Oct 29, 2013 BIOGRAPHY & BRIEF INTRODUCTION Eric Hobsbawm was born into a Jewish family in 1927 to. In The Invention of Tradition. How can the answer be improved?

• The Invention Of Tradition Summary

. This Week's Theme is New to /r/AskHistorians?

Please read our and before posting!. Upvote informative, well sourced answers.

Downvote and Report comments that are unhelpful or grossly off-topic The Rules, in Brief 1.: No Racism, Bigotry, or Offensive Behavior. Nothing Less Than, and. Write, and, Using. Provide If Asked. No Tertiary Sources Like. Serious On-Topic Comments Only:, or other.

Comments That Break. Resources. Flair Our have detailed knowledge of their historical specialty and a proven record of excellent contributions to. Flair categories. To nominate someone else as a Quality Contributor,. Upcoming Events Participant(s) Event Jan.

Of AMA: Mesoamerica and Pseudoarchaeology Features Feature posts are posted weekly. The current rotation is:.

(biweekly). Related subreddits. Follow us on social media.

Welcome to Monday Methods! In another installment of our ongoing series taking a closer look at historiographical milestones and important developments in the academic field of history, today we'll take a look at one of the most prominent historians of the 20th Century and one of his most interesting texts: Eric Hobsbawm and his essay on the invention of tradition. Eric Hobsbawm (1917-2012) was a British Marxist historian specialized in what is known as the 'dual revolution', meaning the political French Revolution and the British industrial revolution and their effects on what he called 'the long 19th Century', meaning the time frame from 1789 to 1914, which he discussed in his three books The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, The Age of Capital: 1848–1875 and The Age of Empire: 1875–1914 with The Age of Extremes dealing with the 20th century. Hobsbawm is also known for his work on social banditry and his importance in founding the Journal Past & Present, which to this day is one of the most prestigious English-language history journals.

In 1983 he and his colleague Terrence Ranger, a prominent historian of Africa focusing on the history of Zimbabwe, edited and published a short anthology called The Invention of Tradition. In it, Hobsbawm wrote the title-giving essay which deals with one of the defining features of modernity: The invention of tradition.

Invented tradition, writes Hobsbawm, is taken to mean a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behavior by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past. In fact, where possible, they normally attempt to establish continuity with a suitable historic past.

What does Hobsbawm mean with this? In the same volume British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper provides a perfect example: Scottish Highland Tradition. Detailing how today whenever Scotsmen gather to celebrate their national identity, they do so by wearing kilts woven in a tartan whose color and patterns indicate their 'clans' and play seemingly ancient Scottish music on their bagpipes. However, as Trevor-Roper makes clear: the whole concept of a distinct Highland culture and tradition including kilts woven in specific tartans and bagpipes is a retrospective invention.

What seems ancient first emerged in the 17th Century and was refined, re-branded, and updated in the 19th Century. When George IV as the first Hanoverian monarch planned his visit to Edinburgh, commercial and national interests entered into an alliance to invent several key traditions of Scotland. Colonel David Stewart of Grath, a military man studying the Highland regiments of the British Army had first publicized the idea of Scottish clans being differentiated by tartans of their kilts; a fact which had virtually no historical basis. When the king announced his visit, Sir Walter Scott, the novelist, was in charge of celebrations and wanted to put on a show including the Highlanders and their kilts. But what tartan should they wear? The idea of differentiated clan tartans, which had no been publicized by Stewart, seems to have originated with the resourceful manufacturers who, for thirty-five years, had had no clients except the Highland regiments but who now (.) saw the prospect of a far larger market.

And so, kilts with differentiated clan tartans came into existence to be treated as if they were an ancient and reaching far back in history Scottish tradition. These invented traditions, according to Hobsbawm are in essence a reaction to social change. The peculiarity of 'invented' tradition is that the continuity with it is largely factious. In short, they are responses to novel situations which take the form of reference to old situations (.) It is the contrast between the constant change and innovation of the modern wolrd and the attempt to structure at least some parts of social life within it as unchanging and invariant, that the makes the 'invention of tradition' so interesting for the historians of the past two centuries. (.) What they do is to give any desired change (or resistance to innovation) the sanction of precedent, social continuity and natural law as expressed in history. Established by repetition, which gives the illusion of historicity, invented traditions not only serve a social purpose but also a distinctly political one: Specifically, a national purpose.

