RURAL MIDDLE CLASS IN MALLORCA (Ca. 1780

RURAL MIDDLE CLASS IN MALLORCA (Ca. 1780-1890).
An “almost impossible” characterisation essay
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The ambiguity of the term
The heterogeneity of the potential team members
A concept that evolves with time
The upward and downward social mobility of the potential team members
The limitations of the documentary sources: need to combine dynamic and
static sources, qualitative and quantitative sources, etc.
The difficulties of establishing limits with strictly quantitative variables
The multiple qualitative aspects that may be taken into account: terms and
forms of address, the typology and quality of household goods, jewels ad
ornaments, etc.
The political representation and social consideration of the members of the
group (the “forms of address”) as a possible distinctive sign
………..
THE AMBIGUITY OF THE TERM
• Middle class in relation to what?
• The “position” occupied by peasants within the whole
in accordance with whether or not they are to be
“proletarianized”?
• The average valuation of the assets they possess
(capital, business, furniture, livestock, …) in relation
to those of the whole of a larger community?
• The typology and/or quality of the belongings they
possess in comparison to the characteristics of other
groups?
• The social consideration awarded to their members
within a specific community?
A CHARACTERISATION ESSAY FOR A SPECIFIC GROUP IN THE
LATTER STAGE OF THE ANCIEN REGIME: “AMOS” (“TENANT
FARMERS”) AND PRODUCE GROWERS
• Selection of the sample
Peasant farmers who exploit land which they lease from others
(generally landlords) in exchange for payment of a rent, the failure to
pay which may lead to their eviction and consequently incur damage
to the cultivation of the leased land. As a result, from the start owners
look for tenants amongst the peasants who have a middling level of
wealth (and the ability to pay a “caution” which may minimise any
possible misfortunes.
In this way, we believe that we guarantee restriction of the sample to
an intermediate group situated between the landowners themselves
and peasants with scant or no resources who are generally day
workers and do not have enough assets for a caution guarantee.
THE EXAMPLE OF THE PRODUCE GROWERS
(Source: “straw and utensils” tax of 1772)
• Description of the group studied: a sample of 122 produce growers
from the municipality of Palma, about whom we know the type
and name of the lands as well the valuation of the assets they own:
real estate, trading or business and the total valuation of both.
• The vast majority do not own any real estate, but have trading
valuations (15.57% only)
• The valuations of the different types of assets present a high degree
of heterogeneity.
• Maximum valuation 1772: 1.238L /2 ---> 619L -As a conjecture,
approximately 500-600L could be considered “middle class”
• In practice, only a small number controls the majority of the wealth:
3 alone control a ¼ of the total.
HETEROGENEITY OF THE GROUP OF HORTELANOS
Results of the descriptive statistics (1772)
Produce-grower
statistics
Property
(pounds)
Trading (pounds)
Total Assets
(pounds)
Tax (Dineros)
Average
55.34
66.53
121.87
45.63
Median
0
42.5
50
19
Mode
0
50
50
19
Minimum
0
0
3
1
Maximum
1,216
650
1,238
466
Gini index
0.9226
0.5347
0.6551
0.6486
INEQUALITY REPRESENTED LORENZ CURVE PROPERTY AND TRADING PRODUCE
GROWERS
PROPERTY (REAL ESTATE)
Property Frequency
CLASS
FREQ.
%
% ACC.
0
104
85.25%
85.25%
30
1
0.82%
86.07%
137
2
0.82%
86.89%
87
1
0.82%
87.71%
90
1
0.82%
88.53%
100
1
0.82%
89.35%
110
1
0.82%
90.17%
130
1
0.82%
90.99%
180
1
0.82%
91.81%
300
1
0.82%
92.63%
343
1
0.82%
93.45%
356
1
0.82%
94.27%
400
1
0.82%
95.09%
429
1
0.82%
95.91%
501
1
0.82%
96.73%
596
1
0.82%
97.55%
872
1
0.82%
98.37%
975
1
0.82%
99.19%
1.216
1
100%
100%
Property Histogram

TRADING OR BUSINESS ASSETS
Trading Frequency (POUNDS)
CLASE
FREC.
