PEASANT HOLDINGS.
Small Proprietors _South of the Balkans_—Flourishing
State of the Country a few Years ago—A Rose-Harvest at
Kezanlik—Bulgarian Villages—Oppressive and Corrupt System
of Taxation and of Petty Government—The Disadvantages
counterbalanced by the Industry and Perseverance of the
Bulgarian Peasant—The Lending Fund in Bulgaria—Its Short
Duration—Bulgarian Peasant often unavoidably in Debt—Bulgarian
Cottages—Food and Clothing—Excellent Reports of German and
Italian Engineers on the Conduct and Working Power of Bulgarian
Laborers—Turkish Peasants—Turkish Villages—Comparative Merits
of Turkish and Bulgarian Peasants—Land _in Macedonia_—Chiefly
Large Estates—_Chiftliks_—The _Konak_, or Residence of
the Owner—Country Life of the Bey and his Family—His
Tenants (_Yeradjis_)—Character of the Yeradji—His Wretched
Condition—The Metayer System Unfairly Worked—The _Yeradji_
generally in Debt—Virtually a Serf bound to the Soil—Difficulty
of getting Peasants to become _Yeradjis_—Statute
Labor—Cultivation and Crops.
The land south of the Balkans, from the Black Sea to the frontier of
Macedonia, is divided into small holdings, which belong to and are farmed
by a peasant population of an essentially agricultural nature. Before
the late destruction of property in Bulgaria, almost every peasant in
those districts was a proprietor of from five to forty acres, which he
farmed himself. The larger estates, of which there were a considerable
number, were superintended by the proprietors themselves, but farmed
by hired laborers. The following figures will give an idea of the
average extent of the holdings in those districts: Out of a thousand
farms, three had five hundred acres; thirty had between one hundred and
five hundred; three hundred between fifty and a hundred; four hundred
between ten and fifty; and two hundred and sixty-seven under ten acres.
All these lands were well cultivated and yielded rich returns. I was
astonished at the beauty and flourishing condition of the country during
a journey I made some years ago from Adrianople to Servia. It appeared
like a vast and fruitful garden. The peace-loving and toiling Bulgarian
was seen everywhere steadily going through his daily work, while his
equally active and industrious wife and daughters were cheerfully
working by his side. _En route_, I stopped a few days in the lovely
town of Kezanlik, and was most kindly received by its well-to-do and
intelligent inhabitants, who pressed their hospitality upon me with a
genuine kindness never to be forgotten. I visited the schools, in which
the people prided themselves as much as in the astonishing progress
the pupils were making in their studies. I was also taken on a round
of visits into well-built clean houses where European furniture was
beginning to find a place, and contrasted pleasantly with the well-made
native tissues that covered sofas and floors. At dawn next morning
a tap at my door announced that it was time to rise and witness the
rose-gathering, which I wished to see. The roses begin to be collected
before sunrise, in order to keep in them all the richness of their
perfume. It requires expedition and many hands; so large bands of young
men and maidens, adding pleasure to toil whilst gathering the roses,
amuse themselves by carrying on their innocent little flirtations and
love-makings.
The large garden to which I was conducted belonged to the wealthy
Chorbadji in whose house I was staying. It was at some distance from the
town, and by the time we reached it the bright rays of a lovely spring
morning were fast spreading over the horizon. The field was thickly
planted with rose-bushes, with their rich harvest of half-open dew-laden
buds. The nightingales, in flights, hovered over them, disputing their
possession with the light-hearted Bulgarian harvesters, and chorusing
with their rich notes the gay songs of the scattered company, who,
dressed in their _Prasnik_ (feast-day) clothes,—the youths in snow-white
shirts and gaudy sleeveless vests, the girls in their picturesque
costume, the colored kerchiefs on their heads floating in the breeze,—had
the appearance of a host of butterflies flitting over the flowers. The
girls were actively and cheerfully employed in stripping off the buds and
throwing them into the baskets slung on their arms. The youths helped
them in the task, and were rewarded each with a bud from his sweetheart,
which he placed in his cap. The children ran to and fro emptying the
baskets into larger receptacles presided over by the matrons, who sat
under the shade of the trees and sorted the roses. The whole picture
was so bright and happy, in such harmony with the luxuriant beauty
surrounding it, that I was perfectly fascinated by it, and felt almost
envious of those happy beings (as I then thought them), the careless
simple children of nature. Their happiness was not for long.
