What Lessons for Economic Development Can We Draw from the Champagne Fairs?



structure of courts in the territory, but superimposed the Parlement de Paris as a final
court of appeal.21

Cases involving foreign merchants could be adjudicated at most levels of this public
legal system. For the most serious cases, according to Alengry, ‘the count as sovereign
was directly employed in person in ensuring justice was rendered to visitors to the
fairs who had suffered injury’.22 This long-standing princely provision of justice to
visiting merchants, dating back to the twelfth century, was explicitly confirmed and
extended in 1245 when the count granted Roman, Tuscan, Lombard and Provençal
merchants frequenting the St Ayoul fair in Provins the privilege of being subject solely
to the count’s own direct jurisdiction or (in his absence) to that of the count’s
23
immediate deputy.

Less serious conflicts involving merchants at the fairs were judged by the princely
bailli or prévôt.24 At each fair a temporary wooden lodge was erected, from which the
prévôt dispensed civil and criminal justice.25 The first record of this lodge dates from
1176, when count Henri assigned to the churchwardens of St Quiriace ‘the wood from
the lodges of the
prévôts at the fairs’.26 Further detail is provided by the Provins
communal charter of 1252, which alluded to the lodges of the
prévôts at the fairs and
declared that ‘the merchants who come to the fairs shall be judged by us [the count]
and our people: that is, by the fair-wardens, or by the
bailli, or by a person whom he
shall set in his place’.27 A subsequent Provins charter of 1268 also mentions the lodges
of the
prévôts at the fairs, and confirms that ‘foreign merchants and our Jews shall
remain within our protection and in our justice’.28 A 1324 conflict between the royal
prévôt and the abbot of Lagny over the fair jurisdiction confirmed the continued
jurisdiction of the princely
prévôt at the Champagne fairs into the fourteenth century.29

21 Arbois de Jubainville and Pigeotte (1859-66), III:155-70; Arbois de Jubainville (1859), 4-17;
Bourquelot (1839-40), I:210; Benton (1969), 281-3.

22 Alengry (1915), 110.

23 Bourquelot (1865), 174.

24 Arbois de Jubainville (1859), 22.

25 Alengry (1915), 113; Terrasse (2005), 61, 78.

26 Bourquelot (1865), II:20 n. 1; Arbois de Jubainville and Pigeotte (1859-66), III:235.

27 Bourquelot (1839-40), II:409; Terrasse (2005), 45, 61.

28 Bourquelot (1839-40), II:416; Terrasse (2005), 61, 78.

29 Boutaric (1867), II:551 (#7394).



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Comparative study of hatching rates of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus Burchell 1822) eggs on different substrates
3. The name is absent
4. Naïve Bayes vs. Decision Trees vs. Neural Networks in the Classification of Training Web Pages
5. The name is absent
6. Cyber-pharmacies and emerging concerns on marketing drugs Online
7. Convergence in TFP among Italian Regions - Panel Unit Roots with Heterogeneity and Cross Sectional Dependence
8. Inhimillinen pääoma ja palkat Suomessa: Paluu perusmalliin
9. The Composition of Government Spending and the Real Exchange Rate
10. The name is absent
11. How do investors' expectations drive asset prices?
12. Running head: CHILDREN'S ATTRIBUTIONS OF BELIEFS
13. Government spending composition, technical change and wage inequality
14. Rent Dissipation in Chartered Recreational Fishing: Inside the Black Box
15. The East Asian banking sector—overweight?
16. FISCAL CONSOLIDATION AND DECENTRALISATION: A TALE OF TWO TIERS
17. Land Police in Mozambique: Future Perspectives
18. On the Integration of Digital Technologies into Mathematics Classrooms
19. LOCAL CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE
20. Gender stereotyping and wage discrimination among Italian graduates