%
% ACC.
0
1
0.82%
0.82%
3
1
0.82%
1.64%
4
1
0.82%
2.46%
5
5
4.10%
6.56%
10
15
12.30%
18.85%
15
3
2.46%
21.31%
20
7
5.74%
27.50%
25
12
9.84%
36.89%
30
8
6.56%
43.44%
40
8
6.56%
50%
45
1
0.82%
50.82%
50
23
18.85%
69.77%
70
2
1.64%
71.31%
80
4
3.28%
74.59%
85
1
0.82%
75.41
100
15
12.3%
87.70
150
17
5.74%
93.44%
200
1
4.10%
97.54%
300
1
0.82%
98.36
650
2
1.64%
100%
Trading Histogram
PRODUCE GROWERS
Tax Frequency (dineros)
Tax Histogram
CLASS
FRQ.
%
% ACC.
< 46.5
95
77.87%
77.87%
46.5-93
14
11.48%
89.34%
93-139.5
3
2.46%
91.80%
139.5-186
2
1.64%
93.44%
354.54
3
2.46%
95.90%
413.63
2
1.64%
97.54%
477.72
0
0%
97.54%
531.81
0
0%
97.54%
531.81
1
0.82%
98.36%
590.90
1
0.82%
99.18%
Mayor
1
0.82%
100%
EQUITY TYPOLOGY OF AN AVERAGE PRODUCE GROWER
(2nd half of the 18th century) Maximum valuation 1772: 1.238L /2 ---> 619L
Typology of the assets and valuation of each item
Pounds
%
Cases botiga (porch for storage)
2. Jewels
232
40,9%
3. Large and small livestock
197
34,7%
6 mules and a donkey
187
-
3 pigs
2 lambs
4.Furniture and household utensils
6
4
90
15,9%
Furniture
Clothes and household fabrics
Household utensils
27
58
5
-
5.Planted vegetables and value of tilled land
31
5,5%
Vegetables
1 “quarterada” (7103 sq.m.) of tilled, planted land
6. Raw materials for spinning
7. Utensils for cultivation
27
4
12
5
2,1%
0,88%
Total
567
1. Real estate
BELONGINGS, JEWELS, CASH, CAPACITY TO ACT AS A MONEYLENDER AND OTHER
ELEMENTS DENOTING A CERTAIN LEVEL OF “WELLBEING”
Receives a distinctive form of address reserved for peasant farmers with a certain
social consideration and economic status: “honor”
Livestock in the form of mules, used for farming and transport, which in the rural
world was a symbol of status and wealth until recently, represents around a third
of the total valuation of assets.
Jewellery and coins even represent a slightly higher valuation (around 40%) and it
is striking that some of them are owned as a guarantee for loans made to other
produce growers or neighbours.
Both items together make for around 75% of the total valuation  sufficient
liquidity even to act as moneylenders, which in Ancien Regime societies is a
symbol of wealth and in this specific case, can be explained because as a member
of the produce-growing class, and being able to sell the produce they grew
practically on a daily basis, they had ready cash available.
CHARACTERISTICS SHARED WITH THE ACTUAL CLASS OF TENANTS
THEMSELVES, OR THAT OF PRODUCE GROWER-TENANTS, TOWARDS WHICH
THEY PROGRESSIVELY EVOLVED.
THE EXAMPLE OF THE TENANTS
(Source: “Straw and utensils tax” of 1772)
• Description of the group studied: a sample of 68 individuals (including
overseers, actual tenants and people who worked the land for a halfshare of its fruits) from the municipality of Palma about which all we
know is the tax rate for the total property and trading assets.
• We therefore do not know the valuations of the different types of
assets, but from the tax they pay, a high level of heterogeneity of the
group as a whole can be inferred.
