Fernand Braudel and the Annales School
1/
Introduction
The
Annales school of historians emerged in France in the late 1920s around
a journal entitled Annales d'histoire economique et sociale (which
translates as the Yearbook of Economic and Social History). The annales
school - which was about far more than just economic and social history -
reached the peak of its importance and influence in the middle decades of the
C20th, and still exists today. The journal is now called: Annales: Economies,
Societes, Civilisations.
Although most of the historians
associated with the annales school were French and worked at French
universities, they by no means limited themselves to studying the history of
France. The annales school was not a solid group of historians all
working on similar topics and using a similar methodology. Rather, it was a
loose group of historians with similar aims. It is the range and diversity of
their work within broadly similar aims that makes the Annales historians
so significant. Most importantly, historians of the annales school were
committed to broadening the range of the discipline of history. In the process,
in some cases they pioneered, and other cases developed and publicised, a
number of approaches to history that were `new' at the time, including:
comparative history, the history of mentalities (or attitudes), quantitative
history amongst others. They challenged conventional ideas on periodization,
and wrote about problems over `the long term' (la longue duree). They
also insisted on breaking down barriers between disciplines, and consciously
drew on the methodologies of other disciplines, in particular: geography,
social sciences such as sociology, anthropology, economics, and psychology, and
also linguistics.
Discussion of annales historians fits well into
the historiography class for a number of reasons:
1.
The annales school emerged in reaction to the dominance in France (and
indeed elsewhere) in the early C20th of political and diplomatic history and
narratives of events by historians following in the tradition of the C19th
German historian Leopold von Ranke.
2.
Annales historians engaged with Marxist historians. Although there were
some similarities between Marxist and annales historians in their
approaches, in their interest in structures and, in particular, their
rejections of narratives of political history, they also disagreed on a number
of issues. In particular, annales historians presented alternatives to
the primacy of the `economic substructure' as a causal factor in history. They
gave greater emphasis to geography rather than the economy.
3.
The annales school of historians also influenced the work of some of the
scholars who will be discussed in later in this class, e.g. Michel Foucault. To
some extent, annales historians' work on mentalities and cultural
history anticipated the `linguistic turn' - the close attention to the
significance of language.
2/
The Annales School
There
were, broadly, three generations of historians of the annales school.
The most important members of the 1st generation - the founders - were the
medievalist Marc Bloch and the early modernist Lucien Febvre. The commanding
figure in the next generation of annales historians, who came to
prominence in the 1940s-50s, was Fernand Braudel. And one of the most prominent
of the 3rd generation, who is still working, is Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie.
Just
a few examples to give you a sense of the sort of work they have done.
Marc
Bloch Works included The
Royal Touch (1924). Its subject was the belief current in medieval and
early modern France and England that the king could cure a skin disease known
as scrofula simply by touching sufferers. In the book, Bloch analysed popular
attitudes to kingship, religion and miracles over a long period of time
(CC13th-18th), and by comparing the belief in France and England. His approach
drew on social sciences: sociology, anthropology, psychology.
Bloch
went on to write major works on rural society and feudal society in medieval
France and Europe in which he paid attention to structures rather than events.
During
WWII he was active in the French resistance, and was executed by the Germans in
1944
Lucien
Febvre If Bloch was heavily
influenced by social sciences such as sociology, then his co-founder of the annales
school was influenced more by geography. Febvre's early work gave great
emphasis to the role of geography in history. His first book was a study of a
region of France in the C16th. The first chapter described the geography of the
region. He did not argue, however, that the natural environment determined the
history of the region, but that there were a variety of human responses to the
environment in which they lived. People, their ways of life, and their
attitudes and beliefs - not geography - were central to Febvre's interpretation
of history. Febvre's approach to the role of geography in history can be termed
`environmental possibilism', in contrast to `environmental determinism'. (The
role of geography in history was a recurring theme in annales school, in
particular in the work of Fernand Braudel.)
Fernand
Braudel. Probably the most
famous work by an Annales historian was Braudel's history of the
Mediterranean World in the C16th. He wrote the first version of this book - his
doctoral thesis - as a POW in Germany during WWII, and later revised it for
publication. The 1st edn came out in 1949, and the 2nd, further revised, in
1966. This was history on a massive scale.
Like Febvre, he began with the geography of the Mediterranean world.
Although he denied this in the text, for Braudel, unlike Febvre, geography
played a more decisive or even determining role in human history. I'll talk
about The Mediterranean in more detail later in the lecture.
Braudel went on to become an exponent of of history on
an even broader scale and on a wider scope: `total history' and `global
history'. He wrote multi-volume works on world history.
Emmanuel
Le Roy Ladurie. The most well known
historian of the 3rd generation of the annales school. His best known
work is a study of a French village called Montaillou in the C14th. The
village was a centre of Cathar heretics. Because of this, the local bishop
ordered an investigation, and had many of the villagers interrogated and
punished. The transcripts of the interrogations served as the source for Le Roy
Ladurie's book. He drew on the records of the interrogations to present a
reconstruction of the village, its society and culture. His subjects included
the housing in the village, the villagers' perceptions of space, time, nature,
God and religion, family life, childhood, sexuality and death.
