From Social History to the History of Society

From Social History to the History of Society Author(s): E. J. Hobsbawm Source: Daedalus, Vol. 100, No. 1, Historical Studies Today (Winter, 1971), pp. 20-45 Published by: The MIT Press on behalf of American Academy of Arts & Sciences Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20023989 Accessed: 23/03/2009 03:18 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The MIT Press and American Academy of Arts & Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Daedalus.

http://www.jstor.org

E. J. HOBSBAWM

From Social History

to the History

of Society

essay

is an attempt to observe not to state a and analyze, or to express is this where (except personal clearly stated) the author's preferences and value I say this at the judgments. are outset in order to distinguish this essay from others which or for the kind of history defenses of practiced by their pleas

This

credo

it authors?as social history does not need either at the happens com moment?but also to avoid two misunderstandings especially mon in discussions All with discus heavily ideology. charged sions about social history are. The first is the tendency for readers to identify authors with this identification the views they write about, unless they disclaim even when so. The terms and sometimes in the clearest they do or to confuse second is the tendency the ideological political moti vations of research, or its utilization, with its scientific value. Where or error, as is often intention or bias produces triviality ideological we condemn motiva the case in the human sciences, may happily a would be and result. life However, tion, method, great deal simpler of history were advanced if our understanding by those exclusively or in on all with whom we are in agreement sympathy public in fashion. is at present and even private matters. Social history care to be seen keeping it would None of those who practice come under with those who the same all company ideological more is than to what historical Nevertheless, important heading. social history stands today define one's attitude is to discover where if and of unsystematic after two decades copious development, whither

it

might

go. I

has 20

term

social history has always been difficult to define, and to define there has been no great pressure it, for it recently interests which and professional vested lacked the institutional

The until

Social History to the History of Society until insist on precise demarcations. Broadly normally speaking, was in at least of the name?it the present vogue of the subject?or senses. First, it in three sometimes the past used overlapping or more to the history of the poor lower classes, and referred spe move movements of the the of the "social to ( poor history cifically term could be even more The ments"). specialized, referring to the essentially history of labor and socialist ideas and organiza social history and the tions. For obvious reasons this link between or socialist movements has remained of social protest strong. history to the subject A number of social historians have been attracted were in radicals or socialists and as such interested because they to sentimental relevance them.1 of great subjects the term was used to refer to works on a variety of Second, difficult to classify except in such terms as "man human activities for linguistic rea life." This was, perhaps ners, customs, everyday a since the lacks sons, usage, language English largely Anglo-Saxon for what the Germans who wrote about similar sub in a rather also and journalistic manner? jects?often superficial This kind of social history was called Kultur- or Sittengeschichte. not oriented toward the lower classes?indeed rather particularly the opposite?though the more radical practitioners politically to them. It formed the unspoken basis of tended to pay attention what may be called the residual view of social history, which was in his English Social put forward by the late G. M. Trevelyan as It out." with the left 1944) (London, History "history politics suitable

requires

terms

no

comment.

third meaning the most common of the term was certainly and for our purposes the most relevant: "social" was used in com with bination "economic outside the Anglo Indeed, history." in Saxon world, the title of the typical specialist this field journal before the Second World War I think bracketed the two ) ( always as u. in the Sozial words, fuer Vierteljahrschrift Wirtschaftsgeschi E. 6- S., or the Annales d'Histoire E. ?r chte, the Revue dHistoire must S. It be admitted that the economic half of this combination was were There preponderant. overwhelmingly hardly any social histories of equivalent the numerous caliber to set beside volumes to the economic various devoted of and countries, history periods, were in not There fact economic and social very many subjects. a few such works, 1939 otie can think of histories. Before only sometimes authors (Pirenne, Mikhail impressive admittedly by W. and the mono Rostovtzeff, J. perhaps Dopsch), Thompson, The

21

D

DALUS

or even sparser. Nevertheless, literature was graphic periodical the habitual in the of and economic social, whether bracketing or under of the general field of historical definitions specialization the more specialized banner of economic history, is significant. to It revealed the desire for an approach history systemati one. What from the classical Rankean interested cally different of this kind was the evolution historians of the economy, and this in turn interested on it them because the threw the struc of light more on ture and in the relation changes society, and especially as between classes and social Unwin ad groups, ship George This social dimension is evident even in the work of the mitted.2 or so as most narrowly economic historians cautiously long they claimed to be historians. Even J. H. Clapham that economic argued was of all varieties the most of history fundamental be history cause it was the foundation of society. The predominance of the over the social in this combination economic had, we may suggest, two reasons. to a view of economic It was partly owing theory refused to isolate the economic from social, institutional, and which as with other elements, the Marxists German and the historical over the to the sheer headstart of economics school, and partly other social sciences. If history had to be into the social integrated to come to terms sciences, economics was the one it had primarily with. One might go further and argue (with Marx) that, whatever the essential in human the economic the of social and inseparability society, the analytical base of any historical inquiry into the evolu tion of human societies must be the process of social production. a spe of the three versions of social history produced None field of social history until the 1950's, at cialized academic though one time the famous Annales and Marc Bloch of Lucien Febvre the economic half of its subtitle and proclaimed itself dropped was a war social. this of diversion the However, purely temporary now been the title by which this great journal has for a quarter of a century?Annales: ?conomies, soci?t?s, well as the nature of its contents, civilisations?as reflect the origi aims of its founders. nal and essentially global and comprehensive Neither the subject itself, nor the discussion of its problems, de in The 1950. it, still journals specializing veloped seriously before few in number, were not founded until the end of the 1950's: we years, known

and

in Society and His Studies perhaps regard the Comparative as the first. As an academic social (1958) specialization, new. is therefore quite history

may

tory

22

Social History to the History of Society and growing the rapid development What emancipa explains in the past twenty years? The question could tion of social history in terms of technical and institutional within be answered changes the deliberate of social science: the academic speciali disciplines in of the to with the fit zation of economic requirements history of the which economic and analysis, theory rapidly developing an is and the remarkable world "new economic history" example; as an academic of sociology wide subject and fashion, growth in turn called service-branches which historical for subsidiary cannot to those required economics departments. We analogous by as the who historians such factors. (such Marxists) Many neglect economic the had previously labeled because themselves prob or even in were not lems they were interested encouraged plainly ex themselves considered found history, by orthodox general economic truded from a rapidly narrowing history and accepted or welcomed if their mathe the title of "social historians," especially matics were poor. It is improbable whether in the of atmosphere like R. H. Tawney would have the 1950's and early 1960's someone a been welcomed the economic historians had he been among researcher

