According to Gladstone, “efflorescence” is intended as the opposite of “crisis” in terms of rethinking economic growth in world history (Gladstone, 323). Whereas crises are defined as “sharp declines in economic well-being” (Gladstone, 325), and characterized as a period in which incomes and trades decline, state authority is challenged or has failed, different religions clash, and other struggles intensify (Gladstone, 323). Such a period can be caused by war, climatic reversals, or the failure of harvests (Gladstone, 325). The main characteristics of “efflorescence’s”, or “anti-crises”, include relatively sharp and usually unanticipated “upturn in significant demographic and economic indices, usually accompanied by political expansion and institution building and cultural synthesis and consolidation” (Gladstone, 333). Furthermore, “efflorescence’s often include both Schumpeterian and Smithian growth, in “a mutually reinforcing fashion.
