Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A major difficulty of a serf's life was that his work for his lord coincided with, and took precedence over, the work he had to perform on his own lands: when the lord's crops were ready to be harvested, so were his own. On the other hand, the serf of a benign lord could look forward to being well fed during his service; it was a lord without ...
The old paternalistic relationship in East Prussia lasted into the 20th century. What was new was that the peasant could now sell his land, enabling him to move to the city, or buy up the land of his neighbors. [13] The land reforms in northwestern Germany were driven by progressive governments and local elites.
In the 18th century the Russian serfs were escaping from Russia to the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (where previously harsh conditions were improving) in significant enough numbers to become a major concern for the Russian Government sufficient to play a role in its decision to partition the Commonwealth.
The land reforms of Latin America were more comprehensive initiatives [30] that redistributed lands from large landholders to former peasants [31] —farm workers and tenant farmers. Hence, many Campesinos in Latin America today are closer smallholders who own their land and do not pay rent to a landlord, rather than peasants who do not own land.
By 1914, approximately 42,500 serf families had purchased their own land. [35] Approximately two thirds of the land affected by the interwar land reform was located in Bosnia and Herzegovina. [36] A total of 1,175,305 hectares (2,904,240 acres), representing 23% of the total territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was expropriated for redistribution.
Manorialism, also known as seigneurialism, the manor system or manorial system, [1] [2] was the method of land ownership (or "tenure") in parts of Europe, notably France and later England, during the Middle Ages. [3]
The landowner could transfer the serf without land to another landowner while keeping the serf's personal property and family; however, the landowner had no right to kill the serf. [8] About four-fifths of Russian peasants were serfs according to the censuses of 1678 and 1719; free peasants remained only in the north and north-east of the ...
Serfs, cottars or slaves, who may have composed as much as 88% of the population in 1086, [2] were bound by law to work on the land. They could not leave without permission of their Lords. But also, even those who were classed as free men were factually limited in their freedom, by the limited chances to acquire property.