Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T19:07:33.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

“Through a Glass Darkly”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2016

Extract

The question that springs to mind at the start of this brief résumé of my career is, how did I come to be employed by the British Economic and Social Research Council, when my research training seemed so much against it? Memory is at best a fallible guide, but, as I remember, 1965 saw the appearance of The World We Have Lost, by Peter Laslett, which sought to describe the structure of English society before the Industrial Revolution. I had known Laslett as a lecturer in the Cambridge History Faculty who gave a course of general lectures on the history of political thought in the ancient world; he was also more generally known as the man who had researched the late-seventeenth-century philosopher John Locke. But here he was, writing a different kind of book altogether, with a first chapter called “The Passing of the Patriarchal Household: Parents and Children, Masters and Servants,” and further chapters on such topics as whether the peasants really starved. What was this political analyst up to? Not to anything good, or so I was told in a leading article in the Times Literary Supplement for 9 December 1965. In a scabrous attack entitled “The Book of Numbers,” E. P. Thompson (for it was he, hiding behind the cloak of anonymity that was generally assumed by the authors of leading articles) did everything to undermine Laslett’s version of the new history. “It is to be hoped that the cause will survive Mr Laslett’s advocacy,” he concluded. He succeeded with me; I let the book pass me by on the other side.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Social Science History Association 1998 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Roger Schofield was director of the Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure and honorary reader in historical demography in the University of Cambridge. He was awarded the Ph.D. in Cambridge. This article was originally presented as the Presidents Address at the Twenty-second meeting of the Social Science History Association, Hyatt Regency, Washington DC, 18 October 1997.

References

Dupâquier, J. (1972) “De l’animal à l’homme: Le mécanisme autorégulateur des populations traditionelles.” Revue de l’Institut de Sociologie 2: 177211.Google Scholar
Eversley, D. E. C. (1965) “Population, economy and society,” in Glass, D. V. and Eversley, D. E. C. (eds.) Population in History. London: Edward Arnold: 2369.Google Scholar
Flinn, M. W. (1970) British Population Growth, 1700-1850. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Glass, D. V. (1965) “Population and population movements in England and Wales, 1700 to 1850,” in Glass, D. V. and Eversley, D. E. C. (eds.) Population in History. London: Edward Arnold: 221–46.Google Scholar
Hatcher, J. (1977) Plague, Population and the English Economy, 1348–1530. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1972) Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laslett, P. (1965) The World We Have Lost. London: Mettmen & Co.Google Scholar
Lee, J., and Feng, W. (with contributions by Campbell, C.) (forthcoming) Malthusian Mythology and Chinese Reality.Google Scholar
Mackenroth, G. (1953) Bevölkerungslehre. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Malthus, T. R. (1987a [1798]) “An essay on the principle of population,” in Wrigley, E. A. and Souden, D. C. (eds.) The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus. 8 vols. London: Pickering: 1:1–137.Google Scholar
Malthus, T. R. (1987b [1824]) “Population,” in Wrigley, E. A. and Souden, D. C. (eds.) The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus. 8 vols. London: Pickering: 4: 179–243.Google Scholar
Ohlin, G. (1961) “Mortality, marriage, and growth in preindustrial populations.” Population Studies 14:190–97.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (1975) The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. (1989) “Family structure, demographic behaviour and economic growth,” in Walter, J. and Schofield, R. (eds.) Famine, Disease and the Social Order in Early Modern Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. P. (1965) “The Book of Numbers.” Times Literary Supplement, 1117–18.Google Scholar
von Ranke, L. (1874) Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen völker von 1494 bis 1514. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.Google Scholar
Wrigley, E. A. (1966) “Marriage and fertility in pre-industrial England.” The Listener, 75, 1924:199–201.Google Scholar
Wrigley, E. A. (1969) Population and History. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Wrigley, E. A. (1978) “Fertility strategy for the individual and the group,” in Tilly, C. (ed.) Historical Studies of Changing Fertility. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wrigley, E. A., Davies, R., Oeppen, J., and Schofield, R. S. (1997) English Population History for Family Reconstitution, 1580–1837. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wrigley, E. A., and Schofield, R. S. (1993 [1981]) The Population History of England, 1541–1871: A Reconstruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar