ABSTRACT
Venice is a living and breathing city. Yet, our collective memory fixates on a present filled with disaster narratives, overtourism, and a perhaps too-literal sinking. Once upon a time, Venice was experiencing a Golden Age of trade and financial innovation. It was at the center of the world, with the Rialto as its beating heart. This paper evaluates how this hub of innovation in the late medieval period and the Renaissance cemented Venice as an economic powerhouse with functioning public banks and complex financial instruments. By analyzing secondary sources and historical records, this study aims to shed light on a city immortalized by its beauty, yet equally deserving praise for its intellectual brilliance.
Introduction
The history of Venice is inevitably associated with innovation. Much is discussed about the legendary shipbuilders at the Arsenale, who projected their power onto the Mediterranean, or the skilled artisans from Murano, who blew intricate glassworks. However, in the late medieval and early Renaissance periods, the world's economic history had a different transformative era, with Venice at its center. By pre-dating the groundbreaking advances in Amsterdam and England, we can trace some of their financial revolution to the bustling area near Rialto. Through innovations like the development of long-term urban debt, the introduction of bills of exchange, and double-entry bookkeeping, Venice was able to shape the institutions of modern financial systems. This paper examines how the Venetian banks contributed to the development of financial innovations during Venice’s Golden Age and later influenced European financial practices. First, it discusses how Venetian institutions were essential to developing financial practices. It then outlines how Venice invented or improved the existing instruments. Finally, the spread of the Venetian financial experiments around Europe is analyzed, with a focus on the case of the Wisselbank in Amsterdam. The aim is to offer insights into the relationship between commerce, governance, and innovation in an economy that presents the traits of a proto-capitalist system.
Venetian Institutions and Geography
The story of Venetian Lagoon cannot be told without special attention to its unique geography. Placed at the corner of the Adriatic Sea, the strategic entrance into Western Europe by sea, and the bridge to the East. Nevertheless, Venice did not have a monopoly on maritime trade across the Italian peninsula; Genoa attempted to overshadow Venetian efforts through its innovations. In some regards, Genoa matches the Venetian genius for entrepreneurship, but they had a different focus. After their third and last war in 1378-81, “the Venetians dominated the routes to the East, leaving to the Genoese room for growth in trade with the West.” [1]
San Marco’s vision was about accessing routes with the Levant and Black Sea, connecting to the Islamic world. Through skilled diplomatic efforts, Venice created and maintained a relationship with the Near East. At the highest level, ambassadors enabled conversations between Muslim sultans and other officials during trade negotiations. [9] These envoys traveled and presented rulers with gifts like fine cloth and Parmesan cheese, which was said to be a favorite diplomatic gift. [9] Additionally, the Venetians actively defied the pope and did not permit any restrictions against trading with the Islamic world because their livelihood depended so much on it. As a result, Venice was left, at times, the only Christian city-state actively trading with the enormous wealth of the East. To the extent of compromising their position with the papacy during the Crusades. [9]
During the late medieval period, Islamic merchants rarely traveled to Venice. As a result, the Venetians were able to maintain their status as middlemen in the sale of Oriental goods. [9] The city finally became a merchant center in Europe. Favored by the late Golden Age, the Venetians operated freely under maritime jurisdiction. The Adriatic was Venetian, and not even Byzantium could afford to challenge the might of the Arsenale. Weakened at the hands of the Venetians in the Fourth Crusade and never recovered. Constantinople would be at the periphery, as the ‘Queen of all Cities’ until its tragic fall to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Would Venice, now the most powerful maritime power in its area, succumb to the usual ails of instability in large empires? It would depend on the strength of its institutions. The Venetian myth, the nation of refugees escaping Attila and finding refuge in the lagoon, developed this mentality of equality. There was no royalty among their peers, and they all had to cooperate to sustain the city. Venice was a “uniquely homogeneous and unified ruling class.” [7] Its republican aspirations were not immediate, but “between 1140 and 1160, in response to the needs of its increased territory and growing economy, Venice underwent a revolutionary change in its political structure, reorganizing itself as a republic.” [4] As such, Venice was able to project an image of trust to the citizens who seldom felt the need to overthrow the government, as opposed to the history of the other Italian city-states that experienced great turmoil during the Renaissance. Worth noting, however, is the Tiepolo Conspiracy, in which Baiamonte Tiepolo and other nobles sought to seize power from the Great Council. [5]
After suppressing the conspiracy, the Council of Ten was established to keep tabs on affairs related to the Republic's security through espionage and extraordinary powers. It was supposed to create checks and balances on the Great Council by having each member of the Council of Ten serve only one term, not allowing more than one family member to serve simultaneously, and not allowing to be re-elected for successive terms. [9] This shows the foresight the Venetian statesmen had in appeasing the public. At least in principle, having impartiality in its ruling system created an environment in which the Venetian Republic lived without internal strife. There would be no Bonfires of the Vanities or aristocratic families ordering assassinations. This is the key to financial trust, and one needs to trust the government’s future because it is the government that will repay debt. If there is no government to speak of, or if the government is prone to corruption and mishandling debts, people are less likely to deposit their money there.
