THE HISTORICAL MACROSOCIOLOGY:
FORMATION, FUNDAMENTAL AREAS OF RESEARCH AND
TYPES OF MODELS
In: Sociology:
History, Theory, and Practices. Vol.10. Bridging the World Together.
Moscow.
Institute of Socio-Political Research. RAS. 2009. P.24-35.
Status and purpose of the macrosociology
Historical macrosociology is an
interdisciplinary area for research the mechanisms and patterns of large and
long-term historical processes and phenomena (such as the genesis, evolution,
transformation, decay and collapse of societies, states, world-systems and
civilizations) by means of objective methods of social sciences.
The substantive field of historical
macrosociology (hereinafter, simply - macrosociology) practically
coincides with the universal (global, world) history, but macrosociology uses
more actively approaches and methodological tools of theoretical history
(building and testing of relatively strong explanatory theories of historical
events [Rozov 2002]).
Macrosociology answers the
traditional questions of philosophy of history on the structure, dynamics and
course of šhistory,
not on the philosophical level, but on scientific and theoretical one. Macrosociology
takes research methods and tools from a broad spectrum of social sciences:
sociology, political science (especially comparative), geopolitics, crosscultural studies, economic history, ethnology,
historical demography, etc.
A brief overview of the history of discipline
What are the origins of macrosociology?
šwhere,
generally speaking, it appeared?
Strange as it may seem, initially
sociology was born and developed as a macrosociology. Auguste
Conte, Karl Marx, John Stuart Mill, Ferdinand Tennis, Herbert Spencer, Emile
Durkheim, Max Weber were concerned primarily with macrosociological issues: they
formulated laws and defined stages of historical progress, of development and
change of social formations, they described and studied principal types of šsocieties, cultures and civilizations.
At that time the scientific
methodology of sociology has not yet been developed.
Many abstract ontological, epistemological and axiological issues were discussed. That’s why the
work of these authors may be equally regarded as the socio-philosophical or
belonging to philosophy of history.
In the 20-th century
sociology has become more narrow, empirical, methodically sophisticated,
focused on the empirical study of group and individual segments of the society.
It šlargely lost
interest for the great historical processes. That is the tradition that we know
well in the standard sociological journals and educational programs.
At the same time, quite a lot of
talented scientists continued macrosociological research, typically undervalued
by contemporaries (P.Sorokin, K.Polanyi,
J.Schumpeter, L.White, N.Elias, N.Luman, P.Baran, B.Moore).
They have received great attention in the last third of 20-th century.
Since the 1970's
the historical sociology appeared as an autonomous discipline with
self-identity [Tilly 1978, 2000]. Macrosociology began
to revive quite rapidly [Amin 1976; Anderson 1974; Bendix 1978; Brenner 1976; Carneiro
1970a, 1970b; Claessen 1978; Collins 1986; Gellner 1988; Harris 1977; Headrick
1981; Kennedy 1987; McNeill 1979,1982; Melko, Scott
1987; Modelski 1987; Skocpol 1979; Tainter 1988; Tilly 1984, 1992; Wallerstein 1974, 1980; Wolf 1982; et al.].
Since early 1990-s macrosociology started
institutionalization šfirst
in US universities as a branch of sociology. Since then it has been steadily
spreading from the English-speaking academic world, as well as in
The main directions of macrosociological research
An important milestone was a book on macrosociology
by Randall Collins Macrohistory: Essays
in Sociology of the Long Run [Collins 1999], who brought together many
seemingly disparate areas of research in the introduction called «The
Golden Age of Macrohistorical Sociology»,
revealed their common grounds and the reasons of their flourishing and
expanding. The most advanced theoretical areas are:
• a study of
military-centered development of modern states [McNeill 1982; Mann 1987, 1993; Tilly 1992]
• a
comparative study of social revolutions and the state decays, the collapse of
empires [Skocpol 1979; Tainter 1988; Goldstone 1991]
• analysis
of world-systems [Wallerstein 1974, 1989; Amin 1976; Gills, Frank 1991; Chase-Dunn, Hall 1997; Abu-Lughod 1989; Arrighi 1994]
• study of the
geopolitical dynamics of long cycles of hegemony [Collins 1986, 1995; Kennedy
1987; Modelski 1987].