The rise of nationalism, so intrinsically linked with modernity and the 19th Century, was an intellectual project that eschewed its own novelty in favor of legitimacy through history. Friedrich Engels summed up this sentiment in an article entitled Democratic Pan-Slavism in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung of February 1849, when he writes Peoples which have never had a history of their own, which come under foreign domination the moment they have achieved the first, crudest level of civilisation. Have no capacity for survival and will never be able to attain any kind of independence. And that has been the fate of the Austrian Slavs. This rather pervasive mind-set sums up the above mentioned defining feature of nationalism: The need for historicity, the need for an ancient and far-reaching tradition to refer to and to legitimize various national aspirations.

This is where invented traditions come in rather handy. Used by what Roger Brubaker calls 'national entrepreneurs', invented traditions form a backbone of any national and nationalist narrative, which by its very nature, seeks to portray the new national community as the continuation of an ancient already established community and their values and views. Hobsbawm: It is clear that plenty of political institutions, ideological movements and groups – not at least in nationalism – were so unprecedented that even historic continuity had to be invented, for example by creating an ancient past beyond effective historic continuity, either by semi-fiction (Boadicea, Vercingetroix, Arminius the Cheruscan) or by forgery (Ossian, the Czech medieval manuscripts). It is also clear that entirely new symbols and devices came into existence as part of national movements and states, such as the national anthem (of which the British in 1740 seems to be the earliest), the national flag (still largely a variation on the French revolutionary tricolor, evolved 1790-94), or the personification of 'the nation' in symbol or image. In short, the invention of tradition is both factor in establishing as well as expression of the follwoing: Modern nations and all their impedimenta generally claim to be the opposite of novel, namely rooted in the remotest antiquity, and the opposite of constructed, namely human communities so 'natural' as to require no definition other than self-assertion. The importance of Hobsbawm's essay and the accompanying anthology is manifold: Not only is it a call to question various traditions we are familiar with and which often project an image of antiquity and long history on a historical level but it also provides us with a method of better understanding their importance in the myths we tend to create of out own national community as well as the idea of a national community reaching far back into times immemorial itself. The concept of invented traditions is doubly important in classical studies.

The first is the invented traditions of the ancient world itself: for Athens, we might look to their very strongly held idea of autochthony (roughly, indigeneity) and the way that this was used in the unification of the Attic plain, as well as how it affected citizenship policy (namely, only trueblood Athenians could be Athenian citizens). There is also the mythological component, in part through literature such as the Orestia, which ends with the tragic hero Orestes finding peace in the Athenian court system, but even moreso with the entire invented mythological tradition of Athens, from the story of the contest between Athena and Poseidon to the entire heroic character of Theseus, who seems to have been a creation of the Peisistratid era. This program might be seen in part to lengthen the mytho-istory of the city, which lacks the Homeric namechecking and ancient monuments of Sparta, Thebes and Argos, but also as a way to reinforce Athenian independence and distinction during the time when it was on the rise. Even moreso this can be seen in Rome, because the Romans were extremely upfront and conscious about their quest to discover or create their history and culture. Unfortunately the early generations of this (for example the Annalist historians such as Fabius Pictor that seem to have done much of the research Livy used), and perhaps more unfortunately the drive for this essentially obliterated traditional Latin literature, such as Saturnian verse poetry, mime and heroic theater, and balladry, from the literary record. The drive for what might be considered a legitimate and prestigious cultural and historical identity was inseparably, although not comfortably, linked to importation of Greek cultural norms. So Vergil's national epic of the Aeneid was written in a self consciously Greek style, and while Augustus was creating a visual history of the Roman people in the Forum Julii (in which a statue program depicted great figures back to Romulus) he was also turning from the veristic portraiture style to the more 'airbrushed' Greek styles.

But perhaps even more important than the invented traditions within the classical world is the invented tradition of the classical world, and particularly the obsessive quest to link the classical past to the modern west, making Greece and Rome the origin of modern Europe and, just as importantly, making Europe the sole inheritor of the classical past. This is of course a massive topic, with results that can be quite comical-such as the 'naming dispute' with Macedonia-or quite not-such as the policies of 'Hellenization' towards minority populations in Greece (not to pick on Greece, it's just what I know best). Not to mention the weirder results like the whole sometimes-satirical, sometimes-wannabe-colonial 'we must reclaim Constantinople' meme found in the stranger corners of the right. Interested to get people's thoughts on the following. I think the whole 'invention of tradition for political purposes' is a hugely interesting and worthwhile subject of study, however I think it would be better looked at more broadly than specifically as a feature of modernity and nationalism. I say this because ancient and medieval European history is replete with exaggerated or invented traditions to bolster political claims, generally involving noble genealogy (and very often from Troy!).

