1978
DOI: 10.2307/1922569
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Families and Farms: Mentalite in Pre-Industrial America

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0
7

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 134 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
27
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…46 See Rothenberg (1992); Henretta (1978); and Kulikoff (1979). Some household members may have left agriculture to seek work in nearby cities, but that effect is captured in our conjectures because the agricultural share of the labor force changes with urbanization.…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysismentioning
confidence: 96%
“…46 See Rothenberg (1992); Henretta (1978); and Kulikoff (1979). Some household members may have left agriculture to seek work in nearby cities, but that effect is captured in our conjectures because the agricultural share of the labor force changes with urbanization.…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysismentioning
confidence: 96%
“…James Henretta has pointed out that immediate profit was less important than yearly subsistence and long-term security for farm families, so what attributes did horses, cattle, sheep and pigs have which made them a priority? 63 …”
Section: New Settlers and Livestockmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite institutional differences in landholding, both sides of the river had similar physical, agricultural, and geographical constraints, particularly in terms of climate and crops that could be grown (Bruegel 1996b). Again, the small freehold agriculture on which Vickers (1996) bases his interpretation likely holds better west of the Hudson (see Fabend 1991;Wermuth 2001) than on the east bank, where small farmers were more likely to be tenants (Kim 1970;1978). 2 East of the Hudson, Earle's (1992a;1992b) staple interpretation may be more apropos.…”
Section: Staples Vs Social Structurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is for the simple reason that tenants in British North America were not formally tied to the land as east European serfs were, and were free to remove to nearby areas with available land-hence the landlords' relative lenience regarding rent, in an attempt to jwsr.org | http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2016.615 better attract and keep tenants (Kim 1970;1978). Per Solow's comments on Domar, "[t]here certainly were positive rents and tenant farmers in colonial America, but the essential nature of the northern colonies was not that of a landed aristocracy " (1991: 37) (Anderson 1974: 324;Braudel 1981: 193;van Bavel and van Zanden 2004: 512-13;White 1991: 141-47;Wolf 1997: 111).…”
Section: East Of Hudson Downriver: Mixed Crops On Westchester Countymentioning
confidence: 99%