Edmund Burke, Historism, and History

Abstract

Historians nowadays tend to be democratic with regard to causality. They no longer believe in an “aristocratic causalism” claiming that only “big” causes can produce “big” consequences; contemporary historians are ready to recognize that small events can have big events as their legitimate offspring.1 A perfect illustration of this new, democratic regime governing cause and effect in history is Rousseau’s psychology. Self-evidently, Rousseau’s psychology is a mere trifle if compared to those majestic social forces that used to fascinate Marxist historians — and not only then. Yet we all know that what went on in Rousseau’s mind powerfully contributed to the downfall of a proud and thousand-year-old monarchy — and are prepared to accept this as a fact.