Response to ‘Duplications’ by Drelichman and Voth
本文回应德雷利赫曼和沃斯2015年的批评，澄清作者2014年关于腓力二世财政政策的论点，并指出对方误解和错误，同时总结当前文献中的立场并评论数据收集。
In this response, we demonstrate that Mauricio Drelichman and Hans‐Joachim Voth, in their 2015 Economic History Review note ‘Duplication without constraints: Álvarez‐Nogal and Chamley's analysis of debt policy under Philip II’, provide a misconceived and inaccurate account of our argument about the finances of Philip II in ‘Debt policy under constraints: Philip II, the Cortes, and Genoese bankers’ ( Economic History Review , 2014). Here, we summarize our position in the context of the current literature and provide a few comments on data gathering.