Some examples are stories of Romulus and Remus' descent from Aeneas, the Kings of Britain's descent from Brutus of Troy, The Franks descent from the Trojans, and the Scots descent from greater Scythia as described in the Declaration of Arbroath. Of course the legitimising aims are different here; in an age of dynastic legitimacy the inventions were to bolster dynastic pedigree, while in the age of national legitimacy the inventions were to bolster the historicity of the nation, and therefore have more to do with the culture of a great mass of people rather than the lineage of an elite. But the same processes are at work, I guess the premodern examples are not exactly the 'invention of tradition', but certainly 'the invention of history', and for the same purpose of bolstering political legitimacy. It's a very late medieval/early modern genre.

One of the most famous is probably the from the mid-16th century, which claims the roots of the Zimmern family lie with the 'Cimbri' barbarian/Germanic tribe of Roman writing. Obviously they don't, but that's the legitimacy that the Zimmerns wanted to claim for themselves. But my broader point is that it's not just about 'political' legitimacy, unless you're defining 'political' in the sense of corporate society altogether rather than governance. Not just that religion is another means of securing noble/government legitimacy, which of course it is. Well, I guess I'm going to be that person here to pick at your entire example.

Trevor-Roper's essay goes too far when it says that 'the whole concept of a distinct Highland culture and tradition including kilts woven in specific tartans and bagpipes is a retrospective invention. Yes, specific patterns of kilts denoting families is likely a later invention, and bagpipes arrived rather late as well, but to say that Highland culture was merely an 18th century invention is a bridge too far. It may not look like the image of Scottish Romanticism we know now, but tartan cloth was associated with the Highlands strongly enough to be appropriated by Lowlanders as an identity symbol during the Jacobite Risings. Gaelic was spoken, the strong tradition of sung stories remaining (and somehow surviving into the diaspora until the language was lost).

There's an enduring old image of Highlander, too, beyond the romanticized one, that of the wild, savage, uncouth and often stupid but wily teuchter (see the comic Angus Og for example, or even Groundskeeper Willie in the Simpsons). If these things don't point at a difference in culture in the highlands, then why were they even noted? Why create an entire mythos around Gaels and their differences if they really were identical to the Lowlanders in every meaningful respect? I'm going to cut myself short before getting on a real tear about stuff I hope to look into more, but I will refer to Michael Newton's blog post on, for a more recent approach to the scholarship around tartanry and distinct Highland Culture.

The Invention Of Tradition Summary

Many of the traditions which we think of as very ancient in their origins were not in fact sanctioned by long usage over the centuries, but were invented comparative recently. This book explores examples of this process of invention - the creation of Welsh Scottish 'national culture'; the elaboration of British royal rituals in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; the o Many of the traditions which we think of as very ancient in their origins were not in fact sanctioned by long usage over the centuries, but were invented comparative recently. This book explores examples of this process of invention - the creation of Welsh Scottish 'national culture'; the elaboration of British royal rituals in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; the origins of imperial ritual in British India and Africa; and the attempts by radical movements to develop counter-traditions of their own. This book addresses the complex interaction of past and present, bringing together historicans and anthropologists in a fascinating study of ritual and symbolism which possess new questions for the understanding of our history. Own up, all of you who watched even an excerpt from the TV coverage of the recent wedding of the future King and Queen of UK and thought, well, yes, sure the Brits are good at this kind of thing, after all they've had hundreds of years of practice at it. Ummm, no actually. As by far the most readable of the essays in this volume claims, it was not until the very late nineteenth century that the monarchy was aggrandized through elaborate public ritual: William IV's coronation was mockingly known Own up, all of you who watched even an excerpt from the TV coverage of the recent wedding of the future King and Queen of UK and thought, well, yes, sure the Brits are good at this kind of thing, after all they've had hundreds of years of practice at it.

