George Lefebvre

George Lefebvre was an important historian who focused largely on social interpretations of history. Largely, the importance of peasants to the historical timeline. He specifically focused on French peasantry and their role in the French revolution. His work basically began as an archivist, looking at documents from the Revolution that discussed the daily lives of peasants. In 1928 he was invited by the founders of the Annales school to join the faculty of the University of Strasbourg. He strongly believed in the values of the French Revolution such as truth and justice and his biography of Napoleon was more or less a criticism of the modern day dictators of Europe and their lack of these ideals. He was interested in the revolutionary mentalities of France that were grounded in his study of the peasantry. One criticism of him was that his social interpretation was favorable towards Marxism which was unpopular.

Burke Chapters 3 & 4

Chapter 3 explains that Fernand Braudel was a very important figure to the Annales school. Braudel's first major work, The Mediterranean, was one of the most complete historical texts to emerge from this group of historians. Starting his historical studies, he began by looking at the relationship of Phillip II of Spain to the Mediterranean, but after meeting Febvre he soon realized the larger importance of Geogpraphy and the smaller importance of individuals to history. One of the greatest strengths of Braudel's work was his separation of time into three different rates. He speaks of the quick, but insignificant, passage of events that occur "at the surface" of history. The middle is the cultural passage of time; the movement of ideas and trade, and finally, the slowest but most important, is the geographic time. The geographic time which Braudel writes about in The Mediterranean is the closest to a global understanding of history because it doesn't focus on anything specific, instead speaking of the relationships of a people to the terrain they live in. His work made the historical world realize the importance of space, rather than people, to the passage of history. Another of his great contributions to the Annales school was when he was President of the Sixth Section of the School. He created another organization which focused on interdisciplinary studies, and moved them all to the same area of the city.

Chapter 4 discusses the new generation of historians that grew up after the world wars. This group of Historians either build their arguments on Braudel or Febvre's ideas or argued against them. They either agreed or disagreed with the importance of ideas like "quantitative study", geo-history, or the study of mentalites. Phillipe Aries disagrees with many of the previous historians ideas and argues that childhood was important in following history and understanding the cause and effect of humans.

Daileader and Whalen Thirty-Seven

Henry Rousso is a historian of the contemporary history specializing in the Vichy regime.  Rousso indicates that there was some collaboration between the Vichy regime and the Nazis.  Rousso's research contradicts the comments spoken by former Vichy officials like Francois Lehideux.  Rousso research concludes that it was the Vichy regime that sought collaboration with the Nazis and not the other way around as was formerly believed.  Rousso employs the narrative form in his writing.  Rousso discusses the political, social, and cultural effects of the occupation of the French population.

Does Rousso's work reveal hidden truths regarding the Vichy regime?

Did the Vichy officials try to benefit and profit from the Nazis at the expense of their own people?

Daileader and Whalen Chapter Thirty-Two

Michelle Perrot has written histories on labor history, prison history, and women's history.  Originally, she had a scientific approach, but later developed a more literary approach to writing.  She was raised in a well to do family and went to a catholic all girls school despite he parents being anti-clerical.  In this religious environment she learned to show compassion which would lead her to fight against injustice in her adult life.  Though not a communist, she did have leftist leaning.  She was very vocal during the Algerian war and when Khrushchev denounced Stalin.  She defended and supported workers and labor unions writing several histories about strikes and other social injustices in France.

How did her early life influence her life's work?

Was her work politically motivated?

Daileader and Whalen Chapter Twenty-Seven

Georges Lefebvre was a prominent French historian and leader of the Annales School.  He studied the social history of the the peasant class during the French Revolution which was influenced by Marxism.  Therefore, socialist thought and belief was not popular nor welcomed in Nazi Germany and their occupied lands.  Lefebvre was a member of the resistance during WWII.  After the war, he became a leader and supporter of the communist party in France.  These social beliefs and principles influenced his writing of history as is clearly shown in his work regarding the Bourgeoisie and the peasant classes during the French Revolution.

Would Lefebvre writing have been different had he not been a communist?

How does one political and social belief influence history?

Burke Chapter Four

The Third Generation at the Annales school came after the retirement of Braudel from the presidency of the Sixth section in 1972.  Jacques Le Goff took over the presidency.  It was during this time that the Annales school had its first woman among its members, Christiane Klapisch, a historian of the family unit during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.  The Third Generation interests in psychohistory and history of ideologies and mentalities (including Anthropology) was also a major shift.  The Annales school had also seen a return to the historical narrative.  The journal experienced larger print runs and wider distribution.

Why is psychology important to the field of History?

Do social ideologies change over time or is there a cycle/pattern?

Burke Chapter Three

Fernand Braudel originally wanted to write a history of Philip II and the Mediterranean during his time in a prison camp in WWII, however, his thesis quickly became the Mediterranean and Phillip II.  In other words, it was imperative to understand the situation in the Mediterranean before one could understand the role of the Spanish Empire.  Braudel expanded his work to include the economic, social, and demographic history in the Mediterranean.  He studied how other cultures and civilizations had influenced the Mediterranean and Spain to identify the wider picture in the historical landscape.  Braudel succeeded Fabvre as director of the Annales in 1956 until his death in 1985.

