<<
>>

Consumptive, Productive, and Secured Credit

The majority of texts in the Digest and Codex do not provide us much context (if any at all) about the identity of the creditor and debtor, the purpose of the

4 3 Imperial family: TPSulp 45, 51 and 52 (= file C.

Novius Eunus); TPSulp 67, 68, 94 and 95. Senatorial class: TPSulp 54, 73 and 109.

44 Camodeca 2003: 86-7. See also Rathbone and Temin 2008: 388.

45 On imperial slaves in the archive of the Sulpicii, see Lerouxel 2016: 220-1, 230-2.

46 Lerouxel 2016: 216-7.

47 Lerouxel 2016: 224. However, the money received from the imperial slave had to be repaid already after one month and ten days, so this may very well have concerned a short-term cash deposit for reasons other than funding the Sulpicii bank. Jones (2006: 65) considers it likely that the cash was deposited in order to pay shippers and merchants of overseas goods destined for the imperial household.

48 For example, TPSulp 51, 52, and 55.

secured debt, or the nature of the collateral. They refer to the pledged objects in neutral terms, such as ‘thing(s)' (res),[287] ‘pledges' (pignora) and/or ‘hypothecs' (hypothecae),[288] or ‘charged object' (res obligata).[289] Creditors and debtors are usually referred to as debitor and creditor and the secured debt (if mentioned at all) with words such as ‘money' (pecunia),[290] [291] [292] [293] [294] ‘principal' (sors)/3 and ‘indebted­ness' (debitum).54 I would hypothesize, however, that in the great majority of texts in which these words are used, the secured debts arose under loan agreements, certainly where the same text also refers to interest (usuris). In some texts we find more details about the nature of the collateral. In addition to texts on generic pledges (invecta et illata, grex, taberna) and maritime loans, we have a small number of texts on other objects, such as leather bags (Scaev.

D. 13.7.43.1), marble plates (Scaev. D. 20.4.21.1), and precious metals and min­erals (e.g., Scaev. D. 32.33.2). There are many texts in the Digest and Codex which expressly state that the pledged objects are land, buildings, or slaves. From most texts it cannot be deduced whether the acquisition of these valuable objects was financed by the loans they secured, but there are some interesting exceptions. We have literary evidence of secured credit granted by profes­sional and non-professional lenders (including the imperial treasury), ranging from small short-term consumptive loans to large long-term product­ive ones.55

Consumptive credit

The hypothesis of Finley is that, as in ancient Greece, there was not much productive credit in Rome. Money was borrowed for consumptive rather than for commercial purposes?6 To be sure, there is plenty of evidence in the legal and epigraphic sources on consumer credit, often secured by pledges of jewel­lery, precious metals, or valuable cloth(es). Literary texts illustrate that taking up consumptive credit from bankers against collateral was a vital part of the imperial Roman economy.[295] In Pro P. Sestio, Cicero contemptuously refers to a fellow citizen whose ‘books were even often pledged for wine’/[296] In one of his epigrams Martial ridicules someone who pledged his ring to a banker for a small loan to finance a dinner/[297] That these literary texts reflect reality is shown by graffiti from Pompeii. In the house of A. Granius Romanus there are graffiti recording loans for which jewellery and clothes were pledged to the female pawnbroker Faustilla. One of the graffiti reads:

CIL IV, 8203 Idibus Iul(i)is inaures pos(i)tas ad Faustilla(m) pro (denariis)

II usura(m) deduxit aeris a(ssem) ex sum(ma) XXX.

On the Ides of July gold earrings were placed with Faustilla; for two denarii she has deducted one copper as from a total of 30.

This inscription states that the interest is ‘deducted' from the principal sum, which appears to refer to the practice of charging interest by deducting it from the money actually paid out by way of mutuum.[298] For another loan by the same Faustilla, with a principal amount of 50 denarii, a traveller’s cloak (paenula) and a small cloak (palliolum) were pledged.

