Credit for the Poor, Investments for the Rich? Different Strategies for Investing and Saving Money in Medieval Tirol

1 Regional Context

Tirol is located in the Eastern Alps. In medieval times the County of Tirol was part of the Holy Roman Empire. In the 13^th century, Count Meinhard II of Gorizia (1258–1295) combined the titles to the lands to the south and north of the Brenner Pass to create the County of Tirol. For the sake of brevity, the terms northern Tirol and southern Tirol are used to refer to the areas that roughly correspond to the present-day regions of Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol and the Austrian state of Tirol.

Agricultural practice in Tirol included animal husbandry on high alpine meadows, mixed agriculture with cereal cultivation and dairy production at lower altitudes, and, especially on the south side of the Alps, viticulture. Agricultural output differed both in the form of cultivation and in the labour intensity depending on the location and quality of land. Overall, a growing agricultural specialisation with a rising market dependency from the 14^th century onwards can be seen.

Urbanisation in Tirol was low compared to the European average. However, there were several village-rural market systems that connected city-like settlements with their surroundings, and peasants could sell their produce at such markets. In several cities such as Meran, Bozen or Glurns, there were regular fairs. The Pentecost and Martini fairs in Meran, that took place in the spring and in the fall, were of interregional importance and a popular payment date for credit transactions. ^[8]

Even the rural regions of Tirol were, at least in part, penetrated early on by the written administrative practices of the public notary’s office and monetary economy. ^[9] The County of Tirol was characterised by the politics of Meinhard II, who disempowered the local nobility and created a strong principality between 1258 and 1295. The dominant position of the sovereign continued into the 14^th century and beyond. Serfdom disappeared nearly everywhere in the county during the reign of Meinhard II. Likewise, the manorial and lordly restrictions on exchange of land largely vanished and the peasantry enjoyed favourable property rights with the dissemination of hereditary tenure (Erbleihe). Insecure tenurial rights (Freistift), where the tenant’s land could be withdrawn anytime, continued to exist mostly in areas of enclosed manorial estates such as ecclesiastical institutions. ^[10] The widespread right of hereditary tenure enabled the peasants to bequeath their farms, to sell, mortgage or divide their leaseholds with consent of their lord. Land could also be sub-leased, provided that the owner was informed. ^[11] Land sales, including sales by peasants, are recorded on a large scale as early as the 13^th century. Urban investments of burgher or municipal institutions in rural landholding were widespread, as has been shown for the city of Bozen. Thus, factor markets for the exchange of land and capital emerged early in Tirol. ^[12] Demesne lordship (Gutsherrschaft) was declining in general in late medieval Tirol but as recent research on eastern Switzerland has shown, landlords continued to interfere in the organisation of their estates to some extent. ^[13]

In Tirol there was a lower class of peasants in addition to the peasants who owned full estates. These latter were called Söllleute (cottagers) if they owned small plots of land or Inwohner (lodgers) if they were landless co-habitants in peasant or sub-peasant households. They earned their living mainly as craftsmen, servants, day-labourers, forest labourers or miners. ^[14] Even cottagers had only limited access to common goods such as forest or pasture. ^[15] No specific demographic data on the late Middle Ages exists, but research on early modern Tirol has shown that in certain districts of northern Tirol, up to 25 percent of the overall population belonged to the group of landless households or households with only small land ownership. ^[16] Already in this sub-peasant strata, there was an active land market: even the smallest plots of land were sold or mortgaged in late medieval Tirol. ^[17]

Overall, despite a low rate of urbanisation and a high dependence on agriculture, there were many opportunities for farmers to acquire financial assets or capital. Since peasants had limited property rights over the land they cultivated, they could mortgage it to obtain credit. In the southern part of Tirol, sharecropping contracts were a source of working capital, so the situation was similar to that in northern Italy. ^[18] However, the specific situation in Tirol differed from neighbouring regions: in Tirol, there was no opportunity for funded debt, as in Italy or northern or western Europe. There was also no large homogeneous institutional framework to facilitate the flow of capital throughout society. Instead, perpetual rents were sold on a private basis. Capital markets were organised to mediate problems of asymmetric information, for example through the use of public notaries.

2 Source Material and Data

The sources for this paper are primarily notary registers and court records from the late 14^th century. The former institution, the public notary, had become widespread across southern Tirol since the 12^th century, and notaries were active both in the bigger towns of Bozen, Glurns or Meran and in smaller settlements in the countryside such as Laas, Forst or Lana. ^[19] They recorded legal transactions in an abbreviated form in registers (imbreviatura). Ample notary registers exist for medieval southern Tirol, most of them recorded in Meran or Bozen. Drawing on a set of several notary registers of the second half of the 14^th century (created by the following notaries: Konrad of Alerheim (1357), Jacob of Laas (1391, 1398, 1400) and Christanus de Eppiano (1406–1407)) and the oldest existing court records of Meran (1388–1391), this paper describes the use of different investment and saving strategies in the last two decades of 14^th century southern Tirol. ^[20]

The notaries recorded individual acts of all kinds, from the sale of land to dowry contracts, in their registers, which facilitated the subsequent verification of legal acts and made it possible to issue a complete contract (instrumentum) for a fee at the request of the contracting parties. ^[21] Transactions of low value were all the more affected by this, as the transaction costs were proportionally much higher. ^[22] Here, we must note the currency used in Tirol at this time, which were the Veronese or Berner denarii (den.). These will be referred to throughout this text. Smaller denominations were marca (mr.), librae (lb.), grossi (gr.) and solidi (sol.). ^[23]

As Table 1 shows, the majority of all legal contracts was connected to credit, debts or transfer of property or rights. The selected registers probably do not cover the full variety of different forms of saving and investment. However, the cases illustrate the diversity of saving instruments and investment opportunities and show that certain aspects, such as the use of loans and pledges to pay dowries, were quite stable over time.

For the period from 1388 to 1391, court protocols of the assemblies of the court meetings (eleichtaidinge) exist, which took place in court places in the countryside (Dingstätten) and in the city court (stadtrecht and dorfrecht) of Meran and in the court district of the so-called Landgericht (Meran und Burggrafenamt). ^[24] The court books recorded criminal assaults and civil law matters, such as legal changes concerning property and assets. Although the protocols cover only the period from July 1388 to April 1391, they are a unique source for small-scale transactions that would not be recorded by a public notary.

The different sources allow an understanding of the investment strategies used by households. A few examples of contracts recorded by a notary (in town) shall illustrate this. On 11th May 1391, Ulricus, son of the deceased Jaennlinus de Turnell, and his wife Brigida sold a rent consisting of payment in grain (rye and barley) for six mr. (or 720 gr.). The rent was redeemable for five years. ^[25] Just six days later, on 17th May 1391, the same couple acquired a rent in kind, consisting of cheese, grain (wheat) and small animals, for five mr. Interestingly, this rent came from the farmstead of said Ulricus (de curia predicti Uelrici de Turnell), which effectively freed him from this rent obligation. The rent was once again redeemable for five years. ^[26] In this case, the sale of the first rent was used for a strategic investment and enabled Ulricus and Brigida de Turnell to restructure debt (or rent in this case). As the payments were in kind, the reason could have been a change in the price or availability of the goods (cheese instead of cereals), or the exchange of a rent with a higher interest rate for one with a slightly lower interest rate.

