Beyond Methodology: The Place of Theory in Quantitative Historical Research

This paper analyzes relationship between theory and methods in that body of research that has come to be called the new social history. First, an argument is iiiade that quantitative analysis of individual-level data that characterizes much of what is new in recent sociohistorical literature is not only a methodology for conducting empirical research but also embodies an implicit theory of social organization that is both quantitative and individual.The power of such a theory to explain social change is limited, however, not only by technical problems associated with measurement and sampling error in historical research but also by absence of an explicit causal component in model. An alternative perspective, based on Marx's materialist theory of history, and which, it is argued, overcomes these limitations, is then presented. Empirical findings from research on family in nineteenth century Los Angeles and Duncan's discussion of structural equation models, are used to illustrate how different theories of social change might be empirically tested. There is a long tradition of debate about relationship between theory and methods, between explanation of empirical observations and techniques used to generate those observations, in history and philosophy of social sciences. The increasing application of quantitative techniques to analysis of historical data and longstanding interest among social scientists in theories of social change provide an opportunity to reconsider some of issues involved in this debate. This paper will present an analysis of relationship between theory and methods in that body of research that has come to be called the new social history. Examples will be drawn primarily, although not exclusively, from historical studies of family. The investigation of historical subjects is a particularly useful case for exploring relationship between theory and