브로델과 마르크스주의

고원 한국세계문화사학회 2020 세계 역사와 문화 연구 Vol.0 No.56

In the 1960s, French Marxist Louis Althusser relied on structuralism to redefine Marxism as a rigorous and strict science. Louis Althusser’s attempt gave Marxism a new boost, and achieved international success. But the situation did not last long, because Louis Althusser’s Marxism based on structuralism has ruled out the possibility of a change in reality. In the end, Louis Althusser, with self-criticism, ceases to redefine Marxism as a rigorous and strict science. And at the end of the 1970s, he insist on the “crisis” and the “transformation” of Marxism. It was Fernand Braudel’s history that provided new possibilities for the transformation of Marxism. After the publication of Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme, XVe et XVIIIe siècles in 1979, Fernand Braudel began to attract attention of Marxists. The theory and the concepts of Fernand Braudel were accepted by Marxists and used as a means to seek the transformation of Marxism. This article examines the encounter between Fernand Braudel and Marxism. Our interest is the relation between Marxism and Fernand Braudel's historical ideas and the impact of Fernand Braudel on the historical flow of Marxism. 1960년대 프랑스의 마르크스주의자 루이 알튀세르는 구조주의의 도입을 통해 마르크스주의를 엄밀한 과학으로 재정립하고자 했다. 알튀세르의 시도는 마르크스주의에 새로운 활력을 불어넣었고, 국제적인 성공을 이뤄냈다. 그러나 이러한 정세는 오래가지 못했다. 구조주의에 기반한 알튀세르의 마르크스주의는 변화를 사고할 수 없는 자기모순에 빠졌기 때문이다. 결국 알튀세르는 자기비판과 함께 마르크스주의를 엄밀한 과학으로 정립하려는 시도를 중단한다. 그리고 1970년대 막바지에 이르면 “마르크스주의의 총체적인 위기”와 “전화”의 필요성을 주장한다. 마르크스주의의 전화를 위한 새로운 가능성을 제공한 것은 페르낭 브로델의 역사학이었다. 1979년 『물질문명과 자본주의』의 출간 이후 브로델은 마르크스주의자들의 관심을 끌기 시작했다. 브로델이 역사 연구의 과정에서 제기한 문제들과 제시한 개념들은 마르크스주의자들에게 수용되었고, 마르크스주의의 전화를 모색하기 위한 수단으로 활용되었다. 이 글은 브로델과 마르크스주의의 만남에 대해 고찰해보고자 한다. 마르크스주의자들이 브로델의 역사사상과 만나게 되는 구체적인 과정과 그 결과 브로델이 마르크스주의의 역사적 흐름에 어떠한 영향을 미쳤는지를 살펴볼 것이다.

브로델의『지중해』와 ‘해역세계(Maritime World)’

현재열(Hyun, Jae-Youl) 효원사학회 2012 역사와 세계 Vol.- No.42

Fernand Braudel was a grand historian representative of the French Annales School. He treated the Mediterranean as a historical world in his The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip Ⅱ(French ed., 1949, English ed., 1972). By analysing and understanding his conception of the Mediterranean in the Mediterranean, we attempt to help construct the "maritime world" conception used in the studies which has been carried out through the view from sea. Braudel"s Mediterranean had not the only one meaning. For him, there were physical or geographical Mediterranean and historical Mediterranean. These were different from each other, though they had been naturally overlapped. In defining the Mediterranean, Braudel gave priority to its geography and environment. So, he devoted over 300 pages to them in his book. And then he explained the historical Mediterranean. In his opinion, the Mediterranean world is "a world-economy, a self-contained universe" linked by intermediary of "the geographical division of labour." Today, many historians who have studied history from sea have used the term of ‘maritime world". All of them declare that their own conceptions of "maritime world" are taken from Braudel"s Mediterranean. However, there exist more or less differentiations within them. Some historians consider primarily the geography and environment of their own objects like Braudel. But others put emphasis on the network of certain ocean areas, even though they also bear the geographical and environmental elements in mind. The problem is not which of two points are right or wrong. All of them have their merits and faults. What we need is the coherent concept of ‘maritime world". Thus, what"s important is not the term but its content. If we wish use the ‘maritime world" conception from the persistent and coherent view-point, we must propose the main theme(ex. diaspora networks, trade networks, biological interactions, etc.) that make the certain sea areas into the maritime worlds.

