which have permanently marked the economic theory, that is, the economic philosophy, or thought and policy, and economic organization of the modern world, sec. 15. This section is followed by secs. 16-18, which give an account of the finances of Henry VIII and the destruction of the monasteries; the agrarian changes and distress of that epoch; English industry and commercial expansion to the far South and the far Northeast and over wide seas; and the rise of the professions, the recognition of public welfare and new methods and devices for the relief of the poor-methods and devices which were required, that is, became socially necessary as a consequence of the reorganized church or churches of the Reformation period.

3. First period of modern economic theory.—The third chapter is given to a consideration of policy, colonization, and finance of Elizabethan England and the Commonwealth of England from 1560 to 1660. During this period the principles of modern economics, so far as these are involved in the modern mechanism of exchange, or money and banking, had attained a quite complete development, and were embodied in almost their present form, in the Elizabethan reform of the currency and the Elizabethan social legislation under the guidance of Elizabeth's great prime minister, Lord Burleigh (Cecil). Altogether the greatest economist of England during the sixteenth century, if judged as a doer, an administrator of economic interests, was Lord Burleigh, just as I should pronounce Pope Gregory the greatest economist of all Europe at the end of the sixth century (590–604 A.D.), if we judge Gregory as a doer, an administrator of economic interests. In ensuing sections of the third chapter the study of applied economics is continued under the twofold title "Policy; Colonization and Finance from 1560-1660."

After the manner of a student of political science who reasons back from the actual practice of statecraft by a Burke or a Jefferson to the political philosophy of a Burke or a Jefferson, so from the economic policy or policies of the ministers of James I, or of Charles I, or of the leaders of the Long Parliament, we may reason back to the economic theory that must have been accepted and tacitly applied by these ministers and leaders as underlying their

actually realized economic policies and their specifically adopted measures of taxation. These two great branches or aspects of economic science, namely, colonial policy and public finances, were likewise cultivated and applied by statesmen of the Continent at the same time with astuteness, energy, and assiduity. About the foregoing subjects and sundry others like agriculture, trade, and population, mercantilist and cameralist economics then mainly centered with increasing energy and animation.

In this volume I aim to write the history of modern economics, but not the history of modern economists, just as Cajorie in that little book of his on the elementary history of mathematics undertook to write the history of mathematics, but not the history of mathematicians. For the history of economists as distinguished from the history of economics, I refer now once and for all to whatever encyclopedic literature may be available for the student desiring to refer to some name or subject in economics on which he wishes further information. Of the encyclopedic literature I name and commend, for example, Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy and Lewis H. Haney's History of Economic Thought (a revision by Ingram).

Chapters ii to iv deal together with the period which can be very properly described as the first period of modern economics, although I am certain that I shall find objectors who will affirm that there was no modern period in economics before Adam Smith. But the defense of my position I will leave to the reader of secs. 5 to 33 of my Rise of Modern Economics which attempt to state the genetic development of economic theory and economic forms of organization before Adam Smith and before the physiocrats.

Among Englishmen who deserve high rank as economists long before Adam Smith, who will deny a place to Lord Burleigh, or Sir William Petty, or Charles Davenant, or Josiah Child, or Nicholas Barbon, to say nothing of others? In some cases we have to discover the economic theory of the earlier modern epoch from 1480 to 1750 by reasoning back from the practice of economic policies to the economic theory or the economic philosophy by which certain great thinkers and actors like Burleigh must have justified their policies and measures.

4. Mercantilism European, 1660-1750.-In this fourth chapter I describe an epoch of especially warlike and warring economic nationalism followed by a short calm in England under Walpole. In sec. 27 of this chapter I undertake to give a retrospective summary of economic nationalism regarded as culminating in a universal European mercantilism during the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. This era was marked by a passionate and incessantly active trade on the seas and by rival national efforts of colonial extension and territorial acquisitions which resulted in a series of trade wars between England and France, and a lesser and briefer conflict between England and Holland during the reigns of William and Mary, and of Anne. These wars were of great intensity. They were preceded and accompanied by a frenzied extension of, and devotion to, the policies of mercantilism. In sec. 28 I offer a brief interpretation of English economic policy and progress from 1660 to 1688; in sec. 29 I sketch the mercantilism of France (Colbertism) and of Holland. Then in sec. 30 I call attention to the special development of cameralism and its significance. In that connection I concede that cameralism and mercantilism have a common basis in economic nationalism, but I also affirm that the two present many contrasts. The English mercantilists were succeeded by Adam Smith and his followers. The German cameralists were succeeded by the modern historical school of economists. The reconciliation of the two tendencies was not even ostensibly accomplished in political economy until the mergence later, especially since 1850, of the classical English school of Smith and the two Mills and the historical school of economists led by Roscher, Knies, and Hildebrand. This union of two wings of economic science is recounted in secs. 44-46 of chap. vi of my Rise of Modern Economics.