Ummm, no actually. As by far the most readable of the essays in this volume claims, it was not until the very late nineteenth century that the monarchy was aggrandized through elaborate public ritual: William IV's coronation was mockingly known as the Half-Crownation, and at the beginning of her reign, Victoria was obstinate and obstructive, and those responsible for devising ceremonies were incompetent. Did you know, for example, that Victoria's coronation was completely unrehearsed? The clergy lost their place in the order of service, two trainbearers talked throughout the entire ceremony, and the choir was 'inadequate'. Indeed, the function of these ceremonies is as old as the monarchy itself, but the form that the ceremony should take is a reflection of how the role of the monarch is conceived, and that is different in different ages.

In his essay, David Cannadine sees a correlation between the waning of royal influence and the growth of enhanced ceremonial - the beginning of what he calls the 'cavalcade of impotence'. He analyses the theatrical performances of royalty between 1820 and 1977, taking in the first show that I remember watching on TV, the investiture of the Prince of Wales - which, as I clearly recall, struck me at the time as a load of humbug. Another highlight in this volume is Hugh Trevor-Roper taking delight in riling the 'Scotch' as he insisted on calling them, to the annoyance of Scotsmen and women everywhere who normally like to be kept distinct from the stuff sold in bottles. He takes every possible opportunity to remind the reader that it was an Englishman who invented the kilt in the early eighteenth century. With enormous gusto he describes how the idea of a separate tartan for each clan was a 'hallucination' sustained by economic interest, and is surprisingly indulgent and forgiving of the (English) Allen brothers who styled themselves the Sobieski Stuarts and were virtually single-handedly responsible for the creation of the mythology around the 'ancient' Highland dress as a vestige of an early rich civilization - as represented by Ossian.

Those clever Englishmen, forging a Scottish national identity and duping the Scots into believing in their own cultural superiority. Equally informative, if a tad drier, is the piece on Wales by Prys Morgan. Welsh national costume? Invented by the wonderfully named Augusta Waddington.'

In 1834 she was not even clear as to what a national costume was, but she was sure there ought to be a costume that would be distinctive and picturesque for artists and tourists to look at.' Eisteddfods, druids, bards, national heroes?

All in the interest of creating a romantic concept of nationhood through cultural history. I could go on with more examples of the excellence within these covers: the essay 'Representing Authority in Victorian India' (Bernard S. Cohn) could almost be hilariously funny if it weren't for the fact that, sadly, this is all true. Cohn concentrates on the great assemblage of 1877 whose function was to establish the authority of Victoria as Empress.

The arrangements and the attention to hierarchy, symbolic acts and representational insignia is utterly astonishing, and ridiculous, and tragic: when the salute was fired, the noise of the cannon and gunfire stampeded the assembled elephants and horses, killing a number of bystanders and casting a pall of dust over the rest of the proceedings. Terence Ranger's own contribution on the invention of tradition in colonial Africa is the one I found least enjoyable, probably due to my own lack of knowledge of African history, thus making it hard to grasp. Hobsbawm's essay on Europe is also not an easy read, but there I felt it was the intense concentration of his ideas that made for the slight difficulty. On second reading, it is a magisterial account of the reasons for the mass production of traditions in Europe in the period 1870-1914. He sees these invented traditions as a kind of social cement, collective group self-representations that create cohesive structure in a changing world. He's also excellent on the problematic nature of analysing these inventions - do they come from the top down? Well, yes, but they can only take hold if they touch on a need that is already there.

This is the kind of book that causes a huge shift in the way that you see the world. The Invention of Tradition, edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, is a selection of essays by different historians. To quote the blurb: Many of the traditions which we think of as ancient in their origins were, in fact, invented comparatively recently. This book explores examples of this process of invention. There's a great quote in the section on the British monarchy.

This is Lord Robert Cecil in 1860, after watching Queen Victoria open parliament: Some nations have a gift for ceremon The Invention of Tradition, edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, is a selection of essays by different historians. To quote the blurb: Many of the traditions which we think of as ancient in their origins were, in fact, invented comparatively recently. This book explores examples of this process of invention. There's a great quote in the section on the British monarchy. This is Lord Robert Cecil in 1860, after watching Queen Victoria open parliament: Some nations have a gift for ceremonial. This aptitude is generally confined to the people of a southern climate and of a non-Teutonic parentage.

In England the case is exactly the reverse. We can afford to be more splendid than most nations; but some malignant spell broods over all our most solemn ceremonials, and inserts into them some feature which makes them all ridiculous. Something always breaks down, somebody contrives to escape doing his part, or some bye-motive is suffered to interfere and ruin it all.

