No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Social History and Historical Sociology: Contrasts and Complementarities
Abstract
Over the ten years of its existence, the Social Science History Association has been a meeting place for groups in rebellion against the dominant orthodoxies of their disciplines. Thus it is fitting that an SSHA panel should assess the accomplishments and relationship of “social history” and “historical sociology,” two movements that have grown up as critiques of formerly dominant orientations in (respectively) the disciplines of history and sociology.
... After the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah's government in 1966, several attempts were made by successive civilian and military regimes to improve the education sector. The National Liberation Council (1966)(1967)(1968)(1969), the Progress Party (1969)(1970)(1971)(1972), the National Redemption Council (1972)(1973)(1974)(1975), the Provisional National Defence Council (1981-19871987-1992), National Democratic Congress (1992-20002009-2016, and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) (2001-2008; 2017-present) have all contributed to educational developments in Ghana. ...
... After the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah's government in 1966, several attempts were made by successive civilian and military regimes to improve the education sector. The National Liberation Council (1966)(1967)(1968)(1969), the Progress Party (1969)(1970)(1971)(1972), the National Redemption Council (1972)(1973)(1974)(1975), the Provisional National Defence Council (1981-19871987-1992), National Democratic Congress (1992-20002009-2016, and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) (2001-2008; 2017-present) have all contributed to educational developments in Ghana. ...
... Similar developments occurred at the secondary school level where history ceased to be taught as a core subject and was instead made an elective subject for General Arts students (Dwarko, 2007). This could be a consequence of global developments during the 20th century, when history assumed a social science context in many regions across the world (Tilly, 1981;MacRaild & Taylor, 2004;Skocpol, 1987). Changes to curricula have accompanied changes to history teaching in Ghana over time. ...
This article employs historical records, cultural traditions, and insights from recent interviews with history teachers to trace the beginnings of history teaching and the political landscape that has shaped school history and history curricula in Ghana. The article argues that history education in Ghana has survived the ravages of time, Western historiographical ideals and imperialist ambitions as well as politically motivated legislations and reforms. The article concludes that history education is regaining its grounds in Ghanaian schools and raises implications for teacher education and resource provision in schools. The article contributes to an understanding of the evolution of history education in Ghana and the impact of colonial and political forces on curricula, teaching and learning of African history. Keywords: Ghana; Education reforms; History curriculum; History education; Teacher education; Schools
... Se uma instituição pública [local ou regional] usa meios, como a paradiplomacia, para atingir seus objetivos (sejam troca de conhecimentos e cooperação, aumento do comércio internacional, atração de investimentos estrangeiros diretos, turismo, desenvolvimento econômico, etc.), ela executa uma política pública, fenômeno pelo qual acontece a "transnacio- Confrontando os dados acima com a população, observa-se que apenas municípios com mais de 50 mil habitantes possuem estrutura internacional e se concentra naqueles com mais de 500 mil habitantes, conforme mostra a tabela 2. A partir dos dados da internacionalização dos municípios brasileiros apresentados acima, conclui-se que não há uma área internacional em municípios de pequeno porte; esta concentra-se naqueles de grande porte. Certamente os custos Com relação aos estados da federação, Rio de Janeiro foi o primeiro a criar uma área internacional na administração do estado, no Governo de Leonel Brizola (1983-1987. ...
... Esta vertente é a mais estrutural do neoinstitucionalismo e trabalha com a lógica de que o legado do passado é uma força importante por trás das ações do presente e do futuro.Para perseguir determinados objetivos, os atores estatais esbarram em limitações resultantes da sua impossibilidade de controlar a estrutura econômica. Segundo ThedaSkocpol (1987), o Estado poderia ser autônomo se os governantes conseguissem ter capacidade institucional para estabelecer seus objetivos e implementa-los, ainda perante os interesses conflitantes. A autonomia pressupõe a capacidade do Estado de contemplar interesses e ob-5 A produção do institucionalismo histórico gerou grandes obras de incomensurável contribuição aos diversos campos das ciências sociais. ...
... Se uma instituição pública [local ou regional] usa meios, como a paradiplomacia, para atingir seus objetivos (sejam troca de conhecimentos e cooperação, aumento do comércio internacional, atração de investimentos estrangeiros diretos, turismo, desenvolvimento econômico, etc.), ela executa uma política pública, fenômeno pelo qual acontece a "transnacio- Confrontando os dados acima com a população, observa-se que apenas municípios com mais de 50 mil habitantes possuem estrutura internacional e se concentra naqueles com mais de 500 mil habitantes, conforme mostra a tabela 2. A partir dos dados da internacionalização dos municípios brasileiros apresentados acima, conclui-se que não há uma área internacional em municípios de pequeno porte; esta concentra-se naqueles de grande porte. Certamente os custos Com relação aos estados da federação, Rio de Janeiro foi o primeiro a criar uma área internacional na administração do estado, no Governo de Leonel Brizola (1983-1987. ...
... Esta vertente é a mais estrutural do neoinstitucionalismo e trabalha com a lógica de que o legado do passado é uma força importante por trás das ações do presente e do futuro.Para perseguir determinados objetivos, os atores estatais esbarram em limitações resultantes da sua impossibilidade de controlar a estrutura econômica. Segundo ThedaSkocpol (1987), o Estado poderia ser autônomo se os governantes conseguissem ter capacidade institucional para estabelecer seus objetivos e implementa-los, ainda perante os interesses conflitantes. A autonomia pressupõe a capacidade do Estado de contemplar interesses e ob-5 A produção do institucionalismo histórico gerou grandes obras de incomensurável contribuição aos diversos campos das ciências sociais. ...
... By applying this theoretical pattern to the social science domain, contemporary social dynamics are shown to be the outcome of nonlinear dynamics, which are rooted in the past. Similar to how small quantic irregularities in the early universe shaped the current cosmic laws, and a small frustration can burden a youth with life-long trauma, the Romans erected numerous castra at the empire's northern borders, which would subsequently evolve into independent feuds in the Middle Ages, hindering Germany's unification for centuries (Rokkan, 1975, p. 562 ff.;Tilly, 1984, p. 53). 5 This assumption also prompts a reconsideration of the theoretical link between sociology and historical studies (see Castañeda & Schneider, 2017;Lachman, 2013, p. 6;Skocpol, 1987). Similar to statistics or economics, historical studies can be data source for sociological researches, even while focusing on contemporary phenomena. ...
This study focuses on the process of identity-building, wherein I aim to provide theoretical tools, other than social-psychology (especially symbolic interactionism), to help analyze the said process. Within the epistemic framework of complexity theories, I demonstrate that historical sociology provides sufficient background for understanding contemporary identity phenomena from a macro-sociological perspective. This enables the assessment of how, in the current scenario, identity dynamics can affect global phenomena and how the global social structure can affect identity-building processes worldwide. The notion of ascribed identities is, thus, crucial. In this study, I describe modernisation as a process where the ascribed characteristics (gender, religion, ethnicity) progressively lose their function of rigidly defining a person's identity, on behalf of personal achievements. Within this framework, I describe the current re-strengthening of ascribed identities and assess, through this description, which phase of the modernisation process is nowadays taking place.
... Skocpol's career is, in part, built on a critique of Wallerstein's approach to the international system (see Skocpol 1977). Skocpol's (1979) preference is to examine the military and fiscal conditions at the national level and its relationship to the replication of the international system. The basic issue for Skocpol is that the state can have autonomy from domestic class interests but needs to provide the right mix so that, if defeated in international conflict, there is not domestic revolution. ...
... Histories of scholarly disciplines remind us that particular fields often need an opposing one to justify their existence (Kristensen 2015;Samman and Seabrooke 2017). 'Historical Sociology', for example, would find it hard to justify itself if not opposed to elements of 'Social History' (Skocpol 1987). Still, while there has been some emphasis on 'bridge building' in IPE (Farrell and Finnemore 2009;McNamara 2009), there are pragmatic reasons why IPE scholarly networks need to recognize each other and cohere, rather than drift into different species altogether: survival. ...
