ABSTRACT
I am concerned in this paper with two central themes of the modern literature on classical economics: the supposed early demise of ‘Ricardianism’, and the related notion of a ‘dual’ development of nineteenth-century theory entailing, on the one hand, typically Ricardian procedures and on the other embryonic neo-classical procedures. My investigation reveals an impressive resilience of the fundamental Ricardian theorem on distribution, and its derivation in terms of the standard measure of value, amongst the so-called ‘dissenters’ as well as those traditionally classified as members of Ricardo's school; and it casts doubt on the historical accuracy of a well-defined duality of analytical development. An introductory word is in order regarding the secondary interpretations, and the precise scope of the present article.
