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?
No comments:
Post a Comment