The Rise of Commercial Empires is a big book. The focus lies in detailing how England's “increasingly coherent mercantilist objectives succeeded in undermining Dutch commercial hegemony, in ways which contributed to the restructuring of the North Sea staplemarket system” (p. xiii). In order to document this assertion, the book is divided into three separate parts. It opens with a discussion of the nature of markets. In the main, the focus here lies not with classical or neoclassical exchange but rather with a consideration of a Wallerstein world systems view contrasted to a more regionally oriented Braudellian approach. The difference in construct between an exchange dominated in the main by rules of mutual gain and that of an exchange dominated by inequality in power creates an underlying tension that emerges throughout the book.

The central body of the book examines particular English–Dutch trades. These are the woolen, linen, grain, coal and energy trade, and the re-export trade. Each of these trades is discussed in great detail wherein David Ormond looks at the nature of the trade in England and in the Netherlands. He examines the role played by the various pieces of legislation passed, the role of war and the role of peace. In each case, he also examines the nature of the commercial organization of the particular trade. Undoubtedly, it is very difficult to provide both an extensive survey and a synthesis of a huge body of work in the space of a single chapter. But each of these chapters provides a good starting point for anyone interested in any one of these trades. At the same time, each of these chapters raises many questions that could be the basis of further research. One question that seems to emerge in each of the commodity-based trades has to do with the nature of technology transfer; when, where and how does it occur. Dr. Ormond documents clearly that these are integrated regional trades but also describes situations where technology differs.

The final section tries to come to grips with the forces generating English expansion and Dutch decline. The main foci here are the roles of war and of protection. Undoubtedly some number of the changes that occur both at the sectoral level and at the national level are the result of the wars that occurred during the time period. These wars had an effect both by closing down regions to trade and also by increasing the costs of trade as a result of the higher levels of protection needed. The point being made in the various chapters is that war affected England and The Netherlands differentially and Ormond discusses how each of the trades responded to these shocks.

There is also an extensive discussion of the various Navigation Acts as they applied to each of the linens, grain, coal, and woolen trades. Here Ormond tends to take the various pieces of legislation as given, in the sense that there is little by way of a political-economy discussion. He then examines how the trades in both England and the Dutch economy were affected. In some ways, this is perhaps too big a topic for a mere chapter, but it does provide anyone interested in the subject with a very thorough overview. More problematic is the issue of the Navigation Acts themselves and their impact on overall economic growth Ormand talks about these acts as a national economic development strategy, where “[M]ercantilist practice was clear in distinguishing beneficial from damaging trades, and in discerning manufacturing interests worthy of protection from those less deserving” (p. 321). Any government's ability to do this must surely be questioned. Such a discussion of the political-economy dimension is missing.

There is also an underlying tension in the book between an argument that would suggest a loss of leadership by the Dutch or a situation of economic decline. Are we looking at a relative or an absolute change? It is never clear which position is being taken by Ormond. The impact of this is to leave the reader somewhat uncertain and perhaps even at times a little confused as to the exact story being told. This matters because the underlying question is whether there was a loss of leadership on the part of the Dutch economy or whether there was an overall loss of competitiveness. Of course, these two issues are related. But as we have seen over the longer sweep of history with British dominance in the nineteenth century and American economic dominance in the twentieth, relative position can change without an absolute decline in the economy formerly in first place.