Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T05:41:58.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wealth and Power: Quesnay's Political Economy of the “Agricultural Kingdom”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Philippe Steiner
Philippe Steiner
Affiliation:
Université; Charles de Gaulle, Lille 3, and PHARE, Université; Paris I.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Physiocrats “New Science” of Political Economy is often represented as unrelated to the pursuit of national power. A recent study (Fourquet 1989), which rests on the approaches of Fernand Braudel (1979) and Immanuel Wallerstein (1980), has radicalized the thesis already propounded by Edmond Silberner (1939) who claimed that Quesnay was profoundly ignorant of military matters and failed to understand the power struggles being played out on the seas and in the colonies. Did not Quesnay propose turning back to an agricultural economy, banishing industry, trade, and the navy—in short, all the active forces thanks to which Great Britain had snatched domination of the world economy from Holland and thanks to which she would prevent France from obtaining it?

Yet this thesis is weak. It must be remembered that Quesnay's first economic writings date from 1756–57, that is to say a period when confrontation between France and England was at a peak, with the start of the Seven Years' War. How could an author who claims to de ne the economic government ofan agricultural nation ignore the military problems which were so crucial in this period? Even if he wanted to, how could he succeed in doing so once he came to deal with taxes and the highly sensitive question of finance? How could he make himself understood by his contemporaries with a political theory that set aside all the burning issues of the day? How could he find an audience among those developing the science of commerce who always accorded great importance to the pursuit of power?

Under scrutiny the traditional thesis appears inaccurate. After recalling the writings of some of his contemporaries, whom Quesnay knew and read (section 1), I shall show that articles drafted between 1756 and 1757, like published or unpublished works which Mirabeau and Quesnay elaborated between 1757 and 1760, give significant room to the nation's military power, particularly when the economic government is in question (section 2). From the years 1763–64 the idea of a natural order does not lead Quesnay to neglect the pursuit of power (section 3). These links between power and wealth in the work of the founder of Physiocracy will lead finally to some remarks on political economy as a form of rationalization of politics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 2002 , pp. 91 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bergeron, Louis, ed. 1978. Inerties et révolutions 1730–1840. In P. Léon, Histoire économique et sociale du monde, vol. 3. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Boney, R. 1996. “Le 18e siècle. La lutte pour le statut de grande puissance et la fin de l'ancien régime fiscal.” In Boney, R., ed., Systèmes économiques et finances publiques. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, pp. 315–95.Google Scholar
Braudel, Fernand. 1979. Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme, XVe – XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Cantillon, Richard. 1755. Essai sur la nature du commerce en général. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, 1997.Google Scholar
Charles, Loïc. 1999. La liberté du commerce des grains et l'économie politique française (1750–1770). Ph.D. dissertation: Université de Paris I.Google Scholar
Charles, Loïc and Steiner, Philippe. 1999. “Entre Montesquieu et Rousseau. La Physiocratie parmi les origines intellectuelles de la Révolution française.” Etudes Jean-Jacques Rousseau, XI: 83–159. Jean, Delmas, ed. 1992. Histoire militaire de la France: de 1715 à 1871. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Dupont de Nemours, Pierre-Samuel. 1768. De l'origine et des progrès d'une science nouvelle. Catania: CUECM, 1992.Google Scholar
Earle, Edward M., ed. 1944. Makers of Modern Strategy. Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Forbonnais François, Véron de. 1753. Le négociant anglois. Dresde.Google Scholar
Forbonnais François, Véron de. 1754. Eléments du commerce. Leyde.Google Scholar
Fourquet, François. 1989. Richesse et puissance. Une généalogie de la valeur. Paris: La découverte.Google Scholar
Gournay, Jacques Vincent de. 1752. Remarques inédites de Vincent de Gournay sur le Traité sur le commerce de Josiah Child. Tokyo: Kinokunya, 1983.Google Scholar
Gournay, Jacques Vincent de. 1993. Mémoires et lettres de Vincent de Gournay. Tokyo: Kinokunya.Google Scholar
Heilbron, Johan. 1998. “French Moralists and the Anthropology of the Modern Era: On the Genesis of the Notions of ‘Interests’ and ‘Commercial Society’.” In Heilbron, J., Magnusson, L., and Wittrock, B., eds., The Rise of the Social Sciences and the Formation of Modernity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers pp. 77–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1977. The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism Before Its Triumph. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Michael. 1976. War in European History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Paul. 1987. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Longhitano, Gino. 1993. Ricchezze, valori, società. La ‘nuova scienzd’ e i modelli sociali nella Francia del secondo Settecento. Vicenza: Neri Poza editore.Google Scholar
Lüthy, Herbert. 1961. La banque protestante en France. De la Révocation de l'édit de Nantes à la Révolution. Paris: SEVPEN.Google Scholar
Mably, Gabriel Bonnot de. 1754. Principes de négociations, pour servir au droit public de l'Europe fondé sur les traités. In Œuvres de Mably. Paris: Desbrière, vol. V, 1794–95.Google Scholar
Mably, Gabriel Bonnot de. 1764. Le droit public de l'Europe fondé sur les traités. In Œuvres de Mably. Paris: Desbrière, vols. V–VI–VII, 1794–95.Google Scholar
Meek, Ronald. 1962. The Economics of Physiocracy: Essays and Translation. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Melon, Jean-François. 1736. Essai politique sur le commerce (s.1.).Google Scholar
Mercier de la RivièrePierre, Paul le Pierre, Paul le. 1768. L'ordre naturel et essentiel des sociétés politiques. Paris: Fayard, 2001.Google Scholar
Mirabeau, Victor Riquetti marquis de. 1760. Théorie de l'impôt. Paris.Google Scholar
Mirabeau, Victor Riquetti marquis de and Quesnay, François. 1757–1760a. Bref état des moyens pour la restauration de l'autorité du roi et de ses finances. In Revue d'histoire économique et sociale, 1913, pp. 177–211.Google Scholar
