Please contact the author for authorization for commercial reprinting, and please indicate the source for non-commercial reprinting.

Author: Ron herzog

Link: /question/2 1593749/ answer/19070 192.

Source: Zhihu.

Each discipline has its own internal development logic. To understand contemporary trends, we must understand the historical process of the past. But this is not clear in a few words. I'm sorry for my lack of organization.

In the past two or three decades, besides Marxism, the school of chronicles has exerted great influence on China's historians. Today, the influence of Yearbook magazine is not as good as before. Braudel's knowledge was surpassed by his successors more than 30 years ago. I have always felt that it is easy for China academic circles to accept the yearbook school represented by Bubu, because this idea of emphasizing structural analysis and stressing depth and shallowness is very similar to Marxism. Can be said to be a manifestation of structuralism. But in today's western academic circles, this road seems to have declined. Of course, from the perspective of historiography, they once played an important role in overcoming the three idols of historiography (narrative, hero and politics) in the19th century.

At present, there are two obvious trends in western historiography. One is the transcendence or dilution of the historical narrative of the nation-state, and the other is the research path of the new cultural history.

What is the historical narrative that transcends or downplays the nation-state? Because since the rise of modern history in the19th century, historical writing is usually based on nationality, state and political power, or it dominates the thinking of historical readers. For example, what about China, one dynasty and one foreign country? In a sense, paying attention to historical heroes is also an inevitable inference of this historical narrative.

Of course, this kind of historical writing also has its historical reasons. But now, people try to write from other angles. It can be said that there are two paths. One is transnational history, the so-called national history, or world history and global history (some westerners don't understand why China scholars are keen on this great history). For example, you can write a transnational history based on the spread of potatoes, or you can write a world history about horses or food. This material civilization or species itself has no national boundaries and national attributes.

Another way beyond the national-national historical narrative, in my opinion, is more fundamental, and that is to deconstruct this narrative from the inside. A few years ago, memory research was very popular in France (perhaps different from the memory research of the Holocaust in the United States and other places), and several volumes "The Place of Memory" were published, which introduced how things such as Joan of Arc and tricolor flag were remembered by the French and were endowed with various meanings. However, Joan of Arc and Tri-color Flag are still the reference objects to construct national identity, and they are still a kind of national historical narrative in essence. This was not the case when memory research rose. It wants to reveal that the memories of some marginal groups, regions and ethnic groups are actually suppressed and silenced by the national historical narrative dominated by the state. For example, in some villages, villagers don't remember things like the two world wars and the Napoleon Revolution clearly, but these things, rather than what they think is important, dominate the usual historical narrative.

Recently, two British and French scholars wrote a book about the memory of the Battle of St. Gast in 1758. This kind of memory mainly prevails in Brittany, but it highlights not the patriotism and heroism of the French, but bretons's unique anti-British sentiment, their "Celtic brotherhood" with the Welsh and their antipathy to the jacobin-style and revolutionary French central power. This means that Brittany also has its own unique identity, which is not completely integrated with the national identity of France, but full of contradictions. These things were hardly involved in the past history, or were deliberately avoided.

This leads to an important concept put forward by Foucault and others: power. Like other cultural phenomena, history is also a force. History's concern for various marginal groups can be regarded as a reaction to traditional historical power. This theory and practice have penetrated into many research fields today. For example, some feminist historical studies believe that the premise of social contract is "sexual contract", and the modern democratic revolution is based on the systematic exclusion and slavery of women. These researchers tried to demonstrate the "hidden meaning" of male hegemony in the revolutionary discourse and behavior in the18th century, which was difficult to find from the perspective of male chauvinism in the past.

Then there is a popular view: the meaning of history and historical phenomena is not endowed and unchangeable, but something constructed and presented. This is the decline of objectivism and the traditional ideal of "seeking truth". Joan of Arc is an interesting example. Her image is inconsistent in people's memory and in the expression of historical documents. Today, the French saint has been ridiculed in Voltaire's works, and before that, Joan of Arc was almost forgotten. The restoration of Joan's image is due to the needs of the specific political and ideological situation. Joan of Arc is constantly being imagined and expressed. By contrast, what her story is, on the contrary, seems less important: what matters is to express and use it.

Decades ago, it was very popular for historians to use Origin as the title of their works. Nowadays, inventions are very fashionable. Exploring the origin presupposes an objective order, and I am confident in the method of history. I believe that researchers can find out the origin of historical events. This understanding still exists today. But others are concerned about another level, that is, how the image of the calendar is formed and how it is given meaning. Just as Joan of Arc is not always a nationalist saint, the so-called "tradition" is not as long as people think. It was invented in a specific environment. Even the image of Mont Blanc was "invented", and it arrived at the sea.