The Undivided Past by David Cannadine

Century,” in Aston,
Crisis in Europe
, pp. 59–95; J. H. Elliott, “Revolution and Continuity in Early Modern Europe,” in Elliott,
Spain and Its World, 1500–1700
(London, 1989), pp. 92–113; Elliott, “The General Crisis in Retrospect: A Debate Without End,” in Elliott,
Spain, Europe and the Wider World, 1500–1800
(London, 2009), pp. 52–73.
    112. A. Cobban,
The Myth of the French Revolution
(London, 1955); Cobban,
The Social Interpretation of the French Revolution
(Cambridge, 1964); Cobban,
Aspects of the French Revolution
(London, 1968); G. Cavanaugh, “The Present State of Revolutionary Historiography: Alfred Cobban and Beyond,”
French Historical Studies
7 (1972): pp. 587–606; S. Schama,
Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution
(London,1989), p. xiv. For other revisionist accounts, see W. Doyle,
Origins of the French Revolution
(Oxford, 1980); Doyle,
The Oxford History of the French Revolution
(Oxford, 1989); Doyle,
Origins of the French Revolution
, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1999); F. Furet,
Interpreting the French Revolution
(Cambridge, 1981); T. C. W. Blanning,
The French Revolution: Aristocrats Versus Bourgeois?
(London, 1987); P. R. Hanson,
Contesting the French Revolution
(Oxford, 2009); W. G. Runciman, introduction to Wickham,
Marxist History-Writing
, pp. 5–6.
    113. R. M. Hartwell and R. Currie, “The Making of the English Working Class,”
Economic History Review
, 2nd ser., 18 (1965): 633–43; C. Calhoun,
The Question of Class Struggle
(Chicago, 1982), pp. 60–94.
    114. W. Reddy,
Money and Liberty in Modern Europe: A Critique of Historical Understanding
(Cambridge, 1987), p. 195.
    115. R. Ruiz,
The Great Rebellion: Mexico, 1905–1924
(New York, 1980); p. V. N. Henderson,
Felix Díaz, the Porfirians and the Mexican Revolution
(Lincoln, Neb., 1981); P. Vanderwood,
Disorder and Progress: Bandits, Police and Mexican Development
(Lincoln, Neb., 1991); Knight, “Revisionism and Revolution,” pp. 165–97; Knight, “The Mexican Revolution: Bourgeois? Nationalist? Or Just a ‘Great Rebellion’?”
Bulletin of Latin American Research
4 (1985): 1–37.
    116. L. H. Haimson, “The Problem of Social Identities in Early Twentieth-Century Russia,”
Slavic Review
47 (1988): 1–20; E. Acton,
Rethinking the Russian Revolution
(London, 1990); R. Pipes,
The Russian Revolution
(New York, 1990); R. G. Suny, “Revision and Retreat in the Historiography of 1917: Soviet History and Its Critics,”
Russian Review
53 (1994): 165–82; L. H. Siegelbaum and R. G. Suny, “Class Backwards? In Search of the Soviet Working Class,” in L. H. Siegelbaum and R. G. Suny, eds.,
Making Workers Soviet: Power, Class and Identity
(Ithaca, N.Y., 1994), pp. 1–26; O. Figes,
A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution, 1891–1924
(London, 1997); S. Smith,
Revolution and the People in Russia and China: A Comparative History
(Cambridge, 2008), pp. 1–15.
    117. A. Kessler-Harris, “A New Agenda for American Labor History,” in J. Carroll Moody and A. Kessler-Harris, eds.,
Perspectives in American Labor History: The Problems of Synthesis
(DeKalb, Ill., 1989), p. 219; D. T. Rodgers,
Age of Fracture
(Cambridge, Mass., 2011), p. 93. See also D. Brody, “The Old Labor History and the New: In Search of the New American Working Class,”
Labor History
20 (1979): 111–26; M. Frisch, “Sixty Characters in Search of Authority,”
International Labour and Working Class History
27 (1985): 100–103; M. J. Buhle, “The Future of American Labor History: Towards a Synthesis?”
Radical Historians Newsletter
, no. 44 (1984): 1–2; D. Montgomery,
The Fallof the House of Labor
(New York, 1987); Smith,
Revolution and the People in Russia
, pp. 1–15.
    118. Kaye,
Education of Desire
, pp. 169–72; Kaye, “E. P. Thompson, the British Marxist Historical Tradition and the Contemporary Crisis,” in H. J. Kaye and K. McClelland, eds.,
E. P. Thompson: Critical Perspectives
(Philadelphia, 1990), pp. 252–75; G. Eley and W. Hunt,