Craig Calhoun

Book review: as sociology meets history by

Charles Tilly

Article (Published version)

(Refereed)

Original citation:

Calhoun, Craig Calhoun, Craig (1983) Book review: as sociology meets history by Charles Tilly. The journal of
modern history , 55 (3). pp. 503-505. ISSN 0022-2801

© 1983 The University of Chicago Press

This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/42209/

Available in LSE Research Online: November 2012

LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the
School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual
authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any
article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research.
You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities
or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE
Research Online website.
As Sociology Meets History by Charles Tilly
Review by: Craig Calhoun
The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 55, No. 3 (Sep., 1983), pp. 503-505
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1878602 .
Accessed: 26/11/2012 09:40

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 support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Modern History.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.216 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:40:26 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Book Reviews 503

latterhave been revised to "focus attentionupon broad historicalproblems"

ratherthanthebooks originallyunderreview.Nonethelesstheyoftenretaintheir
initialsparkiness.There is a usefulsurveyof Macfarlaneand Thomas on magic
and witchcraft and a sharpcritiqueofTrevor-Roper's elderlypaperon theEuropean
witchcraze (though more recent research has tended to substantiatesome of
Trevor-Roper'spoints). The statisticalgullibilityofcrimehistoriansis observed
and condemned.And thereare some trenchantattackson E. P. Thompson's view
ofthepolarizationofEnglishsocietyin theeighteenthcenturybetweenpatricians
and plebs: Stone argues persuasivelyforthe importantrise of professionaland
othermiddlinggroupsin England aftertheRestorationwhichprovidedsome of
the economic and social adhesive helpingto keep the political systemmore or
less stickingtogether.The review of Kearney's work on the universitiesis a
masterpieceof eruditionand critical attack,easily outgunningthe opposition.
At the same time several of the contributionshave clearly lost some of their
initialimpactthroughage and quite a few have been overtakenby events. The
piece on "Court and Country,"for instance, reads strangelyin the contextof
thegreatwealthof studieswhichhave appearedin thelast decade on theEnglish
provinces. Referencesto the lack of industrialgrowthor consumerdemand in
thepost-Restorationperiod have been shown to be mistakenby the researchof
JoanThrisk,Alan Everitt,and others.
While these pieces still have a whiffof corditeabout them,of engagements
past, the historiographicalessays have a different tone, morein the natureof a
full-dressreviewof thefleet."Historyand theSocial Sciences" surveystherise
of historyas a humanisticdiscipline and its fragmentation underthe impactof
Max Weber,theAnnales school, thepsycho-historians, econometricians,and so
on. The new specialisms are generallyattacked,sometimesa littleintemperately
(is itreallytrueto say "the habitof crunchinghistoricalexplanationintoa single
one-way hierarchyof causation . . . is now becoming the hallmarkof much
modernFrenchscholarship"?). More optimistic,thereis a good account of the
problemsand value of theprosopographicalapproach. Finally "The Revival of
Narrative"returnsto thethemeof thelife and timesof theprofessionin thelast
halfcentury,describingtheretreatbyhistoriansfromquantitative,Annales-type
dissection to a new stresson telling a story,which Stone sees as markingthe
end of theattemptto producea coherentand "scientific" explanationof change
in the past. The picturehere seems too schematic,exaggeratingthe decline of
thenarrative approachin thefirstplace andgivingundueweighttoitsreappearance.
The collection thenis not vintageStone. It is a pityperhapsthatsome of his
older and more perdurablearticles on Elizabethan trade, social mobility,and
education have not been included. But there is much to keep one alert, not
infrequentlybristlingover ideas, always delightingin the prose. Perhaps we
should thinkof thisvolume as a refitting exercise, scrapingoffthebarnaclesof
formervoyages. Before the nextcircumnavigationof English society.

PETER CLARK
UniversityofLeicester

As Sociology Meets History. By Charles Tilly.

