DOCSLIB.ORG

Cameralism, Capitalism, and the Making of the Modern Economic Mind Philipp Robinson Rössner

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cameralism, Capitalism, and the Making of the Modern Economic Mind Philipp Robinson Rössner Introduction: Cameralism, Capitalism, and the Making of the Modern Economic Mind Philipp Robinson Rössner Capitalism is often assumed to have been invented in the Anglosphere. Writings by David Hume and Adam Smith have been named as corner- stones in the making of capitalism and modern economic knowledge. But as Alexander von Rüstow, a leading twentieth-century German Ordo-lib- eral thinker argued, during the nineteenth century, Adam Smith’s vision of the market as a natural and God-given order had degenerated into a dark theology of ruthless laissez-faire which, in the German case, had led to the common Schumpeterian perversions of capitalism: high economic inequality, monopoly, and cartelization and national socialism (Rüstow 2009; on economic theology and neoliberalism, see Schwarzkopf 2019). Like Rüstow, however, present-day historians of political economy have tended to miss crucial bits of the story. First, Smith’s and the other Enlight- enment Scots’ works1 built on a commercial tradition that had been mani- fest in Anglo-Saxon economics since the sixteenth century or earlier. Sec- ond, this tradition of thinking about commercial society became quite widespread and in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries extended to the entire European continent, where it became commonly known, at least today, under the name Cameralism. The usual group of suspects starts with mercantilist authors such as Thomas Mun and Gerard de Malynes, earlier Correspondence may be addressed to Philipp Robinson Rössner by email: philipp.roessner@ manchester.ac.uk. I would like to thank Carl Wennerlind and Kevin Hoover for useful comments. 1. On Hume’s economics, see Schabas and Wennerlind 2020. History of Political Economy 53:3 DOI 10.1215/00182702-8993260 Copyright 2021 by Duke University Press Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/hope/article-pdf/53/3/371/925650/0530371.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 372 History of Political Economy 53:3 (2021) Sir Thomas Gresham, later on John Cary and others, then covering proto- or crypto-classicals (William Petty), and finally arrives at the towering Scotsmen David Hume, James Steuart, and Adam Smith (see most recently Faccarello and Kurz 2016). But in the case of English writers, there is one historical peculiarity: they usually came from a mercantile background. So, when Edward Misselden or Thomas Gresham wrote about exchange rates (de Roover 1949), Mun on trade and industry, and so on, we might expect similar outcomes as when asking Steven Mnuchin to write a textbook on the fundamentals of finance, Silvio Berlusconi on taxation, or Richard Branson on industrial policy. This does not necessar- ily imply bad scholarship or dilettantism on the authors’ grounds; quite the contrary.2 But the historian—Marxist or non-Marxist—can expect certain biases in their writings that go together with the broader socio- economic interests shared with the social groups at which these writings were usually directed. To be a merchant in the seventeenth century was compared (by Mun) to the earlier ideals of Renaissance man—their knowledge, profi- ciencies, linguistic skills, and more were considered extraordinary. Also, companies (in particular the East India Company) were and acted like quasi-states, so in early modern England, where key works in economics were produced, the merchant’s role was beyond that of mere traders. This Anglocentric perspective is important when constructing, like Marx did in Capital, vol. 1, the history of mercantilism as a “bourgeois” political economy (see below).3 We also ought to consider what earlier German philosophy of history had as “viewpoints” or, in German, Sehepunkte: reflecting the individual authors’ mental, psychological, and sociological background going beyond social class.4 Gresham, Mun, and Malynes thus were natural advocates of commercial society, even before the concept began to gain currency in the debates around constitutions, the Glorious Revolution (Pincus 2009: chap. 12), and, finally, the Enlightenment (for a most recent overview, see the introduction to Schabas and Wennerlind 2020). As Malynes argued: “Questionlesse therefore, the State of a Mer- chant is of great dignitie and to bee cherished, for by them Countreys are discouered, Familiaritie betweene Nations is procured, and politike Expe- rience is attained” (Malynes 1629: epistle). 2. When I studied micro- and macroeconomics at Göttingen University in the 1990s, many professors there had businesses alongside their chairs; this was considered a sideline. 3. I am indebted to Carl Wennerlind for reminding me of this. 4. This is a Marxist position, for sure, but not everything Marx said was wrong. Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/hope/article-pdf/53/3/371/925650/0530371.