It is well acknowledged that "Global History" is still under construction, and that doubts are many. Many historians, especially those trained in the traditional nation-state mode, do agree about the need for a "global perspective" somewhat in the later stage of their historical writing, but do hold strong reservations about Globalizing or Globalized world history. In their eyes, the guideline remains that "small is beautiful and that first-rate historical work should be narrowly focused and based on original research" (Schaefer). Global history certainly never aims to discard primary reference and to evade original research! This serves to show that global history, in forging ahead, has a number of conceptual obstacles to overcome if it aims to be accepted by the great majority of historians or social scientists in general.

That's why we are trying to clarify the stands of global history in our No. 2 issue of Global History Review. We try to enlist efforts from a number of eminent and constructive global/world historians in this critique as well as constructive endeavor. The essays they hopefully can contribute may not necessarily be long, but must fully embody and reflect their serious thinking on global history construction. Just title it as "What is Global History?"

As a note on world history status in China, perpendicularly (chronologically) structured and horizontally fragmented (with civilizations and nation states as discrete units and frames of narration). Connections are dismal and few if ever existent, as if civilizations and nation states developed independently of each other waiting to be globalized until the dawning of Globalization, which is still a hotly debated issue, and occasionally fiercely opposed.

Our current stance concerning the construction of Global History finds reflection in the following statements:

That connections and interactions have always been the norm, rather than the exception, of human history, which can be, hierarchically, inter-cultural, inter-regional, and inter-personal;

That human beings as a whole have made the world what it is, with many issues of human development, both ancient and contemporary, necessarily to be approached on a species level;

That the agency of human development is multiple, categorically, nature confinement as well as (haphazard) facilitation, human initiative, and the degree of interactive intensity;

That Global History can surely be thematically or regionally organized or based on nation states for convenience' sake, but, like in human biology, the gene can never be taken to represent the whole body, likewise, the local can never be devoid of global influence;

That Global History necessarily is interdisciplinary in nature, construction of which is the joint efforts of experts in a wide array of academic fields;

Ours is the first professional yearly journal on Global History in China, published by the country's leading Commercial Press. As its name, Global History Review, suggests, we aim to be globally concerned and academically professional. Therefore, we earnestly hope that all globally conscientious historians around the world can contribute to making our journal a success. At a tender age of two, it cries to be cuddled and fondled by loving parents, including you.

---------------------------
Other contacts include:
Liu Xincheng, Professor of History, President of Capital Normal University (liuxinch@mail.cnu.edu.cn)

Xia Jiguo, Professor of History Department, Capital Normal University(xiajiguo6890@tom.com)

Liang Zhanjun, Professor of History, Vice Dean of History Department, Capital Normal University (liangzj@mail.cnu.edu.cn)

Shi Cheng, Associate Professor of History, History Department, Capital Normal University (shicheng64@263.net)