New Trends in British Marxist Historiography since the 1990s

Since the 1980s and 1990s, the intergenerational evolution and robust development of British Marxist historiography have somewhat slowed, making it difficult to produce followers and successors comparable to the outstanding historians of the previous generation. Nevertheless, the thematic horizons, core consciousness, and historiographical orientations systematically constructed by British Marxist historiography remain important topics in contemporary international historiographical currents and the disciplinary hallmark of subsequent British Marxist historiography. The core concepts and academic thought of the British Marxist historiographical trend continue to receive attention from the entire international scholarly community, especially British academia. This article focuses on the inheritance and development of the Marxist historiography of the previous generation by British Marxist historians and researchers of British Marxist historiography since the 1990s, paying particular attention to the innovative achievements of British Marxist new labour history and Marxist feminist historiography. From the perspective of historiographical concept construction and practical pathways, it elaborates on the new circumstances and new orientations of British Marxist historiography since the 1990s.

20世纪八九十年代以来，英国马克思主义史学的代际演化与强势发展有所减缓，难以再涌现与前辈杰出史家相提并论的追随者和继承者。不过，英国马克思主义史学系统构建的主题视域、核心意识和史观取向，仍是当代国际史学思潮的重要议题及后续英国马克思主义史学的学科标识。英国马克思主义史学思潮的核心观念及学术思想，仍然受到整个国际学界，特别是英国学界的重视。本文聚焦20世纪90年代以来英国马克思主义史家与英国马克思主义史学研究者对前辈马克思主义史学的继承与发展，尤其关注英国马克思主义新劳工史学和马克思主义女性主义史学的创新成就，从史学观念建构与实践路径的角度，阐述20世纪90年代以来英国马克思主义史学的新情境和新取向。

I. New Circumstances of British Marxist Historiography since the 1990s

一、20世纪90年代以来英国马克思主义史学新情境

From the perspective of the relationship between the historical era of British society and the intellectual context, the academic evolution and basic trends of the British Marxist historiography school since the 1980s and 1990s manifest as the transformation of historiographical thought and the intergenerational transmission of the school, jointly created by two generations of Marxist historians. While adhering to the theoretical premise of historical materialism, British Marxist historians, through rich and diverse historiographical practices, systematically constructed multiple historical understandings of Marxist historiographical concepts, thereby giving rise to multidimensional forms of Marxist historiographical practice. Since the 1990s, with the end of the Cold War and the decline of positivist hermeneutics in Western academia, Marxist theory has faced serious challenges. Even so, British academia has still published a large number of historical works discussing Marxist theoretical methods, a phenomenon rare in the international historical community. These works either defend Marxist historiography theoretically or expand its research fields in disciplinary practice. Most examine and affirm the academic utility and theoretical value of the Marxist historical materialist conception of history and its historiographical paradigm from the perspective of the evolution of the Marxist historiographical tradition and intellectual lineage, thereby promoting the new development of Marxist historiography. Among them, the most famous is the British Marxist historian and British Communist Party activist Willie Thompson, who long served as chairman of the "Socialist History Association," the successor organization to the British "Communist Party Historians' Group." He adhered to the stance of historical materialism and devoted himself to research on communism and social movements, the challenge of postmodernism, and the turn in historiography. Additionally, David Parker, a Marxist historian and early modern France researcher at the University of Leeds, explored the transition from French absolutism to modern society and is renowned for compiling *Ideology, Absolutism and the English Revolution: Debates of the British Communist Historians, 1940–1956*. The series of works by the Scottish Marxist historian Neil Davidson, focusing on Marxist historical theory and historiographical interpretation, expounds historical materialism and its contemporary significance, emphasizing that while Marxism retains its historical image, it should possess the potential to adapt to the evolution of social thought.

从英国社会的历史时代与思想语境的关系看，20世纪八九十年代以来英国马克思主义史学学派的学术演进及基本趋势，表现为两代马克思主义史家共同创造的史学思想嬗变和学派迭代传承。在坚守唯物史观的理论前提下，英国马克思主义史家通过丰富多元的著史实践，系统构建了马克思主义史学观念的多重历史认识，由此衍生了马克思主义史学实践的多维形态。20世纪90年代以来，随着冷战的结束与实证主义解释学在西方学界的衰微，马克思主义理论遭受严重挑战。即便如此，英国学界依然出版了大量讨论马克思主义理论方法的历史著作，这在国际史坛中是少见的。这些著作或从理论上为马克思主义史学辩护，或在学科实践中拓展其研究领域，大多从马克思主义史学传统与思想谱系的演进上，考察与肯定马克思主义唯物史观及其史学范式的学术功用和理论价值，推动了马克思主义史学的新发展。其中，最著名者当属英国马克思主义史家、英国共产党活动家威利·汤普森，他长期担任英国“共产党史家小组”后继组织“社会主义历史协会”的主席，坚持唯物史观立场，致力于有关共产主义与社会运动研究、后现代主义挑战与历史学转向问题。此外，利兹大学早期法国研究者、马克思主义史家大卫·帕克，探讨了法国绝对主义向现代性社会的过渡问题，他以编撰《意识形态、绝对主义与英国革命：英国共产主义史家论辩，1940—1956年》闻名于世。苏格兰马克思主义史家尼尔·戴维森的系列著作,则针对马克思主义历史理论与史学解释，阐述了历史唯物主义及其当代意义，强调马克思主义在保留其历史形象的同时，应具备适应社会思想演变的潜力。

In fact, British academia has also produced a considerable number of works elucidating Marxist theoretical methods and historiographical theory. For example, Gregory Claeys of Royal Holloway, University of London, focuses on the analysis of socialism, utopianism, and dystopian studies, exploring the theoretical value and historiographical significance of Marxism in the 21st century. Göran Therborn of Wolfson College, University of Cambridge, on the basis of reviewing the course of Marxism in the 20th century, looks ahead to its influence on radical thought in the 21st century, emphasizing the shift in left-wing intellectual thought from Marxism to post-Marxism in the fields of philosophy, sociology, and politics. Matt Perry of Newcastle University examines the immense influence of Marxism on historical research from the perspective of the evolution of historiography from the formation of Marxism to the challenge of postmodernism. It can be seen that Marxist theory still holds important value and status in the intergenerational transmission of British Marxist historians. As Victor Kiernan pointed out: "The real (solid) value of Marxism lies in its historical theory, political theory, economic theory, or artistic theory; as long as it has not yet been realized, it has always been a psychological and ethical commitment." Since the 21st century, the British scholar Anthony Kalashnikov has once again explored the theoretical contributions and practical value of British Marxist historians to the field of historiography, affirming the milestone significance of the British school for the development of historiography in the 20th century.

