TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE
Max Weber is probably the most outstanding name in German social thought since Schmoller, and a recent survey finds him the most quoted sociologist in Germany. (See American Journal of Sociology, November, 1926, p. 464.) At a time when the main emphasis in English, and particularly American, economic thought has shifted from general deductive theory to the other two corners of the methodological triangle, namely, psychological and historical interpretation on the one hand and statistical study on the other, there is abundant reason for making available to English readers this last product of Weber’s thought, his economic history. Though Weber was not, as the German editors of the work observe, a specialist in this field, the preparation of a course of lectures on general economic history offered an exceptional opportunity for bringing together and presenting in moderate compass the leading ideas interpretive of economic life and change for which he was already famous in other lands as well as his own.
In preparing this English version, intended for students of the social sciences and the general reader, anything of the nature of re-editing the text has been expressly avoided, but a few departures from the German edition have seemed advisable. The highly technical introduction on “Definitions of Concepts” (Begriffliche Vorbemerkung) prepared by the German editors has been omitted. In several places, especially in the first chapter, matter has been transferred from foot-notes to the body of the text. Other foot-notes have been omitted or condensed, and the extensive bibliographic references, consisting largely of German books and articles, have been reduced to titles in English, references to Max Weber’s other writings, and a few general works in German and French; all retained notes are grouped at the end of the volume.
It is perhaps fair to remark to the critical reader that the translation of a work surveying so large a field of knowledge with so much learning and yet so briefly, has presented problems. In places, notably in the sections dealing with medieval institutions, historical exactness would in any case be impossible without vastly greater length of treatment, and the shade and scope of meaning of many expressions in the original is not clear. Moreover, many of the facts dealt with have no close parallel in English history and many terms have no close equivalent in English usage. Especially since the significance of the book lies in its interpretive brilliancy rather than accuracy of detail, it was clearly preferable to use broad terms giving the general sense and not to enter upon explanations or comparisons which would grow to undue length. On several points of usage, my former teacher in the field of economic history, Professor A. P. Usher, has kindly answered questions and given valuable advice and suggestions.—Finally, it may be a hint useful to some readers to say that both the intrinsic interest of the material and the significance of what the author has to say increase progressively through the book, to the very last chapter, which summarizes Weber’s famous discussion of the relation of religion to the cultural history of capitalism.
F. H. K.