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Rössner / Introduction 373 Interestingly, Malynes was quoted in a later major work in political econ- omy of its time, Wilhelm von Schröder’s Princely Treasure and Exchequer (1686), a bestselling work during the seventeenth and eighteenth century (E. Reinert and Carpenter 2016). Schröder, a Cameralist, came from a very different genre and vantage point sharing very few prima facie con- nection points with those Anglophone economic writings of the enlight- ened mercantilists that have often been proposed as precursors to classical liberalism and modern economic thought (e.g., Appleby 1976). In fact, until recently, Cameralism has often been considered the exact opposite or antinomy to liberalism and possessive individualism.5 So the main purpose of the following articles is to deal away with this myth and lay bare new connections between Cameralist economic thought, capitalism, and the ori- gins of economic modernity.6 As an Austro-German Cameralist, Schröder was socialized first within the protestant academic circles around Secken- dorff, Gotha, and the University of Jena. But later, like Philipp Hörnigk and Johann Becher (the other two leading Cameralists of the later seven- teenth century), Schröder converted to Catholicism to become an admin- istrator in the service of the emperor. But he also developed strong affilia- tions with the Royal Society, having extensively traveled the British Isles. He was familiar with late seventeenth-century English political economy and major debates of the time including the famous Tory-Whig divide about manufacturing or agriculture as the “true” sources of the nation’s wealth (e.g., Pincus 2009). Yet Schröder’s work championed a very differ- ent epistemic vantage point. For him capitalism, economic development, and the wealth of the nations started (and possibly ended) with the prince. Only a well-governed, meaning princely, common weal could provide the foundations of sustainable wealth, wealth that could be tapped into with- out impoverishing the nation. To the modern economic ear this sounds counterintuitive, but we must not forget that the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century German “prince” in political and economic writings usually translates into modern English as “the state.” Neither constitutional monarchy in the English fashion nor republics were known outside the Netherlands. In contemporary political 5. But see Outram 2013, or Nokkala and Miller 2019. 6. Note that while I greatly admire Rüstow and Sombart, and partly Karl Marx, I would not entirely adopt their pessimistic definition of capitalism as a form of economic degeneration (concentration, cartelization, monopolies, and rogue laissez-faire) that during the nineteenth century progressively corrupted and alienated humankind from its natural physical and mate- rial instincts. Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/hope/article-pdf/53/3/371/925650/0530371.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 374 History of Political Economy 53:3 (2021) economy der Staat in the modern sense did not yet exist in its modern conceptual shape. Yet this does not mean it was absent either. Modern development economics and neo-institutionalism have spared no ink high- lighting the role of the state in the process of economic growth (e.g., North, Wallis, and Weingast 2009; Acemoglu and Robinson 2012). But Cameral- ism has not featured in the debates yet. Some scholars have viewed Camer- alism as a science of state, others as a discourse or pedagogy (Tribe 2008), others as a chimera of worlds too good to be true, invented by self-seeking princely administrators desperately trying to get a job at one of the hun- dreds of lesser courts in early modern Germany (Wakefield 2009). Some have seen Cameralism’s virtues as a political economy (Bog 1984), others as a proto-theory of economic development (Reinert 2007; Reinert and Rössner 2016). But mostly it has vanished from the scene. As the contribu- tions assembled in the present issue show, Cameralism should be seen as central to the formation of the European economic mind and the coming of capitalism, given the idiosyncratic frameworks of time, space, and society. Enlightenment must be written in the plural. And there were many politi- cal economies of capitalism, tied to idiosyncratic conditions of their spe- cific countries, societies, and location points in both time and space. Studying the “mind and the market” (Muller 2011) can be limited to nei- ther the Scottish Enlightenment nor earlier Anglophone writers, lest the “soul of modern man” (Myers 1985) become schizophrenic. Continental authors of the Cameralist-mercantilist spectrum—a concept which has become extended in recent studies to many branches of European eco- nomic thought (e.g., Nokkala and Miller 2019; Seppel
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Working Papers Series, Entitled “Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics”
    Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics no. 74 the other canon foundation, Norway Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance CONTACT: Rainer Kattel, [email protected]; Wolfgang Drechsler, [email protected]; Erik S. Reinert, [email protected] 80 Economic Bestsellers before 1850: A Fresh Look at the History of Economic Thought Erik S. Reinert, Kenneth Carpenter, Fernanda A. Reinert, Sophus A. Reinert* MAY 2017 * E. Reinert, Tallinn University of Technology & The Other Canon Foundation, Norway; K. Car- penter, former librarian, Harvard University; F. Reinert, The Other Canon Foundation, Norway; S. Reinert, Harvard Business School. The authors are grateful to Dr. Debra Wallace, Managing Director, Baker Library Services and, Laura Linard, Director of Baker Library Special Collections, at Harvard Business School, where the Historical Collection now houses what was once the Kress Library, for their cooperation in this venture. Above all our thanks go to Olga Mikheeva at Tallinn University of Technology for her very efficient research assistance. Antiquarian book dealers often have more information on economics books than do academics, and our thanks go to Wilhelm Hohmann in Stuttgart, Robert H. Rubin in Brookline MA, Elvira Tasbach in Berlin, and, above all, to Ian Smith in London. We are also grateful for advice from Richard van den Berg, Francesco Boldizzoni, Patrick O’Brien, Alexandre Mendes Cunha, Bertram Schefold and Arild Sæther. Corresponding author [email protected] The core and backbone of this publication consists of the meticulous work of Kenneth Carpenter, librarian of the Kress Library at Harvard Busi- ness School starting in 1968 and later Assistant Director for Research Resources in the Harvard University Library and the Harvard College 1 Library.