实际上，英国学界在阐释马克思主义理论方法与史学理论方面的著述也颇为丰硕。比如，伦敦大学皇家霍洛威学院格雷戈里·克莱斯聚焦社会主义分析、乌托邦主义和反乌托邦研究，探寻马克思主义在21世纪的理论价值与史学意义。剑桥大学沃尔森学院戈兰·瑟伯恩在回顾20世纪马克思主义历程的基础上，展望其对21世纪激进思想的影响，强调了在哲学、社会学和政治领域的左派知识分子思想从马克思主义到后马克思主义的转变。纽卡斯尔大学马特·佩里从马克思主义形成到后现代主义挑战的史观演进中，考察了马克思主义对历史研究的巨大影响。可见，马克思主义理论在英国马克思主义史家代际传承中依然具有重要价值和地位，恰如维克多·基尔南指出的：“马克思主义的真正（坚实）价值在于它的历史理论、政治理论、经济理论或艺术理论，只要它还没有实现，就一直是一种心理和伦理的承诺。”21世纪以来，英国学者安东尼·卡拉什尼科夫再次探讨了英国马克思主义史家对史学领域的理论贡献与实践价值，肯定英国学派对20世纪历史学发展的里程碑意义。

In Western academia, numerous non-Marxist historians have also conducted a series of explorations around the rich historiographical works, profound historical thought, and strong academic influence of the old and new generations of Marxist historians, re-examining the academic tradition and international reputation of British Marxist historiography. For instance, after the deaths of famous historians such as Hobsbawm and Thompson, works reflecting on their academic approaches and academic lives were published one after another, receiving a warm welcome from readers. Representative works include the British scholar Gregory Elliott's *Hobsbawm: History and Politics*, Richard Evans's *Eric Hobsbawm: A Life in History*, Stephen Woodhams's *History in the Making: Raymond Williams, Edward Thompson and Radical Intellectuals 1936–1956*, Nick Stevenson's *Culture, Ideology and Socialism: Raymond Williams and E.P. Thompson*, the Canadian scholar Bryan Palmer's *E.P. Thompson: Objections and Oppositions*, and the New Zealand scholar Scott Hamilton's *The Crisis of Theory: E.P. Thompson, the New Left and Postwar British Politics*. At the same time, works such as the American scholar Dennis Dworkin's *Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies*, the British scholar Keith Laybourn's *Marxism in Britain: Dissent, Decline and Re-emergence 1945–2000*, and Stuart MacIntyre's *A Proletarian Science: Marxism in Britain 1917–1933* have long conducted in-depth discussions on the development process, characteristics, and main achievements of British Marxist historiography. These works have once again drawn people's attention to British Marxist historiography.

在西方学界，众多非马克思主义史家也围绕新老两代马克思主义史家的丰富史学著作、深刻历史思想及强大学术影响进行了系列探索，重新审视英国马克思主义史学的学术传统与国际声誉。比如，在霍布斯鲍姆和汤普森等著名史家逝世后，关于其学术理路的审思和学术人生的著述纷纷面世，受到读者广泛欢迎。相关代表作有英国学者格雷戈里·艾略特的《霍布斯鲍姆：历史与政治》、理查德·埃文斯的《历史中的人生：霍布斯鲍姆传》、斯蒂芬·伍德姆斯的《正在形成的历史:雷蒙·威廉斯、爱德华·汤普森和激进知识分子1936—1956年》、尼克·史蒂文森的《文化、意识形态与社会主义:雷德·威廉斯与E.P.汤普森》，加拿大学者布莱恩·帕尔默的《E.P.汤普森：异议与反对》，新西兰学者斯科特·汉密尔顿的《理论的危机：E.P.汤普森、新左派和战后英国政治》等。同时，美国学者丹尼斯·德沃金的《战后文化马克思主义：历史、新左派与文化研究的起源》，英国学者基思·雷伯恩的《英国的马克思主义：异议、衰落与复兴（1945—2000年）》、斯图亚特·麦金泰尔的《无产阶级的科学：英国马克思主义（1917—1933年）》等著作，早已对英国马克思主义史学的发展历程、特点和主要成就进行了深入探讨。这些著作再次引起人们对英国马克思主义史学的关注。

Moreover, the second generation of British Marxist historians systematically reflected on British social movements and the communist movements of various countries around the world, along with their path choices, and analyzed the enormous potential of Marxist social movement theory, becoming a new starting point for the pursuit of Marxism in Britain and a new growth point in the field of Marxist historiography. For example, Raphael Samuel’s *The Lost World of British Communism*, John Saville’s *Memoirs from the Left*, Willie Thompson’s *The Good Old Cause: British Communism 1920–1991*, Philip Bounds’s *Notes on the End of History: A Memoir of the Welsh Left*, Noreen Branson’s *History of the Communist Party of Great Britain* (Vols. 3–4), Colin Barker and John Krinsky et al. (eds.), *Marxism and Social Movements*, Laurence Cox and Alf Nilsen’s *We Make Our Own History: Marxism and Social Movements in the Twilight of Neoliberalism*, and Steve Cushion’s *The Hidden History of the Cuban Revolution: How the Working Class Shaped the Guerrillas’ Victory*. At the same time, British academic circles have in recent years increasingly emphasized research on the difficult establishment, tortuous evolution, and eventual dissolution of the Communist Party of Great Britain. For instance, John Callaghan’s *Cold War, Crisis and Conflict: The CPGB 1951–1968* (Vol. 5) and Kevin Morgan’s *Bolshevism and the British Left* (Vols. 1–3) are authoritative works in this regard. Meanwhile, John McIlroy and Kevin Morgan et al. (eds.), *Party People, Communist Lives*; Max Adereth’s *The Road to Advance: A Historical and Critical Analysis of British Communism and Its Revolutionary Strategy*; James Eaden and Dave Renton’s *The Communist Party of Great Britain since 1920*; Matthew Worley’s *Class Against Class: The Communist Party in Britain Between the Wars*; Keith Laybourn and Dylan Murphy’s *Under the Red Flag: A History of Communism in Britain, c. 1849–1991*; and Geoff Andrews’s *Endgames and New Times: The Final Years of British Communism 1964–1991* are a series of works that also provide rich historical materials and theoretical foundations for later generations to understand the real Communist Party of Great Britain. In addition, British academic circles have also seen related research on the early Marxist historiographical explorations of the Communist Party of Great Britain. For example, James Klugmann’s *History of the Communist Party of Great Britain* (Vols. 1–2) and the article “Peripheral Visions: Communist History in Britain” by John McIlroy and Alan Campbell can be regarded as periodic summaries of such research, focusing on discussing different viewpoints and methods in the study of the history of the Communist Party of Great Britain and reflecting on the methodological significance of the relevant historiography.

不仅如此，英国第二代马克思主义史家系统反思英国社会运动和世界各国的共产主义运动及其道路选择问题，分析马克思主义社会运动理论的巨大潜力，成为在英国追寻马克思主义的新起点和马克思主义史学领域的新增长点。如，拉斐尔·萨缪尔的《英国共产主义的失落》、约翰·萨维尔的《左派回忆录》、威利·汤普森的《美好的旧事业：英国共产主义1920—1991年》、菲利普·邦兹的《关于历史终结的笔记：威尔士左派回忆录》、诺琳·布兰森的《英国共产党史》（第3—4卷）、科林·巴克和约翰·克林斯基等主编的《马克思主义与社会运动》、劳伦斯·考克斯和阿尔夫·尼尔森的《创造自我的历史：新自由主义黄昏中的马克思主义和社会运动》、史蒂夫·库希恩的《古巴革命的隐密历史：工人阶级如何塑造游击队的胜利》等。同时，英国学界近年来日益重视对英国共产党艰难建立、曲折演化和最终解散历程的研究。比如，约翰·卡拉汉的《冷战，危机和冲突：1951—1968年的英国共产党》（第5卷）和凯文·摩根的《布尔什维克主义和英国左翼》（第1—3卷）便是这方面的权威著作。同时，约翰·麦克罗伊和凯文·摩根等主编的《党员与共产主义人生》、马克斯·阿德雷思的《前进的道路：一种对英国共产主义及其革命战略的历史性和批判性分析》、詹姆斯·伊登和戴夫·兰顿的《1920年以来的英国共产党》、马修·沃利的《阶级对抗阶级：两次世界大战之间的英国共产党》、基思·雷伯恩和迪伦·墨菲的《红旗下：英国共产主义史，约1849—1991年》、杰夫·安德鲁的《残局和新时代：英国共产主义的最后日子，1964—1991年》等系列著作，也为后人认识真实的英国共产党提供了丰富史料与学理依据。此外，英国学界还出现了对英国共产党早期马克思主义史学探索的相关研究。如，詹姆斯·克鲁格曼的《英国共产党史》（第1—2卷）与约翰·麦克罗伊和艾伦·坎贝尔撰写的《外围视野：共产主义史学在英国》一文可被视为对这类研究的阶段性总结，重点讨论了英国共产党史学研究的不同观点和方法，并反思了相关史学的方法论意义。

Since the 1990s, many Marxist organizations, journals, magazines, and media outlets have continued to serve as important carriers of the knowledge form of British Marxist theoretical historiography. On the one hand, a number of internationally renowned British academic journals have become ideological platforms for Marxist historians. For example, hundreds of specialized articles published in professional journals such as *The English Historical Review*, *Past & Present*, *History Workshop Journal*, *New Left Review*, and *Radical History Review* either proceed from the first-generation Marxist historians’ “history from below” perspective, focusing on exploring related fields such as “cultural society,” “class consciousness,” “ethnicity and race,” and “national identity”; or they examine issues such as “women and gender society,” “modernity and the origins of postmodernity,” “political and sociological critique,” and “Marxist theory” that concerned second-generation Marxist historians like Perry Anderson. On the other hand, some organizations and propaganda journals with a Marxist character have constructed a solid battleground for the confrontation between Marxist and non-Marxist thought from multiple angles. The aforementioned important organizations and research institutions established in Britain in the 1990s are mainly two: one is the Socialist History Society, founded in 1992, which is the successor organization of the Communist Party Historians Group after the dissolution of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Its related journal is mainly the Marx Memorial Annual *Theory & Struggle*, published by Liverpool University Press, covering Marxist theoretical debates, research on British and international labor history, and progressive histories such as gender, race, and peace movements. The other is the Marx Memorial Library and Workers’ School, established in 1993, which remains a core organization of the British labor movement, collecting published works and archival materials on themes such as trade unionism, peace and solidarity movements, and the Spanish Civil War. In addition, *Marxism Today*, founded in London in 1957, was acquired by *New Statesman* in 1991, and the magazine published a special issue on Marxist historiography in 1998.

20世纪90年代以来，许多马克思主义性质的组织机构、期刊杂志和媒体报纸继续成为英国马克思主义理论史学知识形态的重要载体。一方面，一些享有国际声誉的英国学术期刊，已然成为马克思主义史家的思想阵地。比如，发表在《英国历史评论》《过去与现在》《历史工作坊杂志》《新左派评论》和《激进历史评论》等专业期刊上数以百计的专题论文，要么从第一代马克思主义史家的“自下而上”历史观出发，集中探讨了诸如“文化社会”“阶级意识”“民族种族”和“国家认同”等相关领域；要么考察第二代马克思主义史家如佩里·安德森等人关注的“女性与性别社会”“现代性与后现代起源”“政治与社会学批判”和“马克思主义理论”等相关议题。另一方面，一些带有马克思主义性质的组织机构和宣传期刊，则多方位构建了马克思主义与非马克思主义思想交锋的坚实阵地。英国在20世纪90年代成立的前述相关重要组织及研究机构主要有两个，一个是1992年成立的“社会主义历史协会”，它是“共产党史家小组”在英国共产党解散后的后继组织。相关期刊主要有利物浦大学出版社发行的马克思纪念年刊《理论与斗争》，内容涉及马克思主义理论辩论、英国与国际劳工史研究、进步主义历史如性别、种族及和平运动等。另一个是1993年成立的马克思纪念图书馆和工人学校，该机构至今仍是英国劳工运动的核心组织，收藏有关工会主义、和平团结运动及西班牙内战等相关主题的出版著作和档案资料。此外，1957年在伦敦创刊的《今日马克思主义》于1991年被《新政治家》收购，该杂志在1998年出版了马克思主义史学特刊。

With the successive deaths of the first generation of paradigmatic Marxist historians, after experiencing the peak of academic thought creation and historiographical practice in the 1970s and 1980s, the British Marxist historiography school became somewhat subdued. Compared with the first generation of Marxist historians, the second generation of Marxist historians found it difficult to reproduce the former glory, whether in the publication of historiographical works or the influence of historiographical thought. However, the second generation of British Marxist historiography groups exhibited relatively stable continuity and specific directional changes in intergenerational transmission and ideological continuation. For example, after Thompson’s death in 1993, the second generation of Marxist historians and their successors valued Thompson’s class historical perspective and new labor history orientation, placing it within the broader social and political movements of the New Left from the 1950s to the 1980s and the overall academic and cultural history of two generations of scholars for discussion, and striving to reflect this continuity. At the same time, a group of new forces emerged within the second generation of British Marxist historiography groups. They gained fame through participation in the British “History Workshop Movement” [1]1 The History Workshop Movement was a British initiative from the late 1960s, associated with Raphael Samuel and *History Workshop Journal*, emphasizing participatory, grassroots history from below and the involvement of non-academic historians. and the revival of feminist historiography in the late 1970s and 1980s, making distinctive contributions to the writing and practical dissemination of British feminist historiography since the 1990s.

随着第一代马克思主义典范史家的相继离世，在经历了20世纪七八十年代学术思想创造与史学实践巅峰后，英国马克思主义史学学派略显沉寂。与第一代马克思主义史家相比，第二代马克思主义史家无论在史学著述的出版，还是史学思想的影响上都难现往日的辉煌。不过，英国第二代马克思主义史学群体在代际传承与思想赓续上呈现出相对稳定的延续性及特定方向性的变化。比如，1993年汤普森离世后，第二代马克思主义史家及其后继者重视汤普森阶级史观与新劳工史取向，将其置于20世纪50—80年代新左派社会政治运动与两代学者整体的学术文化史中加以讨论，并努力体现这种延续。同时，第二代英国马克思主义史学群体内部也涌现一批新生力量，他们通过参与20世纪70年代和80年代后期英国“历史工作坊运动”和女性主义史学复兴而声名远播，对20世纪90年代以来英国女性主义史学书写及实践传播做出了别样贡献。

II. The Orientation of British Marxist New Labor History from the Perspective of the “Cultural Turn”

二、“文化转向”视域下英国马克思主义新劳工史学取向

From the perspective of the relationship between core concepts and historiographical trends, if the existing academic achievements and intergenerational replacement of historiographical thought of the two generations of British Marxist historians reflect the generative context, internal mechanisms, and paradigm changes of British Marxist historiographical concepts and systems, then since the 1990s, the orientation of Marxist new labor history from the perspective of the “cultural turn” has prominently demonstrated the value of this form of work and the significance of the transformation of historiographical concepts.

从核心观念与史学潮流的关系看，如果说两代英国马克思主义史家既有的学术成就及史学思想的代际更替，反映了英国马克思主义史学观念与史学体系的生成语境及内在机制、范式变革，那么20世纪90年代以来，“文化转向”视域下的马克思主义新劳工史取向则突出表现了这种著作形态的价值和史学观念嬗变的意义。

In the 1960s and 1970s, Western historiography witnessed a “cultural turn” trend. Relying on interdisciplinary theoretical methods and drawing on theoretical resources from anthropology, cultural studies, and postmodernism, it liberated the historical subject from socio-economic structural relations. Through the practical methods of deep cultural analysis and micro-historical perspectives, it emphasized the historiographical writing of popular daily life and social experience. The Western historiography under the “cultural turn” stressed the narrative nature of historiography and the popular character of historiographical works, advocated the use of unofficial historical materials and folk historical documents, focused on examining the behavioral rituals, daily images, cultural habits, ritual symbols, and linguistic signs of ordinary people, attempted to restore the daily life of ordinary people in a changing world, and revealed the underlying logic of social and historical evolution.

20世纪六七十年代，西方史学出现了“文化转向”思潮。它依据跨学科理论方法，借助人类学、文化研究和后现代主义的理论资源，将历史主体从社会经济结构关系中解放出来，通过文化深层分析与微观史学视域的实践方式，注重大众日常生活与社会经验的史学书写。“文化转向”下的西方史学强调了史学的叙事性和史学著述的通俗性，提倡借助非官方史料与民间历史文献，注重考察普通人群的行为礼仪、日常形象、文化习惯、仪式象征和语言符号，试图还原变动世界中普通百姓的日常生活，揭示社会历史演进的底层逻辑。

In Britain, Raymond Williams’s *Culture and Society* was the first to respond to the “cultural turn” trend, launching a comprehensive examination of the concept of culture by starting from the impact of cultural ideas on mass culture since the Industrial Revolution. Thompson, from the perspective of “cultural analysis,” described class consciousness as “the way in which cultural dispositions (experience of relations of production) are handled: embodied in traditions, value systems, ideas, and institutions.” In the 1960s, New Left intellectuals and the first generation of Marxist historians, represented by Thompson, reflected on the connotation of culture at the theoretical level, proposed the theoretical concept of “cultural Marxism,” and constructed the historiographical paradigm of “cultural Marxism.” While adhering to historical materialism, they employed class analysis methods and a “from below” perspective to deeply investigate the rise of British social mass culture in specific historical periods and the formation process of the working class’s “experience” and “consciousness.” They examined the cultural horizon and historical interpretive function of Marxist historical writing, and scrutinized the overall interpretive framework of a series of related historiographical ontologies, methodologies, and epistemologies, gradually groping their way toward a method for new labor history research. Therefore, in a certain sense, Thompson promoted the formation of a new Marxist labor history paradigm in post-war Britain, constructed the theoretical foundation for British new labor history since the 1990s, and highlighted the significance of British Marxist new labor history from the perspective of the “cultural turn.”

在英国，雷蒙·威廉斯的《文化与社会》率先回应了“文化转向”思潮，从工业革命以来文化观念对大众文化的冲击切入，对文化概念进行全面考察。汤普森则从“文化分析”视角将阶级意识描述为“文化处置（生产关系之）经验的方式：体现在传统、价值体系、思想和制度中”。20世纪60年代，新左派知识分子及第一代马克思主义史家以汤普森为代表，在理论层面对文化的内涵进行反思，提出“文化马克思主义”的理论概念，构建了“文化马克思主义”史学范式。他们在坚持历史唯物主义的前提下，以阶级分析方法和“自下而上”的视角，深入考察特定历史时期英国社会大众文化的兴起与工人阶级“经验”“意识”形成过程，审视马克思主义史学书写的文化视域与历史阐释功能，并透视与之相关的一系列史学本体论、方法论和认识论的整体阐释构架，逐渐摸索出新劳工史研究的方法。因此，在某种意义上，汤普森推动了战后英国马克思主义新劳工史学范式的形成，构筑了20世纪90年代以来英国新劳工史学领域的理论根基，彰显了“文化转向”视域下英国马克思主义新劳工史学的意义。

Guided by the cultural research tradition and historiographical theoretical methods of the first generation of Marxist historians such as Thompson, the second generation of Marxist historians—including Raphael Samuel, Sheila Rowbotham, Anna Davin, and Timothy Mason—focused on the everyday life experiences of ordinary people and achieved great success in oral history, women’s history, family history, and local history, further advancing the “cultural turn” in contemporary British Marxist historiography. In historiographical practice, this “cultural turn” took the 1970s “History Workshop Movement” [2]2 The History Workshop Movement was a grassroots historical research and writing initiative that emerged in Britain in the 1970s, emphasizing “history from below” and the experiences of ordinary people, closely associated with Raphael Samuel and other second-generation Marxist historians. as an opportunity to promote intergenerational transmission among British Marxist historians, ultimately laying the foundation for the revival of British Marxist feminist historical narratives after the 1990s. Since the 1990s, under the influence of the “beyond the cultural turn” in Western historiography, later Marxist historians have continuously explored the value of interdisciplinary contexts and theoretical methods for traditional labor history research, as well as new interpretations of classic themes. They have constantly broadened research topics, fulfilled the guiding function of Thompson’s “culturalist” paradigm for British Marxist new labor history within the historical circumstances of transnational regional mobility and global labor history, and expanded the extraterritorial effects of the “global working class” historical writing paradigm.

