Adam Smith, Historian

Scholars and biographers of Adam Smith correctly identify him as a philosopher, an economist, a literary figure, and a burgeoning scientist. Indeed, these labels fit Adam Smith and his work but so, too, does the label historian. Smith relied upon history, utilized its tools and performed his own historical analysis. He took part in the Scottish Enlightenment as an empiricist, drawing conclusions from observation. However, what of events in the past? Causation dominates much of his work, especially his Wealth of Nations (WN), and history proved to be pivotal to his work. However, he used history as a historian: by meeting it on its own terms. While not all who utilize the work of historians and the past are historians, it was his reliance on his own investigations and interrogation into and of the past that makes him a historian. 

The past provided Smith with much more material to observe in order to understand the fundamentals of economics, ethics, society, and law in his own time. In other words, it enabled him a better understanding of “how” and “why” 18th century Britain and much of Europe developed as it had. Prime examples include the development of banking, landholding and rent, currency, and trade. In fact, much of Chapter 3 of Book II of WN consists of historical inquiry into the pattern of landholding and rent seeking as an aid to understanding land and rent markets of the 18th century.[1] In particular, Smith delves into historical narrative concerning the decline of agriculture and rise of urban development following the Fall of Rome in Western Europe.[2] Rather than juxtaposing an 18th century theory of urbanization and agricultural economy onto the past, he goes to the past to better understand how merchant and agricultural economic activity came to be in his present. From there, Smith formulated why and how commercial activity emerged in towns and cities, and it related directly to his idea of civilization progressing in “stages.” 

The topics of banking, currency, and the value of precious metals bring out Smith’s need for history and his own historical research. For instance, the value of silver and its influence on the value of commodities, such as wheat, involved his consultation of both primary and secondary sources to formulate conclusions about demand and the value of labor.[3] Smith also placed importance on analyzing the past with regard to trade and trade policy. Rather than relying on more ancient and medieval texts, Smith needed only to look a century or two earlier to obtain evidence and accounts of the cause of mercantile trade and protectionism. Indeed, he cites Britain’s wars with the Dutch during the 17th century and the ill effects of the Navigation Acts that he critiqued in WN.[4]

While WN utilizes history, particularly when finding examples or causation for Britain’s 18th century economy, Smith also sought to inquire history for its own sake and shows a keen interest in the subject. For example, in a letter from his friend David Hume, Hume highlights that he shared “the same Opinion with you…and thought the best Period to begin an English History was about Henry the 7th.”[5] Smith not only held opinions concerning historical inquiry but wrote to Le Doc de la Rochefoucauld of his own historical works on “his anvil” referring to his Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres.[6] And while Smith wrote and conducted historical research separate from WN, readers placed it within a historical context and critiqued it for its historical issues such as by Governor Thomas Pownall, former Governor of Massachusetts Bay.[7]

Smith often finds a place in economic, political-science, and political-philosophy circles as the originator and well-spring of “modern” economic theory, and that is certainly true. However, he and his works also stand as a prime example of the practice of historical research and writing, as well as the results of intense historical work. Without Smith’s sense and emphasis of history, without his ability to investigate and interrogate the past on its own terms, the Wealth of Nations would have fallen largely flat over the expanse of time since the 18th century. It would have been rooted in nothing more than the Scottish Enlightenment and would have undoubtedly found decay as the world changed. Smith even aimed at the Wealth of Nations to be something more than simple commentary on his own time—he had hopes of it being a long-lived examination into ageless concepts of wealth, power, and economy. Thus, the Wealth of Nations should be considered a prime example of excellent historical scholarship also. 

 

Want to Read More?
John Burrow's Adam Smith and Stadial Theory | Adam Smith Works
Paul Mueller's The Scottish Intellectual Tradition Before the Enlightenment | Adam Smith Works
Mike Young's How Did Adam Smith Think About History? | Adam Smith Works


[1] Adam Smith, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Vol. I, ed. R.H. Campbell, A.S. Skinner (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1976), 381-410.
[2] Ibid.,
[3] Ibid., 194-206.
[4] Ibid., 462-65.
[5] David Hume, “From David Hume to Adam Smith”, MS., RSE ii. 25; HL i.167-9. Correspondence of Adam Smith, ed. E.G. Mossner and T.S. Ross (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1987), 8.
[6] Adam Smith, “From Adam Smith to Le Duc de la Rochefoucauld,” Economic Journal vi (1896), 165-6; IC. Lundberg, Turgot’s Unknown Translator: The Reflexions and Adam Smith (The Hague, 1964), 44-5. Correspondence of Adam Smith, ed. E.G. Mossner and T.S. Ross (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1987), 286-7.
[7] Thomas Pownall, “From Thomas Pownall to Adam Smith," Richmond, 25 Sept. 1776. Correspondence of Adam Smith. ed. E.G. Mossner and T.S. Ross (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1987), 337-76.