What major approaches to "class" as a theoretical category do historians commonly use?

Question

"Class" is a set of connected, but not identical, theoretical approaches to social division in human societies, including past human societies. Historians regularly make use of "class" in their writings, but with so many approaches to "class," how can we tell which approach a historian is using in their writing?

What major approaches to "class" as a theoretical category do historians commonly use?

An ideal answer would outline a summary name for each approach, describe how it approaches class and what class means in this approach, and point to major theoreticians or historians using their approach. A "Heads of Title" approach would be the ideal answer.

An ideal answer would not need to fully specify each approach to class. Hopefully a subsequent series of questions could ask for the use of class in particular ways in historiography if these are of interest.

Answer 1

The most common approach to class, especially class conflict in the, is a Marxist approach. Marx took a cyclic view of history from Hegelian "thesis antithesis." he ultimately viewed the synthesis of the thesis, bourgeois, and the antithesis, proletariat, in to a Marxist communist state. Postmodernist are also extremely class conscious, dealing with Deconstructionist and Poststructuralist movements.The most prominent Historian to come out of this was Foucault. The new left, although not as theoretical, was still highly class conscious. This era of historians came out of the Vietnam conflict and the Cold War. The new left was critical of class interests, but also social and diplomatic interests.