It is now common to study the Enlightenment ‘in national
context’, and in few cases
has the approach been more fertile than in the study of the Scottish
Enlightenment. The danger of this
approach, however, is that it deflects attention from the international
connections of the Enlightenment,
fragmenting the movement as a whole. It is argued here that the
Enlightenment is better understood
as an intellectual movement which was both cosmopolitan and patriotic,
and
that this is particularly
evident in its commitment to political economy, as the key to improving
the
human condition in this
world. The argument is developed through a comparison of Scottish and
Neapolitan political economy
from the mid- to the later eighteenth century. Though set apart by very
different economic circumstances, the Scots and the Neapolitans had a common
point of
reference in French economic
writings, and through these Hume's ideas in particular were
transmitted to Naples. It was from
within this common intellectual framework that the Scots and the
Neapolitans elaborated their
distinctive positions on the scope for free trade between nations. If
Hume and Smith believed that poor
countries such as Scotland would prosper through greater free trade,
while Genovesi and Galiani
argued that only by measures of protection could the abundant natural
resources of the kingdom of
Naples be harnessed to its benefit, their differences derived from shared
premises, and a comparable fear
of the inclination of the leading mercantile powers, Britain and France,
to
control trade to their sole advantage.