and

not

of the Economic History president academic and redefinitions Society. However, professional shifts hardly explain much, though they cannot be overlooked. was the Far more of the social significant general historization

young

such

sciences

took place to have been

this period,

and may retrospec within appear tively important development to it is not necessary them at this time. For my present purpose to avoid drawing attention explain this change, but it is impossible to the immense for and struggles of the revolutions significance of and economic colonial and semicolonial political emancipation which

during the most

drew the attention of governments, international countries, which and consequently and research also of social sci organizations, are to what of historic transforma entists, essentially problems or at tions. These were which had been hitherto outside, subjects in the social sciences, best on the margins of, academic orthodoxy and had increasingly been neglected by historians. At all events historical questions and concepts ( some essentially or "economic times, as in the case of "modernization" growth," even crude have the concepts) excessively captured discipline to history, when immune not actually, hitherto most like Rad social to cliffe-Brown's it. This hostile pro actively anthropology, infiltration of history is perhaps most evident in economics, gressive 23

D

DALUS an

where

initial field of growth whose economics, assumptions, more were the cookery book those of sophisticated, or a quantities through n, mix ingredients following and the result will be the take-off into self-sustained has been succeeded that realization by the growing

though much ("Take the and

cook,

growth"), factors outside economic economics also determine development. In brief, it is now to pursue many activities of the social impossible in any but a trivial manner without scientist to terms with coming social structure and its transformations: the history of without were societies. It is a curious paradox that the economists begin some of social (or at any rate not ning to grope for understanding when the economic ) factors at the very moment strictly economic the of economists' fifteen models historians, years earlier, absorbing were to make themselves look hard than rather soft by for trying about and statistics. except equations getting everything can we conclude What from this brief glance at the historical of social It can hardly be an adequate history? development guide to the nature and tasks of the subject under consideration, though it can certain more or less explain why subjects of heterogeneous research came to be under this title, and loosely grouped general in other social sciences how developments the prepared ground for the establishment of an academic theory specially demarcated as such. At most it can provide us with some hints, at least one of which is worth mentioning immediately. of social history in the past seems to show that its best with have always felt uncomfortable the term itself. practitioners to whom we owe so They have either, like the great Frenchmen as historians to describe themselves and much, preferred simply as or as or men to their aim "total" who history, "global" sought in sciences the contributions of social all relevant integrate history, rather than to any one of them. Marc Bloch, Fernand exemplify are not names which can be Lefebvre Braudel, Georges pigeon as holed as social historians insofar except they accepted Fustel de statement that "History is not the accumulation of events Coulanges' in the past. It is the science of human of all kinds which occurred A survey

societies."

Social history can never be another specialization like economic or other its matter cannot be because histories hyphenated subject can define certain human activities as economic, isolated. We at least for analytical and then purposes, study them historically. this may be (except for certain definable purposes ) artifi Though 24

Social History to the History of Society it is not In much the same way, impracticable. level of theory, the old kind of intellectual history which ideas from their human context and traced isolated written one to writer to another is possible, if one wants their filiation from or do that sort of thing. But the social societal aspects of man's ex cannot be separated from the other aspects of his being being, at or cost extreme the of trivialization. cannot, cept They tautology for more than a moment, be separated from the ways in which men even and their their environment. material get They cannot, living be separated for a moment, from their ideas, since their relations with one another are in and formulated expressed language which as soon as their mouths. And so on. they open implies concepts no to The intellectual his attention historian may (at risk) pay economic historian to the the but social economics, Shakespeare, historian who neglects either will not get far. while Conversely, it is on that a improbable extremely poetry proven?al monograph or one on inflation in the sixteenth will be economic cen history both in a could be to treated make tury intellectual way history, them social history. cial or unrealistic, at a lower though

II Let us turn from the past to the present and consider the prob lems of writing concerns the history of society. The first question can societal historians how much from other social sciences, or get indeed how far their subject is or ought to be merely the science of as it deals with the past. This question is natural, society insofar two the of the two dif decades past though experience suggests to it. It is clear that social ferent answers since has 1950 history been powerfully not and the stimulated, shaped only by profes sional structure of other social sciences their specific (for example, course requirements for university and by their methods students), and techniques, but also by their questions. It is hardly too much to say that the recent efflorescence in of studies the British indus a once trial revolution, own its subject grossly neglected by experts because the validity of the concept of industrial revo they doubted to the urge of economists in lution, is due primarily (doubtless turn that of to and how discover governments echoing planners) industrial revolutions them and what happen, what makes happen, With have. certain notable consequences sociopolitical they excep in the past tions, the flow of stimulation twenty years has been one 25

DAEDALUS in developments of convergence by workers from different disciplines toward sociohistorical problems. is a case in The study of millennial point, since among phenomena on these we find men writers coming from anthropology, subjects not to mention students of science, political history, sociology, so as am econo far I literature and religions?though aware, not, mists. We also note the transfer of men with other professional to at least work which historians would formations, temporarily, consider historical?as with Charles Tilly and Neil Smelser from Sir Eric from Everett Wolf and Hagen sociology, anthropology, from economics. John Hicks is best regarded not as con Yet the second tendency perhaps never be as conversion. must it For that if but vergence forgotten way. On the other hand, another way, we shall be

if we

struck

look

at recent

the obvious

to ask social scientists have begun properly historical it is because to ask for historians answers, questions they if they have sometimes turned them themselves have none. And it is because the practicing members selves into historians, of our Marxists the with the notable of and others? exception discipline, not necessarily Marxisants?who have accept a similar problematic, a now are few not there answers.5 the Moreover, though provided made social scientists from other disciplines have who themselves expert in our field to command respect, there are more sufficiently a few crude mechanical who have merely and concepts applied a dozen For Vend?e several models. every Tilly, there are, alas, by of Rostow's others Stages. I leave aside the numerous equivalents into the difficult source who have ventured territory of historical an are material without of the hazards adequate knowledge they or of the means encounter over to of and there, likely avoiding is one in which his coming them. In brief, the situation at present nonhistorical

and

to learn from other all their willingness torians, with disciplines, are to teach rather than to learn. The required history of society cannot be written the meager available models from by applying new ones? it the construction other sciences; of requires adequate the development of existing or, at least (Marxists would argue), sketches into models. and methods, This is not, of course, true of techniques where are to a substantial net debtors the historians extent, and already or more even at to least and will, go ought, heavily systematically into debt. I do not wish to discuss this aspect of the problem of the a or two can be made in history of society, but point passing. Given 26

