Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T14:54:01.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Contested Identities

The History of Economics since 1945

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2014

By
Roger E. Backhouse  and
Philippe Fontaine
Edited by
Roger E. Backhouse  and
Philippe Fontaine
Roger E. Backhouse
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Philippe Fontaine
Affiliation:
Ecole Normale Supérieure de Cachan
Roger E. Backhouse
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Philippe Fontaine
Affiliation:
Ecole Normale Supérieure de Cachan
Get access

Summary

In 2007, when the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) proposed a new classification in which “history of economic thought” was moved from “economics” to “history, archeology, religion and philosophy,” some in the field were up in arms, protesting that this amounted to its destruction (see Kates and Millmow 2008a, b). As most Australian historians of economics are affiliated to economics departments, this change threatened to render their research worthless within their institutions. However, their reaction also reflected a belief that what they were doing fell under the jurisdiction of economics and that it could not therefore be considered a form of the history and philosophy of science.

This episode and others like it point to an identity problem: Most historians of economics are trained as economists and think of themselves as such, but the remainder of the economics profession cannot see the significance of the history of economics for what they are doing. Some historians of economics, such as those who challenged the ABS reclassification, are committed to trying to change this situation while others contend that what they do is a form of history and accordingly feel less concerned about economists’ lack of interest.

Keywords

intellectual historyidentity problemeconomic theoriesarcheologyAustralian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)economic history
Type
Chapter
Information
A Historiography of the Modern Social Sciences , pp. 183 - 210
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abella, Alex. 2008. Soldiers of Reason: The Rand Corporation and the Rise of the American Empire. Boston: Mariner Books.Google Scholar
Allen, William R. 1965. “Discussion,” American Economic Review 55.1/2:143–9.Google Scholar
Amadae, Sonja. 2003. Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Arena, Richard. 2000. “Les économistes français en 1950,” Revue économique 51.5:969–1007.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger E. 1996. “Vision and Progress in Economic Thought: Schumpeter after Kuhn.” In Joseph A. Schumpeter: Historian of Economics, ed. Moss, L.. London: Routledge, 21–32.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger E. 2007. “Lives in Synopsis: The Production and Use of Short Biographies by Historians of Economics.” In Life Writing and the History of Economics, ed. Weintraub, E. R. and Forget, E.. Annual Supplement to Volume 39 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger E., and Bateman, Bradley W.. 2008. “John Maynard Keynes: Recent Developments.” In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, ed. Durlauf, S. and Blume, L.. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger E. and Fontaine, Philippe, eds. 2010a. The Unsocial Social Science? Economics and Neighboring Disciplines since 1945. Annual Supplement to Volume 42 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger E. and Fontaine, Philippe, 2010b. The History of the Social Sciences since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, William J. 1985. New Era to New Deal: Herbert Hoover, the Economists and American Economic Policy, 1921–1933. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, William J. 1996. Designs within Disorder: Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Economists, and the Shaping of American Economic Policy, 1933–1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, Bradley W. 2002. “Sitting on a Log with Adam Smith: The Future of the History of Economic Thought at the Liberal Arts Colleges.” In The Future of the History of Economics, ed. Roy Weintraub, E.. Annual Supplement to Volume 34 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Michael A. 2001. A Perilous Progress: Economists and Public Purpose in Twentieth-Century America. Princeton, NJ, and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1958. Ricardian Economics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark 1962. Economic Theory in Retrospect. Homewood, IL: R. D. Irwin.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark 1990. “On the Historiography of Economics,” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 12.1:27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark 1996. Economic Theory in Retrospect, 5th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark 2001. “No History of Ideas, Please, We’re Economists,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 15.1:145–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, Howard R. 1953. “Graduate Education in Economics,” American Economic Review 43.4 (Part 2): ii–xv and 1–223.Google Scholar
Burgin, Angus. 2012. The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free Markets since the Depression. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrow, John, Collini, Stefan, and Winch, Donald M.. 1983. That Noble Science of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burke, Peter. 2005. History and Social Theory, 2nd ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cain, Peter. 2002. Hobson and Imperialism: Radicalism, New Liberalism, and Finance 1887–1938. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, James. 2009. “Introduction: Doctrines, Disciplines, Discourses, Departments,” Critical Inquiry 35.4:729–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coats, A.W. 1969a. “Is There a ‘Structure of Scientific Revolutions’ in Economics?” Kyklos 22.2:289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coats, A.W. 1969b. “Research Priorities in the History of Economics,” History of Political Economy 1.1:9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coats, A.W. 1982. Economists in Government. Durham, NC: Duke University PressGoogle Scholar
Coats, A.W., 1987. Economists in International Organizations. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Coats, A.W., 1996. The Post-1945 Internationalization of Economics. Annual Supplement to volume 28 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Coats, A.W., 2000. The Development of Economics in Western Europe. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Collini, Stefan. 1985. “What Is Intellectual History?” History Today 35.10:46–8.Google Scholar
Conant, James Bryant et al. 1945. General Education in a Free Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Corry, Bernard A. 1975. “Should Economists Abandon HOPE?” History of Political Economy 7.2:252–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daunton, Martin. 2002. Just Taxes: The Politics of Taxation in Britain, 1914–1979. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daunton, Martin 2007. Wealth and Welfare: An Economic and Social History of Britain, 1851–1951. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, John B. 1998. “Introduction.” In New Economics and Its History, ed. Davis, John B.. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press, 1–9.Google Scholar
Dawidoff, Nicholas. 2003. The Fly Swatter: Portrait of an Exceptional Character. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
De Marchi, Neil, ed. 1993. Non-Natural Social Science: Reflecting on the Enterprise of More Heat than Light. Annual Supplement to Volume 25 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
De Marchi, Neil, and Blaug, Mark, eds. 1991. Appraising Economic Theories: Studies in the Methodology of Scientific Research Programs. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
Düppe, Till, and Weintraub, E. Roy. 2014. Finding Equilibrium: Arrow, Debreu and McKenzie and the Problem of Scientific Credit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmett, Ross B. 1998. “Entrenching Disciplinary Competence: The Role of General Education and Graduate Study in Chicago Economics.” In From Interwar Pluralism to Postwar Neoclassicism, ed. Morgan, M. S. and Rutherford, M.. Annual Supplement to Volume 30 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Engerman, David C. 2009. Know Your Enemy: The Rise and Fall of America’s Soviet Experts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evensky, Jerry. 2012. “HES Presidential Address: What’s Wrong with Economics?” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 34.1:1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1966. Les mots et les choses. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel 1969. L’ Archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics. London Macmillan. Trans. Burchell, Graham from Naissance de la biopolitique: Cours au Collège de France. 1978–1979. Paris: Seuil/Gallimard.Google Scholar
Fourcade, Marion. 2009. Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton, NJ, and Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1956. “The Quantity Theory of Money: A Restatement.” In Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money, ed. Friedman, M.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
General Education in a Free Society. 1945. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gide, Charles, and Rist, Charles. 1909. Histoire des doctrines économiques depuis les Physiocrates jusqu’à nos jours. Paris: Larose and Tenin.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Craufurd D., Spengler, Joseph J., and Smith, Robert S.. 1969. “Avant-Propos,” History of Political Economy 1.1:1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Craufurd D., Spengler, Joseph J., and Smith, Robert S. 2008. “History of Economic Thought.” In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, ed. Durlauf, Steven N. and Blume, Lawrence E., 2nd ed., Vol. 4. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 48–57.Google Scholar
Gordon, Donald F. 1965. “The Role of the History of Economic Thought in the Understanding of Modern Economic Theory,” American Economic Review 55.1/2:119–127.Google Scholar
Gordon, Peter E. 2012. “Agonies of the Real: Anti-Realism from Kuhn to Foucault,” Modern Intellectual History 9.1:127–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvard University, Faculty Committee on the Behavioral Sciences. 1954. The Behavioral Sciences at Harvard: Report by a Faculty Committee. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Henderson, John P. 1976 (1993). “The History of Thought in the Development of the Chicago Paradigm.” In The Chicago School of Political Economy, ed. Samuels, W. J.. New Brunswick and London: Transactions.Google Scholar
Heyck, Hunter and Kaiser, David. 2010. “‘Introduction’ to Focus: New Perspectives on Science and the Cold War,” Isis 101.2:362–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hont, Istvan 2005. Jealousy of Trade: International Competition and the Nation State in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hont, Istvan, and Michael, Ignatieff, eds. 1983. Wealth and Virtue: The Shaping of Political Economy in the Scottish Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Daniel. 1974. “Historians and Economists: Perspectives on the Development of American Economic Thought,” History of Political Economy 6.4:454–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, Anthony. 1998. Free Trade and Liberal England, 1846–1946. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchison, Terence W. 1953. A Review of Economic Doctrines, 1870–1929. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ingrao, Bruna, and Israel, Giorgio. 1987. La Mano Invisibile: L’equilibrio economico nella storia della scienza. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Ingrao, Bruna, and Israel, Giorgio 1990. The Invisible Hand: Economic Equilibrium in the History of Science, trans. McGilvray, Ian. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
James, Émile. 1950. Histoire des théories économiques. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Jardini, David R. 1996. Out of the Blue Yonder: The RAND Corporation’s Diversification into Social Welfare Research, 1946–1968. PhD Dissertation, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
Johnson, Harry G. 1971. The Keynesian Revolution and the Monetarist Counter-revolution,” American Economic Review 61.2:1–14.Google Scholar
Kates, Steven, and Millmow, Alex. 2008a. “The History Wars of Economics: The Classification Struggle in the History of Economic Thought,” History of Economics Review 47 (Winter):110–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kates, Steven, and Millmow, Alex 2008b. “A Canary in the Coalmine: The Near Death Experience of the History of Economics in Australia,” History of Economic Ideas 16.3:79–94. (This article is followed by five comments and a reply.)Google Scholar
Kerr, Clark. 1963. The Uses of the University. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Keynes, John Maynard. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kurz, Heinz. 2006. “Whither the History of Economic Thought? Going Nowhere Rather Slowly?” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 13.4:463–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laidler, David E. 1993. “Hawtrey, Harvard, and the Origins of the Chicago Tradition,” Journal of Political Economy 101.6:1068–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latsis, S. J., ed. 1976. Method and Appraisal in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Frederic S. 2010. A History of Heterodox Economics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leonard, Robert J. 1994. “Reading Cournot, Reading Nash: the Creation and Stabilisation of the Nash Equilibrium,” Economic Journal 104.424:492–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, Robert J. 1995. “From Parlor Games to Social Science: von Neumann, Morgenstern and the Creation of Game Theory, 1928–1944,” Journal of Economic Literature 33.2:730–761.Google Scholar
Leonard, Robert J. 2010. Von Neumann, Morgenstern, and the Creation of Game Theory: From Chess to Social Science, 1900–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, S. Todd. 1991. “Are There Limits to the Past in the History of Economic Thought,” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 13.2:134–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcuzzo, Maria Cristina, and Rosselli, Annalisa. 2002. “Economics as History of Economics: The Italian Case in Retrospect.” In The Future of the History of Economics, ed. Roy Weintraub, E. . Annual Supplement to Volume 34 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, Donald N. 1983. “The Rhetoric of Economics,” Journal of Economic Literature 31.2:482–504.Google Scholar
