Liang Minsu: New Trends in British Marxist Historiography Since the 1990s
Since the 1980s and 1990s, the generational evolution and vigorous development of British Marxist historiography have slowed, making it difficult for a new crop of followers and successors to emerge who can be mentioned in the same breath as the eminent historians of the senior generation. However, the thematic horizons, core consciousness, and historiographical orientations systematically constructed by British Marxist historiography remain important topics in contemporary international historiographical trends and serve as the disciplinary hallmarks for subsequent British Marxist history. The core concepts and academic ideas of the British Marxist school continue to be valued by the international academic community, particularly within Britain. This article focuses on the inheritance and development of the scholarship of earlier Marxist historians by British Marxist historians and researchers since the 1990s. It pays particular attention to the innovative achievements of British Marxist New Labour History and Marxist feminist historiography, elucidating the new contexts and orientations of British Marxist historiography since the 1990s from the perspectives of conceptual construction and practical pathways.
I. The New Context of British Marxist Historiography since the 1990s
From the perspective of the relationship between Britain's historical era and its intellectual context, the academic evolution and fundamental trends of the British Marxist school since the 1980s and 1990s have manifested as a transformation of historiographical thought and a generational transition co-created by two generations of Marxist historians. Under the theoretical premise of upholding historical materialism, British Marxist historians have systematically constructed multiple historical understandings of Marxist historiographical concepts through rich and diverse practices of historical writing, thereby deriving multi-dimensional forms of Marxist historiographical practice. Since the 1990s, with the end of the Cold War and the decline of positivist [1] hermeneutics in Western academia, Marxist theory has faced severe challenges. Even so, the British academic community has published a large number of historical works discussing Marxist theoretical methods, which is rare in the international historical arena. These works either defend Marxist historiography theoretically or expand its research fields through disciplinary practice. Most of them examine and affirm the academic utility and theoretical value of the Marxist historical materialist outlook and its historiographical paradigm from the evolution of the Marxist historiographical tradition and ideological genealogy, thus promoting new developments in Marxist historiography. Among these, the most famous is the British Marxist historian and Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) activist Willie Thompson. Having long served as the chair of the Socialist History Society (the successor organization to the Communist Party Historians' Group [2]), he adhered to the standpoint of historical materialism and committed himself to research on communism and social movements, as well as the challenges of postmodernism and the "historical turn." Additionally, David Parker, a researcher of early modern France at the University of Leeds and a Marxist historian, explored the transition from French absolutism to modern society; he is world-renowned for editing Ideology, Absolutism and the English Revolution: Debates of the British Communist Historians, 1940–1956. The series of works by the Scottish Marxist historian Neil Davidson addresses Marxist historical theory and historiographical interpretation, elucidating historical materialism and its contemporary significance while emphasizing that Marxism, while retaining its historical image, should possess the potential to adapt to the evolution of social thought.
In fact, British academic writings on the interpretation of Marxist theoretical methods and historiographical theory are quite prolific. For instance, Gregory Claeys of Royal Holloway, University of London, focuses on socialist analysis, utopianism, and dystopian studies, seeking the theoretical value and historiographical significance of Marxism in the 21st century. Göran Therborn of Wolfson College, Cambridge, based on a review of the course of Marxism in the 20th century, looks forward to its influence on 21st-century radical thought, emphasizing the shift of left-wing intellectual thought in philosophy, sociology, and politics from Marxism to post-Marxism. Matt Perry of Newcastle University examines the enormous influence of Marxism on historical research through the evolution of historiographical perspectives from the formation of Marxism to the challenge of postmodernism. It is evident that Marxist theory still holds important value and status in the generational inheritance of British Marxist historians, just as Victor Kiernan pointed out: the true (solid) value of Marxism lies in its theory of history, politics, economics, or art, and as long as these remain unfulfilled, it will always be a psychological and ethical commitment. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the British scholar Anthony Kalashnikov has again explored the theoretical contributions and practical value of British Marxist historians to the field of history, affirming the landmark significance of the British school for the development of 20th-century historiography.
