Joseph A. Schumpeter · 1927
Joseph A. Schumpeter’s 1927 review of the third edition of Friedrich Benedict Wilhelm Hermann’s Staatswirtschaftliche Untersuchungen defends the continuing scientific and pedagogical value of a neglected theoretical classic. Opening with Marshall’s esteem for Hermann, Schumpeter endorses Karl Diehl’s judgment that the book ranks foremost in older German theoretical economics. Its achievement lies in knowledge, not political advocacy: patient investigation, intellectual seriousness, and restraint distinguish it from fashionable polemics.
Konsequenz: Man nennt es mit Achtung und kennt es nicht.
English translation: Consequence: one names it with respect and does not know it.
This compressed diagnosis makes neglect the consequence of scientific independence. Hermann offers neither philosophical slogans nor a cause for partisan mobilization; respectful citation therefore substitutes for actual reading. The comparison with Mangoldt places this neglect within a wider failure to appreciate analytical accomplishment.
Kaum ein anderes Werk der Vergangenheit kann man auch dem Werdenden mit so gutem Gewissen zum Studium empfehlen.
English translation: Hardly any other work of the past can one recommend for study with so good a conscience even to the student still in the making.
Schumpeter turns from reputation to practical use. The book deserves study because its intellectual substance remains accessible and instructive, not simply because it occupies a place in disciplinary history. This educational purpose also governs his judgment of the edition: while hoping for an eventual critical edition of all available material, he approves the inexpensive, manageable reprint of the first edition of 1832, which preserves the essentials and is preferable to reprinting the second edition of 1869. The closing recommendation for exercises and introductory seminars completes the review’s movement from historical recognition to renewed teaching use. Its central intervention is to reclaim a neglected theorist through active study rather than ceremonial esteem.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian