Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:22:48.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Quantitative German History in the United States and the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Eric A. Johnson
Affiliation:
with Dawn Eurich, Dave Shane, and Timothy Schilling University of Strathclyde and Central Michigan University

Extract

What has happened to quantitative history? Is it dead? Any working historian alive today in the English-speaking world surely knows that it has come under heavy attack at least since Lawrence Stone, one of its former proponents, began sounding its death knell in a provocative and widely cited essay written at the turn of this decade by declaring scientific history a “myth” and calling for a “revival of narrative.” Georg Iggers, perhaps the leading historiographer of European and especially German history, wrote recently that “the past few years have seen a profound disillusionment with the quantitative approaches which were at the core of would-be scientific history…. The heady optimism of Marxists, Annalists, and American cliometricians that history would become a rigorous science has been shattered. What has taken its place in recent historical writing is a return from analysis to narrative, with a central focus, as Stone says, on ‘man not circumstances. Indeed many pioneering American cliometricians have turned conciliatory like Robert Fogel, irritable and combative like Charles Tilly, or downright depressed like J. Morgan Kousser.

Type
Suggestions and Debates
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1988

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.)

References

The authors wish to thank Jean Fraser, John Butt, Richard Evans, and Brian Hamnett.

1. Stone, Lawrence, “The Revival of Narrative: Reflections on a New Old History,” Past and Present 85 (1979): 324CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For other frequently cited criticisms of quantification see Barzun, Jacques, Clio and the Doctors: Psycho-history, Quanto-history, and History (Chicago, 1974)Google Scholar; Judt, T., “A Clown in Regal Purple: Social History and the Historians,” History Workshop 7 (1979): 6694CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cobb, R., “Historians in White Coats,” Times Literary Supplement, 3 12. 1971, 1527–28.Google Scholar

2. Iggers, Georg G., New Dimensions in European Historiography (Middletown, Conn., 1984), 181Google Scholar. See also Iggers, , The German Conception of History: The National Tradition of Historical Thought from Herder to the Present, 2d ed. (Middletown, Conn., 1983).Google Scholar

3. Fogel has recently explained that any good cliometrician must have worked painstakingly through the traditional literature and archival evidence of their subject as “no amount of mathematical wizardry or computer magic can shortcut this process. Efforts to do so have led to embarrassing failures.” Fogel, Robert and Elton, G. R.which Road to the past? Two Views of History (New Haven, 1983), 67.Google Scholar

4. Tilly, in 1981, stated in a fine book defending social science history that “the problem is simply to understand why spokesmen for the profession should so regularly emphasize the costs of computing without mentioning the benefits. The answer, I suppose, is that the critics consider the accumulation of systematic knowledge about human behavior either impossible, dangerous, of little value, or a serious diversion from other more worthy pursuits.” Tilly, Charles, As Sociology Meets History (New York, 1981), 62.Google Scholar

5. Kousser, J. Morgan, “The Revival of Narrative: A Response to Recent Criticisms of Quantitative History,” Social Science History 8 (1984): 134CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Kousser has, however, become slightly more optimistic of late, but more so about the rather diverse enterprise he calls “social science history” than about quantitative history or quantitative social science history. See his recent article, The State of Social Science History in the Late 1980s,” Historical Methods 22 (1989): 1320CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In May 1987 Kousser sent out a survey which asked questions about professors' and graduate students' attitudes toward the state of social science history to 486 people of three types, historians who are members of the Social Science History Association, Social Science History Association members from other academic disciplines, and non-Social Science History Association members in history departments throughout the United States. He was gratified to get two-thirds of them to respond within a period of six weeks. His findings showed that people from all of these three groups were far more positive to social science history, broadly considered, than one might have expected, and that the respondents, their colleagues, and their graduate students were at least as favorable toward social science history, and perhaps even more so, than they were five to ten years ago. Nevertheless his survey also showed that there was a significant amount of math anxiety among graduate students, a serious lack of quantitative methods courses in most history departments, and that “more than two-thirds of non-SSHA members, as well as a substantial minority of SSHA historians, decry what they believe has been an excessive preoccupation with ‘mere techniques’ in social science history.” (p. 14.)