In Western academia, many non-Marxist historians have also conducted series of explorations centered on the rich historical works, profound historical thoughts, and powerful academic influence of the old and new generations of Marxist historians, re-examining the academic tradition and international reputation of British Marxist historiography. For example, following the deaths of famous historians such as Hobsbawm and Thompson, reflections on their academic paths and writings on their academic lives have appeared one after another, receiving a wide welcome from readers. Representative works include British scholar Gregory Elliott’s Hobsbawm: History and Politics, Richard J. Evans’s Eric Hobsbawm: A Life in History, Stephan Woodhams’s History in the Making: Raymond Williams, Edward Thompson and Radical Intellectuals 1936–1956, and Nick Stevenson’s Culture, Ideology and Socialism: Raymond Williams and E.P. Thompson. Additionally, there are Canadian scholar Bryan D. Palmer’s E.P. Thompson: Objections and Oppositions and New Zealand scholar Scott Hamilton’s The Crisis of Theory: E.P. Thompson, the New Left and Post-war British Politics. Meanwhile, works such as American scholar Dennis Dworkin’s Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies, British scholar Keith Laybourn’s Marxism in Britain: Dissent, Decline and Revival (1945–2000), and Stuart Macintyre’s A Proletarian Science: Marxism in Britain (1917–1933) have long conducted in-depth explorations of the developmental process, characteristics, and major achievements of British Marxist historiography. These works have once again drawn attention to British Marxist history.
Furthermore, the second generation of British Marxist historians has systematically reflected on the British social movement and the communist movements and their chosen paths in various countries around the world. Analyzing the great potential of Marxist social movement theory has become a new starting point for pursuing Marxism in Britain and a new growth point in the field of Marxist historiography. Examples include Raphael Samuel’s The Lost World of British Communism, John Saville’s Memoirs of the Left, Willie Thompson’s The Good Old Cause: British Communism 1920–1991, Philip Bounds’s Notes from the End of History: A Memoir of the Welsh Left, Noreen Branson’s History of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Volumes 3–4), Marxism and Social Movements edited by Colin Barker and John Krinsky et al., Laurence Cox and Alf Gunvald Nilsen’s We Make Our Own History: Marxism and Social Movements in the Twilight of Neoliberalism, and Steve Cushion’s A Hidden History of the Cuban Revolution: How the Working Class Shaped the Guerrillas' Victory. At the same time, British academia has in recent years paid increasing attention to research on the arduous establishment, convoluted evolution, and eventual dissolution of the CPGB. For instance, John Callaghan’s The Communist Party of Great Britain, 1951–68: Cold War, Crisis and Conflict (Volume 5) and Kevin Morgan’s Bolshevism and the British Left (Volumes 1–3) are authoritative works in this regard. Other series of works such as Party People, Communist Lives edited by John McIlroy and Kevin Morgan, Max Adereth’s The French Communist Party: A Critical History (1920–84) [3], James Eaden and Dave Renton’s The Communist Party of Great Britain since 1920, Matthew Worley’s Class against Class: The Communist Party in Britain between the Wars, Keith Laybourn and Dylan Murphy’s Under the Red Flag: A History of British Communism, c. 1849–1991, and Geoff Andrews’s Endgame and New Times: The Lost World of British Communism 1964–1991 have provided rich historical materials and academic grounds for future generations to understand the actual CPGB. Furthermore, British academia has seen research related to the early Marxist historiographical explorations of the CPGB. For example, James Klugmann’s History of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Volumes 1–2) and the article "Peripheral Visions: Communist Historiography in Britain" by John McIlroy and Alan Campbell can be seen as periodic summaries of this type of research, focusing on different perspectives and methods in British Communist historiography and reflecting on the methodological significance of the relevant history.
Since the 1990s, many Marxist organizations, journals, and media outlets have continued to serve as important carriers for the intellectual forms of British Marxist theoretical historiography. On one hand, several internationally renowned British academic journals have become ideological front lines for Marxist historians. For example, hundreds of specialized papers published in professional journals such as the English Historical Review, Past & Present, History Workshop Journal, New Left Review, and Radical History Review have either started from the "history from below" perspective of the first generation of Marxist historians—concentrating on fields such as "cultural society," "class consciousness," "nationality and race," and "national identity"—or examined issues of interest to second-generation Marxist historians like Perry Anderson, such as "women and gendered society," "modernity and postmodern origins," "political and sociological critique," and "Marxist theory." On the other hand, some organizations and propaganda journals with Marxist qualities have multi-dimensionally constructed solid arenas for the encounter between Marxist and non-Marxist ideas. Two major relevant organizations and research institutions established in Britain in the 1990s are prominent. One is the Socialist History Society, established in 1992 as the successor to the Communist Party Historians' Group following the dissolution of the CPGB. Its relevant journal is the Marxist memorial annual Theory & Struggle published by Liverpool University Press, covering Marxist theoretical debates, British and international labor history, and progressive history such as gender, race, and peace movements. The other is the Marx Memorial Library and Workers' School, founded in 1933 [4], which remains a core organization of the British labor movement to this day, housing publications and archives on trade unionism, peace and solidarity movements, and the Spanish Civil War. Additionally, Marxism Today, founded in London in 1957, was acquired by the New Statesman in 1991; this magazine published a special issue on Marxist historiography in 1998.
