VII

Martin Giraudeau saw weaknesses in the history of agricultural accounting, which he explained by the idea of ‘a scholarship enclosure’, that is a general historiographical bias in the study of agriculture: ‘whatever happened in the rural areas was generally understood as a side effect of changes, or even of “revolutions”, initiated elsewhere’.1 Martin Giraudeau, ‘The farm as an accounting laboratory: An essay on the history of accounting and agriculture’, Accounting History Review 27 (2017), p. 201. This volume has nuanced this viewpoint, by showing that agriculturalists were very active in preparing for their own revolutions. The role of agricultural elites in promoting accounting practices among a vast rural population, in spreading a calculative mentality not only among agricultural businesses but also within agricultural families, is a remarkable achievement. It was made possible by the structure of incentives and obligations that farmers experienced when they pondered the decision to keep more or less formalised accounts: the intersection between farm and family, the special managerial needs that derived from animals, plants, and soil. At the same time, it is important not to forget that agriculture cannot be considered in isolation. Banking regulations, tax laws, business models, and economic policies cut across all economic sectors creating similar constraints and shared practices.