![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
In light of the extensive presence and preservation of communal property and resources in territories in mainland Spain, the aim of this paper is to analyse the keys to the use, distribution and retention of such properties and resources, particularly those still in existence, with particular regard to common pasture lands and woodlands. A compilation of council by-laws from past periods, combined with the production of a catalogue of agricultural patterns, has enabled an in-depth study of certain fundamental points relating to social and economic development. Such development has tended to maintain the balance between resources and population and to conserve resources through sustained and sustainable use that to some extent has guaranteed the occupation of lands, the preservation of rural communities and the perpetuation of traditional systems in the context of new challenges and contemporary needs. A combination of qualitative and quantitative documentary sources has enabled elucidation of the role and the full dimensions of communal properties. In particular, the causes and consequences, either of their sale or privatisation, or of their preservation and exploitation, will be outlined in the context of changes and new contemporary needs.
Acknowledgements
This study was undertaken in the context of a research and development project entitled ‘Bienes concejiles, régimen comunal y colectivismo agrario en el noroeste español, siglos xv–xx’ (Council Properties, Communal Regime and Agricultural Collectivism in the north-west of Spain, Fifteenth to Twentieth Centuries). The project was financed by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, the grant reference being: HAR 2009-10302.
Notes
1. Appropriation of lands by councils made it easier for them to control and manage natural resources. During the modern period, councils, as institutions with local powers, strengthened their legislative and executive capacities within their territorial boundaries. On this point see: Rubio Pérez, El Concejo.
2. Rubio Pérez, La gestión del común.
3. Council by-laws as a source of law and the legal framework constitute important documentary sources which are essential to understanding the development of rural areas and especially social and production relationships. Their effectiveness and ability to adapt to secular changes explain their persistence into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in the north and north-west regions of Spain. CitationOrduña Rebollo, Democracia directa municipal, concejos y cabildos abiertos, 95–107.
4. Under the communal system, the control held by rural communities was an important factor as regards use and preservation of common land. This argument has been supported by European historiography when assessing the decision-making role of rural communities. See CitationDe Moor, “La trayectoria de un comunal en Flandes durante los siglos XVIII y XIX,” 111–40. For a similar interpretive stance on the importance of collective action and the direct management of resources in the pursuit of the common good: CitationOlson, La lógica de la acción colectiva and CitationOstrom, Governing the Commons (El gobierno de los bienes comunes).
5. Between 1880 and 1890 the Spanish state auctioned off the greater part of the montes or rough pasture and scrublands, which in the early part of the modern period had been under the control of nobles having the right to administer justice. Villages made representations through their councils to claim the right of first refusal, since they had enjoyed the use of these lands on leases for several centuries. Thus, they acquired ownership of lands that went to swell the total size of properties owned by councils. It should be borne in mind that for centuries, many councils in Tierra de Campos had paid a bond or statutory income to the lords in return for ostensible control over the land and therefore had held the power and possessed the right to clear virgin spaces. This negative factor meant that communities and their councils would retain control over the communal heritage in the nineteenth century, either directly, or by buying it in the corresponding sale.
6. CitationPérez Álvarez, Omaña y sus Concejos.
7. Rubio Pérez, La Bañeza y su Tierra: 1650–1850.
8. Rubio Pérez, “La defensa del común.” The persistence of commons in Spain over time was not unique to the Kingdom of León. On the contrary, commons survived in many other areas of the country despite the privatisation process driven by liberals in the nineteenth century. This process is detailed for Spain as a whole by the Rural History Studies Group (CitationGrupo de Estudios de Historia Rural), “Más allá de la propiedad perfecta.”
9. An analysis of the various different models found in Spain may be seen in: Various Authors “La propiedad colectiva en la España Moderna.”
10. León Provincial Library, By-laws, Box 3, 1929, and Council Archives of Siero, s/n. A representative sample of council by-laws in the Astorga area that record the allocation of communal spaces and council management can be seen in CitationBlanco Blanco, La Somoza de Astorga, Volumes I, II, III and IV. In addition, a representative district sample of council by-laws can be seen in Rubio Pérez, El sistema político concejil en la provincia de León.
11. The 1710 by-laws of Huerga de Garaballes stipulated “that when the neighbours participate in hacenderas (collective work) to repair bridges and other work, that a person goes from each house who is capable of working in accordance with custom, and when the hacendera is to work on reservoirs, each neighbour must take three cart-loads of stones or gravel to where the council members indicate, and those who do not have a cart must help to load the carts under penalty of four quarters”. Provincial Historical Archive of León, protocols box 7356.
12. Provincial Historical Archive of León, protocols, boxes 5048, 5586, 6401, 5119 and 5271. Residents' Register of Castilfalé. Tierra de Campos, years 1642, 1673, 1740, 1747, 1748, 1751 and 1753. In addition: Residents' Register of Castrofuerte, boxes 5586, 5048, 6276 and 5586.
