What Are The Similarities Between China And France Peasant Behavior
In China and France peasant behavior was marked by a tendency over time that caused them to behave in ways that maximized their economic potential. In each country unique behavior was developed due to the different conditions within those separate regions. France’s peasantry ended up reacting in more dynamic ways to economic reality when compared to their Chinese counterparts and their peasantry experienced a greater transition to a higher economic base. Yet, similarities can be noted in both countries, in particular the raising of supplementary crops and diversifying away from a monoculture. Each country had a trend where a primary crop would be later be supplemented, rotated, or replaced with a more valuable crop as the market demand changed. In China cotton was the source of this new income. Peasant families originally grew rice as monoculture, but diversified into sorghum and mulberries. In an attempt to increase productivity the entire family, including women, children, and elders, were used as labor. This kept labor costs very low within the family unit, but at the same time this made large scale farming that utilized hired help unprofitable. In France, land owners had a larger role in determining what was grown by their peasants on their leased property. In China the
…show more content…
cultural tendency towards single family plot subsistence prevented a rise in amalgamated plots where an authority would tell families what to plant. However, there was a distinct lack of trade between the Chinese cities and the countryside, and this new method of ‘familization’ labor did not produce the desired increase in income. Chinese peasants adapted by growing cotton, and using family labor to turn it into ‘handicrafts’. In some areas they had to actually begin importing rice from farther distances outside of the localized area because so many families had switched to cotton. Despite the relative ease of cultivating other crops, rice became predominant. “Neither sorgum or millet required much labor” (Huang 49). Sometimes, this was due to canals becoming filled with silt, reducing the water flow and making it more difficult to grow rice, but in most cases the transition from rice to cotton came from a desire within families to increase their income. There were also innovations in China, and the specific one mentioned was the development of new iron implements. Silk was also a new commodity that commanded a higher market price than rice, and “Peasant families could easily afford the simple equipment required for silk reeling” (Huang 81). Families started to grow mulberries, and then would use those to feed silkworms, producing silk. Silk could then be used as a trade good with the more affluent in Chinese cities. There were weaknesses in China though that did not exist in France.
Trade between the Chinese countryside and Chinese cities took place on a much smaller scale when compared to the trade that happened in France. In China peasants were more used to trading within their community and using their agricultural products for subsistence. Chinese cities also did not develop a manufacturing base as they did in France, nor did animal husbandry exist in China to the same extent that it did in Europe. French peasants began to use cattle, oxen, and other heavy mammals, but the Chinese used animal husbandry for smaller animals less adopted for agricultural purposes, such as fowl, chickens, and
duck. As animal husbandry was developed, French peasants now had a method to accumulate capital, as represented by the animals that they tended. Animals were also self- reproducing and could be used as barter. Different goods could be derived from the animals. Milk, meat, and fur are examples of these goods. In some cases animals encouraged a stable social structure because peasant families now had an incentive to stay in a single location and graze their animals within a fenced in enclosure. One of the side effects of that was a beginning conscience related to the concept of property rights as peasants now had a distinctive incentive to keep their animals, and grazing land, separate from each other. In France peasants also began diversifying out from their primary crop, which was grain. They began to cultivate vineyards, in addition to potatoes, chestnuts, and mulberries. Maize was another new crop that peasants raised that had a dual usage as both a food source and feed for domesticated animals. Peasants had to choose which crops they would raise, since some had certain tradeoffs. “Potatoes generated more calories per hectare than did other crops like oats, but also required more hours of farming” (Miller 13). The range of crops that they would rotate was greater than in China, and so this produced more economic opportunity. Trade was also greater between the cities and the countryside, with the primary city of trade being Paris. Peasants also began to raise animals that could be used for their labor to plow fields, provide meat, and be used as trade goods. With animals, it was easier and less labor intensive to rotate crops. The innovation of crop rotation also put less stress on soil and allowed nutrients to build up over the different seasons. Peasants who faced dwindling land had no choice but to try to intensify their labor and compete more vigorously with each other to find supplementary income. Laborers did not actually own the land but farmed it on behalf of a lord who would lease it to them in exchange for their labor on it. Peasants then had to use their creativity to try and find the most productive ways to increasing output within the standards defined by the owner. Towards the late 13th century peasants did begin actually to own their own land, but farming practice did not change. Another response to dwindling land was to increase the area that was being cultivated. Hilltops and forests were cleared in order to make room for more fields. French lords also would contract out labor and consolidate their holdings into a single parcel where they would direct crop production. The end result of these processes was that Chinese agricultural capacity ended up being less specialized, and less industrialized compared to French agriculture. Peasants in France ended up having more economic mobility while peasants in China generally had less social mobility. In France though, a serious situation began to arise when arable land started becoming further subdivided. “Commercialization did not improve the standard of living and economic growth”, instead, “It ushered in a crisis.” (Miller 21). In the broad picture China remained in an agricultural-subsistence model not due to the behavior of its peasants, but because it did not experience the benefits of the industrial revolution. Chinese society was also slower to change as the interaction and trade that was occurring between the countryside and cities of Europe did not occur in China.
Bibliography:
Miller, Stephen (2009) "The Economy of France in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries: Market Opportunity and Labour Productivity in Languedoc." Rural History. 20:1-30
Philip C.C.Huang:The Peasant Family and Rural Development in the Yangzi Delta,1350-1988
cultural tendency towards single family plot subsistence prevented a rise in amalgamated plots where an authority would tell families what to plant. However, there was a distinct lack of trade between the Chinese cities and the countryside, and this new method of ‘familization’ labor did not produce the desired increase in income. Chinese peasants adapted by growing cotton, and using family labor to turn it into ‘handicrafts’. In some areas they had to actually begin importing rice from farther distances outside of the localized area because so many families had switched to cotton. Despite the relative ease of cultivating other crops, rice became predominant. “Neither sorgum or millet required much labor” (Huang 49). Sometimes, this was due to canals becoming filled with silt, reducing the water flow and making it more difficult to grow rice, but in most cases the transition from rice to cotton came from a desire within families to increase their income. There were also innovations in China, and the specific one mentioned was the development of new iron implements. Silk was also a new commodity that commanded a higher market price than rice, and “Peasant families could easily afford the simple equipment required for silk reeling” (Huang 81). Families started to grow mulberries, and then would use those to feed silkworms, producing silk. Silk could then be used as a trade good with the more affluent in Chinese cities. There were weaknesses in China though that did not exist in France.
Trade between the Chinese countryside and Chinese cities took place on a much smaller scale when compared to the trade that happened in France. In China peasants were more used to trading within their community and using their agricultural products for subsistence. Chinese cities also did not develop a manufacturing base as they did in France, nor did animal husbandry exist in China to the same extent that it did in Europe. French peasants began to use cattle, oxen, and other heavy mammals, but the Chinese used animal husbandry for smaller animals less adopted for agricultural purposes, such as fowl, chickens, and
duck. As animal husbandry was developed, French peasants now had a method to accumulate capital, as represented by the animals that they tended. Animals were also self- reproducing and could be used as barter. Different goods could be derived from the animals. Milk, meat, and fur are examples of these goods. In some cases animals encouraged a stable social structure because peasant families now had an incentive to stay in a single location and graze their animals within a fenced in enclosure. One of the side effects of that was a beginning conscience related to the concept of property rights as peasants now had a distinctive incentive to keep their animals, and grazing land, separate from each other. In France peasants also began diversifying out from their primary crop, which was grain. They began to cultivate vineyards, in addition to potatoes, chestnuts, and mulberries. Maize was another new crop that peasants raised that had a dual usage as both a food source and feed for domesticated animals. Peasants had to choose which crops they would raise, since some had certain tradeoffs. “Potatoes generated more calories per hectare than did other crops like oats, but also required more hours of farming” (Miller 13). The range of crops that they would rotate was greater than in China, and so this produced more economic opportunity. Trade was also greater between the cities and the countryside, with the primary city of trade being Paris. Peasants also began to raise animals that could be used for their labor to plow fields, provide meat, and be used as trade goods. With animals, it was easier and less labor intensive to rotate crops. The innovation of crop rotation also put less stress on soil and allowed nutrients to build up over the different seasons. Peasants who faced dwindling land had no choice but to try to intensify their labor and compete more vigorously with each other to find supplementary income. Laborers did not actually own the land but farmed it on behalf of a lord who would lease it to them in exchange for their labor on it. Peasants then had to use their creativity to try and find the most productive ways to increasing output within the standards defined by the owner. Towards the late 13th century peasants did begin actually to own their own land, but farming practice did not change. Another response to dwindling land was to increase the area that was being cultivated. Hilltops and forests were cleared in order to make room for more fields. French lords also would contract out labor and consolidate their holdings into a single parcel where they would direct crop production. The end result of these processes was that Chinese agricultural capacity ended up being less specialized, and less industrialized compared to French agriculture. Peasants in France ended up having more economic mobility while peasants in China generally had less social mobility. In France though, a serious situation began to arise when arable land started becoming further subdivided. “Commercialization did not improve the standard of living and economic growth”, instead, “It ushered in a crisis.” (Miller 21). In the broad picture China remained in an agricultural-subsistence model not due to the behavior of its peasants, but because it did not experience the benefits of the industrial revolution. Chinese society was also slower to change as the interaction and trade that was occurring between the countryside and cities of Europe did not occur in China.
Bibliography:
Miller, Stephen (2009) "The Economy of France in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries: Market Opportunity and Labour Productivity in Languedoc." Rural History. 20:1-30
Philip C.C.Huang:The Peasant Family and Rural Development in the Yangzi Delta,1350-1988