Abstract
The history of economic thought was arguably the most Eurocentric and Modernocentric subfield of economics. Most primers and readers in the English language used to deal with early modern Europe to the exclusion of other regions. The purpose of this research note is therefore to tentatively revisit famous and lesser-known thinkers across Eurasia, by way of encouraging more inclusive comprehensive accounts of economic thought in pre-modern and early modern times. The issues covered will be mercantile policy; usury and interest rates; taxation; and finally and most importantly monetary thought. The conclusions show that monetary nominalism was pervasive around the world; and that Islamic thinkers were the least anti-mercantile.
Highlights
The history of economic thought was arguably the most Eurocentric and Modernocentric subfield of economics
That China and India for example were the hotbed of profound economic thinking was considered inherently separate rather than of comparative value (Hu, rep. 2009; Dasgupta, 2002)
The provisional findings are that, firstly, economic activity in China was perceived in its interaction with the state
Summary
The history of economic thought was arguably the most Eurocentric and Modernocentric subfield of economics. This is surprising given that luminaries like Geert Hofstede (1928-2020) or Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) stressed the significance of culture and language to the emergence of differing economic ideas The conclusions will discuss the differences and similarities found across Eurasia so as to show the value of more global outlook
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
