by Max Weber
[Editors’ note: The remainder of this note appears only in the 1920 edition. We include it here on account of its reference to Brentano. See Appendix I]
That emigrants of every religious persuasion from all over the world (Indian, Arabic, Chinese, Syrian, Phoenician, Greek, Lombard, or Cawertschen3), having received a training in commerce in highly developed countries, moved to other countries, was a universal phenomenon, and has nothing to do with our problem. In his essay—from which we shall frequently be quoting—Die Anfänge des modernen Kapitalismus—Brentano makes reference to his own family. But bankers of foreign origin who enjoyed the privilege of commercial experience and connections have existed at all times and in every country. They are not specific to modern capitalism and were regarded—see later—with ethical suspicion by the Protestants. It was a different matter for the Protestant families of Muralt, Pestalozzi, etc., from Locarno, who emigrated to Zurich, where they very soon became numbered among the bearers of a specifically modern capitalist (industrial) development.
11) Offenbacher, op. cit., p. 68.
12) An exceptionally perceptive commentary on the character of the denominations in Germany and France, and the intermingling of these differences with the other cultural elements in the conflict between the nationalities in Alsace, may be found in the superb article by W. Wittich, “Deutsche und französische Kultur im Elsaβ,” (Illustrierte Elsäβ. Rundschau, 1900), also obtainable as an offprint.
13) See Dupin de St. André, L’ancienne église réformée de Tours: Les membres de l’église (Bulletin de la société de l’histoire du protestantisme, vol. 4, p. 10). Here one could regard as the driving motive force the yearning for emancipation from monastic control, or indeed from any ecclesiastical control. Catholics might particularly incline to this view. Against this, however, is the opposing judgment of contemporaries (including Rebelais). Moral qualms were also felt by, for example, the first National Synods of the Huguenots (e.g., 1st Synod, C. Partic., qu. 10 in Aymon, Synodes nationaux de l’Eglise réformée de France, p. 10), as to whether a banker should be permitted to become a church elder. Furthermore, arising from questions raised by anxious church members, the debate constantly recurred in the National Synods (in spite of Calvin’s clearly stated position) as to the permissibility of taking interest. All this shows the deep concern felt by those affected, but at the same time it surely also shows that the desire to be able to exercise “usuraria pravitas” without having to go to confession cannot have been the decisive factor.
14) Eberhard Gothein, Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Schwarzwaldes, vol. 1, p. 67.
15) In relation to this, see the brief remarks of Sombart in Der moderne Kapitalismus, vol. 1, p. 280. [See also Appendix Ib) in this volume.]
16) It has been well established that where work is concerned the mere fact of a change in location is one of the most powerful means of intensifying production. The same Polish girl, who, in her homeland, cannot be induced by even the most favorable wage rates to overcome her traditional inertia, appears transformed when she works abroad as a migratory farm laborer, and there seems no limit to the amount of work she is capable of. The same phenomenon may be observed in the case of Italian migratory laborers. That this is not solely due to the educative experience of a higher “cultural milieu”—although, of course, this plays a part—is shown by the fact that the same phenomenon occurs even where—as in agriculture—the nature of the occupation is exactly the same as in the homeland, and the accommodation in barracks for migratory laborers, etc., may even involve a temporary drop in their standard of living to a level which they would never tolerate in their homeland. The mere fact of working in quite different circumstances from those to which they had been accustomed breaks down the traditionalism and is the “educative factor.” It scarcely needs mentioning how much the American economic development depends on such influences. With regard to antiquity, the Babylonian exile had a very similar significance for the Jews. This is almost physically evident in the inscriptions. But for the Calvinists, the influence exercised by the characteristic form of their religious beliefs undoubtedly played its part as an independent factor. This is evident from the unmistakable difference in the economic character of the Puritan New England colonies, compared with Catholic Maryland, the Episcopalian South, and the multi-denominational Rhode Island.
17) This is not, of course, to deny that Pietism, in common with other religious movements, later opposed certain “progressive” features of the capitalist economic order—for example, the transition to the factory system—for reasons of patriarchal sentiment. A clear distinction must be made between the ideal at which a religious movement aimed and the degree to which it was actually able to influence the conduct of life of its supporters, as we shall see.
