Marxist History

The following is but a brief inidication of the important contributions to our understanding of the past that we owe to Marxist practices. Further, the list also includes works by other social historians, and therefore as a whole serves as a recommended reading-list for members who wish to investigate history themselves (something that cannot be encouraged enough!)

For those wishing to read an introduction to Marxist historiography - both in theory and as it has been practiced, Matt Perry's Marxism and History is servicable and very accessable, while Paul Blackledge's Reflections on the Marxist Theory of History is excellent as an overview of Marxist history-writing from its inception to this day, comprehending all the major debates and interventions within the tradition. Chris Wickham's edited volume, Marxist History-writing for the Twenty-first Century, is an excellent collection of recent debates as well as reflections on what Marxist history has (or hasn't) achieved. History and Revolution: Refuting Revisionism, edited by Mike Haynes and Jim Wolfreys, is a recent collection of articles that attempt to do just what they say: reassert the importance of social and economic explanatory models and - in particular - of revolutionary change as an important historical phenomenon against revisionist narratives.

-- Titles marked with '##' are indicated for their status as classic or pathbreaking works which continue to be both important and accessable --

(Updated, May, 2008)


GENERAL HISTORY

:: Chris Harman ::
- A People's History of the World: From the Stone-Age to the New Millennium.


CLASSICAL HISTORY

:: Geoffery De Ste Croix ::
- Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World. ##

:: Ellen Meiksins Wood ::
- Peasant, Citizen and Slave: Foundations of Athenian Democracy.


FIFTH CENTURY - NINTH CENTURY

:: Perry Anderson ::
- Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism.

:: Chris Wickham ::
- Framing the Early Middle Ages: Europe and the Mediterranean, 400-800; ##
- Land and Power: Studies in Italian and European Social History, 400-1200;
- Early Medieval Italy: Central Power and Local Society 400-1000;
- The Mountains and the City: The Tuscan Appennines in the Early Middle Ages.

:: Jacques le Goff* ::
- The Birth of Europe: 400-1500.


TENTH CENTURY - TWELFTH CENTURY

:: Perry Anderson ::
- Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism.

:: Marc Bloch* ::
- Feudal Society [2 vols]; ##
- French Rural History.

:: Guy Bois ::
- The Transformation of the Year 1000.

:: Pierre Bonnassie ::
- From Slavery to Feudalism in South-Western Europe.

:: Georges Duby* ::
- The Three Orders: Feudal Society Imagined; ##
- The Chivalrous Society;
- The Age of the Cathedrals: Art and Society 980-1420.

:: Rodeny Hilton ::
- English and French Towns in Feudal Society: A Comparative Study.

:: Jacques le Goff* ::
- The Birth of Europe: 400-1500;
- The Medieval Imagination;
- Your Money or Your Life: Economy and Religion in the Middle Ages;
- Time, Work, & Culture in the Middle Ages.

:: Lester K. Little** ::
- Benedictine Maledictions: Liturgical Cursing in Romanesque France;
- Religious Poverty and the Profit Economy in Medieval Europe.

:: Chris Wickham ::
- Courts and Conflict in Twelfth-century Tuscany;
- Community and Clientele in Twelfth-century Tuscany: The Origins of the Rural Commune in the Plain of Lucca.


:: Chris Wickham (ed.) ::
- Rodney Hilton's Middle Ages: An Exploration of Historical Themes.


THIRTEENTH CENTURY - FIFTEENTH CENTURY

:: Guy Bois ::
- The Crisis of Feudalism.

:: Rodney Hilton ::
- Bond Men Made Free: Medieval Peasant Movements and the English Rising of 1381; ##
- Class Conflict and the Crisis of Feudalism;
- The English Peasantry in the Later Middle Ages.


:: Rodney Hilton (ed.) ::
- The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism.

:: Chris Wickham (ed.) ::
- Rodney Hilton's Middle Ages: An Exploration of Historical Themes.


SIXTEENTH CENTURY - SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

:: Perry Anderson ::
- Lineages of the Absolutist State.

:: Fernand Braudel* ::
- Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century [3 vols] ##

:: Robert Brenner ::
- Merchants and Revolution: Commercial Change, Political Conflict and London's Overseas Traders 1550-1653.

:: Carlo Ginzburg** ::
- The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller. ##

:: Christopher Hill ::
- The World Turned Upside Down; ##
- Society and Puritanism in Pre-revolutionary England;
- God's Englishman: Oliver Cromwell and the English Revolution;
- Milton and the English Revolution;
- The Collected Essays of Christopher Hill [3 vols].

:: James Holstun ::
- Ehud's Dagger: Class Struggle in the English Revolution. ##

:: Brian Manning ::
- The English people and the English Revolution, 1640-1649;- Revolution and Counter-Revolution in England, Ireland and Scotland: 1658-60;
- 1649: Crisis of the English Revolution.

:: Ethan H. Shagan** ::
- Popular Politics and the English Reformation.

:: Benno Teschke ::
- The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics and the Making of Modern International Relations. ##

:: Ellen Meiksins Wood ::
- The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View.


:: T. H. Aston & C. H. E. Philpin (eds.) ::
- The Brenner Debate: Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-industrial Europe. ##


EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

:: Benedict Anderson ::
- Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism.

:: Neil Davidson ::
- Discovering the Scottish Revolution: 1692-1746.

:: Eric Hobsbawm ::
- Age of Revolution: Europe 1789-1848.

:: C. L. R. James ::
- The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L'Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution. ##

:: Georges Lefebvre ::
- The French Revolution;
- The Coming of the French Revolution;
- The Great Fear of 1789: Rural Panic in Revolutionary France.


NINETEENTH CENTURY

:: Benedict Anderson ::
- Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism.

:: Maurice Dobb ::
- Studies in the Development of Capitalism.

:: Catherine Hall** ::
- Civilising Subjects.

:: Eric Hobsbawm ::
- Age of Empire;
- Age of Capital: 1875-1914;
- Industry and Empire: From 1750 to the Present Day;
- Bandits;
- Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality.

:: Karl Marx ::
- The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte; ##
- The Civil War in France;
- Capital, vol. 1. ##

:: Karl Polanyi** ::
- The Great Transformation.

:: E. P. Thompson ::
- The Making of the English Working Class; ##
- Witness Against the Beast: William Blake and the Moral Law.


:: John Rule & Robert Malcolmson (eds.) ::
- Protest and Survival: Essays for E. P. Thompson.


TWENTIETH CENTURY

:: Maurice Dobb ::
- Soviet Economic Development Since 1917.

:: Marc Ferro* ::
- The Great War 1914-1918; Bolshevik Revolution: Social History of the Russian Revolution.

:: Eric Hobsbawm ::
- The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914-1991. ##

:: Kevin Murphy ::
- Revolution and Counter-Revolution: Class Struggle in a Moscow Metal Factory. ##

:: Steve Smith ::
- The Russian Revolution: A Very Short Introduction.

:: Leon Trotsky ::
- The History of the Russian Revolution.

:: Howard Zinn** ::
- A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present.

ON HISTORIOGRAPHY

:: Paul Blackledge ::
- Reflections on the Marxist Theory of History

:: Marc Bloch* ::
- The Historian's Craft

:: Alex Callinicos ::
- Making History: Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory

:: Marc Ferro* ::
- The Use and Abuse of History

:: Eric Hobsbawm ::
- On History

:: Matt Perry ::
- Marxism and Historiography


:: Mike Haynes & Jim Wolfreys (eds.) ::
- History and Revolution: Refuting Revisionism.

:: Chris Wickham (ed.) ::
- Marxist History-Writing for the Twenty-First Century.


* Annalist historian: the annalists were a school of social historians focused around the French journal 'Annales'. They attempted to write 'eventless' history that ignored the ephemeral and superficial 'fireflies' (as Braudel once put it) of individuals, dates and events and instead studied the evolution of material circumstances across wide expanses of time and space ('la longue duree'). Their belief that history should not be subdivided into different themes led them to adopt analytical approaches which were not before used by historians, such as geography and anthropology. Extremely original in their historiography, they have much in common with a Marxist approach and the two schools have - and will - learn much from each other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annales_School

** These historians are either non-Marxist (or perhaps Post-Marxist) historians who are nevertheless informed by related historiographical methods, or social and economic historians whose works are of value.

[under perpetual construction...]

I fully endorce all of Christopher Hill's books. They are well written, well researched and as Hill himself said "We have much to learn from the 17th Century"

in many ways the 20th century is the most important one...everyone can see how badly leninist ideology failed and turned the western hemisphere against communism

Would like to add:
Howard Zinn - A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present

Was it the ideology that failed or the people responsible for transforming the ideology into reality who failed?

I've added Zinn's work and works of Geoges Lefebvre, the starting point for a detailed analysis of the French Revolution and the thesis of bourgeois revolution. It is interesting to note - and a testament I think to the validity of the Marxist approach - that Lefebvre's theory of the French Revolution and Hill's on the English Civil War passed into historiographical orthodoxy.

