19世纪奥斯曼Niş和Leskofçe的土地庄园、农村公共和集体农业

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY Turkish Historical Review Pub Date : 2022-08-16 DOI:10.1163/18775462-bja10036
Y. Terzibaşoğlu
{"title":"19世纪奥斯曼Niş和Leskofçe的土地庄园、农村公共和集体农业","authors":"Y. Terzibaşoğlu","doi":"10.1163/18775462-bja10036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In contesting claims of private ownership of landed estates in mid-nineteenth-century Niş and Leskofçe, peasants argued that they cultivated and possessed the land ‘jointly and commonly’. It was a claim that questioned existing property relations, based on tenancy and sharecropping in landed estates (çiftliks) owned by urban landholders. This article attempts to reconstruct the social organisation of production in the estates by exploring forms of land use and labour which were embedded in forms of collective peasant organisation and practice. It is argued that the co-existence of multiple land use and labour forms under a dominant framework of estate agriculture generated social tensions with long-term consequences.","PeriodicalId":41042,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Historical Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Landed Estates, Rural Commons and Collective Agriculture in Ottoman Niş and Leskofçe in the Nineteenth Century\",\"authors\":\"Y. Terzibaşoğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18775462-bja10036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In contesting claims of private ownership of landed estates in mid-nineteenth-century Niş and Leskofçe, peasants argued that they cultivated and possessed the land ‘jointly and commonly’. It was a claim that questioned existing property relations, based on tenancy and sharecropping in landed estates (çiftliks) owned by urban landholders. This article attempts to reconstruct the social organisation of production in the estates by exploring forms of land use and labour which were embedded in forms of collective peasant organisation and practice. It is argued that the co-existence of multiple land use and labour forms under a dominant framework of estate agriculture generated social tensions with long-term consequences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Historical Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Historical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18775462-bja10036\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Historical Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18775462-bja10036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在19世纪中期的niu和leskofe,农民们对土地私有制的主张进行了争论,他们认为他们“共同地”耕种和拥有土地。这是一种质疑现有财产关系的主张,这种关系是建立在城市土地所有者拥有的土地的租赁和分成的基础上的。本文试图通过探索根植于农民集体组织形式和实践中的土地使用形式和劳动形式,来重构庄园的社会生产组织。本文认为,在地产农业的主导框架下,多种土地利用和劳动力形式的共存产生了具有长期后果的社会紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Landed Estates, Rural Commons and Collective Agriculture in Ottoman Niş and Leskofçe in the Nineteenth Century
In contesting claims of private ownership of landed estates in mid-nineteenth-century Niş and Leskofçe, peasants argued that they cultivated and possessed the land ‘jointly and commonly’. It was a claim that questioned existing property relations, based on tenancy and sharecropping in landed estates (çiftliks) owned by urban landholders. This article attempts to reconstruct the social organisation of production in the estates by exploring forms of land use and labour which were embedded in forms of collective peasant organisation and practice. It is argued that the co-existence of multiple land use and labour forms under a dominant framework of estate agriculture generated social tensions with long-term consequences.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: The Turkish Historical Review is devoted to Turkish history in the widest sense, covering the period from the 6th century, with the rise of the Turks in Central Asia, to the 20th century. All contributions to the journal must display a substantial use of primary-source material and also be accessible to historians in general, i.e. those working outside the specific fields of Ottoman and Turkish history. Articles with a comparative scope which cross the traditional boundaries of the area studies paradigm are therefore very welcome. The editors also encourage younger scholars to submit contributions. The journal includes a reviews section, which, in addition to publications in English, French, and other western European languages, will specifically monitor new studies in Turkish and those coming out in the Balkans, Russia and the Middle East. The Turkish Historical Review has a double-blind peer review system.
期刊最新文献
War Tax Law (Tekalif-i Harbiye): An Instrument of Dispossession and Capital Accumulation in the Ottoman Empire during the Great War U.S. Commercial Diplomacy Toward Turkey: Ambassador George C. McGhee’s Role in the Privatization of the Oil Business in the 1950s Justice of the Peace Courts in the Adjudication of Property Disputes in the Ottoman Countryside (1839–1914) The Christian Population of 16th-Century Ottoman Anatolia: An Overview and Preliminary Observations on Its Location and Numbers in the 1520s Diplomacy Within the Security Framework in Turkey and Romania During the Interwar Period
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1