▁of ▁Econom ic ▁Ind ividual ism , ▁argued ▁against ▁the ▁historical ▁and ▁religious ▁claims ▁of ▁We ber . ▁Robert son ▁points ▁out ▁that ▁capital ism ▁began ▁to ▁fl our ish ▁not ▁in ▁Britain , ▁but ▁in ▁ 1 4 th ▁century ▁Italy , ▁a ▁decided ly ▁different ▁epo ch . ▁Since ▁this ▁is ▁true , ▁then ▁the ▁rise ▁of ▁capital ism ▁cannot ▁be ▁attributed ▁to ▁Adam ▁Smith , ▁the ▁Protest ant ▁Re formation , ▁etc . ▁In ▁fact , ▁Robert son ▁goes ▁further , ▁and ▁states ▁that ▁what ▁happened ▁in ▁Britain ▁was ▁rather ▁a ▁retro gression ▁from ▁what ▁was ▁achieved ▁in ▁Italy ▁centuries ▁earlier . ▁ ▁Looking ▁at ▁the ▁history ▁of ▁the ▁development ▁of ▁economic ▁thought , ▁Robert son ▁shows ▁that ▁Adam ▁Smith ▁and ▁David ▁Ric ardo ▁did ▁not ▁found ▁economic ▁science ▁de ▁nov o . ▁In ▁fact , ▁liberal ▁economic ▁theory ▁was ▁developed ▁by ▁French ▁and ▁Italian ▁C athol ics , ▁who ▁were ▁influenced ▁by ▁the ▁Sch ol ast ics . ▁The ▁British ▁economic ▁thought ▁was ▁rather ▁a ▁step ▁backwards ▁since ▁it ▁esp oused ▁the ▁labor ▁theory ▁of ▁value , ▁which ▁had ▁already ▁been ▁proved ▁incorrect ▁by ▁the ▁School ▁of ▁Sal aman ca . ▁ ▁Other ▁criticism ▁Be cker ▁and ▁W oss mann ▁at ▁the ▁University ▁of ▁Mun ich , ▁showed ▁that ▁liter acy ▁levels ▁differ ing ▁in ▁religious ▁areas ▁can ▁sufficiently ▁explain ▁the ▁economic ▁g aps ▁c ited ▁by ▁We ber . ▁The ▁results ▁were ▁supported ▁even ▁under ▁a ▁concent ric ▁diffusion ▁model ▁of ▁Protest ant ism ▁using ▁distance ▁from ▁W