The Pax Venetiana assured investors there would be repayment because Venice would last a thousand years. A credible commitment to repaying debts in Venice through the Prestiti System dates back to 1262 when the Great Council gave the Prestiti Loan Officers the charge to collect tax revenues and swore: “a solemn oath that…they would use the revenues under their control to pay interest on loans.” [11] The ruling class understood the value of repaying debt to keep the cost of borrowing low to finance public expenditure and not slow down economic activity. It was not risky to take loans under effective public administration or a monarchy that would tax the people to undertake a war, where, in victory or defeat, it would not repay the people. At the same time, we find a striking difference between Venice and Genoa: “The state was more compact and more willing to interfere with the economy in Venice than in Genoa.” [6] Venice would be a product of state intervention but also exhibit the traits of a capitalist economy centuries before its official arrival.
Long-Term Urban Debt
There is evidence that Venice was already using long-term urban debt in 1164 through a compulsory lending system to the government. This system was known as the Prestiti, and it is an example of the Venetian statist approach to debt. Debt collection was made possible through the establishment of the Monti. Loan sizes were based on the ability to pay [6]. It is worth noting that as early as 1262, Venetian public debt became a perpetuity. [8] What this meant for Venice was that debt management was already entrenched in the lives of citizens. The citizens would now have these perpetual loans, where the principal was never repaid, but they would receive annual interest from the government indefinitely. Through this, Venice could fund its wars and economic ventures, while not alienating its lenders. The practice of life annuities, the perpetual repayment of interest to the lender, did not originate in Venice. Still, it is an example of Venetian synergy between its financial institutions and the people.
The Grain Office, created in the thirteenth century, was an early form of public banking that accepted deposits from individuals and institutions. It lent money to the government to import grain and sustain strategic sectors like the Venetian industry. [6] Later, the Grain Office was replaced by private banks, but its principles were still impactful. Along with the Salt Office, they were sources of short-term credit used by Venice to finance the state's pursuit of common well-being. The nation of equals demanded cooperation from its citizens, but was not concerned with pillaging as an end but with a defined purpose.
Nevertheless, the statist approach waned in the 1500s with the establishment of deposits in Zecca. This system allowed individuals to deposit specie (coins) at the Mint of Venice, where they would yield interest at market rates. [6] The life annuities discussed earlier, an invention from Northern Europe, also proved interesting to private investors who sought different investment returns. A life annuity would provide financial security to the investor, remove risk from the next wage, and live the rest of their lives peacefully. Understanding these motivations, Venice moved into a more market-friendly approach to loans. They were attracting private investors in ways that a forced system like that under the Grain Office could not manage; instead, they were attracting funds based on creditworthiness, leading to a more efficient allocation of resources. Riding the Zeitgeist, Venice was once again able to adapt to its environment and not slow its economic growth. Macro-historical events across the Atlantic Ocean would lead Venice into its era of unavoidable decay, but it is worth noting how adaptable La Serenissima was.