6. In 1978, Konrad Jarausch wrote: “Unlike scholars dealing with other areas of the European or American past, central European historians have been slow to interest themselves in quantitative methods.” Jarausch, Konrad H., “Promises and Problems of Quantitative Research in Central European History,” Central European History 11 (1978): 279CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a discussion of the Germans' traditional lack of concern for quantitative methods, see Iggers, The German Conception of History. See also Kocka, Jürgen, “Quantifizierung in der Geschichtswissenschaft,” in Best, Heinrich and Mann, Reinhard, eds., Quantitative Methoden in der historisch-sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung (Stuttgart, 1977), 410Google Scholar; Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, Historische Sozialwissenschaft und Geschichtsschreibung (Göttingen, 1980)Google Scholar; and Best, Heinrich, “Quantifizierende Historische Sozialforschung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,” Geschichte in Köln 9 (1981): 121–27.Google Scholar

7. Johnson, Eric A., “Counting ‘How it Really Was’: Quantitative History in West Germany,” Historical Methods 21 (1988): 6179CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Best, Heinrich and Schröder, Wilhelm Heinz, “Quantitative Historical Social Research: The German Experience,” Historische-Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschungen 21 (1987): 3048.Google Scholar

8. See, for example, Kocka, Jürgen, “Theories and Quantification in History,” Social Science History 8 (1984): 169–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kocka, , “Theory and Social History: Recent Developments in West Germany,” Social Research 47 (1980): 426–57.Google Scholar

9. Kaeble, Hartmut, “Sozialgeschichte in Frankreich und der Bundesrepublik: Annales gegen historische Sozialwissenschaft?”, Geschichte und Gesellschaft 13 (1987): 85.Google Scholar

10. Though the articles themselves do not contain much quantification per se, they are based on quantitative findings. This in itself represents a major step forward for quantification in Germany owing to Historische Zeitschrift's long-standing aversion to quantitative and theoretical history in any form. See, for example, Kocka, Jürgen, “Grossunternehmen und der Aufstieg des Manager-Kapitalismus in späten und frühen 20. Jahrhundert,” Historische Zeitschrift 232 (1981): 3960CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Blasius, Dirk, “Kriminalitat und Geschichtswissenschaft: Perspektiven der neueren Forschung,” Historische Zeitschrift 233 (1981): 615–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Blasius, , “Scheidung und Scheidungsrecht im 19. Jahrhundert: Zur Sozialgeschichte der Familie,” Historische Zeitschrift 241 (1985): 329–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rohe, K., “Wahlanalyse im historischen Kontext: Zur Kontinuität und Wandel von Wahlverhalten,” Historische Zeitschrift 234 (1982): 337–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For discussions of the Center for Historical Social Research, see Best, “Quantifizierende Historische Sozialforschung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,” esp. 139–41; Best, , “QUANTUM's first year,” QUANTUM Information 1 (1976): 13Google Scholar; Jarausch, “Promises and Problems of Quantitative Research in Central European History,” 281; and Jarausch, Konrad H., Arminger, Gerhard, and Thaller, Manfred, Quantitative Methoden in der Geschichtswissenschaft: Eine Einführung in der Forschung, Datenverarbeitung und Statistik (Darmstadt, 1985), 68.Google Scholar

11. Cited in Sheehan, James J., “Quantification in the Study of Modern German Social and Political History,” in Lorwin, Val R. and Price, Jacob M., eds., The Dimensions of the Past: Materials, Problems, and Opportunities for Quantitative Work in History (New Haven, 1972), 301Google Scholar. Sheehan's article provides excellent information about and specific guides through the great mass of German statistical materials and studies. Among the most important guides for statistical data are Oberschall, A., Empirical Social Research in Germany, 1848–1914 (The Hague, 1965)Google Scholar; and von Mayr, Georg, Statistik und Gesellschafislehre, 3 vols. (Freiburg i. Br., 18951917)Google Scholar. Most of the German states published their own statistical series, but far and away the most voluminous is Preussische Statistik. For the period after the formation of the German Reich, the greatest source of statistical material is Statistik des Deutschen Reichs. This, however, has thousands of volumes on everything from population and criminal statistics to sea trade and is somewhat difficult to use because it has no index or guide. To find the type of statistical material one wants within this massive series, the best guide is the Quellenverzeichnis in the yearly volumes of the German government's statistical yearbook, Statistisches Jahrbuch. The Statistisches Jahrbuch itself contains a wealth of statistical material, which may be enough for many scholars' purposes, but it is still only a summary of the data found in other general and more specific series and reports.

12. See, for example, Jarausch, Konrad H., ed., Quantifizierung in der Geschichtswissenschaft: Probleme und Möglichkeiten (Düsseldorf, 1976).Google Scholar

13. Johnson, “Counting ‘How it Really Was’”; Kousser, J. Morgan, “Quantitative Social-Scientific History,” in Kammen, Michael, ed., The Past Before us: Contemporary Historical Writing in the United States (Ithaca, N.Y., 1980), 433–56Google Scholar; Jarausch, Konrad H., “International Styles of Quantitative History,” Historical Methods 18 (1985): 1319Google Scholar; and Jarausch, , “The International Dimension of Quantitative History: Some Introductory Reflections,” Social Science History 8 (1984): 123–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. For figures, see Kousser, “Quantitative Social Science History.”

15. Though the Journal of Contemporary History is now published in Britain, we have decided to classify this as an American journal. One of its editors has always been at an American university and the other one has moved about from one country to another. More importantly, almost all of its statistical articles are written by Americans and all of the sophisticated mathematics has been written by Americans.

16. Jarausch, “Promises and Problems of Quantitative Research in Central European History,” 287.

17. Johnson, “Counting ‘How it Really Was.’”

18. Jarausch, Konrad H., “German Social History-American Style,” Journal of Social Science 19 (1985): 349.Google Scholar

19. Quantitative economic history is also not highly developed in Germany. Jürgen Kocka explained in 1980 that “economic history, in Germany, has a strong nonquantitative and nontheoretical tradition. It never became an economists' history. Something like the American ‘New Economic History’ of the 1950s and 1960s has hardly developed.” Kocka, “Theory and Social History,” 439.

20. For the abundance of data in nineteenth-century Germany, see note 11. Quantitative data in major statistical series in the Weimar and Nazi periods is far more scanty and less trustworthy than existed previously.

21. Quantitative articles on Nazism's rise, voter support, and party membership published in the United States and the United Kingdom include Abraham, David, “Conflicts Within German Industry and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic,” Past and Present 88 (1980): 88128CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Childers, Thomas, “The Social Bases of the National Socialist Vote,” Journal of Contemporary History 11 (1976): 1742CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Douglas, D.M., “The Parent Cell: Some Computer Notes on the Composition of the First Nazi Party Group in Munich, 1919–21,” Central European History 10 (1977): 5572CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Faris, E., “Takeoff Point for the National Socialist Party: The Landtag Election in Baden, 1929,” Central European History 8 (1975): 140–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Koshar, Rudy J., “From Stammtisch to Party: Nazi Joiners and the Contradictions of Grass Roots Fascism in Weimar Germany,” Journal of Modern History 59 (1987): 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Madden, P., “Some Social Characteristics of Early Nazi Party Members, 1919–23,” Central European History 15 (1982): 3456CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Muhlberger, D., “The Sociology of the NSDAP: The Question of Working-Class Membership,” Journal of Contemporary History 15 (1980): 493511CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Muhlberger, , “The Occupational and Social Structure of the NSDAP in the Border Province Posen-West Prussia in the Early 1930s,” European History Quarterly 15 (1985): 281311CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rogowski, R., “The Gauleiter and the Social Origins of Fascism,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 19 (1977): 399430CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Though the essays themselves do not necessarily present new quantitative evidence per se, the March 1984 special issue of Central European History entitled “Who Voted for Hitler?” deals with the main lines of the quantitative and qualitative debate on the Nazi party vote by many of the leading figures in the present debate such as Richard F. Hamilton, Thomas Childers, and William Sheridan Allen.

