Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T06:34:36.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Sailing of the “Saint Esprit”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2010

Rosalind Kent Berlow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Saint Esprit was a merchant ship which sailed from the harbor of Marseilles in the spring of 1248, bound for Acre. One hundred and fifty contracts relating directly to this voyage are preserved in the notarial records. This article attempts to reconstruct the circumstances surrounding this venture and analyzes the statistical data available with regard to passengers, investors, and cargo. The general picture which emerges from studying the total venture offers a new perspective on medieval business.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 345 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

The author is an Associate Professor of History at Touro College, New York City, and a member of the Institute for Research in History. An earlier version of this paper was read at the Western Michigan Conference on Medieval Studies, May 9, 1974. The author would like to pay tribute to the memory of Professor Raymond de Roover, in whose seminar at the City University of New York Graduate Center she was first introduced to the records of Amalric of Marseilles. This article, unfortunately, was written too late to benefit from his criticism.

1 The date of the sailing is presumed to be shortly after March 31, 1248, the date of the latest investment recorded for the voyage; see Blancard, L., Documents inidits sur le commerce de Marseille au moyen âge, vol. 1 (Marseilles, 1884), no. 335Google Scholar. All references to documents in this publication are to the records of Amalric of Marseilles.

2 The work by von Heyd, Wilhelm, Histoire du commerce du Levant au moyen âge, French trans. Furcy Raynaud, 2 vols. (1885–86; rpt. Amsterdam, 1967)Google Scholar is still the basic study of the commerce of the Levant.

3 These preparations are described by Joinville, , Histoire de Saint Louis, ed; de Wailly, Natalis (Paris, 1874), ch. 2Google Scholar; see also Jordan, William C., “Supplying Aigues-Mortes for the Crusade of 1248: The Problem of Restructuring Trade,” in Jordan, William C., McNabb, Bruce, and Ruiz, Teofilo F., eds., Order and Innovation in the Middle Ages (Princeton, 1976), pp. 165–72Google Scholar. On the activity in the Mediterranean ports, see Pernoud, Régine, Essai sur l'histoire du port de Marseille (Bibliothèque de l'Institute historique de Provence, Collection de textes et d'é-tudes sur la Provence et pays limitrophes, fasc. 11, Marseilles, 1935), pp. 175–76Google Scholar; Byrne, Eugene H., Genoese Shipping in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Cambridge, Mass., 1930), pp. 5–11.Google Scholar

4 See Bach, Erik, “Etudes Genoises: Le Minutier de Lanfranco,” in Studi in Onore di Armando Sapori, vol. 1 (Milan, 1957), pp. 377–79Google Scholar, on the impact of earlier crusades on merchant activity as reflected in the Genoese notarial registers.

5 “The Statutes of Marseilles of 1252–55” (Pardessus, J. M., ed., Collection de Lois Maritimes antérieures au XVIIIe siècle, vol. 4 [Paris, 1837], pp. 278–80Google Scholar) contain the laws pertaining to the ship's scribe. This earliest extant version of the Statutes includes many sections that repeat earlier provisions. The laws regarding the ship's scribes undoubtedly reflect the common practices on board the larger ships in 1248. See also Byrne, Genoese Shipping, pp. 59–61, on the duties of the ship's scribe.

6 Lastig, Gustav, Ein Beitrag zur Handelsgeschichte und Handelsrecht von Marseille (Halle, 1908)Google Scholar, made a preliminary step in this direction, but did not attempt to encompass all of the evidence; he reached very different conclusions from this paper's.

7 Hilmar C. Krueger, “Genoese Merchants, their Partnerships and Investments, 1155 to 1164,” in Studi in Onore di Armando Sapori, vol. 1, p. 260, n. 8, and p. 262, nn. 11 and 13; Bach, “Etudes genoises,” p. 380.

8 For the complete list of documents, see Tables 1 and 2.

9 Only a small fraction of the total number of transactions which Amalric recorded dealt with local commerce or routine legal matters such as wills, marriages, apprenticeship agreements, and land transactions. Most of these have been relegated to the Appendix in Blancard, Documents, vol. 2, pp. 312–44.

