Not long ago I received an e-mail from Armela Hammes
"In searching through FHL microfilm for Dembnica/Gniezno/Poznan, in the 1840's and 1850's, I found family listed as gospodarz... In summary, what would you give as a definition for the 1850's for the words koscielny, wyrobnik, parobek, gospodarz, komornik and huby? Before I started typing up notes for two rolls of microfilm, I wanted to get the translation done correctly. Should I just use the FHL Word List? Would a self-sustaining farmer own the land?"
Part of the problem with translating these terms is that the social and
economic setup we're used to differs substantially from the one in Poland a century ago. There are a lot of
classifications that were important in their society that never generated distinct terms in ours. I don't know
about you, but I've never met a serf or peasant. When I think of a "farmer" I tend to picture the kind of farm
my dad grew up on in Kansas, one stretching for acres and acres. In Poland you can't make that assumption.
So it doesn't help much to know what such a term "means" if you don't understand how it fit into the whole
socio-economic system.
That's why different sources, such as the FHL Word List and a good
dictionary, may give different definitions for the same terms. They're all trying to indicate briefly what
these words meant. But since there are no exact equivalents in English, the best they can give is an approximation.
And by their very nature, approximations are not precise!
What's more, the usage of these terms in records was not always
consistent. You had a variety of people classified as farmers or peasants, but of different status because of how
much land they farmed, and these terms indicated where a given person fit into that overall scheme of things.
The usage and meaning of the same term can vary from area to another, and from one time-frame to another.
We can, however, give definitions of what these terms meant in
general by the 19th century, definitions that will prove reasonably accurate. So let's look at the terms Armela
asked about, and a few others in the same category.
Gospodarz and Kmiec~
[Online I use "~" to indicate the diacritical marks of Polish letters: a~ and e~ for the nasal vowels with tails, c~ for the c with an acute accent, l~ for the slashed l, etc. I use z~ for the accented z, and z* for the dotted z. Using these symbols is awkward, but preferable to making you reconfigure your browser, and perhaps download and add plug-ins, to show the Polish characters properly.]
Before the 19th century the nobles owned the land.
Peasants farmed it, and they might farm large sections or small, depending on various
circumstances; but as a rule the nobles owned the land itself. By the 1800s, however, giving
peasants legal ownership of the land they worked -- called the "emancipation of the peasants" (in Polish uwl~aszczenie
chl~opo~w) -- had become a major issue, and it was only a matter of time before it happened.
The three partitioning governments emancipated peasants under their rule
at different times and to different degrees. Thus in the Prussian partition a series of administrative measures
gradually gave the peasants more and more rights, from 1811 on into the 1860s. In the Austrian partition
(Galicia) emancipation went into effect in 1848. In the Russian partition partial emancipation was introduced in 1863,
followed by a proclamation of the Tsar in 1864 that implemented full emancipation.
So, depending on where your ancestors lived, before 1848 or the 1860s
terms for peasants referred to how much land they farmed; but they usually didn't own it. In return for the right to
work that land they had to recompense their lord, by providing some prescribed form of labor service, produce, or money.
After emancipation, however, peasants owned the land they worked (although often there were strings attached).
A gospodarz was a farmer who worked/owned a full-sized farm,
that is, one large enough that he could support himself and his family from it. The general notion was that it took
about 30 mo~rgs (or morgas) of land, or roughly 40 acres, to do that. So a gospodarz
would usually work or own that much, possibly more. Other kinds of peasants worked less land, from half-sized farms
(maybe about 20 acres) down to just a garden-sized plot. These folks could not grow enough on their land to support
themselves, so they had to hire themselves out to do work for richer peasants.
Incidentally, the terms used for a "full-sized farm" (one of some
40 acres) were l~an, literally "field," and wl~o~ka, literally "a drag, dragging." As a rule
either would cover some 30 mo~rgs (or morgas), a term that originally came from German
Morgen, "morning"; it was originally the amount of land a man with an ox could plow in one morning (according to
Ernst Thode's German-English Genealogical Dictionary). This area was set at about 1.4 acres in the
Russian and Austrian partitions, but closer to 0.6 acres in the German partition. (I don't know; maybe German oxen
plowed slower?!).
You sometimes see place names in Poland that include the word Huby.
It comes ultimately from Hub or Hube or Hufe, and that's a German term for "full-sized farm."
A place named Huby Orl~owskie would be a large farmstead near a village called Orl~owo ... sort of like
"Orl~owo Acres." (Polish zielony means "green" -- would Zielone Huby be Green Acres, Polish-style?
Complete with Arnold the s~winia?).
So a gospodarz worked a full-sized farm, in return for services
rendered his lord; after emancipation he owned a full-sized farm. Another term meaning much the same thing was
kmiec~ (assuming these terms were used accurately, which is not an assumption one can make automatically). The
Latin term used in records as the equivalent of kmiec~ was cmetho, genitive case cmethonis.
Interestingly enough, both words came originally from Latin comes, comitis used in the sense of "ruler's
companion." Later this term comes was used to mean "count, dignitary." By the 18th century its derivative
cmetho or kmiec~ had come to mean "peasant," especially one who had enough land to support himself,
and thus was comparatively well off.
You see here a phenomenon we encounter often with words: a gradual
democratization of meaning. Just as pan once meant "lord" but these days is the way you address any
Tomek, Rysiek or Heniek, so kmiec~ started out meaning a big-wig, but eventually slid down on the social scale to
mean almost any peasant. When you see these terms and titles used in records, part of your task is to assess just where
they stood on that scale at the moment in time when the record was drawn up. As a rule, in the records we deal with,
gospodarz or kmiec~ would mean "peasant, farmer"; gospodarz implies that one worked a
full-sized farm, but by the 1850s kmiec~ was often used for any old farmer.