Social History to the History of Society a of our sources, we can hardly advance much beyond of the suggestive the and hypothesis apt anecdotal illustration without the techniques for the discovery, the statistical and of of data, where necessary grouping, large quantities handling with the aid of division of research labor and devices, technological which other social sciences have long At the opposite developed. for the observa extreme, we stand in equal need of the techniques tion and analysis in of small individuals, groups, and depth specific have also been pioneered outside and situations, which history, which may be adaptable to our purposes?for the partici example, of the social the interview-in pant observation anthropologists, even At the very least methods. depth, perhaps psychoanalytical can stimulate these various the search for adaptations techniques in our field, which may and equivalents to answer otherwise im help questions.6 penetrable I am much more doubtful about the prospect of turning social a backward into as of turning eco of projection history sociology, nomic into economic these retrospective history theory, because us with useful models do not at present or disciplines provide the frameworks for of socio historical analytical study long-run economic Indeed transformations. the bulk of their thinking has not been concerned with, or even interested if such in, changes, we as trends such Marxism. it be Moreover, except may argued that in important respects their have been developed analytical models and most from historical systematically, profitably, by abstracting This is of sociology and true, I would change. notably suggest, social anthropology. the nature

combination

fathers of sociology have indeed been more his founding than the main minded school of neoclassic economics torically not the than school of classical ( though necessarily original political but theirs is an less developed science. economists), altogether The

to the difference between has rightly pointed the Stanley Hoffmann "models" of the economists and the "checklists" of the sociologists are more and than mere checklists. anthropologists.7 Perhaps they These sciences have also provided us with certain visions, patterns of structures can of which elements be possible composed permuted and combined in various ways, to Kekul?'s vague analogues ring at the of unverifia glimpsed top of the bus, but with the drawback bility. At their best such structural-functional patterns may be both elegant

and

heuristically

useful,

at least for some. At a more modest 27

DAEDALUS level, they may provide us with useful metaphors, concepts, or terms aids in ordering our material. ( such as "role" ), or convenient as models, it may from their deficiency Moreover, quite apart or of sociology constructions social be argued that the theoretical ( most successful by excluding history, that been have anthropology) or oriented is, directional change.8 Broadly speaking, the structural in common in societies illuminate what functional have patterns our is with their whereas what of differences, they spite problem Amazonian tribes can have not. It is not what light L?vi-Strauss's throw on modern (indeed on any) society, but on how humanity or cavemen to modern industrialism got from the postindustrialism, were in society and what changes associated with this progress, or for it to take place, or consequential upon it. Or, to use necessary it is not to observe the permanent of another illustration, necessity or to supply themselves with food by growing all human societies what this but when otherwise it, function, acquiring happens having been overwhelmingly fulfilled (since the neolithic revolution) by comes the majority of their societies, of peasants forming to be fulfilled by small groups of other kinds of agricultural producers in and may come to be fulfilled ways. How does nonagricultural I do not believe this happen and why? that and social sociology are at present however helpful anthropology, incidentally, they us with much provide guidance. current I remain of most On the other hand, while skeptical as a framework of the historical societies of economic analysis theory I am (and therefore of the claims of the new economic history), for the histor inclined to think that the possible value of economics is an essentially ian of society is great. It cannot but deal with what in the element dynamic history, namely process?and, speaking social production. and on a long time-scale, globally progress?of Insofar as it does this it has, as Marx saw, historical development built into it. To take a simple illustration: the concept of the "eco to nomic surplus," which the late Paul Baran revived and utilized to any historian fundamental such good effect,9 is patently of the of societies, and strikes me as not only more objective development in terms of and quantifiable, but also more primary, speaking the Of than, say, Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft. dichotomy analysis, course Marx knew that economic models, if they are to be valuable cannot be divorced from social and institu for historical analysis, com tional realities, which include certain basic types of human classes

munal 28

or

kinship

organization,

not

to mention

the

structures

and

Social History to the History of Society or cul socioeconomic formations assumptions specific to particular as tures. And yet, not one of Marx is for nothing regarded though the major (directly founding fathers of modern thought sociological and through his followers the fact remains and critics), that his a Das intellectual the form of of took work major project Kapital are con economic to We with neither his agree analysis. required to But we would be unwise clusions nor his methodology. neglect the practice of the thinker who, more than any other, has defined or to which the set of historical questions social scientists suggested find themselves drawn today.

Ill How are we to write the history or model me to a definition produce here, or even a checklist of what we Even if I could, I do not know how ever, it may be useful to put up a

of society? It is not possible for of what we mean by society want to know about its history.

this would be. How profitable assort small and miscellaneous ment of signposts to direct or warn off future traffic. ( 1 ) The history of society is history; that is to say it has real are concerned time as one of its dimensions. We not chronological structures with and their mechanisms of and only persistence and with the general and patterns of their change, possibilities but also with what If we are transformations, actually happened. us in his article on Braudel has reminded not, then (as Fernand we et are not "Histoire historians. Longue Dur?e"10) Conjectural a even place in our discipline, history has though its chief value is us assess the to of present and future, rather, than help possibilities its is taken by comparative past, where place history; but actual is what we must or history explain. The possible development in imperial China of capitalism is relevant to us nondevelopment as it only insofar helps to explain the actual fact that this type of economy developed fully, at least to begin with, in one and only one contrasted region of the world. This in turn may be usefully (again in the of general models with the for other systems ) light tendency of social relations?for the feudal?to example, broadly develop a much more in areas. The and number of greater frequently history of society is thus a collaboration between of social general models structure and ac which change and the specific set of phenomena is true occurred. or This whatever the chrono tually geographical logical scale of our inquiries. 29