    [Show full text]
  • Cameralism in Practice: State Administration and Economy in Early
    BOOK REVIEW: CAMERALISM IN PRACTICE: STATE ADMINISTRATION AND ECONOMY IN EARLY MODERN EUROPE BY MARTEN SEPPEL AND KEITH TRIBE REVIEWED BY CARLOS EDUARDO SUPRINYAK* *CEDEPLAR, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Contact: [email protected] This “preprint” is the accepted typescript of a book review that is forthcoming in revised form, after minor editorial changes, in the Journal of the History of Economic Thought (ISSN: 1053-8372), issue TBA. Copyright to the journal’s articles is held by the History of Economics Society (HES), whose exclusive licensee and publisher for the journal is Cambridge University Press (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the- history-of-economic-thought). This preprint may be used only for private research and study and is not to be distributed further. The preprint may be cited as follows: Suprinyak, Carlos Eduardo. Review of “Cameralism in Practice: State Administration and Economy in Early Modern Europe” by Marten Seppel and Keith Tribe. Journal of the History of Economic Thought (forthcoming). Preprint at SocArXiv, osf.io/preprints/socarxiv Book Review SEPPEL, Marten & TRIBE, Keith (2017). Cameralism in Practice: state administration and economy in Early Modern Europe, Woodbridge/Rochester: The Boydell Press. By Carlos Eduardo Suprinyak, Cedeplar/UFMG A quick internet search returns the following definition of cameralism, provided by Oxford Living Dictionaries: “an economic theory prevalent in 18th-century Germany, which advocated a strong public administration managing a centralized economy primarily for the benefit of the state”. In the collection of essays Cameralism in Practice, editors Marten Seppel and Keith Tribe seem bent on deconstructing every single element of this definition.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Economic Policy in Thecontext of a History of Economic Thought
    The History of Economic Policy in the Context of a History of Economic Thought. Erik S. Reinert, January-February 2002. 1. Introduction. Methodology and Toolboxes: The Different Kinds of Economics. Readings: The Other Canon, ‘Two Different Ways of Understanding the Economic World and The Wealth and Poverty of Nations (3 pages), Bruce Henderson, Boston Consulting Group, Perspectives on Strategy (1998): ‘Business Thinking’, BCG, pp. 260-263. 2. Theories of History: Learning, Technological Change and Economic Development. Erik Reinert: ‘Karl Bücher and the Geographical Dimensions of Techno-Economic Change: Production-Based Economic Theory and the Stages of Economic Development’. Albert O. Hirschman: ‘The Passions and the Interests’, pp. 9-31+132-135. 3. The Renaissance and Duty-Based Systems: From Economic Anthropology to Statecrafting and Nation-Building. The Failure of Spain’s 16th Century Policies. Readings: Reinert & Daastøl, ‘Exploring the Genesis of Economic Innovations: The Religious Gestalt-Switch and the Duty to Invent as Preconditions for Economic Growth’, pp- 1-24 (= 233-264). Gustav Schmoller: ‘The Mercantile System and its Historical Significance’, particularly pp. 1-17, 29-36, 49- 80, 4. Mercantilism, Colbertism and Cameralism: Economic Growth as Activity-Specific, ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ Trade, The Role of Cities and Diversity, Scale and Synergies. Readings: Antonio Serra, ‘A Brief Treatise’ (1613), (Monroe pp. 145-167), Daniel Defoe, ‘A Plan of English Commerce’ (1730) pp. 126-135, Philipp von Hornick, ‘Nine Principal Rules of National Economy’, from ‘Austria Over All if She Only Will (1684), (Monroe pp. 223- 227). 5. The 18th Century and the Mandevillean Revolution; Physiocracy and Adam Smith. Reading: Eric Roll on Adam Smith, ‘A History of Economic Thought’, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Other Canon: the History of the Immaterial and Production-Based
    The Other Canon: The History of Renaissance Economics. Its Role as an Immaterial and Production-based Canon in the History of Economic Thought and in the History of Economic Policy. Erik S. Reinert, Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo and Norsk Investorforum, Oslo & Arno M. Daastøl, Department of Public Economics, University of Maastricht. Forthicoming in: Reinert, Erik S. (Editor), Evolutionary Economics and Income Inequality, Edward Elgar, 2000. 2 THE OTHER CANON: THE HISTORY OF RENAISSANCE ECONOMICS. 1 ITS ROLE AS AN IMMATERIAL AND PRODUCTION-BASED CANON IN THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND IN THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC POLICY. 1 1. Typologies of Economic Theory and the Foundation of the Two Canons. 3 2. The Family Tree of The Renaissance Canon of Economics. 8 3. The Two Canons Contrasted. 17 4. The Two Canons: Selective Use, Methodological Schizophrenia and Opportunistic Ignorance. 22 5. Communication and Infrastructure in Renaissance Economics 25 6. Canonical Battles: The Head-on Confrontations . 27 Canonical Methodenstreit 1: Misselden vs. Malynes (1622-23) 27 Canonical Methodenstreit 2: Anti-physiocracy vs. Physiocracy & Adam Smith (ca. 1770-1830) 30 Canonical Methodenstreit 3: The American System vs. The British System (19th Century United States) 31 Canonical Methodenstreit 4: The Historical School vs. Marginalism (1883-1908) 35 Canonical Methodenstreit 5. The US Institutional vs. The Neoclassical School (20th Century) 36 5. International Trade Policy and the Two Canons. 37 6. The Two Canons in Present Economics: Theory and Practical Policy. 39 3 1. Typologies of Economic Theory and the Foundation of the Two Canons. It has been said that economics as a science - or pseudo-science - is unique because parallel competing canons may exist together over long periods of time.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Economic Thought, Volume 1
    ANCIENT ECONOMIC THOUGHT This collection explores the interrelationship between economic practice and intellectual constructs in a number of ancient cultures. Each chapter presents a new, richer understanding of the preoccupation of the ancients with specific economic problems including distribution, civic pride, management and uncertainty and how they were trying to resolve them. The research is based around the different artifacts and texts of the ancient East Indian, Hebraic, Greek, Hellenistic, Roman and emerging European cultures which remain for our consideration today: religious works, instruction manuals, literary and historical writings, epigrapha and legal documents. In looking at such items it becomes clear what a different exercise it is to look forward, from the earliest texts and artifacts of any culture, to measure the achievements of thinking in the areas of economics, than it is to take the more frequent route and look backward, beginning with the modern conception of economic systems and theory creation. Presenting fascinating insights into the economic thinking of ancient cultures, this volume will enhance the reawakening of interest in ancient economic history and thought. It will be of great interest to scholars of economic thought and the history of ideas. B.B.Price is Professor of Ancient and Medieval History at York University, Toronto, and is currently doing research and teaching as visiting professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ROUTLEDGE STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF ECONOMICS 1 Economics as Literature
    [Show full text]
  • The Cameralists: Fertile Sources for a New Science of Public Finance
    The Cameralists: Fertile Sources for a New Science of Public Finance Richard E. Wagner Department of Economics George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030, USA Abstract The cameralist writers emerged after 1500, primarily in the German- speaking lands, and stayed on the scene until the middle of the 19th century. While I devote some effort to characterizing some of the work and themes of the cameralists, I devote most of this paper to an examination of the contemporary relevance of a cameralist orientation for scholarship in public finance. To place such stress upon contemporary relevance is not to ignore the vast differences between their times and ours, but is only to affirm that there are some enduring themes within the cameralist orientation that could prove interesting and fruitful for contemporary scholarship in public finance. JEL Code: B11, H1 The cameralists emerged around 1500, and were mostly located in the German-speaking lands. By the time they had disappeared in the middle of the 19th century, they had amassed a collective bibliography of more than 14,000 items, according to Magdalene Humpert (1937). To someone raised on contemporary economic theory, the cameralists would surely seem highly irrelevant. Among other things, they were oriented toward practice and not toward the refinement of theoretical schemata. Principles were present, to be sure, and these were brought to bear on various matters of substantive practice. The driving interest of the cameralists, however, lay in their ability to operate 2 more effectively in a substantive manner, and not on the development of theoretical argument. Joseph Schumpeter (1954, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Economy: Merchants in Seventeenth-Century England
