ECONOM Y A ND SOCIET Y

A New Translation

Max Weber
Edited and translated by

Keith Tribe

Cambridge, Massachusetts
London, England
2019
Copyright © 2019 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of Amer­i­ca

First printing

Photo: Max Weber/Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Design: Jill Breitbarth

9780674240834 (EPUB)
9780674240841 (MOBI)
9780674240827 (PDF)

The Library of Congress has cataloged the printed edition as follows:

Names: Weber, Max, 1864–1920, author. | Tribe, Keith, editor, translator.

Title: Economy and society. I : a new translation / Max Weber ; edited and translated
by Keith Tribe.
Other titles: Soziologische Kategorienlehre. En­glish
Description: Cambridge, Mas­sa­chu­setts : Harvard University Press, 2019. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018030731 | ISBN 9780674916548 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Economics. | Sociology. | Economics—­Sociological aspects.
Classification: LCC HB175 .W36413 2019 | DDC 306.3—­dc23 LC rec­ord available
at https://­lccn​.­loc​.­gov​/2­ 018030731
 Contents

Preface vii

Introduction to Max Weber’s Economy and Society 1

Overview of Chapter One 74

1 Basic So­cio­log­i­cal Concepts 77

Overview of Chapter Two 139

2 Basic So­cio­log­i­cal Categories of Economic Action 143

Overview of Chapter Three 335

3 Types of Rule 338

Overview of Chapter Four 448

4 Social Ranks and Social Classes 450

Appendix A: Translation Appendix 459

Appendix B: The Definitional Paragraphs of Chapter 1 489
Acknowledgements 497
Index 499
 Overview of Chapter Four

Chapter 4 is a fragment of only three paragraphs: two on social classes,

and one on social ranks, Stände. As with Chapter 3, ­these paragraphs have
more to do with classification than with definition, but this is a classification
that proved influential in the social sciences of the twentieth c­ entury.
First of all, by discriminating between social rank and social class, Weber
made clear that while social class grouped men and w ­ omen according to
vari­ous objective characteristics, social rank involved a claim founded on pos­
itive or negative social estimation. While ­there had been a general evolution
in socie­ties from the dominance of social rank to that of class, ­these designa­
tions ­were not in themselves historical. In par­tic­u­lar, claims to privilege per­
sist in modern socie­ties, and so it is impor­tant to separate ­these out from the
more objective criteria of social class that he identified.
Second, the distinction of propertied, acquisitive, and social classes in §1,
coupled with a wealth of related characteristics, provided the idea that modern
society was class based with a systematic foundation. Whereas social rank de­
pends on social estimation, tradition, and inheritance, the key ele­ments of
social class are property and acquisition—as he writes in the penultimate para­
graph, “Whereas acquisitional classes originate and flourish in a market-­
oriented economy, social ranks develop and exist chiefly by monopolising the
provisioning of organisation. . . . ​A society is a ‘society of ranks’ when the so­
cial structure is organised by rank; it is a ‘class society’ when the social struc­
ture is organised by class.” Hence, Weber can be said to have outlined h ­ ere a
contrast between the market orientation of classes and the traditional legiti­
mation of social rank.
Sociology in the ­later twentieth ­century was strongly associated with the
analy­sis of socie­ties in terms of class and power, and Max Weber provided the
Overview of Chap ter Four 449

basic instruments with which this could be done. However, not only is
Chapter 4 a fragment, as a classification of social differentiation it is not clear
how it relates ­either to the action-­oriented framework of Chapters 1 and 2, or
to the typology of Chapter 3. As I suggest in the Introduction, ­there are many
signs in the ­later sections of Chapter 2 and in Chapter 3 that Weber had lost
a clear perspective on what exactly the scope of Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft
was. The clear transition from Chapter 1 to Chapter 2 is not replicated in the
way that Chapter 3 follows on from Chapter 2, and ­here also it is not obvious
how the end of Chapter 3 connects to this new chapter, ­either in terms of sub­
stance, or in terms of analytical approach.
While the analy­sis of class became a familiar feature of twentieth-­century
sociology, Weber had not lent the concept any especial analytical significance
before; ­these classifications would come to assume an importance that they
did not possess for Weber’s own sociology. Nonetheless, it is clear from the
detailed classification that Weber left in the fragment of Chapter 4 that he was
capable of providing a template for ­later sociologies, even if he himself did
not make the fact of social differentiation a central ele­ment of his own
sociology.
CHAPTER FOUR

Social Ranks and Social Classes

1. Concepts
§1. The “class position” of an individual is the typical Chance

1. of provision with goods,

2. of outer social standing,
3. of inner personal fate

that follows from the extent and nature of a power of disposition

(or the absence of such power) over goods, education, and skills
(Leistungsqualifikationen), and from the given form in which they
might be valorised in seeking access to income or revenues within
a given economic order.

