Category: Uncategorized

Categories
Bibliography Courses Economists Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus Uncategorized

Harvard. Econ 113b. Schumpeter’s Grad Course on the History of Economics. 1940.

___________________________

Joseph Schumpeter offered this one semester, second term graduate course “History and Literature of Economics since 1776” nine times during the period 1940-1949. The core readings were basically unchanged. Below you will find the course enrollment figures and the reading list for 1940 (into which I have inserted the two additions from the reading list for 1941). Exam questions from 1940 and 1941 are included as well as an important research tip at the bottom of the posting. Nobel Laureates James Tobin and Robert Solow took this course in 1940 and 1947, respectively. I have gone to the trouble of providing links to almost the entire reading list as a public service to the history of economics community of scholars.

The (much reduced) reading list for the last time Schumpeter taught the course, Spring 1949 is transcribed in a later post.

___________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

___________________________

[Course Description: History and Literature of Economics since 1776]

Course work will mainly consist in critical study of the leading English, French, German and Italian contributions to economic thought in the nineteenth century. An introductory and a concluding series of lectures and discussions will provide the links with earlier and modern developments. Undergraduates who have passed Ec A are admitted without individual permission

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

Course Enrollment Statistics:

Grad. Students Seniors Juniors Radcliffe Other Total
1939-40 9 3 1 0 3 16
1940-41 11 2 0 3 1 17
1941-42 5 1 0 4 1 12
1942-43 10 3 0 6 3 22
1943-44 2 1 0 3 3 9
1944-45 Not offered
1945-46 18 2 5 25
1946-47 21 1 0 6 7 35
1947-48 17 4 0 2 7 30
1948-49 2 1 0 0 1 4

Note: The course number was Economics 113b until the academic year 1947-48, under the new course numbering system in 1948-49, it became Economics 213b. Joseph Schumpeter died in January 1950.

Source: Harvard/Radcliffe Online Historical Reference Shelf. Harvard President’s Reports.

___________________________

Economics 113b
[History and Literature of Economics since 1776]
1939-40
[second term]

 

I. For general reference you should currently consult:

Erich Roll, A History of Economic Thought (1939, [link to 1945 edition]), or
L. H. Haney, History of Economic Thought (1927).[1923 revised edition]

Suggestions:

John M. Keynes, Essays in Biography (Essays on Malthus, Marshall and Edgeworth).

 

II. Works dealing with the history of individual doctrines or problems. No assignment.

Suggestions:

E. Boehm-Bawerk, Capital and Interest, Vol. I.
E. Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution (1924). [2nd ed., 1903]
F. W. Taussig, Wages and Capital (1896).
J. Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade (1937), Chs. I and II.
K. Marx, Theorien über den Mehrwehrt (1921). [1910 edition by Karl Kautsky: vol I, vol. II(1), vol. II(2), vol. III.]

 

III. This course covers many authors whose teaching is also dealt with in other courses and whose works are more or less familiar to every student. The most important of them are:

Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, also read the introduction to Cannan’s edition.
David Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy.
John Stuart Mill, Principles of Political Economy; also read introduction to Ashley’s edition.
Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics, particularly Book V.
John B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth (1899).

Suggestions:

Augustin Cournot, Principles of the Theory of Wealth (Fisher’s edition, 1927).
Léon Walras, Element d’économie pure (edition definitive, 1926).
Knut Wicksell, Lectures on Political Economy (Robbins’ edition, 1934). [volume I, volume II]

 

IV. In addition, the following books should be read, at least cursorily:

Richard Cantillon, Essai sur la nature du commerce en général (1755); English translation by Higgs (1931).
David Hume, Political Discourses (edition by Green and Grose, 1875), Vol. I. [Miller edition]
Sir James Steuart, Principles of Political Economy (1767). [Vol I (1767); Vol II ]
A. R. J. Turgot, Réflexions sur la Formation et la Distribution des Richesses (1766), (Oeuvres, ed. Daire, 1844). Vol I; Vol II.
Thomas R. Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population (1798). [1803 edition, enlarged]
Jean B. Say, Traité d’économie politique (1803). [2nd ed. 1814] [1855 English translation from 4th and 5th editions]
William N. Senior, Outline of the Science of Political Economy (1836).
William St. Jevons, Theory of Political Economy (1871).
J. E. Cairnes, Leading Principles.
Karl Marx, first volume of Das Kapital (English translation).