22. Quantitative articles on political movements and parties other than Nazis include Breuilly, J., “Liberalism or Social Democracy: A Comparison of British and German Labour Politics, c. 1850–75,” European History Quarterly 15 (1985): 342CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Coetzee, F. and Coetzee, M.S., “Rethinking the Radical Right in Germany and Britain Before 1914,” Journal of Contemporary History 21 (1986): 515–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Coetzee, M.S., “The Mobilization of the Right? The Deutscher Wehrverein and Political Activism in Württemberg, 1912–14,” European History Quarterly 15 (1985): 431–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hodge, C.C., “Three Ways to Lose a Republic: The Electoral Politics of the Weimar SPD,” European History Quarterly 17 (1987): 165–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; John, M., “Liberalism and Society in Germany, 1850–1880: The Case of Hanover,” English Historical Review 102 (1987): 579–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kohler, E.D., “Revolutionary Pomerania, 1919–20: A Study in Majority Socialist Agricultural Policy and Civil-Military Relations,” Central European History 9 (1976): 250–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Puhle, H. J., “Conservatism in Modern German History,” Journal of Contemporary History 13 (1978): 689720CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sheehan, James J., “Liberalism and the City in Nineteenth-Century Germany,” Past and Present 51 (1971): 116–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sheehan, , “Liberalism and Society in Germany, 1815–48,” Journal of Modem History 45 (1973): 583604CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sperber, Jon, “The Shaping of Political Catholicism in the Ruhr Basin, 1848–81,” Central European History 16 (1983): 347–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wickham, J., “Working-Class Movements and Working-Class Life: Frankfurt am Main during the Weimar Republic,” Social History 8 (1983): 315–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zangerl, C.H.E., “Courting the Catholic Vote: The Center Party in Baden, 1903–13,” Central European History 10 (1977): 220–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. For non-Nazi voting and legislative behavior studies, see Burnham, Walter D., “Political Immunization and Political Confessionalism: The United States and Weimar Germany,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 3 (1972): 130CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mattheisen, D. J., “Voters and Parliaments in the German Revolution of 1848: An Analysis of the Prussian Constituent Assembly,” Central European History 5 (1972): 322CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mattheisen, , “German Parliamentarism in 1848: Roll-Call Voting in the Frankfurt Assembly,” Social Science History 5 (1981): 469–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mattheisen, , “Liberal Constitutionalism in the Frankfurt Parliament of 1848: An Inquiry Based on Roll-Call Analysis,” Central European History 12 (1979): 124–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peterson, B., “The Politics of Working-Class Women in the Weimar Republic,” Central European History 10 (1977): 87111CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, W. and Turner, S. A., “Legislative Behavior in the German Reichstag, 1898–1906.” Central European History 14 (1981): 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24. For quantitative studies of German military history, see Fann, W.R., “Peacetime Attrition in the Army of Frederick William I, 1713–1740,” Central European History 11 (1978): 323–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hughes, D. J., “Occupational Origins of Prussia's Generals, 1871–1914,” Central European History 13 (1980): 333CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marshall, B., “German Attitudes to British Military Government 1945–47,” Journal of Contemporary History 15 (1980): 655–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, R. J., “The German Pre-War Aircraft Production Plans: November 1936–April 1939,” English Historical Review 90 (1975): 778–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, , “German Air Strength 1933 to 1939: A Note,” The Historical Journal 27 (1984): 465–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, , “Germany, ‘Domestic Crisis’ and War in 1939,” Past and Present 116 (1987): 138–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. Boynton, G.R. and Loewenberg, Gerhard, “The Evolution of Public Perceptions of Adenauer as a Historic Leader: Test of a Mathematical Model of Attitude Change,” Social Science History 1 (1976): 79100CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Scribner, R.W., “Civic Unity and the Reformation in Erfurt,” Past and Present 66 (1975): 2960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26. For quantitative studies of banking and finance, see Forbes, Neil, “London Banks, the German Standstill Agreement, and Economic Appeasement in the 1930s,” Economic History Review 40 (1987): 571–87Google Scholar; Komlos, John, “The Kreditbanken and German Growth: A Postscript,“ Journal of Economic History 38 (1978): 476–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neal, Larry, “The Economics and Finance of Bilateral Clearing Agreements: Germany, 