宋代三冗问题研究 杨高凡【正版书】 在线下载 pdf mobi 2025 epub 电子版

《宋代“三冗”问题研究》全面系统、深入准确地梳理这一课题，并进而进行反思性研究，既是宋朝“三冗”问题本身研究的需要，又是推动宋史纵深研究的需要，具有较为重要的学术意义， 书稿在全面掌握前人对“三冗”问题研究成果的基础上，全面梳理了两宋“三冗”现象的具体表现、形成原因和当时人的议论。不仅分章详论了冗官、冗兵和冗费现象，还强调在整体上要把“三冗”视为一个互相关联的系统，重视从北宋到南宋各个发展阶段“三冗”问题在时间上的变化和空间上的转换。

绪论

章 - -宋代“三冗”问题概述

 - -节 - -宋代冗兵问题及其表现

 - -第二节 - -宋代冗费问题及其表现

 - -第三节 - -宋代冗官问题及其表现

第二章 - -宋代冗兵及其相关问题研究

 - -节 - -宋代冗兵的形成过程

 - -第二节 - -宋代冗兵成因

第三章 - -宋代冗费及其相关问题

 - -节 - -宋代冗费的形成过程

 - -第二节 - -宋代的冗兵与冗官之费

 - -第三节 - -宋代的郊祀冗费

 - -第四节 - -宋代大兴土木之冗费

 - -第五节 - -宋代的公使冗费

 - -第六节 - -宋代冗费之成因

第四章 - -宋代冗官及其相关问题

 - -节 - -宋代冗官的形成过程

 - -第二节 - -宋代冗官的构成与表现

 - -第三节 - -宋代冗官的成因

第五章 - -宋人对“三冗”问题及应对措施的讨论

 - -节 - -包拯对“三冗”问题的认识及对策

 - -第二节 - -蔡襄对三冗问题的认识及对策

 - -第三节 - -黄震对三冗问题的认识及对策

第六章 - -宋代三冗问题的历史教训

参考文献

”

暂无相关内容，正在全力查找中

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：宋代三冗问题研究 杨高凡【正版书】在线阅读

在线听书地址：宋代三冗问题研究 杨高凡【正版书】在线收听

在线购买地址：宋代三冗问题研究 杨高凡【正版书】在线购买

暂无原文赏析，正在全力查找中！

书籍介绍

《宋代“三冗”问题研究》全面系统、深入准确地梳理这一课题，并进而进行反思性研究，既是宋朝“三冗”问题本身研究的需要，又是推动宋史纵深研究的需要，具有较为重要的学术意义， 书稿在全面掌握前人对“三冗”问题研究成果的基础上，全面梳理了两宋“三冗”现象的具体表现、形成原因和当时人的议论。不仅分章详论了冗官、冗兵和冗费现象，还强调在整体上要把“三冗”视为一个互相关联的系统，重视从北宋到南宋各个发展阶段“三冗”问题在时间上的变化和空间上的转换。

• 作者：李猴宝 发布时间：2010-12-25 10:57:23

  作者将小猩猩画得极为可爱，表情中的娇羞、胆怯、乖巧……栩栩如生。

• 作者：三清喵 发布时间：2018-09-12 15:21:28

  宋代“三冗”问题研究的力作，资料详实，争鸣屡见，实在是可喜可贺。不足是“三冗”与“积贫积弱”关系的讨论较少，殊为可惜。

• 作者：momo 发布时间：2021-12-08 21:20:19

  12月份补标一二十本书。分别购于中图网、京东官方旗舰店、当当读书官网自营店。

• 作者：金智媛 发布时间：2019-08-17 00:33:04

  绍述先夫之遗志 精神可嘉 杨著是先入为主的产物 三冗问题是否存在也是仁者见仁 智者见智 书本身不厚 大量引用史料显得有些冗杂 充分吸收前人的研究成果 但学术创新不大 且书中谬误有点多

• 作者：雷霆的纶音 发布时间：2019-02-19 22:40:12

  除了一些格的介绍外，鲜无其用

• 作者：朵朵小时候 发布时间：2021-04-28 12:20:24

  重复之处甚多。虽然提出了既往研究的缺陷，但论述并未当重点解决。看到三冗一定的正面意义还是值得肯定的。

• 搬运-书籍叙述和作者真实生活中冲突的地方：These are the holes in ‘Primates of Park Avenue’

  作者：知蛛養殖與按摩 发布时间：2019-01-08 13:52:34

  https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-true-is-primates-of-park-avenue-2015-06-08

  估计是有作者的演绎在这本书里面吧

  It’s the book everyone on the Upper East Side is talking about. But is “Primates of Park Avenue,” an exposé on the moneyed mommies of Manhattan, really true?

  A Post review of the best seller found holes big enough to drive an Escalade through.

  Author Wednesday Martin — whose real first name is Wendy — claims in the memoir to have spent six years “doing field work” with her two kids on the Upper East Side conducting an armchair anthropological study.

