- check that your browser has third party cookies enabled. You can get instructions on how to do this for your operating system by googling "enable third part cookies" plus "Windows XP", "Mac" or whatever you're using.
Don't forget that the in-class test is happening on Monday in the
second lecture hour. It's in multiple choice format and tests the
lecture and tutorial material from weeks 1 - 3. Good luck!
The reading for this week forms the basis of the Historical Argument
Exercise due at the end of week 5, so any thought you can put to it now
and develop further in the tute will help your preparation. Davis
emphasises that though Pirenne's views have not been generally accepted,
it is important to understand what they were.
 |
| The tribute of Harun al-Rashid to Charlemagne |
For blog comments : What in Davis' view are the most important elements of Pirenne's position?
Good evening,
ReplyDeleteAccording to Davis, it is important to understand Pirenne’s work because it highlights and studies the dramatic decrease of trading activity in Latin West during the 8th and 9th centuries.
Furthermore, it points out the limited use of money and its general loss of value in the Latin West.
Lastly, Pirenne tried to give an explanation for the waning of the Latin West economy that was the baseline for futher studies : Mediterranean trade was disrupted by the expansion of the Islamic Empire. The Mediterranean ports-cities that trived through trade decline. The urban population declines as well. So urban demand for agricultural goods decreases (=”no outlets”). Supply of agricultural goods adjusts to the demand and decreases as well. Therefore producers of agricultural goods only produce for their own consumption. They stop using money because they don’t need it anymore (when exchange is necessary, one will do barter). Consequently, money loses its value. In such situation, land is the only source of wealth left. Therefore, the Caroligians could use nothing but land to reward/ensure the fidelity of their warriors. Leading to the emergence of feudalism.
Amandine
Pirenne believed that the economy of no outlets that was created at this time period - where money had no use and land was the only true form of currency and wealth - must have been caused by a cataclysmic event which disrupted Mediterranean Trade. The Mediterranean had long served as the trading centre of Europe, and through it Romans could live of Egyptian grain, to use one example given in the text.
ReplyDeletePirenne saw many goods such as silk, gold, spices and olive oil disappear from Frankish regions in the early eighth century and concluded that a disruption of trade between the nations who supplied these products must have been the cause. The Moslem Conquest of Tunisia occurred at around the right time for this hypothesis - Pirenne argued that the Muslims would have, upon conquering Tunisia, given it's position relative to important trade routes - dealt a killing blow to Mediterranean Commerce and Trade. [However, the Vandals themselves had this opportunity already and did not take it, so there is not much to say the Muslims would do so.]
With Mediterranean trade supposedly crippled, according to Pirenne, people would be forced to buy locally, and more often than not, live of the produce they themselves are forced to grow. They would have little interest in selling off any excess produce as their would be nothing available to them to buy with the money, with no foreign produce arriving via the Mediterranean.
This lead to land being the primary source of wealth and hence the most valued form of currency, meaning giving land in return for service often benefited both parties greatly. One party was given loyalty and support while the other was given land on which to work and survive.
- Dale
To me it seems that Davis does not put much stock in Pirenne’s arguments and reasoning regarding the trade conditions of the west in the 8th and 9th centuries. Davis does however, find importance in the situation itself that Pirenne attempts to address. Davis focuses on the historical facts in Pirenne’s work, rather than the means by which he attempts to answer them. Specifically, Davis places a great deal of importance on the great decrease in trade found during this period, the decline of the use of money in trade, and the increased focus an agrarian economy and the trend of communities attempting to become self sufficient through land ownership and goods production rather than attempt trade.in particular Davis supports the link between an economy based of land ownership and an agrarian system to the rise of feudalism in the West, given that feudal systems attempt to ensure loyalty and fidelity through contracts largely based on the ownership of land.
ReplyDeleteDavis’s highlights Pirenne’s opinion that the downfall of trade throughout Western to Eastern Mediterranean during the 8th and 9th centuries led to economic decline in the Latin West. This downfall, according to Pirenne was caused by the Mediterranean being unsafe for navigation. Since the sea was unsafe due to pirates, important Eastern goods such as gold, spices, olive oil and silk were not reaching its western markets. This economic crisis saw towns and population decline which led to the destruction of government centres. Another key point mentioned is the aftermath of this crisis. People were turning to local produced as a source of supply alongside showing a larger emphasis on central agriculture, rather than obtaining needs by trade. Since money had lost its requirement, the prominence of owning land a more source of wealth due to creating a more community based town not affected by law (since government have failed) but rather fending for yourself and you neighbor in the dark times…
ReplyDeleteIn evaluating Pirenne, Davis gives the most importance to Pirenne stating the Latin West to have an economy of no outlets. This meant that access to the Mediterranean was a key factor in societal life. If the Mediterranean could not be used for trade, a reaction of events would occur. Commerce declining let to cities shrinking, which led to a decrease in population. This in turn meant there were fewer people to purchase the goods produced agriculturally, thus those who worked the land had to consume their products themselves, and money would lose its importance in society.