18) The final passage comes from Necessary Hints to Those That Would Be Rich (1736), the remainder from Advice to a Young Tradesman (1748), (The Works of Benjamin Franklin, 1836, vol. 2, pp. 80f and pp. 87ff).
19) Der Amerikamüde (Frankfurt, 1855), a literary paraphrase of Lenau’s impressions of America. As a work of art the book would be somewhat indigestible today, but it is simply unsurpassed as a document of the differences (which have long since faded) between German and American feeling. One might say it is a document contrasting, on the one hand, the inner life, which, in spite of everything, has, ever since the time of medieval German mysticism, remained common to the Catholics (Kürnberger was a liberal Catholic) and Protestants of Germany, with, on the other hand, the vigorous activity of Puritan capitalism.
20) Sombart used this quotation from a memorandum from Fugger as the motto for the section on the “Genesis of Capitalism” in Der moderne Kapitalismus, vol. 1, p. 193, compare ibid., p. 290.
21) It is on this that our somewhat different approach to the problematic [Problemstellung] rests. The very considerable practical significance of the distinction will become clear later. By the way, it should be noted that Sombart has by no means disregarded this ethical aspect of capitalist enterprise. However, in his scheme of ideas this ethical aspect appears as a product of capitalism, whereas we propose to consider the opposite hypothesis for the purposes of our argument. Final conclusions can only be drawn when our investigation is complete. For Sombart’s view, see op. cit., vol. 1, p. 357, 380, etc. His argument follows on from the brilliant concepts in Simmel’s Philosophie des Geldes (final chapter). We cannot pursue this matter any further at this point.
22) “I grew convinced that truth, sincerity, and integrity in dealings between man and man were of the utmost importance to the felicity of life; and I formed written resolutions, which still remain in my journal book, to practice them ever while I lived. Revelation had indeed no weight with me as such; but I entertained an opinion that, though certain actions might not be bad because they were forbidden by it, or good because it commanded them, yet probably these actions might be forbidden because they were bad for us, or commanded because they were beneficial to us in their own nature, all the circumstances of things considered.”
23) “I therefore put myself as much as I could out of sight and started it”—that is, the creation of a library that he had suggested—“as a scheme of a ‘number of friends,’ who had requested me to go about and propose it to such as they thought lovers of reading. In this way my affair went on smoothly, and I ever after practiced it on such occasions; and from my frequent successes, can heartily recommend it. The present little sacrifice of your vanity will afterward be amply repaid. If it remains awhile uncertain to whom the merit belongs, someone more vain than yourself will be encouraged to claim it, and then even envy will be disposed to do you justice by plucking those assumed feathers and restoring them to their right owner.” Ibid., p. 140.
24) Proverbs chapter 22, verse 29. Luther translates “in seinem Geschäft,” and the older English Bible translations have “business.” See below for further discussion.
25) To describe the phrase “Anyone who doesn’t toe the line will be kicked out
” (heard at Social Democratic Party Conferences) as “barrack-room style” would be a grievous misunderstanding. The rebel is never kicked “out” of the barracks, but “into” the detention cell. Rather, it is the economic destiny of the modern working man, as he experiences it every day, which he finds and must endure in the party. Party discipline is the reflection of factory discipline.
26) cf. Sombart’s comments in Die deutsche Volkswirtschaft im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, p. 123, above. Although some aspects of my subsequent argument refer to much older works, I hardly need to stress how much it owes to the very existence of Sombart’s great writings, with their penetrating formulations. This is true even—indeed especially—where we part company. Even someone who feels constantly provoked to dissent most strongly from Sombart’s formulations, and rejects some of his theses outright, still has a duty to take account of his work. The attitude of German economic [nationalökonomisch] critics toward his work can only be described as truly embarrassing. [Editors’ note: The remainder of this note was omitted from the 1920 edition. We have included it because of its reference to Sombart. See also Appendix I of this volume, here.] The first, and for a long time the only, man to engage in a detailed and objective manner with some of Sombart’s historical theses was a historian (von Below in the Historische Zeitschrift, 1903). The term “uninspired” would be too polite an adjective to describe the quality of the “criticism” produced so far of the sections of Sombart’s work that are genuinely economic [nationalökonomisch] in character.