Suggestions:

J. H. v. Thünen, Der isolierte Staat (ed. Waentig, 1930).
R. Auspitz und R. Lieben, Untersuchungen über die Theorie des Preises (1888), (also translation into French). [Vol. I (French); Vol. II (French)]
Carl Menger, Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre (London School reprints, 1934). [English translation with introduction by F. A. Hayek]
F. Y. Edgeworth, Mathematical Psychics (London School reprints, 1932).
M. Longfield, Lectures on Political Economy (London School reprints, 1931).
H. C. Carey, The Past, the Present and the Future (1848).
H. George, Progress and Poverty (1879).
S. Newcomb, Principles of Political Economy (1885).
Ph. Wicksteed, The Commonsense of Political Economy (1908).

 

V. Monographs on individual authors. No assignments.

Suggestions:

[Addition to list in 1940-41: Henry Higgs, The Physiocrats (1897)]
W. R. Scott, Adam Smith as Student and Professor (1937).
J. Rae, Life of Adam Smith (1895).
J. Bonar, Malthus and his Work (1924). [1885 ed.]
M. Bowley, Nassau Senior and Classical Economics (1937).
F. Mehring, Karl Marx (1936).
J. R. Hicks, Leon Walras (Econometrica, 1934).
[Addition to list in 1940-41: H. W. Jevons and H. S. Jevons, “William S. Jevons,” Econometrica]

Source: Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Harvard University Archives, HUC 8522.2.1. Box 2, Folder “1939-40, 2 of (2)” and Folder “1940-41”.

___________________________

1939-1940
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 113b2

Answer any FOUR out of the following five questions:

  1. Discuss the wage-fund theory and its practical implications. In what sense was it resuscitated by Boehm-Bawerk and Taussig?
  2. Exponents of the Labor-Quantity theory of value and exponents of the Marginal Utility theory of value have for decades tried to refute each other. What is the true relation between the two theories?
  3. State and criticize the Marxian theory of Surplus Value or of Exploitation.
  4. What do you think of the so-called Ricardian theory of rent?
  5. What are the main objections that were raised against the “Austrian school” during the early stages of its development?

Final. 1940

 

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

1940-1941
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 113b2

One question may be omitted. Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. If a layman, trying to make intellectual conversation, asked you what Adam Smith’s performance consisted in, what would you say?
  2. What was the importance, for the economic theory of its time, of Malthus’ Essay on Population?
  3. Explain the meaning and use of the theorem usually referred to as Say’s Law.
  4. What are the conditions that would have to be fulfilled in order to make the labor-quantity theory of value true?
  5. State and discuss Ricardo’s version of the so-called law of the falling rate of profit.
  6. Jevons, Walras and Menger no doubt felt that they had revolutionized economic theory. What did this revolution consist in and how important do you think it was?
  7. Under modern conditions, most producers have no use for any significant part of their products. Hence their subjective valuation of these products depends on what these products will exchange for, that is to say, on their prices. How, then, can we derive these prices from utility schedules of buyers and sellers without reasoning in a circle?

Final. 1941.

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

Research Tip: 75 pages of student notes taken by future Nobel Laureate James Tobin for Economics 113b2 of the 1939-40 academic year are available in the James Tobin Papers at the Yale University Library Manuscripts Collection, Group No. 1746, Box. No. 6 in one of the hard-bound volumes of Tobin’s notes from his Harvard courses.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1943.

Categories
Courses Economists Harvard Uncategorized

Harvard. Economics Dept. votes down course on Russian Revolution, 1919

An undergraduate student approached Frank W. Taussig to gain the latter’s support for a semester course in the second term of 1919-20 on “various phases” of the Russian Revolution before the latter left for the U. S. Tariff Commission in Washington, D.C. It appears that Taussig’s initial response was at least mildly encouraging and much activity to organize the course followed as reported in the undergraduate’s letter. The undergraduate went on to have a distinguished career as an economic historian and established the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago in 1941 that today bears his name, the John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought.

