Since about the mid-70s, the words " La Nouvelle histoire "began to appear more and more frequently on the pages of French publications, and today there is little doubt among historians that a"new historical science" has already been formed in France. By analogy with the American "New Economik History" or, say, with "modern linguistics", the founder of which was F. P. Blavatsky. de Saussure, it is called new in the sense that, although it is based on the principles and methods of historical analysis developed over the centuries, it nevertheless differs in many ways from the "traditional" historical science.

The present of the "new historical science" is portrayed by its adherents mainly in rainbow colors. Publications devoted to it that have appeared in recent years in the West refer to this direction as the most significant phenomenon in world historiography over the past 50 years, which radically changed "the entire landscape of the humanities". The "new historical science" is being credited with "bringing about a revolution in historical thought", creating a paradigm or "disciplinary matrix" that is generally suitable for all modern historical science .1 According to the conviction of Zh. Le Goffa, for example, claims that only she can provide the necessary information and answers to "a person who is lost in the modern world", because "she perceives a person as a whole, with all the centuries-old weight weighing on him, highlights him through the prism of changes and constants, offers him a balance between material and spiritual elements, economic and mental, offers him a balance between the elements of but it does not force him to make a choice. " 2 Representatives of this direction believe that it will have to perform a very important and growing role: "Transform the collective memory of people and force the whole set of sciences and knowledge to move to a different time duration corresponding to a different concept of human society and its evolution" 3 .

A close acquaintance with the "new historical science", an awareness of its place and role in modern French society leads to the development of a new historical science.-

1 Hexter J. H. Fernan Braudel and the "monde brodellien". -Journal of Modern History, 1972, N 4; Andrews R. The Mediterranean. - New York Times Book Review, May 1975, N 18; Stoianovich T. French Historical Method. Lnd. 1976; En teen G. History and Social Sciences: Emerging Fathers (manuscript, Institute of History of the USSR of the USSR Academy of Sciences); Cedronio M., Dias F., Russo C. Storiografia francese diieri e oli oggi. Napoli. 1977; Alegгa L.,Torr A. La nascita della storia sociale in Francia dalla Comune alle "Annales" Turin. 1977; La recherche historique en France depuis 1965. P. 1980; Coutau-Begarie H. Le phenomene "Nouvelle histoire". P. 1984.

2 La Nouvelle histoire. Sous la direction de J. Le Goff, R. Chatier, J. Revel. P. 1978, pp. 235 - 236.

3 La Nouvelle histoire, p. 12.

page 32

It is obvious that these formulations, for all their deliberate vagueness and apparent scientific and social amorphousness, are quite capacious, since they contain not only an indication of its social tasks and conjugation with politics, but also talk about the real possibilities of the "new historical science", its evolution and influence on the mass consciousness of the French. The current inspirers of the "new historical science" would like to transform the collective memory of people in such a way as to replace the revolutionary, progressive traditions and values deposited in the national consciousness - including Marxist ones - with a modern bourgeois historical consciousness. The task of historical science, therefore, is to erase from the cultural heritage of France the ideas of progress, revolutions, and class struggle, and to adapt the consciousness of the average Frenchman to the bourgeois understanding of the modern era.

What is the French "new historical science"? What is the essence of this concept of human society and its evolution? A full and comprehensive review of these issues is a very large topic 4 . We will focus only on some of its most significant aspects.

First ,the "new historical science" has its own history, now more than half a century old, during which it has experienced a very serious evolution .5 Its beginning is the creation of the magazine "Annals of Economic and Social History" by the French historians M. Blok and L. Fevre in the late 1920s, and its continuation is the work of the largest historian of modern France, F. de Vries. Braudel and the transformation of the "Annals" school into the dominant trend of French historiography 6 . The last 10-15 years in the history of the "new historical science" are very eventful: the directions of research, the interpretation of the evolution of human societies and civilizations have changed dramatically, there have been backward movements marked by a departure from positive achievements. In other words, the novelty of a "new historical science" is a relative concept.

Secondly, the "new historical science" is not the whole of modern French historiography, but only one of its directions. This fact is carefully masked by representatives of the "new historical science". According to P. Huber, for example, " everything worthy of being read and meaningful, with the rarest exceptions, was discussed, prepared, and prepared."-

4 Some of the subjects of this topic have already been considered (see, for example: Historiography of the new and modern history of the countries of Europe and America, Moscow 1977; Sokolova M. N. Modern French Historiography, Moscow 1979; Afanasyev Yu. N. Historicism against eclecticism, Moscow 1980; Dalin V. M. Historians of France of the XIX-XX centuries. Moscow, 1981).

5 See: Afanasyev Yu. N. Evolyutsiya teoreticheskikh osnovy shkoly "Annalov"[Evolution of the theoretical foundations of the Annals School]. Voprosy istorii, 1981, No. 9.

6 Convincing confirmations of the dominant position of the "new historical science" in modern French historiography are given in the above-mentioned book by E. P. Blavatsky. Kuto-Begari. In the West, the prestige of the magazine " Annales. Economies. Societes. Civilisations" (hereinafter referred to as "Annales"), as well as the School of Higher Studies in the Field of Social Sciences - the main basic scientific and educational institution of the Annales School, as well as the Arrnand Colin publishing house. Supporters of the" new historical science "also hold strong positions in the publishing houses Gallimar, Hachett, Flanirnarion, and manage the popular series of publications on history "Bibliotheque des histoires","Bibliotheque des sciences Humaines". Nouvell Clio, etc., are widely used by the mass media: "Le Monde" and "Le Nouvell observateur", which became its main mouthpieces, "Figaro", which was monopolized by Pierre Chaunu, television. Everything taken together-the journal, scientific and pedagogical base, publishing houses, mass media-provides, in the words of the American historian T. Gekster, "something like a consensus according to which the French" new historical science "is the number 1 science" (see: Coutau-Begarie H. Op. cit., pp. 9, 247 - 282).

page 33

heated and written... 7. E. Le Roy Ladury states that thanks to the Annals, the French "lived between 1930 and 1965... they have given the world, without quite doing justice to this fact, the best historians" 8 . Thus, not only "isolated stars", lone historians, but also independent historiographical schools and trends remain outside the "new historical science". First of all, it is a very authoritative, richly traditional Marxist historical school, represented by such prominent scientists as P. Villard, J. Bruhat, A. Sobul, K. Mazorik, K. Villard, M. Vauvel and others. French Marxist historians have written serious works on the history of revolutions, socio-economic history, the history of the labor movement, and many other subjects of modern and contemporary times. Among other historiographic schools and trends that adherents of the "new historical science" stubbornly ignore, we can name a very representative trend of erudite historians who unite around the "Charter School" and, as a rule, deal with traditional subjects from the field of political history. It also has its own authorities, for example, S. Samaran, J. Favier, M. Francois, etc. In recent years, two more groups of historians have become increasingly visible as independent schools: one, which specializes mainly in the history of international relations and consists of students and followers of P. P. Blavatsky. Renouvain, and the second, led by R. Mounier, which includes historians who study social structures and popular movements in modern times. This shows that the" new historical science " in France is just one of the historiographic trends, although it is the most influential, dominant, most representative and prestigious.

