Search results

Abstract. From the notes of a graduate student, James E. Hagerty, there has survived a record of sorts of what Thorstein Veblen taught at the University of Chicago in 1896–97. It shows that Veblen was working out in the classroom the ideas he presented formally after 1889, particularly the idea that "Differences in political economy now and in the past are due to a difference in psychology"—in "the point of view from which the facts are handled." Veblenian thought was the product of the prevailing scientific philosophy. The Hagerty notes are presented in full in an appendix.

Abstract. This article examines the effect of peddling upon industrialization and economic development and the evolution of institutional arrangements in marketing in the Antebellum period. After 1840 peddling in America was undertaken, to an increasing extent, by newly arrived immigrants from Germany who displaced the traditional "Yankees" from the trade. The relationship between peddling and the development of entrepreneurship is explored, along with the special opportunities that peddling provided for economic and occupational mobility in the American milieu. The frequency with which individuals who started careers as peddlers rose to prominence in the fields of merchandising and finance points to the importance of the "schooling" function of this institution for newly arrived immigrants in American folkways, business practices, and commercial possibilities.

The work of H. J. Habakkuk, Peter Temin, Robert Fogel, and Nathan Rosenberg on the effect of relative factor price differentials between America and England in the nineteenth century on the course of technological development has generated considerable interest in providing some empirical evidence on the labor scarcity hypothesis. Briefly stated, the hypothesis claims that relatively higher wages in America brought about the invention and use in production of a relatively capital intensive technology, and since "technical possibilities were richest at the capital intensive end of the spectrum," this phenomenon was somehow responsible for the unique characteristics of American technology, that is, interchangeable parts, certain machine tool developments, and the proliferation of self-acting mechanisms.

My object in this article is to use the historical evidence of one man's life to raise questions concerning the way we have come to understand our technological history. Inventors and mechanicians have long occupied a prominent place in American history. However, the bases for selecting and certifying these national heroes have resulted in a curious record of achievement and considerable distortion in our understanding of the development of American manufacturing technology. The principal historical perspective that enshrined the names of Evans, Whitney, Perkins, etc. has been first, the emphasis on originality of invention or "dramatic newness," and, secondly, the attempt by historians to confine mechanical genius or creativity within national boundaries—Slater and DuPont, of course, being the exceptions to this generalization. Thus we speak quite naturally of American inventors, British inventors, and so on.