Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:22:18.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LATE SPANISH DOCTORS ON USURY, AND THE EVOLVING SCHOLASTIC TRADITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2014

Fabio Monsalve
Fabio Monsalve*
Affiliation:
Professor of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Castilla-La Mancha University. Email: Fabio.Monsalve@uclm.es.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The scholastic intellectual tradition was the dominant scientific paradigm for nearly five centuries in western Europe. That the economic issues of interest to these scholars were similar throughout the period is undisputable, but were the individual views on these issues also similar? This is a pertinent question, upon which an evaluation of the evolution of this intellectual tradition, which often has been considered as monolithic, can be based.

This paper focuses on the analysis of the so-called “natural law case” against usury, and tracks how the lines of intellectual reasoning subtly evolved between early and late scholastics. While the issues, methods, and purposes of scholastic thought remained the same in this period, there also was a systematic evolution within this tradition that makes the essence of the scholastic doctrines conformable to economic realities.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , June 2014 , pp. 215 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aristotle, . 1999a. Nichomachean Ethics. Kitchener: Batoche Books.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1999b. Politics. Kitchener: Batoche Books.Google Scholar
Auxerre, William of. 1500. Summa aurea in quattuor libros Sententiarum. Paris: Philippus Pigouchet impens. Nicolai Vaultier et Durandi Gerlier.Google Scholar
Ceccarelli, Giovanni. 2001. “Risky Business: Theological and Canonical Thought on Insurance from the Thirteenth to the Seventeenth Century.” Journal of Medieval & Early Modern Studies 31 (3): 607.Google Scholar
Clavero, Bartolome. 1984. Usura: del uso económico de la religión en la historia. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
Chafuen, Alejandro Antonio. 2003. Faith and Liberty : The Economic Thought of the Late Scholastics. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1988. Classical Probability in the Enlightenment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Roover, Raymond. 1971. La Pensée Économique des Scolastiques: Doctrines et Méthodes. Montréal: Inst. d’Études Médiévales.Google Scholar
Decock, Wim. 2009. “Lessius and the Breakdown of the Scholastic Paradigm.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 31 (1): 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decock, Wim. 2012. Theologians and Contract Law: The Moral Transformation of the Ius Commune (ca. 1500–1650). Leiden, Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, Bernard W. 1935. “The Historical Emergence of Quantity Theory.” Quaterly Journal of Economics 50: 174–184.Google Scholar
Dempsey, Bernard. 1948. Interest and Usury. London: Dennis Dobson Ltd.Google Scholar
Glaeser, Edward L., and Scheinkman, José. 1998. “Neither a Borrower nor a Lender Be: An Economic Analysis of Interest Restrictions and Usury Laws.” Journal of Law & Economics 41 (1): 1–36.Google Scholar
Gómez Camacho, Francisco. 1981. “Introducción a Luis de Molina, La Teoría del Justo Precio.” In Molina, La Teoría del Justo Precio. Madrid: Editora Nacional, pp. 34–35.Google Scholar
Gómez Camacho, Francisco. 1998. “Later Scholastics: Spanish Economic Thought in the XVIth and XVIIth Centuries.” In Lowry, T. and Gordon, B., eds., Ancient and Medieval Economic Ideas and Concepts of Social Justice. Leiden: E.J. Brill, pp. 503–560.Google Scholar
Gómez Camacho, Francisco. 2005. “Treatise on Money by Luis de Molina: Introduction and Text.” Journal of Markets and Morality 8 (1): 167–198.Google Scholar
Gordon, Barry J. 1975. Economic Analysis before Adam Smith: Hesiod to Lessius. New York: Barnes & Noble Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koyama, Mark. 2010. “Evading the ‘Taint of Usury’: The Usury Prohibition as a Barrier to Entry.” Explorations in Economic History 47 (4): 420–442.Google Scholar
Langholm, Odd Inge. 1984. The Aristotelian Analysis of Usury. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Langholm, Odd Inge. 1992. Economics in the Medieval Schools: Wealth, Exchange, Value, Money, and Usury according to the Paris Theological Tradition, 1200–1350. Leiden, New York: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Langholm, Odd Inge. 1998. The Legacy of Scholasticism in Economic Thought: Antecedents of Choice and Power. Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapidus, André. 1991. “Information and Risk in the Medieval Doctrine of Usury during the Thirteenth Century.” In Barber, W. J., ed., Perspectives on the History of Economic Thought. London: Edward Elgar, pp. 23–38.Google Scholar
Lapidus, André. 1994. “Norm, Virtue and Information: The Just Price and Individual Behavior in Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 1 (3): 435–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lessius, Leonardus. 1605. De iustitia et iure. Louanii: Ex officina Ioannis Masij, Typ. Iur.Google Scholar
Lugo, Juan de. [1642] 1848. De Iustitia et Iure. In Vivés, L., ed., Disputationes Scholasticae et Morales. Lyon: Vivés.Google Scholar
Molina, Luis de. [1597] 1989. Tratado Sobre los Préstamos y la Usura. Madrid: ICI, Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.Google Scholar
Monsalve, Fabio. 2002. “El pensamiento económico de Juan de Lugo. Un estudio sobre sus teorías del precio justo, del dinero y del interés. PhD diss., Universidad de Castilla-la Mancha, Albacete.Google Scholar
Monsalve, Fabio. 2010. “Economics and Ethics: Juan de Lugo’s Theory of the Just Price, or the Responsibility of Living in Society.” History of Political Economy 42 (3): 495–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monsalve, Fabio. 2012. “Scholastic Just Price versus Current Market Price: Is it Merely a Matter of Labelling?” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought: 1–17. DOI:10.1080/09672567.2012.683019.Google Scholar
Monsalve, Fabio, and Dejuán, Oscar. 2006. “Juan de Lugo y la Libertad en Economía: El Análisis Económico Escolástico en Transición.” Procesos de Mercado 3 (2): 217–244.Google Scholar
Nelson, Benjamin. 1969. The Idea of Usury, from Tribal Brotherhood to Universal Otherhood. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Noonan, John Thomas. 1957. The Scholastic Analysis of Usury. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reed, Clyde G., and Bekar, Cliff T.. 2003. “Religious Prohibitions against Usury.” Explorations in Economic History 40 (4): 347.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph Alois. 1994. History of Economic Analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thomas Aquinas, St. [1270] 1947. “Summa theologica.” New York: Benziger Bros.Google Scholar
Van Houdt, T. 1998. “‘Lack of Money’: A Reappraisal of Lessius’ Contribution to the Scholastic Analysis of Money-lending and Interest-taking.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 5 (1): 1–35.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1978. “Religious Thought and Economic Society: Four Chapters of an Unfinished Work.” History of Political Economy 10 (1): 1–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Diane. 2002. Medieval Economic Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar