No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Review Article
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2012
Abstract
Historians have awaited with great interest a new endeavor to tell the story of business in America — not in a narrow or technical way, but broadly related to the social environment of which business is one part. Economic historians, business historians, sociologists, and many other specialists have gathered extensive data on phases of business behavior, and are continuing to do so at a commendably prolific rate. The job of synthesis, however, has been neglected, perhaps because of its formidable demands. No two scholars would be likely to agree on the content and emphasis of any volume, such as the one reviewed here, that describes the development of American business. This circumstance does not detract from either the usefulness of the effort or the value of the criticism. The increasingly specialized nature of scholarship demands both the stimulus of a general thesis and wide reactions to that thesis if historical perception is to be kept abreast of accumulating evidence.
- Type
- Review Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1958
References
1 He also makes occasional errors. Few would agree with him (page 8) that farmers were “well organized” at the end of the last century. There were organizations, but with the exception of the Grange these were tenuous affairs not destined to last very long, and by then the Grange itself was in political decline. He is also in error (page 150) in saying that the American Farm Bureau Federation was a central Washington lobby for business organizations in the thirties. Though it was suspected, not without reason, of doing some dubious business lobbying in the twenties, there must be some mistake here. And if economists are right in insisting that their few moments of great drama should, like Pickett's Charge, be treated meticulously, we may complain about his treatment of the stock market crash. The decline of Tuesday, October 29, was much worse than on Thursday, October 24, the first day of the debacle. On October 24 the bankers met, not early in the morning, but at noon. And so far as that day was concerned — Professor Cochran does not say anything that is specifically to the contrary — their efforts to support the market were quite a success.