ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the clash between arguments that advocate in favour or against the Eurocentric and modern paternity of capital(ism), contrasting Weber’s theory that capitalism is deeply rooted in Protestantism. It therefore embraces a Western and modern genealogy, and Braudel’s perspective that capital is an ahistorical notion, whereas capitalism is a modern tailored ideology, mainly – but not exclusively – determined by Europe’s lifestyle and economic life from the 15th to the 18th centuries. The current analysis explores Bourdieu’s perspective on valuing different forms of cultural capital as they emerge from two of his projects, The Museum Philip II, devoted to the Mediterranean World, and the Museum of Civilisation and Capitalism. These examples illustrate the understanding of how Braudel’s theory on history – composed by short, medium and long-time processes, conceived as structure, conjuncture and événement – offers new insights on the evolution of cultural capital. In fact, cultural capital is the result of a longue durée process. It has an internal logic, subjected both to the histoire probleme and to the histoire total. Braudel will reject a Marxist interpretation of capital as a modern construct and will take the side of a more holistic approach, largely explained along the final part of this chapter.