150 years later, the British have bigger, more pompous and more gilt-ridden ceremonies than almost anyone, and we see ourselves as especially good at pageantry: the opening of parliament, coronations, jubilees, royal weddings and funerals, and all of it presented as though it was ancient continuous tradition. And in fact much of the content, at least for the coronation, is ancient: it's just that between the early 17th and late 19th centuries, the preparation was generally half-arsed and the results shambolic. Apart from anything else, the symbolism was awkward; Britain was a democracy of a sort, and as long as the monarch was a partisan political figure people were reluctant to surround them with all the trappings of divinely-provided power.

It was only once the monarch was reduced to a figurehead that we could safely put them in the centre of these grand pantomimes. The book also has an essay about the Scots (all that twaddle about clan tartans) and the Welsh (druids and the Eisteddfod), but those stories were broadly familiar, so in some ways the bits I found most interesting were about the British inventing traditions out in the Empire. For example, in India, where they had the problem of how best to assert Imperial authority over a 'country' which was in fact hundreds of small kingdoms held together by force, and how to project Queen Victoria as the focus of that authority while she was thousands of miles away. And although the British had been in India for a long time by then, this represented a new focus, since it was only in the wake of the Sepoy Mutiny/India's First War of Independence in 1857 that control of India was taken from the East India Company and taken over by the state. So in 1876 they held the 'Imperial Assemblage' to mark Victoria's accession to her imperial title as 'Kaiser-i-Hind' when Indian kings/princes/maharajas gathered with their entourages at a site near Delhi to take turns to approach a pavilion decorated in British heraldic imagery, and each was presented with a banner which had a coat of arms in the European heraldic tradition, designed for the occasion by a Bengal civil servant called Robert Taylor. It sounds like an extraordinary event: apart from the basic weirdness of it, the scale was immense; 'at least eighty four thousand people' attended in one role or another.

Thinking about all this reminded me of my own little moment of inventing tradition. When I was at university, there a couple of people at my halls of residence who wanted to start an all-male discussion club where the members would take turns to present a little speech on some interesting topic, and then everyone would drink sherry and discuss. A couple of friends and I took great delight in coming up with a ludicrously silly constitution for the club, which laid down arcane traditions and provided bizarre titles for the various officers.

For example, every meeting was supposed to start with 'the toasting of the Pope': a different Pope each week, working through them in chronological order from St Peter onwards. There was no Catholic connection, pro or anti; I think it was just that the phrase 'the toasting of the Pope' was amusing. In the event there was one meeting and then the club fizzled out. And a good thing too, frankly. Actually, though, the whole episode was rather fitting; after all, the University of Bristol itself is an institution whose is a vast Gothic edifice built not in the middle ages, or even at the height of the Gothic Revival in the mid C19th, but in 1915. Pretending to be older than it is — pretending to be Oxbridge, really — is what Bristol does. Anyway, the book is interesting; some of the essays are better than others — Hobsbawm's own contribution struck me as especially weak — but I'm glad I read it.

A slight typographical gripe: irritatingly, quoted passages are marked only by the left margin being indented exactly as much as the first line of each paragraph is indented, which makes it extremely unobvious which paragraphs are quoted. I'm not suggesting that's a reason to avoid the book; I was just irritated by it. Hayali Cemaatler'de acikta kalmis bir konunun, uluslarin uydurulmasi konusuna da temas ederek, tamamlanmasi. Turkiye'de bu konu temas edilip birakilmis durumda, bu kitaptaki olcude bir arastirma ne yazik ki elimizde yok. Ama Persembeleri sela okuma gibi geleneklerin icat edildigini goruyoruz zaten.

Ya da Peyami Safa'nin bir kahramanindan Ulubatli Hasan efsanesi cikarilmasi gibi mesela. Hobsbawm, sinifsal hikayelerde ya iltimas gecmis, ya da Turkiye tipi ulkelerde solun durumuna ozgu bir durum ola Hayali Cemaatler'de acikta kalmis bir konunun, uluslarin uydurulmasi konusuna da temas ederek, tamamlanmasi. Turkiye'de bu konu temas edilip birakilmis durumda, bu kitaptaki olcude bir arastirma ne yazik ki elimizde yok.