R. Collins adds also the following šareas of
macrosociological research:
• comparative-historical
study of family relations (Laslett P., J.Goody)
• Study the evolution of cultural
norms, «civilizing manners» (N. Elias, J.Goudsblom,
J.Mennel]),
• macrohistory of diseases and environment (W.McNeill, A.Crosby)
• macrosociological
comparison in the history of arts (A. Hauser, A. Malrough)
• social and
comparative history of gender, sexuality, material culture.
The Collins’sš list should be added by some more
research areas:
• ‘Big History which
encompasses concepts of stars evolution, evolution of the Solar system, Earth's
history, biological evolution, human origins and traditional human history [Spier 1996, cf.: Anatomy of Crisis 1999]
• rapidly growing area of
study of social evolution, comparative anthropology and ethnology, which works closely
with comparative archeology whith frequent breaks to
valuable macrosociological generalizations; first of all brilliant studies by
Robert Carneiro with his truly macrosociological theory
of origin of the state [Carneiro 1970a; 1988] and conception
of šcomplexity level identified by means
of multiple operation creiteria –
‘features [Carneiro 1970b], the original books
of Jared Diamond, reviving in a new level of geographic determinism, connecting
ecological and social factors of macrohistorical
transformations [Diamond 1997, 2006], as well as E. Gellner,
H. Klaessen, H. Lensky, M. Salins, E. Service , M. Fried, M. Harris,. T. Earl [Gellner 1988; Claessen 1978; Harris 1977; et al. ;]
• ongoing (albeit without the earlier
ambitions, which were typical for O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, P. Sorokin, A. Kroeber,
F. Bagby. etc.) comparative study of civilizations [Melko, Scott 1987]
• large-scale
comparative studies of technological exchange and diffusion in the context of international
politics [Bulliet 1975; Headrick
1981, 1991; Pacey 1990; Ralston 1990]
• comparative and generalizing studies
of cross-cultural trade, the emergence and the eradication of slavery and the
slave trade, colonial relations, the effects of Westernization and industrialization
in different parts of the world [Adas 1989; Chaudhuri 1990; Curtin 1984; Stinchcombe
1995; Tracey 1991; Wolf 1982],
• comparative
studies of democratic transit (see below), etc.
In the field of political sciences
the comparative political studies are closest to macrosociology because of
similar general orientation and methodology, it is successfully developing field which gives many of new non-trivial results. The šcomparative
political science almost always appeales to a broader
historical, social, economic, cultural, geographical and other aspects. It
truly can be considered as the intersection of political science and historical
macrosociology, both the most advanced and promising area of research.
Along with a comparative study
of revolutions, the genesis, transformation and disintegration of states (see
above), a vast and rapidly growing area of research is a comparative analysis
of democratic transit, with both šsuccesses and failure, roll back to
authoritarianism, various modes of simulation of democracy, etc. [Karl, Shmitter 1993, Lipset and others
1993; Przeworski 1988; Rastow
1996; Di Palma 1990; Collins 1999; Huntington 1991].
Historical macrosociology in Russia
Soviet Sociology, which revived since
1960-ies., followed the Western mainstream, mainly the most advanced American
sociology, with its traditional attention to the polls, analysis of public
opinion, etc. Macrosociological issues remained taboo because they were totally
monopolized by one of the main ideological disciplines - «historical
materialism» ( «istmat»).
It seems that this birth trauma is still actual, because Russian
sociologists aw mostly indifferent to the analysis of large social processes, they
do not even consider such research as «truly scientific sociology »in
spite of the translations of classical macrosociological works by P. Sorokin,
N. Elias, N. Luhman, K. Polanyi, J. Schumpeter, new
excellent books such as Sociology of
philosophies by R.Collins and The Long
Twentieth Century by J.Arrighi.