10 Ibid., no. 374. Chartering space on board the Sicard on April 4, 1248, required that the ship be ready to sail in mid-April. See also ibid., nos. 106, 167, and 393.

11 The volume of business involving the Saint Esprit began to grow slowly, with only 3 acts on the first day it was mentioned, but swelled to 33 on the next to last day before the presumed sailing.

12 The registers of Amalric contain references to documents drawn up by at least nine other notaries; Blancard, Documents, nos. 299, 353, 367, 390, 421, 436, 516, 622, 964, 991, and 1014. The list of citizens present in 1243 to ratify the treaty with Raymond Berenger, Count of Provence (see Bourrilly, Victor-L., Essai sur l'histoire politique de la commune de Marseille des origines à la victoire de Charles d'Anjou [Aix-en-Provence, 1925], pp. 291–93Google Scholar) includes the names of nine notaries in addition to the scribe who drew up the document. Amalric's name is not among them.

13 Despite the fact that experienced businessmen evidently resorted to the notarial record with regularity even when investing in the activities of members of their immediate family (e.g., Blancard, Documents, nos. 154, 224, 239–41, and 273–74), the “Statutes of Marseilles,” Pardessus, Collection, vol. 4, p. 269 provided protection “de qua commanda vel societate facta erit carta publica aut non.”

14 See discussion and documents in Lopez, Robert S. and Raymond, Irving W., Medieval Trade in the Mediterranean World (New York, 1955), pp. 174–84Google Scholar. For recent studies on the early history of the commenda, see Udovitch, Abraham L., Partnership and Profit in Medieval Islam (Princeton, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Pryor, John H., “The Origins of the Commenda Contract,” Speculum, 52 (Jan. 1977), 5–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 The statutory protection afforded investors from the claims of other investors (Pardessus, Collection, vol. 4, pp. 266–69) implies that they could make claims against other assets of the travelers. For a discussion on the evidence provided by Amalric, see below.

16 Blancard, Documents, nos. 236, 239, and 240. In no. 236, Durantus Johannes of Montpellier supplied only 20 percent of the capital “in societate et ex causa societatis,” although profits were still to be divided equally. The terms of the others were in conformity with the norm. The societas is sometimes referred to as a “bilateral commenda,” as opposed to the commenda-proper, or “unilateral commenda.” The remaining documents which relate to the sailing of the Saint Esprit (15 contracts, or 10 percent) were promises to pay within two weeks of arrival at the port of debarkation, usually to a fellow traveler. The significance of these contracts will also be discussed below.

17 Weber, Max, Zur Geschichte des Handelsgesellschaften (Stuttgart, 1889), pp. 19–22.Google Scholar

18 Sombart, Werner, Der Moderne Kapitalismus, vol. 1 (2nd ed.; Munich, 1916), pp. 299–302.Google Scholar

19 Michael M. Postan, “Partnership in English Medieval Commerce,” Studi in Onore di Armando Sapori, vol. 1, pp. 524–27, rpt. in Postan, Medieval Trade and Finance (Cambridge, 1973), pp. 68–71.Google Scholar

20 E.g., Lopez and Raymond, Medieval Trade, pp. 183–84. Krueger, “Genoese Merchants,” p. 263, found 36 examples in the records of John the Scribe. The societas was the prevalent form of investment in these records, although by the thirteenth century, the commenda predominated in the Genoese documents also; see Bach, “Etudes genoises,” p. 382. Goitein, Solomon D., “Commercial and Family Partnerships,” Islamic Studies, 3 (Sept. 1964), 326, also noted that merchants normally concluded several partnerships.Google Scholar

21 Krueger, “Genoese Merchants,” p. 259; Bach, “Etudes genoises,” p. 380.

22 Lopez, Robert S., The Commercial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 950–1350 (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1971), p. 77Google Scholar. I do not quote this statement to imply that Professor Lopez considered this a solution, but to underscore the inadequacies of attempts at resolving this problem to date.

