No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Feudal Incomes and Demand Elasticity for Bread in Late Eighteenth-Century France*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 February 2011
Extract
The works of Labrousse and Chabert on income fluctuations in pre-and post-revolutionary France have already been subjected to abundant criticism by Professor Landes in the November 1950 issue of THE JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC HISTORY. The present note results from an attempt at resolving in a constructive way certain of the contradictions observed between Labrousse's inferences and his data. The argument, originally developed on the basis of observations in the decade immediately preceding the French Revolution, was extended to cover the thirty years (1815-1845) following the fall of Napoleon's empire. After a short review of Labrousse's “grain crop” interpretation of French economic cycles, it is shown that (1) his computations of feudal revenues do not agree with his description of their cyclical pattern and (2) grain revenue figures are only consistent with an elastic demand for bread over a certain range. This squarely contradicts the inelasticity assumption which underlies both Labrousse's theory and Landes' criticism of it. The treatment of eighteenth-century bread demand as price-inelastic had already wide currency among contemporary economists, and does not seem to have been seriously challenged ever since. An inductive analysis supported by scattered pieces of empirical evidence is then developed, with the conclusion that demand for bread (and grain) should indeed be elastic over the relevant region. The last section represents an extension of this interpretation to crop and price data in the post-Napoleonic period.
- Type
- Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Economic History Association 1958
References
1 Labrousse, C. E., Esquisse du mouvement des prix et des revenus en France au XVlll6 siècle (Paris: Litrairie Dalloz, 1932)Google Scholar.
2 Chabert, Alexandre, Essai stir les mouvements des revenus et de I'activité économique en France de 1798 à 1820 (Paris: Librairie de Médicis, 1949)Google Scholar.
3 Landes, David S.: “The Statistical Study of French Crises,” The Journal of Economic History, X (11 1950), 195–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4 The decline in agricultural incomes is accentuated by farm unemployment (in larger estates) due to the smaller crops.
5 , Labrousse, Esquisse, tableau A, p. 406Google Scholar; Tableau B, p. 409; tableau, C, p. 411Google Scholar.
6 , Labrousse, Esquisse, pp. 396–98Google Scholar.
7 Labrousse, C. E., La arise de I'économie frangaise à la fin de I'ancien régime et an début de la révolution (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1944), Introduction, p. xxixGoogle Scholar.
8 Caen, Generalité de. Cf. Esquisse, p. 161Google Scholar.
9 , Labrousse, Esquisse, pp. 392–93Google Scholar.
10 Ibid., pp. 103 ff.
11 Ibid., p. 161.
12 Quesnay, , Nemours, Dupont de, and , Turgot. Cf. Esquisse, pp. 389 ffGoogle Scholar.
13 This is perhaps why contemporary economists were already attempting to prove inelasticity, and they did so by twisting data in precisely the same way. The following is a collection of such computations, originated by Quesnay in his Encyclopedia article on grains.
Sources: , Quesnay, Article “Grains” in the Encyclopedia (1757)Google Scholar, reprinted in Oeuvres de Quesnay (Paris: Jules Peelman and Co., 1888), p. 197Google Scholar; Nemours, Dupont de, De I'exportation et de I'importation des grains (1764) (Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner, 1911), p. 10Google Scholar;Turgot, Robert Jacques, “Quatrième lettre sur le commerce des grains,” in Oeuvres de Turgot (Paris: Librairie Guillaumin, 1844), pp. 171–72Google Scholar. None of these authors reveals the source of his price series or cares to indicate whether in fact he ever did observe the association of outputs and prices as described in his table. They all had to prove a point, whether it be the desirability of free trade or that of a national storage program. There is every reason to believe that they followed–or rather preceded–Labrousse in freely associating extreme crops and extreme prices within their experience. We must thank Turgot–an administrator rather than a polemist–for giving us a set of more reasonable figures which exhibit elasticity, at least in the range of less-than-average crops.
14 The long-run trend is computed by Labrousse as a thirteen-year moving average over the six preceding and following years and the year itself. Cf. Esquisse, p. 155.
15 Cf. footnote 13.
16 The hypothesis of a positively sloped demand curve (i.e. bread as an inferior food) cannot be accepted. Of the four output changes associated with price changes in the same direction, three represent variations of only one index unit and one a variation of two index units. In contrast, the output-price correlation is always negative when the output variation is large. Further evidence of negative slope is found in the table of expected revenues at each output level and in the post-Napoleonic data presented later in this article.
17 The revolutionary year 1789 was excluded as representing something more than a random disturbance.
18 In southern France, the corresponding period would be July through June. This difference is reflected in seasonal price movements: compare the wheat chart for Caen with that for Angoulême and Toulouse in Esquisse, p. 161Google Scholar.
19 The scandal and publicity surrounding speculative profits in times of crisis bear an inverse relation to the effectiveness of speculation in equalizing supply over time. The inflationary psychology created by shortages in the spring allowed a swarm of sharp traders to make quick turn-over profits within that period. Profit-seeking storage on a long-run basis appears to have been of very limited scope. On the necessity of creating a national storage program, see , Turgot, “Quatrième lettre sur le commerce des grains,” pp. 171–72Google Scholar.
20 , Labrousse, Esquisse, Graphique xiii, p. 161Google Scholar.
21 Making the extreme assumption that a fixed amount (say 3.5 in index units of Table 1) is consumed out of the new crop in the following five months, and that whatever- is left is consumed (for food and seeding purposes) over the following calendar year, total consumption in each calendar year is equal to the crop of the previous year.
22 Cf. , Labrousse, Esquisse, pp. 122 ffGoogle Scholar.
23 Ibid., pp. 574-97.
24 A certain fraction of the buckwheat, corn, and even bean crop would be incorporated into bread in periods of scarcity. Although Labrousse tends to exaggerate the extent of this substitution, the reader should understand that, in the context of this demand analysis, “bread” is meant to be wheat, rye, or mixed wheat and rye bread.
25 , Labrousse, Esquisse, pp. 212–13, 218–19Google Scholar.
26 “Relevé des rapports sur le produit des récoltes de céréales de 1815 à 1835.” Archives Statistiques du Ministèrs des Travaux Publics, de I'Agriculture et dit Commerce, p. 78Google Scholar.
27 , Labrousse, Esquisse, pp. 262–63Google Scholar.
28 “Prix moyen, département et par mois de l'hectolitre de froment–moyenne pour toute la France.” Archives Statistiques, pp. 17 ffGoogle Scholar.
29 Statistique Générale de la France (1928), p. 133Google Scholar.
30 Chabert, Alexandre, Essai, p. 401Google Scholar.
31 Ibid., p. 230.
32 Ibid., pp. 217, 226.