※ [本文轉錄自 historia 看板] 作者: MRZ (LQY) 看板: historia 標題: 軍事史之史觀理論015 時間: Fri Mar 4 12:47:48 2005 Research on Military Life Social scientists might prefer the term ‘the military system’ to the one used here, i.e. military life, for captioning collectively the three major research fields which have been brought together here, slightly artificially perhaps. These research fields could in simple language be named the things, the bodies, and the ways of military life. The basic ‘things’ (artefacts) of military life are, somewhat abstractedly phrased: weapons and other technical equipment, fortifications, barracks, vessels, vehicles, aircraft, and clothing. The interest of historians proper in this research field has never been very great. It has rather been cultivated by museum staffs, by archaeologists and historians of art, architecture or technology, and by ‘amateurs’ (who might be highly competent in their speciality). The ‘bodies’ (institutions or organisational units) of military life have interested historians far more, probably because of their great importance in domestic and international politics. The research made in this field is, to be sure, of very uneven quality but it has produced much solid and detailed knowledge of some military bodies, like e.g. the Roman Army, Napoleon’ s army, the British Army and Navy, and the German General Staff. The ‘ways’ (customs, rites, and behavioural patterns, and norms and values) of military life have for centuries fascinated numerous people outside the armed profession. They have also captured the imagination of many novelists (Alfred de Vigny, Joseph Roth, James Jones, John Masters, Sven Delblanc, and others). It is, however, only comparatively recently that this prospective field of research has been ‘discovered’ by the scholarly world. And it is not historians (with some few exceptions) who have taken the lead in exploring the new research field, but rather anthropologists, ethnologists, and sociologists. 五﹑軍事生活之研究 許多社會學家會比較喜歡使用‘軍事建制’來取代‘軍事生活’這個說法﹐因為他 們認為這樣的名詞比較能夠含有上述三角關係的涵義。這類研究的主題通常是軍事 術語的來源考據﹑軍品考據﹑軍制考據﹑以及軍事生活的不同性質。 軍事生活中最基本的‘軍品’﹐大致如下﹕武器﹑科技器材﹑堡壘要塞(永久性質)﹑ 防禦工事(臨時性質)﹑容器﹑交通工具﹑(可載人或不載人)飛行器﹑與軍服。史學 家對於這類研究主題其實並沒有多大的興趣﹐通常是博物館工作人員﹑考古學家﹑ 藝術史學家﹑建築史學家﹑科技史學家﹑或是‘業餘’史學研究者(雖然他們對這些 東西﹐反而比專家還專家)﹐才有興趣從事這樣的研究。 在軍事生活中﹐史學家對於‘軍制(總體建制或某一特定軍事組織或單位)’﹐會有 較多的興趣﹐因為這個主題對於內政外交方面﹐都有較為重要的影響力。不過歷代 各國的軍制研究的文章數量或是素質﹐並不怎麼平均分配﹐比如說許多史學家用心 盡力的研究羅馬軍制﹑拿破侖軍制﹑或是英國海軍與陸軍的軍制﹑以及德國參謀本 部。這些主題的軍制研究﹐可說是有如長江大河﹐滔滔不絕。 至於在軍事生活中的‘傳承(服裝﹑儀式﹑行為習慣﹑與意識形態)’這個方面來說﹐ 在過去數個世界以來﹐往往被長期生活在軍營以外的一般民眾﹐賦予了許多刻板印 象。他們往往是經由小說家(亞佛烈德維尼﹑約瑟夫羅斯﹑詹姆士瓊斯﹑約翰馬士特 斯﹑史分德布蘭﹑與族繁不及備載的只有瑞典人才曉得是誰的暢銷小說家)﹐得到這 些千奇百怪的刻板印象的。但這方面的‘研究’﹐卻直到今天﹐才開始被史學界所 重視。但這樣的研究主題﹐卻不是經由史學家(除了少數的例外)所引進入史學界的﹐ 反而是人類學家﹑倫理學家﹑與社會學家。 -- LQY附註﹕老實說﹐光是聽到本人的教授‘們’如何狂批歷史OTAKU或是D頻道的所作 所為﹐就有六個學期看到他們在搖頭。 -- 萬物皆非主，唯曼尼大神，至聖之先知，亞當史密斯。 La ilaha ill money，Adam Smith rasula'Llah 榮耀歸於曼尼。自宇宙之初成﹐貫古今與未來﹐直至永恆不滅。喀鏘！（收銀機響聲） Gloria patri Money. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum.Ka-ching! --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.30.77.184 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.250.145