23 See, for example, Raymond de Roover, “Cambium ad Venetias: Contribution to the History of Foreign Exchange,” Studi in Onore di Armando Sapori, vol. 1, pp. 629–48, for a discussion of one practice. Others are discussed in Lopez and Raymond, Medieval Trade, pp. 157–58, 162–63.

24 In the case of usurious contracts the motivation is clear; namely, to circumvent ecclesiastical prohibitions. See a summary of the problem in Gilchrist, John, The Church and Economic Activity in the Middle Ages (New York, 1969), pp. 104–15Google Scholar. Since the canonists tended to be more amenable to arguments based on remuneration for labor and expenses (see Baldwin, John W., “The Medieval Merchant before the Bar of Canon Law,” Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 44 [1959], 295)Google Scholar, it would have been more advantageous to inflate the profits of the traveler rather than the reverse.

25 More sophisticated methods of regulating the international money market were already in use. Local currency could be transferred home by means of a letter of credit drawn on the Hospital of Saint John in Jerusalem; Blancard, Documents, no. 406. Or, rather than transporting money to its place of issuance, it could be exported to another locality where it was in demand for trade, with its place of issuance; sterlings, for example, were exported to Genoa (nos. 537 and 538), which was probably importing wool from England. The shipment of wool mentioned in document no. 471 probably originated in England, as the name of the daughter of the investor, Ehglesa, suggests. Document no. 505 also records a shipment of wool to Genoa. Cheap woolen goods originating in Genoa were transshipped from the port of Marseilles (no. 245).

26 See Bourrilly, Essai, p. j. 36, p. 388. Out of 36 documents drawn up by Amalric in the second half of March 1248 that mention the rate of exchange, 30 give a rate ranging from 2.5 bezants, the official rate, to 2.593 bezants per pound of mixed money of Marseilles. Régine Pernoud, “Le moyen âge jusquʼen 1291,” in Histoire du commerce de Marseille (publ. by the Chamber of Commerce of Marseilles under the direction of Gaston Rambert; Paris, 1949), vol. 1, p. 332, declares that the bezants were generally made in Provence or Italy and were of questionable weight, but gives no evidence to support this statement.

27 For the exchange rate of raymonds, see Blancard, Documents, nos. 123, 141, and 182; 1£ royal crowns is worth 3£ raymonds; ibid., no. 308.

28 The conversion rate of melgorians can be calculated from the equivalencies given in saracen gold bezants; see ibid., nos. 90, 231; and 469. (No. 89 contains an obvious mistake in specifying money of Marseilles instead of melgorians.) The following conversion rates have been used: 1£ melgorian = 1.7£ mm (“mixed money of Marseilles”); 1£ raymonds = .5£ mm; 1£ royal crowns = 1.5£ mm; 1£ provisine = 1.7£ mm; 1£ tournois = 1.7£ mm; 1£ genoise = 1.12£ mm; 1 bezant of Acre = .4£ mm. The documents show some variation in rates, which may conceal an interest or service charge in some cases. The rates that have been used represent an average of the values given in the documents and are fairly consistent with those suggested by authorities who have studied the problem. The basic works consulted on money and monetary weights are Blancard, Louis, Essai sur les monnaies de Charles ler (Marseilles, 1868)Google Scholar, and the articles on medieval weights by Guilhiermoz, Paul, “Note sur les poids du Moyen Âge,” Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Chartes, 67 (1906), 161–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 402–50; “Remarques sur les poids,” ibid., 80 (1919), 1–100; and “De la taille du denier dans le haut Moyen Âge,” ibid., 84 (1923), 265–83. Much work remains to be done on the local currencies of this period, but inaccuracies in the conversion rates would not significantly distort the conclusions of this paper. The exchange rates given in the later merchant manuals, such as Pegolotti, Francesco Balducci, La Practica della Mercatura, ed. Nevins, Allan (Cambridge, 1936)Google Scholar, which are often such useful guides to medieval currency exchange, unfortunately cannot be used for the rates in the mid-thirteenth century.

