Anievas and Nişancıoğlu’s attempt to shift the terms of the debate about early modern capitalism by a major widening of its perspectives is a welcome move. Accepting this, the paper suggests that their argument can be more forcefully made if the theoretical residues of earlier traditions of Marxist historical explanation are purged from the way they expound that argument. The most ambivalent of these relates to their continued use of the idea of a ‘coexistence of modes of production’. This permeates the confused way they present Atlantic slavery. A second, comparable source of confusion concerns their description of the relationship between merchant capital and the absolutist state. The alliance between the modern state and mercantile capital is radically misrecognised thanks to an uncritical espousal of Anderson’s view of absolutism. The paper suggests that Anievas and Nişancıoğlu might have written a stronger book had they reconceptualised the economic history of capitalism by allowing for a whole epoch dominated by powerful groups of merchant capitalists. In conclusion, I argue (pace Marx) that the commercial capital of the later middle ages/early modern period was the first form in which production began to be subordinated to capital.
LoJung-pang1970‘Chinese Shipping and East-West Trade from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Century’ in Sociétés et compagnies de commerce en Orient et dans l’Océan indien edited by MichelMollatParis: SEVPEN.
LyashchenkoPeter Ivanovich1998[Russian original: 1927]‘The Development of the Russian Grain Economy during the Crisis of 1880–1890’ in Commercialization and Agriculture in Late Imperial Russia: Essays on Russian Economic History edited and translated by HariVasudevanCalcutta: K.P. Bagchi & Co.
MousnierRoland1967Les XVIe et XVIIe siècles. La grande mutation intellectuelle de l’humanité l’avènement de la science moderne et l’expansion de l’EuropeFifth EditionParis: Presses universitaires de France.
PiconMaurice2008‘Production artisanale et manufacturière à l’époque romaine: À propos de L’Histoire brisée d’Aldo Schiavone’ in L’économie antique: Une économie de marché? edited by YvesRoman and JulieDalaisonParis: Société des amis de Jacob Spon.
PokrovskyMikhail Nikolaevich1931History of Russia from the Earliest Times to the Rise of Commercial Capitalism translated by Jesse DunsmoreClarkson and Mary Rose MillieGriffithsNew York: International Publishers.
RooverRaymond de1968‘Labour Conditions in Florence around 1400: Theory, Policy and Reality’ in Florentine Studies: Politics and Society in Renaissance Florence edited by NicolaiRubinsteinLondon: Faber.