Another example of household investment strategies is a marriage arrangement recorded by a notary (in town). In January 1398, a contract was drawn up between Katherina and Johannes rotificis (wheelwright) to settle the arrangement of an existing marriage contract between their underage children from previous marriages (Michael, son of Katherina, and Cristina, daughter of Johannes). The main concern was about the management of a farmstead (Camplung guot). It was the accumulated debt of the bride’s father Johannes that threatened the continued cultivation of the estate. ^[27] In order to ensure the economic viability of the estate, he transferred the farm to the next generation. The contract stipulated, among other things, that Katherina was allowed to stay on the farm and that she should receive a limited amount of firewood. In return, she had to assume the farm’s debts of 43 Mr. and 4 lb. (equal to 5,205 gr.) and take care of the farm until the children came of age. Besides, she was to receive one third of the mobile property of the manor, but she was liable if the value of the remaining household property decreased. When the children reached the age of majority, she had to hand over the farm. In this case, the farm was transferred to the next generation and a retirement plan was made for Katherina. This example shows how assuming someone else’s debts, transferring property to the children or arranging payments, were essential parts of the household economy. And although it is not spelled out in the contract, it seems obvious that in this way the debts could be repaid and the farm could remain in family ownership.

These two examples illustrate the richness of the source material, which enables us to reconstruct stipulations, financial strategies and contracts across two generations or to reveal the strategy behind investments.

Loan and investment amounts ranged from buying a small plot of land worth 24 gr. to credits of up to thousands of gr., as in the latter case mentioned above. These amounts can be compared to the wages of labourers at this time. At the end of the 14^th century, the average annual income of a skilled labourer was about 1,920 to 2,880 gr. per year (for a master labourer), while an unskilled day labourer earned 960 gr. per year, calculating with approximately 240 working days a year. However, it must be noted, most labourers had other sources of income besides wages, such as gardening or farming, or they owned their own livestock.

3 The Need for Saving and Investing Money and Managing Liquidity

It has long been known that consumer and commercial loans, including the acquisition of working capital, have made up the largest part of the credit economy and are closely connected to strategies of saving and investing money. ^[28] Very often we do not have information about what preceded the decisions to become active on the financial market, however, there were various reasons for the need to save and invest money. Some of these stemmed from internal factors, such as lifecycle events or investments in one’s business; others were external, such as extraordinary taxation or harvest failures. The need for financial resources to overcome adversity was great: the main challenges were famines, harvest failures, wars or extraordinary taxation. ^[29]

Cautious estimates based on medieval estate registers (Urbare) of the monastery of Stams in Tirol indicate an average levy burden (ground tax and tithe) of peasant holdings amounting to about 22 percent of the grain yield (see Tab. 3.). After deducting the cost of the grain for sowing (approximately 20 to 25 percent), this leaves roughly 58 percent of the yield to the peasant family. With this they had to cover extraordinary payments, wage labourers and their own livelihood, as well as care for their livestock. Additional expenses for events like marriages or extraordinary taxes had to be paid from the remaining surplus. ^[30] Even considering a large variation in the estimate, a harvest decline of one third, as happened frequently, would have been enough to cause difficulties for the peasant households. ^[31]

Having difficulties in paying rents on time happened quite often. In the local courts, arrears of rent payments (versezzen zins) were claimed regularly. ^[32] In November 1357, Ludwicus and his wife Agnes of Meran promised to pay their landlord, the knight Bertholdus, 30 lb. for rent arrears (occasione retenti census nondum sibi dare) in wine during the next vintage season. ^[33] Larger rent arrears were paid in instalments. On 26th May 1400, Georius textor (a weaver) und his wife Diemundis promised to pay rent to two brothers, Ambrosius and Bartholomeus (amounting to 11 mr. 8 lb. and 6 gr.), that was to be paid to the lord of Starkenberg (pro censu de domino de Starkenberg). ^[34] Georius and Diemundis were probably subtenants of the two brothers who themselves owed the rent to the Lord of Starkenberg. The debtors were to pay 30 lb. annually at the fair of Saint Martin until the debt was repaid. They also had to pledge a plot of land and a pasture as security. The debt obligation was registered before a notary.