It is not a week since my attention was attracted by an article in one
of our papers describing the destruction of Kezanlik and the horrors the
writer had witnessed. The once smiling and fruitful district was become
the valley of the shadow of death.
The general appearance of the villages in Bulgaria was very pleasing.
Those in the plains were not so well built or so picturesque as those
nestled among the hills, where the abundance and cheapness of the
material needed for building afforded greater facilities for more solid
and more artistic construction. Some of these villages had increased to
such an extent as to look like small towns. This was owing to the more
equal division of land among the people and the large number of landed
proprietors that cultivated it. In the midst of the difficulties that
surrounded them, such as an irregular and unequal system of taxation and
the encroachment and tyrannies of petty government officials, Zaptiehs,
Circassians, and sometimes native beys—the Bulgarian peasant, by his
steady and persevering habits of industry, managed to get on, and in
some places, when favored by circumstances, even to become wealthy. A
species of lending fund was organized (since the introduction of the
vilayet system) by the provincial government, chiefly for the benefit
of the peasant class of proprietors. The capital of this fund was
derived from an annual tax of two bushels of wheat (or their equivalent
in money) levied on every yoke of oxen owned by the farmers, and of
money contributed by those not engaged in agriculture, to the value of
one-tenth of their income-tax. The agricultural interest of the country
derived great advantage from this institution. It helped the small
farmers to borrow the sum needed for the cultivation of their crops and
the purchase of stock at a reasonable rate of interest, and enabled
those who had large estates to improve them without mortgaging; while
others were enabled to free their estates from the mortgages which
already burdened them. I believe that this excellent institution did not
long continue in working order, and that latterly it was beyond the reach
of those who really needed the money and might have benefited both their
farms and the State by its use.
As a general rule, the Bulgarian peasant is not wealthy. There are
many villages that were so deeply in debt that for years they had not
been able to pay their taxes. A rising was occasioned in one of the
villages of the district of Sofia on this account. The Pasha of Sofia
had been pressed by the Porte to send some money to Constantinople; he,
on his part, had to collect it from the people. Calling up a Chaoush
of Zaptiehs, he told him to make the round of the villages, and, under
pain of instant dismissal, not to return empty-handed. The Zaptieh was a
bandit, like many of his brethren who have represented the police corps
since the diminution of pay and abolition of the excellent body that had
been organized by the wise policy of Fuad Pasha and Ali Pasha. He marched
with his band into one of the villages and demanded that £400 should at
once be paid to him. The men were absent from the village, and the women,
not authorized to act in such matters, could not accede to his demand.
The Zaptiehs then seized some and locked them up in a barn, and, after
subjecting them to gross ill-treatment, left the village. The unfortunate
peasants, thus pressed by the authorities for taxes they could not pay,
and subjected to foul and violent treatment, revolted.
A Bulgarian cottage is neither neat nor regular in construction. A number
of poles are stuck in the ground, secured to each other by wattles,
plastered within and without with clay and cow-dung mixed with straw.
The walls are generally whitewashed, and the roof raised to a dome
covered with tiles or thatch. The interior, divided into three rooms, is
neat and clean. One of the apartments is used as the living-room of the
family, another as sleeping-room, while the third is reserved for storing
provisions and such-like domestic purposes. These rooms are of tolerable
height, and from fifteen to twenty feet long and ten to fifteen wide. The
earthen floor is hardened and covered with coarse matting and woollen
rugs, the handiwork of the inmates. The furniture consists principally of
the thick woven tissues used for bedding and carpeting.
