메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국프랑스사학회 프랑스사 연구 프랑스사 연구 제16호
발행연도
2007.2
수록면
225 - 253 (29page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
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.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 세계-경제와 세계경제
Ⅲ. 은(銀)의 파괴력
Ⅳ. 콩종튀르의 신비
Ⅴ. 맺음말
〈참고문헌〉
〈Resume〉
〈Summary〉

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-926-016520487