DOCSLIB.ORG

Marxist Historians and the Question of Class in the French Revolution Author(S): Jack Amariglio and Bruce Norton Source: History and Theory , Feb., 1991, Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marxist Historians and the Question of Class in the French Revolution Author(S): Jack Amariglio and Bruce Norton Source: History and Theory , Feb., 1991, Vol Marxist Historians and the Question of Class in the French Revolution Author(s): Jack Amariglio and Bruce Norton Source: History and Theory , Feb., 1991, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Feb., 1991), pp. 37-55 Published by: Wiley for Wesleyan University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/2505290 REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.com/stable/2505290?seq=1&cid=pdf- reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms and Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to History and Theory This content downloaded from 103.77.40.126 on Wed, 09 Sep 2020 04:31:25 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms MARXIST HISTORIANS AND THE QUESTION OF CLASS IN THE FRENCH REVOLUTION JACK AMARIGLIO and BRUCE NORTON In a recent book about Marxist scholarship on the French Revolution, George Comninel notes that in perhaps no other area of historical research has Marxian theory been so dominant among Western scholars. 1 A long line of Marxist and Marx-indebted historians have presented the Revolution as a moment in which the confluence and conflagration of class forces produced a dramatic transfor- mation in Western societies, encompassing sweeping changes in economics, pol- itics, ideology, and culture. The conclusion is supported by an analytical frame- work known as the "social interpretation" of the Revolution, constructed and elaborated through many decades of work by scholars such as Jean Jaures, Al- bert Mathiez, Georges Lefebvre, Albert Soboul and George Rude'2 Dominating French Revolution historiography certainly from the early 1900s to the 1960s, the framework brings to bear concepts related to Marxist theories of the condi- tions and consequences of class struggle, on the one hand, and more broadly conceived transitions between modes of production, on the other. Thus for many years, whatever else they learned, students of the French Revolution learned that Marxian (or Marx-related) notions of class and class struggle are essential keys to understanding how the modern world came to be what it is. From a formal standpoint, however, the analytical framework that characterizes much of the work of Lefebvre, Soboul, and others, can be maddening. A plethora of often conflicting and confusing concepts of class and class struggle inform this tradi- tion. In our view these confusions, along with other characteristics of these authors' understanding of class, help to account for the more recent collapse of the social interpretation's standing among professional historians. They also help to account for the accompanying judgment that Marxism itself is to blame for the tradition's weaknesses, as well as for an interpretative "iron curtain" which too long protected those weaknesses from criticism and empirical refutation. Charged with a distorting predilection for sociological and economic analysis, 1. George Comninel, Rethinking the French Revolution (London, 1987). 2. Well-known works include Jean Jaures, Histoire socialite de la revolution francaise, ed. A. Soboul, 4 vols. (Paris, 1969); Albert Mathiez, The French Revolution, transl. C. A. Phillips (New York, 1964); Georges Lefebvre, The Coming of the French Revolution, transl. R. R. Palmer (New York, n.d. [copyright 1947]); Albert Soboul, The French Revolution, 1787-1799, transl. A. Forrest and C. Jones (New York, 1975); George Rude, The Crowd in the French Revolution (Oxford, 1967). This content downloaded from 103.77.40.126 on Wed, 09 Sep 2020 04:31:25 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 38 JACK AMARIGLIO AND BRUCE NORTON and a misleading faith in sweeping historical generalizations, Marxian theory as a whole now stands accused rather than acclaimed. As leading "revisionist" historians such as Alfred Cobban, Denis Richet, and Frangois Furet argue, no discernible "bourgeoisie" confronted and defeated a fundamentally feudal ruling class in 1789, thereby breaking legal and political shackles hitherto fettering their growth; only misguided Marxian presuppositions support that view.3 Various of Marx's writings do indeed outline a general conception of the French Revolution supportive of the social interpretation. The story that Jaures, Lefebvre, Soboul, and others tell depends quite heavily on brief discussions, in The Com- munist Manifesto, The German Ideology, and Volume One of Capital, of class formations and struggles involved in the transition from feudalism to capitalism in the West. That story represents the Revolution as the crowning moment in the demise of "landed property" and its prerogatives at the hands of rising com- mercial and industrial entrepreneurs and their functionaries. There is no ques- tion that Marx outlined such a view; what is less certain (as Comninel points out) is whether the argument in question has any close and compatible relation to the class analysis produced in Marx's "mature" writings in Capital, particu- larly Volumes Two and Three. This paper concerns the relation of the social interpretation of the Revolution to Marxian class analysis. Our aim is to evaluate the multiplicity of concepts surrounding the word "class" in this tradition. We do that primarily by examining works by two of its leading proponents, Georges Lefebvre and Albert Soboul. Our concern is less to judge the adequacy of particular explanations of the Revo- lution, whether the social interpretation or the revisionist critique, than to bring to the fore certain critical confusions regarding Marxian class analysis which have affected both sides of the battlefield. Prominent critics of the social interpretation of the French Revolution share a general motivation: to deny "the reality of classes and of class struggle." With this contention Albert Soboul began, in 1974, a defense of the interpretative tra- dition to which he belonged.4 What then are the classes which, in his view, form the stakes and object of this controversy, and what is the "great drama whose essential characters are (those) classes"?I Georges Lefebvre, Soboul's mentor, starts with the three "orders" recognized 3. The degree to which the social interpretation has fallen into disrepute was clearly evident in lead articles and editorials of major U.S. newspapers during the recent bicentennial celebrations of the Revolution. Furet's by now famous adage that the "French Revolution is over" was repeated on page 1 of the New York Times, serving to underscore the parting of the ways between the social interpreters' emphasis on class and their implied approval of revolutionary action (even, perhaps, the Terror), on the one hand, and more recent supposedly "non-ideological," "historically accurate" interpretations of Revolutionary events, on the other. The bicentennial publicity symbolizes the cur- rent abandonment of (presumed) Marxian ideas more generally -even, indeed, among French so- cialist intellectuals. On the latter issue see Carole Biewener, "Loss of a Socialist Vision in France," Rethinking Marxism (Fall and Winter 1990). 4. Albert Soboul, Understanding the French Revolution, transl. A. A. Knutson (New York, 1988). 5. Jean Jaures, quoted in Soboul, Understanding, 230. This content downloaded from 103.77.40.126 on Wed, 09 Sep 2020 04:31:25 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms MARXIST HISTORIANS AND THE QUESTION OF CLASS 39 by the French Crown, and thus with a legal category. There were not, however, three main classes, as he quickly clarifies. For "strictly speaking the clergy, as Sieyes said, was a profession and not a social class."6 The clergy included both nobles, centered in the upper clergy, and commoners, centered at the parish and monastic levels. "There were in reality," Lefebvre concludes, "therefore, only two classes, nobles and commoners." Who are the nobles? Lefebvre begins by considering and rejecting various pos- sible differentiating traits: They were not defined by land-ownership, for many commoners also owned land, and indeed manorial land upon which feudal dues were obligated. Nor are they well defined by tax privileges, for many bourgeois, as Lefebvre informs us, were, like the nobles, exempt from the taille, just as var- ious commoners and cities enjoyed other noble privileges. In terms of income, again, they are indeed a heterogeneous group. "What really characterized the nobility," he concludes "was birth; it was possible to become a noble, but in the eyes of everyone the true nobleman was born."7 For Lefebvre, the defining char- acteristic of this particular "class" is not then a directly economic dimension, but the group's social construction in ancestral, or racial, terms. Who then are the commoners? As a category, Lefebvre notes, shifting ground somewhat, this is "purely legal." Its only "real elements were the social ones - and of these the most important, the one which led and mainly benefited from the Revolution, was the bourgeoisie."8 Who belong to this "real element," the bourgeoisie? Again, Lefebvre begins to define his class precisely by stressing the wild diversity of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • JWOS Vol 10.Indd
    12 “To Free-Town, Our Common Judgement Place”: Commoners in Romeo and Juliet Barbara Mather Cobb Murray State University lthough the bulk of Shakespeare’s plays open with characters of the noble class on stage, fi ve open with commoners. A In each case, the commoner characters direct our gaze and focus our attention on the issue at hand. The device is used frequently throughout Shakespeare’s canon: the commoner character is presented matter-of-factly and sympathetically, with little affect and sometimes with little development, and thus serves a similar role to that of the Chorus in a Sophocles play, leading a commoner audience member to recognize the nature of the confl ict in the play at hand. In Coriolanus we meet an angry crowd, Citizens who are starving and who blame Caius Martius, who will become Coriolanus, for their condition. Although some scholars argue for an ambivalent audience response to this protagonist, using evidence from points later in the play, a commoner audience member would be attuned to his fl aw, his culpability, his propensity toward ego and selfi shness because they identify with the commoners who describe him this way in this fi rst interaction with these characters. Timon of Athens and Julius Caesar both begin with tradesmen: in Timon, a Poet, Painter, Jeweler, and Mercer comment on Fortune and on those whom Fortune favors, like Timon, already precursing his fall as Fortune’s wheel turns; in Julius Caesar, a Carpenter and Cobbler celebrate Caesar, prepossessing the audience toward compassion for the leader besieged by other leaders envious of his power and popularity.