13. The progressive oligarchisation of local authority and the greater or lesser political and administrative capacity of rural communities has become a popular explanation for the slow process of the demise of the communal system (commons) in most regions of Spain. The relationship between the local council authorities and the conservation of the communal system which underscores regional differences, above and beyond other specific incidental factors, can be seen in: CitationGarcía Sanz, “Bienes, derechos comunales y proceso de su privatización en Castilla durante los siglos XVI y XVII”; CitationVassberg, Tierra y sociedad en Castilla; CitationMarcos, “Evolución de la propiedad pública municipal en Castilla la Vieja;” CitationBernal Rodríguez, “La tierra comunal en Andalucía durante la Edad Moderna.”
14. During the Early Modern period, the right to use common resources was based on three criteria: “efficiency, utility and equity”. See: De Moor, “La trayectoria de un comunal en Flandes durante los siglos XVIII y XIX,” 116. León council by-laws are for the most part based on the criteria mentioned, as is apparent in the large territorial sample collected in Rubio Pérez, El Sistema político concejil en la Provincia de León durante la Edad Moderna.
15. CitationSerrano Álvarez, “La defensa del comunal y los usos colectivos, León 1800–1936 ¿una economía moral?” In the classic study Costumbres en común, CitationE.P Thompson placed more value on important concepts such as the “moral economy” rather than on the market economy. See CitationEsteve Mora and Hernando Ortego, “Régimen comunal y economía moral en el A. Régimen.”
16. Rubio Pérez, Ordenanzas concejiles de Villarejo de Órbigo, año 1699 and Ordenanzas del concejo de Santiago de Millas y su barrio de Penillas, año 1671.
17. By-laws of Senra in the Province of León 1786. Provincial Historical Archive of León (A.H.P.L). C. 6795.
18. By-laws of Barniedo de la Reina, chap. 28 (1632), Council archives of Barniedo.
19. Further information about regional differences is given in: CitationVarious Authors “Informe sobre la propiedad colectiva en la España Moderna.”
20. Although it is in León areas where communally held properties and agricultural collectivism were most deeply rooted and survived longest during the modern and contemporary periods, the model seems to have been found all over the north and north-west of Spain, especially in those regions dominated by the former mediaeval Christian kingdoms of Castile and Aragon. On this topic, see the studies: CitationMoreno Fernández, “El régimen comunal y la reproducción de la comunidad campesina en las Tierras de La Rioja, siglos XVIII–XIX” and CitationLana Berasain, “Aprovechamientos comunales en Navarra.”
21. The process of state expropriation and sale of lands owned not by individuals but in mortmain and the dismantling of communal systems took place throughout the lands of Western Europe in general, as is recorded in CitationDemélas and Vivier, Les Propriétés collectives face aux attaques libérales (1750–1914). In the case of Spain, the results of this process were uneven throughout the regions, despite legislative reforms, the new municipal framework and the Confiscation of Madoz in 1855. CitationMarti Gilabert, La desamortización española; CitationIriarte, “La desamortización de 1855 en Navarra.” On the political framework, see CitationOrduña Rebollo, Municipios y Provincias.
22. As a reference, the conservation of these council-held lands should be highlighted, together with the development of new community councils which coexisted with the new municipal framework, without entailing a loss of the local council's power to manage rural communities and their economic resources. On this process, see Rubio Pérez, El sistema político concejil en la Provincia de León durante la Edad Moderna, 193–215, 232 and 468. On the fight by villages to maintain the council's power in the face of municipal reform, see CitationFlorez De Quiñones, Contribución al estudio del régimen local y de la economía popular en España.
23. The importance of communally held lands and resources for the social structure and subsistence of rural areas in the context of more-or-less polarised societies is reflected both in the Residents' Registers and in studies on the land around the Orbigo and Esla rivers. The Residents' Register for the Jurisdiction of Benavides, 1680. A.H.P.L., box 9802. Villademor de la Vega, 1833, box 5627. Along the same lines, see Pérez García, “Colectivismo agrario y desigualdad social en la Vega Baja del Esla,” 171–92; Rubio Pérez, “Pobres y ricos”; Rubio Pérez, “Campo, campesinos y cuestión rural en Castilla la Vieja y en el Reino de León durante la Edad Moderna.”
24. Councils in the Órbigo River district rewarded all residents for the birth of a son by assigning them a plot of land of the size of one hemina, approximating to some 600 square metres. This was termed a quiñón (allotment) or alma (soul), and the son was entitled to draw its benefits until reaching the age of 18. At that point the council would re-assign the plot to another family that had just had a new son. The terrain or bago assigned and ploughed for this purpose by the council of Fresno de Valduerna during the nineteenth century came to be called Las Almas.