Third, the" new historical science " as a single entity can only be described with a considerable degree of convention. There is no generally accepted concept of historical development, which is somehow defined and shared by all its adherents of methodology. Under a common name, various and even directly opposite historiographical realities are united: the highest achievements of the "Annals" that contributed to the growth of historical knowledge and the development of methods of historical analysis , 9 progressive social traditions of many countries.

7 Goubert P. Clio parmi les hommes. P. 1973, p. 7.

8 Le Roy Ladurie E. Les mousquetaires de la nouvelle histoire. - Le Nouvel observateur, 1979, N 781, p. 58.

9 There are five main areas in which a significant increase in historical knowledge was carried out: economic history, social history, historical demography, the history of material culture, and, finally, the history of mentalites, i.e., the spiritual sphere of human society. There are hundreds of noteworthy publications listed here. We will refer only to those that give rise to each of these trends, and to those that are considered the best creations of the Annals school: Bloch M. Les Rois thaumaturges. P. 1924; ejusd. Les caracteres originaux de l'histoire rurale francaise. P. 1931; ejusd. La societe feodale. Tt. I-II, P. 1939 - 1940; Labrousse E. Esquisse des prix et des revenus en France au XVIII e siecle. Vol. 2. P. 1933; ejusd. La crise de l'economie francaise a la fin de l'Ancien Regime et au debut de la Revolution. P. 1944; Febvr L. Le probleme de l'incroyance au XVI-e siecle. La religion de Rabelais. P. 1942: Braudel F. La Mediterranee et le Monde mediterraneen, a l'epoque de Philippe II. P. 1949; ejusd. Civilisation materielle, economie et capitalisme, XV-XVIII e siecles. Tt. I-III. P. 1978; Dub у G. La societe aux XI e et XII e siecles dans la region maconnaise, P. 1953; ejusd. Guerriers et paysans. P. 1973; Chaunu P. Seville et l'Atlantique (1504 - 1650). 12 vol. P. 1955 - 1960; ejusd. La Civilisation de l'Europe classique, P. 1965; Goubert P. Beauvais et le Beauvaisis de 1600 я 1730. Contribution a l'histoire sociale de la France au. XVII e siecle. P. 1960; Aries P. L'Enfant et la vie familiale sous la France d'Ancien Regimee. P. 1960; L e Roy Ladurie E. Les paysans du Languedoc. P. 1966; ejusd. Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 a 1324. P. 1975; Foucault M. Les mots et les choses. P. 1966; Mandrou R. AYagistrats et sorciers en France au XVII e siecle. P. 1968; Le Goft J. Pour un autre Moyen Age. P. 1978.

page 34

historians belonging to this direction, and quite clearly manifested a departure from these traditions, revealed in the retrograde speeches and politicking of some of the current representatives of the Annals.

The French "new historical science" - and this should be emphasized-is a part of bourgeois historical science, it reflects the level of modern bourgeois historical consciousness and performs well-defined social functions in capitalist society. Its most important feature is that to a certain extent it unites many humanities and social sciences in France and, acting in such a specific role as an "integrator" of social studies, opposes Marxism. This confrontation did not necessarily take the form of a direct confrontation with Marxism, as has been happening recently. In past years, there were also curtsies in his direction and borrowings from him. Nevertheless, Marxism and the" new historical science " have always opposed and are opposed to each other as two fundamentally different ways of knowing and perceiving reality, as two worldviews.

If we look at the" field "that the" new historical science "cultivates, at the historiographical "territory" that it develops, and at the subject of its research, we will not see clear outlines here; on the contrary, the boundaries are very blurred. This science touches and interacts with the most diverse trends of historical thought and various scientific disciplines-economics, geography, historical anthropology, psychology, etc. And the "field "cultivated by the" new historical science " itself is very diverse and heterogeneous. It should be added that the influence of structuralism, which is still strong, though withering, is very noticeable, there are also adherents of positivism and those who doubt that history is a science at all, and the concepts of structuralist M. Foucault and psychoanalyst Z. Schulz are also visible. The author reads some provisions of Marxism and neo-Malthusianism. Because of its diversity, this school requires a specific, differentiated approach.

Nevertheless, there is also something that forms a kind of framework of this direction, cements it, determines the difference from other historical schools and directions. There are several such features. You can get a general idea of them from two works: "Faire de l'histoire" 10 (in Russian, this name translates as to recreate history, give a historical dimension, saturate with historicism everything that surrounded and surrounds a person) and the already mentioned encyclopedic dictionary-reference book "La Nouvell histoire".

The first volume of "Faire de l'histoire" is devoted to epistemological problems of historical knowledge. Here we are talking about an increasingly deep awareness of its relativity, conditioned by specific circumstances. It also deals with the theorization and conceptualization of modern historical science and notes that although the "new historical science" rejects the philosophy of history even more strongly than anyone else and does not focus on either Vico, Hegel, or Croce ," nevertheless, it is no longer content with positivist illusions and turns to theory." This, however, is believed by J. According to Le Goff and P. Nora, it is not without its problems, because "it can turn the story into something opposite to "itself" 11 . No less important problems, according to the compilers of the collection, arise in connection with the recently growing interdisciplinary ties. Here the problem is formulated as follows: "How can a story,

10 Faire de l'histoire. Sous la direction de J. Le Goff et P. Nora. Vol. 1 - 3. P. 1974.

11 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. XI.

page 35

borrowing them (i.e. other humanities and social sciences. - Yu A.) techniques and methods, enriching themselves at their expense, attracting them to their side, do not lose their specificity, remain a historical science " 12 .

The second volume of "Faire de l'histoire", which is entitled "New Approaches", deals with such sections of historical science as economic history, historical demography, the history of religion, science, etc., which are regarded by the "new historical science" not as separate, autonomous sections of historical reality, but as complex systems, including elements of culture, psychology, and politics. But, in addition to the "new approaches", the direction under consideration also confirms itself by studying objects that previously remained out of the field of view of historians. The third volume of this work describes some of these new objects, which sometimes seem strange and even paradoxical to the reader, either because of their "timeless" nature (climate, the human body, myths, holidays), or because they relate to other modern sciences (not to history) - psychoanalysis, linguistics, cinematography social sciences (probing public opinion), and finally because of their "triviality" (for example, the history of French cuisine).

