Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hobsbawm, E. J. "Peasants and politics", Journal of Peasant Studies, Volume 1, Issue 1 October 1973, pp. 3–22 – article discusses the definition of "peasant" as used in social sciences; Macey, David A. J. Government and Peasant in Russia, 1861–1906; The Pre-History of the Stolypin Reforms (1987). [ISBN missing]
Due to the community's ownership of the land, as opposed to the individual's, an individual peasant could not sell his portion of the land to go work in a factory in the city. A peasant was required to pay off long-term loans received by the government. The money from these loans was given to the primary landowner.
The general assumptions of moral economists is that peasants are "anti-market, prefer common property to private, and dislike buying and selling". [14] On the other hand, Popkin argues that these assumptions are not fixed, and are generally dependent on individual assessments of risk and reward amongst different peasants in different contexts. [14]
Unlike serfs, state peasants and peasants under tsar's patronage were considered personally free, nobody had the right to sell them, to interfere in their family life, by law they were considered as 'free agricultural inhabitants' (Russ 'свободные сельские обыватели') One particular source of indignation in Europe was ...
The Huasteco people spread their ideology using pamphlets, books, and flags. The final root of the peasant revolution of 1879 occurred in 1876, when General Porfirio Diaz enlisted the help of peasants to overthrow the current president Sebastian Lerdo de Tejada in exchange for the return of peasant land rights.
Serfdom only existed in central and southern areas of the Russian Empire. It was never established in the North, in the Urals, or in Siberia. According to the Encyclopedia of Human Rights: In 1649 up to three-quarters of Muscovy's peasants, or 13 to 14 million people, were serfs whose material lives were barely distinguishable from slaves ...
Four major land reforms have taken place in Romania: in 1864, 1921, 1945 and 1991.The first sought to undo the feudal structure that had persisted after the unification of the Danubian Principalities in 1859; the second, more drastic reform, tried to resolve lingering peasant discontent and create social harmony after the upheaval of World War I and extensive territorial expansion; the third ...
The Federal Order [9] reached high print run as well and was probably particularly popular with the peasants, since it provided a model for a federal social order based on the municipality. Peasants’ communities were found to have been organised pursuant to this in the Black Forest, the Alsace and in Franconia.