I have also put in Marx's Brumaire, his work that most closely resembles a strictly historical investigation, since it shows such brilliant interpretation of the past and has been a great influence on Marxist historical praxis.

the works listed are excellent. though a little one-sidedly focused on Europe (and the U.S.) in a way that seems to leave the history of most of humanity off the radar screen. I'm sure that is unintentional -- but it is a common problem (among those who think Euro-America are the center of human history and progress, as well as the center of empire).

I would like to recommend the addition of a few other works:

Eric Wolfe, Europe and the People Without History (1982) -- pathbreaking work that views human history as a whole, and describes the rise of European capitalism in the context of processes and dynamics that envelope the globe. In this book he writes "The world of humankind constitutes a manifold, a totality of interconnected processes, and inquiries that disassemble this totality into bits and then fail to reassemble it falsify reality."

Bob Avakian, Conquer the World -- the International Proletariat Must and Will -- though not a work of history itself, it is a major methodological exploration on how to see this relationship between descrete nations and the world as a whole. Particularly the section "More on Proletarian Revolution as a World Process."

Then there are a great many works of history that deal with the modern revolutionary movements -- the Chinese Revoluion (Morning Deluge and Wind in the Tower, by Han Hsuyin), the Culutral REvolutin (for example: Daumier's book, or "Loss in china and the Legacy of Mao" by Bob Avakian), Vietnam's defeat of the U.S., The Naxalite revolution in india (for example the book "Spring Thunder")....

A valuable book is "Chile, an Attempt at Historic Compromise" by Jorge Palacios.

Another book to add: Germany, the Failed Revolution by Sebastian Haffner

*****

on a friendly polemical note, i'd like to comment on this: "It is interesting to note - and a testament I think to the validity of the Marxist approach - that Lefebvre's theory of the French Revolution and Hill's on the English Civil War passed into historiographical orthodoxy."

Being bestowed with claims of orthodoxy is hardly praise or validation.
Passing into historigraphical orthodoxy is the stage right before brain death, isn't it?

Some good books there!

I want to add:
Leo Huberman - Man's worldly goods (covers feudalism til ww2)

<<Being bestowed with claims of orthodoxy is hardly praise or validation.
Passing into historigraphical orthodoxy is the stage right before brain death, isn&#39;t it?>>

Actually, I think that it is a good thing and helps to validate Marxist history as a real academic tecnique, as opposed to communists reinventing history to fit with their theories. The fact that both these people&#39;s works, which are both openly Marxist, are now considered the defining works on the subject by bourgeois historians is a good thing as it gives us ammunition when fighting people who blindly attack Marxist anything (philosophy, history, geography, whatever) as politically motivated and bias shit.

Being &#39;radical&#39; and outside the &#39;mainstream&#39; just for teh sake of it is just plain stupid.

To follow up on what Scars said...

In historiography, Marxism is a force every bit as serious as the other major appraoches. That this can happen in a society in which hyper-critical theories are constantly under fire demonstrates how historical evidence supports a philisophical view-point that is thus hard to discredit. Since the eighties, yes, we have seen reaction and revision since the great post-war explosion of socialist and theoretical understanding of history. But Marxism is still here. Postmodernism has fallen out of fashion (quite literally), and people are taking stock on all the supposed modifications and subliminations of revolution feudal and bourgeois.

The point that I am making is not that orthdoxy represents validity (obviously quite the opposite in the classic case&#33;), but that the acceptence of challanging theses by a non-receptive community displays their strength.

Obviously I&#39;m aware as anyone else about the Euro-centricity of the list. This should be addressed and if anyone knows about serious works of world history that&#39;d be great. There is of course the problem that as a part of a certain culture the material accessable to us is largely going to be of that same tradition.

I also wonder (I must admit I&#39;m not familiar with him at all here in Britain) if a partisan work like that of Avakian&#39;s stands as creditable enough history? For this list to remain legitimate it is important that all works are thoroughly researched and supported. I&#39;d be weary of the situation of holding these various Stalin / Mao white-washes, for example

Mm, Wolfe&#39;s book looks very interesting, have added.

Any information on that?

Personally, I am very sceptical about the &#39;peoples history/Marxist history&#39; thing. Seems to me that few of the books in this tradition stand significantly above the best academic history and by guiding yourself to the &#39;Marxist&#39; books you can miss the best.

The idea of producing a list of history books worth reading is mind-boggling.

But ever the opportunist, I&#39;ll just take this opportunity to mention:

I.M. Diakanoff Paths of History which is technically a non-Marxist work, but very relevant to anyone trying to read into an overall Marxist conception of history.

The works of the Annalles school from France, particularly Ferdinand Braudel are indispensable for anyone interested in history. No Marxist should fail to read his 3 volume work on the emergence of commercial relations in Europe - incredible stuff.