Ama Persembeleri sela okuma gibi geleneklerin icat edildigini goruyoruz zaten. Ya da Peyami Safa'nin bir kahramanindan Ulubatli Hasan efsanesi cikarilmasi gibi mesela. Hobsbawm, sinifsal hikayelerde ya iltimas gecmis, ya da Turkiye tipi ulkelerde solun durumuna ozgu bir durum olabilir ama burada biz bol bol icat edilmis gelenekle karsi karsiyayiz. Druidleri, kilt etekleri, yeniden yaratilmis kastlari da iceren Iskoc, Gal, Ingiliz, Hindistan ve Afrika gelenek icadi surecleri ancak internet yardimiyla okunabiliyor, cunku benim bilmedigim cok fazla gonderme var.

Mesela kis aylarinda tercih ettigim sapkanin Andy Cap adinda bir model oldugunu ve Ingiliz isci sinifi icin zamaninda bir tur kimlik oldugunu buradan ogrendim.:) Ceviri konusunda fazla sikinti cikmadi. Tek problem Turkceye cevirirken ozgun olacagiz diye asiri turkcelestirilmis terimler. Bu terimleri internette aramak cok zor oluyor. Edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, The Invention of Tradition is a collection of essays that revolve around the notion of the invented tradition, which Hobsbawm defines in the introduction as “a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behaviour by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past”. He further distinguishes “tradition” and “custom” by cl Edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, The Invention of Tradition is a collection of essays that revolve around the notion of the invented tradition, which Hobsbawm defines in the introduction as “a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behaviour by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past”. He further distinguishes “tradition” and “custom” by claiming that the former is invariant while the latter does not preclude change. These “invented traditions”, however, differ from other “traditions” because they claim to be old despite their more recent origins and they tend to emerge “when a rapid transformation of society weakens or destroys the social patterns for which ‘old’ traditions had been designed”.

Hobsbawm identifies three major reasons that traditions are invented: to foster social cohesion among artificial communities, to legitimize authority, and to inculcate beliefs into a society. The remaining six chapters are case studies that invoke this concept, some more clearly than others, but all in a fairly direct fashion.

First, eminent historian Hugh Trevor-Roper takes on Scotland and demonstrates that the most distinctive symbols of Highland culture, such as the tartan and the kilt, were invented in the 18th century for reasons of cultural distinction and later romanticized as legitimate traditions. Next, Welsh historian Prys Morgan describes how the destruction of Welsh culture led to an attempt to preserve it through the romanticization of disparate elements, such as the eisteddfod and Druidic history, which turned them into more attractive and durable cultural products. In the fourth chapter, David Cannadine details the evolution of meaning surrounding once-primitive royal ceremonies and enumerates ten aspects that affect this meaning and four phases of development that end with it becoming so ingrained in the British mindset that they perceive a continuity wherein they have “always” been good at such rituals. Researched by Bernard Cohn, the fifth chapter shows how, in their quest to establish legitimacy, Britain invented new traditions out of the shells of old ones in an attempt to establish a continuity between their rule and those of previous overlords. In Africa, as Ranger’s penultimate essay suggests, invented traditions that could tie the continent to Britain were used to establish “command and control”. The problem was that the empire overlooked the diversity among African cultures and invented traditions that were too easily appropriated by African elites to boost their own authority. The collection ends as it began, with a theoretical exploration from Hobsbawm, and explores how traditions were “mass-produced” in Europe not only by states and nationalistic entities, but by social organizations such as the labour movement, who employed invented traditions to foster unity.

Key is this discussion is the idea that mass spectator sports can be loci for classes, ethnicities, and even nations to build solidarity around a common (and, of course, invented) tradition. Hobsbawm and Ranger’s collection has become a seminal text in both historical and sociological theory and, while its concept is intuitive, the introduction and final chapter benefit greatly from Hobsbawm’s lucid and accessible prose. One’s interest in the individual chapters might vary based on one’s their involvement with the subject matter and preferred style of writing, but overall there are no superfluous articles and each does a good job of elucidating the book’s concept as a whole. Overall, The Invention of Tradition is a rare example of a work that is approachable, scholarly sound, influential, and actually enjoyable to read.

For any student of modern history, regardless of their focus, this collection cannot be overlooked, if for no other reason than its highlighting of the dynamic nature of “history” itself. I find this to be a fascinating subject. The traditions that we follow offer clues as to which tribe we want to join or those to which we already belong; they also indicate which authorities we follow.