Why is it important to study the history of a region before focusing on a particular nation?

Why is it important to understand the economic and social history of the region?

Michelle Perrot

Michelle Perrot is a French Historian whose work is well known throughout the world. Michelle has always demonstrated a commitment to telling the stories of those who have traditionally been left out of history, this explains her interests which are labor history, the history of prisons, and women's history. Her most famous works all deal with these topics. She found her love of history through her Bible history teacher. She was a political activist taking place in movements and had a leading role in the anti-Algerian war of 1954 movement and helped to organize a demonstration against the war that took place on the streets of Caen. After that she chose to study the working class; she gets involved in the events of May 68 in Paris and becomes one of the founders of the new university that opened in response to the crisis. She also participates with two of her colleagues that she was offering courses in women's history with in demonstrations and other activities as part of the fights to make abortion legal in France. Michelle Perrot was a critical figure in women's history becoming a part of historical study.

Rousso

The thing that I respect most about Rousso is how he was able to objectively criticize his own work. I feel like most times historians or other great thinkers may be hardheaded when it comes to their own work, especially if their piece becomes widely popular or accepted. However, Rousso's ability to step back and say that his work needed revision makes me respect him so much.

Henry Rousso

Henry Rousso is a historian whose main focus was during the time when the Nazi's were occupying france during world war 2, a time period known as the Vichy time period. During this time period he focused on many different collaborations that France had with Nazi Germany mainly with the industries that had an effect on the war. This time period was what he was most famous for and the usage of collective memory first focusing on economic history then moving forward to the political aspect of it . 

Perrot

Perrot lead the charge for Women's History. Women were always left out of history so for someone to study them is monumental. However, she not only looked at women, or were always left out of the history books, but she also looked at prisoners and other people who don't make history for whatever reason. Perrot started a journal that would eventually stop being published only to have her students pick up where she left off and began to publish a new journal only years later.

Lefebvre

Focused his attention on peasants in French society, which was something that was somewhat unheard of at this point. We are so used to reading about the great kings and queens of a nation so to know that a historian spent most of his time looking at the underbelly and the working class of France is refreshing. Personally, I'd rather learn about peasantry as opposed to royalty or clergy.

Burke 3 & 4

In both these chapters we learn about the next few generations of Annales historians. The second generation is lead by Braudel whose thesis was about King Phillip II. Not only was Braudel a part of the Annales school but he would also become the director of the school. He was inspired by his mentors and directors of the past and now it was his turn to do the same for the new, younger historians under his watch. Like Brooke has mentioned, this generation really saw a great amount of quantitative data and really focused on things like the economic structure of a society as opposed to just the social or religious. Once we get to the third generation we see a huge amount of change. The biggest being that women are now a studied part of history. This generation continues with the quantitative data like we saw in the second generation and they also go back to studying the political and military aspects of history.

Michelle Perrot

Michelle Perrot was a historian whom focused the majority of her studies on women in history and people whom never had a "say" in history like workers and people whom were locked up. The reason why she is so important is because she is the historian whom actually solidified the study of women's history. 

Georges Lefebvre

Georges Lefebvre is most well known for his controversial  marxist ideas regarding the peasant class during the French revolution. zOne of his most famous topics that he spoke about was the mental state of mind of the peasant class during this time focusing on the fear that they felt. I found him very interesting I noticed that psychologist  focused mostly on mental states not historians. 

Burke 3&4

In chapter three of Burke he describes the second generation of the Annales school and begins to speak about Braudel and his view on the Mediterranean and King Philip II. Braudel wanted to cover these events by a "total history" when looking at this total history he covered things such as the weather, social, political, and economic points of view. This then branched off into looking at history in a whole new different point of view. 

Chapter four of Burke introduces you into the third generation of the Annales school which focuses on how the time that has changed the different views on history. It begins to explain that not only one person should study an event but many, not just men should study but women as well. I took that they want as many points of views as they possibly can get. 

Is there a possibly way to cover every single thing about history?
is total history possible to obtain? 

Burke Ch 4

This chapter discusses the intellectual shifts in the third generation of the Annales.  This generation was the first to include women historians and ideas from outside of France.  The third generation has three major themes.  First is the rediscovery of mentalities through the research of historians such as Philippe Aries and his discovery of the history of childhood.  Next there is an attempt to employ quantitative methods in cultural history.  For example, Michel Vovelle studied dechristianization and attitudes towards death through the study of wills.  Finally, the reaction against these methods is examined.

Chapter 37 Henry Rousso

Henry Rousso is the leading historian on the Vichy regime, a time when Nazi Germany occupied France during World War 2. While still relatively young, he wrote a article that explored how French industries had collaborated with the Nazis. His first monograph looked at the last days of the Petain regime. Also in the monograph he looked at other groups living in France at the time. His work The Vichy Syndrome looked at the impact of the Vichy regime from 1944 to then present day. His research used collective memory as a tool for research. His work on the Vichy regime has made him a popular historian and media personality.

