Abstract
Both Norbert Elias and Max Weber were concerned with the ‘European civilising process’, in the sense of the strong shift in socially induced individual self-control observed from the Renaissance onwards. Religion does not play a prominent role in Elias's explanation of these changes. In contrast, it is argued that, despite his disclaimer, Weber in The Protestant Ethic veers towards ‘a one-sided spiritualistic interpretation of culture and history’. In that respect he followed the dominant intellectual tradition deriving from St Augustine, which singles out religion as a powerful force in the civilising process. Both Weber and Elias were concerned with the unintended consequences of long-term social processes. Weber, however, while acknowledging the importance of the dynamics generated by social interdependencies, confined his analysis to a religious ‘spirit’ that supposedly determined the course of human affairs. In so doing, he followed a tenacious tradition which can be traced to Augustine's The City of God. Elias, on the other hand, can be placed within what is here called the Lucretian tradition. Lucretius, in De rerum natura, anticipated the modern theory of evolution, and he attributed religious belief to people's ignorance of principles underlying life on earth. The dominance of the Augustinian tradition has promoted a persistent tendency to conceive of the European civilising process in terms of providence and teleology, and to give pride of place to religious beliefs as the driving force of the entire process.