중세도시와 자본주의 -페르낭 브로델의 자본주의관을 중심으로

김응종 ( Eung Jong Kim ) 충남대학교 인문과학연구소 2015 인문학연구 Vol.51 No.1

근대 이전까지만 해도 세계경제를 지배한 것은 중국이었다. 그런데 근대에 들어서 서양이 중국을 능가하고 세계경제를 지배하게 된다. 그 원동력은 무엇이었을까? 브로델은 자본주의가 바로 그 힘이었다고 본다. 그리고 그 자본주의는 서양 중세도시에서 발전해 나왔다고 말한다. 중세도시는 본질적으로 자치도시였고, 이러한 자치와 자유의 토대 위에서 자본주의가 발전할 수 있었다는 것이다. 도시의 존재는 자본주의 발전에서 매우 중요하다. 서양이나 동양이나 모두 도시에서 ‘시장경제’가 발전했다. 그러나 서양에서는 자본주의가 시장경제의 발전을 주도한 반면, 동양에서는 국가가 시장경제의 발전을 저해했다. 자본주의와 국가는 시장경제에서 자본주의로의 발전을 좌우한 중요한 힘이었다. 브로델의 이러한 자본주의관이 그만의 독특한 관점은 아니다. 그의 중세도시관은 막스 베버 이후 서양의 학자들이 공유하고 있는 것이며, 세계경제론에 나타나는 서양의 자유와 동양의 전제라는 구분 역시 오래된 것이다. 그리고 폴 케네디, 윌리엄 맥닐, 재레드 다이어몬드, 니얼 퍼거슨, 이언 모리스 같은 학자들의 관점 역시 서양학자들의 전통적인 자유주의 관점을 되풀이하고 있는 것이다. 이들의 관점을 ‘오리엔탈리즘’이라는 이름으로 무시해버리는 것은 서구 자유주의학자들의 중요한 인식틀을 간과하는 것이 된다. 최근에 중국이 미국 이후의 세계를 이끌어갈 경제대국이 될 거라는 전망이 나오고 있다. 중국이 근대 이전에 누렸던 지배적인 위치를 회복할지 모른다는 것이다. 그러나 부정적인 전망이 없는 것도 아니다. 이러한 부정적인 전망은 자유주의의 본질에 대한 논의에서 나온 것이다. 중국의 시장경제는 발전하고 있으나, 서양과 같은 ‘자유’가 없는 상태에서, 고질적인 ‘국가’의 ‘전제’가 도져 그러한 발전을 저해할지 모른다는 것이다. 1929년 경제공황을 맞이하여 유럽의 자본주의 역시 국가주의적인 선택을 한 바 있다. 그러나 그 경우에도 유럽의 국가들은 기본적으로 자유주의 국가였다는 점에서 중국과는 차이가 있다. 중국이 ‘새로운 서양’으로 세계경제를 주도할지, 아니면 중국식의 제3의 체제로 세계경제를 주도할지, 아니면 전통적인 “세계제국”으로 회귀하여 자본주의적 “세계경제”를 대체할지 주목된다. This article aims to reconsider Fernand Braudel``s book, Civilisation materielle, Economie et Capitalisme XVe-XVIIIe siecle in the context of why Europe has ruled over the world since the modern era. For Braudel, its basic force was the capitalism. The point is that the european capitalism was not created by the precious materials imported from the new world, but grew from the european medieval cities. That is why ``city`` plays a very important role in the braudelian thesis. European cities was in essence free and autonomous, which made possible the growth of the capitalism. This argument gains justification by comparison withchinese cities, where the powerful state blocked the continuous growth of the ``market economy``. In China, the state occupied the same place that the capitalism occupied in Europe, but functioned negatively. Braudelian concept of capitalism is not his monopole. His concept of medieval cities is shared by the european historians since Max Weber. The dichotomy of european liberty and oriental despotism is not new as well. Many influential scholars of recent years such as Paul Kennedy, William Mcneill, Jared Diamond, Niall Furguson, and Ian Morris that we examined here repeated the traditional liberalism, which can be considered supporting the braudelian thesis. Rejecting this liberal explanation in the name of ``orientalism`` is abandoning the opportunity to understand the important mode of explanation. The recent economic explosion of China enables to forsee the emergence of the superpower China which will lead world economy. It is possible that China regains the dominating position that it had before the modern era. But there are also negative perspectives, which derive from that liberal point of view. It is certain that the dominating power of the state instead of the capitalism has made possible recent economic growth of China. But we are not sure if the state can continue to lead the economy or bloch it as it did in the past. This is the reason why we are interested in the new concept such as the chinese state capitalism.

브로델과 역사철학 : 진화 대 진보

KOH, Won 문화사학회 2009 역사와 문화 Vol.17 No.-

브로델과 초두리

고원(Won KOH) 한국프랑스사학회 2010 프랑스사연구 Vol.- No.23

역사를 미분하기: 브로델과 미시사

고원 ( Won Koh ) 한국서양사학회 2005 서양사론 Vol.0 No.85

브로델의 역사 3층 구조로 본 한일 관계의 다층적 분석

곽인신 동서대학교 일본연구센터 2025 차세대 인문사회연구 Vol.23 No.-

This study, commemorating the 60th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan in 2025, undertakes a multi-level analysis of Korea–Japan relations based on Fernand Braudel’s tripartite division of historical time—structure, conjuncture, and event—as an attempt to approach the subject from a new perspective. In contrast to previous scholarship, which has predominantly concentrated on short-term diplomatic incidents, regime-specific fluctuations, or contested historical consciousness, this article integrates long-term determinants(Longue Durée: geographical proximity, colonial legacies), medium-term determinants (Conjoncture: patterns of cooperation and conflict during and after the Cold War), and short-term determinants(Événement: summit diplomacy, the Dokdo/Takeshima dispute, the “comfort women” controversy, and the “No Japan” movement). Significantly, the 1965 Treaty on Basic Relations and the 1998 Kim Dae-jung –Obuchi Joint Declaration are reinterpreted not as discrete events but as critical conjunctural turning points and indicative markers of structural transformation. Likewise, issues of historical memory are conceptualized as recurrently reproduced conflicts embedded within a “structure of remembrance.” This analytical strategy departs from a mere chronological enumeration of events by foregrounding the multilayered temporality of history and the constraining as well as enabling role of structural conditions. Furthermore, this study is significant in that it avoids a narrow focus on short-term issues and, through a multi-level analysis of structure, conjuncture, and event, provides an academic foundation for the future reconstruction of Korea–Japan relations.