We analyze the organizational logics of how social clustering operates within International Political Economy (IPE). Using a variety of new data on IPE publishing, teaching, and conference attendance, we use network analysis and community detection to understand social clustering within the field. We find that when it comes to publishing and intellectual engagement, IPE is highly pluralistic and driven by a logic of ‘niche proliferation’. Teaching IPE, however, is characterized by a ‘reduction to polarity’ that emphasizes a dualism in ontological and epistemological frames. In the face of competitive exclusion pressures, intellectual communities regenerate themselves by constructing niches while simultaneously nodding to a common tradition.
... Isso se deu, por exemplo, a partir da utilização de procedimentos estatísticos que davam voz à história dos marginalizados, de um lado; e, a partir do A Sociologia Weberiana e sua Articulação com a Pesquisa em Políticas Educacionais recurso à crônica política, de caráter factual, de outro. O resultado foi a possibilidade de se estudar os fenômenos a partir de sua concretude, sem ter a intenção de formular enunciados de validade universal; a possibilidade de identificar de que maneira a tomada de decisões repercute na vida das pessoas comuns; e a premência de realizar estudos comparados, a fim de verificar o impacto de políticas transnacionais em sua concretude (Skocpol, 1987). ...
This article aims to articulate the main elements of the so-called Comprehensive Sociology of Max Weber with the research potential in the educational policies field. Discussing important issues in Weberian sociology, as the concept of State, the paper approaches the debate of Social Sciences and Political Science with Educational Policy´s objects of interest, with the intention of highlight that, for this field, the conceptual tools built by Weber may be relevant for the analysis of themes and problems that are beyond rigid explanatory schemes.
... Even if it is conceded that everyday experiences are already structured by cultural forms that are pre-narrative, history does not narrate itself, and furthermore, scientific historiography is more than everyday narrative (Ricoeur, 1983). Theoretically informed accounts would lead to a convergence of social sciences and history (Burke, 1992;Skocpol, 1987) without necessarily following 'a doctrine of the unity of method; that is to say, the view that all theoretical or generalizing sciences make use of the same method, whether they are natural sciences or social sciences' (Popper, 1960, p. 130). Therefore, by supporting a 'scientific' historiography, we do not refer to the more narrow meaning of 'science' that only comprehends the natural sciences, but to an understanding that includes the social sciences, as well as the humanities (like the German concept of 'Wissenschaft') if they engage in methodic interpretation (see Rüsen, 1983, p. 110f., on the 'methodization' of historiography). ...
While there has been a broad debate on the use of theory in history in general, there are few contributions by historians of communication and the media discussing the role of theory in their particular field. We therefore review and discuss some of the main arguments pertaining to the use of theory in historiography and apply them to the field of media and communication history. Such arguments include the assumption that theories are already implicit in all types of narratives, or the idea that theory amounts to a speculative philosophy of history. We also discuss the controversial question whether deductive explanations and general laws should be applied to history. The article concludes that the use of theories is advisable, perhaps even necessary, given their multifunctionality and their different forms.
This paper traces the history of sociology in India to colonial anthropology and Indology. I argue that the compulsions of post-colonial society have also made specific demands on the discursive terrain of sociology. Fundamental to the pursuit of sociological knowledge in India, I believe, was a core debate about its mode of discursive practice – specifically, a debate between particularistic and universalistic orientations. From this point of view, I re-read the history of sociology in India. In doing so, I argue that close attention to the history of sociology helps us see the extent to which foundational western approaches to historical and comparative sociology have affected the historical development of sociology in India. Ironically, this has meant that the degree of historical self-awareness in Indian sociology has been limited. Hence, I discuss the grounds for the weak historical self-awareness in terms of historical sociology in India. I conclude by discussing how a strengthened tradition of historical sociology can be a tool to revitalize the discipline.
