The Undevelopment of Capitalism: Sectors and Markets in Fifteenth-Century Tuscany (review)

Emigh's The Undevelopment of Capitalism, explains why fifteenth-century Florence did not develop into a capitalist manufacturing economy and society despite propitious conditions. This excellent book is the culmination and synthesis of years of building-block studies by this author. The first half of the book is a veritable textbook on the tools that sociology can bring to bear on the study of history to yield maximum understanding—something that George Homans' famous book applying sociology to history, English Villagers of the Thirteenth Century (New York, 1941), is not. Despite this huge apparatus of theory, the book is not overburdened because Emigh tersely and directly evaluated the sources of theory and tightly cross-referenced chapters and sections throughout the book to avoid repetition.

The second half of the book examines economic factors in Tuscany, such as the great difference in wealth between city and contado, the growing predominance of sharecropping (mezzadria), the buying up of land in the contado by wealthy Florentines, and the loss of control over agricultural management by the workers of the land. She concludes that despite the profits of agriculture being invested in the cities, capitalism and manufacturing did not develop in Florence because urban markets overpowered rural markets and destroyed them. She does not blame this condition on the retrogressive nature of sharecropping, which she finds to have been profitable for landowners and sharecroppers alike, but on the collapse of rural markets.

Any criticisms aimed at this book should be considered minor. Undervalued in the book, however, is the motivation of all Florentines, rich and poor, to secure a steady supply of grain and other necessary commodities, and the concomitant need to secure a steady supply of land and labor, especially if the grain regulations were not working. Yet, whether or not it hurt rich Florentines in the pocketbook to fix the price of grain, starvation and food riots were worth avoiding. Whole bureaucratic institutions were involved in this effort, institutions that had a long history in the Roman annona. Regardless of how useful the controls on necessary commodities were, the best assurance of a steady grain supply in trying times was the ownership of grain fields for the rich or the availability of land to work for the poor. Furthermore, Emigh could have paid more attention to the effect of the plagues on labor/landowner relations. As landowners vied to attract the remaining laborers, they offered better inducements, such as loans of grain, animals, and money. A grain loan could mean a great deal to a poor grain buyer who found himself buying grain just before harvest when grain prices were at their highest. Mezzadria contracts could be initiated with those who owned nothing. Lastly, it is unfortunate that Emigh's quintessential landowning family, as dictated by the extant primary sources, needs to be the Medici, who were sui generis in both wealth and power in Florence.

Emigh presents compelling arguments about how loans of grain, animals, and money at the beginning of a tenure represented investments in the land and not the creation of debts of bondage. Likewise, her discussion of the knowledge that wealthy Florentines had about farming and managing their land rings true from the evidence of existing mezzadria contracts in a private account book. The Undevelopment of Capitalism is an important book, destined to become a classic.