In "La Nouvelle histoire", the "new historical science" appears even more diverse. Here are the titles of some of the main articles: "History and" Long time duration", "History of structures", "Historical Anthropology", "History of Material Culture", "History of marginal circles", "History of the imaginary". Such terms as "acculturation" (the process of mutual influence of cultures, perception of one nation in whole or in part of the culture of another nation), nutrition, economic (historical, physical, political) anthropology, communications, conjuncture, crisis, economic growth give some idea of the conceptual equipment of the "new historical science"., cycle, econometrics, event, environment, space, ethnohistory, model, myth, death, prehistory, prices, quantification, serial history, sexuality, sociology.

After this most general information about the French "new historical science", we can try to identify more specific and at the same time the most important features of it, in which many of the characteristics already mentioned are manifested. The main components of its paradigm can be considered: the concept of "global history", the category of long time duration - longue duree-and the concept of "historical fact". At the same time, it should be borne in mind that each of these concepts, or categories, is not an independent theoretical construct isolated from the rest, but rather represents a certain side of a single view of history and ways of its research.

For a long time, starting from the 1920s and approximately until the end of the 60s, the "new historical science "developed and acquired its specific features primarily on the basis of the concept of"global history". In the origins of this concept, which require special research, one can also find the influence of Marxism and French historiographical traditions (M. F. Voltaire - F. Guizot - J. Michelet-A. Burr). At the same time, the impact of modern natural science is also felt, in particular, quantum physics, biology, ecology, and the theory of relativity. The idea of holism (philosophy of wholeness), consistency, ideas about the relations of synchrony and diachrony, about a single space-time reality, different types of determination, the laws of probability and statistical laws, functions of time and time.-

12 Ibid.

page 36

the role of discontinuity, nonlinear systems-all these and many other concepts came to historical science in the course of understanding both the historical reality itself, social practice, and the most important discoveries in the field of natural science, physics, and mathematics.

At the beginning of the 20th century, French historiography gave preference to political history, and historians were characterized by a fragmented approach to the subject of their research. It cannot, of course, be said that the realities of economic, social, and spiritual life were ignored altogether. However, these problems were dealt with in special chapters dedicated to them, and it was tacitly assumed that although all these realities are part of history, they are not history itself. Partitions were erected between different areas of history, and this was not done for the sake of a more in-depth analysis of the whole, or because of the specialization then available among historians. This was an epistemological principle, since French historians at that time did not yet consider society as a whole as a subject of historical science.

The concept of "global history" received theoretical justification and concrete historical saturation in the 30s and subsequent years in the works of Blok, Fevre, Lefebvre, Braudel and other historians of the Annals school. How does this concept appear to French historians themselves? First of all, we note that its adherents do not at all demand that "everything about everything" be said, although the words "global" and "total" seem to suggest exactly such an interpretation. To see "globally", it is not necessary to cover the entire ecumene with your eyes. A "global" view is also possible on a particular object or problem, but on the condition that it does not distort the life of the whole society, does not violate the unity and coherence of history, and the person himself is not divided into homo religiosus, homo oeconomicus, homo politicus, etc. The epithet "total" suggests that historical science covers all aspects of human and social life, including those that seem to have no or almost no history-wedding rituals, inn menus, field outlines, etc. those historical realities that are difficult to change over time and act in history as a kind of inert filler, ballast, and often even a brake on historical movement. We are talking about mental, demographic structures, and technological techniques.

"Global history" implies, further, the presence of several levels in historical reality, i.e. its depth, stratification, and gradation. This story means overcoming not only fragmentation, but also a flat view of history. This is not a photo, but a three-dimensional image. In the work of F. Braudel's "Material Civilization, Economy, and capitalism" has a chapter called "Society, or the ensemble of ensembles", which states that "global society" - the "big ensemble" - is divided into several systems, among which the most studied are four: economic, social, political, and cultural. Each of them, in turn, is divided into subsystems and so on - ad infinitum. "According to this scheme," writes F. Braudel, "global history (or, better to say, a history that tends to globality, tends to totality, but can never become so) is the study first of at least these four systems, in themselves, then in their interrelationships, in their interdependence, in their scaliness." 13 "Global History" is, finally, also dynamics

13 Braudel F. Civilisation materielle. T. II, p. 409.

page 37

There are vertically located and interconnected levels of historical reality, which is carried out not in the form of their unidirectional and equidistant evolution, but represents uneven, time-shifted movements, since each historical reality has its own time rhythm.

Thus, "global history" represented a definite step forward in comparison with the French historiography of the early XX century, which was characterized by the restriction of the object of historical research, as a rule, to the political sphere, fragmentation, a simplified view of the nature of historical connections, reduced to elementary causality, etc. The concept of "global history" influenced the very nature of the thinking of a significant part of historians, the general orientation of their scientific approach, and contributed to a significant expansion of the object of historical science.

If we consider this concept in the general current of bourgeois historical and sociological thought, it will be seen that it is not particularly original: much of it comes from Voltaire and E. Durkheim, from F. Schulz. Guizot and A. Tocqueville, from Vidal de Lablache and M. Moss, etc.

The influence of Marxism on the formation of the concept of "global history" can be seen in several directions. First of all, the subject of primary attention of the "new historical science" is the history of the masses of the people. However, in its essence, this story is directly opposite to the Marxist one in the main and main 14 . But the very fact of reorientation from the history of" heroes "and isolated events to the history of the masses and" long processes " is significant. It was the increased interest in the masses of the people that drew attention to the material conditions of their existence, to the study of socio-economic history. And, perhaps most importantly , it was under the influence of Marxism that French historians came to realize the importance of the theory of history, to the need to develop theoretical approaches to concrete historical research. One of these approaches they saw in the concept of "global history".

But in terms of theoretical integrity, equipment, and consistency, this concept does not stand up to comparison with the Marxist-Leninist methodology. The "New Historical Science" could not find a convincing solution to the problem of holistic coverage of society. The general view of history among representatives of this trend is devoid of monism: in history, in their opinion, there are many forces, "factors" that can "overflow" into each other, and each can become decisive. Although the emphasis is placed on material conditions and economics, the history of material life itself is understood empirically, simplistically, in terms of its direct "material" expression. The most important link in economic and social history is the relationship of people in the production process. Especially vulnerable in the concept of "global history" is the underestimation of the mode of production as the basis of society, preference is given to the structural and functional approach to the detriment of the historical genetic one. The concept of "global history" is a well-defined methodologically and value-oriented approach to history. It is both a choice and a constraint: economics at the expense of politics, structure at the expense of events, problem at the expense of chronology, and so on.In what follows, we will see how this methodological orientation manifests itself ideologically.

