During his visit to Denmark in 1964, someone asked Chairman Khrushchev why agriculture in his socialist homeland lagged so far behind agriculture of capitalistic societies. condition of agriculture, he replied, doesn't depend on social system. It depends on manure. That was Khrushchev on defensive, calling on his peasant background to claim that retardation of Soviet agriculture was result of deficiencies in its techniques rather than of inhibitive effects of communistic social order. Professor Confino tells this anecdote in his book in order to express his disagreement with Khrushchev's opinion. The level of agricultural technology, he maintains, depends in large measure on the social structure, on social organization of production, on social cleavage, on economic tonality and orientation, all of which are in turn determined by social (p. 15). Mr. Confino's point of view is, of course, not remarkable among students of these matters. The book he has written, however, is remarkable. He shows a sensitivity, a philosophical bent, and a literary style rare among historians-at least among historians of economic matters. He employs intuition and imaginative insights based upon solid historical fact. He is resolved to penetrate into what he calls mentality of people about whom he writes; indeed, his book could well be described as a study in psychological history. In an earlier book (which contained these same admirable qualities), Mr. Confino explained his method-and mission-with these words: To seek out underlying unity of social and intellectual life, to grasp 'sense' of existence of men at a given time and place, one must turn to realities, to material structures and conjunctures, to 'climates of sensibilities,' and to importance that these ideas and beliefs had for these men.2 Mr. Confino divides his book into three parts. In first section he establishes predominance of three-field system of tillage in older regions of settlement (the provinces of center and of northern tier of Black Earth). He argues convincingly that this method of tillage had an affinity for poor soil and, because of its inherent inefficiency, favored cultivation of rye and oats rather than of higher-yielding but harder-to-raise wheat and barley. The three-field method of rotation was characterized, too, by certain social institutions notably, large villages and collective servitudes -which allowed rights of pasture on common and fallow to peasants. In second part of book he discusses dissatisfaction of a few landowners and agronomists with existing farming practices, particularly