A “class” is a group of men and ­women who find themselves in

the same class position.

a) A propertied class is a class for which the primary

determinant of class position is differences of
property.
b) An acquisitional class (Erwerbsklasse) is a class for which
the primary determinant of class position is Chancen for
the market valorisation of goods or ser­vices.
c) S ocial class is the totality of ­those class positions, between
which a
α) personal or
β) generational
So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses 451

change is easily pos­si­ble, and which typically tends to occur.

Sociations of ­those sharing class interests (class organisations) can

form on the basis of all three class categories. But this does not
have to happen: class position and class denote in themselves only
the ­actual existence of equal (or similar) typical interest situations
in which individuals and very many ­others find themselves. In
princi­ple, the power of disposition over all kinds of consumer
goods, means of production, wealth, means for gainful acquisi­
tion, educational and technical qualifications each constitutes a
par­tic­u­lar class position, and only ­those who are completely “un­
skilled,” propertyless, and reliant for work on casual employment
form a unitary class position. The transitions from one to the
other are variable in ease and fluidity, while the unity of the “so­
cial” class is consequently expressed in very dif­fer­ent ways.

a)70 The primary significance of a positively privileged

propertied class consists in
α) the monopolisation of highly priced (high-­cost)
consumption goods through purchase,
β) the monopolistic situation and possibility of deliberate
monopolistic sales policy,
γ) the monopolisation of the Chance to accumulate wealth
through unconsumed surpluses,
δ) the monopolisation of the Chancen that of accumu­
lating capital through saving, hence the possibility of
investing wealth as loan capital, and so access to the
leading posts in business,
ε) the possession of an educational position owed to the
privilege conferred by social rank, insofar as ­these are
very costly.
I. Positively privileged propertied classes are typically
rentiers. They can be
a) rentiers living off ­human beings (slave ­owners),

70
This introduces a continuation of §11a).
452 So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses

b) rentiers living off income from land,

c) rentiers living off income from mines,
d) rentiers living off income from industrial plants and
equipment,
e) rentiers living off income from shipping,
f) or creditors, living off loans related to
α) ­cattle,
β) grain,
γ) money;
g) rentiers living off income from securities.
II. Negatively privileged propertied classes are typically
a) ­those who are the objects of property (unfree persons;
see §3 below),
b) ­those who are déclassé (proletarii in antiquity),
c) ­those who are indebted,
d) ­those who are “poor.”

Between ­these two are the “­middle classes” (Mittelstandsklassen)

possessing property or educational qualifications, from which
strata of all kinds make their living. Some of them can belong to
an “acquisitional class” (a significantly privileged entrepreneur, a
negatively privileged proletarian). But not all farmers, craftsmen,
officials do so belong.

In its pure form, the composition of the propertied class is not “dy­
namic”; it does not necessarily lead to class strug­gle and class
revolution. The highly positively privileged propertied class of
slave ­owners, for example, can exist alongside less positively priv­
ileged farmers, or even the déclassé, without ­there being any class
conflict, and the former sometimes form ties of solidarity with the
latter (e.g., against t­ hose who are unfree). However, the contrast
in property holding:

1. rentier living off landed income—­déclassé,

2. creditor—­debtor (which often means urban-­dwelling
patrician—­rural-­dwelling farmer or urban-­dwelling small
craftsman)
So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses 453

can lead to revolutionary strug­gles, aimed not necessarily at a

change of economic structure, but mainly instead solely at the pos­
session and distribution of property (revolutions over property).

A classic case of the absence of class conflict was the situation of “poor white
trash,” whites who owned no slaves, with regard to plantation o ­ wners in the
Southern states of the United States. Poor whites w ­ ere much more hostile to
blacks than ­were planters in much the same position, who for their part ­were
often governed by patriarchal feelings. Antiquity provides the principal ex­
ample of the strug­gle of déclassé ele­ments against property o ­ wners, as well as
for the contrasting case: creditors—­debtors, and that of rentiers living from
landed income—­déclassé.

§2. b) The principal significance of a positively privileged acquis-

tional class lies in

α) the monopolisation of the management of the produc­

tion of goods in favour of the acquisitional interests of
their class members; and
β) the securing of gainful Chancen by influencing the
economic policy of po­liti­cal and other organisations.
I. Positively privileged acquisitional classes are typically:
entrepreneurs:
a) merchants,
b) shipowners,
c) industrial entrepreneurs,
d) agricultural entrepreneurs,
e) bankers and financial entrepreneurs, and ­under some
circumstances:
f) “professionals” with special abilities or special training
(­lawyers, physicians, artists),
g) workers with skills over which they have a mono­poly
(skills that are ­either inborn, or cultivated and trained).
II. Negatively privileged acquisitional classes are typically
workers of varied and qualitatively dif­fer­ent kinds:
454 So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses

a) skilled,
b) semiskilled,
c) unskilled.

In­de­pen­dent farmers and craftsmen h ­ ere represent “­middle

classes” between I and II. Also very often ­there are

a) officials (public and private),

b) the category of professionals listed ­under I.f) and the
workers listed ­under I.g).
c) Social classes are
71

α) the workforce as a ­whole, the more automated the

l­ abour pro­cess becomes,
β) the petty bourgeoisie, and
γ) the propertyless intelligent­sia and ­those with specialised
training (technicians, commercial and other clerical
staff, and officials, who are all prob­ably very dif­f er­ent
from each other socially, distinguished by the costs of
training),
δ) the propertied classes and ­those privileged by
education.