14. Afanasyev Yu. N. Metodologicheskie problemy sovremennoi frantsuzskoi bourgeoisnoy istoriografii sotsial'nykh dvizhenii (do XVIII V.) [Methodological problems of modern French bourgeois historiography of social movements (up to the 18th century)].

page 38

The idea of "global history" reached its apogee in the 60s. The monographic research carried out on its basis [15 ] received the widest recognition, and supporters of this idea began to embody the "Annals"school. However, the triumph of "global history" was short-lived. At first, some adherents of this school itself began to debunk this category as cognitive, and since about the end of the 60s, there have been changes in the orientation of historical research - preference is given to local problems. During almost the entire post-war period, "global history" was developed and approved first of all in the Section of Economic and Social Sciences (Section VI) of the Practical School of Higher Studies, where historical research was led for a long time by the inspirer of the concept under consideration, F. A. Kropotkin. Braudel. In 1975, Section VI was transformed into the School of Higher Studies in Social Sciences. The rank of this educational and research institution has increased, and it has been granted the right to accept dissertations for defense. Currently, this school is headed by F. Fuhrer is one of the most active critics of global history. This concept seems to be finally going out of fashion now, the Annals magazine is no longer as active as it used to be, it causes doubts among many prominent representatives of the" new historical science", increasingly giving way to a multitude of stories for which globality is no longer the initial principle, but only a distant horizon.

It is too early to speak about the consequences of the methodological retooling that is taking place in modern French bourgeois historiography. This process is happening right before our eyes. It has not yet become comprehensive. In the spirit of "global history", for example, one of the last works of F. P. Tolstoy was created. Braudel - " Material civilization, economy and capitalism. XV-XVIII centuries". Charles Morazet, J. Duby, J. Le Goff and a number of other historians also hold similar positions. But some of the symptoms of change are already visible quite clearly. For some researchers, "global history" is just a myth, a kind of a priori rationalistic construction, and not the result of positive historical knowledge. "Historians of my generation," writes A. Besancon, " got rid of the mirage of historical totality... They had to realize that if this totality took place, it was only in their imagination. The realization of this truth made it possible to get rid of the illusion of total history. " 16 Approximately the same opinion is shared by F. Fuhrer, for whom the integral structure of a "global society" is just a postulate that is not supported by the current state of historical sciences 17 .

Why did the concept of "global history" cease to meet the requirements of the "new historical science", and French historiography again faces the problem of fragmentation? Although Zh. Le Goff, M. Foucault, J. Revel, and M. de Serteau [18] approach the very fact of splitting and dismemberment of "global history" from different angles.-

15 The first of these studies were the above-mentioned works of M. Blok. A classic example of "global history" is considered to be the book by F. Braudel: Braudel F. La Mediterranee et Ie Monde mediterraneen a l'epoque de Philippe II. On the basis of the concept of "global history", the main works of all the most prominent representatives of the "new historical science" were created: J. Duby, S. Morase, P. Huber, P. Chaunu, E. Le Roy Ladury, J. Le Goff.

16 Besanson A. Histoire et experience de moi. P. 1971, p. 71.

17 See: F. Fuhrer. On some of the problems posed by the development of quantitative history. In sat.. Filosofiya i metodologiya istorii [Philosophy and Methodology of History], Moscow, 1977, p. 259.

18 Lee Goff J. Presentation. - La Nouvelle historic; Foucault M. L'archeologie du savoir. P. 1969; Revel J. Histoire et sciences sociales. Les paradigrnes des Annales. - Annales, 1979, N 6; Certeau M. de. L'operation historique. - Faire de l'histoire. Vol. 1.

page 39

These observations can be summarized in the following general thesis. Over the last 20 years or so, the concept of the subject of "new historical science", the practice of obtaining historical knowledge, has radically changed, in other words, the "territory" of the historian (i.e., the object of research) has been transformed, and at the same time a new theory of historical knowledge has appeared.

Speaking about the subject of historical science, J. "Le Goff and M. Foucault pointed out, in particular, that the very concept of" global history "is" clogged up " with ideas that, from their point of view, do not correspond to the data of science about the nature, limits of coherence and continuity of history, and that all the variety of historical dynamics is reduced to rigid causal relations.- investigative relations. According to M. Foucault, these traditional ideas, which paralyze the historian's consciousness, turned out to be very tenacious due to the very slow and difficult realization that man does not belong to the central place in the universe. The milestones of this process were, according to Foucault, the theories of N. Copernicus, C. Darwin, and K. Marx. In the twentieth century, this process continued to develop under the influence of research in the field of psychoanalysis, linguistics, and ethnology. This has influenced historical disciplines: the concept of "discontinuity"has taken an extremely important place in them. According to M. Foucault, the transfer of this concept from an obstacle to historical research to the category of its most important tools is one of the most basic features of the "new historical science". Discontinuity has become not only a tool, but also an object of historical science. If earlier the historian tried to get rid of it, striving for continuity, coherence of events, now the idea of discontinuity accompanies him both at the stage of forming hypotheses, and in the process of research, and when forming the results of the latter. The modern historian, Foucault continues, reveals the gaps between different levels, the limits of certain phenomena, shifts," scissors " that occur between individual layers, discovers individual residual forms, time shifts, specific chronological features, etc.

A history dominated by discontinuity, dominated by myths, kinship systems, laws of language, and closed structures, such a history is more rebellious and disturbing than one where cause and effect clearly alternate. In contact with it, a modern person feels even more insecure and uncomfortable. History ceases to be a place of comfort for him, a reliable shelter from painful questions. But such a history, according to M. Foucault, is more real, it ceases to be the last repository of anthropological thought and at the same time becomes a real antipode of "global history", with the help of ideological use of which "they tried, as M. Foucault writes, to return to man everything that had eluded him for more than a century" 19 . This is how the ideas about the subject of historical science have changed: man has ceased to be its central figure and link in the course of history. This was indeed a break with what M. Blok, L. Fevre, and others were striving for.

Splitting the subject of "global history" contributes to a significantly changed practice of obtaining historical knowledge. "Modern analysis," writes Certeau, "is regaining faith in the abstraction characteristic of the classical era, but in our time this abstraction is a formal set of relations, or 'structure'. " 20 In recent years, the "new historical science" has developed a certain type, a kind of standard of scientific research, the main links in the chain of which are: the design of fashion models.-

19 Foucautt M. Op. cit., p. 24.

20 Certeau M. de. Op. cit., p. 23.

page 40

comparing it with logically constructed series of information data; identifying deviations and disagreements in relation to the previously developed model in this way. This is also a complete break with what was at the time of the founders of "global history", but on a different line - in the direction, essence and procedure of scientific research. It is no longer reality that is explored through sources, but an object constructed in advance by the historian himself. And research begins "not with' rarities '(sources, 'remnants' of the past) in order to achieve synthesis (i.e., a modern understanding), but with formalization (constructing a modern system) in order to identify ' remnants '(indicating the limits of the model, expressing the past, which looks like the result of scientific work) " 21 .

