彭慕蘭(Kenneth Pomeranz),美國加利福尼亞大學爾灣分校曆史係主任、曆史和東亞語言文學教授,加州大學係統世界史研究組主任。其大部分著作圍繞著中國和比較經濟發展、農村社會變革、環境變革及政府的形成等展開研究,但也著有民間宗教史和傢庭結構及性彆角色史方麵的著作。
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.
此书作者彭慕兰是著名历史学家,汉学家,“加州学派”代表人物,曾担任美国历史学派会长。我认为彭慕兰先生的《大分流》这本书并不能够被称为完全的社会学著作。而更像是对于18世纪前后中国与英国的经济历史视角的分析。 18世纪时,中国与英国的发展道路分道扬镳。英国走向了工...
評分 評分所谓的“有缘无分”说的就是和《大分流》与我。 还在念书时,在书店里、文章中和其他地方无数次遇见,甚至将它加进购物车好久,但始终也没真正拥有它。今天去单位图书馆,作为“副产品”借到这本书。似乎比之前见到的薄许多,不到400页。2003年版。 希望这部所谓“尔湾学派”...
評分- 這本應該是歷史學中加州學派的重要經典,英文版本出版於1999年。台灣及中國大陸分別於2004及2008年曾出過其譯著,今次台灣衛城再出一版。 - 內容有甚麼不一樣就不太知道,有興趣者可自行找來比較。不過值得注意的是,台版兩版的譯者不一樣,而大陸版的譯者也不同,是故幾版應...
評分大傻逼
评分One very long argument.
评分有種不知所雲的感覺.
评分He wants to provide some "surprising" answer after rejecting previous explanations, but his answer is banal.
评分需要再讀!
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小哈圖書下載中心 版权所有