With the successive passing of the first generation of paradigmatic Marxist historians, and after reaching the peak of academic intellectual creation and historiographical practice in the 1970s and 1980s, the British Marxist school has become somewhat quiet. Compared to the first generation, the second generation has found it difficult to reproduce the former glory in terms of the publication of historical works or the influence of historiographical thought. However, the second-generation British Marxist historiographical group has shown a relatively stable continuity in generational inheritance and intellectual succession, along with changes in specific directions. For instance, after Thompson’s death in 1993, second-generation Marxist historians and their successors valued Thompson’s class perspective and New Labour History orientation, discussing them within the scholarly and cultural history of the mid-20th-century New Left social-political movements and the two generations of scholars as a whole, striving to embody this continuity. Simultaneously, a group of new forces emerged within the second-generation British Marxist historiographical community. They gained fame through participation in the British "History Workshop Movement" and the feminist historiographical revival of the 1970s and late 1980s, making unique contributions to the writing and practical dissemination of British feminist historiography since the 1990s.
II. The Orientation of British Marxist New Labour History under the Horizon of the "Cultural Turn"
Regarding the relationship between core concepts and historiographical trends, if the established academic achievements and intergenerational succession of historical thought among two generations of British Marxist historians reflect the formative context, internal mechanisms, and paradigmatic shifts of British Marxist historical concepts and systems, then since the 1990s, the orientation of the Marxist "New Labor History" under the horizon of the "cultural turn" [5] has highlighted the value of this literary form and the significance of the evolution of historical concepts.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the trend of the "cultural turn" emerged in Western historiography. Drawing on interdisciplinary theories and methods, and aided by theoretical resources from anthropology, cultural studies, and postmodernism, it liberated the historical subject from socio-economic structural relations. Through the practice of deep cultural analysis and the perspective of microhistory, it emphasized the historical writing of popular daily life and social experience. Western historiography under the "cultural turn" emphasized the narrativity of history and the accessibility of historical writing. It advocated for the use of unofficial sources and folk historical documents, focusing on examining the behavioral etiquette, everyday images, cultural habits, ritual symbols, and linguistic signs of ordinary people. It sought to reconstruct the daily lives of common folk in a changing world, revealing the underlying logic of social-historical evolution.
In Britain, Raymond Williams’s Culture and Society was the first to respond to the "cultural turn," beginning with the impact of cultural concepts on mass culture since the Industrial Revolution to conduct a comprehensive investigation of the concept of culture. E.P. Thompson, from the perspective of "cultural analysis," described class consciousness as "the way in which these [productive] experiences are handled in cultural terms: embodied in traditions, value-systems, ideas, and institutional forms." In the 1960s, represented by Thompson, New Left intellectuals and the first generation of Marxist historians reflected on the connotation of culture at a theoretical level, proposing the theoretical concept of "cultural Marxism" and constructing the historiographical paradigm of "cultural Marxist" history. While adhering to historical materialism, they utilized class analysis and a "history from below" perspective to deeply investigate the rise of British popular culture and the formation of working-class "experience" and "consciousness" during specific historical periods. They examined the cultural horizon and historical interpretative functions of Marxist historical writing, and scrutinized the overall interpretive frameworks of related historical ontology, methodology, and epistemology, gradually finding the methods for New Labor History research. Therefore, in a sense, Thompson promoted the formation of the postwar British Marxist New Labor History paradigm and constructed the theoretical foundation for the field of British New Labor History since the 1990s, demonstrating the significance of British Marxist New Labor History within the "cultural turn."
Under the guidance of the cultural research traditions and theoretical methods of the first generation of Marxist historians such as Thompson, second-generation Marxist historians—including Raphael Samuel, Sheila Rowbotham, Anna Davin, and Timothy Mason—focused on the daily life experiences of ordinary people. They achieved great success in fields such as oral history, women's history, family history, and local history, further advancing the "cultural turn" of contemporary British Marxist history. In historiographical practice, this "cultural turn" took the "History Workshop Movement" [6] of the 1970s as an opportunity to promote intergenerational succession among the British Marxist historian community, eventually laying the foundation for the revival of British Marxist-feminist historical narrative after the 1990s. Since the 1990s, under the influence of "beyond the cultural turn" in Western academia, subsequent Marxist historians have continually explored the value of interdisciplinary contexts and theoretical methods for traditional labor history research, as well as new interpretations of classical themes. They have expanded research topics to the historical contexts of transnational regional mobility and global labor history, fulfilling the guiding function of Thompson's "culturalist" paradigm for British Marxist New Labor History and extending the external effects of the "global working class" historical writing paradigm.