New York: Academic Press, 1981. Pp. xvi+237. $25.00

Charles Tilly is history'ssociologist and sociology's historian.His prestigein

each field is based largely on his crossing of the boundary,bearing esoteric

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.216 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:40:26 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
504 Book Reviews
knowledgefromforeignlands. In this, he is unlike his formerteacherGeorge
Homans, who successfullypursuedbothhistoricalscholarshipand sociological
theory,but who did each withinits discipline and broughttheminto minimal
juncture.Junctureis preciselywhatTilly is about, and in thecurrentcollection
of essays, it is his major task to introducehistoryto sociology.
The essays are an odd mix, however,of the casual and the serious, the long
and the short,the good and the bad. They begin witha sociologist's overview
of whathistoryis (notfailedsociology,butratheran objectlessonforsociologists
on the importanceof time and place), and follow withnotes and commentson
the use of computersin historicalresearch,the virtuesof George Homans, the
lack of virtuesof Emile Durkheim,seventeenth-century France,nineteenth-century
Britain,and the overall processes of state-buildingand proletarianization.Few
oftheessayshave beenproperlypublishedbefore,thoughmosthavebeenavailable
as papers of the Universityof Michigan's CenterforResearch on Social Orga-
nization. The essays offerinsightsintoTilly's thoughtand method,butreaders
should dismiss the hope that he has pulled togethera coherentstatementof
theoreticalapproach.
Contraryto widespread impressionamong historians,Tilly is not really a
social theorist.Most of his writingson theoriesof collective action are quite
casual-summary statementsat thetextbooklevel. His theoreticalcommentsare
complements to his methodologicalnotes;theyare, it wouldappear,moreintended
as partof a manual forhis impressivearmyof graduatestudentsthanas serious
independentstatements.This is particularlythe case withthis volume. It does
nothave a clear orientationto anybodyofprofessionalhistoriansor sociologists,
but would be of considerable help to any studentabout to begin workingwith
Tilly.
Tilly's attackon Durkheimis a good example of the way in which he treats
serious social theory.It is morea clever dismissal thana sustainedrebuttal.The
essay is thirteenpages long, and Durkheimdoesn't make his appearance until
the sixthpage. In fact,Tilly doesn't confrontDurkheim's social theoryin any
cohesive way (as one mightexpect fromthe titleof the essay) but only attacks
the use of Durkheim's notionof anomie to explain protest.There are several
problemswiththisattack.In thefirst place, itis reallyaimedat 1950sfunctionalism
oftheParsons/Smelser variety,notat Durkheim.Hereis Tilly:"Durkheimindicates
thatshort-rundisruptionsof the balance between moralityand organizational
structureresultfromrapid change, accelerated economic growth,or industrial
crisis and likewise incite disorderin the groups most affectedby them. In our
historicalmaterial,we mightreasonablyexpect to findrapidrural-to-urban mi-
gration,massive industrialization,and major economic fluctuationsproducing
exceptionallyhigh levels of conflictand protest" (p. 104). In fact, Durkheim
had verylittleto say about "conflict" and "protest"; his accountof anomiewas
appliedprimarilytotheexplanationofsuicide, withonlycasual asides on crowds.
It is certainlytrue thathis work fitsinto a long line of work treatingpopular
protestas a sign of psychological disturbance,the argumentof which Smelser
is the foremostcontemporaryexponent.But Tilly's critique,surely,should be
aimed at the failureto realize how much organizationprotesttakes, and thus
how much solidaritymustexist among membersof protestinggroups. Suicide,
by contrast,requiresverylittlecollective mobilization.One might,in fact,use
some of Durkheim's accountof how groupsare knittogetherto explainthesocial
organizationunderpinningprotestand conflict.This has been done. Indeed,
Durkheimis a traceableancestorof "resourcemobilizationtheory,"an approach

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.216 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:40:26 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Book Reviews 505

to theanalysis of collective action withwhichTilly himselfhas been identified.

But Tilly settlesforthe cheap shot. The factthatthis is unfairto Durkheimis
less importantthan the fact that it inhibitshistorical scholarshipand theory
building. It leaves Tilly knockingover strawmen, ratherthanbuildingstrong
new theories.
Tilly is at his best,as well as sometimeshis worst,whenhe teases an hypothesis
out of previousworkand sets out to devise ingeniousways of testingit. He is a
masterof the art of methodologicaladaptation,refusingto surrenderto mere
descriptionjust because the most advanced techniquesof causal analysis are
hardto use withhistoricaldata. Since mostof thehistoricalessays in thisbook
are notreal researchreports,however,butattemptsto exemplifyparticularsorts
of approaches, the book itselfis unfairto Tilly. It fails to convey any sense of
really serious historicalanalysis, thoughelsewhere Tilly has produceda good
deal of this. Here we get mainly generalities; particularcases appear not as
evidence but as examples.
Three more or less serious historicalessays are included. The first,on war
and peasantrebellionin seventeenth-century France, shows thatexcessive focus
on issues of land use and tenurecan mislead the studentof peasant rebellions.
Resistance to commercializationand taxation-especially militaryexactions
needs to be takeninto account. This is a familiarand sound Tilly argument.A
second essay, "How (And to Some Extent,Why) to StudyBritishContention,"
is moreof a hodgepodge. It containsa verybriefand casual reviewofthepopular
politics of 1828-34, a much more sustainedaccount of how the Tilly group is
conductingresearchinto "contentiousgatherings"duringtheperiod (primarily
by an elaborate coding of newspaperaccounts forthecomputer)and a few par-
agraphs about where the analysis seems to be going. The project sounds very
interestingfromthis preview, and one will look forwardto research results;
perhapsthis article originatedas a successful grantproposal or applicationfor
renewal.The conclusions,however,are at thelevel of "The contentious gatherings
of 1828-1834, then,were not only meaningfulin theirown terms.They help
us understandthe political changes thatwere going on in Britainas a whole in
ways thatparliamentary speeches and thecorrespondenceof leaderscannot" (p.
178). In otherwords,Tilly is still arguingin favorof creatingtheSocial Science
HistoryAssociation, or promotingthe "new social history"withits studyof
"historyfromthebottomup." In "States, Taxes, and Proletarianization,"Tilly
makestwopointswhich,again, will notshockthereader.First,"naturalincrease,
not social mobility,played the major partin thegrowthof theproletariatsince
1500 and, especially, after1800" (p. 199). Second, thecosts of stateformation
and war-makingboth led statemakersto promoteand protectthe accumulation
ofcapital,andpromotedthecommercialization oflaborandcommodity production.
A concludingoddity.While Tilly periodicallypraises Marx as a counterpart
(along withHomans) to his vilificationsof Durkheim,he doesn't seem to take
Marx veryseriously,or to see therole of Marxisttheoryin historyas muchmore
than an exhortationto look to the developmentof capitalism and the conflict
among classes as centralto the explanationof historicalchange. I am not sure
wherethis leaves his relationshipto Marxism,except thatit leaves himneither
a followernor a serious critic.

CRAIG CALHOUN
UniversityofNorthCarolina at Chapel Hill

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.216 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:40:26 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions