The growing appeal of the long-run perspective among economists and the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the Conrad and Meyer article (1958), which marked the official beginning of the Cliometric Revolution, have attracted a lot of interest on economic history. This paper explores the long-term development of economic history by analysing all the 6516 articles published in the top five international journals (Economic History Review, Journal of Economic History, Explorations in Economic History, European Review of Economic History and Cliometrica). Our main results are that the Cliometric Revolution took quite a long time to fully display its effects. We show that the conventional wisdom on the current state of the discipline seems a bit too optimistic. Economic history does not seem to be neither more comparative nor more focussed on peripheral countries. The historical periods studied do not change considerably, and the relevance of different topics did not change univocally. Most articles use some econometrics but only a minority feature advanced techniques. Economic history is indeed becoming more democratic, but its boundaries remain limited to the most advanced countries. Articles by authors from Continental Europe increased substantially, while that of North American declined. This change may be the harbinger of a new divergence between the two shores of the Atlantic, possibly related to the rise of a new paradigm, but it is too early to tell.

中文翻译：

---

经济历史的长期演变：来自前五名领域期刊的证据（1927年至2017年）

经济学家对长远眼光的呼声日益高涨，康拉德和迈尔（Conrad and Meyer）文章的发表50周年（1958年）标志着气候计量革命的正式开始，这一点引起了人们对经济历史的浓厚兴趣。本文通过分析前五种国际期刊（经济史综述，经济史期刊，经济史探索，欧洲经济史综述和计量经济学）发表的6516条文章，探索经济史的长期发展。）。我们的主要结果是，“气候革命”花费了很长时间才能充分展示其影响。我们表明，关于该学科当前状态的传统观点似乎过于乐观。经济史似乎既不是比较性的，也不是侧重于周边国家的。研究的历史时期变化不大，不同主题的相关性也没有明显变化。大多数文章使用了一些计量经济学，但只有少数采用了先进的技术。经济史的确确实在变得更加民主，但其界限仍然局限于最先进的国家。欧洲大陆作者的文章大幅增加，而北美则有所下降。这种变化可能预示着大西洋两岸之间新的分歧，