Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Property as a concept does not have one particular meaning - the
concept is very much bound up with social context, and its meaning
has changed over time as society has changed (see Macpherson, 1978).
At one level, 'property', as such, simply refers to a relationship between
humans. The content of this relationship is nonetheless variable
depending upon circumstances. This is perhaps most evident in the
transition from feudalism to capitalism in Europe.
In the feudal regimes of England in the fourteenth century, for
example, property was directly tied to a certain social status and to social
functions (see Fine, 1984). When it came to property, ownership was
attached to the performance of definite social functions. Owners had
neither the absolute rights to use and abuse their property according
to their will nor exclusive rights under all circumstances to bar others
from use of their property. There were, therefore, certain paternalistic
constraints on the rights pertaining to private property. For example,
an obligation to meet the needs of the poor must predominate over the
rights of ownership: social responsibility was tied to property. Feeding
those who worked your land was a duty and obligation, even if it meant
opening your lands to harvest and hunting by the peasantry.
According to 'natural law' there existed an obligatory collection of
rights and duties. These implicated various classes in different ways. For
instance, not only did property owners have paternalistic duties to the
poor, but the poor were subjected to all kinds of personal obligations
to the propertied. These obligations expressed relations of personal
dependence, servility and bondage.
The transition from feudalism to capitalism entailed changes in the
mode of production generally (for example, industrialisation, new
applications of science and technology, the creation of a new wealth
class - the bourgeoisie). As part of this transition great social changes also
had to occur. In particular, social change was to see the emancipation
of the peasantry from their traditional ties and obligations to the
landed gentry, and the release of the nobility from their traditional duty
toward those who shared their lands. This entailed the relocation of the
obligations of the poor from individual property owners to the state,
because otherwise it was oppressive: 'for the poor because it reinforced
their personal dependence, and for the rich because it imposed upon
them arbitrary restrictions' (Fine, 1984: 18).
Under feudalism, traditional obligations attached to property served
to exclude the majority from new forms of property. This was relevant,
for example, for access to private property (in the case of peasants, who
were excluded from substantive property ownership) and international
trade (in the case of private businesses which were confronted by
Search WWH ::




Custom Search