Double-Entry Bookkeeping
Inside Venice, there was a large concentration of wealth through the Fondaco system, where foreign merchants were under constant surveillance and forced to live in designated encampments. Venice learned about them when its merchants were placed in Fonduks (a street or row of buildings in Islamic countries). [1] Merchants in the city, Germans, and later Turkish were forced to live in these storage rooms for the state to ensure that the merchandise they carried was sold only on Venice’s terms. They would sell their goods and only be able to use proceeds to buy goods in Venice. This was tolerated because La Serenissima forbade its merchants from buying and selling directly to Germany, forcing Germans to come to Venice. [1] If you wanted to take advantage of the goods of the exotic East, it was inevitable for you to visit Venice, where you could find anything you desired for the right price under the right conditions. Venetian protectionism successfully concentrated the wealth that flowed from merchants in the north and seafarers in the Adriatic.
Large amounts of money necessitate efficient bookkeeping. Thankfully, Venice was at the forefront of one of the most significant inventions in the history of capitalism: double-entry bookkeeping. Some sources claim that there was already evidence of double-entry bookkeeping in Florence by the end of the thirteenth century [1]. However, there is consensus on where the practice was solidified and spread. That story begins with Luca Pacioli, a Franciscan friar in the late fifteenth century, who traveled to Venice to learn how they measured a business’ value. Luca Pacioli wanted to learn accounting the Venetian way. [2] The Venetians had developed a system to track debit and credit. They understood that a transaction has two sides that affect each other and must be equal by the end of the general ledger. Anything you credit on one side must be debited to the other. If one side of the equation was different, then a mistake was made, and by stating this general principle, the generation of efficient bookkeeping began, with transparency and accuracy at the forefront.
Luca Pacioli’s treatise on the matter was titled Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni e Proportionalità and was published in Venice in 1494. In it, he coined the famous phrase, “A person could not go to sleep until the debits equaled the credits.” [3] With that, he created a revolution in accounting by spreading the practice through the powerful Venetian printing press, another aspect in Venice’s history worth discussing.
However, for this paper, the issue is not the Venetians' publishing pursuits and their influence but the environment they fostered for innovation. The Rialto area was the Wall Street of its time because it was the place where money was moving and going through metamorphosis every day. There were meetings in Rialto that fixed commodity prices fixed the interest rate on public loans and even the premiums for maritime insurance. All business matters were handled on the streets around the Rialto Bridge, and an infamous punishment for merchants was to be barred from their right to go to Rialto and do business. [1] Venice was the place to be if you wanted to get rich from the East and learn how to run an efficient business. Nevertheless, there were other reasons to visit the campos surrounding Rialto.
Bills of Exchange
Venice handled a large amount of money at the time, but this did not mean it was hoarding giant piles of cash under the Palazzo Ducale. Instead, Venice played a key role in the use of exchange bills. Bills of exchange essentially use credit instead of money in transactions to fund long-distance trade. [1] Creating a credit mechanism instead of relying on physical currency protected against the risk of theft while at sea, and increased efficiency when handling large transactions. The Venetians offered future payments in foreign currency on a specified date to Bruges in 1360, with two surviving bills of exchange from the time. [8] The line drawn between the two trade centers in the late Middle Ages through the effective management of resources solidified Venice as a central player in Europe.
It is important to note that Florentine merchants in Rialto issued a significant amount of these bills of exchange, not just the Venetians. Despite being a protectionist state by default, Venice did not outright expel them, but sought to regulate them and benefit from the relationship. By maintaining control of trade with the Levant, Venice preferred a Florentine presence that, while benefiting from the Venetian Republic's relative stability, was also crowning Venice as an international finance hub. [8] Eventually, the free trade experiment led to tensions between an inward-focused Venice suspicious of foreigners and Florentine bankers who extracted too much value from the city.
The Florentine presence in Venice was due to the high demand for credit, commercial ventures, and the fact that Venice was a solidified bullion market. [8] Due to its privileged position and protectionist behavior, Venice was the intermediary of precious metals like gold and silver in high demand from the East. Sources tell us that “Rialto bankers were pivotal in the speculative cycle of buying, refining, and exporting bullion.” [8] The silver market was speculative and highly regulated by the government; crucially, the Silver Office registered imports, collected dues, and ensured commitment to the mint. This regulatory framework allowed Venice to maintain stability and valuation of its currency, which was crucial in maintaining economic relations with the Levant, with bullion being the preferred means of payment. Venice remained committed to being at the center of trade in Europe. Whether through efficient bills of exchange or a more traditional approach with precious metals, La Serenissima remained the heart of commerce through the 1400s.