• As a conjecture on the middle class: 21.05s tax asset valuation: ca.
665L.
• In practice, a small number controls most of the wealth: 4 alone
control a ¼ of the total and one alone member (the first) pays the
13.04% of the total tax.
TENANTS
Tenant Statistics
Tax (Wages)
Average
27.06
Median
13.5
Minimum
2
Maximum
240
Gini index
0.5232
UTENSILS TAX
Tax Frequency (wages)
CLASE
FRC.
%
% ACC.
2
2
2.94%
2.94%
4
5
7.35%
10.29%
6
6
8.82%
19.12%
8
3
4.41%
23.53%
9
3
4.41%
27.94%
10
9
13.24%
41.18%
12
6
8.82%
50%
15
3
4.41%
54.41%
16
1
1.47%
55.88%
20
5
7.35%
63.24%
26
1
1.47%
64.71%
30
6
8.82%
73.53%
40
7
10.29%
83.82%
50
3
4.41%
88.24%
60
3
4.41%
92.65%
70
1
1.47%
94.12%
80
1
1.47%
95.59%
100
2
2.94%
98.53%
240
1
1.47%
100%
Tenant Tax Histogram
ASSET TYPOLOGY OF AN AVERAGE TENANT
(early 19th century)
•
•
•
•
•
Use of a distinctive form of address persists (“honor“ or “amo”)
Scant representation of property:
Urban: house, casa-botiga (porch for storage) or casa posada (half house,
half tavern)
Rural: at the most a low-status piece of land
Importance of draught animals (mules, donkeys, etc.) for cultivation and smaller
livestock (especially pigs) for family consumption. We must remember that in
some districts, sheep (large flocks) would come to be important in certain estates.
Jewellery and cash tend to hold an increasingly important place and once again
we can deduce that many of the members of this group are devoted to credit.
Most of them have enough liquidity to make advance payment of the rent for the
land they cultivate to the owners and, in many cases, even to lend money for other
purposes.
EMBRYO OF A NEW MIDDLE CLASS WHICH WILL COME TO FORM PART OF THE
AGRARIAN BOURGOISIE AS AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRESSES, AND HAVE ACCESS
TO LAND OWNERSHIP
AVERAGE TENANT TYPOLOGY
(beginning of the Liberal State, 1838)
Rural property:
1. A significant expanse of land from segregated estates which usually include
outhouses belonging to the rural houses. Equipped with draught animals,
tools for cultivation and everything necessary for carrying out agricultural
work and housing the whole family and hired hands.
2. The odd small expanse of land (normally no greater than one quarterada
received by inheritance from an ancestor who was generally on a lower
economic rung).
Urban property: a casa-posada in the town or the village where the rural
property is located to be used for different purposes: personal and commercial.
CHARACTERISTIC NOTE: few jewels and ornamental objects, and smaller
amounts of cash, which can be explained by the fact that they had invested their
savings recently to acquire considerable tracts of land.
UPWARD MOBILITY: FROM “MIDDLE CLASS”
FARMERS TO LANDOWNERS
New demands of the Liberal State which evolve from 1836 up to the
establishment of universal male suffrage (1836-1890):
-
Concept of elector and electable
Paying a certain contributory value and therefore being an owner
Being the owner of a certain number of teams of oxen
Being the tenant of urban assets or land with a minimum rent of 225L (3,000
reales de vellón)
Being a teacher or practising a free profession: lawyer, veterinary surgeon,
doctor, etc.
……
NEW DEMANDS THAT CALL FOR THE TESTING OF NEW WORK METHODOLOGIES
FOR APPLICATION TO THE NEW DOCUMENTARY SOURCES PROMOTED BY THE
NEW STATE
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION, AND PLEASE
FORGIVE ME FOR THE DIFFICULTY I HAVE IN
EXPRESSING MYSELF¡¡¡¡¡
Universitat de Girona
9 September 2015