
Edward Palmer Thompson
0British Marxist historian who redefined class as a historical relationship rather than a structural category. In The Making of the English Working Class (1963), Thompson argued that the English working class 'made itself' through struggle and shared experience between 1780 and 1832—not as a product of industrial capitalism's logic but through the agency of artisans and laborers who created their own political consciousness. This 'history from below' transformed social history. His concept of the 'moral economy' showed how eighteenth-century crowds acted on customary beliefs about fair prices and communal obligation, and his polemic The Poverty of Theory (1978) defended humanist Marxism against Althusserian structuralism.
Key Insights
- ✦
What is the central argument of The Making of the English Working Class?
Thompson's magnum opus, published in 1963, argues that the English working class was not a mechanical product of the Industrial Revolution but 'made itself' through the agency of artisans and laborers between 1780 and 1832 . The book's famous preface insists that class is not a 'thing' but a historical relationship—it happens when people 'feel and articulate the identity of their interests' against those who oppose them. Thompson reconstructed the lived experience of workers who suffered loss of status and freedom yet created 'a cultured and political consciousness of great vitality' . Eric Hobsbawm called it 'almost certainly the most influential single book of history in the Anglo-Saxon radical Sixties and Seventies' .
- ✦
What is the 'moral economy' and why did it matter?
In his 1971 essay 'The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century,' Thompson argued that food riots were not irrational outbursts of hunger but disciplined actions grounded in customary beliefs about fair prices and communal obligation . The crowd operated on an 'extraordinary deep-rooted pattern of behaviour and belief'—a moral economy—that legitimized popular action against those who transgressed customary practice . This concept transformed how historians understood popular protest: crowds were not mobs but participants in a plebeian culture with its own moral assumptions, often running 'contrary to those of the propertied and those in authority' .
- ✦
Why did Thompson attack Althusser in The Poverty of Theory?
Thompson's 1978 polemic targeted Louis Althusser's structuralist Marxism for denying human agency. Althusser's concept of history as 'a process without a subject' eliminated the 'blade of human aspiration' that Thompson believed essential to any emancipatory politics . He detected in Althusserian theory 'Stalinism reduced to paradigm of theory'—a 'structuralism of stasis' that confined vivid human life, experience, and morals to rigid theoretical frameworks . Thompson insisted on 'historicism,' 'empiricism,' and 'moralism' as concepts structuralism denied, arguing for a self-critical and unapologetically humanist Marxist tradition .
- ✦
How did Thompson's political activism connect to his historical work?
Thompson saw his scholarship and activism as complementary parts of a unified whole . He left the Communist Party in 1956 after the Soviet invasion of Hungary, helping found the New Left and the journal New Left Review . He was a leading figure in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) from the late 1950s and founded European Nuclear Disarmament (END) in 1979, working to move beyond Cold War orthodoxies on both sides . His concept of 'exterminism'—the logic of weapons systems driving toward annihilation—organized his disarmament writings . His historical work on popular agency and his political campaigning for peace were expressions of the same commitment to human self-determination.
- ✦
What was the debate between Thompson and Perry Anderson about?
The dispute was both substantive and methodological. Anderson, influenced by Althusser, emphasized structural analysis and the relative autonomy of the political level in works like Lineages of the Absolutist State. Thompson attacked Althusserian structuralism as a betrayal of historical materialism's empirical and experiential foundations . Anderson responded in Arguments within English Marxism (1980), defending structural analysis while acknowledging Thompson's moral seriousness. Underneath lay a deeper disagreement about whether class is a structural category or a lived historical relationship—and whether Marxist theory should prioritize conceptual rigor or human experience.
- ✦
What did Thompson mean by 'history from below'?
Thompson's approach shifted historical perspective from kings, aristocrats, and politicians to the common people—the artisans, laborers, and crowds who made their own history . This 'history from below' was not merely a change of subject matter but a methodological commitment to reconstructing the lived experience and agency of ordinary people. His 1963 book 'contributed significantly to a sea-change in the way history was studied and written not only in Britain but in many countries' . The approach became an essential element in historical study, though it faced concerted resistance from elitist and conservative historians who sought to retain control of the historical viewpoint .
- ✦
What were Thompson's institutional affiliations and later career?
Thompson was born in 1924, read history at Corpus Christi, Cambridge, graduating in 1946 . He taught at the University of Leeds from 1948 to 1965 and at the University of Warwick from 1965 to 1971 . He grew uncomfortable in the academic milieu and eventually left formal teaching in the 1970s to devote himself to research, writing, and political campaigning . He died in 1993, survived by his wife and two sons . His son is the novelist Kate Thompson .




