Book Review
The Classical School: A History of the First Political Economy by Callum Williams provides a comprehensive analysis of the development and impact of classical economics as it emerged as a distinct field of knowledge between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. The book explores the intellectual foundations laid by towering figures such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill, and examines how their ideas about free markets, trade, the state, and human nature shaped economic theory.
Williams argues that classical economics was not just an academic discipline but a way of understanding society and politics, deeply rooted in the Enlightenment’s emphasis on reason, progress, and individual liberty. The classical school emphasized the importance of free competition, the natural laws of economics, and limited government intervention. At the heart of their economic theory was the belief in the “invisible hand,” a concept popularized by Adam Smith, suggesting that individuals pursuing their own self-interest would unintentionally benefit society as a whole.
The classical school was bolstered by the work of neoclassicists like Jevons and Marshall, however the “political economy” practiced by the economic thinkers profiled by Williams was eclipsed by the mathematical models that would arise in the late nineteenth century, particularly Keynesian and monetary economics which would gained prominence in the twentieth century. Despite this decline, Williams suggests that classical economic principles continue to influence modern economic theory, often resurfacing in debates about market regulation and government intervention.
In addition to the book’s content, Williams’ writing maintains a nice flow and makes complex technical subjects and historical events accessible without sacrificing depth. The chapters on Petty, Cantillon, Condorcet, Quesnay, and Jevons are particularly valuable, as they shed light on often overlooked thinkers who made vital contributions to the field.
On the other hand I have a number of critiques regarding Williams’ choice of biographical subjects. Granted, some economists may be more interesting than others, but this book is primarily intellectual history and should take its subject seriously. Intellectual contributions should outweigh interesting biographies.
Sticking with the “list of twenty” format, I think there Williams had four big, missed opportunities. Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian School, deserved a chapter, as did Léon Walras, whose contributions to general equilibrium theory were groundbreaking. Furthermore, I think it was criminal to exclude Vilfredo Pareto, whose enduring contributions to economics are still relevant today. Finally, the omission of Irving Fisher is a major oversight given his foundational work in monetary economics.
If the limit is twenty then some economists need to be replaced. Who should they be? Those are easy decisions for me. Engels was consequential but in more of a political-historical sense; I think we should leave the dead end of Marxism with Marx himself. Moreover, clearly Harriet Martineau was just a popularizer and not a theorist, so never belonged in this book in the first place. Naoroji, an unfamiliar figure to many readers, did not seem to offer groundbreaking work despite being an interesting person with a point of view on imperialism. Finally, Rosa Luxemburg is a fascinating character, but she was more as a political organizer than an economic theorist. At any rate, none of those four belong in the ranks of Smith, Mill, and Marshall.
As is the spirit of our time, I can only imagine chapters on Walras and Pareto were cut and replaced after editorial feedback that lamented the distinct lack of diversity among classical theorists. Still, that was how that particular historical cookie crumbled. At any rate if diversity was demanded I think there was a better solution. Rather than dilute twenty percent of the book with interesting but inconsequential economists, Williams could have simply expanded the number of biographies to twenty-five or thirty “extraordinary lives.”
Nevertheless, The Classical School provides a solid historical perspective on the foundations of economic thought, highlighting the ideas of important thinkers who helped shape modern economics. Despite some of the questionable figures that do not deserve a place in this intellectual history, The Classical School is a great book for someone embarking on the study of economics, economic history, or political philosophy. In addition, Williams’ book should be read with Robert Heilbroner’s classic The Worldly Philosophers (a book Williams clearly tries to emulate). While Heilbroner covers many of the same thinkers (Smith, Ricardo, Marx), he also profiles influential twentieth century economists (Keynes, Schumpeter, Friedman).