Pictures of the saints and relics from Mount Athos adorn the walls; a
night-lamp may be seen suspended before the most venerated of these
objects, serving the double purpose of _veilleuse_ and mark of regard to
the saint. The shelves round the walls contain the crockery and shining
copper pans, a pair of pistols, and various other articles. The bedding,
neatly rolled up, is piled in one corner, while near the door stand
the jars of fresh water. Attached to these cottages are sheds for the
farm stock; and a cow-house, pig-sty, and poultry-house, an oven, and
sometimes a well, are inclosed in the yard, which is surrounded by walls
or fences, and guarded by dogs.
In the hilly districts, the cottages of both Mohammedans and Christians
are constructed with considerable solidity. The peasants throughout
European Turkey are economical and frugal; their wants are few, and they
are content with very little. They seldom taste fresh meat, and generally
live on rye bread and maize porridge, or beans seasoned with vinegar and
pepper. The dairy produce is consumed at home, and on great occasions
a young pig or lamb serves as a _pièce de résistance_, washed down by
home-made wine. For pastry they have a cake called _Banitza_, much
relished by all.
The clothing of the peasants is warm and comfortable. It is chiefly
composed of woollen stuffs, coarse linen, or cotton cloth. Every single
article of wearing apparel is woven, embroidered, and made up by the
hands of the women, who are at the same time spinners, weavers, and
tailors. When coming to town, and on _Prasnik_ days, coarse socks and
sandals are worn; these are also home-made, and their use on other
occasions is dispensed with.
The Bulgarian peasant is strong and healthy in appearance. Both in
Bulgaria and Macedonia he is a diligent worker. He may not have the
smartness and activity of the English laborer, but I have often been
assured that, notwithstanding the numerous feast-days he keeps, at the
end of the year he is found to have completed almost as much work, for
the simple reason that he makes his working-day much longer, and his
whole family turn out to assist him; for the women of these districts
are as industrious as the men: no sooner are their household tasks
accomplished than they join the paterfamilias in the field.
The German and Italian engineers who undertook the construction of the
railways in Macedonia repeatedly asserted that the labor of the natives
was equal to that of Europeans. In Macedonia, the Italian company, on
commencing operations, brought out five hundred Italian navvies to work
on the line; but on discovering that the natives, when well paid, well
treated, and shown how to set about it, did the work better than the
Italians, the latter were sent away. These gentlemen were most warm in
their praises of the steadiness of the men and of the excellence of their
work; but I must add that they did not omit to study the character of the
people and treat them with the kindness and consideration that, in the
long-run, never fail to improve and elevate even the most debased.
The Turkish peasants, who are in the minority both in Bulgaria and
Macedonia, have also a healthy appearance, added in the former place to
a look of audacity, and in the latter to a look of ferocity. The Greek
peasant is tall and rather slim, with an intelligent look and a hardy and
self-reliant expression.
All the rural population is sober. Greek and Bulgarian peasants have,
it is true, every now and then, an orgy; but there is no systematic
drunkenness. All the well-to-do farmers and peasants keep a provision
of wine and _raki_, or spirit, but their daily portion is moderate, and
excesses are only indulged in on feast-days, and even these are not of a
very serious nature.
All the villages, both Greek and Bulgarian, have their _Kodja-Bashis_,
who see to the administration of the village, proportion the taxes,
settle petty disputes, attend to the arrival and reception of guests,
Zaptiehs and troops, and other wants or necessities of the community.
The Turkish villages bear a more impoverished appearance and look more
neglected and decaying than the Christian. This is partly owing to the
seclusion of the women, who are little seen about, and, unlike the
Christian, never sit working at their doors. They are helpless; do no
field work, and very little weaving; and occupy themselves solely about
their in-door duties, and as these are not very heavy, they consequently
spend much of their time idly. The men are laborious, but not so active
and energetic as the Christians. They spend a good deal of time smoking
in the coffee-houses of the village, and are much poorer than the
Christians. This is due partly to their character and to the absence of
all help from their wives, but also in great part to the conscription,
which takes many valuable years of labor from the working-man.
Drunkenness is rare among Turks of this class, but when chance cases
occur they are of the most vicious and incurable kind.
In Macedonia landed property is more unequally divided than in Bulgaria.
