Page:The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism.djvu/300

 property (see Unwin, Industrial Organization in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, London, 1914, pp. 196 ff.). To see that this difference was fully known even to contemporaries, compare Parker's Discourse Concerning Puritans of 1641, where the contrast to promoters and courtiers is also emphasized.

94. On the way in which this was expressed in the politics of Pennsylvania in the eighteenth century, especially during the War of Independence, see Sharpless, A Quaker Experiment in Government, Philadelphia, 1902.

95. Quoted in Southey, Life of Wesley, chap, xxix (second American edition, II, p. 308). For the reference, which I did not know, I am indebted to a letter from Professor Ashley (1913). Ernst Troeltsch, to whom I communicated it for the purpose, has already made use of it.

96. The reading of this passage may be recommended to all those who consider themselves to-day better informed on these matters than the leaders and contemporaries of the movements themselves. As we see, they knew very well what they were doing and what dangers they faced. It is really inexcusable to contest so lightly, as some of my critics have done, facts which are quite beyond dispute, and have hitherto never been disputed by anyone. All I have done is to investigate their underlying motives somewhat 'more carefully. No one in the seventeenth century doubted the existence of these relationships (compare Manley, Usury of 6 per Cent. Examined, 1669, p. 137). Besides the modern writers already noted, poets like Heine and Keats, as well as historians like Macaulay, Cunningham, Rogers, or an essayist such as Matthew Arnold, have assumed them as obvious. From the most recent literature see Ashley, Birmingham Industry and Commerce (1913). He has also expressed his complete agreement with me in correspondence. On the whole problem now compare the study by H. Levy referred to above, note 91.

97. Weber's italics.

98. That exactly the same things were obvious to the Puritans of the classical era cannot perhaps be more clearly shown than by the fact that in Bunyan Mr. Money-Love argues that one may become religious in order to' get rich, for instance to attract customers. For why one has become religious makes no difference (see p. 114, Tauchnitz edition).

99. Defoe was a zealous Nonconformist.

100. Spener also (Theologische Bedenken, pp. 426, 429, 432 ff.), although he holds that the merchant's calling is full of temptations and pitfalls, nevertheless declares in answer to a question: "I am glad to see, so far as trade is concerned, that my dear friend knows no scruples, but takes it as an art of life, which it is, in which much good may be done for the human race, and God's will may be carried out through love." This is more fully justified in other passages by mercantilist arguments. Spener, at times in a purely Lutheran strain,