[344]
E. THOEN / E. VANHAUTE
elaboration of Pirenne's pendulum of capitalist development can be found in
Giovanni Arrighi's Long Twentieth Century (Arrighi, 1994). In this book
Arrighi deconstructs the political-economic evolution of the capitalist world-
system into a succession of successful alliances or political exchanges
between governmental and business agencies. They supported a series of
systemic cycles of accumulation: the Genoese, Dutch, British, and American
long centuries (Abbeloos & Vanhaute, 2011). Each cycle had a phase of ma-
terial expansion followed by a phase of financial expansion. This description
of capitalism as an "alternation of opposite kinds of organisational structures"
resembles Pirenne's pattern of alternate phases of economic freedom and
economic regulation:
"A pendulum-like movement in the evolution of historical capitalism as world
system (our italics) was first noticed by Pirenne
" (Arrighi, 1994, 86-87, 243-244,
quote 243).
"As Pirenne suggested, each transition to a new stage of capitalist development has
involved a change in leadership in world-scale processes of capital accumulation.
And as Braudel suggested, each change of the guard at the commanding heights of
the capitalist-world economy reflected the 'victory' of a 'new' region over an 'old'
region" (Ibid., 332).
As scientific heirs to the 'circulationist' school and the Braudelian thesis of
hegemonic cycles within "une économie-monde", world-systems scholars in
the realm of global economic history render high honours to the works of
Henri Pirenne. In more mainstream modern textbooks about economic the-
ory, global studies, or world history, Pirenne is almost always absent
(
see
e.g., Samuels, Biddle, & David, 2007; Szirmai, 2004; Manning, 2003).
Pirenne never engaged in the universal or civilisational histories of Spengler,
Wells, or Toynbee, which were well-known in Pirenne's time. This is striking
(Manning, 2003, 24-36) because of his life-long interest in the writings of
philosophical (Hegel), positivist, and interdisciplinary (Comte, Lamprecht)
historians, social scientists and economists (of the German School), from
whom he learned the advantages of focusing on long-term change and
nuanced ideas about patterns of 'progress'. The explanation could be that
Pirenne attached his views especially to the scientists he studied in the first
half of his career.
Nonetheless, his legacy in contemporary global economic history is obvi-
ous. In the early 21st century, global history is experiencing a thorough
process of re-evaluation and 'rethinking' (Vries, 2009). Standard explanations
of the 'Rise of the West' as a predominant internal story, be it of a Smithian-
Weberian (market mechanisms and cultural peculiarity, cf. David Landes) or
PIRENNE AND ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL THEORY
[345]
of a Marxian nature (distribution of power, Robert Brenner) have been seri-
ously challenged by new, non-Eurocentric narratives of a "Great Divergence"
(Kenneth Pomeranz). This change of perspective is grounded in a more sys-
temic analysis of space (world regions) and time (systemic cycles) (Arrighi,
2007). As Crossley has stressed in a recent overview, Pirenne's interpretation
of space (the interaction of two world regions, the European and the Islamic
world) and time (phases of capitalism) remains one of the first examples of
historical systems theory. Pirenne placed the impetus of European change
outside Europe, thus triggering an inversion of the historical geography
"that most European historians found incontrovertible" (Crossley, 2008, 85-89,
quote 87).
32
"The Islamic empire's economy and the local economies of Europe interacted in
such a way as to transform Europe itself, which in turn initiated a series of changes
that contributed to the later destruction of the Islamic empire" (Ibid., 85-89, quote
88).
For the last few decades, these 'Pirennean' ideas of dynamic but unequal in-
teraction between civilisations
33
and the need for more expansive theories of
historical change on a global scale have inspired and will continue to inspire
successive generations of world-systems analysts and global historians alike.
3. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS
At the launch of the new journal "Annales d'histoire économique et sociale",
Lucien Febvre wrote that at the turn of the 20th century history as a science
was in crisis because many younger scholars could not satisfy their 'need for
reality' in history, and so turned away from social sciences (Burke, 1972, 1-
10). With the emergence of economic history as a separate field, a counter-
movement was born in late-19th-century Germany. The new 'German histori-
cal school' made economic history a required discipline within economics. It
was largely through Pirenne that this movement made an impact in the field
of history and its ideas spread throughout the rest of Western Europe.
Although the German historical school lost much of its importance after the
32.
It is likely that the 'global' ideas of Pirenne increased after the turn of the century and
especially after WWI (see above).
33.
One of the most eloquent defenders of this historical model before 'European hegemony' is
Janet Abu-Lughod (1989).
[346]
E. THOEN / E. VANHAUTE
First World War and disappeared almost completely, economic history has
survived within the field of history.
Initially the 'German historical school', which Pirenne explored during his
period as a student, adopted nuanced and integrated theories (in form and
tendency), combining other social sciences and history, with a positivist,
'source-oriented', structuralist and critical-erudite attitude. This attitude de-
termined Pirenne's way of thinking and methodology during his entire career,
although, after the turn of the century, he reacted strongly against the
excrescences of this school (applied economics, nationalistic and even racist
tendencies), which were actually contradictory to its earlier ideas.
This 'structurally-oriented' and at the same time nuanced 'basis' of
Pirenne's thinking ensured that his theories and works have been adopted by
many traditions and types of historians to the present day. The emphasis he
placed on trade appealed to some neo-classical economists, even while his
aversion to 'unchangeable' models made him less popular in the ultra-liberal –
in the European sense of the word – period from the 1970s to the 1990s. In
the 1950s and 1960s, Marxists and structural historians used Pirenne's struc-
tural, long-term and stage-oriented views. His ideas continue to fit well into
new historiographical trends. We have shown that because he believed that
economic and social conditions evolved within 'institutions', he may be
considered to a certain extent as a predecessor of the 'New Institutional Eco-
nomics', which has become popular with historians in the last few decades.
The supra-national and comparative approach he defended especially after
World War I also meant that he is relevant to the recent field of 'global
history' as well. The popularity of the 'phoenix' Pirenne is only diminishing
because the data on which his theories were based have gradually been
overturned by new and more modern research.
34
34.
We are very grateful to Sarah Keymeulen (Ghent University) who provided us with some
interesting data when she was preparing the exhibition at the Ghent University library on
Pirenne's life and work. The exhibition coincided with the conference at which this article was
first presented.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |