Studies in the Development of Capitalism

Sfl'UDIES IN 'rHE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM

By the Same Authol" POLITICAL ECONOMY AND CAl'1'l'ALISM CAPITALIST ENTERPRISE AND SOCIAL PROGRESS SOVIET ECONOMIC SINCE 1917

DEVELOPMENT

STUDIES IN rrHE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM by MAURICE DOBB, M,A. L~CTURE.R

AND FIlLLOW OF TRIN!r\.' COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

LONDON

ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL LTD BROADWAY HOUSE: 68-74 CARTER LANE, E.C'4

First jJllblisllrrl 1])46 Second alld TlliltllmjJlmions 1')47 FOllrlh Jm/IIl'\ \1011 f[i!i O

!'rint~d in

Gree\: Britein by autler & 1'en[wr I.td•• Frome DIll! IlllllJllll

CONTEN'['S PAnE

vii

, \;GtiiAl' rER ONP. : ~~ CHAPTER

Two :

GapitaHsrn

.,.,.

i,'

\/'

The D~dille of Feudalism and the Growth 01: Towns '\., ...,

~HAPTER TnRll"':

The Beginnings of the Bonrg('oisie :,.

• CHAPTER FOUlt :

The Rise of Industrial Capital ,/'

I23

Capital !\(,cllIllulatioIl and l\ {\'rmntiliwi ,/'

I77

,I

-

CIIAI'T1iR l"rvE : 1./'cU.\I'TllR

~IX

:

33 83

Growth of the l'ro!t:l,trial

Thl' 11l\11l~ldal lZ"vnlllli\ltl .Illll IIII/~ till' tilt: talk about a capitalist system, was following a will tl' tlH~ wisp. Some have been quite oLltspokcn about this, and, Iik/~ a reviewer of ~~ofess9r Ta\:Vn.cis Religion and tlte RiSt' of Capitalism, have denounc7dt'he-:'Term'"as being no more than II political catchword. r To-day, after half a century of intensive research in cconomie history, this attitude is rarely regarded by economic h~orillm as tenable, even if they may still hold the origin of the term to be suspect. True, we find the leading historian of Mercantilism dismissing the notion of" modern capitalism" as" t.hat UIlW!tll!P· some Irish stew",1 But the prevailing view of t!ws/: Will) !lav(~ studied the economic development of ll'lOtkrII t ilIlrs is Slllllllll·d up by Professor Tawney in a wdl.ktloWll pil~sagt~. ".'\nt'" more than half a century of work on thl~ sllltkd hy SdIOLll';; or half a dozen different nationalities and of evcry "arid)! or Ill/lit kal opinion, to deny that the phenomenon exists, 01' to .'iUi\'!.(t:SI tlJ;~1 if it does exist, it is unique among human itlstitlltitl\ls in havillf.f., like Melchizedck, existed ii'om eternity, or to imply that, it' it has a history, propriety forbids that hi~tory to IH~ disil1ll~rl't'd, is to run wilfully in blinkers. . .. An author . . . is Imlikdy to make much of the history of Europe dllrin~ tlw last lhl't·t~ centuries if, in addition to eschewing the word, he ig-Illlrt:s tlte fact." 2 But if to~day Capitalism has received authuritative recognition as an historical category, this al1(J1'(ls no tlSSllmw:e that those who claim to study this system ate talkiug about. the same thing. Some might think that a variety of usage I-iilve little ground for comment and could do no great harm. Hut the dillh~ cnce of verbal usage is not only associated with it c!inh't:nt. emphasis in the search for what is relevant among the multitude of historical incidents and with a different principle of selection in composing the chronicle of events, but is apt to lead to a differe?;t m9de of interpretation and a different causal-genetic 'I,.

. :~r6fessor E. Heckscher in Economic Hislory Review, vol. VIr, p. 4,,). Hl~ add~ that It ~an o.nly ~ave " a .distinc~ mear,:ling" if it is "connected with \~IHlt i~ calk\! hI econonucS?IenCe capItal "-m whIch sense, Le. of the exis telll;ll of capital, difl't'l'clIt stages of history have differed only in degree. ' 2 Preface to 1937 Edition of Religion arId the R~1e of ell/dlldislIl.

CAI'l'l'AL1Sl\t

3

story. If it is the pattern which histprical eVl~ttts ItH'ce llpnn us, and IWt: our own predilections, that j:-; decisive in our me of the terdl Capitalism, there 111ust then be one ddillitioll that accords with the actual shape which historical development possesses, and others which! by contrast with it, are wnmg. Even ,1 believer in historical relativism mtlst, surely, believe tlwt there is onc picture that is right from the staildpoint of any given homogeneous set of historical observations. Ivroreover, it not infrequently happcns that those who write about Capitalism are unaware, apparently, of any problem of meaning; failing to makc clear the sense in which they intend the word to be taken, and e~en themselves showing no great consistency in its employment. OlT should, perhaps, at once make it dear that ''the word " capitalistic" which. has become fashionable am()ngVsom~ e.£"!g2!}~i~t'l, especially vihose "lll,,
!ITI9Jl,e.y> ~~Lg~gJal'G~. that,.:,' mc.dia:vaL ,~Qlu~~~splil~g ,UIt~t1'i!~t.t.;!~~ ' ~_.s::'l:E~t~hs~.l,1?:, ,tl1l1. twelfth.. centu:qr.. P£YQI;l~L it IJOlJl)t ".,1 \'y"!l('.l1

~

. tE!S.. ,Il(),ti()u,is...:r:r;ta,rried,,to,-thut.. o£,Dapitalisrn

.