A professional academic tends to read a great many books each year. This is expected and necessary in order to keep up with the latest trends and innovations within one's field. However, not all of these books get read cover-to-cover. Some turn out not to meet our expectations; others may contain slightly off-course chapters that we tend to skip or skim. And then there are the rare occasions when a book fully justifies a thorough and critical read. From Oikonomia to Political Economy is one of those books. It is a revised and translated version of Maifreda's L'economia e la scienza: Il rinnovamento della cultura economica tra Cinque e Seicento (2010). The translator, Loretta Valtz Mannucci, has done an excellent job and provides an enjoyable text much to both her and the author's credit. The matter of the book is a much-needed and highly inspirational perspective on precisely how the early modern melting pot of knowledge drew upon different traditions, re-evaluations and innovations, which would later emerge as distinct individual disciplines. While the recent focus on the concept of historia has convincingly demonstrated the close relationship between early modern humanism and natural philosophy, economic thoughts have only rarely been connected with, and contextualized within, the rise of experimental and empirical knowledge. This book makes a strong argument that that has been a mistake.

The history of economic thought has always struggled with a reputation of historical antiquarianism. More than a decade ago, the late professor of economics Mark Blaug strongly defended the teaching of the history of economic thought to students of modern economics. He argued, through the use of Richard Rorty's terminology, that it was necessary to distinguish between the ‘rational reconstructions’ and the ‘historical reconstructions’ of historians of economic thought. To historians of science, this is identical to the distinction between the anachronical and the diachronical view, as expressed by Helge Kragh some decades ago in his seminal introduction to the historiography of science. Maifreda's book is a persuasive work of historical reconstruction which links the ‘pre-Adamite’ thoughts and ideas about oikonomia with natural philosophy, European overseas expansions and humanist ideals. By following these three processes throughout the early modern period, Maifreda argues that it ‘was not the great merchants and bankers alone who transformed the system of production and distribution: teachers, lawyers, doctors, notaries, scientists, intellectuals, artisans and specialized workers all contributed as well’ (p. 13).

Mafreda constructs his argument in seven interconnected chapters, dissecting his three historic processes by looking at the concept of value within different contexts. Although not explicitly a book about the historical conceptions of value, this is the focal point to which the book regularly returns. By whom and how was value discussed? Where did these discussions take place, and how did they influence other discussions such as ‘just-price’ considerations, early modern thoughts on supply and demand, and the valuation of work? Concurrently, Maifreda demonstrates how these discussions played into more systematic discussions in academia, where ideas about oikonomia as the proper government of a household were slowly accompanied by a ‘numeric economic usage’ (p. 187) as a quantitative branch of knowledge. Keenly aware of the multifaceted meanings of both oikonomia and economia, the author does not intend to construct a definitive history, but produces instead a much-needed perspective which adds to our understanding of the practical uses of early modern science and economy, as well as the philosophical motivations behind them.

The book is well structured and once the reader reaches Chapter 6, which deals with ‘The economic system[s]’, he or she is fully equipped to follow the transition and transformation from oikonomia to political economy. While this may sound like a case of rational reconstruction, it is most certainly not. Maifreda displays a very broad understanding of diverse fields and demonstrates a strong eye for parallel knowledge processes. He argues that political economy was based on a foundation from many different conceptions of economy: one rational ‘scientific’ form of knowledge; one theological (and not just moral) form; and the fusion of the two, which found a place in the physiocratic thoughts on the animal economy described especially by François Quesnay.

In the closing chapters, Maifreda concludes his processes and presents the emerging systematic views of the nature of economy where William Petty's methodology in particular stands out as a prime example of an idea that drew upon a multitude of knowledge traditions. In the words of the author himself,

Perhaps we already suspected as much, but Maifreda provides a convincing account of why those suspicions might be right.

While not explicitly a book on the history of science, From Oikonomia to Political Economy ought to be read by historians of early modern science. One of the primary affirmations of the past two decades is just how important it is not to study early modern science as separated from other kinds of knowledge production. This book provides an insightful argument as to how money and economy also had a place in the fortunes and failures of natural philosophy and natural history.