Recent research has highlighted the existence of factor markets and commercial dealings in medieval Tirol. ^[35] Signs of rural commercialisation, such as the monetisation of rents, the increasing incidence of wage labour or higher levels of market activity, can be observed in Tirol from the 13^th century onwards. ^[36] In a society that had been forced into a great deal of market involvement, such as 14^th century Tirol or southwestern Germany, access to capital could decide economic survival. ^[37] This was not least because of what Shami Ghosh called a growing social dependence on the market: more people relied on monetary assets for social reproduction – that is, to maintain their social status – through consumption, dowry payments or inheritance. Peasants needed money to maintain access to their holdings, in order to pay both rents and taxes, to pay off debts for inheriting the land or to make settlements between generations. ^[38] This was also the case for medieval and early modern Tirol. ^[39]

The family or lifecycle also involved systematic constellations like marriage, life with or without children or retirement, that involved specific transactions. ^[40] For example, in the event of marriage, financial matters (dowry payments, morning gift) had to be settled in cash or, more frequently, by pledging property. Here, the different assets that each of the spouses brought into marriage were documented and safeguarded. It was common practice in Tirol that the husband secured both the morning gift (donatio ante nuptias, morgengabe) as well as the dowry of his wife (dos, haimsteuer) by providing some property as security. ^[41] The dowry and the morning gift formed separate estates and as such were to be managed separately by the household. In most cases, these sums were not to be paid in cash but were placed as mortgages on properties. ^[42] However, they had to be paid out in the event of a claim or the death of one of the spouses. Several cases put forth before the courts in the district of Meran prove that dowry and morning gift payments were actually demanded and had to be paid out. ^[43] In other cases, wives agreed in their wills to waive payments of the morning gift. ^[44]

These special assets brought into a marriage were also invested and used to generate income. In a contract from January 1357 between Chuenradus dictus Zobel and his wife Cylie, it was agreed that the dowry and morning gift were to be safeguarded as a pledge by Chuenradus and would be paid out in full and undiminished if required. As usual, a special clause in the contract indicated that the interim usufruct, which Cylie or her heirs would receive as capital in the meantime, were not to be deducted from the total sum. ^[45] Consequently, the marital assets were invested in land or profitable businesses.

Other lifecycle phases include, for example, income losses in households during periods when young children are being brought up or when providing care for the elderly. It has been shown in quantitative research that rural family farm households reacted to the presence of young children or non-working elderly and tried to compensate for these cost and human capital burdens with additional resources (land, capital) or extra labour. ^[46] As the farms were very labour-intensive, these temporary losses of work had to be compensated for. Studies on the later period suggest that the actual practices depended, among other things, on the respective inheritance law (division of property (Realteilung) or impartible succession (Anerbenrecht)). ^[47] In any case, financial resources would have been needed to compensate for the loss of labour force by paying wage labourers or saving for retirement.

If no one was there to compensate for the labour, things could end badly for the household. This was the case in February 1389 when the landlord Ludwig auz der Awen claimed rent arrears from one of his tenants, a woman called Grumserin. ^[48] Said woman was living off a manor called ze Grumse. In the summer of 1388, she was already in financial difficulties when several people claimed unpaid debts from her before the court. ^[49] Six months later, she was called to court again. There it was decided that she should consult with her and her children’s relatives and appoint a guardian (gerhab) for her underage child. The guardian should help her to run the farm and help to pay the rent. The final decision of the court, that was to have taken place two weeks later, is unfortunately not documented. In the meantime, the Grumserin was expected to do as she was instructed and was allowed to obtain necessary foodstuffs from the farm on condition that she did not diminish the farm’s value. There is no mention of a husband, who was either dead or had left the household, leaving the family with little means to maintain the homestead. In this case, a network of relatives or friends was necessary to support the family and help them to pay off debts and provide for their livelihood.