ReplyDeleteThis chain of events causing an economy of no outlets is stated by Pirenne as giving rise to the feudal system of the Carolingian era, a fact which is agreed upon by Davis. Where they differ in opinion, is in what caused the end of trade via the Mediterranean, and how complete the economy of no outlets was. (Davis argues that some trade still occurred, and the use of currency did not decline completely)
They both state that the ninth century was a transitional period, in which the Carolingian empire begins to decline, as does trade.
Caitlin Graham
Davis sees importance in Pirenne's argument that a decline in Mediterranean trade to the 'Latin west' led to an economic contraction in the area, which in turn created a socitey far more dependent on locally produced goods and less on long distance trade. Luxury goods such as oil, silk and spices weren't finding their way to the west and Pirenne attributed this halt in trade to Muslim pirates who had captured Tunisia, described as the 'wasit of the Mediterranean'. As trade no longer occured as it once did, people were relying more on food and other items produced by themselves, and with no foreign goods arriving money became obsolete.
ReplyDeleteDavis and Pirenne see this transition to locally produced goods rather than imported ones as the crucial factor in the development of feudalism in which land became the only source of wealth.
Despite Davis claiming that “Pirenne’s picture of a sudden cessation of commerce in the Latin West was a gross exaggeration”, he does seem to believe that this point usefully highlights the decline in trading culture that had occurred in the 8th and 9th Centuries when contrasted to that of earlier and later periods of time. As the others have mentioned in their comments, Davis then continued on to explain the theories behind such decline and in contrast to other arguments presented by Pirenne that Davis is highly critical of (notably regarding the “economy of no outlets”, and the “importance of the Muslim invasions”, labelling such theories as “seductive”), he does find importance in the decline of trade and the effect that that had had on the economy.
ReplyDeleteWhile Davis does seem to be quite critical of Pirenne's view of economics in the Medieval world, he also concedes that Pirenne was on the right track with his ideas. Davis agrees that Pirenne's belief that there was a "sudden cessation" of trade, while something of an exaggeration, does demonstrate the lack of trade that was occurring in the Latin West. However, Davis goes further into this, introducing that this could have been the result of lack of money, unsafe roads and lack of communication. Davis is also highly critical of Pirenne's adamancy that it was Muslim pirates who were causing the lack of trade. He illustrates that there is no evidence of this and that it was simply a presumption made by Pirenne.
ReplyDeleteDavis argues that the most important element of Pirenne's discussion is that there are no outlets in the economy, which leads to the development of the feudal system. He however contradicts Pirenne's view that trade in the west came to a sudden halt due to Islamic expansionism, by stating that it was in decline for a number of centuries.
ReplyDeletePirenne's insistent beliefs about the economy of the ancient world is supported by Davis on one level, although he states that Pirenne's views 'were not generally accepted' as he appeared to form exaggerated conclusions. The decrease in trading between the eighth and ninth centuries is strongly emphasised by Pirenne mainly due to unsafe trading systems and piracy across the Mediterranean. Pinpointing this decrease in commerce by focusing on the Muslim invasions which were occurring, although with no real evidence Davis points out his argument is somewhat flawed. The stoppage of navigation and trade wasn’t as determined as Pirenne thought, evidence of sea communication between Rome and Marseilles has been brought forward etc. Pirenne appears to look at incidents and draw conclusions of an ultimately doomed economy when in fact that wasn’t the case. For instance he believed the changing of the coins from gold to silver signified economic instability when Davis believes the coins were to benefit trade as the coins were stronger, less easy to lose and therefore more valuable in terms of commerce. That aside Pirenne argues that Western Europe was an economy of no outlets and to Davis this was the most important point in his argument.
ReplyDeleteEssentially, as follows: the vanishing of trade, the confinement of local economies, and the depredations of Muslim Pirates... however, Davis goes on to explain that while these are important points, Pirenne's portrayal is rather more exagerrated than was probably the case, vis-a-vis the *INSTANT* and *COMPLETE* ceasing of trade (both things which has disproved by evidence).
ReplyDeleteDavis is highly critical of the reasons that Pirenne gives for the cessation of trade in the Latin West. However Davis' does agree with Pirenne about the cessation just not the reasons that Pirenne gives. Davis believes that all trade was not stopped but just limited but he does say Pirenne was on the right lines. Pirenne's ideas which Davis is most critical of are trade being stopped due to Muslim pirates and the conversion of money.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Davis’ focuses on Pirenne’s point on the cessation of trade throughout the Eastern and Western Mediterranean during the 8th and 9th centuries as the primary factor that led to the economic decline in the Latin West.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Pirenne, this was because the Mediterranean had become unsafe (due to pirates) for navigation, thus trading had ceased and Eastern goods such as gold, spices and silk no longer reached its western markets. Because of this, the people in the Latin West began turning to local produces and consumption and usage of their own products, leading to what Pirenne describes as an ‘economy of no outlets’.