在汤普森等第一代马克思主义史家文化研究传统与史学理论方法指引下，第二代马克思主义史家如拉斐尔·萨缪尔、希拉·罗博瑟姆（Sheila Rowbotham）、安娜·戴文（Anna Davin）、蒂姆·梅森（Timothy Mason）等人，注重普通大众的日常生活经验，在口述史、女性史、家庭史、地方史等领域取得巨大成功，进一步推动了当代英国马克思主义史学的“文化转向”。在史学实践上，这种“文化转向”以20世纪70年代“历史工作坊运动”促进英国马克思主义史家群体的代际传承为契机，最终为英国马克思主义女性主义史学叙事在90年代后的复兴奠定了基础。20世纪90年代以来，在西方史学界“超越文化转向”影响下，后起的马克思主义史家不断探索跨学科语境与理论方法对劳工史传统研究的价值，以及经典议题的新阐释，不断拓宽研究主题，在跨国区域流动和全球劳工史学的历史境遇中，履行了汤普森“文化主义”范式对英国马克思主义新劳工史学的导向功能，扩展了“全球工人阶级”历史书写范式的域外效应。

For example, since the 1990s, later Marxist historians have focused, from the perspective of “global labor history,” on the influence of Thompson’s view of the working class on the writing of global labor history and Third World labor history, producing a substantial body of work. “Global labor history,” mainly proposed by Marcel van der Linden, emphasizes conducting transnational and regional research on labor relations and workers’ social movements in a broad sense, based on the research theme. Given that relevant research involves not only individual workers but also long-term changes in workers’ family relations, van der Linden advocates tracing the research period back to a more distant past. The emergence of “global labor history” is also related to criticism from the international academic community of the “cultural turn” in new cultural history. This criticism points out that past research exaggerated the importance of “experience” and “language,” easily leading to the fragmentation of labor history research. Influenced by this, historians have once again emphasized the role of “social structure” and “grand narrative” in shaping class “experience,” promoting the integration of labor history and global history.

比如，20世纪90年代以来，后起的马克思主义史家从“全球劳工史”角度，关注汤普森工人阶级史观及其对全球劳工史、第三世界劳工史书写的影响研究，产出颇丰。“全球劳工史”主要由马塞尔·林登提出，强调根据研究主题从广义上对劳动关系和工人社会运动进行跨国别与区域研究。鉴于相关研究不仅涉及劳动者个人，而且关联劳动者家庭关系的长期变动，因此林登主张可将研究时段追溯到更为久远的过去。“全球劳工史”的出现，也与国际学界对新文化史学“文化转向”的批评有关。这一批评指出，过往研究夸大了“经验”和“语言”的重要性，容易导致劳工史研究的碎片化。受此影响，历史学家们再次强调“社会结构”与“宏大叙事”对阶级“经验”的作用，推动了劳工史与全球史的结合。

In summary, from the perspective of the “cultural turn,” British new labor history advocates the organic integration of Marxist methodology with the historical subject objects of British labor society. Thompson’s “culturalist” labor history paradigm has played an important role in the transformation of traditional labor history forms into British new labor history. First, the paradigm and narrative style of British new labor history possess distinct Marxist theoretical attributes and methodological tendencies, with its academic purpose ultimately directed toward a critical analysis of contemporary capitalism as a whole. Second, British new labor history emphasizes “from below” historical theory and Marxist class analysis methods, examining the social life and conceptual history of labor from a holistic and dynamic perspective, rather than the “social” history of trade union groups and the “event” history of labor party organizations, which traditional labor history focused on. Third, based on broad historical sources, British new labor history emphasizes research on the “experience” of labor class life and the diverse changes in historical “consciousness” themes within the context of broad social and cultural change. In short, given the new turn in British Marxist historiography since the 1990s and the historical context of the decline of the New Left movement, the field of British new labor history has achieved thematic adjustments and theoretical updates, focusing on exploring the complexity of historical subjects and identity. In the academic context of globalization and the global history orientation, later British Marxist labor historians actively participate in cross-regional comparisons and interdisciplinary global labor history writing, highlighting the practical direction of British Marxist new labor history.

综上，“文化转向”视域下英国新劳工史学倡导马克思主义方法论与英国劳工社会历史主体对象的有机整合，汤普森“文化主义”劳工史范式对传统劳工史学形态转型到英国新劳工史学产生了重要作用。首先，英国新劳工史学范式与叙事风格具有鲜明的马克思主义理论属性及方法论倾向，其学术宗旨最终指向当代资本主义整体的批判分析。其次，英国新劳工史学强调“自下而上”历史理论和马克思主义阶级分析方法，从整体性和动态性角度考察劳工社会生活与观念历史，而非传统劳工史学那样倾力关注的工团群体的“社会”史和工党组织的“事件”史。再次，依据宏阔史料来源，英国新劳工史学侧重广阔社会文化变迁中的劳工阶级生活“经验”研究和历史“意识”主题的多样变化。概言之，鉴于20世纪90年代以来英国马克思主义史学新转向和新左派运动衰微的历史语境，英国新劳工史学领域实现主题调整与理论更新，侧重探索历史主体复杂性及身份认同。在全球化进程和全球史取向的学术语境中，后起的英国马克思主义劳工史家积极参与跨区域比较和跨学科视域的全球劳工历史书写，彰显了英国马克思主义新劳工史学的实践方向。

III. New Orientations in British Marxist Feminist Historiography

三、英国马克思主义女性主义史学新取向

The 1990s were an important period of turn and reorientation in British and even European historiography. The dissemination of works and academic paths of two generations of British Marxist historians also received sustained attention. Among them, British Marxist feminist historiography covers a broad thematic field and achieves outstanding historiographical results, presenting the evolutionary trends and British path of Marxist historiographical concepts. Moreover, from British Marxist feminist historiography, one can see how the theoretical traditions and practical concepts of analytical Marxism played a unique role in the transformation from Marxist new social history to Marxist feminist history, and also see the British experience of the turn from cultural Marxism to practical Marxism.

