ABSTRACT
In his recent reappraisal of Heckscher’s Mercantilism2 Dr Coleman raised certain questions concerning Heckscher’s methodological approach which transcend the immediate problem of the nature and validity of the idea of ‘mercantilism’ and have a bearing upon the broader issue of the relationships between economic conditions, ideas and policy. To the present writer, the danger that Heckscher’s development of the idea of mercantilism will drive yet another wedge between the political and the economic historians as Dr Coleman fears,3 is less serious than the danger that Heckscher’s apparent reluctance to admit the influence of economic conditions upon economic ideas,4 and his readiness to pass directly from generalizations about economic ideas to generalizations about economic policy, will widen the existing gap between economic historians and historians of economic doctrine, two groups of scholars whose mutual services should be considerable. To the student of economic ideas who seeks to rescue his discipline from the sterile pursuit of tracing the genealogy of particular analytic propositions, of which some of his colleagues seem inordinately fond, the matter is one of crucial importance.