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University History Theses Department of History 12-11-2017 Creating Economy: Merchants in Seventeenth-Century England Braxton Hall Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/history_theses Recommended Citation Hall, Braxton, "Creating Economy: Merchants in Seventeenth-Century England." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2017. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/history_theses/116 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CREATING ECONOMY: MERCHANTS IN SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY ENGLAND by BRAXTON HALL Under the Direction of Jacob Selwood, PhD ABSTRACT Between 1620 and 1700, merchants in England debated the economic framework of the kingdom. The system they created is commonly referred to as ‘mercantilism’ and many historians have concluded that there was a consensus among economists that supported the balance of trade and restricted foreign markets. While that economic consensus existed, merchants also had to adopt new ways of thinking about religion, foreigners, and naturalization because of the system they created. Merchants like Josiah Child in the latter part of the seventeenth century were more acceptant of strangers and they were more tolerant of religion that their predecessors
    [Show full text]
  • On the American Paradox of Laissez Faire and Mass Incarceration
    ON THE AMERICAN PARADOX OF LAISSEZ FAIRE AND MASS INCARCERATION Bernard E. Harcourt∗ What we come to believe — so often, in reality, mere fiction and myth — takes on the character of truth and has real effects, tangible effects on our social and political condition. These beliefs, these hu- man fabrications, are they simply illusions? Are they fantasies? Are they reflections on a cave wall? Over the past two centuries at least, brilliant and well-regarded thinkers have proposed a range of theories and methods to emancipate us from these figments of our imagination. They have offered genealogies and archaeologies, psychoanalysis, Ideologiekritik, poststructuralism, and deconstruction — to name but a few. Their writings are often obscure and laden with a jargon that has gotten in the way of their keen insights, but their central point contin- ues to resonate loudly today: our collective imagination has real effects on our social condition and on our politics. It is important, it is vital to question what passes as truth. Any sophisticated listener, for instance, would have understood immediately what Barack Obama was doing when he declared on the campaign trail in 2008 that “[t]he market is the best mechanism ever invented for efficiently allocating resources to maximize production.”1 Or when he quickly added, “I also think that there is a connection be- tween the freedom of the marketplace and freedom more generally.”2 Obama was tapping into a public imaginary, one reflected at the time by the overwhelming belief, shared by more than two-thirds
    [Show full text]
  • Uadphilecon National & Kapodistrian University of Athens Department of Economics Nicholas J
    UADPhilEcon National & Kapodistrian University of Athens Department of Economics Nicholas J. Theocarakis 2014 History of Economic Thought Web Links on Mercantilism1 Bullionists “W.S.” (John Hales d.1571, Sir Thomas Smith ) A Discourse of the Common Weal of this Realm of England, 1581 or A Compendious; Or Briefe Examination of Certayne Ordinary Complaints of Diuers of Our Countrymen in These Our Dayes (Written 1541, not by William Shakespeare despite the 1751 edition) Thomas Milles, c.1550-1627. The Customers Replie, or Second Apologie :…, An Aunswer to a confused Treatise of Publicke Commerce . in favour of the . Merchants Adventurers,' &c., 1604 Gerard de Malynes, c.1586-1641 Saint George for England Allegorically Described, 1601. A Treatise on the Canker of England's Commonwealth, 1601. Consuetudo vel Lex Mercatoria or the Ancient Law- Merchant, 1622. The Maintenance of Free Trade, 1622. The Centre of the Circle of Commerce, 1623. 1 Based on the History of Economic Thought Website [now a dead link] UADPhilEcon, HET, Mercantilists 1/7 Traditional Mercantilists John Wheeler, c.1553-1611. Treatise on Commerce, 1601 Edward Misselden, 1608-1654. Free Trade and the Means to Make Trade Flourish, 1622 Circle of Commerce 1623. Thomas Mun, 1571-1641. A Discourse of Trade from England unto the East- Indies, 1621. in England's Treasure by Forraign Trade, 1664. (Written 1628) facsimile Lewis Roberts, 1596 – 1640 The Merchantes Mappe of Commerce , 1638 The Treasure of Traffike, 1640 John Locke, 1632-1704. A Letter Concerning Toleration, 1689. Two Treatises on Government, 1690. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1690. pt 2 Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and Raising the Value of Money, 1692 Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money, 1695.