For example, since the 1990s, subsequent Marxist historians have produced prolific work from the perspective of "Global Labor History," focusing on Thompson's working-class historical outlook and its influence on the writing of global labor history and Third World labor history. "Global Labor History" was primarily proposed by Marcel van der Linden, emphasizing transnational and regional research on labor relations and workers' social movements based on research themes in a broad sense. Given that relevant research involves not only individual laborers but also long-term changes in laborers' family relations, Linden argues that the research period can be traced back to a much more distant past. The emergence of "Global Labor History" is also related to the international academic critique of the "cultural turn" in New Cultural History. This critique points out that past research exaggerated the importance of "experience" and "language," which easily led to the fragmentation of labor history research. Influenced by this, historians have once again emphasized the role of "social structure" and "grand narratives" in class "experience," promoting the integration of labor history and global history.
In summary, British New Labor History under the "cultural turn" advocates for the organic integration of Marxist methodology with the subject of British labor social history. Thompson’s "culturalist" labor history paradigm played an important role in the transformation of traditional labor history into British New Labor History. First, the British New Labor History paradigm and narrative style possess distinct Marxist theoretical attributes and methodological inclinations; its academic aim ultimately points toward a critical analysis of contemporary capitalism as a whole. Second, British New Labor History emphasizes "history from below" and the Marxist method of class analysis, examining labor’s social life and the history of ideas from a holistic and dynamic perspective, rather than focusing on the "social" history of trade union groups and the "event" history of Labor Party organizations as traditional labor history did. Third, based on broad historical sources, British New Labor History focuses on the study of the "experience" of laboring class life and the diverse changes in "consciousness" themes within broad socio-cultural shifts. In short, given the historical context of the new turn in British Marxist history and the decline of the New Left movement since the 1990s, the field of British New Labor History achieved thematic adjustments and theoretical updates, focusing on exploring the complexity of historical subjects and identity. In the academic context of globalization and the global history orientation, subsequent British Marxist labor historians have actively participated in the writing of global labor history through cross-regional comparison and interdisciplinary perspectives, demonstrating the practical direction of British Marxist New Labor History.
III. New Orientations in British Marxist-Feminist Historiography
The 1990s was an important period for the turn and redirection of history in Britain and even Europe. The dissemination of works and academic paths of two generations of British Marxist historians received continuous attention. Among them, British Marxist-feminist history covers a broad thematic field and has achieved outstanding success, representing the evolutionary trend of Marxist historical concepts and the British path. Furthermore, from British Marxist-feminist history, one can see how the theoretical traditions and practical concepts of analytical Marxism [7] played a unique role in the transition from Marxist New Social History to Marxist-feminist history, as well as the British experience of the shift from cultural Marxism to practical Marxism.
After the 1980s, Thompson's working-class culturalist paradigm was continuously challenged and questioned by emerging research paradigms in subculture, sub-politics, and identity politics. Researchers, including the second generation of British Marxist historians, replaced class with language, focusing on the role of language in the identity construction of the working class and the masses in social behavior. Identities such as gender, nation, and race replaced class identity, and they began to perform a degree of "revision" on the positivist class analysis method of Marxism. These new research orientations represent an enrichment and development of Thompson’s "cultural turn" in Marxist New Social History after the 1990s, concentrated in British Marxist-feminist history.
Regarding the theoretical attributes of historiographical schools and the succession of historical outlooks among historians, critical adherence to Marxist theory and method has been an important theoretical feature of the British feminist historical narrative promoted by figures such as Sheila Rowbotham since the 1970s. This presents a new turn in the overall Marxist-feminist historical concept. Since the 1970s and 1980s, with the development of the feminist movement, British academia has also paid increasing attention to the cultural interpretation of the history of women at the grassroots level. In the "cultural" field of Marxist history, they advocate for a historical narrative of female consciousness and social gender. When British feminist history gained momentum in the 1970s, many feminists were also Marxists; they viewed women's history, labor history, racial history, and national/regional history as new directions for historiography. Thus, through the form and practical methods of feminist history, the first generation of Marxist historians (typified by Thompson) and the second generation (represented by Rowbotham) joined together with postwar socialist neo-feminist historians such as Sally Alexander, Catherine Hall, Margaret Bryant, Barbara Taylor, and Carol Dyhouse to launch groundbreaking thematic studies in the field of feminist history.
