¹ See esp. ch. 1, “Approaches to the study of political power,” and ch. 10, “Economics and Politics in the 20th century,” in Neumann, Franz, The Democratic and the Authoritarian State (Glencoe, 1957)Google Scholar.

² The various expectations during the transition period in 1933 can now be followed in Schulz, Bracher-Sauer, Die Nationalsozialistische Machtergreifung (Westdeutscher Verlag, Koeln-Opladen, 1960)Google Scholar.

³ Gerschenkron, Alexander, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Harvard University Press, 1962), pp. 119–151Google Scholar.

⁴ Nove, Alex, Economic Rationality in Soviet Politics (New York, 1964), p. 32Google Scholar. Cf. Erlich, M., The Soviet Industrialisation Debate 1924–1928 (Harvard University Press, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar: “A policy of moderate tempos would strengthen the position of the upper strata of the villages and would make the adroit balancing between them and the unruly radicals of the cities a necessity which could be adopted only as a temporary expedient. Had such a course been pursued over a long period of time the regime would have stood to lose not only from its possible failures but also from its successes. The alternative to such retreats and maneuvers leading to the gradual erosion of the dictatorial system was clearly a massive counterattack which would have broken once and for all the peasants' power over the basic decisions of economic policy. A high speed industrialisation with a strong emphasis on the capital goods sector which Stalin now favored provided the logical line for such a counterattack.” (p. 174)

“The overhang of agricultural excess population permitted the manning of equipment which was physically usable with the surplus peasants of yesterday, which could be removed from the countiyside without a notable detriment to agricultural output and be employed at a real wage barely exceeding their wretchedly lower consumption levels of the earlier status.” (p. 184)

⁵ Gurland, Kirchheimer, Neumann, The Fate of Small Business in Nazi Germany, 78th Cong., 1st sess., Hearings, Sen. Special Committee to Study Problems of American Small Business, Comm. Print No. 14 (1943), p. 152.

The story and some figures can be found in Schweitzer, Arthur, Big Business in the Third Reich (Bloomiagton, Ind., 1964)Google Scholar, chs. 4 and 5.

⁶ For literature on the episode see the general discussion in Lefebvre, Georges, La Révolution francaise, 3d ed. (Paris, 1963), pp. 354–430Google Scholar, and most interesting in this context his remarks on pp. 407–409; two more specialized works by Guérin, Daniel, La Lutte de Classes sous la Première République, Bourgeois et “bras nus” (1793–1797), 2 vols. (Paris, 1946)Google Scholar, and Soboul, Albert, Les Sans-culoltes Parisiens en l'an II, Mouvement Populaire et Gouvernement Révolutionnaire, 2 Juin, 1793–9 Thermidor an II (Paris, 1958), esp. pp. 427–433, 503–504, 1025–1035Google Scholar. Guérin draws explicit conclusions as to the class content of the struggle between Robespierre and the sans-culottes. Soboul analyzes a wealth of hitherto unknown documents, among them papers of district assemblies and district clubs. His conclusions from the assembled material, though more shaded, are in line with those of Guérin as to the sans-culottes-Revolutionary Government relation. For the social composition of the sans-culottes see also Rudé, G., The Crowd in the French Revolution (London, 1959), pp. 178–84Google Scholar.

⁷ It goes without saying that the conclusions I draw from Moore's analysis are entirely my own.

⁸ Conrad, and Meyer, , “The Economics of Slavery in the Ante Bellum South,” in The Economics of Slavery and Other Econometric Studies (Chicago, 1964)Google Scholar. What is argued in such accounts is the question of profitability of slavery then and there, rather than long term development prospects, which form the basis of Genovese's, Eugene D.The Political Economy of Slavery (New York, 1965)Google Scholar. See esp. p. 204.

⁹ Nevins, Allan, Ordeal of the Nation, vol. 2 (New York, 1941)Google Scholar, ch. 2.

¹⁰ Randall, J. G. and Donald, D., The Civil War and Reconstruction, 2d ed. (Boston, 1961)Google Scholar, ch. 22. Stampp, Kenneth M., The Era of Reconstruction (New York, 1965), p. 44Google Scholar: “Indeed it may be said that if it was Lincoln's destiny to go down in history as the Great Emancipator, rarely has a man embraced his destiny with greater reluctance than he.”

¹¹ Woodward, C. Vann, Reunion and Reaction, 2d ed. (New York, Anchor, 1956), p. 232Google Scholar.

¹² Cochran, Thomas C., “Did the Civil War Retard Industrialization?” in The Inner Revolution (Harper Torchbooks, 1964), pp. 39–54Google Scholar.

¹³ von Stein, Lorenz, Geschichle der Socialen Bewegung in Frankreich von 1789 bis auf unsere Tage, vol. I, Der Begriff der Gesellschaft, ed. Dr. Salomon, Gottfried (Muenchen, 1921)Google Scholar.

¹⁴ von Stein, Lorenz, Verwaltungslehre, 2d ed. (1869), vol. I, p. 82 et seqGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ De la Démocratie en Amerique, 14th ed. (Paris, 1864), vol. I, p. 149.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Stampp, op. cit., note 10 above, p. 130: “In addition confiscation was an attack on property rights—so much so that it is really more surprising that some of the middle class radicals favored it, than that most did not.”

¹⁷ The dubiousness of the state-society dichotomy is illuminated in Ehmke, Horst, “‘Staat’ und ‘Gesellschaft’ als Verfassungstheoretisches Problem,” in Staatsverfassung und Kirchenordnung, Festgabe fuer Rudolf Smend (Tuebingen, 1962)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Leites, Nathan, A Study of Bolshevism (Glencoe, 1953)Google Scholar.