20世纪90年代是英国乃至欧洲史学发生转向和重新定向的重要时期，两代英国马克思主义史家的著作传播和学术路径也获得持续关注，其中英国马克思主义女性主义史学主题领域广阔，史学成就突出，呈现了马克思主义史学观念的演变趋势与英国路径。不仅如此，从英国马克思主义女性主义史学中，可看到分析马克思主义的理论传统与实践观念，是如何在马克思主义新社会史学向马克思主义女性主义史学转变过程中发挥独特作用，也可看到文化的马克思主义向实践的马克思主义转向的英国经验。

After the 1980s, Thompson’s working-class culturalist paradigm was continuously challenged and questioned by the emerging paradigms of subculture, subpolitics, and identity politics. Researchers, including the second generation of British Marxist historians, replaced class with language, emphasizing the role of language in constructing the identity of the working class and ordinary people in social behavior. Identities such as gender, ethnicity, and race replaced class identity, and a certain degree of “revision” began to be applied to the Marxist positivist method of class analysis. These new research orientations represent a kind of enrichment and development of Thompson’s Marxist new social history “cultural turn” after the 1990s, concentratedly embodied in British Marxist feminist historiography.

20世纪80年代后，汤普森的工人阶级文化主义范式不断遭到正在兴起的亚文化、亚政治、身份政治研究范式的挑战和质疑，包括第二代英国马克思主义史家在内的研究者以语言取代阶级，注重语言在社会行为中对工人阶级及民众的身份构建作用，性别、民族、种族等身份认同取代了阶级认同，开始对马克思主义实证主义的阶级分析方法进行了某种程度的“修正”。这些新的研究取向是对汤普森马克思主义新社会史学“文化转向”在20世纪90年代后的一种丰富和发展，集中体现在英国马克思主义女性主义史学中。

In terms of the theoretical attributes of historiographical schools and the evolution of historical perspectives among historians, critically adhering to Marxist theory and method has been an important theoretical feature of British feminist historiography since the 1970s, as promoted by the British Marxist feminist historian Sheila Rowbotham, presenting a new turn in the overall concept of Marxist feminist historiography. Since the 1970s and 1980s, with the development of the feminist movement, British academic circles have increasingly focused on the cultural interpretation of women's grassroots history, advocating for a historiographical narrative of female consciousness and social gender within the "cultural" field of Marxist historiography. When British feminist historiography began to take shape in the 1970s, many feminists were also Marxists, viewing women's history, labor history, racial history, and national/regional history as new directions in historiography. Precisely for this reason, through the form of feminist historiography and its practical approaches, the first generation of Marxist historians typified by Thompson, together with the second generation of historians represented by Rowbotham, collaborated with post-war socialist new feminist historians such as Sally Alexander, Catherine Hall, Margaret Bryant, Barbara Taylor, and Carol Dyhouse, to carry out distinctive thematic research in the field of feminist historiography.

就史学流派的理论属性与史家群体的史观更替而言，批判性遵循马克思主义理论与方法，是20世纪70年代以降，以英国马克思主义女性主义史家希拉·罗博瑟姆为代表推动的英国女性主义史学叙事的重要理论特色，呈现了整体马克思主义女性主义史学观念的新转向。20世纪七八十年代以来，随着女性主义运动的发展，英国学界也越来越注重女性底层历史的文化解释，在马克思主义史学“文化”场域，倡导女性意识与社会性别的史学叙事。当20世纪70年代英国女性主义史学渐成气候时，许多女性主义者也是马克思主义者，他们视女性史、劳工史、种族史和国别区域史为史学新方向。正是如此，通过女性主义史学形态及其实践途径，以汤普森为典型的第一代马克思主义史家群体与罗博瑟姆为代表的第二代史家群体一道，协同诸如萨利·亚历山大（Sally Alexander）凯瑟琳·霍尔（Catherine Hall）、玛格丽特·布莱恩特（Margaret Bryant）、芭芭拉·泰勒（Barbara Taylor）、卡罗尔·戴豪斯（Carol Dyhouse）等战后社会主义新女性主义史家群体，在女性主义史学领域中展开了别开生面的专题研究。

In historiographical practice, British Marxist feminist historiography has shown a trend toward thematic diversification. Following Thompson's holistic historical approach that championed cultural Marxism, his cultural research on the working class, while retaining a place for women, treated them more as merely part of male history; Thompson did not fully attend to or emphasize the historical role of women in the formation of the British working class. In his historical works, class consciousness ultimately belonged to the male groups that created class movements, while working-class women were relegated to a secondary position. In light of this, British new feminist historians began to reassess the research approaches and the gains and losses of older historians like Thompson, starting from the characteristics of social history, focusing on and writing about the experiences of different social groups, attempting to achieve a shift from women's history to gender history. The feminist historian group represented by the second-generation Marxist historian Rowbotham gradually expanded their focus on social history, employing social science theory and modern analytical techniques, moving from a concern with class experience and class consciousness to gradually attempting to integrate the experiences of women or different ethnic groups into historical writing, leading to a gradual "convergence" in value between feminist historical writing and social science research.

在史学实践中，英国马克思主义女性主义史学呈现出主题多样化趋势。按照汤普森推崇文化马克思主义的整体史思路，其关于工人阶级的文化研究虽保留女性位置，但她们更多仅作为男性历史的一部分而存在，汤普森并没有充分注意和重视英国工人阶级形成过程中女性的历史作用。在他的史学著作中，阶级意识最终属于创造了阶级运动的男性群体，工人阶级女性群体则处于次要地位。有鉴于此，英国新女性主义史家开始重新反思汤普森等老一辈史学家的研究路径和利弊得失，从社会历史的特征出发，重点关注与书写不同社会群体的经历，试图实现从妇女史到性别史研究的转向。以第二代马克思主义史家罗博瑟姆为代表的女性主义史家群体对社会历史关注的视野逐渐拓展，其采用社会科学理论与现代分析技术，从关注阶级经历与阶级意识，到逐渐尝试将女性群体或差异族群的经历融入历史写作，导致女性主义历史书写和社会科学研究间的价值逐渐“趋同”。