27) At this stage we cannot tackle the question of where these limits lie. Neither can we take a position on the well-known theory of the links between high wages and high performance. The theory was first propounded by Brassey, then formulated and defended, theoretically by Brentano, and historically and at the same time constructively by Schulze-Gävernitz. The discussion has been reopened by Hasbach’s perspicacious studies (Schmollers Jahrbuch, 1903, pp. 385–91 and 417f.). It must suffice here to state the fact, which no one doubts and is indeed beyond question, that low wages cannot simply be equated with high profits or with favorable opportunities for industrial development—and that, in general, “education” in capitalist culture and with it the possibility of a capitalist economy are not achieved simply by means of mechanical financial operations. All the examples chosen are purely illustrative.
28) The introduction of capitalist business has therefore often not been possible without extensive movements of immigration from more old established cultural regions. Sombart has rightly commented on the distinction between individual “skills” and the tricks of the trade, compared with the scientific objectivity of modern technology. But at the time of the first beginnings of capitalism, the distinction scarcely existed—indeed, the (so to speak) ethical qualities of the capitalist worker (and to a certain degree of the entrepreneur as well) often had a higher “scarcity value” than the skills of the craftsman which had ossified in centuries-old traditionalism. Even today, in the choice of its locations, industry is by no means independent of such qualities in the population—qualities which have been acquired through long tradition and training in intensive labor. Where this dependence is observed, prevailing scientific opinion tends to attribute it to inherited racial qualities, rather than to tradition and training—a very dubious assumption, in my view. Later, we shall have more to say about this too.
29) The foregoing remarks are open to misunderstanding. We all know the type of modern businessman who likes to make use of the old saying “The people must have religion,” and large numbers of the Lutheran clergy in particular, acting out of a general sympathy with “the authorities,” are only too keen to place themselves at the disposal of these businessmen as “clerical police” when it comes to branding strikes as sinful and accusing the trades unions of encouraging “covetousness,” etc. These are matters which have nothing to do with the phenomena we are speaking of. What we are concerned with in the text are not isolated cases, but are very common, and, as we shall see, typically recurring features.
30) Der moderne Kapitalismus, vol. 1, p. 62.
31) Op. cit., p. 195.
32) We must just stress at this point that we are not justified in making the a priori assumption that the technique of the capitalist enterprise and the spirit of “labor in a calling,” which normally provides capitalism with the energy it needs to expand, have their original source in the same social strata. Much the same may be said of the social origins of religious consciousness. Historically, Calvinism was undoubtedly one of the providers of training in the “capitalist spirit.” But the great wealth, in the Netherlands, for example, was not predominantly in the hands of strict Calvinists, but, for reasons that will be discussed later, of Arminians. It was the rising petite bourgeoisie, here and elsewhere, who were the “typical” bearers of capitalist ethics and Calvinist church polity.
33) The following portrait has been composed out of elements of various individual branches of industry in different locations, on the principle of the “ideal type.” For our purely illustrative purposes, it is, of course, immaterial that in none of the examples referred to were events played out in every detail precisely in the manner here depicted.
34) By this we simply mean the type of entrepreneur whom we are making the object of our consideration, not some empirical average. On the concept “ideal type,” see my article in this journal, “Die Objektivität sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpoltischer Erkennt-nis.” In Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik 19:1 (1904) pp. 22–87.4
35) Only further investigation can reveal how this “ascetic” streak was not merely peripheral in the development of capitalism, but was of outstanding significance. This further investigation alone can demonstrate that it is not a question of arbitrarily selected features.
