Road transport productivity in the sixteenth‐century Low Countries: the case of Brabant, 1450–1650†

Abstract

Though there is a consensus that transport plays a central role in economic development, for the period before the eighteenth century there is a lack of strategic information for assessing the importance of road transport productivity changes in economic development. Transport prices in particular are crucial missing pieces of the puzzle. Sources rarely reveal information that meets the standards of reliable price history. However, it is possible to create a reliable transport price series on the basis of the transport of millstones to ducal mills in Brabant. Assessing the impact of the ‘transport productivity changes’ that can be inferred from this transport price series is a hazardous exercise. Moreover, as Masschaele has observed, land transport prices closely match general agricultural price trends. Land transport was essentially an agricultural service, determined both by cost (especially horse provender) and income effects. Transport price inflation was not demand‐led. However, while transport did not impede urbanization and economic growth, conversely, in sixteenth‐century Brabant—a highly urbanized region that experienced considerable growth in the volume of land transport—no significant land transport productivity gains were achieved.

The choice of Madrid as the capital of Spain by Philip II in the light of the knowledge of his time: A transport network perspective

“…The results show that maritime-land cost ratios below 1 generate traffic flows inconsistent with the observed road network. This implies that in 16 th century Spain, land transport was in most cases at least as convenient as maritime transport, which is entirely consistent with the results obtained by Munro [ 34 ] and Ballaux and Blondé [ 35 ] for trade between Italy and the Low Countries.…”

“…These results, however, seem to severely overestimate the advantages of coastal cities by focusing on the most favorable conditions for transport by ship whilst forgetting some of its main weaknesses. As Ballaux and Blondé point out [ 35 ], the lower costs of ship transport did not prevent a significant share of long-distance international trade in the 16th century from being carried out by land rather than by maritime means of transportation.…”

“…On the one hand, no city has all the resources it needs, but this problem can be circumvented if it can be easily provided for elsewhere. Linked to this, it is quite usual in many historical works on the subject [ 31 – 33 ] to underestimate the advantages of inland cities considering ship transport as much better than land transportation [ 34 , 35 ]. On the other hand, the logistical benefits of cities from a network perspective are not considered since this would require a reliable reconstruction of the existing road network in the 16 th century, something not achieved to date.…”