Wealth was distributed in monarchic societies through patronage.

The king would dispense titles to lesser peers and gentry in exchange for incidents and “taxes”. Incidents being severing crops or animals from the land that went with the titles and paying them over to the king and his ministers, who would then redistribute these things accordingly.

Those who had monetary wealth, usually in the form of gold or silver, used that to trade for arts and crafts such as paintings, furnishings, carriages, and masonry work (castle building).

The other quasi-distribution network belonged to the Roman Catholic church which had its own system of banking and distribution. Such as loans to kings to support wars, etc.

Largely, though, most wealth was not distributed. Virtually all trading took the form of barter.

The best thing to do is look up treatises on feudal and noble societies. The English, French and Spanish systems dominated throughout the dark and middle ages.

The redevelopment of wealth distribution began during the Renaissance with the veritable boom in arts, sciences and culture…most of which were brought about by the development of the Gutenberg Press. Mass production of literature assisted in the dispersal of intellectual theory which in turn hosted a number of paradigms.

Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” is a start on economic theory. The treatise explains the laws of Supply and Demand which are market theories kept in practice in modern times, or today actually.

Hobbes, “Leviathan” is another book that describes the work of a monarchy in society and how best to govern.

Rousseau’s, “Social Contract” explains the interplay between politics and economics.

Each of these three branches examine briefly the history of economics from different points of view.

From the radical side, see Marx, “The Communist Manifesto” which is a critique of both monarchy and capitalism and describes the descent from capitalism, to socialism, to communism in a 3 stage process.

There are other writers, notably moderns such as Keynes.

The first three writers mentioned explain in brief the history, the fourth, Marx criticises each system and elevates the descent towards communism as the true social cure.

My personal point of view is that Marx had it wrong. Smith had it right. But that unbridled capitalism is dangerous and so it will take some other unified theory that will explain how to control it. But I digress from your question and leave it up to YOU to go to the library and start cracking open them books!