Macrosociology in
It is equally deplorable situation in
the other potential maternal discipline - history. Russian historical science has
its own trauma associated with the emancipation from the long boring Marxism, that’s
why the major themes of historical shifts and transformations,
šthe problem of identifying the
objective regularities are ignored now by almost all Russian historians. They enjoy
a purely empirical, narrow archival research without unnecessary theoretical
punditry or feel «the joy of recognition», while theirs local
materials show something like some imported fashionable (usually French or
German) concepts. There some attempts to assimilate the achievements of social
sciences in order to subordinate them to historiography, with unconcealed antitheoretical attitude (B.Mogilnitsky šet al.). Only a few historians of older
generation (Igor Diakonov, on which see below, as
well as E.Kulpin, V.Chubarov,
V.Ilyushechkin, Yu.Berezkin
et al.]) allow themselves vast generalizations, broad
comparative and theoretical analysis. A rather small circle of middle
generation [B.Mironov, N.Kradin;
A.Korotaev, S.Nefedov, an
American-Russian author P.Turchin) proceed this line.
The rising generation of Russian historians
sometimes demonstrate vivid šinterest in historical macrosociology,
but the real breakthrough, the emergence of a series of striking new works is to
be expected only after a radical update of current backward «methodology
of history» courses. Young researchers should possess not only an arsenal
of modern methods and tools of mathematical and theoretical history but also
theoretical and macrosociological style of thinking.
So, for many reasons macrosociology in
At the same time, in post-Soviet
Most domestic authors (A. Akhiezer, IA Gobozov, VS Golubev, AL Zhdanko AP Nazaretian, G. S. Pomeranz, S.
Semenov, Yu.V. Yakovets and others) are working on the
philosophical, purely conceptual, and even scholastic level, without distinct
formulation and testing of theoretical propositions, not to mention the
systematic analysis of historical data.
Against this background is the book written
by the historian-orientalist Igor Diakonoff
Paths of History [Diakonoff
1999]. Despite its historical identity, Diakonov
wrote quite macrosociological work with clear scheme of phases of social
development, criteria for their distinction, the mechanisms and patterns of
transitions from phase to phase, etc. The book was translated into English, it
is one of a very few present-day Russian works in humanities that is studied at
Western universities.
There are also promising results of a
theoretical study and mathematical modeling of the historical dynamics and
social evolution (the almanac History and
Mathematics in Russian and one in English). This area was
designated as «cliodynamics». In fact - it is nothing else
than the application of mathematical modeling and statistical analysis within
the same historical macrosociology.
Someš Russian works on geo-economics, comparative economic history of world analysis,
and the modernization theory stand alone (Gaidar, Khoros, etc.] Here we see the šfocus on empirical data, attention to
contemporary discussions of world science, the political and cultural context
of economic development. However, there is still no original bright
«breakthrough» research, maybe because of supererogatory piety
towards the western authorities, combined with the cowardice of own
comparative-historical research.
There are some valuable works in comparison
of the regional political dynamics (S.Ryzhenkov, V.Gelman) and šcomparative ethnopolitical
studies (E.Payin).
Theoretical and methodological branch
of macrosociology develops from the mid 1990's in
Historical macrosociology and the revival of theoretical thinking
In conclusion
let me present some desirable prospects for a historic macrosociology in the
broader world-wide and Russian intellectual context.
Social and human cognition evolves over
120 years within a constant frame of so called ‘dispute
about method’ (Methodenstreit). An apparent
disappointment in the systemic, structuralist,
mathematical and numerical methods of the last decades have led to domination of
idiographical, antiscientist
mood. The most famous in this field is postmodernism. This trend includes not
only aggressive attacks against ‘obsolete Enlightenment ideas’š but also special research attention to
«cases», «interpretations», «deconstruction».
