Schumpeter (1987 [1943], p. 44) eloquently sums up Marx’s use of history:
"Economists always have either themselves done work in economic history or else used the historical work of others. But the facts of economic history were left to a separate compartment. They entered theory, if at all, merely in the role of illustrations, or possibly of verification of results. They mixed with it only mechanically. Now Marx’s mixture is a chemical one; that is to say, he introduced them into the very argument that produces the results. He was the first economist of top rank to see and to teach systematically how economic theory may be turned into historical
analysis and how the historical narrative may be turned into histoire raisonnée."
Karl Marx was probably the best economic historian ever. (Sorry, my GMU colleagues. Please don't argue with me on this point. Before you criticize this great man, please read his works carefully. )
"Economists always have either themselves done work in economic history or else used the historical work of others. But the facts of economic history were left to a separate compartment. They entered theory, if at all, merely in the role of illustrations, or possibly of verification of results. They mixed with it only mechanically. Now Marx’s mixture is a chemical one; that is to say, he introduced them into the very argument that produces the results. He was the first economist of top rank to see and to teach systematically how economic theory may be turned into historical
analysis and how the historical narrative may be turned into histoire raisonnée."
Karl Marx was probably the best economic historian ever. (Sorry, my GMU colleagues. Please don't argue with me on this point. Before you criticize this great man, please read his works carefully. )