    [Show full text]
  • William Jennings Bryan and His Opposition to American Imperialism in the Commoner
    The Uncommon Commoner: William Jennings Bryan and his Opposition to American Imperialism in The Commoner by Dante Joseph Basista Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the History Program YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY August, 2019 The Uncommon Commoner: William Jennings Bryan and his Opposition to American Imperialism in The Commoner Dante Joseph Basista I hereby release this thesis to the public. I understand that this thesis will be made available from the OhioLINK ETD Center and the Maag Library Circulation Desk for public access. I also authorize the University or other individuals to make copies of this thesis as needed for scholarly research. Signature: Dante Basista, Student Date Approvals: Dr. David Simonelli, Thesis Advisor Date Dr. Martha Pallante, Committee Member Date Dr. Donna DeBlasio, Committee Member Date Dr. Salvatore A. Sanders, Dean of Graduate Studies Date ABSTRACT This is a study of the correspondence and published writings of three-time Democratic Presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan in relation to his role in the anti-imperialist movement that opposed the US acquisition of the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico following the Spanish-American War. Historians have disagreed over whether Bryan was genuine in his opposition to an American empire in the 1900 presidential election and have overlooked the period following the election in which Bryan’s editorials opposing imperialism were a major part of his weekly newspaper, The Commoner. The argument is made that Bryan was authentic in his opposition to imperialism in the 1900 presidential election, as proven by his attention to the issue in the two years following his election loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Of" the Dutch Gentry, 1500-1650: Family, Faith, And
    Swarthmore College Works History Faculty Works History 1-1-1988 Review Of "The Dutch Gentry, 1500-1650: Family, Faith, And Fortune" By S. D. Marshall Robert S. DuPlessis Swarthmore College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-history Part of the History Commons Let us know how access to these works benefits ouy Recommended Citation Robert S. DuPlessis. (1988). "Review Of "The Dutch Gentry, 1500-1650: Family, Faith, And Fortune" By S. D. Marshall". American Journal Of Sociology. Volume 93, Issue 4. 993-995. DOI: 10.1086/228845 https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-history/246 This work is brought to you for free by Swarthmore College Libraries' Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Review Author(s): Robert S. DuPlessis Review by: Robert S. DuPlessis Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 93, No. 4 (Jan., 1988), pp. 993-995 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780624 Accessed: 11-06-2015 19:37 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The Commoner Issue 13 Winter 2008-2009
    In the beginning there is the doing, the social flow of human interaction and creativity, and the doing is imprisoned by the deed, and the deed wants to dominate the doing and life, and the doing is turned into work, and people into things. Thus the world is crazy, and revolts are also practices of hope. This journal is about living in a world in which the doing is separated from the deed, in which this separation is extended in an increasing numbers of spheres of life, in which the revolt about this separation is ubiquitous. It is not easy to keep deed and doing separated. Struggles are everywhere, because everywhere is the realm of the commoner, and the commoners have just a simple idea in mind: end the enclosures, end the separation between the deeds and the doers, the means of existence must be free for all! The Commoner Issue 13 Winter 2008-2009 Editor: Kolya Abramsky and Massimo De Angelis Print Design: James Lindenschmidt Cover Design: [email protected] Web Design: [email protected] www.thecommoner.org visit the editor's blog: www.thecommoner.org/blog Table Of Contents Introduction: Energy Crisis (Among Others) Is In The Air 1 Kolya Abramsky and Massimo De Angelis Fossil Fuels, Capitalism, And Class Struggle 15 Tom Keefer Energy And Labor In The World-Economy 23 Kolya Abramsky Open Letter On Climate Change: “Save The Planet From 45 Capitalism” Evo Morales A Discourse On Prophetic Method: Oil Crises And Political 53 Economy, Past And Future George Caffentzis Iraqi Oil Workers Movements: Spaces Of Transformation 73 And Transition
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Rome Notes.Pptx.Pdf