For example, amid the changes in British social culture and socio-economic structure in the late 20th century, British Marxist feminist historian Catherine Hall's *White, Male and Middle Class: Explorations in Feminism and History* pioneered a historical analytical approach that people sought or needed to answer concerning social gender relations and class living conditions. Hall, from the perspective of the mixed states of gender roles and the social changes of mutual influence, revealed the intrinsic relationships among gender, class, and race based on power discourse. Hall argued that the history of class cannot be reasonably explained without a gender perspective, nor can the history of gender be explained without class factors; in particular, the periodic characteristics of British identity centered on race, gender, and middle-class family relations in the 19th century were also rooted in the imperial system and concepts of power. As a typical female historian equally benefiting from Thompson's historiographical paradigm, Sally Alexander, as early as in her *Women's Work in Nineteenth-Century London*, focused her historical gaze on the commercial sphere, discussing the relationship between the capitalist system and the intensification of the gendered division of labor; her later article, "Women, Class and Sexual Differences in the 1830s and 1840s: Some Reflections on the Writing of a Feminist History," revealed the specific historical experiences of women in the early Industrial Revolution, highlighting the awakening of female consciousness in 19th-century British society. Barbara Taylor, who taught at the University of East London and Queen Mary University of London, served as director of the Raphael Samuel History Centre and was long responsible for editing the journal *History Workshop* after the 1980s. Her representative works, *Eve and the New Jerusalem: Socialism and Feminism in the Nineteenth Century* and *Mary Wollstonecraft and the Feminist Imagination*, followed Thompson's pioneering research and reflective approach to William Morris but surpassed the analytical framework and ultimate limits of his feminist concepts. Taylor argued that Engels's division between scientific socialism and utopian socialism essentially led to a theoretical critique of the historical movement of socialism, while it was significant to restore the utopian socialist tradition of the 1830s and 1840s and inject it into the historical subject consciousness of feminists; she emphasized that contemporary feminism must restore this analytical perspective and value element.

比如，在20世纪晚期英国社会文化与社会经济结构的变动中，英国马克思主义女性主义史家凯瑟琳·霍尔的《白人、男性和中产阶级：女性主义与历史学探析》就开创了人们试图或需要解答的有关社会性别关系与阶层生存状况的历史学分析途径。霍尔从两性各自角色的混杂状态和相互影响的社会变化角度，揭示了基于权力话语的性别、阶级与种族之间的内在关系。霍尔认为，阶级的历史离开了性别视角或性别的历史离开了阶级因素，都无法得到合理的史学解释，特别是19世纪以种族、两性和中产阶级家庭关系为核心的英国认同的阶段性特征，也根植于帝国体系和权力观念中。作为同样受益于汤普森史学研究范式的典型女性史家，萨利·亚历山大早在《19世纪伦敦的女性工作》中就将历史目光集中于商业领域，讨论资本主义制度与劳动性别分工强化的关系；其后来撰写的《19世纪三四十年代的女性、阶级和性别差异：对女性主义历史著作的一些反思》一文，揭示了早期工业革命中女性历史的特定经验，彰显了19世纪英国社会中女性意识的觉醒。先后任教于东伦敦大学、伦敦大学玛丽女王学院的芭芭拉·泰勒担任“拉斐尔·萨缪尔历史中心”主任，在20世纪80年代后长期负责《历史学工作坊》的办刊工作，其代表作《夏娃与新耶路撒冷：19世纪社会主义和女权主义》《玛丽·沃斯通克拉夫特与女权主义想象》遵循了汤普森关于威廉·莫里斯的开创性研究及反思路径，但超越了后者女性主义观念的分析框架与最高限度。泰勒认为恩格斯关于科学社会主义和社会主义乌托邦的划分本质上导致了对社会主义历史运动的理论批判，而恢复19世纪三四十年代的社会主义乌托邦传统，并将其施加进女性主义者的历史主体意识中却具有重要意义，她强调当前女性主义必须恢复这种分析视角和价值元素。

The British feminist movement since the 1970s undoubtedly promoted the continuous development of British feminist historiography, becoming an important driving force for the new trends in British Marxist historiography after the 1990s. In fact, *Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850*, co-authored by Catherine Hall, known for her cultural research on the middle class, and Leonore Davidoff, is a historical work typical of class analysis and gender history perspective. While embodying the historical narrative style of *The Making of the English Working Class*, it also demonstrates a historical critical consciousness that surpasses Thompson, arguing that gender issues involve not only the organization of the family but also the organization of society at large, overall reflecting the family conditions of the British middle class in the 19th century. From the perspective of historiographical conceptual orientation, the group of British feminist historians since the 1970s, moving from specific issues to theoretical reflection, has preliminarily articulated a historical theory of "social gender" and a historiographical theory of "gender history concepts," emphasizing the impact of ideological bias and gender consciousness traditions on gender relations between working-class men and women and on social historical change. They have published fruitful results, pushing the narrative of British Marxist feminist historiography to a new height.

20世纪70年代以来的英国女性主义运动无疑推动了英国女性主义史学不断发展，成为90年代后英国马克思主义史学呈现新趋势的重要动力。实际上，以中产阶级女性文化研究见长的凯瑟琳·霍尔与利奥诺·达维多夫合作撰写的《家庭命运：1780年到1850年英国中产阶级的男性与女性》是典型阶级分析与性别史视角下的史学著作。其在体现《英国工人阶级的形成》历史叙事风格的同时，也表现出超越汤普森的历史批判意识，认为性别问题不仅意味着家庭组织构建，而且是社会层面的组织构建，总体上可反映19世纪英国中产阶级的家庭状况。从史学观念取向上看，20世纪70年代以来英国女性主义史家群体从具体问题到理论反思，已初步阐释了一种“社会性别”的历史理论和“性别史观念”的史学理论，强调意识形态偏见和性别意识传统对工人阶级男女性别关系与社会历史变迁的影响，出版了丰硕成果，把英国马克思主义女性主义史学叙事推至新高度。

After the reorientation of Western new historiography in the 1980s, the "cultural turn" of British Marxist new social historiography produced extraordinary academic resonance and positive social effects beyond Britain. Since the 1990s, later British Marxist researchers have continued the tradition of British Marxist new social historiography pioneered by Thompson and others, increasingly focusing on the historical writing of ethnic minority groups and grassroots populations, and placing greater emphasis on the historical narrative of non-mainstream regions and "other" cultural values. Specifically, this British Marxist feminist historiographical writing paradigm has comprehensively challenged the male-centered historiographical concepts and writing forms of traditional labor history, to a certain extent shifting the historical perspective and focus of attention toward interdisciplinary research themes and new socio-cultural historical investigations, involving emerging fields such as women's social medical history, women's health and social leisure history, science, technology and women's history in geographical historiography, legal crime and women's history, women's social activities, and the social status and role of women.