As pointed out in the excellent introduction, tradition is a different matter than customs. Tradition is what has become unvaried or fixed, while customs “serve the double function of motor and fly-wheel.” Customs have more to do with the delicate give and take of civil society, although can become I find this to be a fascinating subject. The traditions that we follow offer clues as to which tribe we want to join or those to which we already belong; they also indicate which authorities we follow. As pointed out in the excellent introduction, tradition is a different matter than customs. Tradition is what has become unvaried or fixed, while customs “serve the double function of motor and fly-wheel.” Customs have more to do with the delicate give and take of civil society, although can become tradition and often do. For example, the author points out that much of what judges do is included under customs, but what they wear is tradition.

This collection covers some great examples of invented traditions from different colonial systems, the British monarchy and the European industrial age after 1870 to the start of World War 1, with the last as my personal favorite piece in the book. As used here, it includes those constructed to assert authority or dominance, and those that simply emerged over a brief period of time. With those definitions, one can easily see how knowing how to untangle which is which (and devised by whom) is vital before adopting or defending them. For example, it seems that recently the singing of the national anthem has become a place of protest at sporting events. While writing about the issue, many reporters began to examine this tradition and found it only became the custom around WW2, with the song itself protested by citizens from its adoption as our anthem in 1931.

Even Jackie Robinson wrote of his inability to stand and sing the song in his 1972 autobiography. No matter how one feels about the protesting, one can see how it has been hardened into tradition that is now so dearly held by some that the flouting of it is seen as an unpatriotic act. So upon investigation, it may turn out that some of these dearly held traditions started from pure myth or even from the cooptation of another culture. But knowing which invented traditions are problematic in their origins may be difficult to uncover and in many cases, may not really matter. After all, all traditions are manufactured by people with their meanings changing with the times.

This may be the main problem with this book; the editors or the authors just do not make a strong enough case that invented traditions are different in any meaningful manner to the users than 'organic' traditions. This lack is apparent in the different essays covered which evade covering any customs or traditions NOT invented by an authority, either governmental or capitalistic in nature. I certainly agree (as I have said elsewhere in this review) that simply understanding the origins of tradition is vital; that may be the true heart of this book. For example, it seems important to know whether nationalist pride events are created and staged to support fascism; Hitler was such a master at staging and symbolism and intertwining the two together that it was difficult to separate Teutonic pride from Naziism before and after the war. It has been noted that Naziism was 'the reductio ad absurdum of the German tradition of nationalism, militarism, worship of success, and force, as well as the exaltation of state.'

To me, it proves that the unexamined tradition can be the devil in the detail. A handful of pieces by Hobsbawm and his fellow travelers that read like well-written academic papers should: thought-provoking, and nearly free of any kind of grim jargon. What we get is a set of incisive analyses of how English traditions were invented, and how 'local' traditions were invented to expand the imperial project and the ambitions of local petty lords in Scotland, Wales, India, and British Africa. The book finishes with an essay by Hobsbawm expanded the purview to the invention of tr A handful of pieces by Hobsbawm and his fellow travelers that read like well-written academic papers should: thought-provoking, and nearly free of any kind of grim jargon. What we get is a set of incisive analyses of how English traditions were invented, and how 'local' traditions were invented to expand the imperial project and the ambitions of local petty lords in Scotland, Wales, India, and British Africa.

The book finishes with an essay by Hobsbawm expanded the purview to the invention of tradition in America and continental Europe, hammering home the point that invented tradition is an almost universal tool to legitimate power And hey, now I live in a tropical quasi-democratic state where invented tradition is still crassly used by the ruling class to enthrall a population held down by an appalling disparity of wealth. I would read a section of the book, have to stop moving on the subway as the national anthem played (really, guys?!) and think 'welp, some shit never changes.' A useful collection despite their age, and while very helpful for each subject the individual essays are on, still do not function as a cohesive whole. As others have mentioned, as a book, this subject would have even more value as a breakdown of the interrelations between the four nations of the British isles and their history, but focuses only on two, which makes contrasting or conclusions less possible. The imperial sections could also have been elaborated into a broader look at British estab A useful collection despite their age, and while very helpful for each subject the individual essays are on, still do not function as a cohesive whole. As others have mentioned, as a book, this subject would have even more value as a breakdown of the interrelations between the four nations of the British isles and their history, but focuses only on two, which makes contrasting or conclusions less possible.

The imperial sections could also have been elaborated into a broader look at British establishment both at home and abroad rather than simply monarchy ritual and India. However, taken as seperate essays (as they were originally intended) this is a valuable resource. Ini buku lama, tapi saya perlu beli used lagi! buat koleksi. Suatu kumpulan esai yang ditampung dan diredaksi oleh sejarawan inggris eric hobsbawm ini sungguh sudah jadi antologi klasik bagi sejarawan.