The Russian Perestroika led to the
ignominious conclusion of the era of dogmatic unification of all the
socio-historical knowledge under monoideology of
Soviet Marxism and «historical materialism». Now, almost all Russian
historians and social scientists share the counter-theoretical consensus, where
laziness and lack of will to know behind stereotyped blaming of «outdated
scientific truth», «objectivism», «positive»,
«scientism», «primitive empiricism» etc. That mentality
is precisely the form of tired cynicism, replacing the old dogmatic era.
The rapid and successful development
of historical macrosociology («Golden Age» according to R.Collins)
has already led to a convincing enhance of new nomothetics
i.e. construction of explanatory theories on the basis of
systematic comparative-historical analysis, taking into account complexity and
specificity of socio-historical reality.
As soon as appears a number of
original Russian (and that is important - receiving foreign recognition) macrosociological
research, young scientists will receive a meaningful alternative to the use of
their talents. It will be a good chance of revival of theoretical thinking
among Russian historians and social scientists, and the Russian science in
these areas will emerge from a permanent unfortunate peripherality
to one of the major world centers of intellectual networks.
References
Abu-Lughod,
Janet, Before European Hegemony. The World System A.D. 1250-1350.
Adas, Michael. Machines as the Measure
of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance.
Amin, Samir. Unequal
Development. N.Y. Monthly Review Press, 1976.
Anderson, Perry. Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism. L.,
New Left Books. 1974.
Arrighi, Giovanni. The Long Twentieth
Century: Money, Power, and the Origins of Our Times. 1994.
Baran, Paul.The Political Economy
of Growth. N.-Y. 1957.
Bendix, Reinhard. Kings or People: Power and the Mandate to Rule.
Brenner, Robert. Agrarian
Class Structure and Economic Development in the Pre-Industrial
Bulliet, Richard W. The Camel and the
Wheel.
Carneiro, 1970a: Carneiro, Robert. A Theory of the Origin of the State // Science. 1970. Vol. 169. P.733 - 738.
Carneiro, 1970b: Carneiro, Robert. Scale Analysis, Evolutionary Sequences, and the
Rating of Cultures // A Handbook in Cultural Anthropology / Ed. by Naroll, Raoul and Ronald Cohen. NY: Natural History Press, Garden City, 1970.
P. 834 – 871.
Carneiro, Robert. The Circumscription Theory: Challenge and
Response // American Behavioral Scientist. 1988. ¹ 31.
P.497 - 511.
Chase-Dunn C., Hall T. Rise
and Demise: Comparing World-Systems. HarpeCollins, Westview Press, 1997.
Chaudhuri, Asia before Europe: Economy and Civilization of the
Claessen H. J. M., P. Skalnik
(Eds.) The Early State.
Collins, Randall. Conflict Sociology. N.-Y., Academic Press,
1975.
Collins, Randall. Weberian sociological theory. NY:
Collins
R. Macrohistory: Essays in Sociology of the Long Run.
Crosby
A.W. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of
Di Palma G. To Craft Democracies: an Essay on Democratic Transitions.
Diakonoff, Igor M. Paths of History.
Diamond, Jared. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.
Gellner, Ernest. Plough, Sword, and Book.
The Structure of Human History.
Goldstone, Jack. Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World.
Goudsblom, Johan, Eric Jones, and Stephen Mennel. The Course of Human History: Economic Growth, Social Process, and
Civilization. M.E.Sharp, 1996.
Harris, Marvin. Cannibals and Kings: The Origins of Cultures. N.-Y., Random House, 1977.
Headrick, Daniel. The Tools of Empire: Technology and European
Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century. N.Y. Oxford Univ. Press. 1981.
Headrick, Daniel. The Invisible Weapon: Telecommunications and
International Politics, 1851-1945. N.Y. Oxford Univ. Press. 1991.
Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military
Conflict from 1500 to 2000. N.-Y. Random House, 1987.
Macrodynamics. 2-nd issue of a series of collective monographs Theoretical History
and Macrosociology (ed. Be Nikolai S.Rozov).