Other major costs were connected to the education and training of children. On 26th February 1357, Chuenradus, who was the cleric (pastor) in Latsch, received the sum of 53 lb. (636 gr.) on behalf of the underage children of the deceased Hainricus dicti Chrophlun from the widow. ^[50] The children were apparently Hainrich’s children from a previous marriage and Stine was their stepmother – at least she is not referred to as the children’s mother in the contract that was drawn up with the cleric. He, as a good friend of the children (melior amicus predictorum puerorum), pledged a rent of 5.5 modios of rye to Stine for the money received. ^[51] The rent stemmed from a field that was cultivated by a certain Ulricus and could be redeemed every year at Christmas by the boys or their procurators. The contract states rather vaguely that the pledge of the rent was made to the benefit of the upbringing and education of the children. ^[52] The children’s upbringing was thus associated with considerable costs.

Inheriting land or taking over a farmstead was also connected to financial burdens. A series of legal contracts from Meran registered by the notary Cristanus de Eppiano from April 1406 enables a glimpse into these practices. On 24th April 1406, Hainricus in Grübe, a farmer, decided to retire and settle his affairs. ^[53] He cultivated half a manor (media curia), the Prünsthof in Telle (in the parish of Schenna, some 15 km away from Meran). With the consent of his sons Chunrad, Iacob and Iaklin, he bequeathed his rights over half of the farmstead with all associated land and rights to another son, Ulric. In return, Ulric had to pay out his brothers by paying each of them ten lb. to redeem their inheritance rights. His father was to receive four staria of rye, one starium of wheat and one starium of barley annually as long as he would live. ^[54] The next entry made on the same date in the notary register is a contract of sale. Here, the brothers Ulric, Iacob and Iaklin sold their rights to the other part of the farmstead in Telle, to their brother Chunrad for 30 lb. ^[55] Chunrad was to possess half of the manor with all its possessions freely, on condition that he respected and paid the landlord’s levies (census domini). Finally, a third contract was recorded by the notary that safeguarded the payment of the sale. ^[56] Chunrad promised to pay his brothers Iacob and Iaklin 20 lb. for the aforementioned farmstead. Iacob was to receive his ten lb. within five years from the coming Pentecost, while Iaklin was to receive his share of ten lb. only after six years. No payment had to be made to the third brother Ulric because his share was offset against the inheritance of the other half of the manor.

This example shows how much money was needed to settle the inheritance affairs for a single farmstead: the father had to be taken care of and the two yielding brothers that did not receive any property, Iacob and Iaklin, had to be paid out. The payment of the modest sum of 20 lb. (approximately 30 day’s wages of a skilled craftsman) was stretched over a period of more than six years. Given that each of the four brothers’ share of half the manor was worth ten lb., the total value of the estate can be estimated at around 80 lb. Volker Stamm has pointed out that a rent-price relation of 1 to 10 for agricultural goods seems to have been the norm in medieval Tirol. ^[57] In this case, the Prünsthof would be economically able to pay a rent of eight lb. (not to be confused with the overall agricultural output). Chunrad had to pay out the yielding heirs with the production of only half of the manor and thus a payment period of around six years seems realistic.

Some of the consumption went beyond covering more basic needs and involved luxury spending – this was mainly the case for higher social classes. A vivid example of the consumption of the upper classes can be found in a charter from 1421. In April of that year, Alphart Goldecker, as guardian (gerhab) for two boys, Balthisar and Sigmund, settled a debt of their deceased brother Caspar in Meran. ^[58] The latter owed Jacob dem Pfisel of Bozen 8 mr. 2 lb. and 9 gr. for drapery. Another item of debt was the material for an extravagantly designed wedding dress, consisting of drapery and a fur coat (ayn vehrueckeine kürsen, daraus man ir yetzund gemacht hat ir prautgewant) of the boys’ sister Agnes. Altogether the debt totalled 22.5 mr. For this sum, the guardian gave the creditor a perpetual rent of 15 lb., stemming from one manor that was owned by the boys. Social distinction through clothing (fur on the dress) and the large sums of money involved illustrate that the upper classes already indulged in conspicuous consumption.