The unfinished conclusion to Karl Marx’s Das Kapital, Bd. III, was clearly
intended to address the prob­lem of the class unity of the proletariat in spite of
its qualitative differentiation. Of importance h ­ ere is the increasing impor­
tance, within quite a short period of time, of the displacement of “skilled”
l­ abour by semiskilled work aided by machinery, also sometimes involving
“unskilled” ­labour as well. Nonetheless, semiskilled capabilities can often be
monopolised (at pres­ent, weavers typically reach their peak of efficiency ­after
five years!). A transition to an “in­de­pen­dent” petty bourgeois occupation was
once ­every workers’ dream, but this possibility is one that is increasingly rare.
Between generations, it is relatively easy for both a) and b) to “rise” into social
class c) (technician, clerk). Within class d), money increasingly buys every­

71
This introduces a continuation of §1c), and so is c) to the b) with which §2 begins.
So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses 455

thing—at least in terms of succeeding generations. Th ­ ose in class c) have

Chancen of rising into banks and financial institutions; officials have Chancen
of rising into d).

Sociated class action is easiest to to bring about

a) against ­those with directly adverse interests (workers

against employers, and not against shareholders, who
­really do receive an income without working for it; nor also
peasants and farmers against landowners),
b) where ­there is a typically mass basis to equality of class
position,
c) where technical possibility makes it easy to come together,
especially a working community concentrated in one place
(workplace community),
d) where ­there is guidance to clear and obvious aims usually
imposed or interpreted by ­those not belonging to the class
(the intelligent­sia).

§3. The position afforded by social rank typically involves a claim

to positive or negative privilege in social estimation, based on

a) the manner in which life is conducted, and so

b) formal mode of cultivation (Erziehungsweise), ­whether
α) empirical instruction or
β) rational instruction and on the possession of the
corresponding forms of living;
c) prestige of birth or of occupation.

In practice, the position afforded by social rank is expressed pri­

marily in

α) intermarriage,
β) eating together, and possibly often
γ) the monopolistic appropriation of privileged Chancen
for gain, or the abomination of par­tic­u­lar forms of gain,
456 So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses

d) conventions relating to social rank (“traditions”) of other

kinds.
The position afforded by social rank can be based on a class posi­
tion of a par­tic­u­lar or ambiguous kind. But it is not defined by this
alone: the possession of money and position as an entrepreneur
are not in themselves qualifications of social rank, although they
can well lead to them. Nor is lack of wealth in itself a disqualifica­
tion for social rank, although it can become so. On the other
hand, social rank can determine class position in part or entirely,
without, however, being identical with it. The class position of an
officer, official, or student can be quite dif­fer­ent depending on their
respective wealth, but without leading to differences in their so­
cial standing, for it is the way they lead their lives that is the deci­
sive point in establishing equality of social rank, and this way of
leading one’s life is a result of upbringing and education.

A “social rank” can be defined as many persons who within an or­

ganisation attract

a) special estimation due to their social rank, and possibly also

b) are able to lay claim to par­tic­u­lar monopolies by virtue of
their social rank.

Social ranks can arise

a) primarily through the par­tic­u­lar way members of the rank
lead their lives, especially including their occupation
(social ranks based on life conduct, or occupational ranks),
b) secondarily, through hereditary charisma, successfully
laying claim to prestige by virtue of being descended from
persons of a certain social rank (social rank by descent),
c) through the a social rank’s appropriation of po­liti­cal or
hierocratic ruling powers as monopolies (po­liti­cal
or hierocratic social ranks).

Development of social rank by birth is usually a form of the

(hereditary) appropriation of privileges to an organisation or a
So cial Ranks and So cial Cl asses 457

qualified individual. Each permanent appropriation of Chancen,

especially ­those related to rule, tends to contribute to the forma­
tion of social ranks. Each instance of the formation of social rank
tends to lead to the monopolistic appropriation of ruling powers
and Chancen for gain.

Whereas acquisitional classes originate and flourish in a market-­

oriented economy, social ranks develop and exist chiefly by mo­
nopolising the provisioning of organisations—­whether this is
liturgical, feudal, or patrimonial. A society is a “society of ranks”
when the social structure is organised by rank; it is a “class society”
when the social structure is organised by class. “Social ranks” are
closest to “social classes,” and most distant from “acquisitional
classes.” The constitution of social ranks is often heavi­ly influenced
by propertied classes.

­ very society based on social rank is ordered conventionally,

E
through the regulation of life conduct; this therefore creates irra­
tional conditions for consumption. This obstructs the f­ ree formation
of markets, through monopolistic appropriation, and by ob­
structing the ­free disposition of individuals’ capacities to engage
in gainful activity on their own account. This w ­ ill be dealt with
separately.72

72
­Here Chapter 4 breaks off.