It was David Hume who said that “a man acquainted with history may in some respect be said to have lived from the beginning of the world”. At the present juncture of time, when various civilizations are in the process of being more and more closely interlinked, it certainly seems desirable for all of us to “have lived from the beginning of the world”. From this springs the necessity for having a theory of universal history which is applicable to the main historical processes in our world. For without such a theory the facts become unmanageable in their complexity and enormous volume; no sort of intellectual comprehension is possible. A theory or philosophy of history has, of course, to be applicable in the same manner as a scientific hypothesis. That is to say, if it cannot explain important processes, it has to be discarded, either entirely, or partially. Unfortunately, this attitude has not prevailed among philosophers of history, who have thought of their theories in the spirit of quasi-religious revelations. The term “philosophy of history” is a fairly recent one, having apparently been introduced by Voltaire in 1756. But there have been philosophers of history of some sort or other from very much earlier times. In this essay one cannot consider all of them, of course.

This article deals with an important chapter in the economic history of Mexico. Throughout its history Puebla was an industrial center. Well into the 19th century it was the prime center of the country's chief manufacture — textiles. The city became the commercial and industrial capital of New Spain within a few years of its foundation. I shall concentrate on the ways in which the several branches of the textile industry were organized, comparing their development with that of the textile industries of medieval and early industrial Europe.

As a new country of settlement origins Argentina, like the United States, belongs to a small group of historically favored nations. Since its economic development has differed to a considerable degree from that of others of the group, an examination of Argentina's experience and relative position may serve to raise questions of interest to students of comparative history.

The field of inquiry in comparative history, wrote Marc Bloch, may be either societies that are neighbors and contemporaries or societies that are remote from each other in time and space. Western and East Asian history as a field in connoarative studies includes both types of comparisons. Focus on such a field has a number of advantages. Among these are the wide range of similar phenomena from feudalism to imperialism, the significant number of population involved, and the variety within each culture area to make possible regional comparisons and checks. Although the inclusion of additional societies might enable statistical study, the narrower gauge provides an opportunity for more depth. The range is sufficient to avoid the pitfalls arising from knowing only one other society.