D

DALUS

The history of society that of is, among other (2) things, in and definable specific units of people living together sociological as well as of human terms. It is the (as history of societies society distinct from, say, that of apes and ants), or of certain types of (as in such terms as "bour society and their possible relationships or or of the of geois" "pastoral" society), general development as a whole. The definition a considered of in this humanity society sense raises difficult even if we assume that we are de questions, an as seems we objective fining reality, reject as illegit likely, unless as imate such statements in 1930 differed from "Japanese society even if we eliminate For the confusions between English society." different uses of the word "society," we face a ) because ( problems the size, and scope of these units varies, for complexity, example, at different historical or and (b) stages of development; periods one set of human because what we call society is merely interrela tions among several of scale and into varying comprehensiveness are classifiable or which often simultane themselves, people classify In extreme cases such as New Guinea or ously and with overlaps. Amazon sets these various same define the tribes, may group of in this is rather fact But this people, though improbable. normally is neither with such relevant units group congruent sociological as the nor with certain wider systems of relationship community, of which the society forms a part, and which may be functionally to it (like the set of economic essential or nonessential relations) ( like those of culture ). as self-classifi or Islam exist and are Christendom recognized a class of societies cations, but though they may define sharing are not societies certain common in the sense characteristics, they in which we use the word when or modern talking about the Greeks in many ways Detroit Sweden. On the other hand, while and Cuzco a are today part of single system of functional interrelationships one economic few would of (for example, part system), regard them as part of the same society, sociologically speaking. Neither would we regard as one the societies of the Romans or the Han and a those of the barbarians who formed, quite part of wider evidently, we of with How them. do define these system interrelationships units? It is far from easy to say, us solve?or evade? though most of some outside criterion: the problem by choosing territorial, ethnic, or the like. But this is not political, always satisfactory. The problem more is than methodological. One of the major themes of the history of modern societies is the increase in their scale, internal homo 30

Social History to theHistory of Society or at least in the centralization and directness of social geneity, an essen an to the from relationships, essentially change pluralist structure. In tracing this, of definition be tially unitary problems as every student of the come very troublesome, of development national societies or at least of nationalisms knows. The history if not a of societies (3) requires us to apply, of such structures, formalized then at least an and elaborate model order of research priorities and a working approximate assumption the central nexus or complex of connections about what constitutes of our subject, though of course these things imply a model. Every social historian does in fact make and hold such such assumptions I Thus doubt whether of historian any priorities. eighteenth-century Brazil would give the Catholicism of that society analytical priority over its or any historian of Britain would slavery, nineteenth-century as central a social nexus as he would in regard kinship Anglo-Saxon England. seems to have established a A tacit consensus among historians common of this kind, with variants. model One fairly working starts with and historical the material environment, goes on to the some of production coming (demography structure of the consequent economy? of labor, exchange, divisions distribution of the sur accumulation, so forth?and and the relations social these. from plus, arising These might be followed by the institutions and the image of so which underlie them. The shape of the ciety and its functioning social structure is thus established, the specific characteristics and insofar as they derive from other sources, can then details of which, most be determined, is likely by comparative study. The practice to work outwards and upwards thus from the process of social pro in its specific duction will be tempted?in my setting. Historians on one view or com relation relational rightly?to pick particular as central and in (or type of society) specific to the society plex and to group the rest of the treatment around it?for question, Bloch's "relations of interdependence" in his Feudal example, or those out of industrial in Society, arising production, possibly in its industrial society, certainly Once form. structure the capitalist has been established, it must be seen in its historical movement. In the French must seen in "structure" be phrase "conjuncture," term must not be taken to exclude other, and though this possibly more relevant, forms and patterns of historical change. Once again the tendency is to treat economic movements (in the broadest forces where

and techniques in between),

the

31

DAEDALUS sense) as the backbone the society is exposed then allow formation

of such an analysis. The tensions to which of historic change and trans to expose the general (1) structures mechanism which the of tend society simultaneously by to lose and reestablish their equilibria, and (2) the phenomena are which the subject of interest to the social his traditionally for collective social the torians, consciousness, movements, example, social dimension of intellectual and cultural changes, and so on. I believe?perhaps what My object in summarizing wrongly? to be a is not to widely plan of social historians accepted working recommend in its favor. It is rather it, even though I am personally to suggest that we try and make the the opposite: implicit assump tions on which we work to ask ourselves whether this explicit and is in fact the best for the formulation nature of struc the and plan ture of societies and the mechanisms of their historic transforma tions (or stabilizations), other plans of work based on whether can be made or are other questions to with be pre it, compatible ferred to it, or can simply be superimposed to the his produce torical equivalent of those Picasso portraits which are simultane full-face and in profile. ously displayed as In brief, if historians of society we are to help in producing? of all the social sciences?valid for the benefit models of socio historic dynamics, we shall have to establish a greater unity of our at the present and our theory, which practice stage of the game means in the first instance to watch what we are probably doing, to correct it in the to of and the it, generalize problems arising light out of further practice. in the process the historian

IV I should like to conclude by surveying the actual Consequently, in the past decade or two, in order to see social of practice history it suggests. This and problems future approaches what procedure inclina that it fits in both with the professional has the advantage tions of a historian little we know about the actual and with what have attracted of sciences. What progress topics and problems are the most attention in recent years? What What growing-points? answers to such questions are the interesting The do people doing? not exhaust analysis, but without them we cannot get very far. The or distorted or? consensus of workers may be mistaken, by fashion as case a as is in such the study of public disorder field the obviously 32

Social History to the History of Society but and administrative requirements, impact of politics our has at The science it derived less progress of neglect peril. a to define perspectives and programs from the attempt priori?if from an obscure and it did we should now be curing cancer?than often simultaneous worth upon the questions convergence asking and, above all, those ripe for an answer. Let us see what has been in the at least insofar as it is reflected impressionistic happening, view of one observer. the