25. Costa, Colectivismo agrario en España.
26. Rubio Pérez, La Bañeza y su Tierra, 1650–1850. These advances in the ploughing process were controlled by the councils and the increase in productivity derived from an increase in the amount of land irrigated and extensive farming practices were particularly marked in river valleys and transition zones. Pérez García, Un modelo social leonés en crecimiento; Rubio Pérez, “Agua, regadío y conflicto social en la provincia de León durante la E. Moderna.”
27. CitationMaya Frades, Pascual, and Gómez Sal, “Propiedad comunal y ocupación del espacio en el sector occidental de la provincia de León.”
28. The local administrative reform and the emergence of new municipal powers in the shape of the new liberal councils which administered the commons as public assets did not affect rural communities in León which, unlike other regions, responded by creating their own community councils. Thus, the commons continued to be considered the private property of the neighbourhood community. The effects of this municipalising process, which had had important consequences in the Early Modern urban world and distanced the neighbourhood community from communal management, spread unevenly to other areas and thus influenced the conservation of communal heritage. On political reforms and the persistence of the council institutions, see: Orduña Rebollo, Municipios y Provincias. On the process in Navarre, see CitationLana Berasain and Iriarte Goñi, “La cuestión comunal,” 694.
29. A good example of this adaptability can be seen in the by-laws of Burón council in the León mountains, written according to tradition and the new needs in the years 1752, 1821 and 1861. León Provincial Library, Council by-laws collection, folder no. 1.
30. A detailed analysis of distribution and records of the land around the Esla River is given in: Pérez García, “Evolución de un modelo agrario en la Vega Baja del Esla: 1700–1850.” A.H.P.L., Protocols. Libro de Acuerdos y repartimientos de Villademor, año 1793, Villaornate, 1834. Box 5596.
31. Administration of the land in the region of Lugo in eastern Galicia (unlike land in the western mountain region of León, which together with Lugo formed the limit of persistence of communal land) was adapted to a legal system based on the system of “voices”, whereby a number of families benefited via inheritance to the detriment of the neighbourhood as a whole. CitationSaavedra, “La propiedad colectiva en Galicia en el siglo XVIII.” One of the important components of the communal regime continued to be council or community control of land, although the capacity of communities to manage common and private resources also continued to exert an influence. The quantification of communal arable land carried out in the late nineteenth century on the basis of a regional analysis of Spain, which did not specify whether the land was virgin or cultivated, assigned percentages of over 30% to Galicia, Asturias, León, Cantabria and Navarra. CitationBeltran Tapia, “Social and Environmental Filters to Market Incentives.” Concerning the persistence, adaptability, functionality and changes in the communal regime in Rioja over the course of the nineteenth century, see: Moreno Fernández, “El régimen comunal y la reproducción de la comunidad campesina en las Sierras de la Rioja, Siglos XVIII–XIX.”
32. The more intense municipalisation and urbanisation processes and access to the market economy in rural communities such as Navarre, which still preserved an important communal heritage in the nineteenth century, may explain the changes and priorities identified in the nineteenth century, and especially the less marked concern for conservation of a sustainable balance and the new objectives of the new communities primarily governed by the concept of “fairness”. CitationLana Berasain, “From Equilibrium to Equity.”
33. The councils, as former holders of most of the land under the control of the former jurisdictional overlords, claimed in right of redemption and acquired significant areas of scrubland, meadows and pastures and cultivated fields for the community at auctions, and these were subsequently distributed in plots or worked collectively. The files deposited in the A.H.P.L. (Provincial Historical Archive of León) evidence this through the survey conducted between 1870–90. The charters or privileges paid for during the Early Modern period by the councils to the jurisdictional overlords in return for ancestral control of the council district facilitated the purchase and access to these areas once the nobility put them up for sale or they were expropriated by the state. Rubio Pérez, “Fueros, concejiles y régimen señorial en el reino de León”; Rubio Pérez, “Señores contra el Estado, vasallos contra señores.”
34. Pérez García, “Demografía leonesa en el Antiguo Régimen, 1500–1850.”
35. The community councils distributed the lots and “quiñones” equitably among residents, regardless of whether some of them, having no cattle to work it, relinquished their use of the “quiñon”, but never their right to claim it. The local use of natural resources and common lands continued under the old regime, as evidenced in the amended by-law texts: See: Fondo de ordenanzas concejiles, carpeta 1-2- Biblioteca Berrueta. County Council of León. León. Special references to council power and the adaptations of the by-laws to the new context of the nineteenth century are given in: Council by-laws of Val S. Lorenzo: A. C. L.; Marzán: A.H.P.L., box 6800; Piedrafita: (1847). A.H.P.L., box 6832.