29 Blancard, Documents, no. 374. See below, n. 37, for other documents related to the Sicard, which seems to have aroused much less general interest than the Saint Esprit.

30 See Byrne, Genoese Shipping, p. 10.

31 The conditions under which pilgrims in the thirteenth century traveled can only be described as appalling. The “Statutes of Marseilles of 1252” (Pardessus, Collection, vol. 4, p. 278) required that a minimum space 2.5 palmorum wide by 6.5 or 7.0 palmorum long (24.75 inches by 64.35 to 69.3 inches) be reserved for each pilgrim and forbade the practice of renting this space to two men to sleep head to foot. The necessity felt by the citizens of Marseilles to legislate this minimum indicates that the provision of even less space had not been unusual. In the spring of 1248, passage for pilgrims from the port of Marseilles, including food, drink, taxes, and other fees, was provided at the cost of 19s per pilgrim; Blancard, Documents, no. 165. Cargo space for goods destined for Acre on board the Sicard was chartered at 30s per quintal; ibid., no. 374.

32 Information on the capacity of ships at this date would not be helpful in resolving this problem, inasmuch as there is no way of estimating the volume or weight of the known cargo.

33 “Insured” merchandise has been calculated at twice the amount of “insurance”; see below, n. 77, for the evidence to justify this estimation. Travelers on the Saint Esprit had also incurred liabilities in the amount of 1,501£, usually payable within two weeks after the safe arrival of their merchandise at Acre.

34 The mixed money of Marseilles was stipulated as weighing 26 shillings to the mark and was struck at the count of 90 shillings per mark of fine silver, or 288 pure; see Blancard, Documents, nos. 130, 136, 141, 182, and 260. The mark of Montpellier, the standard weight in use in Marseilles at this time, was 239.015 grams (8.2655 oz.); see Guilhiermoz, “Note,” p. 448. The silver value of the dollar has been calculated on the basis of the closing price of silver futures on the Commodity Exchange of New York on Friday, January 19, 1979.

35 See Appendix.

36 The 68 transactions recorded by Amalric during this period with regard to the sailing of the Saint Gilles, bound for Messina, mention assets worth 5504£. The 25 known travelers carried assets averaging 220£. The average single transaction was 81£. The 17 transactions recorded with regard to the sailing of the Bonne Aventure, bound for Ceuta, mention assets worth 858£. The 4 known travelers carried assets averaging 214£. The average single transactions was 50£.

37 See Blancard, Documents, nos. 445, 448, 465, 469, 485–89, 522–23, 528, 532, 541, 543–44, and 547–48. In addition, nos. 374 and 511 also involve consignments on board the Sicard for which no value is stated, suggesting that the assets of the travelers on the Sicard were probably even higher than those on the Saint Esprit.

38 A contract frequently expressed the value of the merchandise as “extimatos et appreciatos inter me et te cum naulo et aliis expensis,”; see ibid., no. 84. No document for space on the Saint Esprit has been preserved, but the rate was probably comparable to that charged on board the Sicard, i.e., 30 s per quintal; ibid., no. 374. This and other documents for cargo space (nos. 106, 167, 181, 188, and 493) involved large blocks. Contracts for individual shipments to any overseas destination are exceptional; e.g., see no. 533, in which the primary purpose was probably to record the assumption of risk on the part of the captain rather than the freight charges. Individuals may have made their own arrangements for space from the men who controlled blocks of space and acted as shipping brokers. Petrus Argallola of Figeac, for example, contracted for space for fifty quintals of almonds on board the Sicard (ibid., no. 374), but evidently did not intend to sail with the ship since a week later he commended almonds worth 80£ melg. to William Frone who was sailing on the Sicard.

39 A common type of commenda involved the investment of money which the traveler acknowledged as “implicatas in comunibus meis,”; Blancard, Documents, nos. 9, 44, 47, and 52.

40 See Table 1. There was probably a greater tendency to specify the place of origin of more valuable cloth which would exaggerate its relative importance. It should be borne in mind that 57 percent of the shipment of cloth and canvas cannot be identified as to place of origin.

41 See Table 2. Investments in other shipments to Acre during the period from March 14 to April 16 show a similar pattern. Cloth made up 82.7 percent of the specified cargo, cloth of Chalons representing 42.6 percent of the identifiable cloth. Shoddy, however, accounted for about 46 percent of the cloth shipment. The only item not included in the recorded investments in the sailing of the Saint Esprit that was shipped around this time to Acre was almonds; Blancard, Documents, nos. 411, 448, 472, 511, and 528. The cargo shipped to Messina was very similar: cloth making up 90 percent of the total specified merchandise, the most important being the cloth of Chalons, 43 percent, and cloth of Provins, almost 40 percent. Although there is much less information with regard to shipments to North Africa, that which exists exhibits quite a contrast. Cloth and canvas accounted for 30 percent of the cargo consigned to Bougie, canvas being four-fifths of that item. Spices made up 65 percent of the total specified merchandise; ibid., nos. 125, 341, 354, 451, 464, 466, 474, 499, 500, 517, 535, and 536. Of the total specified merchandise bound for Ceuta 50 percent was cloth, with cotton accounting for 40 percent of that figure and worked silk 35 percent; spices were the second largest item, amounting to 12 percent of the known cargo; ibid., nos. 1, 3, 6, 13, 24, 32, 36, 38, 39, 49, 50, 257, 272, 400, 425, and 441.

42 Some of the other transactions recorded by Amalric relate to the settlement of commendas but seldom specify the amount rendered; or, when this is stated, the transactions do not indicate the amount of the original investment. See Blancard, Documents, nos. 309 and 406.

43 Ibid., no. 444.

44 See above, n. 10.

45 On profits recorded by John the Scribe, see Krueger, “Genoese Merchants,” pp. 265–66.

46 Ibid., no. 419.

47 Ibid., no. 18.

48 Book II, ch. xix in Méry, Louis and Guindon, F., Histoire analytique et chronologique des actes de déliberations du corps et du conseil de la municipalité de Marseille (Marseilles, 1844), vol. 3, p. lxxxix.Google Scholar

49 The interest to be paid was usually concealed by expressing the amount to be repaid in another currency. The difference between the standard rate of exchange (see above, n. 28) and that listed in a particular contract would indicate the amount of interest paid.

50 Blancard, Documents, no. 414.

51 Ibid., nos. 344, 345, and 396.

52 E.g., Berenger Eguezier, citizen of Marseilles, commended 20£ of saffron and 20£ towards the cargo of his brother Bertrandus; Blancard, Documents, nos. 273 and 274. He also invested 50£ with R. de Nercio for himself and 25£ to the same on behalf of associates; ibid., nos. 202 and 204. Laurencius de Posquerius also received an investment of 25£ from Berenger and another 25£ from the association; ibid., nos. 203 and 205. One of the associates, Raimundo Borgundione, placed more substantial investments on his own. Tin, rope, and English hemp, valued at 200£, were entrusted to his brother-in-law, R. de Nercio (ibid., no. 207), while Laurencius de Posquerius received 72£ 10s (ibid., no. 208). His cousin, Petrus de Castellada, was entrusted with bunting worth 94£ (ibid., no. 227).

53 The number of those who are identified in the documents of Amalric can be augmented by the lists of citizens preserved in contemporary treaties; see Bourrilly, Essai, pp. 390–93, 397–400, 425–27. The number is probably still incomplete. The prominent role of citizens of Marseilles is certainly to be expected at this time, the heyday of local self-government. In addition to the basic work on the political history of Marseilles by Bourrilly, see the summary by Pernoud, “Le moyen âge,” pp. 109–14. The communal archives of the city contain the privileges of 1248 accorded to citizens o f Marseilles in the Holy Land; Isnard, Émile, Inventaire sommaire chronologique (Marseilles, 1939)Google Scholar, nos. 106 and 107.

