ABSTRACT
In Weber's methodological writings, he attacked arguments such as those of Marxists on the grounds that Marx had mistakenly treated an ideal-type as a real force. Yet it appears that Weber's own account of historical change suffers from a similar defect. His account too comes to an end in a mysterious phenomenon, charisma, for which there is no further explanation. Did Weber simply fall into the trap that he had pointed out to others? Does his account of history represent no more than a version of such reductive accounts of history as Marx's and Burckhardt's, or for that matter Spencer's, only with a different cast of ultimate explanatory forces? Is his account of law and its history no better than his competitors, such as Ihering and Stammler, with regard to their reliance on real ultimate causes, purposes or forces? These questions can be answered only by a detailed consideration of Weber's methodological writings. Here again, we shall argue, Weber turns to the literature of the law for illumination.