"The strengthening of the moments of formalization in historical research, which the adherents of the "new historical science" have been writing and talking about lately, is not an unambiguous phenomenon. Although there is some improvement in the methodology (formulation of hypotheses, selection of material, justification of analysis methods, differentiation of systems and subsystems, determination of relations between them, formulation of the results obtained and remaining unsolved problems), nevertheless, this process is accompanied, especially in recent years, by form-building, relapses of subjective idealism and agnosticism. Under the banner of the renewal of historical science, under the guise of various modernizations, direct protests against historical materialism have intensified, which both in form and substance resemble the surge of idealism that accompanied the revolution in natural science at the beginning of the XX century. According to P. Wein, history is "an intellectual activity that..... serves the purposes of pure curiosity. " 22 According to Certeau, the modern theory of knowledge, which yesterday was oriented in relation to the "object", to reality, is now retreating to language, to speech. This "digression most significantly affected history" 23 . The belief that the result of historical research can be an adequate reproduction of reality is, according to Certeau, an illusion. The "historical operation" consists in transforming some texts - documents - into other texts-historical works-through a series of "regulated transformations". As for adequacy in relation to reality, in relation to history, this is, in the words of the structuralist linguist R. Barth, just a "reality effect" 24 . Thus, bourgeois historiography again, as at the beginning of the century, finds itself in the circle of ideas of G. Rickert, W. Dilthey, B. Russell.

Consequently, "global history" as a subject of historical science either disappears altogether, turns into an illusion in the course of an idealistically mystified "historical operation", or is so reduced in size that even the epithet "global" turns out to be completely inapplicable to it. According to Certeau, the dependence of the outcome of scientific research on the nature of the developed model, its dimensions and the number of components is another reason for splitting the "global history". The procedure of scientific research, the limits of what is possible in carrying out an analysis that meets the modern requirements of the "new historical science", as if by themselves push not to "global", but to private, local, limited systems. "It is worth noting a strange phenomenon of modern historiography," Serteau writes in this connection, " the historian has stopped creating

21 Ibid, pp. 26 - 27.

22 Veyne P. Comment on ecrit l'histoire P. 1971, p. 103.

23 Certeau M. de. Une epistemologie de transition: Paul Veyne. - Annales, 1972 N 6, p. 24.

24 Ibid.

page 41

empires. It no longer knocks on the door of the paradise of global history, it descends from there and circles around the already existing reasonably grounded constructions. " 25
The revision of the concept of "global history", which is fundamental in all the theoretical equipment of the" new historical science", caused a kind of chain reaction: other most important components of the paradigm of this science also began to be revised and significantly modified. As a result, over the past 10 to 15 years, Novaya istoricheskaya nauka has become so" new "that in it, as well as in its main tribune, the Annaly magazine, F. P. himself has already ceased to recognize his brainchild. Braudel. "When I have them (that is, the Annals. - Yu. A.) left in 1970, they no longer corresponded, - he writes, - neither to the plan of Blok, nor Fevre, nor to my own. I just stopped doing them personally, because they became strangers to me." 26
Among the most striking features of the "new historical science", the second place after" global history " should be given to the category of social time and, above all, its characteristic such as longue duree - long time duration.

The founders of the Annals school, M. Blok and L. Fevre, sought to turn history into a social science. This was the core of their program: history should, in their opinion, go beyond the teaching of what once was, overcome the stage of idiographic (individualizing) thinking and become on a par with the nomothetic (generalizing) sciences. An indispensable condition for the implementation of this program was for them to resolutely reject history-the narration of individual events, from "historicizing", eventful history (as they pejoratively called the positivist historiography that preceded them). There is no science without theory, history is not a narrative, it is the formulation and solution of a certain problem. Hence the concept of "global history" as the first step towards turning history into a science. But the global approach is not a monopoly of historical science. It is characteristic, in particular, of sociology. Therefore, the main condition for self-affirmation as an equal, or rather, even as a leader in the totality of social sciences, the founders of the "Annals" and especially their successor F. Braudel was seen in the concept of time duration.

In 1958, an article was published by Fr. Braudel's " History and Social Sciences. A long time duration " 27, which has become very well known. This article contains both a summary and a theoretical generalization of concrete historical research of both the founders of the Annals and the author himself, as well as a kind of program that largely determined the content originality of the historiographic direction under consideration. The problem of time duration is treated in the article as follows. Since about the 1930s, the concept of historical time has radically changed in French historiography. Previously, it was perceived simply and unambiguously as a uniformly flowing calendar time, as a pre-given scale or axis, on which the historian should only string facts-events of the past. The idea of time as a meaningless duration has been replaced by the idea of a social, content-defined time, or rather, of a plurality of times that are diverse

25 Certeau M. de. Une epistemologie, p. 27.

26 Les 80 ans du "pape" des historiens. Entretien avec Fernand Braudel. - L'Histoire, 1982, N 48, pp. 75 - 76.

27 Braudel F. Histoire et sciences sociales. La longue duree. - Annales, 1958, N 6. For an abridged translation of this article, see: Philosophy and Methodology of History, Moscow, 1977.

page 42

time rhythms inherent in various kinds of historical realities, about discontinuity in the course of social time.

This more complicated and at the same time more consistent with objective reality concept of time was embodied in different ways in the works of French historians.28 Works of F. himself. Braudel's ideas are imbued with the idea of a dialectic of three different time durations, each of which corresponds to a certain deep level, a certain type of historical reality. In its lowest layers, as in the depths of the sea, constants, stable structures prevail, the main elements of which are man, earth, and space. Time passes so slowly here that it seems almost motionless; the processes that take place are changes in the relationship between society and nature, habits of thinking and acting, etc. - measured in centuries, and sometimes even millennia. This is a long time duration. Other realities from the field of economic and social reality, like the tides of the sea, are cyclical in nature and require different time scales for their expression. This is already a" recitative " of the socio-economic situation, time rhythms of an average duration of 10, 20, 50 years, within which the price curve, demographic progression, evolution of bank interest, moments of growth or decline in production are viewed. Finally, the most superficial layer of history: here events alternate like waves on the sea. They are measured in short chronological units: political, diplomatic, and similar "event-related" history.

F. Braudel understood that such schematization is a simplification of historical reality, in which, in his opinion, it is possible to distinguish dozens, hundreds of different levels and time rhythms corresponding to them. In addition, even within each given level of historical reality, several time durations can co-exist, intertwine, overlap one another, like tiles on a roof, since they are nothing more than forms of movement in various spheres of sociality. Time matching, a meaningful explanation of the true time rhythms, is, according to F. A. Kropotkin. Braudel, the most reliable means of penetrating into the depths of historical reality.

F. himself Braudel quite clearly defined the sphere of his personal interests - this "almost motionless history of people in their close relationship with the land on which they walk and which feeds them; the history of the incessant dialogue between man and nature... as persistent as if it were out of reach of the damage and blows inflicted by time. " F. Braudel categorically asserts that history as a whole can only be understood in comparison with this vast expanse of almost motionless reality. 29
Together with F. Almost the entire French "nouveau historique" was plunged by Braudel into the realm of "immobile"history30 , which can only be seen through the prism of the longue duree. Almost all the research carried out in the 60s and 70s is devoted to identifying long-term processes and phenomena. Consequences of this transfer-

28 The study of the ideas of French historians L. Fevre, M. Blok, E. Labrousse, F. Braudel and P. Villard about time is devoted to the work of J. Mairet published in 1974 (see Mairet G. Le discours et l'histoirique. Essai sur la representation historienne du temps. P. 1974).

29 Braudel F. Ecrits sur l'histoire. P. 1969, p. 30, 54.

30 "Immobile history" - this is what E. Le Roy Ladurie called his inaugural lecture delivered at the College de France in 1974, which sounded both as a result and as a landmark of the "new historical science" (Le Roy Ladurie E. "Histoire immobile". Lecon inaugurale au College de France. - Le territoire de l'historien. T. II. P. 1978).

page 43

F. Braudel and his colleagues, concerned with the transformation of history into a science that is not inferior to other disciplines in terms of the level of evidence and the degree of armament with modern means of scientific analysis, apparently, were most impressed by the sphere of historical reality, where there was no room for chance, for sudden zigzags, where, even at the cost of enormous difficulties, but still, you can find strong connections, stable structures. In the long run, patterns and long-term trends in population, production, family relations, and attitudes are better viewed. For example, to answer the question of what was the growth of agricultural production in France in the first two-thirds of the sixteenth century, whether it was the beginning of a long-term, centuries-old trend leading in the long run to the take-off of the entire economy, or just a simple revival after the prolonged crisis period of 1350-1450, we need corresponding identical indicators, types of economic evolution: short-term crises, longer economic downturns, decades-long cycles, and centuries-long intercycles.

F. Braudel believed that only after comparing various indicators of these types, taken in the long term, it is possible to give a complete interpretation of the problem under study. The same can be said about the vast sphere of collective mindsets, worldviews, and worldviews that F. R. Tolkien has developed. Braudel called them "long-term prisons". Various systems of culture, life values, behavioral patterns, people's attitudes to life and death, natural science worldviews (for example, the Aristotelian one) - all these and many other realities were not formed immediately. They gradually developed into complex mental structures and existed in this form for a very long time. And to comprehend them scientifically, the adherents of longue duree believed, it is possible only in the corresponding time scales.

The longue duree category can be characterized, on the one hand, as a certain positive acquisition of the "new historical science". But, on the other hand, this category, as an integral part of the concept of social time and its various durations, does not always contribute to solving the cardinal problems of the theory of historical knowledge and, even more importantly, carries a significant and well-defined ideological charge. Adherents of the concept of different durations of social time are justified in asking the question formulated by Karl Marx in his time to address the teachings of Proudhon: "How could the logical formula of movement, sequence, and time alone explain to us a social organism in which all relations exist simultaneously and are based on one another?" 31 .

In the "new historical science" this question, in contrast to Marxism, remains not only unresolved, but not even formulated scientifically. This also applies to those works that are considered the highest achievements of this science. They talk a lot about the discontinuity and continuity of time, about different time durations, about their cyclicity, about their "overlaps", "co-existence", "interweaving", "pulsations" , etc. Thanks to such a variety of time shades, the reproduced historical reality becomes richer, more concrete, details appear to the reader more figuratively, bright. But at the same time, there is no main thing-the answer to the question, how

31 K. Marx and F. Engels Soch. Vol. 4, p. 134.

page 44

all these times are consistent, which is a common denominator for them.

The 3rd volume of Braudel's work "Material Civilization, Economics and Capitalism" is called "Time of Peace". There are many interesting characteristics of the time parameters of world history and individual regions in the period between the XIII and XIX centuries. The "time of peace" in this case appears not only as a long extension. It does not cover all realities and the entire ecumene. By definition of F. Braudel, this time is not the sum total of human history. This exclusive time controls only certain spaces and certain realities. But other realities and other spaces do not lend themselves to it and remain foreign .32 In the work of F. Braudel's" time of peace " was very specific. The vast body of evidence shows that even "superstructures" are not entirely controlled by this time. From the work of F. Those areas, those zones on the world map that are not affected by the time of the "triumphal history", exist in "ignorance", outside the time that "the whole world"lives in. Thus, it is obvious that Braudel's "time of the world" is in fact nothing more than the integral time of the dominant formation in a given period.

French Marxist historians have repeatedly pointed out the methodological weaknesses of the concept of different durations of social time. P. Villard, for example, noted that sometimes in the course of precocious judgments, they try to turn history into a derivative of time, and not vice versa-to look at time, that is, at its differentiation as a derivative of history .33 Villard refers in this connection to L. Althusser, who once reproached historians for "being content with stating that there are times of long, medium, and short duration, and deducing from this the conclusion about interference as a product of the meeting of these durations, instead of seeing them as a product of what causes them, - production method " 34 .

Guided by Marx's theory of the mode of production, P. Villard saw, in particular, in the works of E. Labrousse something more than Labrousse himself said in them, who devoted many works to identifying the coexistence of different time rhythms at the same economic level of social reality. Thus, the French Revolution at the end of the XVIII century appears in his works as the result of a" meeting", the intersection of three different time durations: a large one - the economic upswing throughout the XVIII century, a medium one - the depression of 1774-1788, and a short one - the seasonal crisis of the summer of 1789. something more: their coexistence reflected the transitional character of French society itself-from feudalism to capitalism - and their intersection reflected the highest intensity of the crisis-the beginning of the revolution. Structural, conjunctural, and seasonal rhythms of E. Labrousse are actually, as shown by P. Wilard, there is a materialistic, concrete-historical expression of space-time reality, a visual way of revealing the fact of the coexistence of feudal and capitalist socio-economic forms with the help of the category of social time 35 . But E. Labrousse himself did not see this because of his negative attitude to the category "method of production".

32 BraudeI F. Civilisation materielle, Т. Ill, p. 8.

33 См. Vilar P. Histoire marxiste, histoire en construction. In: Faire de l'histoire Vol. 1, pp. 189 - 194.

34 Ibid., p. 190.

35 Ibid.

page 45

As for the ideological content of the category of long time duration, it can be expressed as follows: Many of the contradictions that actually exist in history (for example, events and structures, evolution and revolution, changes and constants, etc.) are solved by the" new historical science", unlike Marxism, not dialectically, not concretely-historically-namely due to its dependence on the principles and norms of modern bourgeois ideology. "All historiography, "writes one of the most zealous adherents of the new historical science, P. Nora," has acquired its modern appearance precisely by getting rid of the event, denying its significance, and dissolving it." 36 There are also real consequences of this modernization. The master event for traditional historiography has become a foam event on the crest of a wave in the non - event "new historical science" - it can no longer be noticed at all, it only distracts attention from the longue duree perspective of superstructures, immobilities, large amplitudes, repetitions and patterns, cycles and intercycles. The event can be discarded like foam, and at the same time everything that does not correspond to the stereotypes of modern bourgeois consciousness can be thrown out of history.

At a colloquium held in Göttingen in 1974, some participants raised the question: was there really such an event as the French Revolution of the late eighteenth century? The inspirers of the modern "new historical science" F. Furet and D. Richet and their followers, for example, J. Chaussinant-Nogaret, hastened to declare that the French Revolution is a myth, an ideological relic. The modernization of French society, according to their reinterpretation of history, i.e. its non-event reading, was carried out even before 1789 by an enlightened and homogeneous elite consisting of nobles and the bourgeoisie. The revolution itself was a political and ideological conflict, but not a social upheaval. In socio-economic terms, this event is more of a national catastrophe than a starting point for a new stage in the country's history. Soviet historians38 and Marxist historians in France39 have convincingly shown that such iconoclasm in relation not only to the Marxist, but even to the progressive bourgeois-democratic interpretation of the French Revolution of the eighteenth century became possible as a result of complex methodological and socio-political mutations of the "new historical science".

The ideological focus of the longue duree category is not limited to outright anti-revolution. Based on this concept, the "new historical science", as the contemporary French Marxist historian M. Vovel rightly noted, tends generally to immobility, "calls into question the very concept of change, sudden changes in history." 40 The preference given to the study of the functioning of systems rather than their changes, the increased attention to constants, balances, and structures-all this has recently led to the fact that the concept of human history is being eradicated from the world.-

36 Nora P. Le retour de l'evenement. - Faire de l'histoire. Vol. 1, p. 227.

37 См. Furet F., Richet D. La Revolution. Vol. 1 - 2. P. 1965 - 1966; Furet F. Le catechisme revolutionnaire. - Annales, 1971, N 2; ejusd. Penser la Revolution francaise. P. 1978; Chaussinand-Nogaret G.La noblesse au XVIII e siecle: de la Feodalite aux Lumieres. P. 1976.

38 See, for example, Manfred A. Z. Some trends in foreign historiography. - Kommunist, 1977, N 10, And before A.V. Bourgeois revision of the history of the French Revolution of the XVIII century. In: Social Movements and the Struggle of Ideas.

39 Sobul A. Classical historiography of the French Revolution. In: French yearbook, 1976. M. 1978; Mazoric C. Sur la Revolution francaise. P. 1970.

40 Vovell M. L'histoire et la tongue duree. - La Nouvelle histoire, p. 332.

page 46

Even the concept of evolution is being used. Discontinuity is absolutized so much that it does not represent a moment of general evolution. Different epochs are not considered as stages of consistent, progressive development of societies and civilizations, and different time rhythms do not act as diverse and meaningfully defined varieties of unidirectional time. Let us refer in this connection to F. Fuhr. "By rejecting the whole evolutionist perspective that gives meaning (both meaning and direction) to time, historical science, "he writes," tends to be a very different approach... develop as an extensive laboratory for research on human behavior in society " 41 .

For the new historical science, the past is not a succession of epochs, but "a register of similar, identical, or different experiments that do not resemble one another." 42 On one side, writes F. What remains is " history - a period, a chronological narrative, a reconstruction of the past, an empiricism of facts as opposed to preconceived ideas. On the other hand, history is a problem, an analytical study of a single question over periods that are obviously heterogeneous, an interpretation of the past through the prism of a certain theory or idea." History, according to F. Fure has ceased to be a continuous continuity in genealogical thinking, according to which "before" explains "after", it determines the object of research regardless of the accepted idea of the passage of time and only then determines, "moving by touch, what time duration is suitable for describing and analyzing these objects" 43.

The reorientation of ideas about historical time in this regard is one of the most important components of the very "different concept of human society", according to which representatives of the" new historical science "intend to" transform the collective memory of people" and according to which such realities as the beginning and continuation are actually excluded from history, stages, determinism, regularity, development, progress. Starting with the intention to assert itself with the help of the longue duree concept as the first (in terms of scientific content, evidence) among all social sciences, the "new historical science" eventually came to a significant strengthening (to the direct detriment of scientific content) of its bourgeois ideological orientation.

This shift from scientism to ideologization and politicization is no less clearly seen in the example of the concept of "historical fact". In the general chain of methodological transformations of the "new historical science", a historical fact is interpreted not as an isolated, unique event, but as a phenomenon selected by the historian himself, the main property of which is belonging to a series of identical events, which, in fact, determines its value 44 . Hence the "serial history" 45, which is characterized as follows:

"As a serial history, we can define an approach that involves recreating a statistical series of homogeneous data that repeats over a long time period and is comparable at certain, regular intervals. Names'-

41 Construire avenir: livre blanc sur la recherche presente a Monsieur Ie President de la Republique. P. 1980, p. 169.

42 Ibid., p. 17.

43 Furet F. L'Atelier de l'histoire. P. 1982, pp. 26 - 27, 12.

44 См. Furet F. De l'histoire-recit a l'histoire-probleme. Diogene. 1975, N 89. pp. 116 - 118.

45 In justifying the concept of "serial history", the primacy belongs to P. Chaunu, who still remains one of its most active proponents (see Chaunu P. L'histoire serielle. Bilan et perspective. - Revue Historique, 1970, avril-juin, pp. 297 - 320; ejusd. Le quantitatif en histoire. - Faire de l'histoire. Vol. 1, pp. 42 - 61; ejusd. Histoire quantitative, histoire serielle. P. 1978).

page 47

but with serial history, quantitative methods have really entered historical research.. they have become the main research tool that allows us to present evolution both in its main trends and in short-term fluctuations. " 46
Historical fact as one of many identical phenomena (price, gross product, mention of God in wills, birth rate, death rate, tax, annual rings on tree trunks, the amount of meat in the day laborer's diet, harvest, etc.), deliberately selected by the historian and subject to comparison and final assessment in the long-term perspective of a large time duration in the future. a series of homogeneous data and based on computer processing - this is the credo of "serial history".

The "serial" interpretation of the concept of "historical fact" again does not lend itself to an unambiguous assessment. On the one hand, the turn to strict statistics, mathematical proof, and quantitative data contributed to the advancement of historical knowledge in a number of areas: quantitative measurement of social dynamics, a more in-depth reconstruction of the "non-eventful" everyday, "silent" life of the broadest masses of people, their living conditions, labor, and moods. The range of problems studied here turned out to be very wide, and the content was diverse. Over long chronological periods , the history of climate 47 , cultivated plants 48, wine and vineyards 49 is studied . Research in the field of the history of technology 50, urban and rural buildings 51, housing 52, clothing 53, food 54 has turned into independent scientific directions . Research in the field of the history of diseases and epidemics has become significant .55 The same applies to the study of moral and psychological conditions of life: this is the story of love 56, and the story of single mothers 57, this is the changes in the ideas of people of different eras about death 58, the history of amenorrhea and contraceptives 59, childhood story 60, madness 61, etc. This vast literature deals with a wide variety of historical conditions in the lives of most people.