  But Martin only lived there for three years, with one kid, and mentions stores and services that didn’t exist, calling into question the scenes and behaviors she describes.

  Modal Trigger“Primates” includes eyebrow-raising anecdotes, such as the claim that some women receive yearly “wife bonuses.” After readers expressed doubt, Martin backpedaled, telling New York magazine: “I don’t necessarily think it’s a trend or widespread. It was just one of the many strange-seeming cultural practices that some women told me about.”

  Although the book includes no such disclaimer and is advertised as a “memoir,” Martin told The Post she “telescoped certain parts of the narrative in order to protect the privacy of friends, neighbors, associates and family.”

  That “telescoping” seems to have moved events that happened in different neighborhoods and put them on the Upper East Side.

  In the book, Martin says she and her husband moved from the West Village for her toddler son. She describes being forced to undergo an unusual interview to purchase her Park Avenue abode.

  The co-op board, she says, held the interrogation in her bedroom, where she was confined because of a difficult pregnancy. She wears a strand of pearls while propped up in bed, the board members gathered around her.

  It’s an amusing scene.

  Except, while property records show her and her husband bought an apartment at 900 Park Ave. in January 2004, she does not appear to have been pregnant at the time.

  Martin’s first son was born in 2001 and her second was born in 2007 — the year she moved from the Upper East Side to the Upper West Side.

  Throughout the book, she claims to have been raising two boys on the Upper East Side. They are her supposed entree into the world of play dates and tutors.

  Martin said she was shunned by the “Mean Girl Moms” who looked down on her as an outsider.

  Still, Martin says, she eventually “goes native” and buys into the culture, becoming a full-fledged participant in privileged Upper East Side daily life.

  She says she attended grueling exercise classes at Physique 57 to lose her baby weight after her second son’s birth. But the upscale gym did not exist when she claims to have exercised there.

  She also describes a posh party where the guests bring the hostess gifts from an upscale macaroon shop. But Ladurée didn’t open in New York until 2011, four years after she had moved.

  While at a lunch date just prior to the party, Martin and a friend do an accounting of how much their over-privileged peers spend on personal grooming, clothing and transportation. Her friend refers to Uber, even though the car service didn’t debut in the city until 2011.

  The eldest son attends the “fanciest” nursery school on the Upper East Side — a thinly veiled reference to the 92nd Street Y preschool. Martin describes feeling “euphoric” that he was accepted at a “good” school.

  But while Martin needles over-privileged parents, records show that her husband sued the Y in 2013, saying their youngest son fell off the monkey bars at the school in March 2012 and suffered “severe and permanent injuries.”

  Martin’s Instagram feed has numerous photos of the boy — on a kayak, swimming, playing, sliding down a giant carnival slide and jumping off a lifeguard tower in the Hamptons.

  The suit, which doesn’t specify damages and is ongoing, blames the Y for failing to supervise the child and “failing to catch” him before he hit the ground. Martin told The Post that the suit is “pretty standard insurance-company stuff.”

  In the book, Martin says her family leaves the Upper East Side after both sons are accepted to a school across town, even though one hadn’t been born yet.

  Public records show Martin and her husband, Joel Moser, sold their Park Avenue pad — at a $1 million profit — in June 2007, only 3 1/2₂ years after arriving, not six. They moved to a $3.7 million co-op apartment on the Upper West Side.

  Martin was actually pregnant during this house hunt. Her youngest boy was born a few months after the move.

  In her muddled narrative, Martin writes that while living on the Upper East Side, she became pregnant at 43 with her third child. She confides she briefly considered aborting the pregnancy, only to go forward and miscarry in her sixth month.

  In the book’s emotional climax, Martin describes how the Mean Girls she once thought “bitchy and off-putting” rallied around her with support and comfort.

  Did this outpouring ever happen? At the time, Martin already would have been living across town, far from the women she derides on the Upper East Side.

  Asked specifically about the timing of the miscarriage, Martin replied, “I am not going to answer questions about my health, reproductive health or choices, children, or private meetings.” She added: “Since the book is organized by topic (ex. real estate, social hierarchies, exercise), it is not always a straightforward chronology.”

  Simon & Schuster, which published the book, declined to comment.