Great portions of it are united in large estates held by native beys, or
by pashas and officials at Constantinople. Some of these estates comprise
an immense area, of which only a part is cultivated. They are called
_Chiftliks_; the house, or _Konak_, on the estate, is the residence of
the owner when he visits it, for he seldom resides on his property, but
is represented by a _Soubashi_, or agent. The elegance, dimensions,
and comfort of the Konak depend, of course, upon the means and habits
of the owner. Some of the more ancient of these edifices are large and
spacious, built in the style of the old Konaks at Stamboul; but they
present a still more dilapidated and neglected appearance. Others of more
recent erection are smaller, but neither more comfortable nor more tidy
in appearance. Some, again, are in the form of turrets, which, if not
elegant, have at least the merit of being as strong as small fortresses.
A large court-yard contains, beside the house, the usual farm buildings.
On entering the yard of the best regulated _Chiftlik_, the first thing
that attracts the attention is the air of complete disorder and dirt
that pervades the premises. In one or two corners may be seen heaps of
refuse, in others broken carts and farm implements standing in the midst
of mud-pools and filth of every description, including a collection of
old brooms that could never have been worn out in sweeping the place.
Among these, children, fowls, geese, ducks, and dogs roam in freedom. The
interior of the Konak is usually divided into Haremlik and Selamlik, if
sufficiently large. One or two rooms in each department may be furnished
with a few hard sofas and dingy calico curtains. The room reserved for
the master sometimes presents a somewhat better appearance, its walls
decorated with fire-arms, sometimes of beautiful workmanship, and its
furniture boasting a deal table and a few chairs. When the Bey intends
paying a long visit to his estate and is accompanied by his family,
the bedding and other household necessaries are brought from town. It
is astonishing to see how little luggage a Turkish family travels with
on such an occasion. Each person will have a _boghcha_,[6] containing
his or her wearing apparel; the articles for general use comprise a few
candlesticks, petroleum lamps, perhaps two _Leyen_[7] and _Ibrik_[8] for
ablutions, which in the morning and at meal times make the round of the
house; kitchen utensils and a few tumblers, plates, etc., are all that is
needed for the _Villeggiatura_ of a Turkish family.
The way in which the Bey spends his time on his estate is also regulated
by the means and tastes of the individual. If he be a sportsman, he
will have a battue on his lands and enjoy the pleasures of the chase.
Should he be addicted to drinking and debauchery, he has every means
of indulging his taste. His duties as landlord consist in regulating
accounts with his agent, hearing the cases that need his interference,
giving general instructions for future operations, and, above all,
realizing the profits. As to improving his estate, ameliorating the
condition of the tenants, beautifying the property by planting trees and
laying out gardens, such things are never thought of or known to have
been practised by any large land-owner in Macedonia.
The harem, on their side, bring friends to stay with them; and the days
are spent in roaming out barefooted in the most _négligés_ costumes,
eating fruit, and helping to make the winter provisions, such as
_Tarhana Kouskous_, _Youfka_,[9] _Petmaiz_,[10] _Rechel_,[11] and
_Nichesteh_.[12] No needlework is brought to fill up the leisure hours of
country life; the only amusements are the indecent conversation and the
practical jokes of the parasites who never fail to accompany such parties.
The villages owned by the bey are made up of the dwellings of the
tenants. These for the most part present a pitiable appearance of poverty
and misery, though their interiors are as clean as circumstances will
allow. They are constructed of mud and wattle, and divided into two
or three rooms, with small openings for windows, and open chimneys. A
fence incloses the house, together with the granary and cattle-shed. The
tenants are, with few exceptions, Christians, and are called _Yeradjis_.
They are poor, and look dejected and depressed, a demeanor I have
often heard superficial observers attribute to laziness and natural
worthlessness. This judgment may be just in some instances, but can by
no means be taken as generally correct; the people are as willing to
work and gain an honest living as those of any other land, but they
labor under certain disadvantages which merit attention, and which, when
carefully examined, will go far to justify their failings.