세계체제분석의 탄생

차태서(Cha tae-suh) 경상대학교 사회과학연구원(마르크스주의 연구) 2008 마르크스주의 연구 Vol.5 No.2

서구 중심주의 역사학에 대한 비판과 반비판* -페르낭 브로델을 중심으로-

김응종 한국프랑스사학회 2007 프랑스사연구 Vol.- No.16

The purpose of this article is to examine the criticism that A. G. Frank made of the Eurocentric historiography in his book Reorient. According to this sociologist, China has been the center of the World Economy since the bronze age until around the end of 18th century. During this long period, Europe has been a poor and isolated province. With the discovery of the New Continent and the massive influx of the silver, Europe could participate in the world market. It is undeniable that the american silver strengthened the european economy, and so reduced the Chinese hegemony. So far, the arguments of A. G. Frank have nothing special. But, we cannot follow him when he explains the decline of Chine in 19th century in terms of her proper “conjoncture”, considering it not to be the result of the european force but that of the cyclic up-and-down of the chinese economy. The unscientific concept of ‘conjoncture’ justifies his prejudice that China lost the world market because of herself, and, in consequence, that she will recuperate her lost hegemony. We criticized his opinion with the help of Fernand Braudel. This eminent historian is one of the best witnesses in our favor, because he himself is considered by A. G. Frank to be eurocentric, but from our viewpoint, is not. Europe began to mount a ladder of the world market by the 13th century when she formed, for the historien, a world-economy, a self sufficient and autonomous economic space, which permitted Europe to develop without major interruptions. With the american silver and the industrialization, Europe became dynamic and competitive. She did not take the vacant space left by China. It is that she took the world hegemony by her own long effort. In fact, the argument of Fernand Braudel is no other than the usual explication that has been criticized as eurocentric. Here, for our part, we examined with critical mind the anti-eurocentrisms such as A. G. Frank’s, which seemed to us to be too systematic and nationalistic. We are sure that the eurocentrism should be criticized and overcome. But what is more important for the historian is that it is to be realized not on the ideological plane but on the historical, that is ‘factual’ plane.

제주 공동체문화와 4·3항쟁의 발발 조건

홍기돈 ( Gi Don Hong ) 제주대학교 탐라문화연구원 2015 탐라문화 Vol.0 No.49

This article focuses on exploring Jeju characteristic culture of community`s building process with a three tiered structure argued by Fernand Braudel and analyzes the 4·3 resistance`s conditions of outbreak. Jeju is unsuitable for farming to the point of island of the three disaster(三災). Jeju people seem to realize these conditions as shown by 『Songdang-bonpuri』 in which combination between hunting culture and farming culture was so fragment that marine trade excelled. Relics and historical records prove that Jeju traded with the Han(漢) of China, the Samhan(三韓) of the Korean peninsula, and Japan. The chief items of export changed from abalone to horse, cause it makes profits, after Yuan(元) had installed the horse ranch in 1276. However, in the period from Taejong to Sejong of Chosun, seeking a nation-state, Chosun had control over Jeju`s horse industry. In addition, Chosun hold trading appendages of slaughtered horses in check. As a result, horse industry collapsed; Jeju people became drifting people(流民) or pirates(水賊) wandering the sea near the Korean peninsula. In 1629, Chosun issued the ban that Jeju people was forbidden from leaving the land. Jeju people had to struggle to maintain their existence with Jeju cutting off from land for two hundred years. That is why Jeju characteristic community spirit based on the sharing of village unit built; this spirit settled down to Sunurum system. Also, village community had religious belief; Jeju people had consciousness on separation from Chosun while they revolted against central authority which suppressed faith, predicated upon ideology of Confucianism. In modern times, reinforcement of village community requires attention and the followings motivate it; landowner`s capital did not enter into Jeju. It could make maintaining agricultural community. Ranches and fisheries of beaches, originally a state demesne, converted into public land of village. Facing liberation, Jeju people drove for the decentralization system grounded on the village community. But, a series of policy that American military government issued was against what Jeju people wanted and the group dispatched from land had confrontation. Nine regiment stationed in Jeju understood the meaning of 4·3 as fight between Jeju land and they so avoided intervening that they could be replaced. It is a very symbolic event in that it shows the aspect of conflict at that time. There are obvious evident for that many novels dealing with 4·3 resistance embody and focus on Jeju characteristic community spirit.