In a little over a week I will be giving a webinar with the Centre for Quantitative History at HKU. The topic will be centered on ancient history and the political economy of violence for those who are interested.
Takeaway: this is a rare case of a state successfully overcoming the information problem Scott identified. Not by imposing legibility top-down, but by delegating to local experts with the right incentives. Link: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti... (12/12)
This method reduced search and measurement costs for incoming settlers who couldn't identify good land themselves. From 1607–1700, 5k sq miles were surveyed and settled. In the 18th century alone, 45k+ sq miles were added. The surveyor-as-speculator model worked.(11/12)
Thomas Lewis (Augusta County surveyor, 1745–1777) acquired 4,160 acres for himself. More than 11x the county average! and they sold. William Preston bought 799 acres at age 20 and flipped it for a 600% profit.(10/12)
Did surveyors actually pick good land? Yes! Using georeferenced maps of land tracts and the caloric suitability, we show that tracts acquired by George Washington, Peter Jefferson, and William Cabell were all more calorically productive than the surrounding area.(9/12)
Regressions show that grants were significantly larger when awarded to that county's own surveyor, and when the grant was located in a frontier county. Frontier surveyors received far more total acres and more grants than their eastern counterparts.(8/12)
The data: we compiled all Council grants to 18th-century Virginia surveyors from the Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia. 103 surveyors, 131 grants.(7/12)
This is a James C. Scott story in reverse. Scott shows how states fail when they ignore local knowledge (metis̄). Virginia succeeded because it harnessed local knowledge by empowering local experts rather than sending distant bureaucrats with grand plans.(6/12)
The colonial government's solution: assign property rights on the western frontier directly to surveyors. By letting surveyors accumulate large landholdings, the government effectively turned them into land speculators with skin in the game.(5/12)
Surveyors had a massive comparative advantage. They were required by law to reside in their county, they surveyed every land claim, and they maintained the official record books. Nobody in the colony knew unclaimed land better than the county surveyor.(4/12)
The answer: Virginia's colonial government needed to expand westward, but settlers were reluctant to claim unknown frontier land. They didn't know where the fertile tracts were or where it was safe to settle. Transaction costs were ever large for a would-be western settler.(3/12)
The puzzle: surveyors in neighboring colonies never came close in wealth or political influence. Even technically superior English surveyors didn't match their wealth. What was special about Virginia and their surveyors? (2/12)
New paper in European Economic Review: "Seeing Like a Colony: The Virginia Land Surveyor". Why were colonial Virginia surveyors among the wealthiest people in the New World, rivaling plantation owners and legislators? Peter Hazlett and I looked to investigate just that 🧵 (1/12)
Was thrilled to write this for @broadstreetblog.bsky.social (which I recommend for anyone interested in historical political economy)
www.broadstreet.blog/p/blood-and-...
Thanks to everyone who has given comments on this paper through the years!
In addition to this, I look at the late 20th century and find results that are suggestive that there may be less persistence than assumed in the long-run. (6/6)
My argument is that imperial institutions are driving part of the effect. Lower level institutional shocks (Catholicism) are interacting with the higher level imperial institutions, leading to heterogenous effects. (5/6)
Why the difference? If we look at education, the human capital argument might be an answer. But I theorize it might be due to different imperial institutions.
Historical work points towards the French being more diplomatic in their relations, and the Spanish more coercive(4/6)
I found that tribes historically treated by the Spanish had lower incomes in the early 20th century relative to non-treated in the southwest. Tribes historically treated by the French had higher incomes. (3/6)
Using census and historical mission data, I look at whether the French and Spanish had different impacts on long-term income for Indigenous in America (2/6)
🚨New Working Paper 🚨
Did Catholic missions have an impact on American Indigenous communities? Were the effects different depending on the origin of the missionaries? These are things I examine in this paper: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... (1/6)
Some personal/professional news: I am excited to be joining the Economics Department @upenn.bsky.social and the Penn Initiative for the Study of Markets as a Postdoc in Fall 2025!
The paperwork has been filed and I am happy to announce that my dissertation has been successfully defended! Thankful to my fantastic advisor @markkoyama.bsky.social and amazing committee @jonathanschulz.bsky.social @vincentgeloso.bsky.social @ndjohnson.bsky.social
Very interesting! Congrats!
Thanks for the kind word on the paper! We’ve been fortunate enough to present an earlier draft at a classicist conference, but I would be interested in how the paper is generally received by them
"Democracies don't go to war", they say.
Tell that to Athens & Syracuse.
Super cool analysis of ancient Greek city-states suggests that democracies actually fought more battles!
cc @economeager.bsky.social & @patrickwyman.bsky.social www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Thanks!
This paper is now out in JEBO! www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Co-authored with @vincentgeloso.bsky.social and @jrhall1066.bsky.social