A Yeradji’s house costs from £30 to £50; sometimes it is built by the
landlord, sometimes by the tenant himself. This may happen for instance
when the Yeradji has a son to marry and the landlord refuses to build
a house for him, in which case he has to build it at his own expense,
and should he leave the estate, receives no compensation for it. These
_Chiftliks_ are cultivated on the Metayer system as it is understood
and practised in Macedonia: the landlord provides the seed in the first
instance, the Yeradji finds his own yoke of oxen or buffaloes and
implements, tills the ground, sows the grain, reaps it, threshes and
winnows it, and when the seed for the next year and the tithes have been
deducted, shares the produce with the landlord. The Metayer system on
a luxuriant soil like that of Macedonia would not only pay, but would
also contribute to increase the wealth of the estate and improve the
wretched condition of the Yeradji if it were only properly and equitably
administered. But it is not difficult to point out capital failings in
the working of the system. When the grain is cut, a certain number of
sheaves, forty for instance, of the finest and heaviest, are set aside as
samples. These are threshed separately, and the seed for the next year,
the tithes, and the landlord’s share deducted according to this standard,
which leaves the Yeradji an iniquitously small proportion of the produce.
Under this unfair arrangement the Yeradji has to give for every head of
cattle he possesses six Constantinople kilés of barley and six of wheat
to the _Soubashi_ of his bey.
In addition to these the Yeradji has to defray the heavy burden of his
own taxes, and the quartering of troops and Zaptiehs upon him, besides
other burdens, among which must be reckoned the wasted time of the
numerous feast-days, that deprive him of so much work in the year. Toil
as hard as he may, he can never become an independent and prosperous man.
When these estates are transferred by sale or other causes, the Yeradji,
should he be in debt to the estate, goes with it into a sort of bondage
terminable under certain conditions, viz.: his industry and activity
and the honesty of the landlord and his agent. If on one hand the
superabundance of feast-days is to be looked upon as a hindrance to the
Yeradji freeing himself from debt, the unscrupulous manner in which
his master or the Soubashi reckons accounts opposes fresh obstacles to
the breaking of the chain that binds him to the soil. Farm accounts
are generally kept by means of _chetolas_, or notched sticks, a very
primitive mode, leading to many errors being committed, wittingly or
unwittingly. The consequence is that all tenants are more or less in debt
to their landlords in the same manner as all Turkish landlords are in
debt to the Government or to private individuals.
The scarcity of Yeradjis and their disqualifications as tenants are now
a general complaint throughout Macedonia. It is not, however, surprising
that the better class of peasants should refuse to become Yeradjis, and
that the inferior classes, employed in their absence, should be found
fault with and be always in debt.
Of late years some of these estates have passed into the hands of
Christians, by purchase or mortgage. These proprietors, as a rule, do not
reside on their estates, which are left in the charge of an agent, but
content themselves with an occasional visit. When this property is well
situated, and (as seldom happens) free from litigation, it is said to be
a good investment.
Besides these Yeradji villages, there are the _Kephalochoria_, or
head-villages, composed of petty landholders, some of whom were formerly
wealthy, and might have continued so but for the injury done to them by
the forest regulations and the heavy impositions laid upon them by the
Government since the commencement of the war.
One of the principal grievances peasants labor under is the _angaria_,
or statute-labor, into which man, beast, and cart are impressed at the
command of a mere Zaptieh, causing a loss of time, and injury to property
and cattle, which is often fatal to an otherwise well-to-do village.
A village on a main road is never free from all kinds of vexatious
impositions and the quartering of Zaptiehs and troops, who, whether they
pay or not for what they have consumed, extort sums of money from their
hosts, and are always careful to take away with them a declaration from
the _Kodja-Bashi_ that all accounts have been settled.
The Angaria work lately exacted from the inhabitants of Cavalla for the
transport of flour for the use of the army was very nearly occasioning
troubles of a nature likely to prove fatal to the whole town. The
affair originated in the townspeople being required to carry on Sunday
loads which they willingly carried on Saturday. They refused, and shut
themselves up in their houses; whereupon an excess of zeal was displayed
by the police in trying to force them out by breaking into some of the
dwellings. This led to a slight disturbance which encouraged some noted
bad characters belonging to the Moslem population to take a menacing
attitude, and conspire to break into the offices of some of the principal
merchants of the town, ransack them, and then proceed to follow the
precedent with the rest of the town, threatening the Christians with
massacre. Panic soon spread, and the people shut themselves in their
churches. Men-of-war were telegraphed for, but luckily the local
authorities were able to put down the tumult, and order was restored
without loss of life. The incident is instructive in showing the
difficulties and dangers under which the Macedonian peasant carries on
his work. It is no wonder that the land is ill-cultivated.
