Russia's Debt to the Mongols in Suretyship and Collective Responsibility

Bibliographic Data

ID2107684
AuthorsHorace W Dewey (University of Michigan, corresponding author)
Year1988
Volume30
Issue2
Pages249-270
Publication date1988-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueComparative Studies in Society and History (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0010-4175 • E-ISSN: 1475-2999
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0010417500015188
OpenAlexW2105721975
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited21

Theterms poruka(suretyship or collective responsibility) andporuchnik(surety, guarantor) rarely appear in pre-Mongol Russian texts. Formal poruka seems to have expanded enormously only after the Mongol invasion. The institution clearly flourished in Muscovite Russia, where q'surety bonds' (poruchnye zapisi) were drawn up to cover debts and contractual obligations, military and administrative service, payment of fiscal levies, obligatory labor, trial procedure, personal conduct, public safety, political allegiance-and even matters of conscience and orthodoxy ('spiritual suretyship'). In all those areas, individuals or groups of people could, as 'sureties,' be held responsible for the conduct of others, the 'principals.' Sureties faced harsh penalties-fines, forced labor, corporal punishment, and worse-for their principals' misconduct or failure to fulfill certain obligations

Allegiance · Business · Collective responsibility · Conscience · Debt · Dismissal · Institution · Misconduct · Payment · Political science · Politics · Punishment (psychology · Surety · Eurasian Exchange Networks · Finance · Law · Linguistics and language evolution · Rangeland Management and Livestock Ecology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub