Sorry, this comment would be a polemic one: What I have been pointing out is that although he defines himself as a Marxist, he does not really make a Marxist analysis, does he? BTW, I don't think Marxist historiography can be judged as a whole as "equally bad". Is Thompson bad, is Hobsbawm bad, is Mathiez bad? I just cannot agree with the second paragraph: historians who pretend not to have a political stance usually have the most conformist one. The decriptive, "fact-based" historians of the late 19th century were often the champions of nationalism and creators of the most long-lived myths and commonplaces. And: I don't know which is exactly your home-country, but "fact-based", descriptive (and nationalist) historiography based on German and Austro-Hungarian tradition was widely practiced in the Central-European satelites even during the communist regimes. Moreover, the books of 19th century French and English historians were freely accessible in the libraries, then. Sometimes we should not accept so easily the stereotyped vision of the past, especially if it is supposed to be ours own.
no subject
What I have been pointing out is that although he defines himself as a Marxist, he does not really make a Marxist analysis, does he?
BTW, I don't think Marxist historiography can be judged as a whole as "equally bad". Is Thompson bad, is Hobsbawm bad, is Mathiez bad?
I just cannot agree with the second paragraph: historians who pretend not to have a political stance usually have the most conformist one. The decriptive, "fact-based" historians of the late 19th century were often the champions of nationalism and creators of the most long-lived myths and commonplaces.
And: I don't know which is exactly your home-country, but "fact-based", descriptive (and nationalist) historiography based on German and Austro-Hungarian tradition was widely practiced in the Central-European satelites even during the communist regimes. Moreover, the books of 19th century French and English historians were freely accessible in the libraries, then. Sometimes we should not accept so easily the stereotyped vision of the past, especially if it is supposed to be ours own.