Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T19:04:16.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reply to Kurz and Salvadori

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Terry Peach
Terry Peach
Affiliation:
(Victoria) University of Manchester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Professors Kurz and Salvadori seem aggrieved by my review article of their Companion (Peach 1999; Kurz and Salvadori 1998). They give the impression that the article should never have been published, apparently on the grounds that I had “disqualified” myself from writing it: I was not an “unprejudiced reviewer.” At the same time, they pronounce that the article “has not much to offer,” which makes it all the more curious that they should trouble themselves to discredit its author.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2000 , pp. 491 - 492
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. 1998. The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, 2 vols. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Peach, T. 1999. “Surplus to Requirements: Kurz and Salvadori's The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 21 (12): 449–62.Google Scholar