1934–1938,” Economic History Review 32 (1979): 391404CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neubanger, Hugh M. and Strokes, R. Houston, “German Banks and German Growth, 1883–1913: An Empirical View,” Journal of Economic History 34 (1974): 710–61Google Scholar; Neubanger, and Stokes, , “German Banks and German Growth: A Reply,” Journal of Economic History 36 (1976): 425–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neubanger, and Stokes, , “German Banks and Japanese Banks: A Comparative Analysis,” Journal of Economic History 35 (1975): 238–52Google Scholar; Tilly, Richard, “Mergers, External Growth, and Finance in the Development of Large-Scale Enterprise in Germany, 1880–1913,” Journal of Economic History 42 (1982): 629–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Webb, Steven B., “Supply of Money and Reichsbank Financing of Government and Corporate Debt in Germany, 1919–1923,” Journal of Economic History 44 (1984): 499509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. For quantitative studies on transportation, see Fremdling, Rainer, “Railroads and German Economic Growth: A Leading Sector Analysis with a Comparison to the United States and Great Britain,” Journal of Economic History 37 (1977): 583621CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, R. J., “Cars, Roads and Economic Recovery in Germany, 1932–1938.” Economic History Review 28 (1975): 466483Google Scholar; Overy, , “The German Motorisierung and Rearmament: A Reply,” Economic History Review 32 (1979): 107–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, , “German Pre-War Aircraft Production Plans: November 1936–April 1939,” English Historical Review 90 (1975): 778–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, , “Transportation and Rearmament in the Third Reich,” Historical Journal 16 (1973): 389411CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Spenceley, G.F.R., “R. J. Overy and the Motorisierung: A Comment,” Economic History Review 32 (1979): 100106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. For quantitative studies on the business cycle, see Balderston, T., “The German Business Cycle in the 1920's: A Comment,” Economic History Review 30 (1977): 159–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Falkus, M.E., “The German Business Cycle in the 1920's,” Economic History Review 28 (1975): 451–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Temin, Peter, “The Beginning of the Depression in Germany,” Economic History Review 24 (1971): 240–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Webb, Steven B., “Fiscal News and Inflationary Expectations in Germany After World War I,” Journal of Economic History 46 (1986): 769–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. For quantitative studies on German industry, see Abraham, David, “Conflicts within German Industry and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic,” Past and Present 88 (1980): 88128CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overy, R. J., “Heavy Industry and the State in Nazi Germany: The Reichswerke Crisis,” European History Quarterly 15 (1985): 313–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Webb, Steven B., “Tariffs, Cartels, Technology and Growth in the German Steel Industry, 1879–1914,” Journal of Economic History 40 (1980): 309–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30. For quantitative studies in German labor, see Geary, Dick, “The German Labor Movement: 1848–1919,” European Studies Review 6 (1976): 175–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schneider, Michael, “Religion and Labor Organization: The Christian Trade Unions in the Wilhelmine Empire,” European Studies Review 12 (1982): 345–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tipton, Frank B., “Farm Labor and Power Politics: Germany, 1850–1914,” Journal of Economic History 34 (1974): 951–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. For quantitative studies on demography, see Bade, Klaus, “German Emigration to the United States and Continental Immigration to Germany in the Late 19th/Early 20th Centuries,” Central European History 13 (1980): 348–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fenske, H., “International Migration in 18th Century Germany,” Central European History 13 (1980): 332–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brugg, F., “Morbidity and Mortality on the North Atlantic Passage: Eighteenth Century German Immigration,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 17 (1978): 565–85Google Scholar; Hochstadt, Steven, “Migration and Industrialization in Germany 1815–1977,” Social Science History 5 (1981): 445–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hochstadt, , “Migration in Preindustrial Germany,” Central European History 15 (1983): 351–76Google Scholar; Imhof, A., “An Approach to Historical Demography in Germany,” Social History 4 (1979): 345–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jackson, James, “Migration in Duisburg 1861–1890: Occupational and Familial Contexts,” Journal of Urban History 8 (1982): 235–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Knodel, John, “Town and Country in 19th Century Germany: A Review of Urban-Rural Differentials in Demographic Behavior,” Social Science History 1 (1977): 356–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neuman, A., “The Influence of Family and Friends on German Internal