PREFACE TO VOLUME i
The Marx–Engels Chronicle is a chronology, not a biography. A good biography
gives a balanced view of a life; in a chronology, relatively trivial events may jostle
some of the most important dates in political history.
In the Chronicle the qualities that make for a good biography have been sacrificed in favor of the accurate assemblage of more or less raw data—that is, unevaluated facts. Above all, a chronology should provide specific dates, and indeed this has been one of the major concerns.
Like the Marx–Engels Cyclopedia as a whole, this chronology covers both Marx and Engels, up to the year of Engels' death (1895). All previous chronologies, with one exception, have focused on Marx. In principle MEC devotes equally detailed attention to both men, but possibly the reader may detect somewhat greater emphasis on Marx.
THE TWO FOUNDATION CHRONOLOGIES
This chronology did not start from scratch: it was based on two great chronologies already available, both in German.
1. The first, in point of time, was Karl Marx, Chronik seines Lebens (abbreviated KMC—see ST/36) published in 1934 by the Marx–Engels–Lenin Institute of Moscow, largely based on the earlier research of the staff organized by D. Ryazanov. For almost a half century it has been one of the most important resources for Marx studies. For almost as long, there have been reports that an English translation was under way, but none ever appeared. Now we can say: just as well. Much of this great work is now out of date; in the light of several decades of research, it is clear that it is peppered with errors. It is important to point these out, since the Chronik is still being used as an authority; and accordingly the most important errors are mentioned in the following pages. But it is just as important to preserve, and pass on, the positive content of this work.
2. The more modern basic chronology winds through 19 volumes of the Marx–Engels Werke (MEW—see ST/ME69) in the form of a section titled “Daten aus ihrem Leben und ihrer Tätigkeit” [Dates in Their Lives and Activities]. It is referred to here as MEW Daten. The 19 sections add up to a work of 352 pages. It covers both Marx and Engels, often in great detail.
The Marx–Engels Chronicle started with the idea of conflating KMC and MEW Daten, a combination that would automatically be the most useful chronology available. Two other steps have been taken: enrichment with added material, and the excision of extraneous matter. First, on the enrichment process:
New material has been drawn from a variety of sources, which need not be listed here since they constitute most of the Sources and Translations (“ST“) List found in Volume II. Four special campaigns of the enrichment process may be described as follows:
1. Special notice was taken of Marx and Engels' reading and study patterns, including the listing of many of the specific books they read and annotated. In order not to overload the Chronicle dates with long lists, the book titles or authors are often detailed in a “Year Appendix” section (following December), and are sometimes reserved to the author's name in the Glossary (Volume III). In any case, the Glossary indexes all mentions of a given name.
2. The chief source for the enrichment process was the body of the Marx–Engels correspondence: letters by them to each other or to third persons. The correspondence has also functioned as a check on the KMC and MEW Daten entries, and as a source of specific dates not otherwise mentioned.
3. The next great source was the minutes and documents of the General Council of the International (see especially ST/21 and ST/26, 27). The Chronicle now provides full access to all of Marx and Engels' participations in General Council meetings and International conferences, connected up with their correspondence.
4. Another special project embodied in the Chronicle is the tracing of Marx's “road to Capital,” that is, the steps and events in the development of his views on political economy (insofar as this can be done in terms of a chronology). All the essential entries have been placed under two rubrics, which identify them. Up through December 1862, when Marx adopted the title Capital, the rubric is (or contains) the key word “Economica“—a term used by Marx for the work he was preparing. (By analogy it is also used for Engels, when necessary.) From 1863 on the rubric is “Capital.” If you follow these two signposts from month to month, you are on the “Road to Capital“—which heading has indeed been placed on a special periodization/chronology found in the Appendix to this volume.
On the other hand, in the course of conflating KMC and MEW Daten, certain material has been digested out. I want to call these extruded elements to the reader's attention, in the case of both of the older works.
Karl Marx, Chronik. In this work, each dated entry is followed by a smalltype note giving a list of the sources on which the entry is presumably based: very often, letters by or to Marx and Engels. I have not taken over these notes as such, though much of their content has been used. Many of these references are to letters sent to Marx or Engels by others, mostly unpublished, hence available chiefly in the archives of the Institute of Marxism–Leninism in Moscow or the International Institute for Social History in Amsterdam. But nota bene: for some purposes this material may still be useful to certain researchers; to this extent KMC is not completely superseded by the present Chronicle.
MEW Daten. All of the factual material in this chronology has been carried over to the present Chronicle (apart from errors, of course). What has been omitted are the frequent homilies and party-line statements on various points of doctrine and interpretation inserted by the IML editors to sanitize whatever material would otherwise taint the pages. However, it should be said, as strongly as possible, that I have found no clear instance where the party-line predilections of the editors have led to the falsification of hard facts or of published texts; acts of omission, and omitted texts, are another matter, as is well known. Not only in MEW Daten but also in MEW editorial notes, peculiar interpretations are legion, but there is no problem about distinguishing between these and the line separating hard facts from factual errors.
Since I have explained what has been dropped from KMC and MEW Daten, I must now emphasize the other side of this coin: special effort has been made to carry over all other details given in these works, even those I might otherwise have considered too minor to include. In fact this explains why certain entries appear while equally unimportant items have been left out: the former were already in KMC or MEW Daten and therefore could not be omitted by the above rules. Put in another way, one aim of the Chronicle is to supersede the two foundation works to the fullest extent possible.
OTHER PUBLISHED CHRONOLOGIES
Many books about Marx include short chronologie, of a few pages; these need not concern us here. Noteworthy chronologies on a larger scale have been produced by Maximilien Rubel, singly or with an associate. Readers may find these useful. They are mainly concerned with Marx alone, and are mostly based on KMC plus a survey of Marx's writings and letters. They tend to be organized mainly by month only, deemphasizing specific day dates, and often offer discursive passages in which Rubel expresses his special views on Marxism. Here is a chronological list, each publication being a revised form of the preceding:
1. “Chronologie,” by M. Rubel, in Marx's Oeuvres. Economie, edited by Rubel, Tome 1, pages Ivi to clxxvi (Paris: Gallimard, Bibliothèque de la P1éiade, 1963; 2d ed., 1965). In French.
2. M. Rubel, compiler, Marx–Chronik. Daten zu Leben und Werk (Reihe Hauser 3) (Munich: Carl Hanser Verlag, 1968). 163pp. In German.
3. M. Rubel and M. Manale, Marx without Myth. A Chronological Study of His Life and Work (Oxford: Blackwell, 1975). 368pp. In this version the Marx chronology is embedded in parallel chronologies of general events and “Technological Progress,” plus bibliographical appendices, and is organized by year, but not by month or day (month/day dates are scarce). Indeed this work is halfway between a chronology and a sort of biography, with frequent political essays by the authors on their views.
FORM OF PRESENTATION
In principle the Marx–Engels Chronicle is a day-by-day chronology, with compromises here and there. Within the year the basic division is the month but unfortunately not everything fits neatly into this framework. Below we list several ways in which this framework has been rubberized.
Thematic Rubrics. Related events that occur within a month or part of a month—usually within a few days—have been grouped together under topical rubrics, thereby combining the chronological with the thematic. Rubrics pertaining to Marx, or to both Marx and Engels, do not necessarily include Marx's name; but Engels' name always appears in rubrics pertaining to him. Some rubrics are used repeatedly as standard tags, in particular “W&P“
(Writing and Publication), referring to the activities covered by (W) and (P) in the Register; but this rubric also covers plans and intentions. In any case the rubrics are not necessarily exact descriptions, being limited by the compulsions of brevity.
Conspectus. At the beginning of most years, an overview of events and activities is given, in the first place as a summary of the period. This Conspectus also points to material that cannot be pinpointed in a specific month, either because it extends over part of the year or because its dating is indeterminate. It includes broad dates: events extending over more than one or two months or outside the current year. These events may also be noted in the month-by-month chronicle at the beginning and ending dates. It includes indefinite dates, lacking sufficient information to fix their place: e.g., “sometime in 1853,” or “the first half of 1871.“
Year Appendix. This section, located after December at the end of a year, is mainly a device for removing long lists of authors read and studied by Marx or Engels, from the other sections of the Chronicle. However, short references under the rubric “Reading and Study” are still found in the Conspectus or elsewhere, especially if limited to a particular month.
