The giving and receiving of credit was not the preserve of medieval mercantile and urban society, but was also common among the villagers of medieval England. Disputes that arose from such debt were often recorded in manorial court rolls and it is through such evidence that Chris Briggs provides the first book-length investigation of rural credit in medieval England. This is a much needed survey of the types, formation and breadth of credit, expanding upon Briggs's own publications and the groundwork of historians like Elaine Clark and Phillipp Schofield. The themes of the six chapters encapsulate the aims of the book: what is the traditional historical view of rural credit, what forms does credit take, how are credit relationships formed, who are the creditors and debtors, how does credit affect social relations, and how reliable was the supply of credit over time?
Briggs addresses a number of assumptions about rural credit that still appear to persist in much of the historical literature. He counters the conventional view that increasing credit defaults were symptomatic of poverty and crisis, particularly during the early- fourteenth century. Traditionally, structures of medieval credit relations are seen as reinforcing inequalities and encouraging exploitation. Villagers sought to alleviate consumption difficulties ("exigency credit," 43), but often entered a downward spiral of debt and became in thrall to a particular creditor. Credit thus polarised the social and economic hierarchy within the peasantry. Briggs disagrees with this hypothesis and instead argues that there was a robust and sufficient credit system, the absence of which would have made things a whole lot worse. Indeed, for many, the availability of credit allowed them not only to survive periods of crisis but also to invest when the opportunity arose. Briggs's view of medieval rural credit thus errs towards the optimistic and he counters the "exploitative" model, highlighting the extent of horizontal lending links where those of similar wealth lent to each other.
Briggs employs the evidence of five manorial courts: Great Horwood in Buckinghamshire, and Balsham, Littleport, Oakington and Willingham, all in Cambridgeshire. The Oakington court also covers the manors of Cottenham and Dry Drayton, meaning that seven manors are studied in depth. Briggs argues that these manors are "midland" in type. In other words, they exhibited strong control by lords, with a large proportion of servile tenants, nucleated settlements and customary landholdings of standard size. Nevertheless, there are hints in the data that credit supply and enforcement mechanisms could vary significantly between manors. For instance, Littleport's particular commercial links led to a greater amount of sales credit and debt litigation. In broader terms, the evidential basis for a study of credit is problematic, as is often the case when attempting to use legal sources as a window onto everyday life. Manorial court records can tell us much about villagers, and without them our knowledge would be immeasurably poorer, but they also tend to emphasise certain activities to the neglect of others. In particular, credit cases in manorial courts, presented as private civil lawsuits, were about defaults and unpaid debts. They are recorded because something went wrong. The mass of uncontentious credit relations lies beyond our view and its scale and nature can only be inferred from those that were disputed. Even the cases themselves are often sparse in detail and tell us little about the content and length of a debt, the motivations of the creditor and debtor, and the reasons for default. For instance, only thirteen cases are found in the studied manors which tell us about the expected duration of a loan, between the advance of credit and due payment, though these are supplemented with a further eleven cases from the manor of West Halton (Lincolnshire) (72-3). Briggs also suggests that Balsham's records may be missing a set of court rolls used for debt pleas on market day; a gap in the sources that has important ramifications for his findings.
Ultimately, unusually informative and peculiar cases become nectar to the historian, but there is always a concern that they are atypical. Briggs recognises such pitfalls and is very careful in the conclusions he draws. He navigates his way through a number of suppositions and assumptions, due to the lack of detail in court roll cases, amassing a range of circumstantial evidence. At one point, Briggs states: "by incorporating explicit assumptions about the scale and significance of the missing information, and suggesting what the implications might be if those assumptions were changed, it is possible to strengthen the conclusions reached" (16). Appendix Two highlights some of the technical issues and a thorough awareness of the evidential limitations and potential unwieldiness of the task. There are a few minor uncertainties within the book. It is not entirely clear why cases of detinue were included with debt cases. It is also statistically unsurprising that those who appear in just one or two credit relationships were more likely to be "creditor only" or "debtor only" (132-6). Lastly, there is a question as to whether successful, reciprocal debt relationships (171-2) would necessarily appear in the court records at all, or more than once, given that repeated default would harm creditworthiness and trust between two parties.
Why did people engage in rural credit? Briggs highlights the importance of deferred payments for a commodity or service, even though debts were described in terms of cash amounts. A significant number of known debts involved grain or malt, which are more often deferred sales rather than consumption loans. Transactions were disseminated relatively widely across the village community, even if the level of engagement differed depending on whether it was servants requesting arrears of wages or tenants looking to invest in more land. Male heads of household appear most as creditors or debtors, while female participation is difficult to track given the restrictions of coverture. The limited number of women who appear in the courts were primarily single or widowed. There were very few specialist money-lenders and Briggs finds little evidence of villagers consistently tied to a single creditor or pushed into losing their land and even abject poverty. Seigneurial and clerical involvement in village credit was also limited, at least for institutionalised or flexible forms of loans or sales, as opposed to quasi-charitable devices such as delayed payment of rents or fines. Equally, there were few examples of involvement from the very poorest ranks, since resources and land still acted as barometers of creditworthiness. However, there is little evidence that land was regularly advanced as collateral, and Briggs is also cautious as to whether the leasing of land was part of a system of security on loans (86-92, 156-69). Correlation between the timing of leases and loans provides circumstantial evidence, but there is no concrete relationship. Subletting at times of crisis was a means to raise cash as much as providing collateral for loans.
Accusations of usury are rarely found in manorial court rolls, but this may be because flagrant cases were pursued in the church courts. Even though lending for interest was not an overt activity, it is possible that such interest was hidden within credit instruments. Briggs, however, argues that claims for damages should not be regarded as in lieu of interest, especially since there is little correlation between the size of a debt and the level of damages, while over half of creditors did not systematically pursue such compensation (74-9). However, lenders must surely have made a profit on many credit deals and damages were potentially one means to achieve this; the mechanisms for seeking and paying damages is a subject requiring further research.
Brigg's main aim throughout this book is to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of English rural credit. This is partly achieved through comparison with what we know about money-lending more widely in medieval European rural society, particularly France and Italy, and also with early modern England. This exercise is hampered somewhat by the differing bases of evidence and the varying approaches of the historiography. The notarial registers of southern Europe provide fascinating evidence of loans, but they are very different in form and purpose to the manorial court rolls of England, which were usually only concerned with the moment when debt relations broke down. Nevertheless, interesting comparisons can be made, such as the fewer straightforward cash loans in England compared to deferred payments. There is also a notable lack of involvement from urban money-lenders in the English countryside. At first glance, the English rural credit markets appear weak and inflexible, especially given the reliance on oral sureties. However, Briggs emphasises the advantages of the manorial court system and how it developed to provide relatively efficient means of debt enforcement that facilitated and encouraged the advancement of credit. Certain manorial courts established a reputation for swift and cheap justice, backed by mechanisms of confiscation and compensation. The institution of the manor court thus forms the foundation to Briggs's argument, and he suggests that it may have been unlike courts elsewhere in Europe. The English use of personalised pledges and sureties provided protection against default, even with unknown borrowers; it differed from the European notary system and its greater use of land as security, but was no less effective and may even have provided advantages in encouraging oral debt contracts.
This all raises the question as to whether all manorial courts were efficient and well-run and, if not, what were the repercussions for credit relationships? In the same vein, variations in lordship and control of the manor court become important when attempting to understand the flow of credit. The role of the lord in the manorial court is not discussed in detail in this book, particularly Crowland Abbey and the bishop of Ely, and the effect of strong lordship and seigneurial demands could possibly be considered further. Would lesser lords have tackled matters in a different way compared to relatively wealthy ecclesiastical landlords, and perhaps been more involved in credit relations? Similarly, regional peculiarities are not tackled specifically until the closing passages of the book, and there is uncertainty regarding how much the "traditional" viewpoint still holds good for East Anglian rural credit. Briggs hints that the freer land and tenant structures of East Anglian manors, with relatively weaker lordship and more fragmented land holdings, might have led to a more exploitative credit market and perhaps a greater use of land as security.
Overall, the manorial court data has been analysed in a systematic and rigorous manner, as shown by the supporting array of tables and figures. This includes looking at credit over time and much can be learnt from such aggregation of the figures. Briggs examines what happens to the credit supply during periods of dearth, mortality and monetary shortages. Care is required in understanding the range of possible interpretations and in recognising the fragility of the data when exploring long periods of time. However, tentative conclusions can be reached and Briggs posits that credit was advanced even during difficult economic times. This was a resilient and flexible credit market.
Briggs provides a fascinating and detailed analysis of rural credit that lays down markers for future research. The level of scholarship is excellent, with Briggs discussing the caveats and possibilities in a comprehensive manner, while also drawing upon a strong basis of previously published work on credit. A picture is painted of medieval communities permeated with important credit relations, as well as proactive villagers who were involved in relatively sophisticated dealings.