人口統計與英國婦女史研究

Census Statistics and British Women History

統計方法雖有其優點，但運用於人文學科卻容易引發爭議。人口統計可以是歷史材料的一種，隨著計量方法的興起，在1970年代，成為英國婦女史研究主流。由於各年度政府調查的標準並不相同；加上數字的編寫、名稱的定義、分類的方式，都存在著主觀價值的判斷，因而招致批判。反對量化的學者中，以牛津大學的歷史工作坊學派最為激烈，重視口述歷史、家族史、女性主義史等強調個人經驗的主題，反對強調群體的量化研究。於是，計量派史家發動了挑戰，形成論戰。為此，女性主義學者回應，過去的婦女史研究，過度且毫無質疑接納人口資料的態度，應該被批判。但是，婦女職業與勞動的研究，也不可避免地出現了統計的問題。表面看來真確無疑的資料，仍須進行質性的考訂，不能簡單地通過量化進行分析。可見，這場論戰導引了新的方向。在英國婦女史研究上，具有重要的意義。本文的研究主旨即在於釐清各學派採取質陸或量性的主張，以探究19世紀以降，英國婦女史的研究方法與史料運用情況，並提出縮小時空與研究主題，以民間薪資紀錄(Wage Books)等資料與政府檔案相互對照的具體方法。

After the Quantitative Revolution, statistics methods become as essential to academic circle; however; they make controversy when meet the humanities. Following quantitative historian's efforts, in the 1970s, the new methods dominated the studying ways of women history. But, some were explicitly anti-quantitative, especially, the History Workshop's historians. They thought the Censuses were varied not only from years, hut between parishs. The UK government used radically different methods of compilation, different occupational categories, and women's occupation was often omitted. Besides, the problem with numbers comes when they are linked to ideas via language even though numbers are relatively value-free concepts. History Workshop emphasizes the fields as oral history, genealogical family history and feminist history, which share the individual historical experience; however, quantitative history by its nature is alien to ”individual”. As a result, quantitative historians originate a challenge and make debates. The feminist women's historians respond that all too often scholars are accepted census figures unquestioningly, and quantitative data is not necessarily ”raw material” for unbiased scientific analysis, it is also a human construct and therefore a worthy, and indeed necessary, subject for historical analysis.