Research Foundation of SUNY
The Annales School before the Annales [with Discussion] Author(s): George Huppert Source: Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 1, No. 3/4, The Impact of the "Annales" School on the Social Sciences (Winter - Spring, 1978), pp. 215-224 Published by: Research Foundation of SUNY for and on behalf of the Fernand Braudel Center Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40240782 . Accessed: 03/09/2014 09:21 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
.
Research Foundation of SUNY and Fernand Braudel Center are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review (Fernand Braudel Center).
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Review,I, 3/4,Winter/Spring 1978, 215-219.
TheAnnalesSchool BeforetheAnnales
GeorgeHuppert We have been gatheredhere to celebratethe achievementsof the Annales school. Naturallyenough,most of the participantsin thiscelebrationare loyal admirersof this tradition,themselvesveteran practitionersof the Annales method. Even so, there has hardly,been unanimityhere on the question of defining just whattheAnnalesschool standsfor;or on thequestion:just whatis the method of the Annales exactly?Or the question: what has been the influenceof theAnnales?Or evenon thequestion:is therean Annalesschool? I see no reason to be ashamedof thisconfusion.As a historianof historiography,I findit entirelynaturalthatwe (as historians)shouldbe makingsucha our aims and the directionof our discipline. hopeless mess of understanding our confusion is a par withthe confusionspelledout in the on Besides, quite most recent authorized philosophicalmusingscoming out of the Annales, collectionof articlesentitledFaire de l'historié,which namely,the three-volume was assembledby LeGoffand Nora and bearstheimprimatur of the Vie Section. The prefaceof thisnewsummais instructive: find in it theritualdenial will you of the school's existence;you will find,also, theritualclaimthathereis a team (animatedby the spiritof Febvre,Bloch, and Braudel) whichis seekinga new movementin type of history;you will findthe claim to beingan international no way culture-bound; and finallyyou willfinda collectionof articlesmeantto describethe global successes of this new history- and writtenentirelyby Frenchmen. Mind you, the editorsare aware of thislast anomalywhichstrikesthemas
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
216
GeorgeHuppert
paradoxical.Now it doesn't seem odd to me. It seemsentirelynatural.And I don't for a minutebelieve that the editors should feel bad about being as culture-bound as theyreallyare. This qualitywhichwas castigatedat theopenof our as the academicsinpar excellence\ seemsto me, in this conference ing to be we are told,has always case, quite possiblya virtue.Historicalscholarship, been culture-bound, a national context. defined True.Quite so. We narrowly by are advisedto getridof thisshamefulprovincialism: must not onlybreak history the barriers it or from through sociology,economics,anthropology, separating but it also must or Well this British. geography, stop being French,German, sounds reasonableenough.But ask yourselfwhetherthe historyof historiogracreation,and renewal- all of phy does not have a splendidrecordof discovery, it accomplishedwithinnarrownationallimits.One could make a solid case for the argumentthat the historyof modernhistoricalwritingis intimatelytiedto the historyof the modernnation-state, and thatthishas not necessarily been a bad thing. Now the Annales traditionhas always been verymuch a Frenchtradition, of its manifestos since1900. It wished despiteall the imaginedinternationalism to be international in itsscope,it wishedto inspirea worldwideconfraternity of like-mindedcreatorsof a new kind of historywhichwould supersede,replace, and driveout the oppressiveand detestedkindof historywhichreignedsupreme in the Sorbonneand in the Revue historique since 1876; in a wordto driveout the Germankind of history,introducedby GabrielMonod and othersafterthe defeatat Sedan. This was the avowed dreamof Febvreand his followersfrom the start.Febvre's kindof historywon a proudplace in Franceaftertwo generationsof combat;but not in the English-speaking world,not untilveryrecently, and even then,not whatI would call a seriousbridgehead.This combativelegion (legionratherthanschool,I thinkFebvrewould approvethechoiceof theword) has been no more seriousabout permanentconquestsabroad thanthe Swissof the fifteenthcentury.In America afterthree-quarters of a century,it has achieved an enviablereputationamong the happy few; a special issue of the out of 50; half Journalof ModernHistory; two or threetranslatedmasterpieces a dozen fanaticaladherentsintroducedas a fifthcolumn;a conferencein Binghamton.Is thismorethan a tokenbridgehead?A symbolicoutpost,a Macao in our midst?We are worthconquering,thatmuchis clear.We presentby farthe most temptingtargetfor culturalimperialism. A handfulof skirmishes won in Poland or Hungarycan hardlymake up forthe deadlockon theWesternFront. Are not one-halfof all livinghistorianscitizensof the U.S.? Whythenso little successhere? One mightpropose the explanationthatour defensesare superb,unequalled: our main line of defenseis our ignoranceof the Frenchlanguage.Veryfewof our historianscan read Frenchfluentlyenoughto be at all vulnerableto the charmsof Braudel or Febvre.Afterall, we are talkingabout giganticbooks, of thestyle. runninghabituallyto 1000 pages.Moreto thepointis thedifficulty It is quite differentfromthe more prosaic and and predictablelanguageof ordinaryFrenchacademicbooks. The followersof Febvrego out of theirway to avoid soundinglike ordinaryacademics.Theiraim is to be different, to surprise the reader. It is a languagefull of allusions,of referencesmysteriousto foreigners.For instance,when LeRoy Laduriewritesabout thehardtimesof debt-
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AnnalesSchool BeforeAnnales
217
riddenshare-croppers, he speaksof thecomingof MonsieurDimanche.Now who would know that this is a prettyallusion to an entirelyminorcharacterin a seventeenth-century play? Whoindeed,exceptsomeonewho had the misfortune once of havingspentsix or sevenyearson thebenchesof a Frenchlycée? It is a difficultlanguage,dense and rhapsodic,a dictioninheritedfromFebvreand perhapsfromMichelet.Romanticin its effects,baroque in its means,precious and voraciousin its searchforsurprising resonances,it movesveryquicklyfrom the mostabstrusetechnicalvocabularyto themostidiomaticexpression.One is and to be implements, agricultural expectedto know the namesof 400-year-old in debate St.-Germain-desstructuralist the latest at the same to time, attuned, face- suddenly one comes face-toPrés.And at the turnof thesameparagraph, - withthejuicy, earthylanguageof sixteenth-century peasantsand publicists.I admirethesetricks.I use them.But I have to admitthat such a stylesimplyis not for export. It cannotbe understoodreadilyby Englishor Americanhistoriansif theyare not nativeFrenchspeakers.It cannotbe translatedsuccessfully. None of thesebooks,not evenBraudel'sMediterranean , has muchof a chanceof did receivea short Mediterranean The the Atlantic. across historians influencing noticein the AmericanHistoricalReview afterits originalpublicationin 1949, but the reviewby the late Prof.Mattinglycould not possiblytip anyoneoffto the importanceof the book. The reputationof BraudePsworkor Febvre'swas an almostclandestinerumorherein the 1950's. As a student,I admitI heardthe rumor.But it was impossible,almost impossible,to get your hands on these books. Theywereout of print. Ten yearslaterI inquiredinto the possibilityof havingat least TheMediterraneantranslated.I discoveredthatsomeonehad been workingon a translation to the original; forseveralyears.I looked at theresult.It bore littlerelationship it made littlesense;it was not publishable.It was thenI persuadedHarperand Row to take over the task. I spent at least a yeartryingto finda translator. had to be rejected.Amongthemwere Eightcapable and experiencedtranslators and French in experiencedprofessionaltranslators.None history specialists could producea reasonableEnglishversionof eventen consecutivepagesof the book. At last we foundthat rare person who did the job. And then I went throughthe same difficultieswith LeRoy Ladurie's Peasants of Languedoc. Someday I hope to tackle Febvre'sFranche-Comtéwhich to my mind is the unsurpassedmasterpieceof theAnnalestradition. fromthe Whichbringsme to the question: why are thesebooks so different thisquestiontoday,I hope massof Frenchacademicproductions?In answering to get away fromsome conventionalviews of what the Annales school is all about. The view,to beginwith,whichholdsthattheAnnalistesare a newbreed, anti-humanist a new and dangerousbreed, of barbaric,scientificating, quantiRichardCobb, come believe to fiers.These historiansin white coats, if one is out of the laboratoriesof the Vie Section- and worse,lately,out of streaming those well-knowndens of iniquity,the Americanuniversities.Those "dark mechanizedforcesof thesocial sciences,thosearmiesof thenight",are depicted as a fearfulmenaceof the futureof genuine,gentlemanly scholarship,perhaps evena menaceto the futureof civilization. There is no denyingit: the Annales people, quite willfully,have indeed managedto give this kind of impression.There is much talk about quantifica-
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
218
GeorgeHuppert