Here we seem to be dealing with small pawnbrokers granting short-term (weeks, months) credit for consumer purposes against pledges. In these cases the pledges are likely to have been possessory ones. The graffiti use the verb ponere (in CIL IV, 8203: ‘pos(i)tas’): in the jurists’ writings the expression pignori ponere almost always refers to a possessory pledge.[299] From Roman Egypt we also have epigraphic evidence of what presumably was a consumptive loan secured by a possessory pledge of valuables. In P. Vindob. L 135, cavalryman L. Caecilius Secundus declares to owe another soldier, C. Pompeius, 400 imperial and Ptolomaic drachmas against a pledge of ‘a helmet inlaid with silver, a silvered insigne and a silver scabbard for a dagger adorned with ivory’.[300] The purpose of this loan is not stated, but as the loan was between two soldiers it is likely to have been a consumptive one. In the Digest and Codex there are texts concerning the pledge of jewellery/[301] pearls/4 (bare or wrought) gold65 or silver/6 silverware/7 or other valuables/8 These objects are typically assets serving as collateral for consumptive loans, with the exception of bare gold and silver (which may also have been used as collateral for productive credit)/9

Productive credit

There is much evidence in the legal sources of productive credit as well, even if one only mainly looks (as I have done) to the evidence of secured credit/0 Not only did the Romans take over the Greek maritime loan: in the archive of the Sulpicii and in the Digest we encounter secured credit granted to grain merchants, marble dealers, cloth merchants, oil sellers, and shipowners.71 There are strong indications that a significant part of the loans in the Sulpicii archive were productive in the sense that they facilitated production and commerce.72 This is what one would expect in case of bankers who were active in the commercial hub that was Puteoli in the first century ad. In par­ticular, the loans to grain traders, secured by a pledge on wheat and other foodstuffs (TPSulp 51, 52, and 79) and the loan to (presumably) a clothes merchant, secured by a pledge of precious cloth or clothing (‘purpuras laconicas’: TPSulp 83 and 84) must have involved productive creditTh There are also testationes in the archive that appear to concern the auction of slaves who were charged (fiducia) in order to secure productive loans to slave traders.[302] In all these cases, productive credit was secured by real security over the type of assets which the borrower used for his business.

The same pattern can be detected in many examples of productive credit in the Digest. One example of secured productive credit is Scaev. D. 20.1.34 pr., concerning a pledge of the floating stock of a shop (taberna). Although the purpose of the secured credit is not mentioned, this is likely to have been to finance the purchase of new merchandise/5 In another text from Scaevola (D. 13.7.43.1) the grain merchant Titius borrowed money from Gaius Seius against a pledge of leather bags: again the purpose of the loan is likely to have been the purchase of new grain. In D. 14.5.8 Paul discusses the liability of a master for certain acts of a slave who had been appointed in order to ‘provide loans and to accept pledges^6 and who seems to have been the (sole) manager of a bank financing the grain tradeTh Ulp. D. 14.3.13 pr. is not concerned with secured credit. This text does, however, demonstrate how the master's liability for money borrowed by his slave, who was authorized to manage an olive oil trade in Arles, could depend on the productive nature of the loan. In particu­lar, where it could not be proven by the lender that the slave had also been expressly authorized to take up loans, the master could still be liable if it could be demonstrated that the money was borrowed in order to finance the merchandise. Also in relation to maritime trade we can find many examples of loans with a commercial purpose/8 A right of pignus could also secure com­mercial sellers' credit. Ulp. D. 14.3.5.15 deals with the scope of the actio insti­toria in relation to a slave who was an institor of an olive oil business. Ulpian declares that the owner of this ‘slave/manager' shall be liable with the actio institoria when the manager has accepted a pledge for payment of the purchase price but refuses to return the charged object when the purchase price has been fully paid/9

Secured credit in banking and other contexts

Secured credit would often be provided by bankers and other professional moneylenders.

Faustilla probably earned her living as a pawnbroker in Pompeii. In secured lending transactions evidenced by the archive of the Sulpicii the Puteolean bankers acted as lenders to whom real security (pignus or fiducia) had been granted.[303] [304] [305] [306] [307] [308] [309] [310] In other transactions in the archive, the secured lenders may have been private citizens, but these secured loans were negotiated and/or monitored by the Sulpicii as financial intermediaries?1 In some Digest texts we also encounter security granted in order to secure the debts owed to professional financiers?2 Ulpian D. 2.13.6.3 records an opinion by Labeo on the taking of pledges by bankers, in which he says that pledges are not recorded in the ledgers of a banker (argentarius) and for that reason, an argentarius cannot be forced to disclose the pledge. This text indicates that in Labeo’s time, bankers would habitually receive pledges from their debtors?3 In Scaev. D. 13.7.43.1, grain merchant Titius borrowed money from Gaius Seius, who received a possessory pledge of leather bags. These bags were requisitioned by an officer of the officio annonae while they were stored in the horreum of Gaius Seius himself. This creditor may therefore very well have been a merchant financier both operating and financing grain trading?4 There may also have been professional collateral givers: Gai. D. 13.7.12 refers to per­sons ‘who do usually borrow money against pledges’.

It would be a mistake, however, to associate pignus, hypotheca, and fiducia exclusively with commercial lending by bankers. The Roman law of real security also played a significant role in renting out rural and urban real estate, as will be elaborated in section 3.5?5 Loans with which members of the senatorial class funded the purchase of agricultural or urban real estate would often be taken from family and friends and would normally not be secured?6 But real security was sometimes agreed between relatives.

Suetonius reports that Vespasianus (when still a senator and consul) borrowed money from his brother Sabinus, in order to fund his participation as a limited partner in a partnership?7 This loan between brothers was secured by Vespasianus charging all his land to his brother (‘omnia praedia fratri obligaret’).ss This loan was granted in order to finance investments and the secured credit rela­tionship was not different from one that would have been entered into at arm's length.[311] [312] [313] [314] [315] [316] [317] Security was granted in the context of family and other personal relationships, between husband and wife (Paul. D. 20.6.11), between heirs (Pap. D. 20.4.3.2), and between a warden and his pupil (Scaev. D. 20.4.21), on a much larger scale, it seems, than today. In Pap. D. 33.1.9 a pledge was granted over a fundus in order to secure legacies to the testator's freedmen in the form of annual payments. Moreover, Romans would also borrow from the state and these loans would need to be secured?0 For instance, we know that Marcus Antonius (before he was emperor) charged certain of his assets in favour of the state and ran the risk that they would be sold if the loan could not be repaid.91 Vice versa, Roman moneylenders did also provide high interest loans to cities in the East, for which they demanded public property as collateral?2

3.4

<< | >>
Source: Verhagen Hendrik L.. Security and Credit in Roman Law: The Historical Evolution of Pignus and Hypotheca. Oxford University Press,2022. — 448 p.. 2022

More on the topic Consumptive, Productive, and Secured Credit:

  1. Deciphering Development: The Productive Power of Myths
  2. 3. The Commodity Credit Corporation
  3. Verhagen Hendrik L.. Security and Credit in Roman Law: The Historical Evolution of Pignus and Hypotheca. Oxford University Press,2022. — 448 p., 2022
  4. The federal government supports farms through five main avenues: crop insurance, commodity programs, conservation payments, credit, and trade.
  5. Introduction
  6. Execution of Pignus Nominis
  7. 7. Lending Programs
  8. Introduction
  9. Antichresis
  10. Termination of Real Security
  11. Myth and Normalisation
  12. CONCLUSIONS: PURPLE-MERCHANT'S WIFE AND SISTER-IN-LAW
  13. Introduction
  14. The limitations of sponsio
  15. Roman law recognized two principal forms of security for the performance of an obligation: personal security or suretyship, whereby a person undertook to be personally liable as surety to the creditor for the discharge of the debt[541];
  16. Excursion: Constantine’s Prohibition of Forfeiture Clauses
  17. Suretyship