• 《复兴之路上的三个比较伟大的艺术家》

  作者：A5-1E 发布时间：2024-02-17 10:29:35

  挺好的三本画册，买来读读非常好，我只要打分就是五星，那本书我继续打五颗星。

  但我不喜欢《文艺复兴三杰》这个书名。

  我小的时候，听前辈们聊天，总是听各路人马说什么【如果将西方的艺术史，从古代一直到今天，拉出一条时间轴，文艺复兴时期其实就是复兴了古代希腊罗马时期的文艺”。所以叫做“文艺复兴”】。

  而基于约瑟夫·噶赔耳博士【谎话重复一千遍就是整理】定律。由于我从小就听各种人以讹传讹的反复多次重复“文艺复兴三杰”，“文艺复兴三杰”，“文艺复兴三杰”，也就觉得那“文艺复兴”必然就是和“文艺复兴三杰”有关系。进而也就非常自然的觉得“文艺复兴时代”最伟大的人就是这“三杰”。

  但两种理解，其实是两个巨大的认识论陷阱，分别可以被称为”文艺陷阱“和”三杰陷阱“。

  先说”文艺陷阱“。

  “文艺复兴”这个词，是外语“Renaissance”所对应的中文翻译词。但如果你查字典，就会发现renaissance这个词在不大写的时候，原本的含义就是“复兴”。和“实现中华民族伟大复兴”这句话当中的“复兴”一词是同一个含义，并不只是指代“文艺”的“复兴“。而当他被大写成“Renaissance”的时候要，则指西方那一群国家，在希腊罗马时代结束后，经历了近千年的糊涂蛋生活之后，突然在包括政治，军事，经济，工程，金融等多个方向上出现的，全方面的爆发性发展时期。

  看一看Renaissance时期的西方历史，谁说“Renaissance”就只是和文艺相关？现代意义上的工程学，金融学，会计学，生物学等等其他很多学科，都是Renaissance时期发扬光大并定型下来的。

  但是，由于我们从小一讲“Renaissance”就是讲”文艺复兴“，一下就把西方文明那几百年爆发式的变态型大爆发给搞成”琴棋书画“了。

  但会讲中文的人都知道，“文艺”真心没什么实际作用，而说一个人“很文艺”也并不一定是夸奖。

  而当“Renaissance”被当作专有名词翻译成“文艺复兴”之后，研究“Renaissance”突然变得很“奢侈”，很“没有实际意义”，或者“很文艺”了。

  所以当年的我，觉得自己作为一个长在红旗下的年轻人，在一个必将长期处于初级阶段的国家研究“文艺”，那肯定是个没什么实际作用的“文艺青年”了。

  这一“文艺”，就让我们忘记了去研究在西方“Renaissance”时期究竟是经历了什么，发生了什么，才导致了西方文明出现了那几百年爆发式的变态型大爆发，以至于在清朝末年超过了我们。

  我们的理解方式，被完全被“复兴希腊罗马”给骗了。错误的以为“Renaissance”就只是“模仿古代”，也就是中国人所说的“法古”。而我们也傻兮兮的觉得，既然他们“模仿古代的希腊罗马”能变得那么强，而我们的古代的祖先明明比“希腊罗马”要更佳强大，那我们只要“克己复礼”，“继续法古”就肯定能比今天的他们强。完全忘记了“Renaissance”顶多也就是在“纹样”和“皮肤”上模仿了古代的希腊罗马，但在实际的内容方面，完全是开了一个新的游戏。

  再说“三杰陷阱”

  这个“三杰”真是充分暴露了包括我在内的一部分人的逻辑混乱。

  虽然我们从小被教育要有”群众史观“，不要有”英雄史观“，不要相信”救世主“，要相信人民群众。但我们却特别喜欢总结出一些伟大的“英雄人物”，然后告诉大家是这些家伙单枪匹马改变了历史。

  这符合逻辑吗？这就像是我从小唱《国际歌》时知道“从来就没有救世主”，但然后马上又唱《东方红》的时候说“他是人民大救星”，完全没有思考过“救世主”和“大救星”之间的语言学上的亲缘关系，以及总是连着唱的几首歌的歌词之间是否应该彼此形成逻辑闭环。

  “文艺复兴三杰”这个词，在我小的时候听的次数实在太多了，也非常自然的觉得“文艺复兴”时期最伟大的人就是这三位老哥，和“六神合体的雷霆王（Six God Combination Godmars 1981）”一样，是三个部分，合体后被称作“文艺复兴三杰”。但后来学了点外语，敢于和老外虎逼喷了，才知道，除了咱们国家，并没有太多其他的国家对文艺复兴有“三杰”这么个说法。在他们的“Renaissance”历史里面，重要人物很多，所取得成就也是千奇百怪。

  这三位老哥确实是文艺复兴时期比较牛逼的艺术家，但你要非说他们是“Renaissance时期最杰出”的“三杰”，那恐怕是有点牵强了。

  他们三人确实很伟大，但我们能不能客观一些，就说他们三位是“三个伟大的艺术家”。而既然“Renaissance”时期伟大的艺术家也很多，除了艺术之外的其他领域伟大的人物依然有更多，我们能不能客观一点，就说这三位老哥是“Renaissance”时期的“三位伟大的艺术家”。

  当然可以。

  但恐怕不能这么做。

  毕竟引进出版是为了卖钱，而如果我们从图书销售的角度思考一下，如果这套书不叫《文艺复兴三杰》，而叫做《复兴路上的三个比较伟大的艺术家》，谁TMD会买呢？

  好吧，我依然支持本书继续叫做《文艺复兴三杰》。

  赚钱的事情，做得对！