Failed Arbitrations before the Court of Common Pleas: Cases Relating to London and Londoners, 1400–1468

Stevens, Matthew

doi:10.1080/01440361003633353

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Queen's University Belfast1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2011

2017

Publication Types

Select...

Article3

Book1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this analysis, usury prohibitions persisted because they created monopoly rents for the Church, secular rulers, and merchant‐bankers. Stevens analyses the use of arbitration by mercantile and sub‐gentry disputants in the fifteenth‐century Court of Common Pleas, and notes that its use declined between 1400 and 1468. Frankot examines the varied forms of maritime law used in late medieval Aberdeen.…”

Section: Queen's University Belfastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of periodical literature published in 2010

Faith

Davis

Healey

et al. 2011

The Economic History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Queen's University Belfastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of periodical literature published in 2010

Faith

Davis

Healey

et al. 2011

The Economic History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Changes in the Late Medieval Period

Rose¹

2017

Maintenance in Medieval England

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

London creditors and the fifteenth‐century depression

Stevens

2016

The Economic History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence of debts owed to Londoners, and contested before the royal Court of Common Pleas, allows an examination of the role of London creditors in the English depression of the fifteenth century and a reassessment of its causes. In this article, four main issues are examined. What is the nature of the Court of Common Pleas evidence (section I)? What were the three main forms of credit offered by Londoners—unsecured cash loans, sales of goods on credit, and written instruments called bonds (section II)? What is yielded by decadal analysis of Londoners’ extension of credit in the fifteenth century—making direct comparisons with Nightingale's published Statute Merchant and Staple data (section III)? What defines, in modern economic terms, the claim of so‐called ‘monetarist’ historians that credit was actively withdrawn during the depression, and how is this verified by the actions of London creditors (section IV)? It is concluded that the records of the Court of Common Pleas provide the detailed evidence monetarist historians have previously lacked both to prove that Londoners actively withdrew credit during the fifteenth century and to demonstrate that they employed pure equilibrium credit rationing in order to do so.

show abstract

Failed Arbitrations before the Court of Common Pleas: Cases Relating to London and Londoners, 1400–1468

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Review of periodical literature published in 2010

Review of periodical literature published in 2010

Changes in the Late Medieval Period

London creditors and the fifteenth‐century depression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About