54 Petro Martino, changer, entrusted 36£ 9s worth of crude hemp on board the Saint Esprit (Blancard, Documents, no. 2) and 32£ 10s worth of wool on board the Bonaventure (ibid., no. 505). Bernardo Gasco invested cloth of Chalons and buckram as well as bezants in the voyage of the Saint Esprit (ibid., nos. 84, 88, and 217); bila and gold thread of Genoa in the Sicard (ibid., no. 543); and tin, copper, and cloth in the Bonaventure to Genoa (ibid., no. 531). Giraudo Alamanno's investments in the Saint Esprit included saffron, canvas, and cloth (ibid., nos. 35, 46, 108, and 330); taris were sent to Messina (ibid., no. 503); and other documents record his sale of chestnuts (ibid., no. 58) and receipts on deposit (ibid., nos. 232 and 334).

55 E.g., Blancard, Documents, nos. 31, 55, and 71.

56 E.g., Dietaviva Alberti and Guidaloto Guidi of Siena invested saffron valued at 162£ 9s in the voyage of the Saint Esprit; ibid., no. 230. All of their other investments made about this time required a fixed return; see ibid., no. 17 to Messina, nos. 92, 102, 340, and 351 to Champagne, nos. 325, 344, and 345 for loans. No investment in the Saint Esprit is recorded for Otto Angosolla of Piacenza, but see nos. 413, 434, and 435 for investments in other overseas ventures, and nos. 101, 150, and 151 for Champagne.

57 Ibid., nos. 65, 127, 140, and 277. For the general picture of the role of the Jews of Marseilles based on the records of Amalric, see Loeb, Isidore, “Les Negotiants juifs à Marseille au milieu du XIIIe siècle,” Revue des Etudes Juives, 16 (1888), 73–83.Google Scholar

58 Blancard, Documents, no. 60.

59 See the regulations of societas and commendas in Pardessus, Collection, vol. 4, pp. 266–69.

60 E.g., Marsselerio Costantino, changer, citizen of Marseilles, commended 20£ on board the Saint Esprit (Blancard, Documents, no. 312); 20£ on board the Saint Gilles (ibid., no. 336); 14£ on board the Saint Antoine (ibid., no. 252); and leather worth 35£ on board the Bonaventure (ibid., no. 539).

61 Inconsistencies in the versions of names given in the documents may obscure the fact that an even larger number of investors may have made multiple investments. Was Petro de Podio (ibid., nos. 168 and 285) the same man as Petro Cambaforti de Podio (nos. 111, 112, and 132)? The notary's practice of translating French names into Latin—which the editor attempted, often imaginatively and inconsistently, to translate back into French in his summaries—only adds to the confusion. The surname de Templo is rendered in French as Dutemple and du Temple. Pierre Arles also appears as Pierre Darle. The notary Johannes Uticensis becomes Jean Duzes. The notarial index at the end of the register (ibid., vol. 2, pp. 345–67) is helpful in correcting these errors.

62 E.g., see above, nn. 52, 54, and 60.

63 Blancard, Documents, no. 318, refers to a court action; nos. 389–90 involve the appointment of arbitrators and their decision.

64 Ibid., no. 57.

65 Ibid., no. 397, and probably nos. 431 and 436.

66 Ibid., nos. 84, 88, 119, 141, and 144.

67 A younger man would obviously be better able to withstand the hardships of travel and be more capable of defending the ship and his possessions. The traveler was required by law to be armed and the weapons he was to carry were stipulated in the “Statutes of Marseilles” according to the value of the merchandise he accompanied; see Pardessus, Collection, vol. 4, p. 275.

68 Blancard, Documents, nos. 59 and 80 record investments made in other voyages by travelers preparing to embark on the Saint Esprit.