Every scientific endeavor contains a classification. Classifications are influenced as much by the methodological assumptions as the nature of the phenomenon under study, and by the historicity of the mind that sets out these classifications. Classifications for Turkish modernization also contain traces of historical positions, paradigms, ideological positions and relativity that may be involved in most scientific selection and classification processes. In this article, historical sociology, which can be considered as an effort to reconcile the methodological orientations of history and sociology, and alternative perspectives developed within this scientific tradition are introduced. Then, how the experience of Turkish modernization was classified in the context of various perspectives and the contribution of these classifications to the holistic understanding of the modernization experience is problematized. Thus, a framework for guiding social scientists interested in both the sociological examination of the history and the experience of modernization of Turkey has been put forward. This study is also based on the methodological assumptions of historical sociology and has inevitable relativity in terms of resources and readings.
1) Marxismo.
2) Neoinstitucionalismo
International law's traditional emphasis on state practice has long been questioned, as scholars have paid increasing attention to other important - though sometimes inchoate - processes of international norm development. Yet, the more recent focus on transnational law, governmental and non-governmental networks, and judicial influence and cooperation across borders, while a step in the right direction, still seems insufficient to describe the complexities of law in an era of globalization. Accordingly, it is becoming clear that "international law" is itself an overly constraining rubric and that we need an expanded framework, one that situates cross-border norm development at the intersection of legal scholarship on comparative law, conflict of laws, civil procedure, cyberlaw, and the cultural analysis of law, as well as traditional international law. Moreover, this new scholarship must be truly interdisciplinary, drawing on insights not only of international relations theorists, but also of anthropologists, sociologists, critical geographers, and cultural studies scholars. Such insights afford a more nuanced idea of how people actually form affiliations, construct communities, and receive and develop legal norms, often with little regard for the fixed geographical boundaries of the nation-state system. This Article refers to such a broader frame of analysis as "law and globalization." Although "globalization" is, of course, a controversial term, the idea of law and globalization nevertheless provides a useful lens for viewing the plural ways in which legal norms are disseminated in the Twenty-first Century. This Article sketches the contours of what it might mean to emphasize law and globalization, rather than simply international law. It suggests four important ways in which the study of law and globalization enlarges the traditional focus of international law and then identifies ten areas of conceptual inquiry that are already coalescing within the scholarly literature to form the core of a study of law and globalization.
At this meeting, we celebrate 25 years of the Social Science History Association, the SSHA.With appreciation from all of us, I acknowledge the achievements of our founders and our long-time members. We stand on their shoulders metaphorically and historically. We mark this anniversary with a plenary president's “founder’s session,” a variety of retrospective and prospective panels, and the conference theme “looking backward and looking forward.” We also commemorate more than 25 years of groundbreaking research and recognition of the presence and practice of social science historians along the hallowed halls of history and social science departments—even if it has not always been accompanied by a readywelcome orcomplete acceptance. (We mark no fewer years of controversy.)
One might have predicted that “as sociology meets history” (Tilly 1981), there would arise a demand for synthesis, for a history-as-social-science that would combine the best of both disciplines. A few voices, chief among them the late Philip Abrams (1982), issued that call. But the synthesis has not arrived. Today the relation between history and sociology is that of parents from differing backgrounds whose adolescent children have contracted a friendship at school. There is a pleasant but empty cordiality between the elders. Although the adolescents have an acrimonious rivalry, they close ranks against parental orthodoxies of either sort. One hopes that the young people will cooperatively transform the social attitudes of their parents, but unthinking loyalties ultimately prevent this transformation. So the synthesis of history and sociology, or more broadly of history and social science, has not arrived. Today, the most synthetic call we hear is for each (sub)discipline to keep the other honest (e.g., Roy 1987b).
This paper deals with exchanges and misunderstandings between the German school of social history (most prominently represented by scholars from the University of Bielefeld (such as Hans-Ulrich Wehler) and Anglo-American trends in historical sociology (exemplified by the works of Barrington Moore, Theda Skocpol and Michael Mann). The social historians tended to dismiss historical sociology as too dependent on modernization theory, without taking into account the critique of that tradition by authors who brought processes of state formation and revolutionary change into the debate. On the other side, mainstream historical sociology worked with assumptions that limited its ability to change the terms and directions of sociological discourse, and to assimilate lessons from history. Among these inbuilt biases, organizational realism and materialism - particularly pronounced in the work of Michael Mann - stand out as particularly important. The paper closes with arguments in favour of bringing more history into historical sociology, with particular emphasis on three sets of problems. There is a need for more historical approaches to differentiation, less dependent on functionalist premises than the hitherto prevalent paradigm. A more explicit thematization of temporality in history and society would, among other things, help to clarify issues linked to the notion of path dependency. Finally, a reconsideration of the models and types of explanation in historical sociology would place more emphasis on their interpretive dimension.
Although historians have for some time been integrating sociological concepts into their work on eugenics, sociologists have for the most part left the study of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century eugenics to historians. Arguing that our understanding of eugenics can be advanced by combining sociological and historical methods, this paper undertakes a constructionist analysis of the first U.S. eugenics campaign, which redefined poor, feeble-minded women as carriers of “depraved” heredity and resulted in establishment of the first U.S. prophylactic institution. The author merges original research and the results of previous historical investigations with social problems theory to answer three questions about this “discovery” campaign: (1) How did it construct feeble-minded women as a eugenic threat? (2) Why did it (in contrast to other eugenic crusades) concentrate exclusively on women? and (3) Why was it successful?
This paper analyzes the politics of disputing in complaint hearings held by the court clerk in a district criminal court in Massachusetts. By examining struggles over the meaning of local conflicts, it suggests the implications of detailed studies of dispute processing for our understanding of how systems of legal and social meanings are constituted and reproduced. The paper argues that the work of the court, the roles played by court officials, and the meaning of law and of community at particular moments in time are shaped in the interaction of court staff with local citizens. At the same time, it argues that these interactions are constrained by culturally and historically embedded relations of class, ethnicity, and power. Thus the paper suggests how the practice of complaint hearings both reproduces and transforms systemic inequalities and oppositions, and points to the importance of interactive rather than dichotomizing approaches for studying the interconnection and interpenetration of law with society.
Most time-ordered analyses of historical processes are rendered "ahistorical" because the premises that direct quantitative inquiry obscure changing historical relations through time. These conventional practices stem from three problematic presuppositions: (1) the separation of theory and history, (2) ahistorical conceptions of time, and (3) methodological autonomy and the primacy of the theory of statistical technique. We illustrate how these premises shape sociological-historical investigation by examining several quantitative historical analyses of labor organization and conflict. Reanalysis of the same historical series with "temporally moving covariance" analysis demonstrates theoretically important historical contingency as well as the error of presupposing temporal homogeneity in historical relationships. Our critique of conventional practice and our reanalysis enable us to pose alternative premises to ground quantitative historical research in the interdependence of history and theory, in historical conceptions of time, and in the historicization of quantitative methodology. Our redirection aims at moving us closer to historical "actuality," that is, to historical relations and processes, when we use time-series data and analytic procedures.
Cet article propose quelques pistes pour revisiter la contribution intellectuelle d’un pilier de la sociologie politique américaine. S’érigeant en faux, tôt dans sa carrière, contre le fonctionnalisme parsonien qui dominait alors la sociologie américaine, Charles Tilly (1929-2008) consacrera sa vie active à l’élaboration d’une sociologie politique intrinsèquement historique, consciente de la complexité de son objet. Nous envisageons cette sociologie sous trois angles : nous rappelons les critiques auxquelles elle dut faire face depuis les années 1970, nous présentons les plus grandes lignes de ses applications empiriques, puis nous évaluons ses assises ontologiques.
Ein Beitrag, der sich im deutschsprachigen Raum mit ‚Historischer Soziologie‘, zumal mit ‚Neuer Historischer Soziologie‘ befasst,
kann nicht darauf vertrauen, dass es einen Konsensus darüber gibt, mit welchem Gegenstand man es eigentlich zu tun hat. Die
Historische Soziologie ist in der deutschsprachigen Soziologie kaum vertreten. Das hat verschiedene Gründe. Einer liegt in
der Gegenwartsbezogenheit der hiesigen Soziologie. Ein weiterer ist darin zu sehen, dass die Geschichtswissenschaft der Soziologie
vielfach den Rang abgelaufen hat und man selbst dann, wenn man sich etwa über die klassischen historischsoziologischen Arbeiten
eines Max Weber informieren möchte, bei den Historikern oftmals besser aufgehoben ist als bei den Soziologen. Ein dritter
Grund könnte darin liegen, dass hier auf dem Felde der Makrosoziologie die vornehmlich systemtheoretisch formulierte Differenzierungstheorie,
zu der viele Positionen der Historischen Soziologie in einem sehr spannungsgeladenen Verhältnis stehen, dominant ist. Und
der wichtigste Grund liegt sicherlich darin, dass die Soziologie eine starke Neigung zur raum-zeitlichen Dekontextualisierung
ihrer Forschungsgegenstände hat.
In an earlier generation, scholars seeking to understand law on the world stage focused on only two types of normative systems: those promulgated by nation-states and those promulgated among nation-states. With nation-states as the only relevant players, the law governing the global system was, of necessity, exclusively international. And international law, not surprisingly, focused on bilateral and multilateral treaties between and among states, the activities of the United Nations, the pronouncements of international tribunals, and (somewhat more controversially) the norms that states had obeyed for long enough that such norms could be deemed customary. This was a legal universe with two guiding principles. First, law was deemed to reside only in the acts of official, state-sanctioned entities. Second, law was seen as an exclusive function of state sovereignty. Both principles, however, have eroded over time, creating the need for a broader framework. The rise of a conception of international human rights in the post-World War II era has transformed individuals into international law stakeholders, possessing their own entitlements against the state. But even apart from individual empowerment, scholars have more recently come to recognize the myriad ways in which the prerogatives of nation-states are cabined by transnational and international actors. Whereas F.A. Mann could confidently state in 1984 that "laws extend so far as, but no further than the sovereignty of the State which puts them into force," many international law scholars have, at least since the end of the Cold War, argued that such a narrow view of how law operates transnationally is inadequate. Thus, the past fifteen years have seen increasing attention to the important—though sometimes inchoate—processes of international norm development. Some scholars have sought to define and understand "transnational legal process," the ways in which nation-states over time come to internalize international or transnational norms. Others have focused on non-traditional legal actors such as non-governmental organizations and their role in defining (and sometimes enforcing) legal standards. And even with regard to classic legal actors such as courts, scholars have noted the increasing willingness of judges to apply international norms transnationally, to engage in a transnational judicial dialogue, or even to adopt conceptions of universal jurisdiction. Yet, this new focus on transnational legal processes, governmental and non- governmental networks, and judicial influence and cooperation across borders, while a step in the right direction, still seems insufficient to describe the complexities of law in an era of globalization. Legal scholars need an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on the work not only of international relations theorists, but also of anthropologists, sociologists, critical geographers, and cultural studies scholars. Such work affords a more nuanced idea of how people actually form affiliations and construct communities, often with little regard for the fixed set of geographical boundaries of the nation-state system.
Historians of the United States have long contended that the study of governmental institutions, including the history of public policy, is no longer central to the teaching and writing of American history. Some lament this development; others hail it as a sign that other worthy topics are finally getting the attention they deserve. Yet is it true? The recent outpouring of scholarship on the relationship between the state and the market, or what an earlier generation would have called political economy, raises questions about this venerable conceit. Indeed, if one were to pick a single word to characterize the state of the field in the history of American political economy, it might well be “robust.”
This essay provides a survey of new research themes, methodologies and empirical and theoretical questions addressed in the other social sciences today and how they can be applied to traditional concerns of social history. Recent trends within economics, sociology and political science especially have generated new interest in historical questions as they relate to the origin, development and role of institutions in defining contemporary societies. Equally new interest in motivation of actors and their interaction with institutions has provided new insights into analysis of personal choice which also offers historians interesting new themes to explore. Thus there is a fruitful area of cooperation which can develop between historians and social scientists because of these new theoretical orientations. An awareness of these trends can help social historians focus their own research just as it allows these social scientists to engage some of the traditional concerns in our discipline.
This article addresses three recent developments in historical sociology: (1) neo-Weberian historical sociology within International Relations; (2) the 'civilizational analysis' approach utilized by scholars of 'multiple modernities'; and (3) the 'third wave' cultural turn in US historical sociology. These developments are responses to problems identified within earlier forms of historical sociology, but it is suggested each fails to resolve them precisely because each remains contained within the methodological framework of historical sociology as initially conceived. It is argued that their common problem lies in the utilization of 'ideal types' as the basis for sociohistorical analysis. This necessarily has the effect of abstracting a set of particular relations from their wider connections and has the further effect of suggesting sui generis endogenous processes as integral to these relations. In this way, each of the three developments continues the Eurocentrism typical of earlier approaches. The article concludes with a call for 'connected histories' to provide a more adequate methodological and substantive basis for an historical sociology appropriate to calls for a properly global historical sociology.
Social Science History 25.4 (2001) 483-533
At this meeting, we celebrate 25 years of the Social Science History Association, the SSHA. With appreciation from all of us, I acknowledge the achievements of our founders and our long-time members. We stand on their shoulders metaphorically and historically. We mark this anniversary with a plenary president’s “founder’s session,” a variety of retrospective and prospective panels, and the conference theme “looking backward and looking forward.” We also commemorate more than 25 years of groundbreaking research and recognition of the presence and practice of social science historians along the hallowed halls of history and social science departments—even if it has not always been accompanied by a ready welcome or complete acceptance. (We mark no fewer years of controversy.)
Twenty-five years is a long time in the history of academic disciplines and interdisciplines, a professional association, and professional life courses. The past quarter century has seen the rise, and sometimes the fall, of numerous “‘new’ histories.” Some of the passages have been unusually boisterous. A cry, a refrain of history as a discipline in “crisis” has often accompanied them (see Bogue 1986, 1987; also Fox-Genovese & Lasch-Quinn 1999; Higham 1989; Novick 1988; Ross 1995, 1998, among the literature). For me, these years also embrace my graduate education, my professional vocation as an interdisciplinary and comparative social historian, and my practice as a social science historian.
Despite the recognized achievements of the fields that constitute the SSHA, the status of contemporary social science history is clouded by criticism that risks misconception and distortion. In her recent presidential address to the American Historical Association, Joyce Appleby (1998: 5, 6) complimented social historians but then silenced them: “The new social history swept all before it for a decade or more”—despite its failure to move from data to understanding. By the late 1970s, she said, “social history settled into middle age, its disruptive potential spent.” Acknowledging “the rich contribution of much of what was once called the ‘new social history,’” Eugene Genovese (1999: 6–7) condemned “much of the history now practiced in the academy [for] becoming increasingly specialized, careerist, bureaucratized, and politically conformist. . . . Contemporary academic history is being systematically gutted of the breadth, the drama, and, most dangerously, the tragedy that have accounted for its abiding hold over the public imagination.” Ironically (to choose a word), Genovese’s Historical Society may reflect the historical moment of its founding much like the SSHA reflected its time. Each presented itself as new, in opposition to established or mainstream practice, general and open, and restorative. For the SSHA, the problem was “traditional” or “narrative” history; for Genovese’s Historical Society, it was the “new histories,” like social science history, that came of age in the decades after the 1960s. Their ideals and agendas differ accordingly. More sympathetic to social science history, Dorothy Ross (1998: 93) observed that “those involved in SSHA’s original aims tend to be disappointed” with the outcomes.
SSHA’s twenty-fifth anniversary provides an appropriate—perhaps a necessary—occasion to review our own history: to reconsider social science history and the SSHA in their historical contexts. As the terms of criticism old and new illustrate, certain fundamental misconceptions plague the field and promote misunderstanding, at times widely. I seek to clarify that understanding by returning to the historical grounds of our origins and development. By renewing that connection, I propose alternative perspectives on several major issues about which misconstruals are common.
Toward that reconceptualization, I offer a set of intersecting reflections. First, perceptions of a discipline of history in crisis are inseparable from considerations of the rise of new histories, such as social science history. Notions of disciplinary crises and reconstructions of conceptions and practices within disciplines intricately interrelate and powerfully influence each other. That recognition aids efforts to understand crises, new histories, and disciplinary change. Second, despite many images to the contrary, the history of social science history reveals not one but many social science...
Also CSST Working Paper #52. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51209/1/442.pdf
Britain was a pioneer in launching a modern welfare state. Before World War I, it instituted workers' compensation, old age pensions, health insurance, and the world's first compulsory system of unemployment insurance. By the end of the nineteenth century, the United States had expanded Civil War pensions into de facto old age and disability pensions for many working- and middle-class Americans. However, during the Progressive Era, as the Civil War generation died off, the United States failed to institute modern pensions and social insurance. Conventional theories of welfare-state development-theories emphasizing industrialization, liberal values, and demands by the organized industrial working class-cannot sufficiently account for these contrasting British and U.S. patterns. Instead, a macropolitical explanation is developed. By the early twentieth century, Britain had a strong civil service and competing, programmatically oriented political parties. Patronage politics had been overcome, and political leaders and social elites were willing to use social spending as a way to appeal to working-class voters. However, the contemporary United States lacked an established civil bureaucracy and was embroiled in the efforts of Progressive reformers to create regulatory agencies and policies free of the "political corruption" of nineteenth-century patronage democracy. Modern social-spending programs were neither governmentally feasible nor politically acceptable at this juncture in U.S. political history.
A Sovereign ProfessionThe Rise of Medical Authority and the Shaping of the Medical System * The Social Origins of Professional Sovereignty * Medicine in a Democratic Culture, 17601850 * The Expansion of the Market * The Consolidation of Professional Authority, 18501930 * The Reconstitution of the Hospital * The Boundaries of Public Health * Escape from the Corporation, 19001930 The Struggle For Medical CareDoctors, the State, and the Coming of the Corporation * The Mirage of Reform * The Triumph of Accommodation * The Liberal Years * End of a Mandate * The Coming of the Corporation
Historical Sociology Roots of Rebellion: Workers' Politics and Organizations in St
- P Abrams
Abrams, P. (1983) Historical Sociology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Bonnell, V. (1983) Roots of Rebellion: Workers' Politics and Organizations in St. Petersburg and Moscow, 1900-1914. Berkeley: University of California Press.
I976) Social Change in a Peripheral Society: The Creation of a Balkan Colony Politics Against Markets: The Social Democratic Road to Power
- D Chirot
- G Andersen
Chirot, D. (I976) Social Change in a Peripheral Society: The Creation of a Balkan Colony. New York: Academic Press. Esping-Andersen, G. (1985) Politics Against Markets: The Social Democratic Road to Power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
I98I) City Trenches: Urban Politics and the Patterning of Class in the United StatesWorking-class formation and the state: nineteenth-century En-gland in American perspective Bringing the State Back In
- I Katznelson
Katznelson, I. (I98I) City Trenches: Urban Politics and the Patterning of Class in the United States. New York: Pantheon. (1985) "Working-class formation and the state: nineteenth-century En-gland in American perspective," in P. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol (eds.) Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985: 257-284.
A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China Vision and Method in Historical SociologyBringing the state back in: strategies of analysis in current re-search Bringing the State Back InThe political formation of the American wel-fare state in historical and comparative perspective
- T Skocpol
Skocpol, T. (I979) States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge Univer-sity Press. [ed.] (1984) Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. (I985) "Bringing the state back in: strategies of analysis in current re-search," in P. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol (eds.) Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press: 3-37. and J. Ikenberry (I983) "The political formation of the American wel-fare state in historical and comparative perspective." Comparative Social Research 6: 87-148.
Between global process and local knowledge: an inquiry into early Latin American social history, I500-1900 Reliving the Past
- W B Taylor
Taylor, W. B. (1985) "Between global process and local knowledge: an inquiry into early Latin American social history, I500-1900," in 0. Zunz (ed.) Reliving the Past. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
The Formation of National States in Western EuropeI98I) As Sociology Meets History Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge ComparisonsRetrieving European lives Reliving the Past
- C Tilly
Tilly, C. [ed.] (1975) The Formation of National States in Western Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (I98I) As Sociology Meets History. New York: Academic Press. (1984) Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. (1985) "Retrieving European lives," in 0. Zunz (ed.) Reliving the Past. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press: II-52.