Although maybe not the most fashionable area of study today, French science has a secure place in the classical canon of the history of science. Like the Scientific Revolution and Italian science at the beginning of the seventeenth century, French science, particularly eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century French science, remains a safe, albeit conservative, bet in terms of history-of-science teaching and research. The classic trope of the passage of the flame of European science from Italy to Britain and France in the seventeenth and then eighteenth centuries is well established in overviews of the field. Specializing in research in this area is not, therefore, unreasonable as a career choice if you are aiming for a history-of-science position in Europe or even in the US. The Académie (royale) des sciences, with its state-sponsored model of collective research, provides a striking counterpoint to the amateur, more individualistic functioning of London's Royal Society - a foretaste of modernity in the institutionalization of science. Clearly naive, such a representation of French science serves as a good initial framework on which to hang half a century of critical historical research. If proof of the continued interest for eighteenth-century French science is needed, we can cite the Web-based project around Diderot and d'Alembert's Encyclopédie currently in progress under the auspices of the French Academy of Sciences. The large number of publications in the history of French science (in English as well as French) make it unreasonable to pick out one or two for special attention here. But what about history of science in France and the academic community that practises this discipline today? Here, I offer a very personal view and analysis of this community, trying to underline contrasts with the history of science in the UK and the US.

中文翻译：

---

法国科学史

尽管可能不是当今最流行的研究领域，但法国科学在科学史的经典经典中占有一席之地。与 17 世纪初的科学革命和意大利科学一样，法国科学，尤其是 18 世纪和 19 世纪初的法国科学，在科学史教学和研究方面仍然是一个安全的、尽管保守的赌注。17 世纪和 18 世纪欧洲科学的火焰从意大利传到英国和法国的经典比喻在该领域的概述中得到了很好的确立。因此，如果您的目标是在欧洲甚至美国获得科学史职位，那么专注于该领域的研究并不是不合理的职业选择。Académie (royale) des Sciences, 凭借其国家资助的集体研究模式，与伦敦皇家学会的业余、更个人主义的运作形成了鲜明的对比——这是科学制度化中现代性的预兆。显然，这种对法国科学的表述是一个很好的初始框架，可以将半个世纪的批判性历史研究置于其上。如果需要证明对 18 世纪法国科学的持续兴趣，我们可以引用围绕狄德罗和达朗贝尔的百科全书的基于网络的项目，目前在法国科学院的赞助下正在进行中。法国科学史上的大量出版物（英文和法文）使得在这里挑选一两个特别关注是不合理的。但是，法国科学史和今天实践这门学科的学术界又如何呢？在这里，我对这个社区提供非常个人的观点和分析，试图强调与英国和美国科学史的对比。