What do you think?
Rate this book
Money and its Use in Medieval Europe by Peter Spufford
The many changing roles played by money in Europe throughout the Middle Ages are traced through war and trade and other political, economic, and ecclesiastical activities, regardless of national or international barriers.
Paperback Bunko
First published January 1, 1988
3 people are currently reading
139 people want to read
About the author
Peter Spufford
13 books4 followersPeter Spufford was until 2001 Professor of European History, University of Cambridge, and is the author of definitive studies of money in the Middle Ages.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 23, 2021
[UPDATE 08-23-2021] Hello. It has become clear to me that my ratings system is flawed beyond repair. Due to a lack of standardization, I have rated many books more highly than they deserve, resulting in an inability to rate newly read books accurately without creating an incorrect impression of quality compared to books previously read. As a result, I am re-rating all of the books I have read in 2020 and 2021. For each book, I will append this little explanation, my new rating for this book using Storygraph’s scale (which allows for quarter-star ratings), my reasoning for the change (if necessary), and finally a guide to my new rating scale. Thank you.
Old Rating: 5
New Storygraph Rating: 5
My Reasoning: I’m keeping this book as a 5 because it is nearly flawless. Like, it’s essentially without flaws. I didn’t love it because I have a super hard time with non-fiction (see below), but I can recognize good quality when I see it. AND I’m glad I read it. I did enjoy it, and I was very impressed. If my rating scale were based purely on my own enjoyment divorced from any consideration of a work’s merits, maybe this would be rated lower, but because it isn’t, Spufford retains his 5 stars from me.
Guide to my New Rating Scale:
* 5 Stars: This book was more or less flawless. One of the best things I’ve ever read.
* 4.75 through 4.25 Stars: This book had slight flaws, but I REALLY loved it. Marked as 4 stars on Goodreads.
* 4 Stars: This book had slight flaws, but I loved it.
* 3.75 through 3.25 Stars: This book had significant flaws, but I REALLY liked it. Marked as 3 stars on Goodreads.
* 3 Stars: This book had significant flaws, but I liked it just fine.
* 2.75 through 2.25 Stars: This book was extremely flawed, but I thought it had some merit. Marked as 2 stars on Goodreads.
* 2 Stars: This book was extremely flawed, but I didn’t actively dislike it. It was a waste of my time but not odious.
* 1.75 through 1.25 Stars: This book was irreparably flawed, and I actively disliked it. Marked as 1 star on Goodreads.
* 1 Star: This book was irreparably flawed. I actively hated this book and am worse off for having read it.
————————————————————————-
Look, this book was extremely good, but I just have a hard goddamned time with nonfiction. Jesus, I do. Took me three months to read this. Literally almost all of Q2. Goddamn.
Anyway, I didn’t dock any stars due to my weird inability to enjoy nonfiction. On the merits, it’s an excellent book. It’s an academic text written for monetary historians, yet it’s accessible to the layman (like me). I don’t like reading pop-nonfiction because I always feel like I’m being sold a bill of goods – if it’s on the NYT Bestseller list, that means it was written for an audience with neither the ability nor the inclination to fact check it. And publishing houses certainly aren’t out here fact-checking their pop-nonfiction.
Reading academic nonfiction circumvents this issue, but at the cost of often being dry and inaccessible. However, Spufford does a pretty damned good job of making sure this rigorous work is both accessible and as un-dry as could reasonably be expected for a book about money and its use in medieval Europe.
Would I recommend it? Yeah, I would, if you’re into history. It took me a while because it’s, still, you know, an academic text, even if it’s better than the average. I’m not well-versed in history, but I thought this work – which was a first-of-its-kind synthesis of an enormous body of historical and numismatic research – was pretty interesting and gave me a pretty good look at the middle ages from a perspective I’d never seen before, and helped me see how the way we use money today has its roots in the Roman times, and how in many ways we have much in common with people throughout history as we go about our daily economic lives.
Old Rating: 5
New Storygraph Rating: 5
My Reasoning: I’m keeping this book as a 5 because it is nearly flawless. Like, it’s essentially without flaws. I didn’t love it because I have a super hard time with non-fiction (see below), but I can recognize good quality when I see it. AND I’m glad I read it. I did enjoy it, and I was very impressed. If my rating scale were based purely on my own enjoyment divorced from any consideration of a work’s merits, maybe this would be rated lower, but because it isn’t, Spufford retains his 5 stars from me.
Guide to my New Rating Scale:
* 5 Stars: This book was more or less flawless. One of the best things I’ve ever read.
* 4.75 through 4.25 Stars: This book had slight flaws, but I REALLY loved it. Marked as 4 stars on Goodreads.
* 4 Stars: This book had slight flaws, but I loved it.
* 3.75 through 3.25 Stars: This book had significant flaws, but I REALLY liked it. Marked as 3 stars on Goodreads.
* 3 Stars: This book had significant flaws, but I liked it just fine.
* 2.75 through 2.25 Stars: This book was extremely flawed, but I thought it had some merit. Marked as 2 stars on Goodreads.
* 2 Stars: This book was extremely flawed, but I didn’t actively dislike it. It was a waste of my time but not odious.
* 1.75 through 1.25 Stars: This book was irreparably flawed, and I actively disliked it. Marked as 1 star on Goodreads.
* 1 Star: This book was irreparably flawed. I actively hated this book and am worse off for having read it.
————————————————————————-
Look, this book was extremely good, but I just have a hard goddamned time with nonfiction. Jesus, I do. Took me three months to read this. Literally almost all of Q2. Goddamn.
Anyway, I didn’t dock any stars due to my weird inability to enjoy nonfiction. On the merits, it’s an excellent book. It’s an academic text written for monetary historians, yet it’s accessible to the layman (like me). I don’t like reading pop-nonfiction because I always feel like I’m being sold a bill of goods – if it’s on the NYT Bestseller list, that means it was written for an audience with neither the ability nor the inclination to fact check it. And publishing houses certainly aren’t out here fact-checking their pop-nonfiction.
Reading academic nonfiction circumvents this issue, but at the cost of often being dry and inaccessible. However, Spufford does a pretty damned good job of making sure this rigorous work is both accessible and as un-dry as could reasonably be expected for a book about money and its use in medieval Europe.
Would I recommend it? Yeah, I would, if you’re into history. It took me a while because it’s, still, you know, an academic text, even if it’s better than the average. I’m not well-versed in history, but I thought this work – which was a first-of-its-kind synthesis of an enormous body of historical and numismatic research – was pretty interesting and gave me a pretty good look at the middle ages from a perspective I’d never seen before, and helped me see how the way we use money today has its roots in the Roman times, and how in many ways we have much in common with people throughout history as we go about our daily economic lives.
Displaying 1 of 1 review