What exactly is collective memory and should historians use it in their research?

Chapter 32 Michelle Perrot

Michelle Perrot not only made great strides in one area of study, she made it in three distinct fields of study: labor history, history of prisons, and women's history. She studied under Ernest Labrousse, a leading economy historian at the time. Her first major work was Les Ouvriers en greve, which described in detail every strike in France from 1871 to 1890. She went to archives in every part of France to collect data. She continued to write about labor history and is considered one of the worlds foremost historians on the subject. She later wrote about prisons and her work The Impossible Prison looked at the relationship between criminals, poverty, and revolution. While teaching, she offered courses in women's history and she later wrote about the topic. 

Is it better for historians to stick to one subject or be well versed in other, more complex topics and areas?

Chapter 27 Georges Lefebvre

Georges Lefebvre was one of France's most controversial historians. His work on the French Revolution influence historians. While is influence is undeniable, what has been debated among historians was his use of Marxism in his study of the revolution and his socialist ties. As noted in the chapter, he has supporters who still view is work on the revolution still relevant. His first book about peasants in the Nord region reflected his growing social awareness. Soon after his first book, he was introduced to the Annales school. His book The Great Fear of 1789: Rural Panic in Revolutionary France became an important look at peasant life during the revolution. He used grievances lists to rte peasant life. This work enhanced his reputation among historians. The growing political environment no doubt influenced his work and career. When war broke out, his work was deemed subversive and his reputation suffered. After the war, he retired but continued to study and write. His work La Revoultion francaise became the most standard text on the revolution. Lefebvre's career was like the era he lived in: turbulent but productive at the same time.

Should historians look at political alliances while studying another historians work?

Burke Chapters 3 and 4

In chapter 3, Burke describes the second generation of the Annales school and in particular Braudel. Braudel's monumental The Mediterranean was greatly influenced by the Annales school and their journal.  I found interesting that a historian Febvre attacked often named Friedrich Ratzel greatly influenced Braudel and his work on The Mediterranean. Burke brought up an interesting evaluation about Braudel's book. Burke wrote that although Braudel tried to write a "total history", Braudel had little to say about attitudes, values etc. It seems that when ever a historian writes a radical new perspective on a topic, readers and critics tear it apart. After Febvre's death in 1956, Braudel became the de-facto leader of the Annales school. Chapter three also includes a part on Ernest Labrousse, who started to introduced Marxism into the Annales school.

my question is when does a radical, new perspective on history become a important piece of historical writing?

Chapter 4 deals with the third generation of the Annales school and it should be pointed out that this generation took shape in the years following 1968. This new generation did not want one historian dominating the spotlight like Febvre and Braudel did. The third generation also included women historians, including Mona Ozouf who we have studied. They broke away from France and started to study abroad, including America. There were three themes that Burke talked about: mentalities, cultural history, and historical anthropology. Historians like Aries and Delumeau is discussed. Burke talks about the changing trends in history at the time and how that influenced the newer generation of the Annales.

My question is what generation, if any, is left of the Annales school?

Burke Chapter 3

Chapter 3 introduces us to Fernand Braudel,a French historian who published  The Mediterranean.  He approached history in three ways:  1.  He emphasized the significance of events and the limitations on the freedom of action of individual events.  He referred to events as "surface disturbances".  2.  The history of structures such as economic systems and states and 3. The history of man and his environment.  Braudel credits the Annales school for his inspiration.  Braudel  became director of the Annales.

Henry Rousso

Born in 1954 in Alexandria, Egypt, Henry Rousso specialized in the legacies of the Vichy regime. Qualified as a University teacher and research supervisor, Rousso who once studied economic history moved onto political history. Rousso wrote in the narrative form about a variety of cultural products using psychoanalysis. His work has been highly criticized because of the use of collective memory. Rousso became a critic of his own work as well. He acknowledged that his work would need to be revised due to periodization.

Michelle Perrot

Born in 1928 in Paris, Michelle Perrot was a pioneer in the study of Women's history. Perrot's work included the study of people that have been left out of history. In addition to the history of women, she also researches workers and prisoners. A teacher by trade, Perrot successfully began to integrate Women's history into the discipline and later formed a journal devoted to Women's history. Though the journal came to an end in 1985, another journal began publication in 1995, founded by a group led by on of Perrot's students.

Georges Lefebvre

Born in 1874, Georges Lefebvre was a specialist in French peasantry. Though his works are considered highly controversial because of his Marxist views and political allegiances, Lefebvre acquired and "influential position" and "ultimate authority" on the French Revolution. Lefebvre works focus on the social interpretations of the peasantry social group, in particular, the mentality of fear.