20世纪80年代西方新史学重新定向后，英国马克思主义新社会史学的“文化转向”在英国域外产生了非凡学术回响与积极社会效应。20世纪90年代以来，后起的英国马克思主义研究者延续了汤普森等人开创的英国马克思主义新社会史学传统，日益关注少数族裔群体与底层人群的历史书写，更重视非主流区域与“他者”文化价值的历史叙事。具体来说，这种英国马克思主义女性主义史学书写范式，全面挑战了传统劳工史以男性为中心的史学观念及书写形态，在一定程度上将历史视野与关注目光转向跨学科的研究主题与新社会文化史考察，涉及女性社会医疗史、女性健康与社会休闲史、地理史学中的科学技术与女性历史、法律犯罪与女性历史、女性社会活动及女性社会地位作用等新兴领域。

British Marxist feminist history and historiography have gradually achieved a triple shift in perspective. First, in terms of temporal latitude and spatial scope, British Marxist feminist historiography has continuously focused on the historical writing of different classes and women’s daily experiences within social history and cultural structures, shifting from a tradition of writing about the productive and living historical experiences of female workers during the British Industrial Revolution, the women’s suffrage movement, gender relations, and the formation of women’s class consciousness, to examining the daily lives of women and changes in gender social history in national and regional societies such as Ireland and Australia. For example, in recent years, the historical field has expanded research on women and gender social history in the Scottish and Irish regions. Under the trend of new social history, new cultural history, and the return of international historiography to grand history, British Marxist historians emphasize a perspective that integrates regional history with nation-state history, examining the value of the “gender” factor in Marxist feminist historical writing. Second, in the dimensions of historiography and intellectual history, British Marxist feminist historiography has always valued the contextual analysis of the historical background of the New Left feminist movement, the social counter-cultural movement, and the socialist movement. From focusing on the historical writing of women and gender in the 19th century to emphasizing the historical circumstances of women and gender after the 1980s, and from the historical context of the second and third waves of feminist thought from the 1960s to the 1990s, it revolves around the main line of women and gender social history under the new “imperial historiography” and global history, reflecting on the theoretical achievements and practical effectiveness of Marxist feminist historiography. Third, in terms of the relationship between historiographical culture and social change, British Marxist feminist historiography continuously emphasizes re-examining the criticisms and challenges of the “cultural turn” in Western new social history regarding class theory, patriarchy, and grand narratives from the perspective of academic history in reception history and gender history, proposing a theoretical demand to return to a “class analysis perspective” and “critique of patriarchal discourse.” Driven by the trend of “beyond the cultural turn” in new social history at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, British Marxist feminist historians inherit the “culturalist” paradigm tradition of new social history, discard the method of economic determinism, advocate a dual perspective of “class and gender,” and explore the different dimensions and values of gender relations and women’s perspectives in constructing popular culture and the history of working-class formation. In historiographical practice, British Marxist feminist historiography combines power discourse analysis of “women,” “men,” and “gender” society with Marxist class theory and historical theory, integrating grand historical narratives with micro-political historical narratives into historical interpretations of gender history concerning the state, nation, and region, in order to expand the field of Marxist patriarchal historical theory and traditional women’s historiography, enrich the connotation of the “culturalist” historiographical paradigm, and catalyze the internal transformation and overall effect of British Marxist new social historiography.

英国马克思主义女性主义历史与史学叙事逐渐实现了三重视域转移。其一，在时间纬度与空间范围上，英国马克思主义女性主义史学持续聚焦社会历史与文化结构中不同阶层及女性日常经历的史学书写，从关注英国工业革命时期女工生产生活历史经验、妇女选举权运动、两性关系与女性阶级意识形成的书写传统，转向考察爱尔兰、澳大利亚等国别区域社会的女性日常与性别社会历史变化。比如，近年来史学界拓展了苏格兰和爱尔兰区域女性与性别社会史研究，在新社会史、新文化史和国际史学回归大历史的趋势下，英国马克思主义史家强调地区史与民族国家史的融合视角，考察“性别”因素对马克思主义女性主义历史书写的价值。其二，在史学史和思想史维度中，英国马克思主义女性主义史学始终重视新左派女性主义运动、社会反传统文化运动和社会主义运动的历史语境分析。从聚焦19世纪妇女与性别历史书写，到注重20世纪80年代后妇女与性别历史境遇，从20世纪六七十年代到90年代第二、三波女性主义思潮的历史语境中，围绕新“帝国史学”与全球史视域下的女性与性别社会历史主线，反思马克思主义女性主义史学的理论成就与实践成效。其三，英国马克思主义女性主义史学在史学文化与社会变迁的关系上，不断强调在接受史学与性别历史的学术史角度上，重新审视西方新社会史“文化转向”阶级理论、父权制和宏大叙事的批评与质疑，提出回归“阶级分析视野”与“父权制话语批判”的理论诉求。在20世纪与21世纪之交新社会史“超越文化转向”趋势的带动下，英国马克思主义女性主义史家继承新社会史“文化主义”范式传统，扬弃经济决定论方法，倡导“阶级与性别”的双重视域，发掘了性别关系和女性视角在构建大众文化与工人阶级形成历史中的不同面向及价值。在史学实践中，英国马克思主义女性主义史学将“女性”“男性”与“性别”社会等权力话语分析与马克思主义阶级理论、历史理论结合，将宏大历史叙事与微观权力政治的历史叙事融于有关国家、民族与地区性别历史的史学阐释，以拓展马克思主义父权制历史理论与传统妇女史学领域，丰富“文化主义”史学范式的内涵，催化英国马克思主义新社会史学取向的内在转变和整体效应。

In the past thirty years, later British Marxist historiography researchers have mostly focused on the historical works and intellectual lineages of typical historians among the first two generations of historians, especially taking Thompson’s “culturalist” historiographical paradigm theory and its influence on historiographical practice as the object of analysis. In terms of ideological and cultural origins and the shift in academic traditions, based on the changes in the historical context of the New Left and the academic evolution of international historiographical trends, they have successively produced rich academic works and research results, with new expansions and forms in both the social and cultural significance of research themes and the transformation of historiographical paradigms in analytical perspectives. In the regional distribution and dynamic evolution of global Marxist historiographical trends, the changes, rises, declines, and evolutionary trends of Marxist historiography in various countries have mostly undergone a logical process from breaking through individual survival dilemmas to forming group development scales. British Marxist historiography is no exception. Whether it is the practical actions of the British Marxist historian group or the theoretical shaping of contemporary British historiographical traditions by British Marxism, it still receives attention from both the British historical field and the international historical field.

最近三十年来，英国后起的马克思主义史学研究者大多聚焦前两代史家群体中典型史家的历史著作及思想脉络，特别是以汤普森“文化主义”史学范式理论及其史学实践影响为分析对象，在思想文化渊源和学术传统转向上，基于新左派历史语境的变迁与国际史学思潮的学术嬗变，先后推出了丰富的学术论著与研究成果，分别在研究主题的社会文化意义和分析视域的史学范式转换上有新的拓展与形态。在全球马克思主义史学思潮的区域分布与动态演变中，各国马克国主义史学的变动兴潜与流变趋势大多经历了从突破个体生存困境到形成群体发展规模的逻辑进程，英国马克思主义史学亦不例外，无论是英国马克思主义史家群体的实践行动，还是英国马克思主义对英国当代史学传统的理论塑造，都仍然受到英国史学界及国际史学界的重视。

(Author’s brief introduction: Liang Minsu, Professor, Department of World History, Shanghai Normal University)

（作者简介：梁民愫，上海师范大学世界史系教授）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心