International regimes,transactions,and change 385 mately,they lead back to my depiction of international authority as reflect- ing a fusion of power and legitimate social purpose.An historical illustration of this interpretation of the"'structure''of international authority therefore serves as my point of departure. 1.The structure of international authority Karl Polanyi's magisterial work,The Great Transformation,was first published in 1944.In it,he developed a distinction between "embedded'' and "'disembedded''economic orders:"normally,the economic order is merely a function of the social,in which it is contained.Under neither tribal, nor feudal,nor mercantile conditions was there,as we have shown,a sepa- rate economic system in society.Nineteenth century society,in which eco- nomic activity was isolated and imputed to a distinctive economic motive, was,indeed,a singular departure.''16 The best known international forms taken by this"'singular departure''were,of course,the regimes of free trade and the gold standard.What were their bases? The internationalization of domestic authority relations Charles Kindleberger,who is justly accorded a leading role in having established the efficacy of the "hegemonic stability''model in his book on the Great Depression,17 subsequently managed to write an account of the rise of free trade in western Europe without even mentioning British eco- nomic supremacy as a possible source of explanation.18 He focused instead on a fundamental reordering of the relationships between domestic political authority and economic processes.Free trade,he reminds us,was due first of all to the general breakdown of the manor and guild system and the so-called policy of supply,through which a complex structure of social regulations rather than market exchange determined the organization of economic activity at home and abroad.Indeed,the earliest measures under- taken in order to free trade were to dismantle prohibitions on exports,pro- hibitions that had restricted the outward movement of materials,machinery, and artisans.The bulk of these prohibitions was not removed until well into the 1820s and 1830s,and in some instances even later.A second part of the stimulus"'came from the direct self-interest of particular dominant groups. Boston:Beacon Press,1944,p.71.The historical claims are backed up in Polanyi et al., eds.,Trade and Markets in the Early Empires (Glencoe,Ill.:Free Press,1957). 17 Charles P.Kindleberger,The World in Depression,1929-1939 (Berkeley:University of California Press,1973),esp.chaps.1 and 14. 1s"The Rise of Free Trade in Western Europe,1820-1875,"Journal of Economic History 35 (March1975):20-55.International regimes, transactions, and change 385 mately, they lead back to my depiction of international authority as reflect￾ing a fusion of power and legitimate social purpose. An historical illustration of this interpretation of the "structure" of international authority therefore serves as my point of departure. 1. The structure of international authority Karl Polanyi's magisterial work, The Great Transformation, was first published in 1944. In it, he developed a distinction between "embedded" and "disembedded" economic orders: "normally, the economic order is merely a function of the social, in which it is contained. Under neither tribal, nor feudal, nor mercantile conditions was there, as we have shown, a sepa￾rate economic system in society. Nineteenth century society, in which eco￾nomic activity was isolated and imputed to a distinctive economic motive, was, indeed, a singular departure."16 The best known international forms taken by this "singular departure" were, of course, the regimes of free trade and the gold standard. What were their bases? The internationalization of domestic authority relations Charles Kindleberger, who is justly accorded a leading role in having established the efficacy of the "hegemonic stability" model in his book on the Great Depression,I7 subsequently managed to write an account of the rise of free trade in western Europe without even mentioning British eco￾nomic supremacy as a possible source of explanation.ls He focused instead on a fundamental reordering of the relationships between domestic political authority and economic processes. Free trade, he reminds us, was due first of all to the general breakdown of the manor and guild system and the so-called policy of supply, through which a complex structure of social regulations rather than market exchange determined the organization of economic activity at home and abroad. Indeed, the earliest measures under￾taken in order to free trade were to dismantle prohibitions on exports, pro￾hibitions that had restricted the outward movement of materials, machinery, and artisans. The bulk of these prohibitions was not removed until well into the 1820s and 1830s, and in some instances even later. A second part of the stimulus "came from the direct self-interest of particular dominant groups. l6 Boston: Beacon Press, 1944, p. 71. The historical claims are backed up in Polanyi et al., eds., Trade and Markets in the Early Empires (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1957). l7 Charles P. Kindleberger, The World in Depression, 1929-1939 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), esp. chaps. 1 and 14. l8 "The Rise of Free Trade in Western Europe, 1820-1875," Journal of Economic History 35 (March 1975): 20-55