    Ancient Rome Notes Geography ● Located on peninsula in southern Europe thus creating a sea-faring traders. ● Shaped like a high-heeled boot extending into the Mediterranean Sea. ● Two major mountain ranges, the Alps in the north and the Apennines in the south. Geography ● Hilly, rugged land with several volcanoes such as Mt. Vesuvius. ● Some fertile flatland can be found. ● Mild climate makes it excellent for farming grains, grapes, olives, and citrus fruits. ● Tiber River is one of several rivers that provided fresh water. Economy ● Surplus of crops such as grains and oils enabled growth of Rome. ● Sea traders traveled to Greece, Spain, northern Africa, and kingdoms of Asia. Economy ● Merchants sold meats, vegetables, cloth, sandals and pottery as well as books on Egyptian papyrus. Achievements ● Constructed roads of long lasting materials to withstand traffic and exposure to weather which connected large areas of the country. ● Created aqueducts or channels that carried fresh water from the mountains to the cities. ● Used concrete, a mixture of sand or gravel and cement as a building material. Achievements ● To support the roof they created a vault; a series of arches. ● Sought knowledge in order to improve their lives. ● The story of the Trojan War hero, Aeneas, tells how Ancient Rome was formed with a group of people called the Latins. Social classes ● Strong belief in such values as justice, honesty, valor, and loyalty. ● Society was divided into Rich Ancient Romans two groups: patricians, (wealthy leaders) and plebeians (the common people). Commoner Ancient Romans Social classes ● Slaves were common and those that were educated often held highly skilled professions such as teachers and doctors.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery, Surplus, and Stratification on the Northwest Coast: the Ethnoenergetics of an Incipient Stratification System
    Slavery, Surplus, and Stratification on the Northwest Coast: The Ethnoenergetics of an Incipient Stratification System Eugene E. Ruyle Current Anthropology, Vol. 14, No. 5. (Dec., 1973), pp. 603-63 1. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=OO1 1-3204%28 1973 12%29 14%3A5%3C603%3ASSASOT%3E2.O.CO%3B2-S Current Anthropology is currently published by The University of Chicago Press. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR' s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR' s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/ucpress.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org/ SatJul22 17:49:41 2006 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 14, No. 5, December 1973 © 1973 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Slavery, Surplus, and Stratification on the Northwest Coast: The Ethnoenergetics of an Incipient Stratification Systeml by Eugene E.
    [Show full text]
  • A Companion to the French Revolution Peter Mcphee
    WILEY- BLACKwELL COMPANIONS WILEY-BLACKwELL COMPANIONS TO EUROPEAN HISTORY TO EUROPEAN HISTORY EDIT Peter McPhee Wiley-blackwell companions to history McPhee A Companion to the French Revolution Peter McPhee Also available: e Peter McPhee is Professorial Fellow at the D BY University of Melbourne. His publications include The French Revolution is one of the great turning- Living the French Revolution 1789–1799 (2006) and points in modern history. Never before had the Robespierre: A Revolutionary Life (2012). A Fellow people of a large and populous country sought to of both the Australian Academy of the Humanities remake their society on the basis of the principles and the Academy of Social Sciences, he was made of popular sovereignty and civic equality. The a Member of the Order of Australia in 2012 for drama, success, and tragedy of their endeavor, and service to education and the discipline of history. of the attempts to arrest or reverse it, have attracted scholarly debate for more than two centuries. the french revolution Contributors to this volume Why did the Revolution erupt in 1789? Why did Serge Aberdam, David Andress, Howard G. Brown, it prove so difficult to stabilize the new regime? Peter Campbell, Stephen Clay, Ian Coller, What factors caused the Revolution to take Suzanne Desan, Pascal Dupuy, its particular course? And what were the Michael P. Fitzsimmons, Alan Forrest, to A Companion consequences, domestic and international, of Jean-Pierre Jessenne, Peter M. Jones, a decade of revolutionary change? Featuring Thomas E. Kaiser, Marisa Linton, James Livesey, contributions from an international cast of Peter McPhee, Jean-Clément Martin, Laura Mason, acclaimed historians, A Companion to the French Sarah Maza, Noelle Plack, Mike Rapport, Revolution addresses these and other critical Frédéric Régent, Barry M.
    [Show full text]
  • I Geography A
    New Dorp High School Social Studies Department AP Global Mr. Hubbs Aim: How did Rome establish a Republic? I Geography a. Located on a peninsula b. 3 surrounding islands c. located near the Tiber River built on 7 hills for protection d. It was also a strategic location, center of trade and commerce II Early Civilizations 1. 1500–1000 BCE Indo-Europeans migrate to Rome (spoke Latin) 2. 800-500 BCE Greeks and Etruscans migrate to Italy 3. Etruscans turned Rome into a city 4. Greek culture blended into Rome 5. art, architecture, literature, alphabet, olives and grapes all transferred to Rome 6. 509 BCE Romans drive out foreigners, begin independent rule III Republic a. Landowners and aristocrats had the power b. 300 man senate was center of gov’t c. Senators were patricians (a member of one of the original citizen families of ancient Rome) d. 2 Consuls elected annually (they are chief civil and military magistrates) e. Tribune charged with protection of lives and property of plebeians (commoner) IV Social Class a. Patricians- aristocrats, landowners, senators, MOST POWER b. Plebeians- common people -Little say in gov’t, no intermarriage -Had their own assembly V Law Code a. 451 Twelve Tables were a system of laws that were created to organize prosecution for crimes and trials b. Also used to protect plebeians from abusive patricians c. Use of judges VI Military a. Romans skilled in battle and allies can become citizens b. Superior discipline, high values, courage c. Phalanx was used d. Roman Legion 3000-6000 men This work is the intellectual property of MrHubbshistory.com.
    [Show full text]
  • World History--Part 1. Teacher's Guide [And Student Guide]
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 462 784 EC 308 847 AUTHOR Schaap, Eileen, Ed.; Fresen, Sue, Ed. TITLE World History--Part 1. Teacher's Guide [and Student Guide]. Parallel Alternative Strategies for Students (PASS). INSTITUTION Leon County Schools, Tallahassee, FL. Exceptibnal Student Education. SPONS AGENCY Florida State Dept. of Education, Tallahassee. Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services. PUB DATE 2000-00-00 NOTE 841p.; Course No. 2109310. Part of the Curriculum Improvement Project funded under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part B. AVAILABLE FROM Florida State Dept. of Education, Div. of Public Schools and Community Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, Turlington Bldg., Room 628, 325 West Gaines St., Tallahassee, FL 32399-0400. Tel: 850-488-1879; Fax: 850-487-2679; e-mail: cicbisca.mail.doe.state.fl.us; Web site: http://www.leon.k12.fl.us/public/pass. PUB TYPE Guides - Classroom - Learner (051) Guides Classroom Teacher (052) EDRS PRICE MF05/PC34 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Accommodations (Disabilities); *Academic Standards; Curriculum; *Disabilities; Educational Strategies; Enrichment Activities; European History; Greek Civilization; Inclusive Schools; Instructional Materials; Latin American History; Non Western Civilization; Secondary Education; Social Studies; Teaching Guides; *Teaching Methods; Textbooks; Units of Study; World Affairs; *World History IDENTIFIERS *Florida ABSTRACT This teacher's guide and student guide unit contains supplemental readings, activities,
    [Show full text]
  • Modernity, Cosmopolitanism, and the Emergence of Middle Classes in Tonga
    Modernity, Cosmopolitanism, and the Emergence of Middle Classes in Tonga Niko Besnier “The Embarrassment of the Middle Classes” A recurrent issue in our understanding of the transformations experienced by Pacifi c Island societies, and societies of the developing world in gen- eral, is the extent to which traditional social arrangements (eg, rank-based systems, inequalities predicated on colonialism, or local forms of egalitari- anism) are being displaced by social-class structures. A focus on these his- torical transformations demands that we address what constitutes a social class—an almost unsolvable problem, but nevertheless one for which we are fortunate to have a distinguished intellectual genealogy. The work of two of the founding fathers of modern-day social science, Karl Marx and Max Weber, can be understood as lifelong projects to understand social inequality in the West in terms of social-class stratifi cation. Yet, as social scientists, we continue to have diffi culties apprehending social class, par- ticularly in contexts that are not traditionally viewed as the locus of class hierarchies. This article