Walras in Spain（ 1874-1936）

Walras in Spain（ 1874-1936） Jesús Astigarraga Juan Zabalza Abstract: This article focuses on the fate of Walras and Walrasian ideas in Spain, which should be contextualised within the coming of marginalism to Spain. Traditionally, it has been accepted that marginalism was almost forgotten by Spanish economists during the period of 1870 to 1936. This statement held on to the idea that Spanish economists did not contribute in almost any way to the theoretical heritage at the time. However, this interpretation is misleading in that Spanish economists were well in- formed about the advances of economic theory and that they applied them to solve the problems of Spain’s economic backwardness. In particular, during the first third of the twentieth century, the main Spanish economists used a generic version of ‘na- tional equilibrium,’ which was merely a simplified adaptation of the Walrasian notion of equilibrium to the Spanish economy, for grappling with the problems of economic development. Three economists in particular, Antonio Flores de Lemus, Romà Per- piñá Grau and more specifically Manuel de Torres, used this version to support dif- ferent economic policies that were assumed to contend with economic backwardness. In doing so, they contributed to the introduction of marginalism, and in particular, Walrasian ideas into Spain. JEL Classification: B 13, B 31, D 50. The central decades of the nineteenth I The Reception of Marginalism century were characterised by the rule of the in Spain so-called ‘escuela economista’-economist In order to understand the low impact that school-whose members radically defended marginalism had in Spain, an analysis of the free trade and were highly influenced by gradual extinction of the classical political such French economists as Bastiat or Moli- economy and its gradual substitution by new nari. The group reached its pinnacle during approaches to economics is required. How- the 1860s and 1870s, when some members ever, this process of replacing the classical of the school served in government and in- political economy had certain peculiarities in fluenced economic policy. Theoretically, Spain, which will be briefly described below. however, the economist school was by no The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2009. Ⓒ The Japanese Society for the History of Eco- nomic Thought. 2 経済学史研究 51 巻 1 号 means original-they strongly believed that pleaded for competition that operates within Bastiat’s works contained the answers to a legal framework organised by the State. most economic problems（ Lluch and Alme- The State, however, also assumed social pol- nar 2000, 129-43）. icy. Both Catholics and Krausists, however, Things worsened and the last quarter of did not entirely reject marginalism; they the nineteenth century has unanimously been were simply not inclined to debate the latter appraised as a period of deep decadence of （Malo 1998, 378, 459-515）.1） As for the in- political economy in Spain（ Velarde 1974）. stitutional development of the political econ- On the other hand, the last members of the omy in Spain, neither group contributed to economist school like Carreras y González, the adoption of the neoclassical approach. Martín Rodríguez, Figuerola or Sanromá, The successive educational reformations, gradually passed away and the liberal eco- however, did result in placing the chairs for nomic agenda was unable to successfully political economic at the faculties of Law; contend with the problems that arose from thus, the majority of Spanish economists the economic crisis during the 1880s. Leav- held legal backgrounds, seemingly contribut- ing aside the remarkable response of revolu- ing to the disregard for marginalism. The tionary working-class movements, the re- prevalence of French economic literature- formist reaction was basically comprised of the main French journals at the time such as three approaches: the conservative approach Journal des économistes or L’économiste of some politicians who defended the inter- Français were profusely read in Spain-that ventionism of the State; the social-catholic did not pay particular attention to economic alternative to the classical political economy theory and the professional dispersion of and; the so-called Krausist economists. So- Spanish economists who devoted a consider- cial Catholicism was a heterogeneous move- able part of their time to politics, public de- ment that shared the acceptance of a moral bates and consulting, seems also to have framework inspired by the Church and the been an impediment to the introduction of moderate interventionism of the State in so- marginalism into Spain（ Almenar 2000, 82; cial issues in common. The movement pro- Laurent and Marco 1996）. moted the translation into Spanish of a wide The