Understanding Marxist Historiography: An Overview

Don't want to sound pretensious, but I love writing history papers.  My love for writing and reading has turned me into a Hubber, and with that, I would like to share some of my past College research papers and essays.  With that said, please feel free to check them out:

• Various History Papers
• Literary Analysis
• How to Raise Your GPA Article Series
• The Benefits of Journaling

This paper, on the basics of Marxist Historiography, gives a basic overview of Karl Marx's theory on Historical relevance, and his ideas on how to view all of history.

Wherever one stands on the ideological scale, it is hard to refute the influence of Karl Marx, and his subsequent theories and doctrines, have had on the world at large. Some, like Vladimir Lenin, took Marx’s ideals and turned it into a political party and system of government, while others, like Mao Zedong, have simply used it as a basic foundation to further their own ideological and political ambitions. But in its truest essence, based on the writings and comments made by Marx and others, Marxism is a view of the world, offering both resources to scholars and laymen alike. To further understand Marxism Paul Blackledge states that “it would be a mistake to equate Marxism with the Soviet System”,[i] with the later being a strictly separate entity from the theories originated from Marx[ii] and that the “doctrine of [Marx] … has revivified and influenced almost all modern historical research”.[iii]

To gain a true appreciation for what Marxist Historiography entails, an understanding of Karl Marx is important. He was a German philosopher and political theorist focusing his attention on the interactions between those who owned the means of production and those who supplied the production through their labor. He was motivated not by a curiosity of industry “but by a critical awareness of its shadowy side, the industrial laborers sorrow, heartbreak, sweat, and toil”.[iv] Marx was also critical of religion, believing that it was merely a construct to control the masses. Of course his most lasting legacy was the spread of Communism as a political ideology, but it was his contribution to historiography that offers what was, in his time, an entirely new and unique way of analyzing the past. Marx’s theory of historical materialism presented historians a methodological approach to their work, as well as shedding light and emphasizing the plight of the common man. His ideas were a different way of viewing history, this time from the bottom up, seeing the agent of change in history from a perspective of relationships between people, and not as a series of accidents

The basic concepts of Historical Materialism were introduced by Marx in his A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy . He believed that society should depend on the division of labor, creating social classes based on property ownership. He states that since division of labor is not equal there would be strife and conflict and that the only means of genuine social change is through social or political upheaval. Marx created “a theory based on economic forces, a grand jury which would not only explain all of history but also deliver the tools for eventual human redemptions from all injustice.”[v] With these concepts now realized, both Marx and others contributed to the history of the working class using empirical class analysis, social arrangements, and economics to prove their theses.

Historical Materialism has a three-part social structure: the productive forces, the relations of production, and the political and ideological superstructure. The theory offers an explanation as to why these three models are beneficial to each other and necessary for progress, known as a “functional explanation”. An example of this approach can be found with F.W. Walbank’s work on the decline of the Roman Empire. He theorized that the failure of productive forces were the cause of Rome’s decline, stating that the level of production was “essentially the same as it had been in the Greek world”.[vi] With the ever-increasing costs of expansion and maintenance of the Roman Empire, coupled with the stagnate levels of production, Walbank believed that the fall of the empire was destined to occur. Another facet of Walbank’s theory is the use of slavery as a producer of materials. Since slaves were given no incentive, and thus no reason to innovate, this “induced a contempt for all forms of labour amongst the propertied … thereby diminishing total demand and limiting the possibilities of economies of scale”.[vii] In fact, many Marxist historians stress the failure of these productive forces to develop in the ancient world as a cause for the decline of many societies.[viii]

Historians who continue to employ the tools of Marxist Historiography concentrate on a few key tenants of the theory; They trace the growth of productive forces within a society, civilizations are characterized in terms of the dominate class and its relationship to production, they view political institutions within the broader social context, and they explore the nature of class conflicts. Two notable, modern people that carry on the tradition were E.P. Thompson and E.J. Hobsbawm, both British historians. Thompson, considered a “New Left” historian, wrote The Making of the English Working Class, which focused on the working class of English society between 1780 and 1832. Likewise, Hobsbawm focused his work on both the political French revolution and industrialization of Britain, most notably in his book The Age of Empire: 1875-1914. In the book British Marxist Historians E.P. Thomspon is quoted as saying that “to work as a Marxist historian in Britain means to work within a tradition founded by Marx, enriched by independent and complementary insights by William Morris, enlarged in recent times in specialist ways … I could find no possible cause for dishonour in claiming a place in this tradition”.[ix]

