Response to Edwards and Ogilvie

James Foreman‐Peck and Peng Zhou
Authors registered in the RePEc Author Service: James S. Foreman-Peck

Economic History Review, 2019, vol. 72, issue 4, 1447-1450

Abstract: Our article on ‘Late marriage as a contributor to the industrial revolution in England’ is intended to show that the evidence is consistent with the European marriage pattern being a major influence on long‐run English economic development, through the accumulation of human capital, broadly defined. Edwards and Ogilvie assert that our approach is inadequate because, they claim, we consider neither other influences on English industrialization, such as non‐familial institutions, nor other European economies where marriage age was high throughout the early modern period but where industrialization came later. We do allow for other influences on English industrialization in our model, and the observation that some late industrializers had later marriage than England does not refute our contention, which we test appropriately by simulating the model.

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.12819

Related works:
Working Paper: Response to Edwards and Ogilvie (2019)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ehsrev:v:72:y:2019:i:4:p:1447-1450

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0013-0117

Access Statistics for this article

Economic History Review is currently edited by Stephen Broadberry

More articles in Economic History Review from Economic History Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().