Search Hobsbawm's Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th Century It is generally accepted by historians that there was a? A myriad of revolts, uprisings and economic contractions occurred almost simultaneously and had a profound impact on the socio-economics of the entire continent. The topic for discussion in this paper is the effects that this? In particular, the focus will be on Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm, and his theory that the 17th century crisis was the catalyst for the transition from feudal society to capitalism in England and ultimately the genesis of the industrial revolution.
It was obvious—as I rather tactlessly suggested in the first paragraph—that this book was likely to be his last another volume of essays is in fact scheduled to appear in Some of his right-wing critics, like Michael Burleigh, argue in their obituaries of Hobsbawm that his historical work must be rejected because of his support for the USSR and the other Stalinist states.
I argue below that he was essentially right in this judgment. Now that his life is over and his body of work complete, it is only fair to Hobsbawm that his critical admirers take time to assess his output as a whole, free from the demands of instant assessment required by obituaries.
I am confident, however, that relatively little of his serious historical output is irredeemably tainted by the political tradition to which he belonged; most of is a lasting contribution, not only to the culture of the Left, but far beyond it.
And can those critics of the Right who endlessly demanded that he recant the views which informed his entire life and work point to any historians with their beliefs who entered the public consciousness to anything like the same degree?
How to Change the World: The roll-call of those who have predeceased him gives some indication of the extraordinary range of talent involved: Appropriately enough it deals with the subject of Marxism itself and provides us with the opportunity to assess his own relationship to it, which has been far from straightforward.
Unlike these contemporaries, they remained so: This may explain why—as he has noted with evident pique more than once—his historical works were not translated into Russian nor, Hungarian and Slovenian apart, into the majority of the other Eastern European languages until after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Outside of contemporary political issues which potentially conflicted with the views of the party leadership there were genuine attempts to explore historical issues. In the case of British history there was in any case no particular line and Group members specifically attempted to connect their work as Marxists with analysis of earlier radical traditions.
I was ready to write about the century in a political or public capacity, but not as a professional historian. My history finished at Sarajevo in June It is sometimes argued that his classicism is primarily demonstrated by his adherence to the base-superstructure metaphor.
This insistence has manifested itself in his work in two particularly important ways. One is that since capitalism emerged as a system, which for Hobsbawm was signalled by the crisis of the seventeenth century, it has been international in character.
We turn to How to Change the World then to find some insight into the Marxism which has inspired his achievements as a historian. The book is highly uneven in terms of both style and quality, as is likely to be the case with any collection spanning fifty-three years the earliest piece dates fromthe latest from and drawn from quite disparate sources.
The sixteen chapters break down as follows: The second part of the book, devoted to the latter subject, deals with it in very general terms indeed and, as Hobsbawm himself notes: Here, he not only delineates the trajectory of Marxist theory, but also makes his own contribution to it. The academic sociologists make similar distinctions on a rather lower level of scientific interest, the historians on an even humbler one.
The social relations of production i e, social organisation in its broadest sense and the material forces of production, to which they correspond, cannot be divorced. In fact, as Hobsbawm points out:Hobsbawm's Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th Century It is generally accepted by historians that there was a?
crisis' that blanketed all of Europe during the 17th century. A myriad of revolts, uprisings and economic contractions occurred almost simultaneously and had a profound impact on the socio-economics of the entire continent.
1 Chronology and Meaning: Reflections on the General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century Jonathan Dewald University at Buffalo It requires no special historical theory to view the seventeenth century-- . This paper checks whether Keynes's theory is more general than the neoclassical theory or is applicable to economic systems other than capitalism.
The paper will focus on the interpretation by those who have emphasized the financial institutions' characteristics. Hobsbawm's Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th Century. Hobsbawm’s Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th century It is generally accepted by historians that there was a ‘crisis’ that blanketed all of Europe during the 17th century.
Eric Hobsbawm. Eric Hobsbawm was one of the founder members of the journal in , and was Assistant Editor for its very first issue in February Over half a century, he chose to publish a series of his major articles in the journal, which we are delighted to make freely available.
The General Crisis of the European Economy in the. Chapter I: 'The Theory of the General Economic Crisis of the Seventeenth Century,' pp. A criticism of the Hobsbawm thesis (esp. pp. ) by another, but very unfriendly Marxist. Not to be accepted uncritically. * J.H.
Elliott, 'Revolution and Continuity in Early Modern Europe,' Past and Present, no. 42 (Feb. ), 35 - *