Influence of Venetian Practices
Venetian Banco della Piazza di Rialto, founded in 1587, is the closest link to the established financial revolutions of England and Amsterdam. This exemplifies early public banking innovation. These revolutions were characterized by large mobilizations of national debt, which enabled the Dutch and English to finance their overseas endeavors through state financing and capital markets. The Rialto bank accepted Giro accounts, an innovation to protect against scarcity and high costs of information about the quality of coins. There was a solvency guarantee by the state that earlier banks did not have, which would allow for efficient transfer of funds between accounts without the need for physical coins. It would coexist with private banks and be subject to a 100% clearing mechanism. The Wisselbank in Amsterdam, which monopolized money change, large bills of exchange, and bullion transactions, was modeled after the Venetian Rialto bank at its core. [6]
Later, the Banco de Giro was created to manage Venice’s floating debt. Its functions were like those of the Bank of England. The Banco de Giro lent to the Venetian government, and as opposed to the Bank of England, which issued notes, it also issued bookkeeping entries. Its deposit liabilities could be treated as legal tender, one of the privileges granted by the city. This allowed Giro to replace Rialto, as the more linked a bank is to the government and its finances, the likelier it becomes the central bank. [6] The synergy of banks with the government was evident in the Venetian system and served as a lesson for the successors. Even as Venice traversed more market-friendly approaches to attract voluntary investment, it taught valuable lessons on relinquishing control over the masses.
Through this process, Venice and its public banks were bent on honoring their obligations. Even with some delays in repayment, Venice’s continuous positive reputation as a lender created creditworthiness that solidified its position inside the sphere of finance. Its size would prevent it from reaching heights that Dutch banks would reach later with the voyages they funded. However, the humble legacy of Venice amounts to what it was able to accomplish with its structural limitations. Venice bridged the two worlds with a thriving merchant city that enthralled European merchants.
Conclusion
Venice benefited from its geographical position and strong republican institutions to become a playground for revolutionary ideas. Not all ideas were fully Venetian, but you needed to be in Venice to be aware of them. The Rialto bore witness to the flourishing of long-term funded debt handled by the government, and saw it evolve into market-friendly approaches that enthralled investors of all kinds. Campo di San Giacometto overheard conversations that shaped accounting forever and looked upon millionaire deals being made with a piece of paper entailing a promise. Perhaps the bankers in England or America centuries later only heard of Venice as a trivia question at social gatherings. Still, they must know they are standing on the shoulders of giants. Italian city-states advanced the practices that made them famous. And Venice, perhaps the greatest of all, is a micro-historical lesson on how establishing trust and honor can yield great dividends.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Braudel, Fernand. “The City-Centered Economies of the European Past: Before and After Venice.” In Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century: The Perspectives of the World, 89–174. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992.
Cameron, R. “Double Entry: How the Merchants of Venice Shaped the Modern World.” Google Books. Accessed December 12, 2024. https://books.google.it/books/about/Double_Entry_How_the_Merchants_of_Venice.html?id=FbHqak5_okIC&redir_esc=y.
Chiappetta, Barbara, and Kermit D. Larson. Fundamental Accounting Principles: Student Learning Tools. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 1995. https://books.google.com/books?id=9780256207484.
Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Venice: History.” Last modified 2024. https://www.britannica.com/place/Venice/History.
Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Venice in the 14th Century.” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Last modified 2024. https://www.britannica.com/place/Italy/Venice-in-the-14th-century#ref318497.
Fratianni, Michele, and Franco Spinelli. 2006. Did Genoa and Venice Kick a Financial Revolution in the Quattrocento? Working Paper no. 112. Vienna: Oesterreichische Nationalbank (OeNB).
Jones, Philip (1997). The Italian City-State, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mueller, Reinhold C. The Venetian Money Market: Banks, Panics, and the Public Debt, 1200-1500. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997.
Muir, Edward. Civic Ritual in Renaissance Venice. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Venice in the 14th and 15th Centuries.” Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. Last modified October 2004. https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/cedr/hd_cedr.htm.
Tracy, James (1985). A Financial Revolution in the Habsburg Netherlands: Renten and Renteniers in the County of Holland, 1515-1565, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Commenti