?by we

Let me suggest that the bulk of interesting in the ten or fifteen years has clustered past or of questions: topics complexes

work around

in social history the following

( 1 ) Demography and kinship

(2 ) Urban studies insofar as these fall within our field (3 ) Classes and social groups or collective or consciousness (4) The history of "mentalities" sense of "culture" in the anthropologists' of societies (for example, moderniza (5) The transformation tion or industrialization ) of social protest. and phenomena (6 ) Social movements first two groups can be singled out because they have al as fields, of the im themselves institutionalized regardless ready now own and their their of possess organ subject matter, portance Historical and system of publications. ization, methodology, demog rests not so and fruitful field, which is a rapidly growing raphy a as on on a in research innovation set technical of problems much it to derive that makes interesting possible (family reconstitution) or exhausted hitherto regarded as recalcitrant results from material (parish registers ). It has thus opened a new range of sources, whose in turn have led to the formulation of questions. The characteristics of historical lies in interest for social historians demography major on structure certain it of and the light sheds behav aspects family at different and on inter of people ior, on the life-curves periods, are important changes. These though limited by the generational than the most limited nature of the sources?more enthusiastic in the of and themselves allow, subject by champions certainly the framework of analysis of "The World We sufficient to provide the fundamental Have Lost." Nevertheless, of this importance and it has served to encourage field is not in question, the use of The

strict quantitative effect?or techniques. One welcome to arouse a greater in historical interest been

has

side effect? problems

of 33

DAEDALUS structure than social historians might have shown without kinship a modest this stimulus, demonstration effect from social though not to be neglected. nature The and prospects anthropology ought of this field have been to make debated further dis sufficiently cussion unnecessary here. a certain deter Urban also possesses history technologically a is lim mined unity. The individual normally city geographically its with ited and coherent unit, often and specific documentation even more lends itself to research on the often of a size which of urban problems which scale. It also reflects the urgency Ph.D. the major, or at least the most dramatic, have increasingly become in modern and management industrial of social planning problems tend to make urban history a societies. Both these influences large container and sometimes with indis ill-defined, heterogeneous, contents. It includes about cities. But it is clear criminate anything to social at least that it raises germane history, problems peculiarly in the sense that the city can never be an analytical framework for must a it be economic macrohistory of (because part economically as it a is found self and politically larger system), only rarely a contained city state. It is essentially body of human beings living a in and the characteristic of way, process particular together in modern societies makes urbanization it, at least up to the pres ent, the form in which most of them live together. The technical, out of the of the city arise essentially social, and political problems in interactions of masses of human beings close to living proximity one another; mere those

the ideas about the city ( insofar as it is not a for the display of some ruler's power and glory) are the Book of Revelation men?from tried on?have

and even

stage-set in which

to express their aspirations about human communities. in Moreover, recent centuries it has raised and dramatized the problems of rapid social change more than any other institution. That the social his torians who have flocked into urban studies are aware of this need hardly be said.11 One may say that they have been groping toward as a a view of urban of social change. I doubt history paradigm I it can be this, at least for the period up to the present. whether studies of the also doubt whether many really impressive global larger sidering

cities

history must only because 34

era have

of the industrial

the vast

quantity remain a central it brings

so far been con produced, in this field. However, urban concern of historians of society, if

of work

out?or

can

bring

out?those

specific

aspects

Social History to the History of Society and social which sociologists concerned. psychologists peculiarly have not so far been insti The other clusters of concentration one or two may be this stage of tutionalized, approaching though The history of classes and social groups has plainly development. out of the common assumption that no understanding of developed com an is of the without major society understanding possible on no ponents of all societies no longer based primarily kinship. In field has the advance been more dramatic the neglect and?given in the of historians list of the The briefest necessary. past?more of societal

change are

and structure with

most

in social history must works include Lawrence significant on the on the Elizabethan E. Le aristocracy, Roy Ladurie on the the En Edward of peasants, Thompson making Languedoc on the Parisian bourgeoisie; class, Adeline Daumard glish working in what is already a sizeable mountain but these are merely peaks to these the study of more restricted social range. Compared been less for instance?has groups?professions, significant. or The novelty of the enterprise has been its ambition. Classes, as are of such relations slavery, today being specific production on the scale of a society, or in inter considered systematically or as of social relationship. societal comparison, They general types are also now considered in that is, in all aspects of their depth, is new, and the and behavior. This social existence, relations, are work the achievements has striking, already though barely we as the intense activity, of fields such except specially begun?if a number of difficulties study of slavery. Nevertheless, comparative can be discerned, and a few words about them may not be out of Stone

place.

for these studies is such ( 1 ) The mass and variety of material is artisan technique of older historians that the preindustrial plainly teamwork and the utilization require cooperative inadequate. They I would technical of modern guess that the massive equipment. will mark the early phases of this works of individual scholarship kind of research, but will give way on the one hand to systematic ( such as the projected study of the Stockholm projects cooperative on the other hand and in nineteenth class the century)12 working at syn still to periodic (and probably attempts single-handed) in the field of work with which I am most thesis. This is evident class. Even the most ambitious familiar, the history of the working no more than a great torso, P. Thompson's?is work?E. single a rather short with it deals (J?rgen Kuczynski's period. though 35

D

DALUS

unter dem Kapitalismus, titanic Geschichte der Lage der Arbeiter as its title on certain concentrates aspects of the work only implies, class. ) ing even where technical difficulties, (2) The field raises daunting as measurement the of conceptual clarity exists, especially regards over time?for into and out of any spe the flow change example, in peasant We cified social group, or the changes landholdings. sources to be have which such from may lucky enough changes can be derived the recorded of the (for example, genealogies the material and gentry as a group ) or from which for aristocracy our constructed the methods be of (for may analysis example, by or the data on which historical valuable the studies of demography, the Chinese bureaucracy But what are we to do, have been based). we to have contained about Indian which also know castes, say, such movements, but about which it presumably intergenerational, is so far to make even statements? impossible rough quantitative serious are the conceptual (3) More problems, which have not historians?a fact which confronted does been by always clearly can work be and ridden not preclude (horses recognized by good can't define that we have those who them), but which suggests of social structure and been slow to face the more general problems in turn raise technical These and their transformations. as those of the such of the specification problems, possibly changing of a class over time, which quantitative complicates membership more of the multidimen general problem study. It also raises the a few there is the well sionality of social groups. To take examples, one sense it is a gen term In known Marxian of the "class." duality in another a product of eral phenomenon of all post-tribal history, one sense almost an in con modern bourgeois society; analytical sense of otherwise struct to make in an inexplicable phenomena, in their other a group of people actually seen as belonging together own or some other or both. These consciousness, group's problems in turn raise the question of the of consciousness language of class? the changing, and sometimes ter often overlapping, unrealistic relations

classification13 about which we contemporary in terms. (Here historians might yet very little quantitative at the methods look and preoccupations of social anthro carefully L. Girard and a Sorbonne while team are pologists, pursuing?as

minologies know as

doing?the ulary.14) Again, 36

of

such

systematic there

are

quantitative degrees

of

study class.

