Lot meadows, do they have a role in understanding scattered holdings? A study case in northern Spain

ABSTRACT

Lot meadows are those hay meadows that, periodically, are divided into plots which are allocated by raffle among the inhabitants of a township or a parish, usually integrated within a common field system. In this article the lot meadow is presented as a relevant object of study, which can facilitate the understanding of the origin and evolution of agricultural landscapes. Firstly, the article provides technical aspects on how the lot meadows operate in Cantabria, a region located in northern Spain. In this region two lot meadows are still in use, and many others remained in use until the mid-twentieth century. By interviewing and by direct observation, a feature about the way in which they are internally zoned was documented: a permanent division of the meadow into large sets of similar forage quality, each of them being the subject of a separate lottery. Secondly, a locational analysis of twentyseven lot meadows, based on environmental factors and using historical records from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, enabled the identification of possible causes of privatisation or the preference for private meadowlands. The entire analysis led to an illustration of two classic explanations about scattered holdings in common field systems: i.e. equality distribution, and risk avoidance. If a lot meadow was consensually privatised among the villagers, it is likely that such internal zoning in sets was maintained, and therefore scattered plots were obtained. Likewise, this tenure pattern would result if this allocation procedure (with internal zoning in sets) were used to collectively create private meadows or arable fields.¹

Keywords:

• Common-property fields
• landscape
• lot meadows
• open fields
• Spain

Notes

1 This article is based on the unpublished doctoral dissertation of the author (Vázquez 2016).

2 Brian (1999) documents the same internal division in sets, while Watts (1987, citing Robertson 1813) notes that these sets were usually established according to differences in soil quality.

3 Next the by-laws that are cited in this article are referenced: Tudanca 1705 (SML 470, pp. 1–21), Cosío 1751 (SML 432, pp. 110–22), San Sebastián 1844 (SML 432, pp. 387–95), Pujayo 1785 (Azcuénaga 1980), Mogrovejo 1739 (Arce 1974), La Vega 1739 (Pérez & Baró 1988, pp. 361–86), Potes 1619 (ibid.,

4 Data on the lot meadow of Barrio has been provided by Joaquín Bedia.

5 A reverse procedure was common in England, where lots were introduced into the container, identified with a number, name or symbol (Brian 1999).

6 Hereinafter, the term lot field is used to refer generically to both lot meadows and lot grainlands.

7 Sánchez-Salazar (1988, pp. 143–4) found a document that seems to support this hypothesis. In the Spanish village of Campanario, in the region of Extremadura, villagers were opposed to fertilizing the plots they obtained after the draw of a lot grainland, because there was a probability that the following year they would not get the same plot. As a result, in 1752, local authorities decided upon the permanent allocation of the lot grainland so that villagers could improve it (document found in: NHA, Concejos: 10.483, 217). However, there is uncertainty about the validity of this document for the aim of the present article. On the one hand, of the total documentation and bibliography consulted, it is the only testimony that deals with such a proposal. On the other hand, the date of the document raises the following question: was this event influenced by the ideas of enlightenment and economic liberalism? At this period, these ideological and political movements began to spread throughout Spain, and, precisely, one of the most recurrent proposals was to privatise the agrarian common property, assuming it was an unproductive regime. Proposals such as the one documented by Sánchez-Salazar (1988), using similar arguments, can be found in the work of a well-known author such as Jovellanos (1795/1820, p. 26).