The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 230)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 230)

المحتوى

214
third of his output to meet cash needs and pay off debts.'”’ This canceling out of
most potential benefits to peasants did not only pertain to wheat and flour, but to
other agricultural products as well.'*°
In addition, the poor peasants most in need of those benefits were, in many
cases, the ones least helped, while the moneylenders and merchants reaped much
of the advantages. In this regard, it has been noted that
full benefits . . . are not enjoyed entirely by the poorer and smaller
growers because they are compelled through poverty to sell their
crops at or soon after harvest to moneylenders and merchants. It is
the latter who can hold on to the crop and release it, as it is
required, on a rising market.'*!
Even worse for the peasant, he was forced, later on, to buy back, at a higher
price, some wheat from the moneylender in cases where the peasant was left with
less than the family’s needs when he sold part of his yield to pay off debts or to
meet other cash needs.'” In many cases, this “buying back” from the
moneylender was on credit, thus increasing the peasant’s debt. The peasant’s lack
of resources, debt, meager government support, and the government’s policies of
taxation and trade are made more evident by the fact that the area devoted to wheat
and durra more or less remained the same.
Brown, “Agriculture,” 129, Survey I, 450.
'0Brown, “Agriculture,” 129. Brown specifically lists barley, olive oil, poultry
and eggs, and vegetables.
S'Tbid., 130.
2Survey I, 450.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

هو جزء من

The Dispossession of the Peasantry

تاريخ

٢٠٠٦

المنشئ

Riyad Mousa

مجموعات العناصر

Generated Pages Set

Theses رسائل ماجستير ودكتوراه