To

of use

sociopolitical

vocab

Theodore

Shanin's

Social History to the History of Society is a "class of low of Marx's 18th Brumaire phrase,15 the peasantry a is of class whereas Marx's classness," very high, per proletariat There are the problems of the homo "classness." of maximal haps or or what much be of classes; the same, may heterogeneity geneity to other groups and their internal in relation of their definition and

divisions

of

problem at any given

In the most general sense, there is the static between classifications, necessarily the multiple and changing behind reality

stratifications. the

relation

time,

and

them.

serious difficulty may well be the one which (4) The most It arises toward the history of society as a whole. leads us directly in isolation, from the fact that class defines not a group of people both vertical and horizontal. Thus it but a system of relationships, is a relationship and of difference of distance, but (or similarity) a of of different also social function, relationship qualitatively on must Research class of dominance/subjection. there exploitation, it is a part. Slaveowners fore involve the rest of society of which cannot

be

sectors

of society.

without the nonslave understood slaves, and without It might be argued that for the self-definition of to the nineteenth-century middle classes the European capacity over exercise power (whether through property, people keeping the patriarchal and servants, or even?via family structure?wives over of not direct and exercised them children), power having selves, was essential. Class studies are therefore, unless confined to a restricted and partial aspect, analyses of society. The deliberately most Le Roy Ladurie's?therefore go far beyond impressive?like the limits of their title. that in recent years the most direct ap It may thus be suggested come proach to the history of society has through the study of class we believe in this wider sense.10 Whether that this reflects a correct we or whether of the nature of post-tribal societies, perception it down to the current influence of Marxisant history, merely put the future prospects of this type of research appear bright. In many ways the recent interest in the history of "mentalities" to central marks an even more direct methodological approach prob It has been lems of social history. by the tradi largely stimulated tional interest in "the common people" of many who are drawn to social history. It has dealt largely with the individually inarticulate, undc ^umented, and obscure, and is often indistinct from an inter or in more est in their social movements of so general phenomena an cial behavior, which also interest in includes today, fortunately, 37

DAEDALUS in the fail to take part in such movements?for example, as well as in the militant or worker. socialist passively a treatment This very fact has encouraged dynamic specifically as those of the to of culture by historians, studies such superior those who

conservative

of poverty" by anthropologists, though not uninfluenced by so and pioneering their methods They have been not experience. or not studies of an aggregate of beliefs and ideas, persistent much there has been much valuable thought about these mat ?though of ideas in action and, ters, for example, by Alphonse Dupront17?as more in situations of social tensions and crisis, as in specifically, so much Grande Peur, which has Lefebvre's sub Georges inspired sources for such of work. The nature has sequent study rarely al to confine himself lowed the historian to factual study and simple to He has outset been construct from the models, exposition. obliged that is, to fit his partial and scattered data into coherent systems, without which than anecdotal. be little more The cri they would is or terion of such models its components should ought to be that a fit together and provide to both the nature of collective guide in specifiable action social situations and to its limits.18 Edward of preindustrial concept of the "moral economy" Thompson's Eng land may be one such; my own analysis of social banditry has tried to base itself on another. Insofar as these systems of belief and action are, or imply, im arises, (which may be, as occasion ages of society as a whole or its its either and transformation), permanence images seeking to certain aspects of its actual reality, insofar as these correspond us closer to the core of our task. Insofar as the most suc they bring or customary so cessful such analyses have dealt with traditional even with im sometimes such societies under the cieties, though their scope has been more limited. pact of social transformation, For a and characterized fundamental by constant, rapid, period a the in change, and by complexity which puts society far beyond even or dividual's the models deriv grasp, experience conceptual a con able from the history of culture have probably diminishing tact with the social realities. even not any longer be very They may in useful the pattern of aspiration of modern society constructing ("what society ought to be like"). For the basic change brought in the field of social about by the Industrial Revolution thought has on been to substitute a system of beliefs progress resting unceasing can be as a process, toward aims which for one rest specified only on the can be described of permanent order, which assumption ing "culture

38

Social History to the History of Society or

some concrete social model, normally or drawn from the past, real imaginary. The cultures of the past the cul their own society against such specific models; measured can measure tures of the present them only against possibilities. in introducing of "mentalities" has been useful Still, the history to the discipline of the social anthropologists something analogous is very far from exhausted. into history, and its usefulness studies of social conflict, of the numerous I think the profitability more careful assessment. riots to revolutions, from requires ranging attract research today is obvious. That they al Why they should are crucial aspects of social structure because they ways dramatize cer in not is doubt. the to here strained Moreover, breaking point in and cannot be studied at all except tain important problems into not of eruption, which do merely bring through such moments and that is normally the open so much latent, but also concentrate illustrated

in terms

of

the for the benefit of the student, while?not phenomena magnify our documentation least of their advantages?normally multiplying less would we about them. To take a simple example: How much know about the ideas of those who normally do not express them ex or at all in selves commonly but for the extraordinary writing is so characteristic which of of articulateness plosion revolutionary of pamphlets, the mountains and to which letters, articles, periods, court de and speeches, not to mention the mass of police reports, and bear witness? How the study fruitful positions, general inquiries can be revolutions of the great, and above all the well-documented, which has of the French Revolution, is shown by the historiography been studied longer and more intensively perhaps than any period of returns. It has been, and visibly diminishing equal brevity, without the historian.19 still remains, an almost perfect for laboratory to isolate in the of lies this The danger of type temptation study a context overt crisis from wider of the of the phenomenon society This transformation. great danger may be particularly undergoing when we launch into comparative studies, especially when moved ( such as how to make or stop rev by the desire to solve problems or so in is not a very fruitful approach olutions ), which sociology common one in have riots with cial history. What, another (for say, even It be be trivial. insofar may illusory, example, "violence") may an anachronistic as we may be criterion, imposing legal, political, or otherwise, on the stu which historical phenomena?something same may or are to dents of criminality avoid. The may learning not be true of revolutions. I am the last person to wish to discourage 39