Relation to the Register. While the Register is organized alphabetically, the provides a systematic chronological access to Marx and Engels' writings: this is why the Register numbers (#) pepper the text. Major writings are mentioned by title; minor writings may be indicated by subject; others may be listed by place of publication (like New York Daily Tribune articles); but in all cases the Register number provides a bridge to the bibliography. journalistic writings are located in accordance with the publication date—(P) in the Register—and unless otherwise specified the date of writing (W) may be assumed to be within a couple of days. Writing dates are given for major works, for unpublished writings, and in most cases where there is a substantial gap between the dates of writing and publication. See the remarks on “broad dates” and “indefinite dates” under Conspectus, above.
Multimonth Dates. If the date of an event is, say, “Jan–Mar,” the entry will appear in the earliest month, with a back–reference probably added at the enddate. Such an “indefinite date” would appear toward the end of the January listings, in order to point ahead.
Season Dates; Parts of Years. Given dates are sometimes formulated in terms of seasons rather than months. While “summer 1868” may be used in the text, it is in practice interpreted to mean “July–Aug.” Similarly: “winter” = Jan–Feb; “autumn” = Oct–Nov; “spring” = Apr–May. The words “beginning of 1870” are interpreted to mean Jan–Feb; “end of 1870” = Nov–Dec. In such cases the exact dates are probably unknown.
Dating from Letters. As mentioned, many entries derive from letters, which do not always give exact dates. Suppose that on November 20 Marx writes Engels that he has read a certain book; the frequent practice of KMC and MEW Daten is to make a guess and state: “First half of Nov: M reads X's book. . . .” Actually it is not known whether he read the book that month or before. Instead of guessing, it is preferable to state the known fact, namely,“Nov 20: Marx writes Engels he has read ....” This may make the Chronicle read in part like a record of correspondence, but it has the advantage ofstating the truth rather than unacknowledged speculation.
Here is a second problem: KMC and MEW Daten often list letters by the date putatively received by Marx or Engels, rather than the date on the letter itself, the date sent. This practice has been changed wherever possible, in any case making clear which date is involved. In some cases both dates are given, e.g., “Oct 4 (rec'd 7) . . .“—especially in the case of letters from America, since here the gap was nearly two weeks. Let us note that letters between London and, say, Germany seem to have taken two or three days; and letters between London and Manchester could be depended on to be delivered the following morning, sometimes even the same day. (It has taken a century of triumphant technological progress to bring it about that a first-class letter from one side of Manhattan to another can take anywhere from days to weeks.)
No-Day Dating. If our date is the name of the month only, this may be ambiguous. The dating “Nov” by itself may mean either “the whole month of Nov” or “sometime during the month.” In some cases the context makes the case clear; if it does not, the case is probably that we simply don't know.
Dating Abbreviations and Short Forms. The reader is referred to the material facing the title page of this volume for a summary of the most important dating abbreviations: the months (Jan, June, Oct, etc.); the quartering of the month (Jan A, Jan AB, Jan CD, etc.); and the use of “c.” as “circa” (about). This material also lists all symbols used. For other abbreviations and short forms, see the “List of Abbreviations” (which follows this Preface), including abbreviations for periodicals. Periodical names are often given without a definite article (e.g., Volksstaat instead of Der Volksstaat); the complete name is available in the Glossary (Volume III).
¶ Symbol. The paragrah symbol () is always a reference to the Chronicle, to a particular year and paragraph. Thus [ 62:4] refers to the year 1862, paragraph 4. Inside a year, an paragraph reference will omit the year's number; for example, in the course of 1862, the mentioned reference would look like this: [ :4]. The colon always introduces the paragraph number and the year is printed in italics.
H.D.