Le Roy Ladurie has also written on
peasants and rural history in the early modern period, and the history of the
climate over the last thousand years. The range and ambition of his work, and
the aim of pushing history into new areas, area all typical of the annales
school.
(These
are just a few examples of work by some of the more prominent historians
associated with the annales school. There is much, much more besides.)
3/
Braudel
I've
chosen to focus on the work of Fernand Braudel in this lecture, in part because
one of the documents for a later tutorial is the Preface to The
Mediterranean, but more because if one historian has to be singled out from
the annales school as making the most significant contributions to
historical theory, I think it has to be Braudel. And, I want to focus on these
as exhibited in his most well known book: The Mediterranean and the
Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II (i.e. the C16th), 1st edn 1949,
revised edn 1966.
I
want focus on three areas:
1.
Braudel's attempt at `total history' and the relationship between the three
parts of The Mediterranean;
2.
Braudel on time in history;
3.
Braudel on the role of geography in history.
But,
for sake of convenience will try to consider them together while discussing the
book.
One of the aims of the founders of
the annales school back in the 1920s was to challenge the contemporary
dominance of political and diplomatic history and narratives of events in
favour of social, economic and cultural history, and looking for broader
structures in history. In The Mediterranean, Braudel took this further
than Bloch or Febvre, and sought to integrate the different types of history.
(The point of this discussion of The
Mediterranean is not to seek to understand Spanish foreign policy in the
C16. This is done far better than I can by colleagues in the Dept who are
specialists on early modern history, and who draw on a far wider body of more
recent scholarship than one book written half a century ago. The point here is
to consider Braudel's approach to history.)
The Mediterranean is divided
into three parts.
Part
1: `The Role of the Environment'
examines the geography of the Mediterranean World. Braudel's `Mediterranean
World' was vast, extending from the Turkish Empire in the east to the Spanish
Empire in the west, and included the Sahara in north Africa, eastern, central
and western Europe, and even the Atlantic as well as the immediate hinterland
of the Mediterranean Sea. Braudel began by looking at the mountains, hills,
plains and coasts that surround the sea, at the sea itself, and the islands in
the Mediterranean. The discussion of the geography of the Mediterranean World
ends with a analysis of communications and cities.
Braudel divided `historical time'
into three layers, one layer for each part of the book. Thus, for part one was
`geographical time'. For Braudel, the relationship between humans and the
environment was very slow, change was almost imperceptible, and was a history
of repetition and recurring cycles based on the cycle of the seasons.
Part
2: `Collective Destinies and General Trends'. This part focuses on economic, social and political structures: the
economies, trade and prices, and also the empires, societies and
`civilizations' of the Mediterranean World. This part ends with a discussion of
warfare in the region, and points towards the 3rd and final part.
Braudel's layer of time for this
part was `social time', which was a little faster than geographical time. It
was still slow, but with perceptible rhythms, over generations and centuries.
Part
3: `Events, Politics and People'.
This is more conventional political, diplomatic and military history. And, in
this part of the book, time was `individual time', in which change was fastest
and most perceptible to people.
Braudel devoted the 3rd and final
part of the book to an analysis of the war in the second half of the C16th
between the Spanish Empire of Philip II that dominated the western end of `The
Mediterranean World' and the Ottoman or Turkish Empire that dominated the
eastern end. This part includes sketches of the individuals involved as well as
descriptions of the battles, diplomacy, treaties etc. The key battle was that
of Lepanto, between the Spanish and Turkish fleets, in 1571. The Spanish fleet
emerged victorious but, Braudel argues, Phillip II of Spain was not able to
follow up the victory and establish dominance over the whole Mediterranean
World. Indeed, by the end of the C16, the Spanish Empire had turned its
attention to the West, to the Atlantic World, and to its growing empire in the
New World.
In order to explain why Phillip II
was not able to turn the Spanish victory at Lepanto into dominance of the
Mediterranean World, Braudel referred back to the previous two parts of the
book.
He drew attention to the financial
exhaustion of the Spanish economy, which greatly limited Phillip II's options,
even after the victory at Lepanto. This part of his explanation referred back
to part 2 on the economic, social and political structures of the Mediterranean
World.
He also drew attention to the
difficulties of communications across the vast Spanish Empire in limiting the
options open to Phillip II even after the Turkish fleet had been defeated. Thus,
he referred back to part 1 of the book on the geography of the Mediterranean
World.
The argument Braudel was making was
that `events', the subject matter of traditional history, were relatively
insignificant in history, and individuals, even those as apparently powerful as
Phillip II of Spain, were severely limited and constrained in what they could
do by broader, and deeper structures beyond their control. In the Preface to
the 1st edn of The Mediterranean, Braudel wrote that statesmen such as
Phillip II, `despite their illusions
[were] more acted on than actors'. (p.19).