In historiographical practice, British Marxist-feminist history shows a trend toward thematic diversification. According to Thompson’s "total history" [8] approach, which favored cultural Marxism, his cultural research on the working class reserved a place for women, yet they existed more as a part of male history. Thompson did not pay sufficient attention to the historical role of women in the formation of the British working class. In his historical works, class consciousness ultimately belonged to the male groups who created class movements, while working-class female groups remained in a secondary position. In view of this, British neo-feminist historians began to re-examine the research paths, advantages, and disadvantages of the older generation of historians like Thompson. Starting from the characteristics of social history, they focused on and wrote about the experiences of different social groups, attempting to achieve a shift from women's history to gender history. The community of feminist historians, represented by the second-generation Marxist Rowbotham, gradually expanded their horizons of social history. By adopting social science theories and modern analytical techniques, they moved from focusing on class experience and class consciousness to attempting to integrate the experiences of female groups or diverse ethnic groups into historical writing, leading to a gradual "convergence" between feminist historical writing and social science research.
For instance, amidst the shifts in British socio-cultural and socio-economic structures during the late 20th century, the British Marxist feminist historian Catherine Hall’s White, Male and Middle Class: Explorations in Feminism and History pioneered a historical analytical approach for those seeking or needing to explain the relationship between gender relations and the existential conditions of class. From the perspective of the hybridity of gender roles and the social changes influenced by their mutual interaction, Hall revealed the intrinsic connections between gender, class, and race based on power discourses. Hall argued that historical explanations are inadequate if the history of class ignores the gender perspective, or if the history of gender ignores class factors. Specifically, she noted that the periodic characteristics of British identity in the 19th century—centered on race, gender, and middle-class familial relations—were rooted in the imperial system and concepts of power. As a quintessential female historian who similarly benefited from the Thompsonian [9] historiographical paradigm, Sally Alexander focused her historical gaze on the commercial sphere as early as Women's Work in Nineteenth-Century London, discussing the relationship between the capitalist system and the intensification of the gendered division of labor. Her later article, "Women, Class and Sexual Differences in the 1830s and 1840s: Some Reflections on Feminism and History," revealed the specific experiences of women's history during the early Industrial Revolution and highlighted the awakening of female consciousness in 19th-century British society. Barbara Taylor, who taught at the University of East London and Queen Mary University of London, served as the Director of the Raphael Samuel History Centre and was long responsible for the publication of History Workshop Journal after the 1980s. Her representative works, Eve and the New Jerusalem: Socialism and Feminism in the Nineteenth Century and Mary Wollstonecraft and the Feminist Imagination, followed Thompson’s path of pioneering research and reflection on William Morris, yet transcended the analytical framework and limits of the latter’s feminist conceptions. Taylor argued that Engels’s distinction between scientific socialism and utopian socialism essentially led to a theoretical critique of socialist historical movements; conversely, she maintained that recovering the utopian socialist tradition of the 1830s and 1840s and applying it to the historical subjective consciousness of feminists is of great significance. She emphasized that contemporary feminism must restore this analytical perspective and these value elements.
The British feminist movement since the 1970s undoubtedly propelled the continuous development of British feminist historiography, becoming a major driver for the new trends emerging in British Marxist historiography after the 1990s. In fact, Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850, co-authored by Catherine Hall—noted for her research on middle-class female culture—and Leonore Davidoff, is a quintessential historiographical work utilizing the perspectives of class analysis and gender history. While embodying the historical narrative style of The Making of the English Working Class, it also demonstrated a historical critical consciousness that transcended Thompson, arguing that gender issues signify not only the construction of domestic organization but also organization at the social level, which in aggregate reflects the domestic conditions of the 19th-century British middle class. In terms of historiographical orientation, the cohort of British feminist historians since the 1970s has moved from specific issues to theoretical reflection, preliminary articulating a historical theory of "gender" [10] and a historiographical theory of "the concept of gender history." They emphasized the influence of ideological prejudice and traditions of gender consciousness on the gender relations of the working class and socio-historical transitions. Producing prolific results, they pushed British Marxist feminist historical narrative to a new height.
