Ludwig von Mises: Review of Hugo C. M. Wendel’s The Evolution of Industrial Freedom in Prussia, 1845–1849 (1922)

Mises’s brief book review combines recognition of Wendel’s historical research with a criticism of its explanatory scope. He credits the study’s diligent use of printed materials and identifies its subject through the outcome of the period it covers:

Die vorliegende, auf Grund fleißiger Benutzung des gedruckten Materials gearbeitete Untersuchung gibt einen kurzen Überblick über jenen bedeutsamen Abschnitt der preußischen Gewerbegeschichte, der mit dem Siege der zünftlerischen Ideen in der Notverordnung vom 9. Februar 1849 abschloß.

English translation: The present study, prepared through diligent use of printed materials, provides a brief overview of that significant phase of Prussian industrial history which ended with the victory of guild ideas in the emergency decree of 9 February 1849.

This framing emphasizes the triumph of guild principles rather than a straightforward advance toward industrial freedom. Mises then distinguishes the book’s value for two audiences: German readers will find little that is new, whereas American readers gain an introduction to the unfamiliar world of policy concerning the industrial middle strata. Its contribution is therefore chiefly one of historical orientation across national contexts.

The review’s decisive qualification concerns what such an introduction needs to explain:

Sie hätte diesen Zweck noch besser erfüllt, wenn sie nicht darauf verzichtet hätte, auch die geistesgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der Erneuerung mittelalterlicher Wirtschaftsverfassung wenigstens im Überblick darzustellen.

English translation: It would have fulfilled this purpose even better had it not refrained from presenting, at least in outline, the intellectual-historical foundations of the revival of the medieval economic order.

Mises thus moves from assessing documentary work and readership to asking for the history of the ideas behind institutional restoration. The missing element is an account of the intellectual foundations that made the revival of a medieval economic order possible. His criticism identifies a limit of Wendel’s treatment without supplying that account himself. The review’s relevance lies in this distinction between describing a policy reversal and explaining the ideas underpinning it.