Among the peasant farmers of Roumelia there is no regular system of
rotation of crops observed; but with the occupants of large estates the
ordinary rule for rich lands is two wheat crops and one of oats, then
fallow one or more years, wheat, and then sesame. In Macedonia, where
arable land is more abundant, one year’s rest is allowed to some lands.
The only manure some of these lands obtain is from the treading of the
sheep on the land in early spring and after the harvest is reaped, and
yet the soil is naturally so rich that a generally bad harvest is of
rare occurrence. The mode of cultivation is very primitive, employing
much hand labor and involving much waste. Tillage is performed with the
native plough, on an average depth of four inches to the furrow. The
instrument used for the purpose is very rude and has only one handle.
The number of buffaloes used varies from two to five. In Roumelia some
large estate owners attempted introducing agricultural implements from
Europe, but threshing-machines alone met with any success. In Macedonia
even these proved a failure, as their management is not understood, and
fuel is difficult to procure in the interior. In some parts the grain is
scattered over the stubble and then ploughed in. Much of the harvest is
done by young women and girls in Roumelia and Macedonia. They and the
male harvesters hire themselves for the June harvest. On the 21st August
the harvest-home is celebrated. Decked in their holiday costumes, crowned
with garlands, and carrying bouquets composed of ears of corn, the
reapers proceed to the nearest town to dance and sing before the doors of
the principal houses and in the market-place.
Threshing is performed in the most antique manner imaginable. The
instrument used for the purpose consists of two pieces of wood curved at
one end, fastened together, and studded with a number of flints. This
is attached at the curved end to a team of three or four horses. A girl
stands on this sledge and drives the team rapidly over the corn thrown
in bundles on the ground, which has been hardened and prepared for the
purpose. This process breaks the straw into very small lengths, making it
very palatable food for the cattle. The corn is winnowed by being thrown
up in the air with wooden shovels, the breeze carrying away the chaff. In
some parts of Macedonia the process is even more simple. A team of horses
is driven over the bundles of corn, treading out the grain. The women and
children also sit on the ground and help in the operation by beating it
with sticks.
The principal crops raised in Roumelia are wheat, barley, maize, rye,
oats, sesame, and canary-seed. A considerable quantity of rice is grown
in some parts. In the south, towards Adrianople, the vine reaches some
degree of perfection, and excellent wine is made, which, when kept for
some years, resembles sherry in taste and color. The mulberry grows
abundantly, and before the silkworm disease appeared in those districts
formed a very profitable branch of industry. The mulberry gardens
sometimes comprise several acres of land; when they are near towns or
large villages, the silkworm nurseries are placed in them. The rearing
process begins in early spring, with the budding of the leaves, and lasts
over two months. It is a very tedious and laborious work, requiring great
neatness and attention, and is generally undertaken by the women. When
the crop succeeds and is free from disease, it is an interesting process
to watch. In Macedonia the same crops are grown, with the addition of a
large supply of excellent tobacco. The best comes from Drama and Cavalla.
The cattle in Turkey, though small, are hardy and very serviceable.
Little attention has hitherto been paid by the Government towards
improving the breed. The sheep, too, are small, and their wool is of an
inferior quality. Those in Asiatic Turkey are mostly of the Karamanian,
or broad-tailed, breed. Their fat is much used by the natives for
cookery, and their milk made into cheese. Sheep-farming is carried on
to a great extent both in European and Asiatic Turkey. Buffaloes for
draft purposes and ploughing, and camels as beasts of burden, are very
numerous, especially in Asia Minor. Great numbers of goats are also kept;
their milk is much used for making cheese. The Angora goats are (I need
hardly say) much prized for their fleece. Their introduction into other
parts of the country has been attempted several times, but has invariably
failed. They do not thrive away from their native mountains.