No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2009
In their discussion of my modest contribution on the character of Austrian industrialization, my esteemed colleagues Eduard März and Herbert Matis have raised a number of questions regarding the “new economic history,” the nature of historical inquiry, epistemology, and the value of my conclusions. In addition, they have both, and Prof. März in particular, raised a number of suggestive hypotheses—if I may be forgiven the use of the word—in regard to the character of Austrian economic development. Needless to say, in this brief reply I cannot discuss all the points touched upon in their discussion. However, I would like to deal with those which strike me as the most significant.
1 Magister Ludi (The Glass Bead Game) (New York: Bantam Books, 1970), p. 398.
2 See, for example, Matis, Herbert, Österreichs Winschaft 1848–1913 (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1972).Google Scholar
3 “Beyond the New Economic History,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXXIV, No. I (March, 1974), p. 2Google Scholar.
4 März, Eduard, Österreichische Industrie- und Bankpolitik in der Zeit Franz Joseph I., am Beispiel der k. k. priv. Ösierreichischen Creditansiall für Handel und Gewerbe (Vienna: Europa Verlag, 1968), p. 16Google Scholar.
5 Krantz, Frederick and Hohenberg, Paul M. (eds.), Failed Transitions to Modern Industrial Society: Renaissance Italy and Seventeenth Century Holland (Montreal: Interuniversity Centre for European Studies, First International Colloquium, Proceedings, April 18–20, 1974)Google Scholar.
6 Eddie, Scott M., “The Terms of Trade as a Tax on Agriculture: Hungary's Trade with Austria, 1883–1913,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXXII, No. I (March, 1972), pp. 298–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Katus, L., “Economic Growth in Hungary during the Age of Dualism (1867–1913). A Quantitative Analysis,” in Pamlényi, Ervin (ed.), Social- Economic Researches on the History of East-Central Europe (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1970)Google Scholar; and Iván T. Berend and György Ránki, “Nationaleinkommen und Kapitalakkumulation in Ungarn,1867–1914,” ibid.