[Ger-Poland-Volhynia] Germans Migrating to Volynia

[Otto]

Richard Benert wrote:
> With apologies for the length of this...   And, Otto, please jump on  
> me if
> I'm wrong about any of this


Good afternoon Richard,
I well understand your thinking process and manner of expression. And  
no, I will "not beat you up" over your contribution to the discussion  
or questioning of my offerings. My not doing so does not make your  
statements correct. Examine your request above and you will see it is  
perhaps an unintentional rhetorical device. In research one cannot win  
by default.

The many social classes of a peasant (farmer-90% of society) result in  
confusing explanations. No single term can apply without social  
classification. A farmer could be free or enserfed (in bondage). . .  
but in reality remained a farmer, i.e. 'peasant.'

One thing we can agree upon is when Alexander ll abolished serfdom  
through a major agrarian reform in 1861, 23,000,000 "private serfs"  
now joined the classification of "Peasant" and referring to them with  
the present day word = "Farmers."  Farmers without coin or land. They  
could rent at exorbitant fees yet they were penniless and lacked  
education. The serfs combined with the various classes of peasants,  
totaled to 60,000,000 angry farmers. No moral conscience motivated  
Alexander ll. . . he simply made a "top down" decision instead of a  
bottom up one. Peasant uprisings (change from the bottom up) were not  
desired so Alexander moved before they could. In fifty years the  
Bolsheviks exploited the anger of the farmer class to bring about  
revolution in Russia.  I'm certain the Mensheviks did not stand there  
saying, "Nay,Nay,"  they also needed "angry men to bring about  
change."   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_serfdom

I keep my ListServ comments neat, orderly and concise, after all, I am  
not writing a thesis.
ListServ participants, including myself, want brief accurate  
information that can be cross referenced in the university and library  
of the near electronic future, the Internet. In doing google searches  
use the following notation and add your keywords as the following  
example:  site:.edu Russian serfdom    Also site:.org Russian serfdom
Just a straight search will include .com sites yet some are useful.

My comments contain "keywords" that can easily be Wikipedia or Google  
researched on the Web. All ListServ participants are computer literate  
and have a need to broaden their historical horizons.

We are discussing three groups that comprised society:
Those that worked,
those that fought
and those that prayed.

Two types of change exist:
Slow change-by attrition; a dying out of the old-a traditional method.
Fast change-by revolution and war. This appears to be the popular  
method.

Here are a few easily accessible Wiki sources with notes, references,  
bibliographies and external links:
If one has interest, the external links can prove edifying.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_serfdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom_in_Russia
http://www.answers.com/topic/serfdom-in-east-central-europe
http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/EastEurope/FreeSerfs.html
http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/EastEurope/ImperialRussia.html

The following notes are condensed and informative-a thumbnail account  
of the rise of Russia.
It makes mention of Peter the Great who began the process of bringing  
Russia out of the dark ages. Catherine attempted to emulate him while  
in an ego competition with her cousin Frederick William ll, the Great  
(Der alter Fritz)
You will note her "great love" for her Germans.
Serfdom is Russia is also noted.
http://occawlonline.pearsoned.com/bookbind/pubbooks/stearns_awl/chapter24/objectives/deluxe-content.html

On Apr 19, 2010, at 11:11 PM, Richard Benert wrote:
>   Catherine II's invitation.

> Now I must beg Otto's indulgence to comment on a couple of things

>  serfdom in
> Western Europe, but I think it is commonly agreed that, while the  
> word,
> "serf," is related to the Latin word, "servus," a serf was not a  
> slave.  He
> may have been bound to the soil,
He was bound to the estate as the noble's property
  In some cases serfs were de facto bought and sold, as when an estate  
or part of an estate was sold along with its residents, or when a  
landlord who had taken in a runaway peasant offered monetary  
compensation to the original owner in lieu of returning the runaway..

>  Perhaps Otto's use of  the word "modified" covers this.
Yes, modified. They could not place them on an auction block. . . An  
estate with 10,000 serfs could be placed on the auction block. Aside  
with euphemisms, they were considered cattle.

> But I would question the use of the word, "chattel," and the idea  
> that landlords "owned" their serfs.
The serfs were bound to the estate. Labor was valued, not the land. A  
noble's net worth was not based on his land holdings but on his serf  
holdings. He could obtain loans on his serfs.
chattel–noun
1.
Law. a movable article of personal property.
2.
any article of tangible property other than land, buildings, and other  
things annexed to land.
3.
a slave.
>
> Central and Eastern Europe certainly became strongholds of serfdom  
> When to call it "serfdom" is partly a matter
> of definition.
See URLS
>
> Most historians, I think, distinguish between manorialism (with its  
> serfdom)
> and feudalism.  Feudalism is system of personal relations between  
> freemen,
> cemented by oaths of loyalty and a contractual agreement binding on  
> both
> lords and vassals.  Serfs were not freemen, and were not technically  
> part of
> the feudal system,
Their owners were.
Feudalism as a descriptive term is under question-what system that  
actually existed isn't. See URL
The Church and its "Divine Right of Kings" had a lot to do with it  
(the largest landholder)
>
> As for Russian peasants, Otto is right on in pointing out that,  
> outside of
> serfdom, many of them were less secure than under it.  That is one  
> reason
> they sometimes hankered after German-owned land.
>

. . .   Otto
          " The Zen moment..." wk. of January 01, 2010-
                   _____________________________________
                   "Satisfaction . . . lurks in the answers."