DAEDALUS an interest

in such matters, since I have spent a good deal of pro time on them. However, we in them to studying ought define the precise purpose of our interest clearly. If it lies in the transformations of society, we may find, that major paradoxically, our the value of itself is in inverse propor study of the revolution on the brief moment tion to our concentration of conflict. There are fessional

or about human things about the Russian Revolution, history, which can on the discovered be only by concentrating period from March to November 1917 or the subsequent Civil War; but there are other matters which cannot emerge from such a concentrated study of brief periods of crisis, however dramatic and significant. and similar subjects of in On the other hand, revolutions study ( can a movements into be social wider ) normally integrated cluding field which does not merely lend itself to, but requires, a comprehen sive grasp of social structure and dynamics: the short-term social as such, which and labeled stretch transformations experienced or over a a few decades are not generations. We period of dealing a continuum out with chunks carved of of simply chronological or with but brief historic growth development, relatively periods as the very is reoriented and transformed, society during which ( Such periods may of course phrase "industrial revolution" implies. cannot be include great political but revolutions, chronologically The such crude terms delimited of by them.) popularity historically as

"modernization"

hension

or

"industrialization"

indicates

a

certain

appre

of such phenomena. are enormous, which is of such an enterprise The difficulties are as yet no of studies the there adequate eighteenth perhaps why as social processes for any nineteenth century industrial revolutions are one or two excellent works local and country, regional though now available, and such as Rudolf Braun on the Zurich countryside on It may be that a Oldham.20 early nineteenth-century John Foster can at be to such phenomena present derived practicable approach in not has economic from (which history inspired studies of only in the field science. Workers dustrial revolution ), but from political liberation have naturally and history of colonial of the prehistory in an exces been forced to confront such problems, though perhaps and studies have African perspective, proved par sively political to recent attempts to extend this approach ticularly fruitful, though the political India may be noted.21 In consequence science and po litical sociology dealing with the modernization of colonial societies can furnish us with some useful help. 40

Social History to the History of Society I (by which and ad acquired by conquest directly is that here an entire society or group of societies is ministered) an outside contrast its various defined with and force, by sharply as well as its reactions to the uncontrol internal shifts and changes, lable and rapid impact of this force, can be observed and analyzed as a whole. Certain in other societies are internal, or forces which operate in a gradual and complex interaction with internal elements of that society, can here be considered for and practical purposes in the short run as is which external, very help entirely analytically ful. We shall not of course overlook the distortions of the colonial ( The analytical advantage mean that of formal colonies

of the colonial

situation

societies?for and so example, by the truncation of their economy cial hierarchy?which also result from colonization, but the interest of the colonial situation does not on the that depend assumption colonial society is a of noncolonial. ) replica a more is A central preoc There .specific advantage. perhaps in of workers this field has been nationalism and nation cupation and here the colonial situation can provide a much closer building, to the approximation general model. Though historians have hardly come to can be with which it, the complex of phenomena yet grips called national (ist) is clearly crucial to the of social understanding structure and dynamics in the industrial era, and some of the more in has come to recognize it. interesting work sociology political The project conducted Stein on Eric and others Rokkan, Allardt, by "Centre Formation, and Cultural pro Nation-Building Diversity" vides some very interesting approaches.22 invention of the past two hundred The "nation," a historical immense whose years, significance today hardly needs dis practical raises the several crucial of cussion, questions history of society, for the change in the scale of societies, the transformation of example, ones social into linked with di systems unitary indirectly pluralist, rect smaller societies (or the fusion of several preexisting linkages into a larger social system ), the factors the boundaries determining of a social system ( such as territorial-political and others of equal ), are these boundaries To what extent im significance. objectively of economic which neces posed by the requirements development, sitate as the locus of, for the example, type nineteenth-century a territorial state of minimum or maximum industrial economy size in

extent do these To what circumstances?23 requirements not the and destruction of automatically only imply weakening earlier social structures, but also particular of degrees simplification, given

41

DAEDALUS and centralization?that standardization, is, direct and increasingly "center" and "periphery" exclusive links between (or rather "top" to fill extent is the "nation" an attempt and "bottom")? To what of earlier community the void left by the dismantling and social structures which could function as, or by inventing something a the of substitutes for, consciously produce symbolic functioning or (The concept of the "nation society? community apprehended then combine these objective state" might and subjective develop ments. ) more The colonial and ex-colonial situations are not necessarily suitable bases for investigating this complex of questions than is European history, but in the absence of serious work about it by the and twentieth-century of nineteenthhistorians Europe, who have been hitherto?including the Marxists?rather baffled by it, it seems history may form the most convenient likely that recent Afro-Asian starting-point. V us toward a the research of recent years advanced on I cannot me the table. Let point put my cards history of society? to any single work which exemplifies the history of society to which we to aspire. Marc Bloch has given us in La so ought, I believe, indeed an exemplary, work on the nature ci?t? f?odale, a masterly, of a certain type of social structure, including both the consideration illuminated by the of society and of its actual and possible variants, into the dangers and the much method, greater re comparative to enter here. Marx has sketched I do not propose wards of which a model out for us, or allows us to sketch for ourselves, of the ty How

far has

the long-term pology and societies which remains ahead of its time as were

historical

transformation

and evolution as almost

and

of far

immensely powerful the Prolegomena of Ibn Khaldun, whose own model, based on the interaction of different types of societies, in has of course also been fruitful, especially ancient, pre-history, and oriental history. of the late Gordon Childe (I am thinking there have been ad and Owen Lattimore.) important Recently vances toward the those study of certain types of society?notably based on slavery in the Americas of antiquity (the slave-societies and those based on a large body of peas appear to be in recession) ant cultivators. On the other hand the to translate a com attempts me so far as social into strike prehensive synthesis history popular 42

Social History to the History of Society not all their great merits, unsuccessful or, with relatively as schematic is stimulation, and tentative. The the least of which is still being constructed. I have in this essay tried history of society to assess some of its practice, to suggest some of its problems, and to hint at certain which from might benefit incidentally problems more concentrated it would be wrong to conclude But exploration. either

state of the remarkably flourishing noting, and welcoming, to be a social historian. Even those of the field. It is a good moment name will not want to us who never set out to call ourselves by this

without

it

disclaim

today.

References 1. See

the

remarks

of A.

J. C. Rueter

in IX congr?s

international

des

sciences

historiques (Paris, 1950), I, 298. 2. R. H. 34,

Tawney,

Studies

in Economic

History

(London,

1927),

pp.

xxiii,

33

39.

3. J. H. Clapham, A Concise Economic History of Britain (Cambridge, Eng.: University

Press,

1949),

introduction.

4. Two

from the same document and Social Studies (Economic quotations Social Conference Board, Istanbul, Aspects of Economic Development, illustrate the motivations this new behind 1964) may divergent pre of the board: "Economic occupation; By the Turkish president development or in the areas is one of the most retarded growth economically important . . . Poor which the world confronts countries have made questions today a of this issue of is to them ideal. Economic development high development associated with and a sense of sovereignty." political independence By Daniel Lerner: "A decade of global with social and experience change us. The economic lies behind has been decade with development fraught in every part of the world, to induce economic without efforts, development to accelerate cultural economic without chaos, producing growth disrupting societal to promote economic without equilibrium; mobility subverting

political stability" (xxiii, 1 ). 5.

. . .will Sir John Hicks's is characteristic: complaint "My 'theory of history' a . . . nearer to the kind of was good deal thing that by Marx attempted Most to order of [those who believe ideas can be used by historians their . . . so that the course can be fitted of history into material, general place] use the Marxian or some modified would version since of them; categories, be

is so little in the way version of an alternative it is that is available, that they should. It does, remain nevertheless, surprising extraordinary a that one hundred after Das after which years Kapital, century during enormous there have in social so little been else science, developments A should have Clarendon (Oxford: of Economic emerged." Theory History Press, 1969), pp. 2-3. there

not

43

D

DALUS

6. Thus

Marc

Ferro's

of

sampling first weeks of

in the

grad

the

of a retrospective been thought

equivalent it would

for

and telegrams revolution

nonhistorical

M.

purposes.

sent

resolutions of

may

of opinion 1917 de

development La R?volution

Ferro,

to Petro

the plainly doubt whether is

1917

One

survey. opinion public the earlier of without

have

research

the

February

(Paris: Aubier, 1967). 7. At 8.

on New

the conference not

I do

such

regard

creasing

devices

for

as historical.

complexity"

in History,

Trends

inserting may,

They

9. P. Baran, The Political Economy of Growth Press, 10.

1957), an

For

1968.

J., May

direction

into

of course,

be

societies

as

"in

true.

(New York: Monthly Review

2.

chap.

version

English

N.

Princeton,

this

of

see

article,

important

Social

Science

Infor

mation, 9 (February 1970), 145-174. in a broader view of urban is the of making history possibility to the of urbanization central of social process study change. Efforts to should be made in ways urbanization that actually conceptualize social change." Eric Lampard in Oscar Handlin and John Burch represent and the City Mass.: M.I.T. ard, The Historians Press, 1963), (Cambridge,

11. Cf.

"At

the

stake

societal

p. 233. 12. This

is in progress under of Stockholm.

work

of Professor

the direction

Sven-Ulric

Palme

at the University 13.

For

the

possible about

discussions America.

14.

See

N.

Cliffs, A.

et

des

typologie

in Latin

Relations in the New

Slavery p. 221.

1969),

J.: Prentice-Hall, "Vocabulaire

Prost,

of Race

"The History M?rner, and E. D. Genovese,

Magnus in L. Foner

ica," wood

between and classification, divergences reality the complex socioracial hierarchies of colonial

familles

World

see

the

Latin Amer (Engle

Cahiers

politiques,"

de lexicologie, XIV (1969). 15. T.

"The

Shanin,

(1966), 16. Class

has

example, I, 298-299.

Peasantry

as a Political

long A.

been

the

central in IX

J. C. Rueter

of preoccupation international

congr?s

17. A. Dupront, et m?thodes "Probl?mes Annales: lective," ?conomies, soci?t?s, 3-11. 1961), 18.

14

Review,

Sociological

dune

histoire

civilisations,

social des

de 16

historians. sciences

for

See, historiques,

la psychologie

col

(January-February

a I mean connection between together" "fitting systematic establishing and sometimes of the same different, unconnected, syn apparently parts drome?for the beliefs of the classic liberal example, nineteenth-century in both a structure. individual bourgeoisie patriarchal liberty and family

By

19. We

look

historians 44

Factor,"

17.

forward with

to

the

comparable

time

when

opportunities

the

Russian

Revolution

for the twentieth

will

century.

provide

Social History to the History of Society 20.

R.

Braun,

und

Industrialisierung

Volksleben

. . . im 19. und Foster's

thesis

20.

Jahrhundert

is being

21.

Stokes, who in African history. Asian Nationalism:

22.

Centre

Eric

prepared

Rentsch,

(Erlenbaeh-Zurich:

in einem l?ndlichen Industriegebiet

1960); Sozialer und kultureller Wandel

Rentsch,

(Erlenbaeh-Zurich: for publication.

1965).

J. O.

the results of work of applying this, is conscious doing E. Stokes, Resistance Movements Traditional and Afro in India The Context of the 1857 Mutiny-Rebellion

is

( forthcoming ). Formation,

Nation-Building

Symposium Organized by UNESCO sium was 23.

held

August

28-September

and

Cultural

sary

role

of

economic

the

state

in economic

Report

on

a

1, 1968.

as a has developed Though global capitalism its in the real units of fact tions, development units? U. French, German, British, political due to historic accident but also ( the question purest

Diversity:

(duplicated draft, n.d.). The sympo of system have been

economic certain

S. economies?which

development,

remains

open even in

interac territorial

be may ) to the neces the era of the

liberalism.

45