The Sociability of Credit and Commerce

Abstract

By the late sixteenth century the scale and complexity of credit relationships and networks was of such great social and economic significance that it attracted much cultural attention. As the amount of credit increased, household wealth became entangled in interpersonal economic obligations, and these came to be interpreted in terms of sociability. Changing financial circumstances, greater spending, poor bookkeeping, competing obligations and hospitality all made it difficult to pay debts on time. This made trust more problematic, and as a result much was written about the moral factors involved in such communication and obligation, especially the ethics of cooperation within the marketing structures of the period. Individual profit and security were important, but neither could be achieved without the direct cooperation of one’s neighbours, or those one traded with, because of the importance of trust.

We be borne not for our selves alone … all to the use of man is created … that may serve for common commodities, by enterchaunge of duties in giving, and taking: and also by arts, by travail, by riches, to knitte the felowship of man with man.

Faithfulnesse is the foundation of justice: which is in worde, and covenaunt, a trouth, and stedfastnesse.

(Cicero, De Officiis, trans. by Nicholas Grimalde, 1558)¹

Every man is to his neyhbour a debtor, not onely of that which himselfe borroweth, but of whatsoever his neyghbour needeth.

(John Blaxton, The English Usurer, 1634)²