36) We can learn exactly how they used to come to terms with the ban on the taking of interest in, for example, Book I, chapter 65 of the statute of the Arte di Calimala (at the moment I only have at my disposal the Italian edition by Emiliani-Giudici, Storia dei Comuni Italiani, vol. 3, p. 246): “Procurino i consoli con quelli frati che parrà loro, che perdono si faccia e come fare si possa il meglio per l’amore di ciascuno, del dono, merito or guiderdono, ovvero interesse per l’anno presente e secondo che altra volta fatto fue.” [The consuls must ensure that they make confession to those brethren whom they judge most likely to pardon them, and that they do it in the manner most appropriate to the gift, service, or reward received, in terms of the interest exacted for the past year, according to custom.] In other words, the guild obtains indulgence for its members through official channels and through submission to the Church. The instructions that follow are also highly typical of the amoral character of capital gains, as well as, for example, the immediately preceding injunction (chap. 63) to record all interest and profits as “gifts.” Today’s stock exchange blacklisting of those who take profits from differential rates can be compared to the vilifying of those who came before the court of the Church pleading exceptio usurariae pravitatis.
37) Greek has no word corresponding to the ethical tone of the German word. Where Luther translates Ecclesiasticus [Jesus Sirach] 11, 20–21 as “bleibe in deinem Beruf,” quite in accordance with today’s usage (see below), the Septuagint translates it, on one occasion, as ϱγον, and on the other, “πόνος.” Elsewhere in ancient times, “τὰ πϱ οςήκοντα” is employed in the general sense of “duties.” In the language of the Stoics, “κάματος” occasionally carries a similar connotation (as my colleague Herr Dieterich has pointed out to me) although the linguistic origin is doubtful.
What we express by the word “Beruf,” namely, the continuous activity of man on the basis of the division of labor, which is normally his source of income and thus a permanent economic living, is expressed in Latin either by the colorless “opus,” or by “officium,” which carries a connotation that is at least related to the ethical content of the German word. (It derives from “o
pificium,” which was originally ethically neutral, and later, especially in Seneca, de beneficiis, IV, 18, is equivalent to “Beruf”). Latin also has “munus”—derived from the feudal dues of the ancient civic community—or finally “professio.” The latter word, when used in this sense, appears to derive from the idea of public duties, especially the ancient tax declarations of the citizens. Later, it is used in the modern sense of “liberal professions” (as in “professio bene dicendi”), and within this limited field takes on a general meaning which is quite similar in every sense to our word “Beruf” (even in the more inward sense of the word; as when in Cicero it is said of someone “non intelligit quid profiteatur,” in the sense of “he does not recognize his own ‘Beruf’”)—except that the idea is entirely secular, with no religious connotation whatever. This, of course, applies a fortiori to the word “ars,” which is used in Imperial times in the sense of “craft.”
The Vulgate translates the above passages in Ecclesiasticus [Jesus Sirach] in the first instance by “opus,” and in the second (v. 21) by “locus,” which in this case would mean, roughly, “social position.”
In the Romance languages, only Spanish has anything which even partially corresponds to the German sense, namely, “vocacion,” which has the sense of inner “calling” to something, as to a spiritual office. However, the word is never used in a secular, external sense like “Beruf.” In the translations of the Bible into the Romance languages, the Spanish “vocacion” and the Italian “vocazione” and “chiamamento” are only used in a sense at all similar to the (soon to be discussed) Lutheran and Calvinist usage when translating the New Testament term “κλῆσις,” that is, the gospel calling to eternal salvation, for which the Vulgate has “vocatio.” The fifteenth-century Italian Bible translation, for example, printed in the Collezione die opere inedite e rare, Bologna, 1887, uses “chiamamento” in this way, alongside “vocazione,” the word preferred by the modern Italian translations of the Bible. The words used in the Romance languages for “Beruf” in the external sense of regular business activity, however, carry no religious connotations in themselves. This is evident from the lexical material and from a detailed exposition kindly supplied to me by my esteemed friend Professor Baist (Freiburg). Admittedly, some of these words, like those derived from “ministerium” or “officium,” may have originally had a certain ethical connotation, while others, like those derived from “ars,” “professio,” and “implicare (impiego),” have never had one. The passages from Ecclesiasticus [Jesus Sirach] quoted earlier, where Luther used “Beruf,” are translated as follows. French, verse 20, “office”; verse 21 “labeur” (Calvinist translation); Spanish, verse 20, “obra”; verse 21, “lugar” (following the Vulgate); Italian: older translations, “luogo” (following the Vulgate), recent translations, “posto” (Protestant).