The influence of Marxist Historiography is irrefutable, whether or not one agrees with the political and radical aspects of Marx’s overall beliefs; however there are criticisms of his theory. Perhaps the most prominent was the deterministic nature of Marxist Historiography. Critics have “pointed out that with its strict determinism … the theory was destructive to the existing social order, to empirical research, and to a truly historical view of the world.”[x] Others have said that Marx’s reputation was ruined with the advent of Marxist-Leninism and the political and economic problems that Communist nations faced. Still others are concerned that class becomes the sole foundation in Marxist analysis, pointing out that race, gender, and other classifications would be more useful in its place. Finally critics have determined that since the overthrow of Capitalism never really occurred, paired with the absolute failing of Communist governments, that the entirety of Marx’s beliefs should be called into question. Although Steve Rigby counters with an excellent point, arguing that “acceptance of Marx’s historical claims entails no commitment to his revolutionary politics”[xi] and vice-versa.

From either view, whether radical or revolutionary, whether pragmatic or impractical, Karl Marx’s theory of history is long-lasting and far-reaching. He has not only influenced future historians, but offered analytical tools and definitions that aid in the study of history today. Although not a historian, Che Guevara points out the merits of Marx, “that he suddenly produces a qualitative change in the history of social thought. He interprets history, understands its dynamic, predicts the future, but in addition to predicting it, he express a revolutionary concept: the world must not only be interpreted, it must be transformed.”[xii] Perhaps his greatest accomplishment was the effort to focus on the working classes of history and how they affect a society, a civilization, and the world at large. Either way, the controversy surrounding Karl Marx will continue on, just as his methodologies, beliefs, and theories continue to as well.

[i] Blackledge, Paul, <i>Reflections on the Marxist Theory of History</i> (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006).

[ii] As the Soviet System is a more pragmatic and political amalgamation of Lenin’s beliefs with Marx, known as Marxist-Leninism.

[iii] Croce, Benedetto, Historical Materialism and the Economics of Karl Marx (New York: Russell & Russell, 1966).

[iv] Breisach, Ernst, Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern, Third. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007), 293.

[v] Ibid., 293.

[vi] Rigby, S.H., "Marxist Historiography," in Companion to Historiography, Michael Bentley (London: Routlredge, 1997), 895.

[vii] Ibid., 895.

[viii] Ibid, 895

[ix] Kaye, Harvey J., The British Marxist Historians, (Oxford: Polity Press, 1984), 8.

[x] Breisach, Ernst, Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern, Third. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007) 27.

[xi] Rigby, S.H., "Marxist Historiography," in Companion to Historiography, Michael Bentley (London: Routlredge, 1997), 201.

[xii] Che Guevara, "Notes for the Study of the Ideology of the Cuban Revolution", in Marxists Internet Archive <http://www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/1960/10/08.htm> [accessed 15 March 2010].

Bernstein, Howard. "Marxist Historiography and the Methodology of Research Programs." History and Theory 20, no. 4 (1981): 424-449.

Carr, Edward Hallett. A History of Soviet Russia. 14 volumes. London: Macmillan, 1951.

Cohen, G.A. Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1978.

Croce, Benedetto. Historical Materialism and the Economics of Karl Marx. New York: Russell & Russell, 1966.

Draper, Hal. Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978.

Hobsbawm, Eric. The Age of Empire, 1875-1914. New York: Pantheon, 1987.

Marx, Karl. A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. New York: International Publishers, 1970.

Marx, Karl. The Communist Manifesto (annotated text). New York: W.W. Norton, 1988.

Mehring, Frank. On Historical Materialism. London: New Park Publications, 1975.

Rigby, S.H. "Marxist Historiography." In Companion to Historiography, Michael Bentley, 889-928. London: Routlredge, 1997.

Stephens, Lester D. Historiography: A Bibliography. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1975.

Thompson, E.P. The Making of the English Working Class. New York: Pantheon, 1964.