George Lefebvre

George Lefebvre was a prominent historian of the French Revolution but there is some controversy surrounding his work.  His social, or Marxist interpretation of the Revolution has been challenged as well as his political allegiances.  At one point in his career, Lefebvre was the foremost authority on the study of the French Revolution.  Because he was a specialist in the study of French peasantry, he wrote about the revolution from that point of view.  His career stumbled a bit during WWII when his books were put on the "banned" list because his writings were thought to promote French nationalism.  Then in 1954 a professor and revisionist from the University of London named Alfred Cobban challenged Lefebvre by criticizing him for examining the Revolution from a single-sided view.  Subsequent historians have questioned Lefebvre's social interpretations of the French Revolution and have introduced new ways of looking at the event.  The article raises the question as to exactly how much an historian is influenced by his or her current political environment.

Burke Chapters 3 & 4

In chapter 3, Burke introduces the reader to Fernand Braudel and the second generation of the Annales.  Inspired by his "intellectual father," Lucien Febvre, Braudel,  took a new approach to his thesis about King Philip II and the Mediterranean by taking a different approach to history. His massive book which is in three parts covers the history of the relationship between man and the environment, economic, social and political structures, and finishes with what he intended as his original thesis, the fast moving history of events during the reign of King Philip II. This was done purposely to show that the history of events can only be understood through Geo-history.

Aside from his thesis, Braudel became the director of the Annales and inspired many younger historians to take yet another set of new approaches to history. It is during the second generation of the Annales that there is a rise in the history of material cultures, geo-history, and a deeper look into economic history. The second generation also led to a rise in the use of quantitative and demographic history as well. This led the way into new trends of religious history, cultural history, the history of mentalities, the history of prices and population.

In chapter 4, Burke introduces the reader to the third generation of the Annales. It is during this third generation in which the Annales spews off into three different directions. Not only was this the first generation to include women but, it also took Febvre's ideologies to a new level by the splintering off of the history of mentalities to include historical psychology and the study of family, emotions, and health. The second change was a return to the scholarship in political and historical biography. The third direction, which wasn't entirely new but much debated, was the quantitative approach to history especially in the subjects of religion, books and literacy.

Michelle Perrot

Michelle Perrot is best known for her studies of women's history although she also did extensive work and research on labor and prison history.  She told the story of people who were typically in the "shadows" of historical research; women, workers and prisoners.  She is credited with making women's history a valid subject of study in the 1970s.  Perrot has also made these topics and their scholarly debate available to the public by publishing in more popular historical magazines and through French radio shows.

The article describes how Perrot was greatly influenced by observing female prisoners in a prison yard adjacent to her school but does not indicate if she specifically studied female prisoners.  I wonder if she did.

Topic Proposal

For my topic, I'm going to look at Functionalism vs Intentionalism, which deals with trying to understand why and how the Holocaust occurred and who is responsible.

Topic proposal

For my historiography paper, I would like to examine how historians have viewed the relationship between master and slave in the antebellum south. I will be looking at the different approaches historians have taken on the subject whether it be psychology, economic, etc. In addition I will compare and contrast their different viewpoints.

Essay Topic

Essay Topic: "The Parsley Massacre of 1937" (Dominican Massacre of 30000 Haitians)

Brundage 2

This chapter in Brundage is specifically on the two types of sources that historians use. On the other hand he also talks about the uses of other sources such as journals, papers, and even letters. When speaking of these types of sources although they bring in insightful thoughts they can not be used as factual events because they are only through either the press's eyes or the composer of the specific document.
Primary sources are usually first hand accounts written by some one who was actually there the secondary sources are written from an outside perspective.

Is there any way to validate a letter or journal as a primary source? how?

Brundage Chapter 2

The chapter discusses the types of sources used by history students. It breaks sources into two groups, primary and secondary sources. Primary sources being manuscripts and published sources, while secondary sources are books,manuscripts,and periodicals. The chapter states that the updated peroidicals are almost more accurate than thr traditional ways oof learning.

My question is: Is revisionist history ever going to reach a point where it doesn't need revision?

Brundage Chapter Two

Brundage discusses two categories of historical sources:  primary sources and secondary sources.  Historians consult both to develop well documented and supported works.  Primary sources can be manuscripts such as diaries, letters, documents, and newspapers that give a first-hand account of the actual events and time period being researched.  Secondary works are usually books, articles, and essays that are studies on a particular area of history and that offer a historian's  personal perspective.

How do we know what sources to use and when to use them?

Why is it important to use good primary and secondary sources?

Brundage Chapter 2

In this chapter, Brundage explains what primary sources and secondary sources are and what they consist off. Written primary sources can be classified into two major categories which are manuscript sources and published sources. A manuscript is considered to be "Any handwritten or typed record or communication that has not been printed or otherwise duplicated in significant quantities for public dissemination."  Letters, memoirs, and diaries are common examples of manuscript sources. Published sources are sources which were meant to be published and widely distributed from the beginning. Newspapers, advertising,and  business reports are published sources.
Secondary sources are written on a topic from an indirect perspective as opposed to primary sources which are generally a firsthand account. Secondary sources use primary sources and other secondary sources for their credibility. Books, essays and articles are the most common secondary sources.

