Why Italy and not Spain?: comparing two industrialization processes from a dissagregate time-series perspective

This study presents new evidence concerning the uneven processes of industrialization innineteenth century Spain and Italy based on a disaggregate analysis of the productivesectors from which the behaviour of the aggregate indices is comprised. The use of multivariate time-series analysis techniques can aid our understanding and characterization of these two processes of industrialization. The identification of those sectors with key rolesin leading industrial growth provides new evidence concerning the factors that governed thebehaviour of the aggregates in the two economies. In addition, the analysis of the existenceof interindustry linkages reveals the scale of the industrialization process, and wheresignificant differences exist, accounts for many of the divergences recorded in the historiography for the period 1850-1913.

A comparison of the processes of institutionalisation of political economy in Spain and Italy (1860-1900)

[spa] El estudio de los procesos a través de los cuales la economía política se ha transformado en una disciplina académica es un área de creciente interés en la historia del pensamiento económico. Dicho estudio se ha abordado a través del análisis de la importancia de la economía política en un conjunto de instituciones, consideradas clave en la expansión de la economía en las sociedades occidentales en la segunda mitad del siglo XIX y primeras décadas del XX: universidades, sociedades económicas, publicaciones periódicas de contenido económico y los parlamentos nacionales. Este papel presenta una comparación entre los desarrollos del proceso de institutionalización de la economía política en España e Italia, a través del estudio de la presencia de esta disciplina en las instituciones mencionadas para el periodo 1860-1900. El objetivo es medir la posible existencia de una vía común en la institucionalización de la economía política en ambos países, como un primer paso hacia la elaboración de un modelo supranacional de institucionalización de la economía en este periodo.

Why Italy and not Spain?: comparing two industrialization processes from a dissagregate time-series perspective

This study presents new evidence concerning the uneven processes of industrialization innineteenth century Spain and Italy based on a disaggregate analysis of the productivesectors from which the behaviour of the aggregate indices is comprised. The use of multivariate time-series analysis techniques can aid our understanding and characterization of these two processes of industrialization. The identification of those sectors with key rolesin leading industrial growth provides new evidence concerning the factors that governed thebehaviour of the aggregates in the two economies. In addition, the analysis of the existenceof interindustry linkages reveals the scale of the industrialization process, and wheresignificant differences exist, accounts for many of the divergences recorded in the historiography for the period 1850-1913.

Regional income inequality in Italy in the long run (1871–2001). Patterns and determinants

The chapter presents up-to-date estimates of Italy’s regional GDP, with the present borders, in ten-year benchmarks from 1871 to 2001, and proposes a new interpretative hypothesis based on long-lasting socio-institutional differences. The inverted U-shape of income inequality is confirmed: rising divergence until the midtwentieth century, then convergence. However, the latter was limited to the centrenorth: Italy was divided into three parts by the time regional inequality peaked, in 1951, and appears to have been split into two halves by 2001. As a consequence of the falling back of the south, from 1871 to 2001 we record σ-divergence across Italy’s regions, i.e. an increase in dispersion, and sluggish β-convergence. Geographical factors and the market size played a minor role: against them are both the evidence that most of the differences in GDP are due to employment rather than to productivity and the observed GDP patterns of many regions. The gradual converging of regional GDPs towards two equilibria instead follows social and institutional differences − in the political and economic institutions and in the levels of human and social capital – which originated in pre-unification states and did not die (but in part even increased) in postunification Italy.

Antonio Agustín, Bologna e l’antiquaria del Cinquecento

One of the founders of numismatics in Modern Age was the archbishop of Tarragona and renowned jurist Antonio Agustín. He was educated during the mid-sixteenth century mainly in Italy, particularly in Bologna and Padua. His role in the development of antiquarian studies – and interest in collecting – ran parallel to the development of numismatics in the Cinquecento. His interest in realia , i.e., the materials and documents perceived as primary evidence of history understood in a global sense, make him a pioneer in setting the trends and methodologies which would be later employed by Bernard de Montfaucon. The period Antonio Agustín spent in Bologna, at the Reale Collegio di Spagna, between 1539 and 1544, afforded him the opportunity to enter a very cultivated circle where the admiration and study of the Antique was well established since the mid-fifteenth century. The cultural effervescence taking place in Bologna was encouraged by the court of Giovanni II Bentivoglio and the University alike. Artists also contributed to the development of antiquarian knowledge, and the painter Amico Aspertini (ca. 1475-1552) exemplifies this. It is clear that Antonio Agustín certainly benefited from the scholarly environment in Bologna during the first half of the Cinquecento, which had been firmly anchored since the fertile Quattrocento. Although the documentary evidence is scarce, and it is difficult to pinpoint the details, it is undeniable that Antonio Agustín was heavily influenced by his Bolognese experience.