In Taussig’s absence the Harvard economics department voted not to participate in such a course.

_________________________________

 

[Taussig to Day forwarding Nef letter]

United States Tariff Commission
Washington

December 6, 1919.

Dear Ezra:

The enclosed letter in the main explains itself. I’m willing to assume the responsibility provided that the department approves of the general scheme and of my participation in it. Bring this before the members individually or at a meeting; and I suggest that then you communicate direct with Neff [sic].

My first impression is that we secure for the lectures: (1) Foerster [Robert Franz, Ph.D. 1909] or Meriam [Richard Stockton, Ph.D. 1921], (2) Ohsol [Johann Gottfried, Ph.D. 1914]. I suggest that one of the first two give introductory lectures on Marx, Marxism, the International and post Marxian socialist developments. Then let Ohsol take up the development of thought in Russia and say something about the doctrinal position and the communistic scheme. I believe Ohsol would do the thing with full information and in a temperate spirit. By way of ascertaining possibilities, I shall find out whether Ohsol is still with the Federal Trade Commission and whether he is likely to remain in reach through next spring.

As between Foerster and Meriam, I am inclined, on the whole, to let Meriam have a try. Foerster has plenty of other work to do and Meriam’s recent residence abroad has probably put him in touch with the Continental situation.

[…]

Always sincerely yours,

[signed] F. W. T Taussig

Prof. E. E. Day,
Department of Economics,
Cambridge, Mass

_________________________________

[Nef’s Letter to Taussig: requests course on Russian Revolution]

19 Holworthy Hall,
Cambridge, Mass.
December 4, 1919.

Prof. F. W. Taussig,
c/o U. S. Tariff Commission,
Washington, D. C.

My dear Professor Taussig:

The Friday before you left for Washington, you will remember I consulted you as to the possibilities of offering a course on various phases of the Russian Revolution, during the second semester of the present academic year. Since that time considerable progress has been made. Prof. A. C. Coolidge is enthusiastic over the plan which he believes will work in well with the collection of all available documents and data on the Revolution for the Library. For this part of the work, he proposes, provided the funds can be raised and the demands warrant it, to employ a secretary who will have full charge of collecting the materials. He further plans to set aside a room in Widener Library, which will contain the most important books and documents to be consulted by students taking the course.

Professor Lord has expressed his willingness to take charge of the first part of the course, which would deal with the background of the problem and the narrative history up to the beginning of the Bolshevik regime. The second and third part would deal with the economic and political theories involved, and with the actual workings of the Soviet form of government so far as they can be ascertained. Fifield Workum and I went today to see Professor Ferguson, who thought the scheme feasible and proposes to bring it up before the history department for approval at a meeting on Friday, December 12th. First, however, he wishes to know whether you will be willing to take charge of the second part of the course. This would not mean that you would actually deliver the lectures, although we all hope very much you will be able to give some of them, but simply, as I understand it, that you will see that this part of the course is given.

The third part, Professor Coolidge proposes to arrange with Professor Ferguson. After hearing from you, Professor Ferguson will bring the plan before the history department.

We feel that undergraduate interest in the course justifies its being offered. Professor Ferguson thought it might be given at 2.30 o’clock on Tuesdays and Thursdays during the second term. This would enable a number of men who are now taking History A to take it. All the undergraduates to whom I have mentioned the possibility have immediately expressed a desire to enroll. Professors Ferguson and Coolidge feel that it will make the course both possible and successful if you could stand behind the second part of it.