Apart from such social and economic pressures, wealthy peasants, burghers and minor nobles in Tirol invested their capital in leases, vineyards or houses that provided them with a regular income that far exceeded their economic needs. ^[59] Funds were needed to take over inherited properties and to cover related costs. There was even an active pursuit of profit in certain upper-class peasant families. The subsistence and non-subsistence consumption of peasants resulted in the need to acquire or save money, which again was spent to acquire foodstuff or artisanal products. ^[60] Thus, the consumption of large parts of the population was of great economic importance.

4 Financial Instruments Available for Saving, Investing and Acquiring Cash

In this section, the different tools available in medieval Tirol for saving, investing and acquiring money are described. Saving here means keeping money safe, so that it is available when needed, which usually involves little risk. Investing does involve risk, but also the potential for higher returns. Investing is usually associated with a long-term horizon, such as preparing for retirement. In both instances, the ability to convert money into cash – and thus maintain liquidity – is important.

Wealth was the decisive factor in deciding how someone saved or invested money. This is due to two reasons: Firstly, poor and rich households had different demands. The major concern of the poor was not to save for the future, but to maintain cash flow in the present. ^[61] Therefore, poor households resorted to different methods and most of all wanted liquidity, that is the possibility of converting their assets back into cash at low cost and short notice. ^[62] Secondly, land-poor households were to a large extent excluded from the formal credit market since they lacked security which could be mortgaged in exchange for credit. ^[63] In contrast, wealthier households had easy access to credit by mortgaging their property.

Before the emergence of insurance and modern capital markets, households had to resort to other ways to ensure a flow of capital or to save money for hardships. ^[64] For example peasant households depended upon internal transfers, having to resort more often to financial services within their social networks consisting of neighbours or relatives, where money was lent (with or without interest). ^[65] Although this sector of the medieval economy is difficult to reconstruct, an analysis of the court records of Meran (1388–1391) suggests that there was a lively informal small-scale credit market, the majority of which was conducted orally. ^[66] This need for informal credit must be understood against the backdrop of slim profit margins in agriculture, seasonal working patterns creating a volatile household income over the year, or the payment of wages in kind. ^[67] Payments in kind increased the need to raise cash from other sources to pay monetised levies such as taxes. Table 4 provides a schematic depiction of the assets and financial instruments used for acquiring cash or saving money recorded by the selected notaries. Borrowing within family or neighbourhood circles was not recorded by them, so the list is not exhaustive. Not all methods were suitable for saving or investing money or providing needy people with cash and vice versa. The choice of financial instrument depended on the specific need, the age or lifecycle status of those involved, the risk affinity and personal preferences of the people living in the household, as well as on the overall economic conditions. It can also be assumed that people (then as now) used a variety of financial instruments, some of which were riskier, others less risky, some very liquid and others less liquid.

In Tirol, markets for land and capital had already emerged in the 13^th century, so people had experience with this sort of investing and trading. Data from 13^th century Tirol suggests that the volume of markets for capital and real estate was already quite sizable; in Bozen at least 10 percent of the available assets flowed annually into the property and land market. ^[68] This means that there were ample possibilities for households to invest in the market and to adjust their portfolios to their specific needs. People could choose to be more or less marketoriented and resort to the financial strategy of their choice. The rest of this section will focus on analysing the variety of financial instruments used in Medieval Tirol.

5 General Trends of Saving and Investing in Medieval Tirol

Practices of saving and investing in Tirol were complex, and households were in many ways economically and socially entangled. A recurring topic is the transfer of property and assets at certain stages of life, such as at weddings or as inheritances. Cash savings, labour input, credit and real estate were used in different combinations. Some more examples from the sources will be provided here to show just such complexities and combinations, as well as other common factors that affected financial transactions.

