3,801 works, 471 books, 3,267 articles, 60 other works, 3 awaiting classification, 150 years of economic thought. Each one summarized and searchable, with cited passages inside.
German agricultural cooperatives offer a promising model for Italian Tyrol’s fragmented farms—but what makes a cooperative different from any other business association? In this 1902 review of Giovanni Lorenzoni’s two-volume study, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen links that practical prospect to a precise conceptual disagreement. Against Lorenzoni’s adoption of Pantaleoni’s account, he argues that members’ social position and shared purposes constitute a historically distinctive organization, not incidental variations on a common form. His approval remains discriminating: Germany’s achievements in rural credit do not establish that cooperatives can meet every agricultural credit need. The review lets readers examine how legal structure, economic purpose, and social membership shape the case for cooperative reform—and why its usefulness must be assessed rather than assumed.
What could unite France’s revolutionary socialist groups when participation in government and the admission of trade unions and workers’ cooperatives remained contentious? In this brief 1902 review of the official proceedings of the Lyon congress, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen singles out the proposed party’s founding principles: international worker solidarity, proletarian organization, the conquest of power, and socialization of production and exchange. He acknowledges substantial disagreements without detailing them, and distinguishes these shared commitments from organizational rules shaped by French circumstances. The review offers a compact view of the programmatic basis of socialist unity—and of what Schullern chooses to leave outside that account.
Comparative economic history promises insight, but when does comparison outrun knowledge of local conditions? In this brief review of W. J. Ashley’s Surveys historic and economic, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen pairs appreciation with methodological restraint. He finds Ashley’s discussions of settlement history especially instructive, yet notes their limited engagement with current controversies and cautions against premature, detailed parallels between France, England, India, and Japan. His selective judgments distinguish material that stimulates further inquiry from conclusions readers might too readily draw. The review offers a compact example of critical reception: an economic historian welcoming international evidence while insisting on closer study of particular circumstances.
Compulsory association promises farmers a stronger public voice—but who bears its costs, and whose interests prevail? In this commentary on Austria’s 1902 law establishing agricultural occupational associations, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen supports collective organization while scrutinizing its safeguards. Smallholders must not be overwhelmed by large estates, nor compulsory members exposed to speculative losses. His distinctive expectation is that organization will both strengthen agricultural representation and moderate excessive agrarian demands by imposing practical responsibility. Credit, collective purchasing, and other services matter as foundations for this political capacity. The commentary shows how that ambition depends on unglamorous institutional choices: membership boundaries, contribution limits, trained officials, and provincial legislation that could either realize or weaken the national framework.
What happens to economics when its basic unit is neither goods nor value, but an enterprise comprising people and goods? In this short German review, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen presents Alberto Zorli’s proposed reorientation while drawing attention to its terminological difficulties: even translating azienda economica requires a choice between Unternehmung and Betrieb. Schullern’s particular interest lies in the consequences for public finance. Zorli treats the state as a collective enterprise distinguished by coercion, drawing economic principles from economics and its governing norms from public law. Rather than testing this framework at length, the review isolates the connection between Zorli’s conceptual innovation and his account of state economic activity—a compact encounter with the problem of bringing private and public economies under one vocabulary.
Argentina’s currency question mattered to European grain producers as well as to those studying the destination of European emigrants. This connection frames Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen’s brief 1903 review of the first, monetary volume of Eteocle Lorini’s study of Argentina. Schullern judges the book chiefly as a source: he praises the care and objectivity of Lorini’s government-sponsored investigation and the breadth of documentation supporting its account of monetary affairs. Rather than endorsing a currency reform, the review shows what Schullern valued in economic research—local investigation, official evidence, and the placement of monetary conditions within a wider account of production, migration, and public finance.
Land improvement, insurance, hotels, and the drying of silk cocoons all fall within “industrial” enterprise in the handbook assessed by Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen. His brief 1903 review of Ferdinando Piccinelli’s work locates its chief interest for non-Italian readers in detailed descriptions of 617 joint-stock companies. Schullern distinguishes the handbook’s accessible, broadly liberal account of Italian law from the documentary value of its company survey: chronological ordering within groups offers clues to corporate development, while financial tables record the scale of capital and indebtedness. The review provides a compact contemporary judgement of a reference work whose expansive definition of industry brings agricultural and service enterprises into view alongside more familiar industrial activities.
Municipal self-government means more here than running waterworks or transport services. In this brief 1903 review of Francesco Invrea’s Il comune e la sua funzione sociale, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen singles out worker protection for particular praise. His telling example is Brescia’s municipal labour office, charged not only with finding employment but also with promoting workers’ moral and material advancement—a broader remit than that of its German counterparts. Schullern also reports Invrea’s insistence that greater municipal autonomy requires popular oversight through the referendum. The review offers a compact glimpse of how local independence could be linked to expanded social responsibilities, with Schullern’s selective emphasis directing attention beyond public utilities to the institutions serving workers.
Does agriculture follow industry towards capitalist concentration—and what would that mean for socialist expectations? In this brief 1903 review of G. Gatti’s Le socialisme et l’agriculture, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen singles out landownership as a decisive test of revised Marxist doctrine. Gatti expects capitalism and cooperation together to prepare socialism’s victory, yet concedes that agricultural concentration has barely begun and that transformation will take a long time. Schullern’s qualified praise turns on this restraint, not on agreement with the predicted outcome. The review offers a compact encounter between socialist confidence and economic caution: its distinctive interest lies in a reviewer’s willingness to recognize sober judgment in an author whose expectations he does not endorse.
Can family and private property change without ceasing to be the foundations of social life? In this brief 1903 review, Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen welcomes Giovanni Amadori-Virgilj’s answer: both institutions are primordial, not successors to an original communal order. Schullern draws attention to the book’s evolutionary method and scrutiny of evidence, but his strongest approval concerns its political implications—a vision of progress that preserves family and property while reconciling individual and social interests. He leaves particular theses open to disagreement, yet praises their challenge to partisan certainty. The review offers a compact encounter with Schullern’s standards of judgement, showing where methodological appreciation meets an explicitly sympathetic response to criticism of socialism.
A mathematically ordered progressive tax can still leave too little income protected from taxation. That tension shapes Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen’s brief review of Mario Marsilj Libelli’s Per l’imposta progressiva. Libelli places collective needs below subsistence but above other private needs, deriving a continuous, diminishing progression and a narrowly measured subsistence exemption. Schullern finds the study worth considering for anyone examining the practical feasibility of a single progressive direct tax, yet reserves serious social-policy objections, particularly about the exemption’s level. The review offers a compact distinction between finding a tax scheme useful for practical inquiry and accepting the principles that determine how much taxpayers retain for basic needs.
Scholarly recognition need not imply agreement: Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen’s brief 1903 review grants Teresa Labriola’s arguments serious attention while explicitly distancing himself from her views on divorce. Reviewing three studies together, he draws out their connections to social policy, especially the gap between possessing rights and having the conditions needed to exercise them. His account of Labriola’s work on personhood makes that distinction concrete: political freedom remains incomplete if society does not enable individuals to attain personal dignity. The review offers a compact encounter with Labriola through a sympathetic but dissenting reader, whose appreciation of her learning remains distinct from endorsement of her conclusions.