Economic collaboration of byzantine peasants

Fotini Kondyli. "Changes in the structure and wealth of the Late Byzantine family," In: Approaches to the Byzantine Family S. Tougher and L. Brubaker (eds) (Aldershort; 2013), pp. 371-390

Changes in structure of property from the 13th to the 14th century, issues of mobility, cooperation and alternative economic activities. On the basis of acts of Lemnos (Lavra 1284 - no. 73 and 1304 - no. 99). In fascal lists one can see a domination of nuclear family of 2 persons, sometimes 3, in 1304 act les and less those families who had more than 3 members - this is a fiscal strategy.In land ownership - majority had any, so some and more services (millers, shoesmakers etc.), vineyards and ship owners. Changes in family economic strategies and property ownership. Economic collaboration and common use of property inside of family. Property owned not jointly, but in shares, it is pooled together for common tasks.After mid-14th century depopulation (maybe coz of haevy taxes and Black death). Increase in ownership of paroikoi - Lavra 1361 (no. 139). Huge increase in family ownership.  This change made paroikoi not to have commonly shared property and extended family, coz land is available.Changed an inheritance pattern.So, in 1284 act the bigger family than walthier. More ships, more lands. If children could extract some property from parents, they could register as a separate fiscal unit, though they stil owned jointly some parts.Lefort, 1985, 1986 - many population, not many arable lands led to migration to more margin and less inhabited areas.it also could lead to change of activity, staying at parents' house.In well populated villages more children and more families (so, they divide more), less populated villages have smaller families and no relations with each other, so they could be newly inhabited (see lefort, 1985-6 describing this resettlement strategy).in act of 1304 there is a number of males, who registered with their fathers-in-law, and not with their fathers (reffered as son-in law). fortunes of 2 families were connected. These men could be from another place, who settled with their new families in the village.Many references to abandoned lands - peasant's mobility. but this mobility comes from helmets, cultivated lands, but not abandoned villages.
In the end of the 14th - b. of the 15th majority of families in the acts were nuclear with distinct possessins and obligations from the extended. Monasteries relocated the peasants to revive areas (Pantocrator, no. 20, 140-145).
Jacoby 1962 - increased peasants' mobility in Macedonia in the end 14-b. 15th.
Family roles depended on property' ownership. In extended family young mles in their decisions were depended on the older members.
If peasants were taking abandoned lands belonging to their extended family they actully strengthened their ties. 

Question of common rituals with members of extended and immediate family? So, social, not economic ties (networks) became wider. Changes in property management.

A. Laiou, “Family Structure and the Transmission of Property,” in A Social History of Byzantium, ed. J. Haldon, 51–75 (Chichester, 2009)

Family and transmission of property. Family is a mian production unit ofr agrarian societies - in byzantium it is peasant household. Kinship was up to 7th degree
Family property consists of material goods + symbolic capital (networks, reputation, social status) . Byzantine system was based on partible inheritance.
Studies on trnsmission of property can be based on legal or narrative sources. - disjunction of leglislative norms (Roman) and customs (Hellenic).
Issue of dowry as finale or augmentable in future inheritance mode - Beaucamp 1998; Cheynet 1998; Laiou 1998; Lefort 1998

Question of the rights of political and ecclesiastical powers over the inheritance of people dying without heirs and without a testament - Karpozilos 1979; Nakos 1988; Tourtoglou 2000; Laiou 2000: 114–20

Whether the state ruled on the matter of the transmission of property differently depending on the status of the affected individuals (dependant peasants or not).

 Laiou 1992: chap. 1. - matrimonial strategy of artistocracy which became since the 11th century closely linked to each other through multiple marriages and created the network of alliances.In Komnenian time the role of women in lineage rises, so Alexios Komnenos married Irene Doukaina - alience of families. So, starting from Komenian time "women were transmitters of both lineage and property." 

Laiou has changed her point of view since 1977 (Peasantry Society in the Late Byzantine Empire), when she traced through the indices of patriarchy the fact that the names and relationships passed through male line. Later she noticed that discendants through female line did occur. So, starting from 14th c. about 20% of households were headed by widows. Usual household is either a nuclear family or 2 families (parents and child's family). But extended household is present, especially in areas with Slavic names. (reference to Laiou-Thomadakis 1977, 78ff).

According to law, without a testament all children receive the equal share. Usually, however, the children received their portion at the moment of marriage, so the parents had greater freedom with what has left - Connection of property transmission and matrimonial connections. Exemplified with the will of Karabas (Chilandar no. 30, 1314), who made a testament after ditributing to children their shares, so he left to church, 2nd wife, godsons etc.

Aristocracy's strategies to fight defragmentation (since close marriages are forbiden as well as primogenitura). Cheynet thinks that ladies could receive a large part of their dowry in cash and jeweleries, not to divide the estates (Cheynet, 1998), but out of Peira is visible that women also got property.Secondly a good marriage was also a capital - so, importance of marriage stategies. Good material for 13-14th c. of patriarchal registers and Chomatianos - people invented strategies to diminish the conflicts inside a family. There was a law of returning a dowry for further redistribution after parents' death, and it was known, but according to custom all children who got marriage gift were excluded from inheritance, heirs - who didnt leave the household with marriage gift.

Peasantry's strategies. They also practiced the equal partition. But sometimes the eldest son might receive preferential treatment. For peasants selling their lands was introduced a preemption right (first buyer should be a relative). Patrimony was a form of family bond.

Some bibliography: 

Patlagean. Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siècles 1977

Laiou-Thomadakis 1977: 90–4. - wome became the heads of households when widowed.
J. Lefort. "Radolibos population et paysage,” TM 9 (1985): 195–234
Τόνια Κιουσοπούλου. Οι "αόρατες" βυζαντινές πόλεις στον ελλαδικό χώρο (13ος-15ος αιώνας) (Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις Πόλις , cop. 2013 orig. 1990) - on inheritance, dowry could be like an equal share
Cheynet “Aristocratie et héritage (XIe–XIIIe siècle) G. Dagron and J. Beaucamp (eds.), La transmission du patrimoine (Paris): 53–80
Marc C. Bartusis. "Exaleimma : Escheat in Byzantium," Dumbarton Oaks Papers 40 (1986): 55-81 - On exaleimmata - he thinks that exaleimmata in late Byzantium were non-owned lands as a consequence of their owner death without heirs. While many abandoned lands wer owned by monasteries, landlords or even paroikoi.