Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [S-R] 1715 Hungarian Urbarial Census and Successor Archives

Expand Messages
  • Margo Smith
    Hi, Andrea -- Yes, it seemed to me in studying the parish records and the 1715/1720 tax lists that there were more families in the parish records than on the
    Message 1 of 62 , Jul 30, 2007
      Hi, Andrea --

      Yes, it seemed to me in studying the parish records and the 1715/1720 tax lists that there were more families in the parish records than on the tax lists. So I looked in detail at 3 small (to keep this manageable) villages in Turoc county. From the parish records, I made a list of the families where there were births or marriages between about 1712 and 1721 (i.e. adult nuclear families who might be expected to be taxable), deleted the adults who died during that period -- to get a list of who was in the village at that time. Then I compared this list to the tax list. My conclusion was that a taxable household included > 1 nuclear family. Elsewhere I found reference to the taxable household including people who slept under the same roof, and who ate their meals together. So taxable households could be extended families. It would be to the serfs' advantage to live as extended families -- fewer taxable households. There are a couple of the traditional old wooden
      houses still in Budis, not to mention a place like Cicmany. The extended families must have been crowded in those wooden houses.

      Margo

      Andrea Vangor <drav@...> wrote:
      I don't think every serf in a village (speaking prior to 1785 or so when serfs became peasants) is included in these tax lists, or they would include dozens of households in even the smaller villages. Rather, the tax involved here concerns property owned by contract, not by feudal tenure. So if the serf family had managed to purchase (as we understand the term) a cow or a field, that is what is listed for the purposes of the tax. But the land they worked ordinarily was their "holding" in the feudal system. It was theirs to use as long as they paid their dues of produce and labor to the overlord. They could not sell it but neither could their children be displaced from it. This system broke down after 1848 when peasantry was abolished, but very slowly.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Margo Smith
      To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 7:47 PM
      Subject: Re: [S-R] 1715 Hungarian Urbarial Census and Successor Archives

      Paul, you win the prize. Yes, there was essentially 1 or 2 people/families who owned the land and the village. If you were from the Revay family, their members owned a bunch of villages in the Turiec Valley. Several members of the Beniczky family owned the villages in the area of Benice and Pribovce. The Jesuits had been granted several villages including Slovany, Leziachov, and the town of Klastor, plus a few others. (The 1720 tax list includes the name of the feudal lord, as do the 1770s urbarium and the 1828 tax list.)

      The serfs were supposed to pay the 9th (the second 10% of the harvest each year) to the feudal lord. They also had to perform robota, required uncompensated labor for the feudal lord for a certain number of days per year. The number of days varied by location.

      See also: Richard Marsina and Michal Kusik: Urbare Feudalnych Pastiev na Slovensku, 2 vol. Bratislava: Slovenskej Akademie Vied, 1959 The records for the different counties varies. Some counties include for the 1500s the landowners only, others also include serfs.

      Also: Elena Mannova, ed. A Concise History of Slovakia. Bratislava: Historicky ustav SAV, 2000

      Also: Julius Bartl, et. al. Slovak History, Chronology and Lexicon. Wauconda: Bolchazy Carducci.

      You aren't bothering me. I'm just delighted that someone else is interested in how the feudal system worked.

      Margo
      Paul Tomasko <PaulE4Sure@...> wrote:

      Margo

      Thank you for your reply and that leads me to one more question then I will
      leave you alone. In your research does it seem like there are many or just
      one or two people who owned all the land for a small village? My family
      comes from Siba, Saris County, it is a small village and I just always kind
      of figured that one guy owned the whole village and basically the people in
      it also. Can you learn how much a peasant had to pay monthly/yearly to the
      individual who actually owned the land?

      Thanks Again

      Paul

      >From: Margo Smith <margolane61@...>
      >Reply-To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      >To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: Re: [S-R] 1715 Hungarian Urbarial Census and Successor Archives
      >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:59:49 -0700 (PDT)
      >
      >Hi, Paul!
      >
      > Yes, the 1715 and 1720 tax lists are both available on microfilm from
      >LDS. Az 1715 es 1720 evi orszagos osszeirasok. For my county they are
      >reels 1506126 and 1529565. The 1715 tax list is also on line at the
      >Hungarian archives web site which has been discussed a lot this month.
      >"All" is a loaded word, but the lists exist for many many many villages.
      >Serfs only because they were the ones who paid the taxes. (Actually, I did
      >find a couple of lower level local gentry on the list for one village.) I
      >am finishing up an article for publication concerning this tax list. Watch
      >for it! I have found these tax lists very helpful for understanding what
      >the village folk were doing.
      >
      > Margo
      >
      >Paul Tomasko <PaulE4Sure@...> wrote:
      > Hello
      >
      >I do not have my family back that far, but where do you find this records,
      >LDS? and are they for all villages or counties? Do they cover land owners
      >and peasants? This seems like it may be a very good source for me down the
      >road here.
      >
      >Thank you for your time
      >
      >Paul Tomasko
      >
      > >From: Margo Smith <margolane61@...>
      > >Reply-To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      > >To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      > >Subject: Re: [S-R] 1715 Hungarian Urbarial Census and Successor Archives
      > >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
      > >
      > >Joyce, I have worked extensively with this "census." What county are you
      > >looking at? The column headings are somewhat different for Turocz County.
      > >This is more of a tax list than a census.
      > > Margo
      > >
      > >bhewlett@... wrote:
      > > The 1715 census is written in Latin. The first column is "first
      > >and last name of person". 2nd column is the column for occupation. On my
      > >5th ggrandfathers page it had "cloggers, shoemakers and tanners". I only
      > >looked at a couple other pages, but saw different occupations listed. 3rd
      > >column is amount of land owned. 3 'holds" for example, would be around 3
      > >acres (so I was told). 4th column relates to "land that was usually "won"
      > >by cutting trees and cultivating, usually on a hill." You did the work,
      >you
      > >got the land I guess. The 5th column asks how many fields are plowed but
      > >not seeded. The last column relates to how much of the property is a
      > >vineyard.
      > >
      > >Although this was written in Latin, which should make it fairly easy to
      > >translate, it turned out to be difficult. A kind man in France, worked on
      > >it stating that some of the words seem to be abbreviations and that's
      >where
      > >he had problems. Nevertheless, I think this is a good indication of the
      > >column headings.
      > >Joyce
      > >
      > > >From: jump4toys@...
      > > >Date: 2007/07/04 Wed AM 05:52:22 CDT
      > > >To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      > > >Subject: Re: [S-R] 1715 Hungarian Urbarial Census and Successor
      >Archives
      > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >I see this is in Hungarian...how do others read this if it's in
      > >Hungarian?
      > > >
      > > >DAniel
      > > >
      > > >Dear Daniel,
      > > >
      > > >You can find 1715 online here:
      > > >_http://www.arcanum.http://_ (http://www.arcanum.hu/mol/)
      > > >
      > > >************************************** See what's free at
      > >http://www.aol.com
      > > >
      > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >---------------------------------
      > >Got a little couch potato?
      > >Check out fun summer activities for kids.
      > >
      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >---------------------------------
      >Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of
      >spyware protection.
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >

      ---------------------------------
      Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
      Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






      ---------------------------------
      Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
      Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • konekta@nm.psg.sk
      You have to be careulf with readin place names. In marriage records, if there are two place names, the first is place of origin and the second is place of
      Message 62 of 62 , Jul 31, 2007
        You have to be careulf with readin place names.
        In marriage records, if there are two place names, the first is place of
        origin and the second is place of current residence.
        Since there is no place like Zboro Lofalu ( Lo falu does not exist anyway)
        it is likely, that Zborov was place of birth and Maybe Uj falu was place of
        residence.
        Did this pertain to the broom?
        If this record is from Bardejov, then it was Bardejovska Nova Ves , but the
        broom was born in Zborov.
        Vladimir



        _____

        From: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of johnqadam
        Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:11 PM
        To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [S-R] Re: Village Location



        >>> I cannot find the village or town of Zboro' Lo'falu. I find this
        is a marriage record from the Rychvald R.C. church register from the
        year 1894. <<<

        Using Bogardi and some guesswork, I am led to believe that the 1910 map
        shows it as Bartfa ujfalu. That would make it Bardejovska Nova Ves on
        the current map. That is compatible with your reference to Rychvald =
        Bardejov.






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.