middle ages, the French Revolution, the German Revolution), with the exception of the Renaissance, which he specifically exempts from the influences of material conditions and reserves it, supposedly, for "higher" influences. He then draws the general conclusion that some relations ("Zusammenhänge") and periods may be treated according to the Materialistic Conception of History, and others may not. Curious as it may seem for a philosopher to arrive at such half-way conclusion about a purely philosophic matter, it is even more curious to observe that this same philosopher and critic, instead of following up his conclusion by an examination of the provinces and periods in which the Materialistic Conception of History does apply and in which it does not, turns around and declares that as far as we can see, there are no historical laws at all, and that it is practically impossible to write or treat history scientifically; in short, that there is no historical science. This Nihilism, which, as we have said, is the last recourse of the opponents of Marxism if they want to keep at least the show of being scientific, is very significant, as we meet with it not only in the province of philosophy of history, but all along the line of sociology, including political economy, as we shall see later.
But it is not only the Nihilists among the Marx-critics who do not follow up their criticism with the only decisive proof, that mentioned by Engels, the proof of history. Instead, they indulge in generalities; such, for instance, as:—Marx gives "undue" "prominence" to the material factors and disregards factors which ought to be considered. Expressions that mean absolutely nothing, because of their indefiniteness, and are absolutely incapable of verification, by any method, except, perhaps, the "subjective" one of everybody deciding for himself, according to his fancy, which factor got its "due," and which did not.
The slowness on the part of Marx-critics to talk more definitely is not due to any desire to be brief. These gentlemen are usually quite voluble. It is simply a case of dis-
