If Bourne’s Romance of trade is available the student may prepare an abstract of chap. 1 (the Jews) or chap. 4 (money and credit).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The student will find bibliographies of some of the topics treated in this chapter by consulting the appropriate articles in Palgrave’s Dictionary. Most of the best literature is foreign. The best references in English are to **Ashley and *Cunningham.
The important and difficult subject of the development of capitalistic organization is treated by John A. Hobson, *Evolution of modern capitalism, new ed., 1916, chap. 1, W. Sombart, **The quintessence of capitalism: a study of the history and psychology of the modern business man, London, 1915, and by Pirenne, *The stages in the social history of capitalism, American Hist. Rev., Apr. 1914, 19: 494-515. One aspect of the subject is covered by Arthur H. Woolf, Short history of accountants and accountancy, London, 1912.
CHAPTER XIV
COMMERCE AND POLITICS IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES
138. Development of the modern political system in the later Middle Ages.—Toward the close of the Middle Ages the feudal system of government gave place gradually to a system more like that which the Romans had established and with which we are familiar now. As trade and intercommunication increased, and towns grew up holding a population of considerable wealth, the kings found it possible to make into a reality the position of nominal headship which tradition and the church conferred upon them. They found in the mercantile and manufacturing classes people who could afford to pay taxes, and who were willing to pay large sums to be relieved from the oppressions of the feudal lords. It became possible once more to transport supplies and to send troops to distant localities, and the kings devised means by which they could keep in touch with their officials, and hold them to loyal service. The result was a great increase in the power of the central government, at the expense of the feudal lords.
139. Variety of development in different countries.—The development, as sketched above, was very different in the different countries. It came early in England, and local lords lost practically all of their independence. In France it was a very gradual process, extending over the last four centuries of the Middle Ages. Even in the sixteenth century and later, the kings, though they seemed to enjoy great power, did not abolish all the remnants of feudalism, which continued down to the French Revolution in 1789, to the great harm of industrial development. In Spain the union of the crowns of Castile and Aragon just before 1500 completed the process, by establishing nearly absolute royal authority over the greater part of the peninsula. In Germany and Italy the result was different. The same man, who called himself the Emperor of the Romans, claimed the royal power in both countries, but in attempting too much he lost everything. He wasted the royal resources in vain attempt to establish his authority, and became a mere figure-head. The control of government passed in those countries to local authorities; but it is important to note that these included not only feudal lords, but also cities which had become strong enough to throw off feudal authority and to establish for themselves almost complete independence.
140. Effect on commerce of a strong and of a weak central government.—In a country in which the cities established complete independence they seemed for a time to have gained by throwing off the royal power. Each city could control its affairs and shape its policy to suit local interests; and the great cities of Italy and Germany before the close of the Middle Ages were the most advanced and prosperous parts of Europe. Though they controlled only small areas of land they had great resources from their commerce, and even in war could hold their own with the feudal lords fighting in the old-fashioned way.
They were strong enough to fight a feudal lord; they were not, however, strong enough to fight a modern king. While they were building up their power at the expense of rival cities and at the expense of the country districts, the kings of lands to the west of them were quietly engaged in uniting all the cities and the country districts, too, under one rule. The cities in France and England seemed for a time to lose, because they were forced by the kings to make concessions to each other and to the country districts. When, however, they had become used to consider themselves as only parts of a bigger whole, the nation, they found that their sovereign was far better fitted to represent their interests and further their progress than any one of them was individually. The struggle of the independent cities of Italy and Germany against the national states of England, Spain, and France was not decided until after the discovery of America and the sea-route to Asia, when the national organization proved decisively its superiority to the municipal.
141. Rise of a national commercial policy.—The rise in power of the central government in countries like England and France is proved by the appearance, toward the close of the Middle Ages, of a national commercial policy. The reader will remember that even in these countries the towns were at first so independent that each adopted a commercial policy of its own; as though, nowadays, for instance, Boston and New York and Philadelphia should each have its own independent tariff and set of commercial regulations. A merchant of Dover was a foreigner in Southampton, and if he wanted to collect a debt due him from a Southampton merchant he would appeal, not to the central government and the law of the land, but to the Dover government; and the Dover government would put pressure on the Southampton government, perhaps by arresting any merchant from Southampton and holding his goods, until the debt was paid. About 1300 the English king was at last strong enough to make general regulations in matters like this of the collection of debts, and about the same time he established a national tariff at the ports, as a regular system, and forced the various towns to give up the right to levy what dues they pleased. A similar change took place in France at nearly the same time; the idea grew strong that the general interest of all Frenchmen was superior to the particular interests of any town or individual, and the people of France began to look to the king instead of to the local authorities for protection and control.