Secara khusus, saya tertarik mengenai pernyataannya yang provokatif bahwa sebenarnya apa yang kita sebut sebagai 'tradisi' entah kegiatannya atau hasilnya itu temuan beberapa abad terakhir saja. Wayang, busana jawa, gramatika bahasa jawa, dsb. Itu ternyata bikinan orang abad XIX yang diklaim men ini buku lama, tapi saya perlu beli used lagi! buat koleksi.

Suatu kumpulan esai yang ditampung dan diredaksi oleh sejarawan inggris eric hobsbawm ini sungguh sudah jadi antologi klasik bagi sejarawan. Secara khusus, saya tertarik mengenai pernyataannya yang provokatif bahwa sebenarnya apa yang kita sebut sebagai 'tradisi' entah kegiatannya atau hasilnya itu temuan beberapa abad terakhir saja. Wayang, busana jawa, gramatika bahasa jawa, dsb.

Itu ternyata bikinan orang abad XIX yang diklaim menyambung tanpa putus aktivitas sebelum-sebelumnya. Tindakan 'menemukan' kembali? tradisi ini berhutang pada media. A fascinating group of papers on how 'ancient traditions' are invented by societies that have, for one reason or another, lost touch with their true historical past. Without knowing it, of course, I have used this notion in 'Eirelan,' whose latter-day Celts imagine themselves closely connected to the ancient Celts but with many differences in outlook. They have 'invented their traditions' over some ten centuries, and now (meaning 'now' in 3953 AD) it is almost impossible to separate true histori A fascinating group of papers on how 'ancient traditions' are invented by societies that have, for one reason or another, lost touch with their true historical past.

Without knowing it, of course, I have used this notion in 'Eirelan,' whose latter-day Celts imagine themselves closely connected to the ancient Celts but with many differences in outlook. They have 'invented their traditions' over some ten centuries, and now (meaning 'now' in 3953 AD) it is almost impossible to separate true historical traditions from the invented ones. Well worth reading.

You will be startled by much of what you find in this book. The amazing work of a group of people, that influenced many sciences greatly. The idea of traditions as something invented, made people think at the things that surround us with new eyes. There are very many reviews both from the 80s and also of recent time, that can give some image of the book. So, no need to write so much about the content. There is only one thing i would like to say - a must-read for all people!!!

Especially for those fighting for the so cold 'purity' of the 'nation' and for The amazing work of a group of people, that influenced many sciences greatly. The idea of traditions as something invented, made people think at the things that surround us with new eyes.

There are very many reviews both from the 80s and also of recent time, that can give some image of the book. So, no need to write so much about the content. There is only one thing i would like to say - a must-read for all people!!! Especially for those fighting for the so cold 'purity' of the 'nation' and for all 'nationalists'.

A favourite of mine. Hobsbawms introduction sets the base - his co-authors put in the historical examples to put colour to the theory. It is really worth reading it over and over again.

I especially enjoyed the parts on Welsh and Scottish traditions, invented at some point of the 18th and 19th century. This makes you think about the supposedly traditional 'ways of behaviour' you were accustomed to! A favourite of mine. Hobsbawm´s introduction sets the base - his co-authors put in the historical examples to put colour to the theory.

It is really worth reading it over and over again. I especially enjoyed the parts on Welsh and Scottish traditions, invented at some point of the 18th and 19th century.

This makes you think about the supposedly traditional 'ways of behaviour' you were accustomed to! Eric Hobsbawm, a self-confessed 'unrepentant communist', was professor emeritus of economic and social history of the University of London at Birkbeck. He wrote many acclaimed historical works, including a trilogy on the nineteenth-century: The Age of Revolution, The Age of Capital, and The Age of Empire, and was the author of The Age of Extremes: The Short 20th Century 1914-1991 and his recent au Eric Hobsbawm, a self-confessed 'unrepentant communist', was professor emeritus of economic and social history of the University of London at Birkbeck. He wrote many acclaimed historical works, including a trilogy on the nineteenth-century: The Age of Revolution, The Age of Capital, and The Age of Empire, and was the author of The Age of Extremes: The Short 20th Century 1914-1991 and his recent autobiography, Interesting Times: A Twentieth-Century Life.