IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v17y2021i3p615-646n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trading with the Dead

Author

Listed:
  • Leeson Peter T.

    (Department of Economics, George Mason University, MS 3G4, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA)

Abstract

Late medieval Englishmen provided for their wellbeing in the hereafter by purchasing intercession for their souls. They traded valuable landed endowments for the promise of posthumous Masses and prayers whose daily observance contractual counterparties agreed to underwrite for decades, centuries, even eternally. Intercessory foundations so contracted were called chantries. Chantry contracts constituted trades with the dead in the sense that the promisees were deceased when the promisors were supposed to perform. I study the special problems that chantry contract promisees faced in enforcing their rights from the grave and analyze the devices they used for that purpose. Chantry founders wary of their fates in the afterlife showed equal concern for the challenges their contracts would encounter in this life long after they were gone. Founders met those challenges by leveraging the economics of incentives to develop a strategy of chantry contract self-enforcement: profit the living, present and future, for monitoring the contractual performance of promisors and promisors’ agents, and for punishing them should they breach. Chantry founders’ strategy was successful, enabling trade with the dead.

Suggested Citation

  • Leeson Peter T., 2021. "Trading with the Dead," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 615-646, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:17:y:2021:i:3:p:615-646:n:1
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2021-0036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2021-0036
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rle-2021-0036?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter T. Leeson, 2007. "Trading with Bandits," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(2), pages 303-321.
    2. Peter T. Leeson, 2014. ""God Damn": The Law and Economics of Monastic Malediction," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 193-216.
    3. Alberto Cassone & Carla Marchese, 1999. "The Economics of Religious Indulgences," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 155(3), pages 429-429, September.
    4. Greif, Avner, 1989. "Reputation and Coalitions in Medieval Trade: Evidence on the Maghribi Traders," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 857-882, December.
    5. Peter T. Leeson & Jacob W. Russ, 2018. "Witch Trials," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(613), pages 2066-2105, August.
    6. Ekelund Jr., Robert B. & Tollison, Robert D., 2011. "Economic Origins of Roman Christianity," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226200026.
    7. Peter T. Leeson, 2012. "Ordeals," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(3), pages 691-714.
    8. Peter T. Leeson, 2013. "Vermin Trials," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(3), pages 811-836.
    9. Frey, Bruno S & Buhofer, Heinz, 1988. "Prisoners and Property Rights," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 19-46, April.
    10. Leeson, Peter T. & Nowrasteh, Alex, 2011. "Was privateering plunder efficient?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 303-317, August.
    11. Peter T. Leeson, 2007. "An-arrgh-chy: The Law and Economics of Pirate Organization," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(6), pages 1049-1094, December.
    12. Ekelund, Robert Jr. & Hebert, Robert F. & Tollison, Robert D., 1992. "The economics of sin and redemption : Purgatory as a market-pull innovation?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter T. Leeson, 2014. ""God Damn": The Law and Economics of Monastic Malediction," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 193-216.
    2. Peter T Leeson, 2014. "Oracles," Rationality and Society, , vol. 26(2), pages 141-169, May.
    3. Escalante, Edwar E. & March, Raymond J., 2020. "Fighting on Christmas: brawling as self-governance in rural Peru," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 355-368, June.
    4. Franklin G. Mixon & Kamal P. Upadhyaya, 2020. "The economics of Puritanism’s treatment of bewitchment: exorcism as a potential market-pull innovation?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 203-222, October.
    5. Peter Leeson, 2014. "Pirates, prisoners, and preliterates: anarchic context and the private enforcement of law," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 365-379, June.
    6. Peter T. Leeson & Jacob W. Russ, 2018. "Witch Trials," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(613), pages 2066-2105, August.
    7. Leeson, Peter T. & Boettke, Peter J. & Lemke, Jayme S., 2014. "Wife Sales," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(4), pages 349-379, December.
    8. Gershman, Boris, 2015. "The economic origins of the evil eye belief," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 119-144.
    9. Andrew Young, 2022. "The Peace of God," Rationality and Society, , vol. 34(1), pages 28-55, February.
    10. Rustam Romaniuc & Katherine Farrow & Lisette Ibanez & Alain Marciano, 2016. "The perils of government enforcement," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 161-182, January.
    11. Manvir Singh & Pascal Boyer & Leeson, Peter T & Mckay Ryan & Bentall, Richard P & Sarah Peacey & Ruth Mace & Schimmelpfennig, Robin & Muthukrishna, Michael, 2021. "Magic, explanations, and evil: the origins and design of witches and sorcerers," Post-Print hal-03256601, HAL.
    12. Edwards, Griffin & Robinson, Joshua J., 2019. "You gotta fight for your right? Publicly assigned but privately enforced property rights," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 31-39.
    13. Leonid Krasnozhon & John Levendis, 2018. "Weekend racer: cheating and self-governance in road racing," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 75-90, February.
    14. Rustam Romaniuc & Katherine Farrow & Lisette Ibanez & Alain Marciano, 2016. "The perils of government enforcement," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 161-182, January.
    15. Jefferson DP Bertolai & Luiz GDS Scorzafave, 2021. "Property rights’ emergence in illicit drug markets," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(1), pages 52-105, February.
    16. Piano, Ennio E. & Rouanet, Louis, 2020. "Desertion as theft," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 169-183, April.
    17. Peter T. Leeson, 2009. "The Laws of Lawlessness," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 471-503, June.
    18. Roth, M. Garrett & Skarbek, David, 2014. "Prison Gangs and the Community Responsibility System," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 223-243, May.
    19. Teppo Felin & Peter T. Leeson & Christopher J. Coyne, 2012. "Wisdom, Alterability, and Social Rules," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5-6), pages 441-451, July.
    20. Benjamin Powell & Edward Stringham, 2009. "Public choice and the economic analysis of anarchy: a survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 503-538, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    chantries; contract enforcement; intercession; purgatory; self-enforcement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law
    • N13 - Economic History - - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics; Industrial Structure; Growth; Fluctuations - - - Europe: Pre-1913

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:17:y:2021:i:3:p:615-646:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.