What if Christianity didn't proscribe the charging of interest?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

How would Europe have developed post-Rome if Christianity didn't forbid Christians charging each other interest on loaned money?
 
Well, while it was technically forbidden, the interdiction wasn't exactly largely enforced, under different names and more or less purposefully complex ways, interests rates did existed, and usury was one of the big financial (if not the biger) element of medieval economy with the XIIth century.

Now, I won't say it wouldn't change anything : heresies may have an harder time getting rooted in urban middle-classes for exemple, or an earlier promotion of craftmanship or "profitable" charity.

But for what matter economy, I'd see relatively little changes, even if some relatively important changes may happen.
It is possible that a lesser economical complexity would allow Arabic numbers to get more widespread ITTL, for exemple.

In order to get the PoD, you'd need a lesser Romanized Christianity : one that doesn't include Aristotelician concepts of money as an "achieved" or "sterile" state, the roman commodatum legal concept (basically things that doesn't rot with time, that remain the same) and more tied up with ancient Scriptures.

How to achieve that is anybody's guess : probably an earlier fall of Rome would do it, but of course butterflies would be impressive.
 

jahenders

Banned
It would definitely impact the evolution of minority Jewish communities in Europe. In many cases, money lending was one of their main earning potentials, so they'd have to find ways to flourish in other trades (which might not be welcomed by the majorities of the time).

If Jews weren't, then, often associated with usury, they might be perceived more positively in many sectors. You wouldn't have things quite like "The Merchant of Venice," which shows a clear disdain for the Jewish moneylenders, a heavy reliance on them economically, and a willingness to subvert justice at their expense.

How would Europe have developed post-Rome if Christianity didn't forbid Christians charging each other interest on loaned money?
 
Bourgeoisie evolves a couple of centuries before OTL and protestantism never develops. No wars of religion in 17th century, something speeds up the development of european nations.
 
It would definitely impact the evolution of minority Jewish communities in Europe. In many cases, money lending was one of their main earning potentials, so they'd have to find ways to flourish in other trades (which might not be welcomed by the majorities of the time).
Actually, their role was mainly exagerated for what matters medieval finance.
You had a Christian usury that was really develloped : lombards or cahorsins, for exemple.

It have to be understood : Christian usurery, loaning, proto-banking was very much a financial reality since the XIIth in spite of whatever the Church could say about it.

Jewish role in economy was real, mostly because we're talking of organised communauties keeping ties with each other, sort of an "international" or more realistically regional network. But they weren't characterised by that (and when they were, it was partially because they served as "front names" for much Christian loaners).

If Jews weren't, then, often associated with usury, they might be perceived more positively in many sectors.
I'm not sure : Jewish communauties were "stuck" socially from the XIIIth century onwards (not systematically tough), but they didn't beneficied from a positive image before when they were, for exemple, renewed winemakers in some regions.
 
Last edited:
I can imagine that theologically, in a Christiannity that doesn't condemn the practice of loans, there could still be some sort of "economical ethics" doctrine within the Church since Greed is one of the seven deadly sins. Don't know if that would have a huge impact on society though.
 
Well, with the XIIIth century, when the financial aspects of economy became accepted socially (including the Church*, even if you had a theological disaprooval that remained strong), it was accepted that the greed could be alleviated (not excused, tough, but that was partially due to social reprobation) if you kept a part of the profits for charity and kept your loan rates low (these remained usually around 10%/15% of interest.

Maybe an earlier appearance of this?

But again, I'm really unsure : it would ask for an earlier monetarisation of the medieval economy. As long usurers are not an obvious financial factor, there's no much reason to get more tolerant on them.

*Usurers are represented on stained glasses of Chartes cathedral because they helped to finance the construction, for exemple.
 
Top