At what point do stories, legends, and myths become primary sources?

Brundage 2

Historians look at two types of sources when it comes to historical research, primary and secondary. Most students when writing a paper or working on a project will usually look at secondary sources which we know are writings about an event, not a first person account. Primary sources are the diaries or journals or interviews from people that surround a certain event. These sources can be extremely useful but also can often times hold bias. A diary entry from a king and an entry from a peasant about the same event are going to be extremely different.

I liked Brooke's question, it was what I was thinking about: with older primary sources how do we determine the authenticity?

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie

He was a student of the Annales way of thought.  Ladurie felt that for four hundred years, history stood still.  Along with that, so did the growth of the people.  He gave the term total history in his book called Paysans which was a study of a region's people, religion, weather, etc. in southern France.  Ladurie stayed away from the study of what I call "mainstream history", meaning war, monarchy, exploration, etc.  in favor of this study. He seems to put an vast importance on the region's climate over time.  He was a true pioneer the way he was able to use his data to show the warming and cooling pattern of the region.

My question... though his way of documenting data was truly unique and unheard of during the time, was it helpful?  What did studying the peasants prove in the long run?

Mona Ozouf

Born in Brittany, she was a philosophy professor with different view on the French Revolution.  She published a book in 1976, which was translated in 1988 called "Festivals and the French Revolution".  the way I read was that she called the French Revolution a festival driven by fear, like most of the festivals during the time. the The Revoltion was an attempt at Utopia, as well as an attempt to bring the State together. I found it interesting that she called them sacred, because of the decline belief in Christianity.

My question... with the way of life being the way it was in France in 1789, along with enlightenment showing people you could believe in God the way it worked for you, why did she place such importance on the need for the festivals to be sacred?

Philippe Aries

Born in 1914, he is credited with being the first man to make the study of childhood a legitimate practice.  is father wanted him in the field of engineering, but eventually allowed him to chase his true love, history.  He wrote a book in 1960 that was translated in English in 1962 tilted, "Centuries of Childhood". it was an examination of the relationship between parents and children from fifteenth to eighteenth century France.  he was a camp councilor that was in favor of promoting the expansion of families. This was an act that Aries was not in agreement with, and investigated further. He found that the French were using form of birth control as early as the seventeenth century. It also shows that until recent times, children were used for trade or for sale. Many families would go hungry if they did not have children to provide for work.

My main question is this... why were the French practicing birth control during this time?

My follow up question is... is this such a rogue action that is someone of power were to find out, what action would be taken?

Brundage Ch 2

Brundage describes different examples df primary and secondary sources in Chapter 2.  He urges the researcher to consider all types of sources when doing their project but he warns that you should consider the motives of both the author and editor.  For example, newspaper articles are designed to influence public opinion  and a paper's political orientation should be considered.

I would like to learn more about "monographs" as i didnt quite understand that section of the chapter and how to locate newspaper articles.  I was also wondering if "popular" books on a topic are acceptable sources for this project.

Brundage Chapter 2

In chapter 2, Brundage goes over the different types of sources. First there are primary sources. Primary sources can be broken up into two categories:manuscript and publish sources. Manuscript are anything written or typed that has not been replicated and can include manuscripts of meetings between world leaders. Publish sources are books, diaries, and letters. Brundage also goes over secondary works, such as books on  regions or countries. As historians, which sources do we used primary and which ones should we avoid? Also do we consider popular books on history in the same light as those of scholarly works?

Brundage Chapter 2

There are two types of sources that historians use in their research, primary and secondary sources. Primary sources can be in the form of manuscript sources, which are not intended for public view, and published sources. Published sources can include letters, diaries, newspapers, and autobiographies.

Secondary sources are written histories based on primary sources and come in many forms. Books, one of the most popular forms of source, cover a wide array of historical information from very broad down to very narrow historical context. Essays, which are shorter than books, also can cover a wide array of historical topics. Articles are typically published in periodicals and can give historians ideas on new perspectives. Dissertations and Conference Papers are also available as secondary sources, and are typically narrow in topic content.

How can you tell if a particular primary source is authentic and not something that was just made up? 

Burke Chapter 1 & 2

Chapter 1:
Burke explains that in order for any revolution to be successful you need to look at what came before. The same idea applies to History. The new histories that historians write emerge from the understanding of the previous history that was written. The authors of these new histories build their arguments up from criticisms of these "traditional" histories. The Annales school didn't just look at histories of people it looked at outside fields such as psychology, and sociology.

Chapter 2:
One of the two founder of the Annales school, Lucien Febvre is quoted in the chapter as arguing that "a river might be treated by one society as a barrier, yet as a root by another." Here he is looking at history through the relationship of a people to their environment. Marc Bloch, the second founder focused on a multidisciplinary approach to history; social, economics, and political factors all weighed equally. 

How has the Annales school greatly affected the 20th century historical writing?

