1081 David Fox and Wolfgang Ernst

Book Reviews 1081 David Fox and Wolfgang Ernst (eds) Money in the Western Legal Tradition: Middle Ages to Bretton Woods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Pp. 800. $ 210. ISBN: 9780198704744. This ambitious 800 page work has been assembled by David Fox, a lecturer in law at the University of Cambridge, and Wolfgang Ernst, Regius Professor of Civil Law at the University of Oxford. A significant part of the work is based on papers delivered at conferences held in Cambridge in 2011 and 2012. The text boasts a formidable range of contributors, including lawyers, economists and historians. With their assistance, Messrs Fox and Ernst have succeeded in pro- ducing a work that is both of great interest and great scholarship – not always an easy combination to achieve! As both the title of the work and the introductory chapter point out, the text attempts to examine monetary law from the medieval period until the establishment of Bretton Woods in 1944. This period of monetary development should be of interest to both lawyers and to historians, and yet seems to have been neglected by both. The contributors have thus had the challenging task of creating their commentaries from diverse sources and drawing together a range of otherwise disconnected materials. In this endeavour, they have succeeded brilliantly. For some readers there may be disappointment that the text does not advance in any great detail into the aftermath of the collapse of the gold standard or the challenges of monetary union in Europe. But this would have resulted in a volume of impossible length and, in any event, the buyer is not misled for the scope of the work is clearly encapsulated in the title. The chapters within the introductory section of the book consider the evo- lution of money both in law and in economics, and the need for money to ben- efit from an institutional infrastructure. As in so many other areas, monetary law has tended to develop of the basis of pragmatism, rather than principle. Thus, for example, the concept of ‘legal tender’ was adopted because it was necessary to define the means by which a debtor could discharge his obliga- tions. Yet very limited attention was given to the nature of ‘money’, or its legal incidents. The origins of money – whether as societal developments or as sovereign acts – are also discussed in this segment. Part I of the text examines coins and the law in the late Middle Ages (bank notes being a somewhat later invention). Three chapters consider the monetary environment during this period. To Martin Allen falls the task of explain- ing the debasement of coinage in Medieval Europe. There is a wide-ranging discussion of the causes of debasement in different countries and the legal and political responses to them. Fabian Wittreck discusses money in medieval © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��17 | doi 10.1163/��119000-1�340085 108� Book Reviews philosophy and its enduring impact to the modern day, whilst Stefan Kötz discusses Gabriel Biel’s Monetary Theory. The legal input into Part I is provided by Thomas Rüfner, who examines Roman monetary law, including the meaning of pecunia and its definition in Justinian’s Digest. Wolfgang Ernst examines the use of Roman law sources in later periods. Andreas Thier examines money in medieval Canon Law – a surprising source of monetary law, given the church’s longstanding position on usury. Alan Wiffles examines monetary challenges in the Low Countries around the turn of the 16th century, when the collapse of the value of money led to claims against various Dutch cities. The historical discussion is fascinat- ing and perhaps a salutary reminder that sovereign debt crises have not been the exclusive preserve of the 20th and 21st centuries. Part II of the text begins with a short but interesting chapter by Michael North on monetary reforms in the Holy Roman Empire during the 15th and 16th centuries. David Fox then brings the English lawyer back to his comfort zone through a discussion of the history and development of nominalism. He notes the remarkable fact that – despite debasements and other changes to the monetary system – the principle of nominalism seems to have been an im- mutable part of the common law landscape for some 800 years. This principle established that money was different from any other form of commodity and had a value prescribed by law that was entirely independent of the value of any metal content. This state of affairs, coupled with the acceptance of the powers of the Crown over the currency, mean that issues of a purely domestic monetary law character have rarely been litigated before the English courts. In contrast, however, the use and value of foreign currencies appears to have been causing problems for the English courts as early as 1455. One of the few cases that may be said directly to turn on issues of pure monetary law is Gilbert v Brett (1604), often referred to as the Case of Mixt Monies.1 It explains the general principle of nominalism and the incidence of sovereign power over the currency. This broad outline of the decision is well known to monetary lawyers. But, in Chapter 12, David Fox discusses the case in detail and, by placing the judgement in its wider context, brings a new interest to the subject. The case is of historical interest because it arose from Elizabeth I’s 1601 debasement of the Irish currency as part of a strategy to supress rebellion. From a more legalistic perspective, the case offers an interesting example of the use of civil law sources to determine a common law case. Harry Dondorp then offers a parallel discussion of the principle of nominalism from a civil law 1 Gilbert v Brett (1604) Davis 18; an English translation of the Case appears as (1604) 2 Howells State Trials 114. Journal of World Investment & Trade 18 (�017) 1073–1085.

Load more