Mirabeau, Victor Riquetti marquis de and Quesnay, François. 1757–1760b. Traité de la monarchie. Paris: L'Harmattan, 1999.Google Scholar
Montesquieu, Charles Secondat de. 1748. L'esprit des loix. In Œuvres complètes, vol. 2. Paris: Gallimard, 1951.Google Scholar
Petty, Sir William. 1671. Political Arithmetick. In The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty. New York: Kelley, 1986.Google Scholar
Pocock, John G. A. 1975. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, John G. A. 1990. “The Political Limits to Premodern Economics.” In Dunn, J., ed., The Economic Limits to Modern Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 121–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1756. “Fermiers.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques vol. 2, pp. 427–58.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1757a. “Grains.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, pp. 459–510.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1757b. “Hommes.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 511–78.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1757c. “Impôts.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 579–617.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1759. “Extraits des économies royales de M. de Sully.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 669–73.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1765. “Droit naturel.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 729–42.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1766a. “Remarques sur l'opinion de l'auteur de l'Esprit des loix concernant les colonies.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 781–90.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1766b. “Analyse de la formule arithmétique du Tableau économique.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 793–812.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1766c. “Observations sur l'intérêt de l'argent.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 763–68.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1767. “Maximes générales du gouvernement économique d'un royaume agricole.” In François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Demographiques, vol. 2, 1958, pp. 949–76.Google Scholar
François, Quesnay. 1958. François Quesnay et la Physiocratie. Paris: Institut National des Etudes Démographiques, vol. 2.Google Scholar
Riley, James C. 1986. The Seven Years War and the Old Regime in France: The Economic and Financial Toll. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Christian. 1991. Penser la guerre, penser l'économie. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
Silberner, Edmond. 1939. La guerre dans lapensée économique du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Sirey.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics, 1981.Google Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1986. “Les peuples et l'impôt dans la Dîme royalle de Vauban.” Œconomia 5: 153–79.Google Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1987. “Le projet physiocratique: théorie de la propriété et lien social.” Revue économique 38 (6): 1111–128.Google Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1994. “Demand, Prices, and Net Product in the Early Writings of F. Quesnay.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 1 (2): 231–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1996. “Les revues économiques de langue française au 18e sisècle (1751–1776).” In Marco, L., ed., Les revues d'économie en France (1751–1994). Paris: L'Harmattan, pp. 33–78.Google Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1997. “Quesnay et le commerce.” Revue d'économie politique 107 (5): 695–713.Google Scholar
Steiner, Philippe. 1998. La “science nouvelle” de l'économie politique. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Tsuda, Takumi. 1983. “Un économiste trahi: Vincent de Gournay (1712–1759).” In J. Vincent de Gournay 1752, pp. 445–85.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne-Robert-Jacques. 1770. Lettres au Contrôleur général sur le commerce des grains. In Schelle, G., ed., Œuvres de Turgot et documents le concernant. Paris: Alcan, vol. 3, 1914, pp. 265–354.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne-Robert-Jacques. 1774. “Lettre au Roi.” In Schelle, G.; ed., Œuvres de Turgot et documents le concernant. Paris: Alcan, vol. 4, 1922, pp. 109–14.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne-Robert-Jacques. 1776a. Edits. In Schelle, G., ed., Œuvres de Turgot et documents le concernant. Paris: Alcan, vol. 5, 1923, pp. 148–300.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne-Robert-Jacques. 1776b. Réflexions rédigees a l'occasion d'un Mémoire remis par de Vergennes au Roi sur la manière dont la France et l'Espagne doivent envisager les suites de la querelle entre la Grande-Bretagne et ses colonies. In Schelle, G., ed., Œuvres de Turgot et documents le concernant. Paris: Alcan, vol. 5, 1923, pp. 384–420.Google Scholar
Vaggi, Gianni. 1987. The Economics of François Quesnay. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VaubanSebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de Sebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de. 1686. “Méthode generalle et facile pour faire le dénombrement des peuples.” Annales de démographie historique, 1975, pp. 241–55.Google Scholar
VaubanSebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de Sebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de. 1695. “Mémoire concernant la caprerie.” In de Rochas d'Aiglun, A., ed., Vauban: sa famille et ses écrits, ses oisivetés et sa correspondance. Genève: Slatkine reprint, vol. I, 1910, pp. 456–61.Google Scholar
VaubanSebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de Sebastien le Prestre, Maréchal de. 1707. Projet de Dîme royale. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1992.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1948. “Power Versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries.” In Coleman, D. C., ed., Revisions in Mercantilism. London: Methuen, 1969, pp. 61–92.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1980. The Modern World System II: Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World Economy 1600–1750. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1919. Science as a Vocation. In H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Kegan, Trench and Co., 1948, pp. 129–56.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1921. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology. English translation. Berkeley: The University of California Press, 1978.Google Scholar