Labour History Review

Andrew Thorpe, ‘Stalinism and British polities’, History, 83, 1998, pp. 608-27; ‘The Comintern and British Communism’, in Tim Rees and Andrew Thorpe (eds), International Communism and the Communist International, 1919-1943, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1998, pp. 67-86; ‘Comintern "control" of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1943’, English Historical Review, 113, 1998, pp. 637-62; ‘The membership of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1945’, Historical Journal, 43, 2000, pp. 777-800; The British Communist Party and Moscow, 1920-43, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000. ‘Stalinism and British polities’ History 83 608 27 Google Scholar

See reviews by Nina Fishman, Labour History Review, 66, 2, 2001, pp. 252-3; Eric Hobsbawm, Political Quarterly, 72, 4, 2001; David Howell, English Historical Review, 116, 468 (2001), pp. 915-17; Keith Laybourn, History, 86, 284, 2001, p. 605; Daniel F. Calhoun, Albion, 34, 3, 2002, pp. 536-7; Victor Silverman, American Historical Review, 107, 3, 2002, pp. 941-2; Stuart Macintyre, International History Review, 24, 1, 2002, pp. 65-7; Kevin Morgan, Socialist History, 23, 2003, pp. 99-102. Labour History Review 66 252 3 Google Scholar

John McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’, Revolutionary History, 8, 1, 2001, pp. 195-226; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘The heresy of Arthur Homer’, Llafur, 8, 2001, pp. 105-18; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats": the new revisionism, the Communist International, and the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1930’, Labour/Le Travail, 49, 2002, pp. 147-87; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"For a revolutionary workers’ government": Moscow, British Communism and revisionist interpretations of the Third Period, 1927-34', European History Quarterly, 32, 2002, pp. 535-69; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Histories of the British Communist Party: a user's guide’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, pp. 33-59. ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’ Revolutionary History 8 195 226 Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

The word ‘rigorous’ as, in effect, self-description appears regularly in these articles: see e.g. John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, p. 5; McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history’, p. 205; McIlroy and Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats’", p. 161. ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’ Labour History Review 68 5 Google Scholar

Andrew Thorpe, ‘Stalinism and British polities’, History, 83, 1998, pp. 608-27; ‘The Comintern and British Communism’, in Tim Rees and Andrew Thorpe (eds), International Communism and the Communist International, 1919-1943, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1998, pp. 67-86; ‘Comintern "control" of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1943’, English Historical Review, 113, 1998, pp. 637-62; ‘The membership of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1945’, Historical Journal, 43, 2000, pp. 777-800; The British Communist Party and Moscow, 1920-43, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000. ‘Stalinism and British polities’ History 83 608 27 Google Scholar

Andrew Thorpe, ‘Stalinism and British polities’, History, 83, 1998, pp. 608-27; ‘The Comintern and British Communism’, in Tim Rees and Andrew Thorpe (eds), International Communism and the Communist International, 1919-1943, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1998, pp. 67-86; ‘Comintern "control" of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1943’, English Historical Review, 113, 1998, pp. 637-62; ‘The membership of the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1945’, Historical Journal, 43, 2000, pp. 777-800; The British Communist Party and Moscow, 1920-43, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000. ‘Stalinism and British polities’ History 83 608 27 Google Scholar

See reviews by Nina Fishman, Labour History Review, 66, 2, 2001, pp. 252-3; Eric Hobsbawm, Political Quarterly, 72, 4, 2001; David Howell, English Historical Review, 116, 468 (2001), pp. 915-17; Keith Laybourn, History, 86, 284, 2001, p. 605; Daniel F. Calhoun, Albion, 34, 3, 2002, pp. 536-7; Victor Silverman, American Historical Review, 107, 3, 2002, pp. 941-2; Stuart Macintyre, International History Review, 24, 1, 2002, pp. 65-7; Kevin Morgan, Socialist History, 23, 2003, pp. 99-102. Labour History Review 66 252 3 Google Scholar

See reviews by Nina Fishman, Labour History Review, 66, 2, 2001, pp. 252-3; Eric Hobsbawm, Political Quarterly, 72, 4, 2001; David Howell, English Historical Review, 116, 468 (2001), pp. 915-17; Keith Laybourn, History, 86, 284, 2001, p. 605; Daniel F. Calhoun, Albion, 34, 3, 2002, pp. 536-7; Victor Silverman, American Historical Review, 107, 3, 2002, pp. 941-2; Stuart Macintyre, International History Review, 24, 1, 2002, pp. 65-7; Kevin Morgan, Socialist History, 23, 2003, pp. 99-102. Labour History Review 66 252 3 Google Scholar

John McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’, Revolutionary History, 8, 1, 2001, pp. 195-226; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘The heresy of Arthur Homer’, Llafur, 8, 2001, pp. 105-18; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats": the new revisionism, the Communist International, and the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1930’, Labour/Le Travail, 49, 2002, pp. 147-87; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"For a revolutionary workers’ government": Moscow, British Communism and revisionist interpretations of the Third Period, 1927-34', European History Quarterly, 32, 2002, pp. 535-69; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Histories of the British Communist Party: a user's guide’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, pp. 33-59. ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’ Revolutionary History 8 195 226 Google Scholar

John McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’, Revolutionary History, 8, 1, 2001, pp. 195-226; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘The heresy of Arthur Homer’, Llafur, 8, 2001, pp. 105-18; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats": the new revisionism, the Communist International, and the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920-1930’, Labour/Le Travail, 49, 2002, pp. 147-87; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘"For a revolutionary workers’ government": Moscow, British Communism and revisionist interpretations of the Third Period, 1927-34', European History Quarterly, 32, 2002, pp. 535-69; John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Histories of the British Communist Party: a user's guide’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, pp. 33-59. ‘Rehabilitating Communist history: the Communist International, the Communist Party of Great Britain, and some historians’ Revolutionary History 8 195 226 Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

The word ‘rigorous’ as, in effect, self-description appears regularly in these articles: see e.g. John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, p. 5; McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history’, p. 205; McIlroy and Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats’", p. 161. ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’ Labour History Review 68 5 Google Scholar

The word ‘rigorous’ as, in effect, self-description appears regularly in these articles: see e.g. John McIlroy and Alan Campbell, ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’, Labour History Review, 68, 1, 2003, p. 5; McIlroy, ‘Rehabilitating Communist history’, p. 205; McIlroy and Campbell, ‘"Nina Ponomareva's hats’", p. 161. ‘Editorial: new directions in international Communist historiography’ Labour History Review 68 5 Google Scholar