69 Ibid., nos. 109, 118–19, 140–44, 155, 166, 174–75, 185, 194–95, 217, and 275.

70 Except for “insured” personal property and investments “implicatas in comunibus meis,” there would have been no need to mention the existence of personal property in a notarial document. Other documents show that some of the travelers had quite substantial assets; e.g., ibid., no. 106, in which R. de Cadro arranged for the rental of his own ship to a group of merchants bound for Naples, and no. 295, the will of Petrus de Sancto Paulo of Montpellier.

71 Ibid., no. 29.

72 See above, n. 68.

73 See Blancard, Documents, no. 499, an investment for a companhia with R. de Nercio who sailed on the Saint Esprit. The companhia was a more permanent association than the commenda or the societas, and had a quasi familial character. Documents recording its formation are relatively rare. See, for example, no. 112, in which a companhia was formed with a traveler who supplied one-third of the capital in expectation of receiving half the profits, as in the societas. The assets of the companhia were then commended to the traveler who would be entitled to the usual quarter of the profits, which he agreed to reinvest in the companhia. In another case, a companhia formed for the voyage on the Sicard, it was stipulated that half of the profits were to be reinvested after the voyage; see no. 486. Examples that reveal the companhia in action, however, are very common; e.g., ibid., nos. 88, 123, and 204.

74 No such document is preserved with regard to the travelers on the Saint Esprit, but see ibid., no. 539, for the form such an appointment might take.

75 Ibid., no. 295.

76 The practice of using an exchange contract for sarracen gold bezants, whose rate was fixed by law, payable after the safe arrival of the goods, makes it impossible to determine the actual charges. On the general question of insurance, see de Roover, Florence Edler, “Early Examples of Marine Insurance,” this Journal, 5 (Nov. 1945), 172–200.Google Scholar

77 The travelers evidently sought only partial coverage. Raimund Boquerio, for example, insured two bails of cloth on the Saint Esprit for 112£; Blancard, Documents, no. 145. The value was not stated but in other transactions—e.g., ibid., nos. 161 and 343—the unit price of a bail of cloth ranged from 77£ 17s to 258£ 5s, indicating the coverage might have been anywhere from 21 percent to 72 percent. Deducting the price of canvas, which was comparatively stable, from the purchase made by Daniel de Auria (ibid., no. 138) indicates that the unit price of the cloth he bought was 123£. He insured one bail for the voyage to Messina for 42£ (ibid., no. 321) or 35 percent of its estimated value. Travelers bound for Acre on the Sicard received 6 pieces of cloth of Chalons valued at 42£ 10s melg. (melgorian) from an agent of W. de Lodieva (ibid., no. 488) who, earlier that day, had insured six cloths of Chalons for 24£ melg. (ibid., no. 469) or approximately 56 percent. It seems reasonable to estimate the value of insured cargo at twice the amount covered by insurance.

78 Ibid., nos. 89, 90, and 533. Occasionally the risk might be assumed by the merchant who sold the goods (e.g., ibid., nos. 68, 72, and 73), or a banker (e.g., ibid., no. 435).

79 The events in the spring of 1248 (see above) would have made the need for such protection very obvious.

80 In most contracts the date of completion is not given; presumably it took place within a short time after the return of the ship. Two contracts (Blancard, Documents, nos. 228 and 230) were settled by R. de Cadro on March 22, 1249. Since shipping in the Mediterranean came to a virtual halt between November and March, he must have returned to Marseilles in the fall and spent the winter disposing of his goods. Some investors had a long wait before their accounts were settled. Hugo Boverio did not receive the return on his investment of 16£ 10s until March 31, 1250; ibid., no. 291. He was still more fortunate than Auberto Gombaudo who did not receive the settlement of his investment to Messina until April 1258; ibid., no. 245.

81 Arch. Dep. B 1501, ff. 22–44, cited by Pernoud, “Le moyeri age,” p. 339, recorded payment of 109£ 7s duty on its return to Marseilles. This duty, known as the Table de la mer, was assessed at the rate of Id per £ on the goods of foreigners, according to a treaty of 1252; Bourrilly, Essai, p. 420. The Saint Esprit can therefore be estimated as returning that year with a cargo of which 26,244£ was in the hands of non-citizens of Marseilles.