Was this excursively a French idea? Or did Americans and British create similar counter histories in the same period?

Daileader & Whalen Chapter 31

Mona Ozouf was a champion of the women's role during the French Revolution.  Previously, a lot had been written by men about men in the French Revolution.  However, Ozouf's research was not only what women's role was during the French Revolution, but what drove them to take action.  Did Christianity, Ethics, and Morals play a part?  Ozouf disproved a lot of misconceptions regarding women in the time period by digging deeper to find a larger historical narrative dating back centuries before the Revolution i.e. Joan of Arc.

Why was it important for Ozouf to explore women's role in the French Revolution?

Do other periods in history have to similarly be looked at again?

Daileader & Whalen Chapter 26

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie studied family unit in France throughout time.  He was convinced the large long term communities resulted in economic-social thriving areas of mercantilism and educational learning.  As agriculture declined, so would the wages of peasants in countryside.  This would result in a crisis when population increased, wages decreased, and food production plunged.  In addition, Ladurie studied climate change.  Ladurie argued that the Vikings went to North America to find a warmer and more suitable climate due the the cold in Europe during that period.  Ladurie furthered the Annales school's cause.

What led to certain area become densely populated?

What were the climate conditions in the 16th century that caused an agricultural crisis?

Daileader & Whalen Chapter 2

I found Phillipe Aries to be a very interesting historian.  He was a Catholic and conservative in yet, he was part of the new social school of thought that was very progressive.  For instance, he spent a great part of his life documenting the relationship between children and parents and the population growth and decline in Europe.  His research led him to be a public political figure in France.  However, when Aries criticized Charles de Gaulle's decision to grant Algeria oversees territory status he fell out of favor with the public and the government.  He continued to study family dynamics and population growth trends.

How was Aries a revolutionary in his own right?

Was Aries right about Europe's declining population growth?

Burke Chapter 2

The Annales Movement had two leaders, Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch.  Both studied at the Ecole Normale Superieure.  Febvre was a scholar of 16th century history and Bloch was a scholar of medieval history, but both applied a similar social approach to their disciplines.  In 1929, they published a journal called "Annales d'histoire economique et sociale" which promoted dialogue and sharing ideas amongst historians.  Under the leadership of Febvre the Annales school became an institution.  Perhaps, one of the biggest achievements of Febvre and the Annales school was when he was called upon to help reform the French higher-education system in the 1940's.

Were there other schools in Europe and abroad that had a similar purpose?

Who else was involved in the reformation of the French Higher-Education system?

Burke Chapter 1

Burke discusses the shift in focus in writing history after the enlightenment and into the late 19th century.  There was a shift from a political and military narrative characterized by biographies of kings and great military leaders to a social history.  However, this was not unique to France, this was happening in Britain, Germany, and in the United States.  By the year 1900, historians of the Annales School had become quite critical of the established political and military focused brand of history.  This does not mean that there were not some historians before the 18th century who wrote social narratives, but the overwhelming majority were of the established school of thought.

When did the shift to writing social narratives begin?

Did the French Revolution expedite this school of thought?

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie and Mona Ozouf

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie argues that the period from the beginning of the fourteenth century until about 1720 was one where the demographics underwent a re-balancing. In his opinion the driving force of social change is not kings, generals, cardinals or scientists, but forests, pastures, fields, and most importantly the peasants and their relation to the land. Ladurie creates a history that is based more in demography and economics than on genealogy and politics. He links demographic and economic changes that were happening during the 16th century to new forms of religious and social consciousness. Ladurie argues that the agricultural changes which were being implemented by the peasantry of the time had more to do with the revolutionary ideas than any ruling or religious figure did. These changes in economic makeup of the peasants opened the doors for revolutionary ideas to take root.

Could we use Ladurie's technique of evaluating economic data to rewrite the history of the 20th century? Would it reveal a different history?


Mona Ozouf has a profound interest for education. She focuses on cultural anthropology and language. What is interesting about her is that she challenged the normal interpretation of the French revolution which focused on social and economic ideas. She instead focused on the social sphere that was created by French identity, education and land distribution.

To what extent does education affect a specific period of History?

Mona Ozouf

Born in 1931 in Brittany, Mona Ozouf decided to take a different route when researching the French Revolution. Instead of the usual socialist views, Ozouf looked at the French Revolution in cultural and philosophical terms. In taking this approach, Ozouf came to the conclusion that the French Revolution was held more of a cultural background than it did the common thought social and class conflicts.

As students, how do we know which perspective of a particular event is the right?

Philippe Aries

Philippe Aries showed a profound interest in History, particularly in cultural History. He is counted among the most original French historians of the twentieth century. His main interest was focused on the study of a broader history of the culture of family life, where he paid close attention to the parent/ child relationship. He wrote L'Enfant et la vie familiale sous l'Ancien Regime in 1960 where he explained that the family was a dynamic institution that had changed throughout time and had become a smaller and more intimate unit in a private sphere that was apart from public life. I found Aries' argument that the idea of childhood is a recent invention fascinating. He explains that in the Middle Ages children were shown no particular attention in family life and that gradually, over the centuries of the early modern era the personal development of the child came to be nurtured which then turned the child into the center of the family's attention. To think that a child was not always a family's center of attention is quite strange. Aries was interested and fascinated by the changing realities of the present age and eager to put them into historical perspective.

