Intoxicants and the invention of 'consumption'

In 1600 the word ‘consumption’ was a term of medical pathology describing the ‘wasting, petrification of things’. By 1700 it was also a term of economic discourse: ‘In commodities, the value rises as its quantity is less and vent greater, which depends upon it being preferred in its consumption’. The article traces the emergence of this key category of economic analysis to debates over the economy in the 1620s and subsequent disputes over the excise tax, showing how ‘consumption’ was an early term in the developing lexicon of political economy. In so doing the article demonstrates the important role of ‘intoxicants’ – i.e. addictive and intoxicating commodities like alcohols and tobaccos – in shaping these early meanings and uses of ‘consumption’. It outlines the discursive importance of intoxicants, both as the foci for discussions of ‘superfluous’ and ‘necessary’ consumption and the target of legislation on consumption. And it argues that while these discussions had an ideological dimension, or dimensions, they were also responses to material increases in the volume and diversity of intoxicants in early seventeenth-century England. By way of conclusion the article suggests the significance of the Low Countries as a point of reference for English writers, as well as a more capacious and semantically sensitive approach to changes in early-modern consumption practices

Accounting: A General Commentary on an Empirical Science

Many researchers have questioned the view of accounting as a science. Some maintain that it is a service activity rather than a science, yet others entertain the view that it is an art or merely a technology. While it is true that accounting provides a service and is a technology (a methodology for recording and reporting), that fact does not prevent accounting from being a science. Based upon the structure and knowledge base of the discipline, this paper presents the case for accounting as an empirical science

Money markets and exchange rates in preindustrial Europe

This chapter focuses on money markets and exchange rates in preindustrial Europe. The foreign exchange market was mostly based on bills of exchange, the instrument used to transfer money, and provide credit between distant centers in preindustrial Europe. In this chapter, first I explain bill of exchange operations, money market integration, usury regulations and circumventions to hide the market interest rate, as well as the evolution of bills of exchange in history, focusing mainly on the most relevant features generalized during the first half of the seventeenth century: endorsement and the joint liability rule, which facilitated the full expansion of the foreign exchange market beyond personal networks. Then, I describe the European geography of money in the mid eighteenth century, characterized by a very high degree of multilateralism with the triangle of Amsterdam, London, and Paris as the backbone of the European settlement system. Finally, I measure the cost of capital and relate it to liquidity. I show evidence of interest rates in the eighteenth century for Amsterdam, London, Paris, and Cadiz. While Amsterdam, London, and Paris presented low and similar interest rates, Cadiz had higher interest rates, mostly being double the cost of capital. These results seem to show a high inverse correlation between liquidity and interest rates, suggesting that the share in international trade of European centers might have been a powerful driver of international monetary leadership. While more empirical evidence and further research are needed, this approach opens the scope of the analysis beyond the national institutional explanation

Money Markets and Exchange Rates in Pre-Industrial Europe

This chapter focuses on money markets and exchange rates in preindustrial Europe. The foreign exchange market was mostly based on bills of exchange, the instrument used to transfer money and provide credit between distant centers in pre-industrial Europe. In this chapter, first I explain bill of exchange operations, money market integration, usury regulations and circumventions to hide the market interest rate as well as the evolution of bills of exchange in history, focusing mainly on the most relevant features generalized during the first half of the 17th century: endorsement and the joint liability rule, which facilitated the full expansion of the foreign exchange market beyond personal networks. Then, I describe the European geography of money in the mid-18th century, characterized by a very high degree of multilateralism with the triangle of Amsterdam, London and Paris as the backbone of the European settlement system. Finally, I measure the cost of capital and relate it to liquidity. I show evidence of interest rates in the 18th century for Amsterdam, London, Paris and Cadiz. While Amsterdam, London and Paris presented low and similar interest rates, Cadiz had higher interest rates, mostly being double the cost of capital. These results seem to show a high inverse correlation between liquidity and interest rates, suggesting that the share in international trade of European centers might have been a powerful driver of international monetary leadership. While more empirical evidence and further research is needed, this approach opens the scope of the analysis beyond the national institutional explanation