The large exogenous shock to labor and capital markets, aggregate demand, the distribution of expenditures, and the rate and direction of technological innovation that war often causes can lead to substantial changes in the allocation of resources. Empirical evidence reveals a significant misallocation of resources during the American Civil War, as a result of reduced geographical mobility, greater incentives for individuals with high opportunity cost to switch into the market for military technologies, and decreased financial returns to inventors. However, the rapid economic recovery that ensued after the end of the war suggests that the misallocation was only temporary, not long inhibiting the capacity for future technological progress.

The analysis of markets, courts, and civil litigation on the northeastern frontier of the United States provides a valuable opportunity to assess the evolution of institutions during economic development. The data set pools longitudinal and cross-sectional observations on 30,000 lawsuits filed in Maine during the critical period between 1700 and 1860. The earliest legal institutions moderated both social and economic norms, but courts quickly began to specialize in commercial issues. The residence of debtors and creditors and changes in spatial characteristics over time yield insights into the nature and extent of capital markets and impersonal exchange. The distribution and disposition of property and debt cases indicate that early markets were well developed and orderly; the evidence of “social tension” between debtors and creditors was minimal. The results do not support the standard claim of a transition from interactions based on community norms to impersonal market exchange late in the eighteenth century.

Contrary to claims that nineteenth-century women did not contribute to inventive activity and that their work was insulated from technological progress, women inventors pursued profit opportunities and distributed patents in much the same way as their male counterparts whose patent rates responded to market incentives. Women in rural and frontier regions were especially inventive. A random sample of assignment contracts indicates that the rate at which women commercialized inventions kept pace with patenting. The evidence indicates that nineteenth-century women were active participants in the market for technology and suggests that the diffusion of household articles may have been more pervasive than previously thought.