(De Ste Croix is not the only one on ancient Greece. Check out George Thomson and there is a couple who wrote a book whose names I can&#39;t remember - but I could search it out if anyone were interested. )

BTW, I strongly agree with reading Perry Anderson&#39;s historical works, thought provoking.

Agreed. Fantastic book.
__

Of course (not classic histories, but will do)
: F.Engels - Origin of the Family, Private Properity and the State, Role of Labour in Transition from Man to Ape, and On The History of Early Christianity

Some old Soviet historiography of ancient times is pretty good, because alot of historians who wanted to express themselves had to work with not so contemporay and recent history where they did not have a freedom to express themselves without the fear that they might write something that was not in acordance with established dogmas. So in addition:

: V.V. Struve - D.P. Kalistov, Ancient Greece
: Mashkhin, Ancient Rome

In the same grain couldn&#39;t The Civil War In France by Marx be added?

You make a good point. It is imperitive that those wishing to study history read a breadth of opinions and sources. If anyone soley examined Marxist interpretations - be it of the more structurist or humanist &#39;history from below&#39; tendency - their understanding would be jilted and shallow. However, in conjunction with other good historians&#39; works, we can assess the strength of the Marxist approach, increasing due to the use of historical evidence our awareness of its various merits and demerits. For the historian the reading of a Marxist history allows an important analysis of events while for those engaged in praxis it provides a far greater aid to comprehension of where we are now.

I&#39;d also dispute the insinuation that Marxist history is some sort of subcultural current in historiography that could never match up to the academic titans, like CrimethInc&#39;s book found in the philosophy section next to Foucault (though Zinn may come under that catagory from what I hear). On the contrary it has been one of the dominant strands. Especially in the 50s to 70s. As has been mentioned, Christopher Hill and Lefebvre&#39;s interpretations have been THE analyses if their respective fields. In medieval study, Wickham is a giant while Bois for example, after men such as Barthelemy and Bonnassie, is one of the most important contributors to the perrenial debate on what feudalism is and how it occurred.

The emphasis on social history was an innovation by Marxist historians, one that is now more than commonplace. Along with the Annalistes, they radically changed the primacy over politics and events and neo-Rankianism, instead placing an emphasis on the economic. If it wasn&#39;t for the strength of the Marxists, R W Southern, a very conservative, Anglican medieval historian, would never be dreamt of arguing that the idea of purgatory was due to the growth of the profit economy&#33;

Yes&#33; The Annalistes are brilliant men. I&#39;ve already included Marc Bloch (having studied his Feudal Society) and Braudel along with Bloch friend and co-founder Lucein Febvre are to highly recommended to anyone with a serious desire to understand history. From the next generation Georges Duby would also be a good man to be sought out.

Yes, definitely, an ingenius work

Not sure about Hobsbawm really. He&#39;s a good historian, but his politics are highly questionable. He&#39;s still a bit Stalinist - in fact, I read him saying recently that he&#39;d spy for the Soviet Union if it still existed. His analysis of the October Revolution in &#39;Age of Revolutions&#39; (I think) is totally flawed. Now spends his time telling liberal broadsheets why the &#39;socialist experiment&#39; has failed.

Bit of a prick.

Can I suggest &#39;A history of the Russian Revolution&#39; by Lev

And &#39;Redemption Song&#39; by Mike Marquese, which is the best book I &#39;ve read about the sixties.

I&#39;d add The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People&#39;s History of Ancient Rome by our favorite popstar, Michael Parenti, and maybe Chris Harmen&#39;s "Revolution and Bureaucracy in Eastern Europe". You might disagree with the latter&#39;s ideological stance (I don&#39;t, but . . .), but it is a fascinating and uncommon look at some interesting segments of Soviet History.

I&#39;ve been reading A Peoples&#39;s History of the World by Chris Harman, I haven&#39;t read Howard Zinns A People&#39;s History of the U.S.A, although I heard Harman attempts to take off where Zinn left.

I haven&#39;t read all of this book yet, but before the 20th century its well informed, the 20th parts I&#39;ve skimmed through seem sort of incomplete--it will explain what happened, but not how or why.

Well then you&#39;ve settled the question yourself- he&#39;s a good historian. I&#39;d dispute that he&#39;s a Stalinist; recent interview I read he stated that with hindsight the Soviet &#39;experiment&#39; was not worth it. Perhaps there&#39;s an element of intellectual cloudiness hung over from the CPGB, but hey, this is also the man who supported the Labour 3rd Way. He attacked The Militant Tendency for jeopodising Labour political unity.

I remebered making this thread a while ago and I still think it would be a great resource... so, here&#39;s another attempt at making this into a good resource.