In July 1357, domina Luitgardis donated to her husband, Bertholdus, all of her goods and provided insight into her economic life. ^[136] She probably did this because of the support her husband provided during their marriage. The contract stated that she made the donation because Bertholdus brought into the marriage, besides several estates, ten mr. that he used to pay off her debts and to work her land, which he did reliably, according to the contract. Here, different financial instruments and assets (saving, real estate, input of additional labour force) were combined. While the sources often mention the dowry, the settling of debts or the donation at the end of a person’s life separately, the combination of different types of financial instruments seems to have been the norm rather than the exception.

Another visible characteristic of economic behaviour was the impact of the seasonal rhythm of the financial market. Figure 1 shows the number of contracts and the respective number of credit transactions recorded by the notaries Konrad von Alerheim (1357), Jakob von Laas (1391) and Christianus de Eppiano (1406/07) per month and the result shows a strong correlation to the farming calendar.

Fig. 1

Seasonality of financial contracts in Medieval Tirol as recorded by selected notaries per month (1357 to 1407). Source: StA Meran, NI 3 (1357); Ni 22 (1391); NI 30 (1406/07).

There was a strong seasonality of the credit market with two peaks: The early peak of credit activity during the first half of the year is due to investments in agriculture. ^[137] The rise in May is connected to the annual Pentecost fair of Meran, which took place during this month in the respective years. In the summer, credit activity declined and came nearly to standstill before it rose again during harvest and vintage time. In October and November, most of the rents had to be paid, and grain had to be bought to stock up for the winter and for sowing. This explains the second peak of credit activity during the calendar year. The fairs were important payment dates. In addition, at the Pentecost and Martini fairs, goods could be sold or bought, cash was exchanged, and merchants and moneylenders offered their financial services. ^[138] Crops and wine sold on credit before the harvest were to be delivered.

As can be seen, this rhythm of financial activity remained rather stable over several decades. This seasonality stems from the fact that most of those involved in the credit market worked in the region’s dominant economic activity, that is, agriculture. Peasants were the dominant borrowing group, and they imparted their seasonality on all lending groups. The heavy borrowing during October and November was possible because other groups, whose economic activities were not fully entangled with agriculture, were willing to engage in the rural capital market. ^[139] The rural and urban capital markets were closely connected and people from Meran invested in the countryside and vice versa.

The data shows that an increasing number of people were involved in the capital and land market. In many cases, households – these could include married couples with or without children, stepchildren, guardians, or other relatives – appear as groups of people in the transactions. This may be attributed to the makeup of landholdings that were owned mostly by groups of relatives. Shares in a sixth or a quarter of a property were not uncommon. Numerous contracts involved cessions, waivers and sales of inheritance rights to relatives. Groups of people who were not related to each other and who jointly acquired property as an investment by pooling their resources were only rarely mentioned in the sources. ^[140]

The majority of people appear only once in the selected sample, suggesting that for many people a capital or property transaction was a rare affair. However, some individuals such as Cristanus de Swinsteg from St. Leonhard were vividly engaged. Cristanus de Swinsteg owned property in Riffian and St. Leonhard (Passeier Valley). On 26th February 1357, he leased out a vineyard in Riffian and a manor in St. Leonhard. ^[141] On the same day, he sold an annuity of grain for 12 mr. (1,440 gr.) with the right to redeem it. In June of that year, he sold another redeemable annuity of 5 lb. stemming from a house in St. Martin (also in Passeier Valley). ^[142] Five months later, he bought a redeemable annuity consisting of one carrada of wine from Chuenradus dictus Traechke for 14 mr. (1,680 gr.) from a vineyard in Algund. ^[143] Cristanus also bought and sold annuities, depending on economic preferences. ^[144] He invested the profits from his agricultural activities to build a portfolio of annuities and agricultural land in Passeier Valley and the surrounding area (all within around 35 km from St. Leonhard where he apparently lived). In addition, he used his property to acquire loans by selling annuities from it. He reinvested the capital in other investments. In this single notarial register, Cristanus appears as an investor five times in one year. This example suggests that there was a vivid local land market. Cristanus both sold and bought annuities, making him a debtor and creditor at the same time. However, his economic position enabled him to redeem the annuities sold and he therefore only paid a manageable amount of interest in absolute terms. For him, real estate and annuities were a good investment tool. However, there were few cases of people like Cristanus de Swinsteg owning such large portfolios of property. The majority of people mentioned in the notarial records seem to have made only one or two transactions a year.