However, whilst Davis does highlight this point, and agrees with it to some extent (he did seem to agree that the decline occurred in the 9th century) , it would appear that he holds little further regard of this theory due to insufficient evidence and other factors that have disputed Pirenne’s theory.
Davis doesn’t fully agree with Pirenne reasons for the caseation of trade in the 8th and 9th centuries in the eastern and western of the Mediterranean, but does agree, half-heartedly, that trade took a while to cease as saying; trade was in a decline for several centuries. Pirenne believed the trade stopped due to Muslim pirates, which Davis does not. Davis believed that trade stopped due to not enough money, roads being unsafe and no communication.
ReplyDeleteI believe that both have merit and both are right, (even though there is no proof that Pirenne is correct), due to the fact that pirates did raid merchant ships and the threat of Vikings to land-traders would have stopped and communication with the small cities and town in the east, with the west. Followed by the devaluation of the currency, importing and exporting goods in the Mediterranean most definitely would have ceased.
Where Davis may critique pirennes theories surrounding the contraction of the western European economy, he puts value in many of his arguments as they form the basis of many other, more strongly supported arguments on the issue. For example, pirrene contended that around the turn of the eighth century, trade between western Europe and other regions came to a abrupt halt due to Muslim pirates. This view, however, is contended by Davis who suggests that the rate of trade declined over a longer period of time, rather than over a couple of decades, and that the trade didn't completely stop, despite it's heavy decline. This was also seen in pirennes notion of an economy of no outlets, in which monetary currency lost its value due to the reduction in trading. While Davis agreed that currency had become less significant in the economic climate of the time and that land had become a more valuable form of currency, goods such as livestock were still being used as reimbursement, as backed by historical documentation
ReplyDeleteDavis implies that the most important element of Pierrene's position is the idea of the necessity of trading routes for the wealth of the Western Empire. Although he rejects the extreme nature of Pirrenne's argument, arguing that the possibility of inaccuracy of evidence, and the single focus of the thesis, provide a certain shallowness, Davis opens his argument with a description of the wealth of the Eastern Byzantine and Islamic Empires, focussing, in part, on the importance of the trading systems. The description of trading Davis provides is one of luxury; the passage from Ibn Khurradaahbeh is interesting in the way it attests to the necessity of trade to procure wealth. Although Davis provides a depth of argument in attributing Eastern success to "political conditions", his focus on the trading routes as, if not central to Eastern success, then important, follow, to some degree, the concept upon which Pirrenne bases his entire argument.
ReplyDeletexyz
ReplyDeleteIn Davis' view, the most important perspective of Pirenne's position is his theory that the economy of the Latin West was crippled due to the abrupt end to trade in the Mediterranean. He termed this as the Latin West having "an economy of no outlets"; the inhabitants were unable to purchase goods and therefore also unable to sell their own excess produce, leading to the development of the Latin West Feudalist society in which land was the only source of wealth. Davis is of the opinion that although there was a contraction of trade, it was more likely a gradual cessation for a variety of reasons.
ReplyDeletePirenne argued that the Muslim invasion of the Mediterranean halted the transportation of goods via the sea, causing the Latin West’s economy to nosedive. He pointed to evidence such as the replacement of gold coinage with the less expensive silver and the once staple olive oil, with butter. He asserted that the Muslim capture of Tunisia allowed them to control the activity of the Mediterranean, creating a “vacuum” in Marseilles and ending the port’s crucial position as the connection between the two halves of the Mediterranean.
By Pirenne’s analysis, the regression to a self-sufficient agrarian society, in which trade was largely unnecessary, was proof of the Muslim invasion’s effect on the Latin West economy. His theorising is shown by Davis to be highly debatable and even, in some instances, disprovable, lacking numerous aspects of fact that open his conclusions to scrutiny.
You do have to admire Pirenne's vivid imagination and his ability to draw conclusions from little evidence. His focus on trade reduction and the Muslim wars could almost make the reader believe that Eastern empire was a magnificent, holy, place where they fought off invaders and pirates. Whilst the west was poor slave driven economy that had no value and due to the Christian movement had very little slaves. Davis points out that Pirenne's views where mostly incorrect and that trade didn’t cease due to pirates or Muslim invasion. Davis suggests that there was a change in the value of trade in both areas. Simply, one side valued coins where another valued land. Both items could be regarded as currency but neither side wanted the other item, therefore trade ceased. Sure, pirates didn’t help and the Muslim invasion would have been costly, but neither where the major cause of the economic downfall between the East and the West.
ReplyDelete