Following the reorientation of the Western New History in the 1980s, the "cultural turn" of British Marxist New Social History produced extraordinary academic resonance and positive social effects outside of Britain. Since the 1990s, a later generation of British Marxist researchers has continued the tradition of British Marxist New Social History pioneered by Thompson and others. They have increasingly focused on the historical writing of ethnic minority groups and subaltern [11] populations, placing greater emphasis on the historical narratives of peripheral regions and "Other" cultural values. Specifically, this British Marxist feminist historiographical paradigm has comprehensively challenged the male-centered concepts and forms of traditional labor history. To a certain extent, it has shifted the historical horizon and focus toward interdisciplinary research themes and investigations into New Social and Cultural History, involving emerging fields such as the social history of women’s medicine, women’s health and social leisure, science and technology within geographical historiography and women’s history, legal crime and women’s history, and women’s social activities and status.
British Marxist feminist history and historiographical narrative have gradually realized a triple shift in perspective. First, in terms of temporal dimension and spatial scope, British Marxist feminist historiography continues to focus on the historical writing of the daily experiences of different classes and women within socio-historical and cultural structures. It has shifted from a traditional focus on the production and living experiences of female workers during the Industrial Revolution, the women’s suffrage movement, and the formation of gender relations and female class consciousness, toward investigating the daily lives of women and socio-historical changes in gender within national or regional societies such as Ireland and Australia. For instance, in recent years, the historical community has expanded research into the social history of women and gender in the Scottish and Irish regions. Under the trend of New Social History, New Cultural History, and the return of international historiography to "Grand History," British Marxist historians have emphasized an integrated perspective of regional and national-state history to examine the value of "gender" factors in Marxist feminist historical writing. Second, within the dimensions of the history of historiography and intellectual history, British Marxist feminist historiography has consistently prioritized the analysis of the historical contexts of the New Left feminist movement, the social counter-culture movement, and the socialist movement. This spans from focusing on 19th-century women’s and gender history to the historical situation of women and gender after the 1980s. Within the historical contexts of the second and third waves of feminism from the 1960s–70s to the 1990s, they have reflected on the theoretical achievements and practical efficacy of Marxist feminist historiography around the central themes of the "New Imperial History" and the social history of women and gender in a global historical perspective. Third, regarding the relationship between historiographical culture and social change, British Marxist feminist historiography has continuously emphasized—from the academic perspectives of reception history and gender history—a re-examination of the criticisms and skepticism directed toward class theory, patriarchy, and grand narratives during the "cultural turn" of Western New Social History. It has put forward a theoretical demand for a return to the "horizon of class analysis" and the "critique of patriarchal discourse." Driven by the trend of "transcending the cultural turn" in New Social History at the turn of the 21st century, British Marxist feminist historians have inherited the "culturalist" paradigm tradition of New Social History, rejected the method of economic determinism, and advocated for a dual perspective of "class and gender." They have unearthed the diverse facets and values of gender relations and female perspectives in constructing popular culture and the history of working-class formation. In historiographical practice, British Marxist feminist historiography combines power discourse analysis of "female," "male," and "gendered society" with Marxist class and historical theories. It integrates grand historical narratives with the historical narratives of micro-power politics concerning the gender history of states, nations, and regions, thereby expanding Marxist historical theories of patriarchy and traditional women’s historiography, enriching the connotation of the "culturalist" historiographical paradigm, and catalyzing the internal transformation and overall impact of the British Marxist New Social History orientation.
Over the past three decades, the later generation of British Marxist historiographical researchers has mostly focused on the historical works and intellectual lineages of quintessential historians from the first two generations. In particular, they have taken Thompson’s "culturalist" historiographical paradigm and the influence of his practice as objects of analysis. Regarding intellectual sources and academic tradition shifts, and based on changes in the New Left historical context and the academic evolution of international historiographical trends, they have successively produced a wealth of academic treatises and research results. These works have achieved new expansions and forms in the socio-cultural significance of research themes and the transformation of historiographical paradigms within analytical horizons. Within the regional distribution and dynamic evolution of global Marxist historiographical trends, the rise and fall of Marxist historiography in various countries has mostly undergone a logical process from breaking through individual existential dilemmas to forming a collective scale of development. British Marxist historiography is no exception; whether in the practical actions of the cohort of British Marxist historians or the theoretical shaping of contemporary British historiographical traditions by British Marxism, it remains highly regarded by both the British and international historical communities.
(About the Author: Liang Minsu is a Professor in the Department of World History at Shanghai Normal University) Web Editor: Tong Xin Source: Historical Theory Research (史学理论研究), Issue 1, 2024.