180 Ewert and Selzer
is defined as a loose cooperation of legally and economically independent
entities. This kind of interorganizational network neither possesses hierar-
chical levels nor is controlled by a central authority. Thus, the cooperation
between network members is thought to happen only by voluntary and flex-
ible couplings. Such interorganizational networks are characterized by a mini-
mal degree of formal definition.
Business transactions between the merchants of the Hanse were generally
handled on a partnership basis. Several juridical forms of cooperation were used:
Within the so-called wedderleginge (labeled also kumpanie, vera societas) two
merchants cooperated, one of them was trading goods whereas the other only
contributed part of the financial capital the first one was using for his trading
operations. Profits were shared.40 In contrast, the so-called sendeve was a sort
of commission business. The commission agent sold the goods he had received
from another merchant by order and for account of this merchant, the sender.
Profits and risks remained with this sender, who had instructed the sale and
had provided the commisson agent with goods.41 Yet, by far the most impor-
tant transaction type between Hanseatic merchants was the cooperation of
two traders. This was different from a commission business and can be labeled
a “reciprocal” business. In such reciprocal partnerships, each partner sold the
other’s goods, but in every case the sender pocketed the profits. However, the
risk remained only with the partner who operated the sale.42 Simultaneity of
Vernetzung. Zu den Erfolgsfaktoren des hansischen Handels,” in Mark Häberlein
and Christof Jeggle, eds., Praktiken des Handels.Geschäfte und soziale Beziehungen in
Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit, Irseer Schriften, nf 6 (Konstanz: uvk Verlagsgesellschaft,
2010), 39–69, 43–50.
40 Wilhelm Ebel, Lübisches Kaufmannsrecht vornehmlich nach Lübecker Ratsurteilen des
15./16. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen: Göttinger Arbeitskreis, 1953); Cordes, Gesellschaftshandel
(see footnote 22); Id., “Einheimische und gemeinrechtliche Elemente im hansischen
Gesellschaftsrecht des 15.–17. Jahrhunderts. Eine Projektskizze,” in Jörn, Kattinger and
Wernicke, eds., ‘kopet uns werk by tyden.’ (see footnote 27), 67–71; Id., Wie verdiente der
Kaufmann sein Geld? Hansische Handelsgesellschaften im Spätmittelalter, Handel, Geld
und Politik, vol. 2 (Lübeck, 2000); Hammel-Kiesow, Hanse (see footnote 14).
41 Cordes, Gesellschaftshandel (see footnote 40); Id., “Gesellschaftsrecht” (see footnote 40);
Id., Wie verdiente der Kaufmann sein Geld? (see footnote 40).
42 Gunnar Mickwitz, “Neues zur Funktion hansischer Handelsgesellschaften,” Hansische
Geschichtsblätter 62 (1937), 24–39; Id., Aus Revaler Handelsbüchern. Zur Technik des
Ostseehandels in der ersten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhundert, Commentationes Humanarum
Litterarum, ix/5 (Helsingfors: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1938); Walter Stark, “Über
Platz- und Kommissionshändlergewinne im Handel des 15. Jahrhunderts,” in Konrad
Fritze, Eckehard Müller-Mertens, and Walter Stark, eds., Autonomie, Wirtschaft und
Kultur der Hansestädte, Hansische Studien, vol. 6 and Abhandlungen zur Handels-