    [Show full text]
  • "Theater and Empire: a History of Assumptions in the English-Speaking Atlantic World, 1700-1860"
    "THEATER AND EMPIRE: A HISTORY OF ASSUMPTIONS IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING ATLANTIC WORLD, 1700-1860" BY ©2008 Douglas S. Harvey Submitted to the graduate degree program in History and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ____________________________________ Chairperson Committee Members* ___________________________________* ___________________________________* ___________________________________* ___________________________________* Date Defended: April 7, 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Douglas S. Harvey certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: "THEATER AND EMPIRE: A HISTORY OF ASSUMPTIONS IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING ATLANTIC WORLD, 1700-1860" Committee ____________________________________ Chairperson ___________________________________* ___________________________________* ___________________________________* ___________________________________* Date Approved: April 7, 2008 ii Abstract It was no coincidence that commercial theater, a market society, the British middle class, and the “first” British Empire arose more or less simultaneously. In the seventeenth century, the new market economic paradigm became increasingly dominant, replacing the old feudal economy. Theater functioned to “explain” this arrangement to the general populace and gradually it became part of what I call a “culture of empire” – a culture built up around the search for resources and markets that characterized imperial expansion. It also rationalized the depredations the Empire brought to those whose resources and labor were coveted by expansionists. This process intensified with the independence of the thirteen North American colonies, and theater began representing Native Americans and African American populations in ways that rationalized the dominant society’s behavior toward them. By utilizing an interdisciplinary approach, this research attempts to advance a more nuanced and realistic narrative of empire in the early modern and early republic periods.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses The Eucharistic liturgy in the English independent, or congregational, tradition: a study of its changing structure and content 1550 - 1974 Spinks, Bryan D. How to cite: Spinks, Bryan D. (1978) The Eucharistic liturgy in the English independent, or congregational, tradition: a study of its changing structure and content 1550 - 1974, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/9577/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 BRYAN D. SPINKS THE EUCHARISTIC LITURGY. IN THE ENGLISH INDEPENDENT. OR CONGREGATIONAL,. TRADITION: A STUDY OF ITS CHANGING- STRUCTURE AND CONTENT 1550 - 1974 B.D.-THESIS 1978' The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Chapter .17 of this thesis is based upon part of an unpublished essay 1 The 1'apact of the Liturgical Movement on ii'ucharistic Liturgy of too Congregational Church in Jiu gland and Wales ', successfully presented for the degree of Master of Theology of the University of London, 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • BA Semester IV- Rise of the Moderns West-II (BAHS CC 401) Dr. Mukesh Kumar UNIT-I 17 Century European Crisis
    BA Semester IV- Rise of the Moderns West-II (BAHS CC 401) Dr. Mukesh Kumar UNIT-I 17th Century European Crisis: The two decades of war and occupation in the mid-17th century, which in the case of Lithuania gave a foretaste of the 18th-century partitions, ruined and exhausted the Commonwealth. Famines and epidemics followed hostilities, and the population dropped from roughly 11 to 7 million. The number of inhabitants of Kraków and Warsaw fell by two-thirds and one-half, respectively. Wilno was burned down. The Khmelnytsky uprising decimated the Jews in Ukraine, even if they recovered fairly rapidly demographically. The productivity of agriculture diminished dramatically owing to labour shortages, the destruction of many farm buildings and farming implements, and the loss of numerous cattle. The dynamic network of international trade fairs also collapsed. Grain exports, which had reached their peak in the early 17th century, could not redress the un favourable balance of trade with western Europe. Losses of art treasures the Swedes engaged in systematic looting were irreplaceable. The Commonwealth never fully recovered, unlike Muscovy, which had suffered almost as much during the Time of Troubles. Twentieth-century Marxist historians blamed the manorial economy based on serf labour for pauperizing the masses and undermining the towns, yet the Polish economy was not unique in that respect. Moreover, some attempts to replace serfs with rent-paying tenants did not prove to be a panacea. The economic factor must therefore be treated jointly with other structural weaknesses of the Commonwealth that militated against recovery. The 17th-century crisis a European phenomenon was basically a crisis of political authority.
    [Show full text]