46 La Nouvelle histoire, p. 508.

47 Le Roy Ladurie E. Histoire du climat depuis l'an mil. P. 1967.

48 Hemardinguer J.-J., Keul M., Randies W. G. L. Atlas des plantes vivrieres. P. 1973.

49 Dion R. Histoire de la vigne et du vin en France des engines au XIX e siecle. P. 1959.

50 Gille B. Histoire generale des techniques. P. 1962; Daumas M. L'Histoire des techiques, son objets, ses limites, ses methodes. P. 1969.

51 Kopp A. Changer la vie, changer la ville. P. 1975; Bailment, enquete d'histoire economique (XIV-XIX e siecle). P. 1971.

52 Roux S. La maison dans l'histoire. P. 1976; Kerblay B. H. L'isba d'hier et d'aujourdhui. P. 1973.

53 Deslandres Ty. Le costume, image de l'homme. P. 1976.

54 Aron J. - P. Le manger de XLX e siecle. P. 1973; Hemardinguer J. -J. Pour une histoire de l'alimention. P. 1970; Strouff L. La viande. Ravitaillement et connommation a Carpentra au XV siecle. Annales, 1969, N 6.

55 Gremek M. D. Preliminaires d'une etude historique de maladies. -Annales, 1969, N 6; Lebrun F. Les crises demographiques en France aux XVII e et XVIII е siecles. In: XV Congres international des sciences historiques. Bucarest. 1980. T. 1, Rapports.

56 Flandrin G. Contraception, mariage et relations amoureuses dans l'Occident chretien. - Annales, 1969, N 6.

57 Lottin A. Naissances illegitimes et filles-meres a Lille au XVII e siecle. - Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine 1970, avril-juin.

58 Vovelle M. Mourir autrefois; attitudes collectives devant la mort, XVII-XVIII e siecles. P. 1974; Chaunu P. La Mort a Paris (XVI e , XVII e , XVIII e siecles). P. 1977.

59 Le Roy Ladurie E. L'amenorree famine (XVII e - XX e siecles); ejusd. Demographic el "funestes secrets": le Languedoc (fin du XVII e -debut XIX e siecle). In: Le territoire de l'histoirien, P. 1973.

60 Aries P. L'enfant et la vie familiale sous la France d'Ancien Regime. P. 1960.

61 Foucautt M. Histoire de la folie a l'age classique. P. 1972.

page 48

However, on the other hand, the reconstruction of only those facts that fit into a" series " and can be quantitatively processed inevitably leads to artificial restrictions, to the fact that such important facts as, for example, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the Uprising fall out of the field of view of historical science (because of their uniqueness and uniqueness)., works of literature, absolutism, Reformation. The scientism of" serial history " was also reflected in the fact that quantitative analysis often became self-sufficient: prices, incomes, rents, and crops were calculated by themselves. Quantitative analysis was not accompanied by qualitative analysis; By recreating the history of bread, meat, and other food products, "serial history" tends to obscure the question of how the relationship between the people who produced and consumed these products developed. It is possible, for example, to reconstruct exhaustively the dynamics of wage fluctuations over a long period, but the essence of this process will remain hidden if it is considered as something self-sufficient, and not as a category of social relations. Even the mere comparison of wages and profits (so far as it is possible to do so) is not sufficient to reveal surplus-value, which expresses the relation of exploitation.

The ideological orientation of" serial history "is also evident in the fact that in many books about" anonymous", everyday history, one can quite clearly see the peculiar scientific snobbery of some authors, the arrogant condescension towards the object of their research - the masses of the people. In the giant panorama of the "history of large numbers", mass data on births and deaths, epidemics and diseases, food, household utensils, etc., the masses of the people appear in their daily "grounding" in the form of a swarming mass of swarming, eating, sick and dying people. They are not creators, not engines of progress. These are rather particles in Brownian motion, a "massive passive". As already mentioned, bourgeois scientists hand over creative and developing history to the elite .62
At present, the French "new historical science", as can be seen from the above, quite clearly shows a tendency to multiply negative phenomena: fragmentation of" global history", dehumanization, skepticism about determinism, objectivity of historical knowledge, manifestations of formalism and idealism. These trends are accompanied by an increase in anti-revolutionary and anti-communism, and an increase in anti-Marxist orientation. F. openly demonstrates his anti-Marxism. A Fuhrer who claims to "reinterpret" the history of the French Revolution. M. Ferro established himself as one of the most active anti-Sovietists and falsifiers of the history of the October Revolution. A. Besancon publishes anti-Soviet fakes one after another, praises them in the pages of the most reactionary French publications by P. Chaunu. P. Vane tries to prove that Marxism is outdated. Here, perhaps, in the most naked form, the social conditionality of historical knowledge, its organic inclusion in modern society, is manifested. In historical science, since it is a window into the world, many concepts about this world that come from natural science are refractedindividually. Physics contributes to the dissemination of ideas about nonlinear laws, the nature of space-time, relativity, and the theory of relativity.-

62 This feature of modern bourgeois historiography is also pointed out by French Marxist historians (see: Casanova A., Hincker F. Introduction. In: Aujourd'hui, l'histoire. P. 1974, p. 13; Soboul A. Description et mesure en histoire sociale. In: L'histoire sociale. Sources et methodes. P. 1967, pp. 17 - 18.

page 49

bernetics accept the concepts of circular causality, genetics significantly expand the understanding of the dialectic of the natural and social, and so on. However, the direction and intensity of all currents going to historical science are conditioned and regulated by powerful forces emanating from social practice. In the contradictions, imperfections, in the very nature of obtaining historical knowledge, the most important contradictions, conflicts of the twentieth century, which is now going back to history, are finally read.

The positive results of the French "new historical science" mentioned above became possible in due time largely because the position of its most prominent representatives in society was determined by their generally left-wing positions. They took a direct and active part in the struggle against fascism, openly supported the progressive forces of French society, and sincerely believed in the progress of humanity. Now the situation has changed. Representatives of the elite of bourgeois society began to set the tone. Maybe this is exactly what F. had in mind. Braudel, when explaining the reasons for his departure from the post of editor-in-chief of "Annals". "From the moment he was born," says f. Braudel, " it was a heretic's journal. When I received it from L. Fevre, I also inherited the hatred that it aroused for myself. In short, it was an outlaw magazine. Later, Braudel continued, "it became the most orthodox, prestigious historical journal, one of those that promote scientific careers and public well-being." 63 The situation, as we know, obliges, and the institutionalization of the" new historical science", its involvement in the social conflicts of the modern era on the side of the bourgeoisie is manifested not only politically, but also epistemologically.

63 L'Histoire, 1982, N 48, p. 75.

page 50

Permanent link to this publication: