De re rustica (Columella)
De re rustica (full title: De re rustica libri duodecim “Twelve Books on Agriculture”) is a comprehensive Latin guide for managing a farm. It comprises 13 volumes and comes from Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella , who probably lived in the first half of the 1st century AD.
object
Since Cato the Elder and Varro , the Roman farm has grown considerably in size. Columella is a writer who is mainly agriculturally oriented and calculates for large farms. Here he bases his research on his own experience as a farmer. He also quotes other agricultural writers - including Cato and Varro - and shows their actual or supposed errors. Columella's specialty is viticulture; in matters relating to animal husbandry, he relies on older authors, but not on his own experience. Columella mainly writes for Italian businesses, but also takes into account the physiogeographical circumstances of the provinces ( Tremellius Scrofa had already warned against transferring proposals to Italy that refer to provinces such as Africa). Wherever Columella does not explicitly include more distant areas, he restricts himself to Italian agriculture.
The work is conceived as an encyclopedia - it does not want to leave out any area of knowledge. But even if farms were never pure monocultures , a certain agricultural production always dominated. With Cato it was viticulture and olive growing, and with Columella it is also described as the basis of the Italian economy. Columella appears to be a suburbanum praedium that can be easily reached from the city as an ideal type of an agricultural good.
Agriculture in Italy in the 1st century AD
In Italy in the 1st century AD, the agricultural form of latifundia gradually established itself across all areas. But the development was a slow process and begins gradually with the "uprooting of the peasant" after the Second Punic War . From the late 3rd century onwards, large knightly and senatorial farms emerged, which in older research are often referred to as the new economic form of latifundia, but this is incorrect: the farmers were largely expropriated after the 2nd Punic War because they were forced to own their land had to sell to the landed aristocracy, get into debt or enter into a bondage relationship with the large landowners in order to maintain their existence. The small peasant property was thus amalgamated to form large areas of landowners.
But latifundia ownership did not mean latifundia economy by a long way: The Romans were not yet able to guarantee the supply of an agricultural area of more than 500 iugera (size of latifundia) from a single central point, the villa. At least this is unlikely for the time of Catos (2nd century BC). With Varro (1st century BC) the idea of area-wide cultivation initially prevailed partly on remote estates in the provinces - small and medium-sized businesses remained the normal form here too, although the coloni (cf. Kolonat (law) ) appear at this time as a new form of "work contracting".
It cannot be denied that latifundia already existed in Italy at the beginning of the classical republic; However, a closed total area of more than 500 iugera cannot be assumed here. Rather, it is to be expected that individual parcels were scattered over a wide area and merely arithmetically resulted in a total area of more than 500 iugera.
As a result of neglected management and lack of care, gradual swamping began to emerge. The desolation of the land was already striking proportions in the early imperial period, for example in the time of Nero (54–68 AD), when z. B. six men owned the province of Africa . In his work Columella himself gives us an indication of the state of the large farm in his time by saying that he detests the enormous latifundia, some of which have been abandoned by their owners and some poorly managed by poor small tenants . The idea of latifundia as huge plantations (i.e. cultivation of monocultures) with hundreds and thousands of slaves is widespread, but certainly wrong. On the latifundia there was either extensive pasture farming in which slaves were used as shepherds, but the total number was not too high. Or, as already indicated above, the large estates were parceled out and handed over to free small tenants. These small tenants were personally free, i. H. they were not subject to the vitae necisque potestas of the pater familias and thus not to the patria potestas , but they remained tied to the leased land and were therefore slaves . Brockmeyer ( Work Organization and Economic Thinking in the Gutswirtschaft of the Roman Empire (1968), p. 80.) wants to recognize an early form of colonization in the "leases" of Catos. However, by the leases, Cato only meant the work hiring in the form of labor rent , namely the work carried out by the politor to cultivate grain fields, on which tree management was also carried out, as well as the cultivation of the vineyards by the so-called partiarius . Both could either represent freelance day laborers who exclusively had the function of harvest workers or - and in these terms Cato remains imprecise - small entrepreneurs who were assigned to help with the harvest with a certain number of workers or to tackle the harvest entirely .
Land use at Columella
As already indicated above, the main features of land use did not differ significantly from those of Catos and Varros. In Italy, says Columella, the ground is planted with tree vineyards and olive groves. In Columella, as in Cato and Varro, cattle breeding is separate from agriculture; nevertheless - because of the fertilization and also an important work area at Columella - cattle breeding on the villas (of course on a small scale) forms a proportion that should not be underestimated. In order to achieve adequate fertilization, the cultivation of legumes is recommended.
Size of the farm
Columella clearly refers to the large farm in his remarks. The previous sizes of model farms, with Cato 240 iugera for olive and 100 iugera for viticulture (Varro lacks a precise idea; in older research it was assumed that Varro writes as the owner of several agricultural goods for large landowners, but this cannot be exactly His work should therefore be treated with caution as a source for the agricultural history of the 1st century BC,) no longer apply here. A determination of the approximate geophysical size, which Columella writes after its imagination, is not very easy. He himself states that two pairs of draft oxen, two ox drivers and six farmhands are required to cultivate an arable land of 200 iugera; If there are also tree plantings on the property, three more workers are added. However, he borrows this advice from Sasera , which is why it must be assumed that he does not use areas of this size as an actual measure of a good, but only as a unit of calculation for the use of workers per 200 iugera. Columella calculates much higher. How high can be shown using the following calculation. Let's take Cato again for comparison, but first take a quick look at the staffing at Columella: the slaves are divided into classes of 10 workers each, so-called decuriae , with their supervisors (monitores) and supervisors (magistri operum). In addition, there is the labor penitentiary (ergastulum) for the tied up with the guards, the ergastularii . Overall, it can be assumed that 30 men, i.e. three decuria , were deployed. Cato now reckons for 240 iugera oil construction 13 slaves - 1 steward (vilicus), his wife (vilica), 5 common servants (operarii), 3 ox drivers (bubulci), 1 donkey driver (asinarius), 1 swineherd (subulcus) and 1 shepherd ( opilio). For 100 iugera viticulture he estimates 16 slaves - 1 vilicus, die vilica, 10 operarii, 1 bubulcus, 1 salictarius (for tying the vines), 1 asinarius and 1 bubulcus. If one compares the numbers, the Columella arithmetically results in a size of over 500 iugera for the olivetum, for the vinea almost 200 iugera must have been estimated. But it can still be calculated with Columella, because even if he does not tell us the size of his olivetum or the vinea expressis verbis , it will turn out that 500 iugera are not even enough to be the size of a farm to determine Columella's ideas. The object of observation are the farm buildings, one of which is located on the vinea and one on the olivetum. The one on the vinea is called cella vinea , the one on the olivetum is called cella olearia . With Columella there are now 3 rows of fictila labra (clay pans) in the cella olearia , in each of these rows there are 30 such fictila labra , making a total of 90 labra in the cella. For comparison, here again Cato: With Cato, the cella olearia only comprises 12 labra (no row information is found in Cato). If we now extrapolate (assuming that the number of labra can be related to the size of the farm), we get a 7 times larger area for the olivetum in Columella than in Cato. From the point of view of work organization, the farm was in any case more than 500 iugera (key value in the transition to latifundia), we now have over 1500 iugera floor space for the olivetum. Unfortunately, there are no such comparative factors for determining the size of the vinea. In the next chapter, let's look at how the size of the Columella estate can be viewed from a legal perspective. To do this, it is essential to take a look at the various statutory provisions.
Legislation on the development of arable land
Already in the early days of the Republic, more precisely before the lex Hortensia 287 BC. BC, which had the aim of a balance between patricians and plebs, the question of the use of the ager publicus arose . It was originally intended that use would be open to all citizens with the establishment of a small fee, the so-called vectigal. The patricians occupied because of their influence frequently and (as part of the cash economy introduction of the denarius to earlier research to judge 268 v. Chr., The newer provides for the introduction of the denarius with the Quinar and Sesterz for the period from 213 to 211 v . Chr.) Clearly in excess. This did not pose any problems as long as there was enough arable land for everyone. It became a major problem, however, when the distribution of ager publicus became a privilege of the patricians. In the class struggle (around 500-300 BC) the claim of the plebs to common land therefore played a major role. An early agricultural law, through which the plebs received a share of the common land, provided a legal balance; However, since the vectigalia could most likely be paid by the patricians, the financial possibilities for the next centuries remained the relevant benchmarks for the distribution of ager publicus. Excessive occupation should be prevented at an early stage by a corresponding law, with which an upper limit for the occupation of parcels was set at 500 iugera. Older research insisted that this law was included in the leges Liciniae Sexiae of 367 BC. Was included. The research is based on Gellius ' Noctes Atticae , where at a corresponding point (Noct. Att. 6, 3, 37) there is a reference that this upper limit is at least old and with the annexation of Fidenaes (426 BC). ) and Vejis (396 BC), through which the ager publicus has again increased considerably in size. However, recent research dates the establishment of the upper limit to the 2nd century BC. And brings it with the lex de modo agrorum (contained in the lex Villia annales ) from 180 BC. Chr. In context. In our context, however, it does not matter whether the law dates from the 4th or 2nd century - that it was often circumvented should be obvious, especially since the large farms, i.e. those that are the very big ones Promised turnover (and that should include farms the size of the Catonian villa), owned by the senatores (Cato himself was censor ). With the lex Claudia nave senatorum from 218 BC In BC, attempts were therefore made to limit their socio-economic influence, so to get a grip on the control of the ager publicus by weakening the economic power of the large landowners. In view of such a law, it should be evident that the upper limit of 500 iugera was on the one hand bypassed, but on the other hand it quickly became clear that the progressive economic development could also develop an influential source of money from a medium-sized good that served the senators well because the positions of the cursus honorum were primarily filled through solvency (those who had no money could only advance within the cursus to a limited extent). The lex Claudia now planned to exclude the senators from wholesale and long-distance trade by forbidding them to own ships that could hold more than 300 amphorae. 300 amphorae only meant the rent from an average good between 300 and 500 iugera. Since they could not theoretically ship their goods in full, it should no longer be worthwhile for the senators to own a medium-sized or larger country estate. It is obvious, however, that this law was also circumvented, through middlemen who covertly handled the business for the senators. It was still in the interests of the senators to increase their land holdings as much as possible. Probably the most comprehensive attempt to solve the agrarian question to the advantage of the plebs and to curb the dominance of the rich landowners, were the Gracchic reforms (cf. Gracchic reform ) by Tiberius Gracchus and his brother Gaius Gracchus . Ti. Gracchus renewed the law with the provision an upper limit of 500 iugera 133 BC By the lex Sempronia agraria . In addition, there were 250 iugera for a maximum of 2 sons per head. In addition, the land should pass into the possession of the individual and no longer be allowed to be reclaimed. The rest was to be divided among the poor families and the Latin allies (the latter would later be given Roman citizenship under Gaius). These small parcels should be 30 iugera (for comparison: to secure the existence of a family of 4, 7-10 iugera were necessary with medium soil quality) and be given on long leases in exchange for a low basic rent. A commission, the so-called 'triumviri agris iudicandis adsignandis', consisting of the two Gracchi and Tiberius' father-in-law Appius Claudius Pulcher , was convened to divide up the common land .
In the next chapter, let's look at how Columella's statements are to be assessed with regard to the legal situation addressed. Before we make such an assessment, it is imperative to briefly describe the outcome of the Gracchian reforms (even if there is already an excellent article on this) and to see how things went afterwards. After the death of Tiberius, his brother Gaius, 9 years his junior, took over the reform policy, renewed the reform commission with the lex agraria and mobilized the plebs in his favor with the lex frumentia . His agrarian reform had the aim of settling farmers in Africa, but the proposed legislation was no longer to be implemented; C. Gracchus was not re-elected to the People's Tribunate in 121. This is largely due to his adversary, the tribune of the people, Marcus Livius Drusus, who was instrumentalized by the Optimates . From him (and in return certainly also from the reform side around C. Gracchus) came constant agitation and demagogy, and the gullible people could allow themselves to be influenced. After the death of Gaius, the distribution of ager publicus until 111 BC. Ended (lex agraria), the vectigalia were abolished and the newly distributed common land went into private ownership; the weaning of the farmer from cultivating his own property and being responsible for it can be attributed to the fact that as a result the newly distributed state land could pass into private ownership and thus partly also into the possession of the small farmers; Said small farmers, however, immediately sold their property to large landowners and preferred to lease themselves . The small farmers could not be re-established by the Gracchian reforms, but rather - and this is where the fatal ambivalence lies - large landowners crystallized even more strongly. At the beginning of the early imperial era - and that brings us back to Columella - the entire Italian ager publicus is privately owned; only in Campania did the state still have shares in it. This development suggests that coloni, i.e. small tenants and thus the colonate, could only fully develop in the 1st century AD.
Small tenancy
In Columella the coloni are found in their pure form; Columella states, however, that the best coloni are the so-called coloni indigenae , i.e. those born on the good. Frequent leases should therefore be avoided if possible. Furthermore, the farmer should cultivate his property on fertile soil himself with slaves, the so-called domestici . The leasing of the colonies is advisable where the soil is barren or very remote, and where slave revolts can be feared. In addition, only arable fields for grain cultivation should be offered for leasing, as vineyards can easily be spoiled by the coloni. On building land, where the return is decisive (wine and oil), but the owner (dominus) cannot take care of the management himself, the order under the care of his vilicus is sufficient .
expenditure
- Columella: About agriculture: a teaching and manual of the entire arable and livestock economy from the 1st century a. Z. entered v. Karl Ahrens (Berlin 1976).
- Columella: Twelve Books on Agriculture. Book of a stranger about tree cultivation , Latin and German. Ed. And transl. by Will Richter (Darmstadt WBG 1982).
- Loeb Classical Library : Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella: On agriculture , with a recension of the text and an English translation by Harrison Boyd Ash, ES Forster and Edward H. Heffner. (English)
- Columella: De l'Agricoltvra . 1559 Libri XII. Trattato de gli Alberi del medesimo, Tradotto nuovanente di Latino in lingua Italiana per Pietro Lauro Modonese, (Venice, G. Caualcalouo, 1559). (Italian)
Web links
- Columellas De re rustica , Latin text, Lyon 1535 at the MDZ
- Das Ackerwerck ... , first German translation, Strasbourg 1538 at the MDZ
- Columella * . Publications in the bibliographic database of the Regesta Imperii .