McCraw, Thomas K. 2007. Prophet of Innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction. Cambridge, MA, and London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McCraw, Thomas K. 1985. The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Middleton, Roger. 1983. Government versus the Market. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Middleton, Roger 1998. Charlatans or Saviours? The British Economics Profession from Marshall to Meade. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip. 1989 (1991). More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirowski, Philip 1992. What Were von Neumann and Morgenstern Trying to Accomplish?” In Toward a History of Game Theory, ed. Weintraub, E. Roy. Annual Supplement to Volume 24 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip 2002. Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip, and Plehwe, Dieter, eds. 2009. The Road from Mont Pelerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moggridge, Donald E. 1992. Maynard Keynes: An Economist’s Biography. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morgan, Mary S., and Rutherford, Malcolm, eds. 1998. From Interwar Pluralism to Postwar Neoclassicism. Annual Supplement to Volume 30 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Ortolano, Guy. 2009. The Two Cultures Controversy: Science, Literature and Cultural Politics in Postwar Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Patinkin, Don. 1969. “The Chicago Tradition, the Quantity Theory, and Friedman,” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 1.1:46–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patinkin, Don 1976. Keynes’s Monetary Thought: A Study of Its Development. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Patinkin, Don 1982. Anticipations of the General Theory?Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Pigou, Arthur Cecil. 1902. Review of Theories of Value before Adam Smith, by A. R. Sewall. Economic Journal 12.47:374–375.
Rodgers, Daniel T. 2011. Age of Fracture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rutherford, Malcolm. 2008. The Institutionalist Movement in American Economics, 1918–1947. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, Warren J. 1974. “The History of Economic Thought as Intellectual History,” History of Political Economy 6.3:305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1962. “Economists and the History of Ideas,” American Economic Review52.1:1–18.Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1978. “The Canonical Classical Model of Political Economy,” Journal of Economic Literature 16.4:1415–34.Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1987. “Out of the Closet: A Program for the Whig History of Economic Science,” History of Economics Society Bulletin 9.1:51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schabas, Margaret, “Breaking Away: History of Economics as History of Science,” History of Political Economy 24.1:187–203.CrossRef
Schabas, Margaret " 2002. “Coming Together: History of Economics as History of Science.” In The Future of the History of Economics., ed. Roy Weintraub, E.. Annual Supplement to Volume 34 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Jospeh A. 1954. A History of Economic Analysis. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Skidelsky, Robert. 1983. John Maynard Keynes, Vol. 1: Hopes Betrayed, 1883–1920. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Skidelsky, Robert 1992. John Maynard Keynes, Vol. 2: Economist as Saviours, 1920–1937. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Skidelsky, Robert 2000. John Maynard Keynes, Vol. 3: Fighting for Britain. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam 1976. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Solovey, Mark, and Cravens, Hamilton, eds. 2012. Cold War Social Science: Knowledge Production, Liberal Democracy, and Human Nature. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, Robert M. 1997. “How Did Economics Get that Way and What Way Did It Get?” Dædalus 126.1:39–58.Google Scholar
Sturges, P. 1975. Economists’ Papers, 1750–1950: A Guide to Archive and Other Manuscript Sources for the History of British and Irish Economic Thought. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trentmann, F. 2008. Free Trade Nation: Commerce, Consumption and Civil Society in Modern Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tribe, Keith. 1978. Land, Labour and Economic Discourse. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Villey, Daniel, and Neme, Colette. 1944. Petite Histoire des grandes doctrines économiques, rev. ed. Paris: Génin, 1985.Google Scholar
Walker, Donald A. 1991. “Economics as Social Physics,” Economic Journal 101.406:615–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman, Anthony M. C. 2002. “The ‘Sussex School’ and the History of Economic Thought: British Intellectual History, 1750–1950,” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 9.3:452–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman, Anthony M. C. 2008. “Two Kinds of ‘History of Economics,’” History of Economic Ideas 16.3:106–11.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy. 1985. General Equilibrium Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 1991. Stabilizing Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 1992. “Introduction.” In Toward a History of Game Theory. ed. E. Roy Weintraub. Annual Supplement to Volume 24 of History of Political Economy. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 1999. “How Should we Write the History of Twentieth-century Economics?” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 15.4: 139–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 2002a. The Future of the History of Economic Thought. (Annual Supplement to Volume 34 of History of Political Economy). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 2002b. How Economics Became a Mathematical Science. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy 2007. “Economic Science Wars,” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 29.3: 267–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy, Meardon, Stephen J., Gayer, Ted and Banzhaf, H. Spencer. 1998. “Archiving the History of Economics,” Journal of Economic Literature 36.3: 1496–1501.Google Scholar
Winch, Donald N. 1964. “What Price the History of Economic Thought?” Scottish Journal of Political Economy 11.3:193–204.Google Scholar
Winch, Donald N. 1978. Adam Smith’s Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winch, Donald N. 2000. “Does Progress Matter?” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 7.4:465–84.
Winch, Donald N. 2009. Intellectual History and the History of Economic Thought: A Personal View, Working paper, Sussex Center for Intellectual History.
Yonay, Yuval P. 1998. The Struggle over the Soul of Economics: Institutionalist and Neoclassical Economists in America between the Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×