ماهية الوثيقة عند المدرستين التاريخيتين الوضعانية و الحوليات الفرنسية و أثرها في كتاباتهما التاريخية مع دراسة مقارنة بين فرناند بروديل و سلطان القاسمي

الملخص EN

Historical schools agreed on the importance of the Charter and its pivotal role in preserving the historical heritage.

However, they differed in the nature of the Charter.

While Positivism was limited to using the written Charter, another school, such as The Annals, expanded its concept and considered that every written trace, a decree, or an inscription is a Charter.

Their disagreement was reflected in the subjects chosen for writing for them; Positivism focused on political and military history, while The Annals concentrated on economic and social history.

Among the Annals' historians, Fernand Braudel is one of the principal defenders of its vision for the Charter.

On the contrary, historian Sultan Al Qasimi appeared as one of the historians committed to using the written Charter in his historical writings.

In this study, descriptive and analytical approaches were used to answer the following questions: What did change Braudel's attitude towards the Charter? How was this reflected in his writings? Why did the Al Qasimi adopt the written Charter? Can he be considered a Positivist based on the clarity of Positivism's methodological features in his writings? What is the justification for choosing Braudel and Al Qasimi to compare their use of the Charter?