People with smaller economic means had to resort to selling annuities to obtain credit and were often unable to redeem them for a long time. As a result, these people were burdened with additional levies, which were difficult to pay due to the low profit margins in agriculture. Annuities also had the drawback that they could not be converted back into cash at short notice. For such purposes, other instruments such as pawnbroking or selling the harvest on credit were more suitable. Thus, households had to and could resort to many different options of saving, investing or acquiring money.

6 Conclusion

Although sources are scarce, the study of the notary registers and court records allows valuable insight into the investment and saving strategies of individuals and households in medieval Tirol. It is possible to draw four main conclusions from this analysis.

1. Evidence from the second half of the 14^th century suggests that households used a combination of different financial tools for saving money or overcoming economic hardships. The question of purpose is essential because while some forms of investment were geared towards profit, others were better suited to bridge cash shortages or acquiring working capital. The use of different financial instruments was complementary and not mutually exclusive.

2. Family relations mattered, both for financial support as well as for financial obligations. On the one hand, the family was one of the first places to go for support and help. In addition, the pooling of economic resources within households enabled investment and social advancement, for example by allowing appropriate dowry payments to be made. On the other hand, family matters were strictly regulated, and financial obligations were carefully recorded. Older household members had to be cared for and children had to be raised and provided for. The claims of (co-)heirs had to be satisfied or their consent obtained from the estate administration. All such family matters were associated with financial burdens that needed to be addressed

3. The urban and rural land and capital markets appear to have been closely linked. Thanks to a standardised system of written documentation (by notaries), property titles, annuities and debts were easily transferable. Residents of rural areas also had access to common financial instruments, such as the sale of annuities. The annual fairs in cities like Meran, Bozen and Glurns, were important events for paying rents, bartering and exchanging money and thus bringing together the urban and rural population. However, the farming calendar also affected urban participants in financial markets.

4. Wealth mattered, both for investing capital, but also for obtaining credit. Wealthy households sought to diversify their portfolios by investing in various agricultural goods, houses and annuities. The assets could be used both as a source of income and as collateral on the credit market. Those who did not own real estate had to resort to other instruments. Raising working capital without personal wealth was difficult. In addition to the pledging of personal property, sharecropping enabled people to obtain capital, although this could be on unfavourable terms.

These findings suggest that the multitude of financial instruments available in medieval Tirol allowed different households to cope with a variety of everyday struggles. The available instruments were open to nearly everyone, but the financial outcome depended on the personal situation. Whereas annuities or sharecropping could be profitable investments (for the rich), they were often the only affordable credit option (for the poor). The combination of different financial instruments and strategies must be regarded as an important part in the financial history of the medieval period that enabled households to overcome adversities. These findings are particularly relevant because according to the literature, the medieval economy is characterised by an ever-increasing commercialisation.

As has been shown, even in the rural parts of a mountainous region such as Tirol, which was characterised by a high dependence on agriculture, economic activity was stimulated by the availability of various financial instruments. The overall picture is that even mountainous and agricultural regions (that are supposedly economically backward) were affected by commercialisation, but the specific development was not the same as that in urbanised regions. As Shami Gosh has pointed out, commercialisation took place at the same time in several regions of Europe, but the nature of the structural changes that took place differed. ^[145] The increasing commercialisation of the later Middle Ages can only be understood in a comparative context, looking at both urban and rural areas.