tion, much talk about teamwork,and even about sophisticatedequipmentincludingcomputers.It is not entirelytalk.Thereis a fashionin Parisforgadgets, for new techniques,for ratheroutlandishnew subjects.One could easily be persuadedthatwhattheAnnalesis all about is new techniques. Well,I defyanyoneto show me the importantbook whichwas producedby teamworkand those ingenious,expensivenew techniques,which,accordingto Mr. Cobb, take all the vitalityout of history.Let us be serious: Braudel's Mediterraneanwas writtenwithout them, withoutnew techniques,and long beforethe comingof the computer.There is nothingin thePeasantsof Languedoc or in Bennassar'sValladolidor in Meyer'sBretonNobilitywhichan intelligentman cannotdo singlehanded, equipped only witha pen, paper,tenyears of time,and a cooperativewife.To the extentthatthe Vie Section does nowadays adopt new techniques,thisis a traitin no way limitedto Annalistes.What distinguishesthe Annales traditionis not an unusual propensityfor trying It is gadgetsor a fondnessforlaboratorycoats. It is something utterlydifferent. a style,it is a way of posingproblems,a way of thinking, whichall go back to theturnof thecentury. The originsof this traditionmust be pushedback, as Jacques Revel among otherspointedout, to the yearsbeforethe FirstWorldWar.The journalAnnales did not beginpublicationuntil 1929. But it was thoughtof before1914, and it was in Henri Berr'sRevue de synthèsebetween 1900 and 1914 that all the characteristic traitsof what was to become knownas the Annalesschool were invented.It was also then, in 1910, that Febvrepublishedhis thèse on the Franche-Comté whichservedas a modelof theAnnalestradition. What were the most strikingfeaturesof this historywhichproclaimedits noveltyin a fiercelyaggressivetone in the firstyearsof thecentury?Werewe in the presenceof new techniques,of secretweapons,of a technicalbreakthrough? Not at all. The methodsof researchemployedby Febvrein 1910 wereentirely, orthodox:a thoroughinvestigation of thearchivesof Besançon unimpeachably, in the best Germantradition.Whatwas new then?The narrative style,certainly: it was visibly,triumphantly different. There was nothingacademic about the narrative.The historianaddressedthe readerin a verypersonalway.The reader was cajoled and lectured,the readerwas askedto sharetheauthor'senthusiasm. And theauthortook risks. But the stylewas onlythemostvisiblenovelty.The subjectwas new: utterly, new. In theFranche-Comté in theAge ofPhilipII, it was theprovince, strikingly not the Princewhich was the subject. This doctoral thesisbegan with an acinto countingof thehumangeographyof theregion.The readerwas transported the hill countryof theJura.He was takenalong the narrowtwistingvalleysof little-known mountainstreams.The size of thetowns,thenumberof people,the of these numbersagainstthe resourcesof the woods, theharvesting of pressure timber,the hammeringof the tanneriesalong the river,the miningof salt,the patternof the graintrade and the map of the wine country,even the underI need hardlyremind groundresources- all this was sketchedin masterfully. have become standardfeaturesin the you thatsuch geographicalintroductions Annalestradition. From geographyto economy,fromthe ruraleconomyto the map of industrial production,on to the re-creationof the urban habitat,for hundredsof
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AnnalesSchool BeforeAnnales
219
pages the readerwas led into a denserecreatedsixteenth-century provincewithout meetinga singleevent.Alreadyin 1903 the phrasehistoireévénementielle had been coined as a pejorativedescriptionof the narrowvisionof traditional betweenpoliticalor diplomahistorians.On purposeI avoidthe falsedistinction tic historyand socio-economichistory.Febvreand his companionsdid not think in those terms.They too did politicalhistoryand diplomatichistory.Therewas no human activitywhichwas not partof the total historywhichtheyclaimed fortheirideal. Politicsand diplomacywere importantsubjects.In his FrancheComté,Febvreshowshow politicsand diplomacyslowlystrangledthisprovince. But politics,diplomacy,warfarecould not be understood,Febvreargued,separatelyfromall the other aspects of life as it was lived in this province.The the agrariantechmaterialcivilization,the floraand fauna,the social structure, of themachinery of municipaland regionalinstitutions, niques,the functioning credit,the mobilityof social groups,thereligiousobservancesof thepopulation, thecultureof the accusationsof heresyand witchcraft, the tensionssurrounding towns,the local patriotismexpressedin travelbooks and privatecorrespondences - all thiswas partof an inseparablewhole.Hereagainthegroundrulesof theAnnaleskindof historywerelaid out. Insteadof catchinga piece of history and holdingit down so it would stand still whilebeingdissected,Febvrewas determinedto catchglimpsesof themotionof history.The movementalone was worthstudying.He groped for ways of gettingpast the documentsat "the collectivehistoricalperson caughtat a specificmomentof its evolution."The historian,no longera pedanticbystanderwho holds up an album of snapshots forus to see, was becominga filmdirector.He zoomed in forcloseups,moved away, came back when the subject changedhis pose, moved away again,and came back again,untilwe wereat last able to discern"a new order,dynamicand geneticat the same time,in which nothingin separatewhichoughtto be together."It wouldbe pretentiousto call thistotalhistory.Let us say withFebvre thatthegoal was a morelivinghistory,betterthoughtout.
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Discussion
220
STOIANOVICH: My friendProfessorHuppertis verywittyand verycynical. For all our admirationof Voltaireshouldwe forgetthatthereis perhapsa more permanentvalue in Montesquieu?Is it impossibleforAmericansto makeuse of in theAmericanculturethatmakesthis theAnnalesparadigm?Is thereanything I and think There thereis, and I thinkthat on several may be, impossible? whatthatproblemis. I occasionsthatwe have been on thepointof determining of the two hostileinterpretations thinkthatthe problemlies withtwo different, of stimulusis in terms do we learn? of How One explanation way learning. response.We beginwitha tabularasa and thenwe are hitby thingsfromoutside - culture,environment, else - to whichwe respondin one way or everything another.That is one way of lookingat it, statedcrudely.It comes to us from to Locke, todayby way of Skinner.And we getit through Aristotle,transmitted the Frenchtraditiontoo: not the traditionof Frenchphilosophy,but through the traditionof Frenchpsychology,throughCondillac.Destuttde Tracy,and in terms an attemptto interpret theIdéologues. The otheris a volistictradition, of cognitivepatterns.It comes to us fromPlato, fromDescartes,and Vico and Michelet.Now I myselfthinkthatboth explanationshave some value,but that you use them under differentoccasions, and you explain some problemsin termsof one traditionand you explain otherproblemsin termsof the other tradition.They are both probablyincompletein themselves,but both highly necessary.Therefore,what I would urgeis thatiftheAnnalesschoolhas ceased to be a school,ifit has been émietté,thatthereis no need fortheparadigmitself I therefore suggest to be lost, at the verymomentit is in theprocessof arriving. that the rest of us, whateverour traditions- French,English,American, German,Polish, yes Polish - go on with this greatadventureof creatingan histoireglobale. HOBSBAWM: Could I just disagreewithHupperton one thing.The Annalesis an international phenomenonin spiteof the factthatthesethreevolumes,about whichopinionscan be verydivided,are writtenexclusivelyby Frenchmen.Only I thinkwe are lookingforthe wrongkindof international phenomenon.We are how thinkingin termsof the influenceof the Annales school. We are seeing is that But Annales." for am "I on sticker a have saying got bumper manypeople movementdevelops.Whatwe have not the way in whichin factan international of various trendsin various confluence a is are we what here, seeing seen, and otherreasons,in France historical for it so of which countries, happened, the revueAnnales,the Vie Section,and so on became the maincarriers.But in othercountriesit exists,eitherorganizedor less organized.And it is thisconfluencewhichwe notice. whatwe weretaughtin univerThose of us who are old enoughto remember sitiesbeforethe war,or even untillet us say 1945-50,knowhow totallyhistory has changed.The textbooks- eventhe kindof "WesternCiv" textbooks- that are taughtfromtoday containstuffwhich,in the days when I undergraduates was an undergraduate, nobody,except on the one handtheMarxistsand on the other hand people like Marc Bloch, thoughtwas worth puttingin or even of historyin certaindirectionsTo thisextent,the transformation mentioning. for instance,to put it into its lowest common denominator,the growingimand so on - is somethingthathas portanceof social and economic structures
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Discussion
221
happenedand is happening,and of which the Annalesis at least one national expression.Due to the greatmeritsof the Frenchschool,broaderthanAnnales, resonance. as I said previously, it has had a considerableamountof international I think there is anotherthingwhich I have noticed in the course of this conferenceitself.A lot of people,eventhoughtheyhaven'tbeen up to thelatest policy discussionsin Annales, are in fact thinkingalong the same lines. For instance,thereis the tendencyofAnnalesto drawclosertowardswhatmightbe called broadlyan anthropologicalapproach. Well,we have had it in England. Wedidn'thaveto readAnnalesforit,though And we havehad it independently. some of us have benefittedby readingsome of the thingsthatthepeople in the Annaleshave done. So to theextentthatwe have,in a sense,a community, you mightsay with luck an avant-gardecommunitywhich hopes to become as it were the main army,which is movingin the same kind of directionor in movement. directions,we are facing,we are partof,an international convergent the But we should be wrongif we look at it in termsof culturalimperialism, of matter that for or the the of the United States Annales, conquest by conquest Franceby the UnitedStates.Therehavebeen attemptsto do