Search results

After some introductory words about the preeminence of German accounting research during the first half of the 20th century, the paper offers a survey of the most important theories of accounts classes that still prevailed during the first two decades or longer. Following World War I, the issue of hyperinflation in Austria and Germany stimulated a considerable amount of original accounting research. After the inflationary period, a series of competing Bilanztheorien, discussed in the text, dominated the scene. Two figures emerged supremely from this struggle. The first was Eugen Schmalenbach, with his “dynamic accounting”, a series of further important contributions to inflation accounting, to the master chart of accounts, to cost accounting, and to other areas of business economics. The other scholar was Fritz Schmidt, with his organic accounting theory that promoted replacement values and his emphasis on the profit and loss account, no less than the balance sheet. The gamut of further eminent personalities, listed in chronological order, contains the following names: Schär, Penndorf, Leitner, Gomberg, Nicklisch, Rieger, Prion, Osbahr, Passow, Dörfel, Sganzini, Walb, Calmes, Kalveram, Meithner, Lion, Töndury, Mahlberg, le Coutre, Geldmacher, Max Lehmann, Leopold Mayer, Karl Seidel, Alfred Isaac, Mellerowicz, Seyffert, Beste, Gutenberg, Käfer, Seischab, Kosiol, Münstermann, and others. Separate Sections or Sub‐Sections are devoted to charts and master charts of accounts in German accounting theory, as well as to cost accounting and the writing of accounting history.

This paper offers a general survey of accounting literature in the French language area of the first half of the 20th century: After a general Introduction, referring mainly to renowned French authors of past centuries, it deals first with historical accounting research (Dupont, de Roover, Gomberg, Vlaemminck, etc). Then come publications in financial accounting theory and its application (Faure, Dumarchey, Delaporte, Penglaou, de Fages de Latour, etc.), followed by a section on cost accounting and managerial control (Julhiet, de Fage de Latour, Detoeuf, Satet, Bournisien, Brunei, Sauvegrai, etc.). Alarger Section is devoted to inflationary problems (Delavelle, Raffegeau and Lacout, Bayard, Léger, Faure, Thomas, Bisson, Dumarchey, Durand, Beaupère, Ratier, etc.). Another large section refers to charts of accounts and public supervision (Otlet, Faure, Blairon, Detoeuf, Caujolle, Fourastié, Gabriel, Chardonnet, Gamier, etc.). The paper closes with a concise general conclusion about this period of transition from a mainly traditional agricultural to an industrial society with its costing problems, its organizational control, and its greater service orientation.

The paper offers a survey of major Italian accounting scholars and their work for the period from 1900 to 1950. Apart from the late works of Rossi and Besta, the main focus is on the contributions by Zappa, who undoubtedly dominated the scene. In this period, as well as later, most Italian accountants and “aziendalisti” adopted the so‐called “income system”. Although its premises originated with Fabio Besta, master of the so‐called “patrimonial or proprietorship system”, the Italian School under Zappa gave this system a new theoretical basis that differed fundamentally from that of Besta. Zappa also developed the dynamic aspect of accounting and business economics that still prevails in Italy. The paper also devotes attention to other Italian scholars, less well‐known abroad. In the area of cost accounting it concentrates on the views of De Minico and his disciple Amodeo, but also mentions other contributors. The final Section deals with Italian contributions to accounting history during this period

This paper seeks to offer a survey of accounting publications and research in the French literature from 1950 to the end of the twentieth century.

The methodology is that of literary research, review and critique.

Finds that over the period mentioned different aspects of accounting research have been examined in the literature – academic, social, matrix, events, historical. The leading researchers in these fields are covered in detail.

Succeeds in offering problems the most comprehensive survey to date of the French literature on accounting and related research during the period under review.

In this survey we present (after an Introduction) a guide to the major doctrinal trends of Spanish accounting of the period, classified in various categories: different views of the scientific nature of accounting, dominant theories, purposes of accounting, special areas, views on classification and on the recording of transactions, views on valuation and depreciation, cost accounting, inflationary issues, auditing, accounting terminology, historical concerns, and the practical orientation of publications. A separate section offers further details about prominent Spanish scholars; it is followed by the conclusion. The latter indicates that during the period under investigation, Spanish accountants contributed little to novel accounting thought, but strongly relied on French and Italian doctrines, though neglecting German ideas. Despite of this, Spanish accountants were aware of many theoretical and instrumental novelties of the day, and applied them without substantial delay to their own environment.

The received wisdom on classical accounting thought is that its early stages were methodologically vacuous, while, in its “golden” age, it espoused the methods and philosophical commitments of received-view hypothetico-deductivism but actually remained methodologically incoherent. The purpose of this paper is to argue, to the contrary, that classical accounting thought possesses a coherent constitutional structure that qualifies as a methodology and unifies it as a body of argument.

The paper draws on Cartwright’s metaphysical nomological pluralism, which holds that we should attend to the actual practices of successful inquiry and the methodologies and metaphysical presuppositions that support it.

The paper argues that accounting does achieve disciplinary success and that classical accounting thought, using the methodology of defeasible postulationism, provides the theoretical infrastructure that supports that success. The accounting domain is a world of “dappled realism”, in which theories are useful in the construction of reporting schemes and inform our understanding of the nature of the domain.

Applying metaphysical nomological pluralism rescues classical accounting thought from the charge of methodological incoherence and metaphysical naivety.

The paper justifies a place for classical accounting theorising in the endeavours of modern accounting scholarship and moves the analysis of classical accounting thought within a philosophy of science framework towards an approach with a contemporary resonance.