How can/ does History change over time? What can influence these changes?

All Chapters for this week

Chapter 1 and 2:

History was very by the book leading up to the Enlightenment. Like others have said, most historians looked at miltary (wars) and political (kings and leaders) history as the only kind of history. It wasn't until the englightment when historians began to consider and record social history and cultural history. Its amazing to me that historians could be recording certain eras or events and not consider this. How do you write about a war or a king and not write about how the people of the country feel about it? 

The Annales school would change this and the change was led my Lucien Febrve and Marc Bloch. And to me, it seems as though Burke liked Febrve much more than he did Bloch. Although he did talk about Bloch a fair amount in this chapter, he went on and on about Febrve. Now I could be totally wrong because it is possible that Burke had little to say about Bloch because he was shot and killed at a younger age, but who knows. Also, Burke pounds the idea of the friendship between the two into the readers heads. I think that the annales school really came about because these two were such good friends with these brilliant minds so natually they wanted to leave their mark on history and how we look at it.

If Bloch had lived longer how would the Annales school have been changed? Could it still be around today?

Aries:

Aries is the man who is responsible for considering Children in the study of history, another great "stride" in history that just boggles my mind. Why were children left out of history before this? Its so ridiculous that the men who were writing history upuntil recent centuries just desiregarded so many aspects of history. Studying children can give historians and the world such a great perspective on different events. Its always great to see how a child feels about something like a war or mayube an election because they are so young and innocent that they can give us this fresh perspective. Also, if you ask a child about something you know that you are getting their 100% honest and truthful answer. They're not going to hold anything back and this is great for historians.

How have the study of children affected how we view history?

Ladurie:

To me, it seems like Ladurie was using Cliometrics. He would find quantitative data that he could use to put in some type of formula or algorithim and use it to find long patterns and similarities throughout history. Cliometics is a very interesting tool to use when it comes to history because it gives the historian something that he can use as proof for his connections or his findings. For example if a certain drop in economic progress lead to a civil war in more than one situation the historian could say that are connected and back it up. Now its not 100% true all of the time but it is strongly correlated for sure.

What kind of data could you use if you were using Cliometrics.

Ozouf:

Ozouf took what the Annales school was doing and added it to what she was doing when looking at the french revolution. She took the new idea of looking at history from a cultural and social view point as opposed to the old vanilla type of politics and miltary and used it when she looked at the revolution. This is a great way to look at a social uprising because, although it is usually caused by politics, it has its roots in a social problem. 

What events in history are better to look at from a social view point than a politcal one?

Mona Ozouf

Ozouf was a very very interesting person in the way she looked at the French revolution. It seems as the further I look into the people that we read about the more and more I become interested in not only History but the way these people look at history. Ozouf looked at the revolutions reasoning as to find the perfect world. I don't agreein utopias as  Ryan's post also stated but to my understanding is you revolt to attempt to gain a better life then the ones in control have laid out for you, so to my understand maybe Ozouf was trying to state that these people wanted their own Utopias. Very creative way of putting it.

Are there any historians who are specifically known for going against what society thinks really happened ?

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie was a historian that followed the Annales. He is most known for his idea on the "total history."Ladurie would look at every aspect of every data that he could possibly get his hands on. What he did with this data was the most important part of why he was a great historian. This man would take into consideration the weather when speaking about why peasants lived the way that they did, my guess was to explain the rate of crop growth in that year, but either way this is the first time I'm hearing of someone using weather to explain why something happened in history in a detailed form besides the potato famine.

What are some new ways technology can allow us to compile data as Ladurie did?

Philippe Aries

Aries was a french historian whom favored the way the Annales school looked at history one could say that he was motivated by them. He was most famous for looking at how the adolescent child lived its life and why parents wanted to have children in general. He shared many ideas as psychologist Erickson. What I found to be so interesting with Aries was his passion in the everyday life of a family and how the dynamics work within them.

How have the dynamics of the family changed from when Aries has studied them?

Burke 1&2

In chapter one of Burkes book he speaks about how history was typically written. He goes into depth about how history is typically written in a various types of genres such as, monastic chronicle, the political memoir, the antiquarian treatise, and so on. He then began to speak about how the romans integrated a socio-cultural form into a history narrative. This is a basic overview of how other wrote history which I found quite interesting how he breaks down different aspects from different ways of writing history. For example, he notes that the economic historian were the most organized, and in the 1900's france's history was up for a debate.

Chapter two speaks of the Annales School and its beginning. Burke then begins to explain Febvre and Bloch's background and how they came to work together to form this new way of looking at history. The two of these men then began to focus on focal points in history such as the royal touch, or the renaissance and reformation period. After focusing on things like this the two men realized that people were not looking at history from every point of view that could be looked at.