In a famous and often quoted phrase,
Braudel wrote (also in the Preface to the 1st edn): `the history of events' was merely the history of `surface disturbances, crests of foam that
the tides of history carry on their strong backs'. He noted that the
history of events is `the most exciting
of all, the richest in human interest, but also the most dangerous.'...
`Resounding events are often only momentary outbursts, surface manifestations
of... larger movements and explicable only in terms of them.' (p.21)
For Braudel, therefore, the outcome
of the struggle for supremacy in the Mediterranean World - the example he chose
for his study to demonstrate a wider point about the course of human history -
was the result, not of events such as battles such as Lepanto or the actions of
individuals such as Phillip II, but was the outcome of the longer term
structures - political, social, economic and geographic - which he analysed in
the first two parts of his book. Thus, the hero of Braudel's book is not King
Phillip II of Spain, but the Mediterranean Sea itself.
Elsewhere, Braudel used prisons as a
metaphor for the role of human agency in history: humans were prisoners of
their physical environment and also of their mental framework. It has often
been noted, of course, that he wrote the first version of The Mediterranean
as a POW in Germany during WWII.
Historians have praised and
criticized Braudel's work, and the theoretical arguments concerning the
relationship between the different aspects of history, the different layers of
time, and the pessimistic argument about the role of individuals in history.
Many of the criticisms have focused on this last point: Braudel's determinist
argument that seems to assign paramount importance to geography. One critic
(J.H. Elliot in New York Review of Books, 3 May 1973) wrote that
`Braudel's Mediterranean is a world unresponsive to human control.' Braudel's
determinism based on geography can be contrasted with Marxist interpretations
of history which assign that role to the economic substructure. Braudel's
geographical determinist argument has often been contrasted with the
`environmental possibilism' and voluntarism of the original annales
historians, in particular Lucien Febvre (see above). I should point out that
Braudel tried to deal with this in the second edn of the book. On p.225 he
stated: `It is worth repeating here that
history is not made by geographical features, but by the men who control and
discover them.' This sits a little uneasily with the overall argument of
the book and his views stated elsewhere.
Criticisms aside, The
Mediterranean remains one of the most distinctive and influential books
written by a historian in the C20th. Peter Burke concluded; `it remains Braudel's personal achievement
to have combined the study of la longue duree with that of the complex interaction between the environment, the
economy, society, politics, culture, and events.' (The French Historical
Revolution, p.42.)
4/
Conclusion
The
annales was one of the most important schools or groups of historians in
the C20th. They have influenced, indirectly as well as directly, historians
working in countries as far apart as Brazil and Poland, and specialists on a
wide variety of geographical areas.
In
my own field, Russian history, the annales school has been influential
on some historians in the former Soviet Union seeking alternatives to the
official Marxist interpretation of history which imposed by the ruling
Communist Party until the collapse of party rule and the Soviet Union in 1991.
At the time of the peak of the
importance of the annales school in the middle decades of the C20th,
many members of the `historical establishment' in Britain looked at annales
history with suspicion and even hostility. Traditional British empirical
historians looked askance at what they saw as another manifestation of the
continental European obsession with theory rather than hard facts and
empiricism. Among British historians who did recognise the importance of the annales
school were members of another group who stood out from the majority of their
colleagues for their use of continental theory: Marxist historians, e.g. the
medievalist Rodney Hilton and modernist Eric Hobsbawm.
It was only from around the 1970s
that the annales school began to be taken more seriously by historians
in Britain, and that more of their works began to appear in English
translations (e.g. Braudel's Mediterranean first came out in English
translation only in 1972). Le Roy Ladurie's Montalliou became a best
seller on the back of its `sensational' revelations about sexuality in a
medieval French village, and was the subject of television documentaries. It is
a measure of the lasting influence of the Annales school that most
historiography classes such as this and textbooks on historiography, such as The
Houses of History, include discussion of their work.
Probably the most prominent British
champion of the annales school is the cultural historian Peter Burke, whose
concise and readable book - The French Historical Revolution: The Annales
School, 1929-89 - is on the reading list for this class. Burke concluded
(pp.110-11):
`In my own view, the outstanding
achievement of the Annales group, ... has been the reclaiming of vast
areas for history. The group has extended the territory of the historian to
unexpected areas of human behaviour and to social groups neglected by
traditional historians. These extensions of historical territory are associated
with the discovery of new sources and the development of new methods to exploit
them. They are also associated with collaboration with other disciplines...
A remarkable amount of the most
innovative, the most memorable and the most significant historical writing has
been produced in France.'
Peter Tosh, in The Pursuit of History (p.80),
wrote that as a result of the work of the annales school in broadening
and refining `the content and methodology of history', many of the new
directions which the discipline has taken in the past thirty years owe much to
their contribution.'
Others, of course, have been critical of their work,
noting in particular the determinism in Braudel's work, the limitations of his
attempts at `total history', and the extent to which other historians were
working in similar directions and later historians have gone beyond their work.
Few, however, deny their influence.