在法国,一如欧洲大部分国家,甚至其它大洲的国家(例如魁北克,日本,中国等),似乎我们又重新回到了曾经就国别史功能展开激烈争论的年代那些主张历史学研究方法应该为非排他性国别史研究方法的历史学家曾经在数十年中认为他们在公共空间推动了观念和思想的发展,并成功地使历史教学的某些层面向较之于继承于19世纪和20世纪上半叶的史学研究方法而言不那么传统的研究方法进行开放。此后,对时代的政治精神的研究,对导致世界格局平衡局面产生重大变化的事件的研究,以及对人们面对传统认知方式无法加以解释的未来所产生的焦虑性关注,对传媒即时发布的将复杂问题加以简单化处理的公共人物的话语的研究等等,这一切都使得人们过去目之为“新史学”学术圈子的历史学家和今天位于学术界 In France, as in most European countries and even in other continents (such as Quebec, Japan, China, etc.), it seems that we are back to the era where there was a heated debate over the function of the history of the nation that advocates a historical approach to research that should For decades, historians of non-exclusive country history research methods have argued that they have contributed to the development of ideas and ideas in public spaces and have succeeded in bringing certain aspects of history teaching to life in the nineteenth and 20th centuries In the first half of the century, historically research methods were less open to the traditional research methods. Since then, the study of the political spirit of the times, the study of events that led to major changes in the balance of the world pattern, and anxiety over the future that people face beyond the traditional ways of cognitive cognition, The study of the discourse of public figures that simplify complicated issues, and so on, all make historians of past “the new historiography” academic circles and today’s academicians in academia