Chronicles of a Death Foretold

In order to appreciate the impact of I the 'death of Marxism' upon the historical study of the twentieth century, it is important to note, in this as in so much else, the distinction between Marxism as a methodological tool and Communism as a political practice. If we confined our attentions exclusively to the former, there would not be very much to say. The major works of Marxist historiography, in Britain and in continental Europe, dealt with earlier periods, notably early-modern Europe, revolutionary-era France and (to a lesser extent) early-industrial Britain. This was in keeping with the historical concerns of Marx himself and of the first Marxist historians who followed him, all of whom were chiefly interested in the transition from feudalism to capitalism, or the revolutionary origins of bourgeois society. A self-consciously Marxist historiography of the twentieth century, on the other hand, had always to face the hurdle of explaining why it was that the prospects for revolution in the West had declined steadily since 1848, and how it had come about that such revolutionary transformations as could be identified had all taken place in decidedly 'backward' locations.