seeks to address these diffi culties in the context of one Pacifi c Island society, Tonga. The problem is particularly acute when one deals with the middle classes, as opposed to the working or elite classes—those who are betwixt- and-between, caught in a liminal position that, like other forms of liminal- ity, are supposed to go one way or another, while in fact they remain in suspension. This suspension is particularly pertinent to the “middleness” of the middle classes and renders their very nature unstable, in contrast to the solidity that Marx attributed to both the proletariat and the bour- geoisie, groups whose self-consciousness is fi rmly ingrained in their identi- ties, and who theoretically have little trouble fi nding a common “enemy” The Contemporary Pacific, Volume 21, Number 2, 215–262 © 2009 by University of Hawai‘i Press 215 216 the contemporary pacifi c • 21:2 (2009) whose interests are opposed to their own.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery in the Roman Economy
    Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics Slavery in the Roman economy Version 1.0 September 2010 Walter Scheidel Stanford University Abstract: This paper discusses the location of slavery in the Roman economy. It deals with the size and distribution of the slave population and the economics of slave labor and offers a chronological sketch of the development of Roman slavery. © Walter Scheidel. [email protected] Building on Greek and Hellenistic institutions, ancient Rome created the largest slave society in history. 1 There are several reasons for defining the Roman Empire as a slave society, above all in its Italian core but also to varying degrees in its subject territories. Slaves, numbering in the millions and widely dispersed, accounted for a non-trivial share of its total population. In key areas, slaves were not merely present but supported what has been termed a ‘slave mode of production,’ a mode that rested both on an integrated system of enslavement, slave trade, and slave employment in production, and on “the systematic subjection of slaves to the control of their masters in the process of production and reproduction.” 2 Most importantly, Rome counts as a slave society in terms of the structural location of slavery: dominant groups, once again above all at the core, relied to a significant degree of slave labor to generate surplus and maintain their position of dominance. 3 Since the role of slavery in central productive processes turned Rome into a ‘slave economy’ just as the widespread domination of slaves as a primary social relationship made it a ‘slave society,’ these two terms may be used interchangeably, especially in those strata where slaves and ex-slaves continuously enveloped owners and patrons and mediated their interaction with the freeborn population.
    [Show full text]
  • Twelve Who Ruled
    Twelve Who Ruled Tlte Year of the Terror in the French fuuolution Bv R. R. PALMER PRINCETON PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS (tt+t/ r,rst) rHE TWE,LVE CHAPTER I tlce Earth Tw)e/ae Terrorists to Be " stranger se t of Clotr'd'-C onr'peller's ._CARLYLII TH E FRIIN clr REVOLU TIo N m' ez, e r s a19." : NYONE who had business with the government of the Reign of Terror directed his steps to the Tuileries, an old the Guillotine"' a law- BpnrneNu Baninr, b. tT5S, "Anacreotl of palace of the kings of France on the right bank of the Seine -- t^uyJ.:t {amily, easy going' affable' hard- ,., brecl in " between the Louvre and the Tuileries Gardens, in which tilen as worl<irtg, clotlucrrt. now children played and chestnut trees blossomed in April' Enter- Bn.rauo-VennNur, b' t75(t' also a larvyer and sou ing the courtyard on the opposite side of the building from the JeeN-Nlcor-as garden, saw signs of a governnlellt not very sure of of a lawyer, a lvriter and agitator, impatiet'rt' clanlototls' the visitor itself, for two cannon and a file of soldiers guarded the door' enginecr' nathenlaticiau' LazenB C,ttltlot, b. r753, army officer, Passing tl-rese sentries and climbing what had lately been called of Victory'"' stern patriot, "Organizer the Queen's Staircase, he came into a series of communicating people, busy little function- Tnan-Manrr Cor-ror u'I{onnOIS, b. ]r75o, actor ancl playwright, chambers crowded vn'ith all manlter of and another, clerks carrying papers to be signed self -made, crude, excitable' aries of one kind by the great men within, army officers, politicians and contractors family mall' a GBoncBs CournoN, b.
    [Show full text]