Mann, Michael. The Sources of Social Power. Vol. I: A History of Power from the Beginning to A.D.1760, 1987.
Vol. II: The Rise of Classes and Nation-States, 1760-1914.
McAdam D., S.Tarrow, Ch.Tilly. Dynamics of Contention.
McNeill,
W. Plagues and Peoples. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1979.
McNeill, William. The Pursuit
of Power: Technology, Armed Force, and Society since AD 1000.
Melko, Mattew, Scott L.. The Boundaries of Civilizations in
Space and Time /Ed. M. Melko and L. Scott.
Univ. Press of America, Inc.,1987.
Modelski, George. Exploring Long Cycles.
Lynne Rienner Publ.,L.,1987.
Nee,
Victor and Peng Lian. Sleeping with Enemy: ADynamic
Model of Declining Political Commitment in State Socialism // Theore and Society, 1994, 3. P.253-296.
Pacey,
Przeworski A. 1988.
Democracy as a Contingent Outcome of Conflicts. In: J. Elster, R. Slagestad (eds.). Constitutionalism and Democracy.
Ragin, Charles. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and
Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley,
Ralston,
David B. Importing the European Army: The Introduction of European Military
Techniques intoš Extra-European World, 1600-1914.
Razrabotka i Aprobatsia Metoda
Teoreticheskoi Istorii (The
Development and Approbation of the Method of Theoretical History). 1-st issue
of a series of collective monographs Theoretical History and Macrosociology
(ed. Be Nikolai S.Rozov).
Rozov, Nikolai S. The Structure of
Civilization and the Trends of World Development. Novosibirsk
State Univ. 1992.
Ibid. Philosophy and Theory of
History. The book 1. The Prolegomens. Moscow, 2002.
Ibid.
Historical Macrosociology: Methodology and Methods. Novosibirsk
State Univ. 2009.
Sanderson 1995a: Sanderson Stephen. Macrosociology. An Introduction to Human Societies. 3-d
ed.
Sanderson 1995b:Sanderson, Stephen. Social
Transformations: A General Theory of Historical Development. Blackwell, 1995.
Snooks Graeme. The Dynamic Society: Exploring the Sources of Global
Change. L.-N.-Y., Routledge,
1996.
Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory (Ed. By P.Hedström
and R.Swedberg)
Spier, Fred. The Structure of Big
History. From the Big Bang until Today.
Stinchcombe, Arthur. Constructing Social
Theories. The
Stinchcombe, Arthur.
Structury Istorii (The Structures of
History). ‘Vremia mira. Almanac for
Modern Studies Theoretical History, Macrosociology, Geopolitics, Analysis ofš World-Systems and
Civilizations. (ed. Be Nikolai S.Rozov).
Issue 2. Novosibirsk 2002 (in
Russian).
Tainter, Joseph. The Collapse of Complex Societies.
Cambridge & N.-Y.:
Tilly, Charles. From Mobilization to Revolution.
DReading,
Tracey, James D. (Ed.) The Political Economy of Merchant Empires: State Power and
World Trade, 1350-1750.
Turchin, Peter. War and Peace and War.The
Rise and Fall of Empires. Plume Book, 2007.
Voina I Geopolitika (War and
Geopolitics) ‘Vremia mira. Almanac for Modern Studies Theoretical History,
Macrosociology, Geopolitics, Analysis ofš World-Systems and Civilizations. (ed. Be Nikolai S.Rozov). Issue 3. Novosibirsk 2003 (in Russian).
Vremia Mira (The World Time). Almanac for Modern Studies
Theoretical History, Macrosociology, Geopolitics, Analysis ofš World-Systems and Civilizations. (ed. Be Nikolai S.Rozov).
Walder, Andrew. The Decline of Communist Power: Elements of
Theory of Institutional Change // Theory and Society, 1994, 23. P.297-324.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. The Modern World System I-III
Wolf, Eric.