Social structure and land markets in late medieval central and east-central Europe

Abstract

Recent research on the development of peasant land markets and transfer patterns for central and east-central Europe concentrated on the early modern period. For the late Middle Ages, rural history still relies on older approaches studying the general development of ‘agrarian structure’ (Agrarverfassung) and peasant ‘inheritance’. This article seeks to establish the basis for a more systematic analysis of the formation and general development of peasant land markets in late medieval central and east-central Europe in a comparative perspective. Apart from changes weakening traditional manorial structures, secure peasant property rights of hereditary tenure developed and prevailed by the later Middle Ages. Possible institutional rigidities of transactions with peasant farmland, whose effects in practice would need further exploration, were undermined by the existence of reserves of land situated outside the measured open fields of peasant farms that could be traded more flexibly. These areas also formed important resources for the establishment of smallholders and cottagers who in turn added to the dynamics of developing peasant land markets. In the final section, the article offers a brief survey of developments during the early modern period and concludes that traditional images of an undermining of peasant property rights and of massive landlord powers due to the rise of ‘demesne lordship’ (Gutsherrschaft) must be seriously questioned, as recent empirical studies highlight enormous regional variation and a dominant pattern of continuity of secure peasant property rights and also indicate considerable land mobility.

A golden age before serfdom? The human capital of Central-Eastern and Eastern Europe in the 17th-19th centuries

“…c) The second serfdom hypothesis is also commonly cited in the economic history literature (Kula, 1976;Millward 1982;Cerman 2008;Ogilvie and Edwards 2000;also Sosnowska 2004). Scholars have noted that historical Poland and Russia in particular were affected by noble landlordism and village subjection (Hagen, 1998;also Mironov, 1996).…”

“Girl Power” in Eastern Europe? The human capital development of Central-Eastern and Eastern Europe in the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries and its determinants

“…Serfdom. The second serfdom hypothesis is also commonly cited in the economic history literature as a determinant of slow development (Kula, 1976;Millward 1982;Cerman 2008;Ogilvie and Edwards 2000;also Sosnowska 2004; on a different perspective: Malinowski 2016a). Scholars have noted that historical Poland, and Russia in particular, were affected by noble landlordism and village subjection (Hagen 1998;Mironov 1996).…”

“…All these sources, except for nineteenth century censuses and the seventeenth/eighteenth century sources on Russia, are the part of the CEURFAMFORM Database developed by M. Szołtysek, supported by the Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship project(FP6-2002-Mobility-5, Proposal No. 515065) at the Cambridge Group for the History ofPopulation and Social Structure, 2006-2008. Details: Szołtysek 2008 …”

Life-cycle service and family systems in the rural countryside: a lesson from historical East-Central Europe

“…13 All the same, an overwhelming majority of the population discussed here lived in personal and hereditary subjection, had property rights limited to an indeterminate leasehold, and delivered labor services to a landlord (region 5, and some parts of regions 3 and 4 were generally the only exception). However, one of the paradoxes of the "western" region was the coexistence of formal serfdom structures with quite an extensive land market and a considerable land mobility (Cerman, 2008). In all the clusters, the social and economic centre of gravity rested predominantly on the middle-sized farmers and smallholders.…”