In sec. 31, chap. iv, I continue consideration of European mercantilism by describing English parliamentary Colbertism; and this section I conclude with a subparagraph, sec. 31 (4), which notes the Tory free-trade movement from 1688 to 1714.

During this latter period and the decades thereafter which followed under the Walpole administration, England laid the foundations of her commercial empire and buttressed her national

power upon the economic liberalism of her common law and upon the principles of her seventeenth-century constitutional struggle and a sounder trade policy, namely, the thoughtful Tory policy which heralded a free-trade movement, or more correctly, a freertrade movement, as over against the narrower Whig Colbertism of that epoch. British internal economy in the period of calm which came to England in the age of Walpole is recounted in sec. 32, which is followed in sec. 33 by a summary presenting a very brief account of the economic development of the American colonies to 1750.

B. SECOND PERIOD OF ECONOMIC NATIONALISM

5. Commercial imperialism and economic internationalism.—In chap. v we enter upon the second period in the rise of modern economics, an epoch during which the absolute sway of the older economic nationalism ceased, but we must guard ourselves most carefully and even sedulously against accepting the inference which has frequently been made that modern economic nationalism then ceased. Economic nationalism did not cease even a generation later with the appearance of Adam Smith's great treatise on the Wealth of Nations in 1776. Nor had it, nor has it, ever altogether ceased, even after the reform epoch which began in 1830.

During the three centuries preceding the period from about 1750 onward, the mercantilist and cameralist economics which began in the days of the new nationalist monarchs and their finance ministers, monarchs like the English Edward IV, Henry VII, and Henry VIII, the French Louis VI, Louis XI, and Charles VII, or the Spanish Ferdinand and Isabella, and the emperor Charles V, were represented by that first school, or those first schools, of modern economics which remained in unquestioned ascendancy until the forerunners of Adam Smith, like Richard Cantillon and David Hume, and great cameralists like Justi and Sonnenfels prepared the way for a more liberal and more cosmopolitan economics. The period beginning about 1750, may be denominated as the second period of economic nationalism.

The great eighty years from 1750 to 1830' witnessed a notable breaking up of economic nationalism, a radical change and even a partial collapse of mercantilism by the introduction of a larger viewpoint for the development of economic theory, for the development of a larger, wider, and more liberal system of economic thought, that is, a more liberal system of thought on economic subjects. But the practices of an objective English national economy changed but slightly and but very, very gradually. Nevertheless even the practices of the English national economy were slowly enlarged and widened by the experiences and demands of empire resulting in some changes of structures and policy, i.e., changes of polity and policy. Encouraged by the visions of a cosmopolitan world-economy anticipated and advocated by Adam Smith's treatise on the Wealth of Nations, this treatise then began at once its epoch-making influence.

In sec. 34 I interpret the meaning and significance of commercial imperialism as exemplified in the rise of British India and other contemporaneous events in the political and commercial world of that period. In sec. 35 I point to the logical and inevitable connections and relations of the commercial imperialism of that epoch to the rise of the Smithian economics as result or resultant of the economic and political forces then operative in the enlarging British Empire. In secs. 36 and 37 I analyze the industrial revolution of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries; in sec. 38 the economic significance of the French revolution; and in sec. 39 English social economy and the changes therein wrought and actively proceeding from 1760 to 1830. In sec. 40, with which I conclude the fifth chapter, I give a brief summary account of the Ricardian political economy, which is itself a triumphant expression of the industrial revolution in its effects on markets and the stock exchange as these forced themselves on the attention of a man who like Ricardo studied and understood markets and the stock exchange. But Ricardo himself took but slight and an altogether inadequate notice of the changes which the industrial

These may be called the second great eighty years in contradistinction from the great eighty years from 1480 to 1560. Cf. chap. ii of Modern Economics.