What are some things that we may not know if the Annales form of looking at history was not made?

Burke Chapter 2

In Chapter 2, Burke goes into the backgrounds of the leaders of the Annales movement' Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch.  Bloch specialized in the Middle Ages and Febvre was interested in historical geography.  Burke explains that both men thought about history in a problem-oriented way.  I don't quite understand this idea so I hope to discuss this in class.  Anyway, both men eventually taught at the University of Strasbourg in 1920-1933 which were critical times for the Annales.  The two men were surrounded by a "lively interdisplinary group".

In 1928 Febvre and Bloch became joint editors of a French journal entitled "Annales d'histoire economique et sociale".  The editors "pleaded for a new interdisciplinary approach to history".  For example, Bloch used non-literary sources, such as estate maps when researching for his book French Rural History and proposed approaching history through a "regressive" or backward method since we know more about later periods.  I wonder if the Annales journal is still in existence today.

Mona Ozouf

Mona Ozouf main works are about the French Revolution. Although the French Revolution was written about for decades before her, Ozouf looked at the Revolution from a cultural, anthropological, and philosophical approach. She took the Annale school ideas and incorporated them into the French Revolution. Taking that approach, she attempted to understand the Revolution in a new, cultural and sociological way. What struck me was she stated that the Revolution was an attempt at utopia. I have my doubts about that, but it is an interesting idea. My question about this chapter do we also put Ozouf in feminist history as well as the Annale school?

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie importance in the Annale school can be best described as influential. He believed that for a period of time from the 14th century until 1720, history "stood still" and was at an equilibrium. He focused his studies not on the kings and queens but the peasants and the fields they worked in. His main interest was peasants and history based on how peasants interacted with the environment. His major work Paysans is one of the most important pieces of historical writings in history. Paysans dealt with the peasantry in southern France. Later in career, he wrote about weather and a historical history of weather in France. My question is peasants have always been a part of history, was Ladurie the first to give them their due or was he influenced by someone else besides the Annale school?

Philippe Aries

Philippe Aries was an historian who incorporated many of the Annale school ideas and used them as his own. Part of his research was based on the History of Mentalities, which dealt with everyday life. He also studied families within a broader narrative. Some of works included works on birth control in the 17th century. As he got older, he met the famous psychologist Erickson and continued his studies about families but also death and social rituals. What I found interesting was the study of birth control in the 17th century. My question about Aries is where do put Aries in the Annale school? The first stage from the Twenties until the forties or so on?    

Burke Chapters 1&2

In chapter one of Peter Burke's book about the Annale school, he points out the different directions historical research took throughout the centuries. Burke shows that before the Annale school, most historians wrote in a narrative format and mostly about politics and wars. But in the centuries that followed many historians tried to find new ways to look at history and different techniques. These techniques would greatly influenced the Annale school.

In chapter two, Burke explain the origins of the Annale school and their founders: Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch. Both Febvre and Bloch were educated at the same school, but Febvre was eight years older than Bloch was. They ended up teaching at Strasbourg University and the two became close. What I found interesting reading the chapter was both Febvre and Bloch enjoyed other academic disciplines and I think that influence their work like the Royal Touch. What made the Annale school so revolutionary was incorporating sociology, psychology, geography, and economics to study history. Also to tie different regions together like France and England were quite revolutionary. my questions for these two chapters are they mention some precursors of the Annale school but was there a definitive group or person that influence them? Also how much influence did Freud and Einstein's theories had on the Annale school?    

Burke Chapter 1

In the introdction to The French Historical Revolution, Peter Burke explains that his goal is to allow the reader to see the Annales movement as a whole.

Chapter 1 describes the approaches to history before the Annales school.  Basically, history was told through major political and military events.  Then, Leopole Von Ranke introduced a paradigm shift in the 1800s, however, his followers were more narrow-minded and his non-political view of history was excluded.

Critics of historians, in particular Francois Simiand, attacked the "idols of the tribe of historians" to be the political idol, individual idol and chronological idol.  These idols must be toppled, he said.

In 1900, Henri Berr founded a journal called the Revue de Synthese Historique which encouraged historians to collaborate with other disciplines.  Two admireres of this journal were Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch.

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie

Ladurie's approach to history was to view it in the long term rather than a series of political events.  He focused on long-term continuities.  His approach was also unique because he focused not on kings and policitcal figures but on peasants.  His doctoral theses Les Paysans de Languedoc is a total history of the peasants of a region in southern France.

Ladurie measured history by generations and centuries, not by decades.  He also used quantitative data such as tithes, although critics say that data could be imprecise.  In addittion to peasant life, Ladurie wrote about the History of Climate through analyzing tree rings he developed a chronology of climate change.  Again, he emphasized gradual changes and long-term continuities.  This project conntected historians with scientists.

I wonder if his approach to examining the past over such broad sections of time is still relevant in reviewing modern history.  It seems that in modern history every decade has been unique.