Very sincerely yours,

[John U. Nef]

_________________________________

[Day’s Reply to Taussig: Time not yet ripe]

December 12, 1919

Dear Mr. Taussig:

At a meeting of the Department yesterday afternoon I brought up for discussion your letter presenting the proposal of J. U. Nef and other undergraduates for a course the second half-year on various phases of the Russian Revolution. The matter was discussed at length, with the result that a number of different grounds for opposing the plan were brought up. I need not go over these at length, as you can readily imagine most of them. Professor Ripley’s objection lay altogether against the method in which the course was to be administered; Bullock’s against the proposed subject matter of the course. The outcome was a unanimous vote that in the opinion of the members of the Department it is inexpedient for the Department to participate in the offering of the proposed course. If you wish further details regarding the opinions expressed, I shall be glad to send them to you. I may add that I should have voted with the other members had I been called upon to do so, as it does not seem to me that the time is yet ripe for academic instruction on the subject of the revolution.

[…]

Sincerely yours,

[Day]

Prof. F. W. Taussig

_________________________________

[Taussig’s Reply to Department Decision: Should have met students half way]

United States Tariff Commission
Washington

December 15, 1919.

Dear Ezra:

I have yours of December 12th. I confess it is a matter of surprise that the Department should have voted as it did. My own strong inclination was to meet the under graduates half way, and to have joined in giving a course, not “on the Revolution,” but upon Russian history and Russian conditions, as leading up to the Revolution. I am sorry not to have been on hand.

[…]

  Very sincerely yours,

  (signed) F. W. Taussig

Professor E. E. Day,
Department of Economics,
Harvard University,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.

_________________________________

Source: Harvard University Archives. UAV.349.10 Department of Economics, Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950, Box 23.   Folder: “Course Offerings 1913-1925”.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1920.

Categories
Uncategorized

Page has been deleted

Back to the front page.

Categories
Uncategorized

David Hume’s Grave

At the Old Calton Burial Ground in Edinburgh.

Categories
Chicago Courses Exam Questions Uncategorized

Chicago. Money and Banking. Economics 330 Exam. Autumn 1932

Here we have the exam questions and Milton Friedman’s choices together with his notes for one of the answers to Lloyd Mints’ graduate course (first in a sequence of the two quarter courses.) on Money and Banking in 1932.

_____________________________

[Univ. of Chicago]

[Milton Friedman (MF signature)]

 

ECONOMICS 330
Autumn, 1932

Write on any four questions.

  1. [✓] “The banks could either keep the demand for real capital within the limits set by the supply of savings or keep the price level steady; but they cannot perform both functions at once.” (Hayek) Discuss this statement critically.
  2. “Only the purely static quantity theory needs no index number, for its comparisons assume relative prices to be unchanged inter se. The objections to Professor Fisher’s Equation of Exchange arise mainly from the faults of the price index implied in it.” (Hawtrey) Explain and evaluate this statement.
  3. [✓] The criticism is sometimes made of the quantity theory that it assumes other things to be equal, whereas in fact they are not. Discuss this criticism. What “other things” are referred to?
  4. Discuss the relation between the k of Keynes’ earlier equation and the velocity of circulation.
    b. Discuss the statement that changes in the velocity of circulation of goods cannot bring about changes in the price level because of the fact that they necessarily bring about compensating changes in the velocity of circulation of money.
  5. [✓] According to Keynes’ analysis what would it be necessary to do in order to eliminate the business cycle? State and support your opinion of Keynes’ conclusion.

_____________________________

[Milton Friedman’s right margin notes for Question 4:]

n=pk
p=\frac{n}{k}
\frac{n}{k}=\frac{MV}{T}\text{ (MF then cancels }n\text{ with }M\text{)}
\frac{1}{k}=\frac{V}{T}
k=\frac{T}{V}=\frac{1}{V}

Source: Hoover Institution Archives, Milton Friedman Papers, Box 115, Folder  13 (Biographical. Class exams, ca 1932-38).

_____________________________

Cf. Keynes: Tract on Monetary Reform (1923), p. 76-77

“We can measure this definite amount of purchasing power in terms of a unit made up of a collection of specified quantities of their standard articles of consumption or other objects of expenditure….Let us call such a unit a ‘consumption unit’ and assume that the public require to hold an amount of money having a purchasing power over k consumption units. Let there be n currency notes or other forms of cash in circulation with the public, and let p be the prices of each consumption unit (i.e., p is the index number of the cost of living), then it follows from the above that n = pk. This is the famous Quantity Theory of Money.”