The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 297)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 297)

المحتوى

281
stayed in villages and tilled or managed their land themselves.*’ The origin of big
iandowners varied. Some belonged to towns for few or many generations while
others “amassed their wealth only recently [such as] villagers who had got on in
the world.” Regardless of origin or residence, a certain number of landowners
invested in citrus.*’ Again, some of these landowners may have been
moneylenders and merchants also.
Having distinguished between the moneylender, merchant, and landlord as
belonging to a separate position/function and their, in many cases, being the same
in reality, it is true that “pure” merchants were involved in citrus plantations, not
as growers, but as marketers. Those were called “fruit-on-the-tree merchants, who
buy the fruit when it is still on the tree.”** Besides not being citrus growers, it
may also have been the case that these merchants were also big landowners or
upper-middle peasants. An additional important rationale for the inclusion of
growers of citrus, let alone vegetables and other cash crops in our analysis, was
the fact that most of the “funds” used for investment in these crops originated in
rural areas whether in the form of revenue from the sale of land to European
settlers, which meant the eviction of tenants, or appropriation in the form of rent
extraction, surplus value, or the profits of merchant capital—all of which played a
*Granott, Land System, 108.
“Tbid., 81-2.
‘Whid.
“Brown, “Agriculture,” 140-2; and B. Veicmanas, “Internal Trade,” in
Himadeh, 364-5.
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