this,and attempts to borrow,partlyon ideologicalgrounds, I thinkevenin theAnnalesuncritically countries.I don't thinkthatis theway it other from and approaches techniques works.I don't thinkthatis theway it oughtto work. JOHN AGNEW (Geography,Syracuse): It strikesme thatmanypeople's commentshave been directedexclusivelyto the impactthe Annalesschool has had of the upon history.I thoughtthe title of the conferencewas "The Impact relation AnnalesSchool on the Social Sciences."A pointI would liketo makein to this is that perhapsthe lack of influencethe Annalesschool had upon the social sciencesin theUnitedStates,in Britain,evenin France,maybe due to the of factthat,in termsof its origins,it was in facta reactionto the developments an draw social sciencein Franceat the turnof thecentury.If we could perhaps of human analogybetweentheworkof theAnnalesschooland the development been interpreted by geographyin France under Vidal de la Blache,whichhas Durkheimian of the to a reaction or a as writers development response many sown in social sociology,we can thenperhapssee the seeds of resistancebeing to the resistance of seeds the science,the seeds of resistanceto particularism, of the certain and la Blache uniquenessof places, the verythingsthatVidal de this I raise question, writersin the Annalestraditionseem to have emphasized. in tryingto accountforthe one thathas not been addressedso farin attempting, as impactof the Annales school upon social science,whichI see beingpretty minimal. HUPPERT: Well,I can't reallygivea verygood answerto thatlast observation, whichmay be just. Afterall I am an historian,an historianof history,not a social scientist.If I turnmy mindback to themomentwhichyou conjureup in decade just beforethe yourremarks,namelythatarcaneand magically-charged is correct.Certainly observation that sure not I am firstWorldWarin Paris, your collaboratedin the who The the it. To people contrary. nobody admittedto de synthèse, Revue the in who and time the of intellectualsalons published from them of some writing included historians,economists,psychologists,
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Discussion
222
Vienna even. Geographersalways had pride of place. Febvreand thesepeople were disciplesand greatadmirersof the Frenchschool of humangeographyof Vidal de la Blache. There never was any question among the historiansof for fear that the newersocial scienceswould take away "counterattacking", theirterritory. Perhapsthat was the unexpressedmotive,I can't reallysay. But mechanism.Perhapsthatis what the actual mechanismwas a sortof preemptive have in mind. That is to we love you say, you and we will takeyou in. Wewill 's elephantor snake. Let's have 100 pagesof swallowyou up like Saint-Exupéry geographyin our books. Let's have 100 pages of economy. Let's have some psychology.Let's have it all. And I guessyourremark,comingfroma discipline which has been historicallyslightedin this countryin the last two or three generationsI think,makes sense in a way. I understand.There is a kind of motivationof bitterness,perhaps,which I understand.I guess the way it is finallyplayedout in the Frenchtraditionis thatthehistorians cleverlytook over the social sciencesand reignedoverthemin theVie Section.At leastthatis one new or a surprising answer way of lookingat it. This is not meantto be anything to the observationyou made,but I thinkthatis how I feelabout it moreor less. As forHobsbawm,well I can't reallyarguewiththat.He knowsperfectly wellI wasn'ttoo seriousin myremarks. WALLERSTEIN: I would like to talk to that last question because I am not surethatit poses thequestioncorrectlyat all. In histalk,JacquesRevelclaimed as the keyarticlein thewholeculturalhistoryofAnnalesthearticleby Simiand, who was not a historianbut an economist,verymuch of a social scientist.He assertedit was the cornerstone,if you will, of Annales ideology,and he proceeded to say that Simiand had been veryinfluencedby Durkheim,and that Annaleswas in factin theheartof the social scientific whichI thinkis tradition, how theyalwaysthoughtof themselves. I would see the issue differently. I would see, in fact,Annalesas fighting on two fronts.It was fighting againstone enemy,whichin facthad two different faces. If the enemy was, as I suggestedin my openingremarks,the kind of Britishimperialview of the world as it got expressedin social science and history,this view took two forms- the formof universalizing generalizations, and the formof the absolute segregationof the social sciencesone fromthe of speakother,whichrelegatedto historythe role of beingtotallyidiographic, ingonly of the nonrepeatablephenomenon.People like Febvreand Bloch,quite specificallyFebvrein