isolationism of the Spanish political range of works by Antoine, Hervé-Bazin, Le economy began to come to an end when An- Play, Pesch, Toniolo and many other Euro- tonio Flores de Lemus returned from Germa- pean social Catholics （Zabalza 2005）. By ny in 1903. Flores, together with Bernis and contrast, Krausist economists were some Zumalacárregui, carried out the first steps of kind of Spanish historicists that criticised the modernisation of Spanish economics in classical political economy on two princi- the first third of the twentieth century by ples: its lack of ethical foundation and the promoting the gradual introduction of Ger- narrow role attributed to State intervention- man neo-historicism and marginalism（ Ve- ism. They were inspired by Italian Civil Law larde 1990）. Whilst Flores and Bernis were experts or in some questions such as co-op- more connected to German neo-historicism erative movement by Fawcett, and they without ignoring the analytical advances of ASTIGARRAGA AND ZABALZA: WALRAS IN SPAIN（ 1874-1936） 3 British marginalists such as Marshall or cal school of economics and that he defend- Edgeworth, Zumalacárregui seems to have ed bimetallism（ Carreras y González 1881; been responsible for the introduction of mar- Madrazo 1874; Olózaga and Salvá 1892-93; ginalism and, in particular, the approach of Piernas 1903, 94-95）. the Lausanne School into Spain （Fuentes The most outstanding Krausist econo- 2001, 345-429）. However, the education on mists like Piernas Hurtado or Alvarez Buylla economics in the Spanish university seems seem to have been well prepared to grasp the to have ignored this reception, since margin- meaning of the marginal revolution, but they alism, as far as we know, was only taught in kept the debate grounded on a mere descrip- some specific academic spheres. A second tion of the principles of neoclassical eco- generation of economists advanced the ef- nomics, and in some cases such as Alvarez forts of this trio of pioneers. These econo- Buylla, they explicitly rejected the use of mists did not produce any theoretical contri- maths by Walras. In any case, they focused bution to economics with the exception of their attention on Austrian marginalists such Bernácer. However, some of them like Olar- as Menger or Böhm-Bawerk（ Malo 1998）. iaga or Fernández Baños seem to have com- Other minor Krausist economists like Jimén- pletely understood the meaning of neoclassi- ez, following the Italian Loria, considered cal economics （Almenar 2001）. However, the contributions to mathematical economics the most worthwhile contributions of the and in particular those by Walras as entirely Spanish to economic science were made in inaccurate （Perdices and Reeder 2003, the applied fields. In particular, during the 414-15）. The members of the liberal econo- 1930s and on the trail of Flores, both Romà mist school mentioned above seem to have Perpiñá and Torres took the notion of gener- perceived the significance of marginalism in al equilibrium as the analytical framework general and Walras’s contributions in partic- with which to address the Spanish backward- ular. Figuerola, for example, praised in 1880 ness as we will demonstrate below. the mathematical contributions of Walras as they confirmed, according to him, the princi- II Walras and General Equilibrium ples of free trade3）; and the economist and in Spanish Economic Literature winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature José （1874-1936） Echegaray declared in his memories to have The isolationist context described above did a profound knowledge of Walras’s work and not promote a propitious climate for the ex- to have planned a mathematical reinterpreta- pansion of Walrasian ideas in Spain. In fact, tion of the political economy, which actually the Spanish economists only marginally never was completed（ Cabrillo 2000, 486- mentioned Walras’s contributions to eco- 87; Pascual 2000, 540-41）.4） Summing up, nomics.2） The mentions, however, were the works of the Spanish economists of the mainly embedded within handbooks normal- last third of the nineteenth century reveal ly used to teach political economy at the fac- that they had heard of Walras’s contributions ulties of Law, and thus, they merely pointed to mathematical economics but not to what out that Walras belonged to the mathemati- extent they had understood them.5） 4 経済学史研究 51 巻 1 号 Flores’s return to Spain at the beginning wrote an intellectual biography of Pareto in of the twentieth century brought about a which he stressed and explained the close change in the pattern of reception of eco- connection between Walras and Pareto, re- nomic ideas in Spain. As mentioned, he be- garding the representation of general equilib- came fascinated by German neo-historicism rium through the system of simultaneous

Load more