PhD Defense R.J. Mooi

Under medieval German law, foreign (non-local) creditors were traditionally discriminated in insolvencies. They were only paid out after all domestic creditors had been satisfied in full, or suffered some other substantial disadvantage. In practice, this often meant a complete loss of their claim. This was a highly relevant issue, since city laws provided the dominant legal regimes, and foreigners would often come from close by. The situation changed throughout the second half of the seventeenth century, however. In the German territories, foreigners were awarded a right of equal treatment with domestic creditors in a growing number of cities. The relatively short time span in which this development occurred in cities which were autonomous with regards to their insolvency laws, is remarkable. Also the fact that these cities adopted a highly similar rule, consistently hinging on a requirement of reciprocity, stands out. This dissertation analyses the motives and mechanisms behind this early modern emancipation of foreign creditor rights across the German territories, thereby taking Frankfurt am Main’s City Council and mercantile community as a focal point.

For this research, an archival study of communications and negotiations between the City Councils of Frankfurt am Main and several other important Southern-German trade cities was carried out. These cities included, among others, Nuremberg, Würzburg, Basel, Zürich, and Geneva. It is demonstrated that from the 1660s on, a right to equal treatment was guaranteed by a growing number of cities, as long as this was also the case in the foreigner’s home city. Reciprocity was therefore a key element of this new rule. In fact, it also provided an important incentive to other cities to adopt such a rule, since their own subjects could then make use of this right in foreign insolvency procedures. The design of the rule thereby stimulated its further spreading. As a result, the rights of foreign creditors in insolvencies both improved and converged across the German territories.

By analyzing and connecting developments in foreigner rights across several German and Swiss cities, this research applies a supralocal, cross-border approach. It thereby contributes to historiographical debates on foreigner rights in early modern insolvency, inclusiveness in early modern legal systems, and institutional dimensions of early modern trade. Moreover, it provides an early modern example of how rules may spread across legal systems.