Migration,” Journal of Social History 13 (1979): 277–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rowan, S., “The Common Penny (1495–99) as a Source of German Social and Demographic History,” Central European History 10 (1977): 148–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32. For quantitative studies on social class and social mobility, see Crew, David, “Definitions of Modernity: Social Mobility in a German Town 1880–1901,” Journal of Social History 7 (1973): 5174CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fredrichs, C., “Capitalism, Mobility and Class Formation in the Early Modern German City,” Past and Present 69 (1975): 2449CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hubbard, W., “Social Mobility in Graz 1857–1910,” Journal of Social History 17 (1984): 453–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kaeble, Hartmut, “Social Mobility in Germany 1900–1960,” Journal of Modern History (1978): 439–61Google Scholar; Kaeble, , “Social Stratification in Germany in the 19th and 20th Centuries: A Survey of Research Since 1945Journal of Social History 10 (1976): 144–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lee, W.R., “Bastardy and the Sodoeconomic Structure of South Germany,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 7 (1977): 403–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tobin, Elizabeth, “War and the Working Class: The Case of Düsseldorf, 1914–1918,” Central European History 18 (1985): 257–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wickham, J., “Working–Class Movement and Working–Class Life: Frankfurt on Main During the Weimar Republic,” Social History 8 (1983): 315–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33. For quantitative studies on education, see Ash, M., “Academic Politics in the History of Science: Experimental Psychology in Germany 1879–1941,” Central European History 13 (1980): 255–86CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Hahn, E., “Junior Faculty in Revolt: Reform Plans for Berlin University in 1848,” American Historical Review 82 (1977): 875–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Giles, Geoffrey J., “German Students and Higher Education Policy in the Second World War,” Central European History 17 (1984): 330–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jarausch, Konrad H., “The Social Transformation of the University: The Case of Prussia, 1865–1914,” Journal of Social History 12 (1979): 609–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jarausch, , “Students, Sex and Politics in Imperial Germany,” Journal of Contemporary History 17 (1982): 285303CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zneimer, Richard, “The Nazis and the Professors: Social Origins, Professional Mobility, and Political Involvement of the Frankfurt University Faculty 1933–1939,” Journal of Social History 12 (1978): 147–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zorn, W., “Student Politics in the Weimar Republic,” Journal of Contemporary History 5 (1970): 128–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. For quantitative studies of crime and protest, see Johnson, Eric A. and McHale, Vincent E., “Urbanization, Industrialization and Crime in Imperial Germany,” Social Science History 1 (1976 and 1977): 4578, 210–47Google Scholar; Johnson, and McHale, , “Socioeconomic Aspects of the Delinquency Rate in Imperial Germany, 1882–1914,” Journal of Social History 13 (1980): 384402CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Johnson, , “The Roots of Crime in Imperial Germany,” Central European History 15 (1982): 351–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Johnson, , “Women as Victims and Criminals: Female Homicide and Criminality in Imperial Germany, 1873–1914.” Criminal Justice History 6 (1985): 151–75Google Scholar; Tilly, Richard, “Popular Disorders in 19th Century Germany: A Preliminary Study,” Journal of Social History 12 (1970): 147–58Google Scholar; Zehr, Howard, Crime and the Development of Modern Society: Patterns of Criminality in Nineteenth Century Germany and France (London, 1976).Google Scholar

35. For quantitative studies of women and family history, see Peterson, B., “The Politics of Working-Class Women in the Weimar Republic,” Central European History 20 (1987): 87111Google Scholar; Berkner, Lutz, “The Stern Family and the Developmental Cycle of the Peasant Household,” American Historical Review 77 (1972): 398418CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hertz, D., “Intermarriage in Berlin Salons,” Central European History 16 (1983): 303–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stow, K., “The Jewish Family in the Rhineland in the High Middle Ages: Form and Function,” American Historical Review 92 (1987): 10851110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36. Childers, Thomas, The Nazi Voter: The Social Foundations of Fascism in Germany, 1919–1933 (Chapel Hill, 1982)Google Scholar; Hamilton, Richard F., Who Voted for Hitler? (Princeton, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kater, Michael H., The Nazi Party: A Social Profile of Members and Leaders, 1919–45 (Cambridge, Mass., 1983)Google Scholar; Jarausch, Konrad H., Students, Society, and Politics and Imperial Germany (Princeton, 1983)Google Scholar; Evans, Richard J., Death in Hamburg: Society and Politics in the Cholera Years, 1830–1910 (Oxford, 1987).Google Scholar