-62, 2014

著者

北村 昌史

出版者

日本西洋史学会

雑誌

西洋史学 = The studies in Western history (ISSN:03869253)

巻号頁・発行日

no.253, pp.50-62, 2014

著者

塚本 栄美子

出版者

佛教大学歴史学部

雑誌

歴史学部論集 (ISSN:21854203)

巻号頁・発行日

no.4, pp.41-62, 2014-03

---

宗教改革やその後の宗派化のプロセスを通じて、自身や家族のために追悼説教パンフレットを作成する慣習が、王や諸侯たちの間ばかりでなく、より階層の低い貴族や領主層、ブルジョワ階層や裕福な手工業者たちにも広がっていった。とりわけルター派地域に浸透するが、改革派やカトリックの人びとの間でも認められ、近世ならではの慣習として注目される。本稿では、わが国であまり紹介されてこなかった当該史料の具体例を検討し、その史料的価値を考察する。近世ドイツ追悼説教パンフレットブランデンブルク・プロイセン

著者

土倉 莞爾

出版者

関西大学法学会

雑誌

関西大学法学論集 (ISSN:0437648X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.64, no.2, pp.325-348, 2014-07

著者

土倉 莞爾

出版者

關西大學法學會

雑誌

関西大学法学論集 (ISSN:0437648X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.64, no.2, pp.325-348, 2014-07

著者

鈴木 重周

出版者

日本ユダヤ学会

雑誌

ユダヤ・イスラエル研究 = Studies on Jewish life and culture (ISSN:09162984)

巻号頁・発行日

no.28, pp.12-23, 2014-12

著者

岡部 造史

出版者

北陸史学会

雑誌

北陸史学 (ISSN:03868885)

巻号頁・発行日

no.62, pp.1-22, 2014-09

著者

高橋 則雄

出版者

専修大学緑鳳学会

雑誌

専修総合科学研究 (ISSN:13418602)

巻号頁・発行日

no.22, pp.1-23, 2014-10

著者

藤原 翔太

出版者

公益財団法人史学会

雑誌

史學雜誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.123, no.12, pp.2149-2177, 2014-12-20

---

On 17 February 1800, the Consulat enacted a law concerning the districting and administration of the entire territory of France, and embarked on fundamental reforms that would lead to the encouragement and reinforcement of the centralization of local administrative institutions. However, the law also reintroduced the commune system, thus reviving local autonomy, a fact which has long been neglected. Once noticed, this fact leads to the question of why the regime of Napoleon, which has been considered to be a centralized one, needed to reorganize certain structural features of local autonomous institutions. In order to answer this question, the author of this article examines the structure of local governance under Napoleon by focusing on the town mayors who represented both the communes and central state authority in the prefectures of the Hautes-Pyrenees. The mayors of rural towns and cities who served under Napoleon have long been criticized for being "incompetent" and in league with their constituents, problems that were fully recognized by contemporary governors of prefectures and arrondissements (prefects and vice-prefects), as well as by the central government. Therefore, the prefectures proposed that any canton larger in area than a commune should have one paid mayor; however, the central government ignored this proposal and persisted in maintaining the commune system. This means that the government regarded the appointment of mayors based on the commune system as the best way to rule at the local level. Such a conclusion leads to the question of how the mayors, who were so important in terms of local rule, were actually chosen. To answer this question, the author first turns to an examination of the available mayoral prosopography and finds that there were definite differences in social status between the mayors of canton administrative centers (chef-lieu) and those of ordinary communes. Moreover, regarding the actual administration of local authorities, we find unique solutions adopted by prefecture-level bureaus to deal with problems caused by the mayors of rural towns and cities. Despite obvious regional differences, in the economic and cultural periphery of the Pyrenees, administrative affairs of the greatest import were carried on at the canton level. Rather than this fact indicating that the commune system was being treated as a mere formality, we find mayors of chef-lieu, who were selected from the ranks of local dignitaries, utilizing their political influence to guide politicians of inferior status and power in their duties as mayors of ordinary communes. In this sense, the commune system should be considered as having been introduced into a highly centralized, socially stratified political order for the purpose of integrating political power and influence at the regional level.

著者

藤原 翔太

出版者

公益財団法人 史学会

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.123, no.12, pp.2149-2177, 2014

---

On 17 February 1800, the Consulat enacted a law concerning the districting and administration of the entire territory of France, and embarked on fundamental reforms that would lead to the encouragement and reinforcement of the centralization of local administrative institutions. However, the law also reintroduced the commune system, thus reviving local autonomy, a fact which has long been neglected. Once noticed, this fact leads to the question of why the regime of Napoleon, which has been considered to be a centralized one, needed to reorganize certain structural features of local autonomous institutions. In order to answer this question, the author of this article examines the structure of local governance under Napoleon by focusing on the town mayors who represented both the communes and central state authority in the prefectures of the Hautes-Pyrenees. The mayors of rural towns and cities who served under Napoleon have long been criticized for being "incompetent" and in league with their constituents, problems that were fully recognized by contemporary governors of prefectures and arrondissements (prefects and vice-prefects), as well as by the central government. Therefore, the prefectures proposed that any canton larger in area than a commune should have one paid mayor; however, the central government ignored this proposal and persisted in maintaining the commune system. This means that the government regarded the appointment of mayors based on the commune system as the best way to rule at the local level. Such a conclusion leads to the question of how the mayors, who were so important in terms of local rule, were actually chosen. To answer this question, the author first turns to an examination of the available mayoral prosopography and finds that there were definite differences in social status between the mayors of canton administrative centers (chef-lieu) and those of ordinary communes. Moreover, regarding the actual administration of local authorities, we find unique solutions adopted by prefecture-level bureaus to deal with problems caused by the mayors of rural towns and cities. Despite obvious regional differences, in the economic and cultural periphery of the Pyrenees, administrative affairs of the greatest import were carried on at the canton level. Rather than this fact indicating that the commune system was being treated as a mere formality, we find mayors of chef-lieu, who were selected from the ranks of local dignitaries, utilizing their political influence to guide politicians of inferior status and power in their duties as mayors of ordinary communes. In this sense, the commune system should be considered as having been introduced into a highly centralized, socially stratified political order for the purpose of integrating political power and influence at the regional level.