thatsectionI quote in my editorialin Review,assertthat the enemyis Bourgeois,theidiographichistorians.Againstthem,Febvreis pushing the claim for social science. On the otherhand, therewas also the other enemywho disregardedthe factthatall of theworldwas not of a singlepiece. I see the Annales as always havingfoughton these two fronts,whichwerethe same front,the same enemycomingtogether,the pure universalizers and the idiographers. CONRAD BIEBER (French,SUNY, StonyBrook): I am not a social historian.I am a literaryperson.AfterMr.Hobsbawm's enlightening criticalremarks, it may seem merelyfrivolousto come back to a minorpoint thatProfessorHuppert made. But it is not so minor so as not to deserveperhapsa footnote.The
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Discussion
223
of the Annales,and the translationof thebooks to whichyou refer, translation is indeed a problem,but it may be more than the fact that one faltersover read Americansocial science, allusionsto Frenchclassicalliterature. If foreigners are in the 1940's and 1950's not the ones to be turned off what they only by was called by MalcolmCowley the impossiblejargonof social science.Now this freefromjargon,so I have no axe to meetinghas been to my ears refreshingly in this if read what is writtenin social sciencesvery grind respect. But you are to the references not writersof the quality of Molière,but competently, or basketball, or very minor baseball sometimesto "B" categorymovies, one indeed. is an international authors.Thus theproblem HUPPERT: I just have a one or two sentencereplyto thatverytrueremark.I think there is a differencethoughbetween the predicamentof the French Annalisteswho cannot make themselvesunderstoodamong English-speaking readers.They want to be understood.Americansocial sciencewas nevermeant to be understoodin the firstplace. WALLERSTEIN: Norhas it eversucceeded. ANDREWS: I wouldjust liketo makeone verybriefcommentin a criticalsense as to the reasonsit seemsto me whyin say the 1940's, 1950's, into the 1960's, worksof theAnnalesschool in factdid not succeedor whythe mostsignificant to enterwithinthemainlineor anywherenearthe summitof werenot permitted serious considerationby veryimportantand powerfulAmericanhistorians.I thinkone gets a clue to this not just in the short notice givenby Garrett Mattinglyto the firstedition of The Mediterranean,but, when the second edition was publishedin 1966, in the reviewby BernardBailyn. It is very to note what BernardBailyn said. He found the book incompreinteresting hensibleand a methodologicalfailure,because he could see no causal links establishedbetweenthisverylongdiscussionin the firstpartof thegeographical, biologicalmilieuin the progressionto social systemsand finallyto politics.The bulk of Bailyn'sreviewconsistedin a discussionof the politicsand diplomacv whichformsthe finalsectionof The Mediterranean, declaringthe demograpny to whatBailyn irrelevant be it to in of role the irrelevant, geography practically In consideredto be relevant,whichis his politicaldiscussion.Let us go further. we theNew YorkReviewof Books, J. H. Elliotreviewedthe firstvolume.Now are not talkingabout an Americanhistorianat thispoint. This was only a few He taxed Braudeland The yearsago, rightafterthe Harperand Row translation. Mediterraneanfor introducing500 or 600 pages of physical,economic,demographicdiscussionwhichdoesn't explainthe Battleof Lepanto, and thatit was all the morea failure,a lyricalmasterpiecebut a failure.J. H. Plumb therefore reviewedthe firstvolume in the New York TimesBook Review somewhereat the end of 1973, and used thatreviewto launch intoa massiveattackreallyon Now thelattertwo the whole geographic,economic,or biologicaldeterminism. historiansare English but withina verydefinabletraditionand a certaintype withthe whichsharescertainverybasic characteristics of Englishdeterminism, 1930's the up to major preoccupationsof Americanhistorianssince roughly the or event on the insistence about the 1960's. That is an overwhelming policy
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
224
Discussion
or the individualas a subjectmatterof history,an overwhelming concernwith the and voluntaristic Lockean of is corrosive This work reading history. basically and I that think has and it been of, challengingto, reading rejectedby a certain maintraditionof Americanhistoriography, not because it is occasionallyexotic or difficultto read in its language,but because it challengescertainveryfundamentalassumptionsof twentieth-century Americanintelligentsia.
This content downloaded from 116.203.220.24 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014 09:21:39 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