Half-Farmers and Half-Men
We sometimes run into interesting references to a pol~ownik or
po~l~kmiec~ or po~l~rolnik or po~l~chl~op (in Latin semi-cmetho).
The prefix po~l~- means "half," so these were half-men, half-farmers, half-peasants. These words evoke
images of vicious Turks or Scythians (or taxmen) galloping through the peaceful fields of Poland and lopping poor
peasants in half -- who, apparently, got right up and kept on working their farms. We knew life was tough in the
old days, but this is ridiculous!
Actually, a "half-farmer" was one who had a half-sized farm. How did this
come about? There were various possibilities, but often it was due to dividing an inheritance among heirs. Poles
did not practice primogeniture -- the custom of giving the whole inheritance to the oldest son -- but divided property
among the sons (the daughters' share went toward dowries). Thus a full-sized farm big enough to support a family could be
subdivided in a generation or two to the point that you had half- and quarter-farmers scrambling to make ends meet.
Such farmers could not grow enough on their land to support themselves, so
they had to supplement their income. Often they would work part-time for wealthier farmers. Since farming any land at
all (before emancipation) required labor service or rent paid to the lord, these fractional farmers had a tough row to hoe.
Between working off their duty to their lords and working for wealthy peasants, they might have no time left to farm their
own fields. But there were even poorer folk around who might be able to help them out, in exchange for food or shelter.
Little or No Land
A term used for a peasant who worked/owned a piece of land, with a house
and maybe a few farm animals, was a zagrodnik (sometimes ogrodnik), in Latin hortulanus.
These terms mean literally "gardener," and indicate that the land these folks worked couldn't have been very large.
Actually a zagrodnik was one who owned or worked a agroda, a croft or farmstead or enclosure; and
in the 15th century it meant a farmer who did not use beasts of burden to work his land, but did it under his own power.
As time went on it came to mean one who had a piece of land, but one substantially smaller than that worked by a
kmiec~ or gospodarz.
A chal~upnik was literally a "cottager," who worked or owned a small
plot of land along with a little chal~upa or cottage. By the 19th century we often see this term used for one who
was employed in a cottage industry, i. e., worked at home producing items for sale such as cloth or
clothes. Such people didn't earn much, but they still were better off than many others.
A komornik was like a tenant-farmer. As a rule he had no
land of his own, and had to work for another, richer peasant; he lived on the wealthier peasant's land and worked it
for a share of the produce. Elderly people who'd turned their farms over to grown children often lived as
komornicy. The term ka~tnik was also used for one who owned no land and lived in a corner
(ka~t) of someone else's home.
Originally Latin inquilinus was another term for "farmer," but
by the 19th century it was generally used as a Latin equivalent of Polish komornik or ka~tnik.
Lower on the scale was a parobek or farmhand. He owned
nothing, and worked as a hired hand for a wealthier peasant. As a rule he did have steady employment on one large farm.
The Latin term used for this was famulus.
A wyrobnik was a day-laborer, one who had neither land nor a
steady job. He hired on as a hand to help out with chores on the farms of wealthier peasants; he would do basically
whatever needed to be done. I think the practical difference between him and a parobek is that the
parobek at least might have steady work in one place, whereas a wyrobnik had to find work whenever
and wherever he could.
Originally akolonista, Latin colonus, was indeed a
colonist, one who came from elsewhere -- often a German -- to settle a new colony. But by the 19th century that
term was frequently nothing more than another way to say "farmer, peasant." Polish rolnik and
wl~os~cianin, and Latin agricola, were also generic terms for "farmer," as in "You all look and
smell the same to me, like farmers, and I ain't interested in the details."
Finally, to get away from the farm altogether, a kos~cielny
was a sexton or sacristarian, an attendant who worked at the church and helped out with the various duties there. He
was usually in or near the church, so he'd make a handy witness for weddings and such; that's why we see him mentioned
in church records. The exact nature of his duties could vary from one parish to another: helping with the choir, digging
graves, keeping the grounds in good shape, that sort of thing. In some parishes you'd have a kos~cielny
as well as an organista, who played the organ. In some parishes the duties of the organista
included those done by the kos~cielny in other parishes. I guess "church attendant" is the most accurate
translation for kos~cielny; his duties would often overlap those of a sexton, but a sexton isn't exactly the
same as a kos~cielny.
If all this seems a little much, at least these occupations are ones not
totally foreign to our experience. In my research on names I ran into bl~oniarz, an archaic term for one who
made windows out of bl~ona, animal membrane! I guess you could sit by your membrane window and sip on your
czarnina (soup made of duck's blood). Sounds gross -- unless you've lived on a farm yourself, or have ever been
really poor and hungry. If you've ever had either experience, you understand that those who can take nothing for granted
are careful to waste nothing!
Conclusion
If you'd like more information on these terms and titles, visit
Rafal Prinke's page on this subject (from which I have borrowed freely and, I hope, without error!):
http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~rafalp/GEN/soc-pl.htm
You might also find much interesting material at this page:
http://main.amu.edu.pl/~rafalp/GEN/zawody.htm
I hope this clears things up a little. As I said, we can't always get them
crystal clear because people sometimes used these terms sloppily; what one record keeper called a parobek, another
might call a wyrobnik. And a particular clerk might use the term gospodarz loosely, applying it to
one who owned a small farm. But as a rule, by the second half of the 19th century a gospodarz did own his farm,
and it was big enough to support him and his family, and often farmhands and tenant-farmers as well.
Written by William F. "Fred" Hoffman (WFHoffman@PolishRoots.org).
Previously published by GEN DOBRY!, Vol. 2, No. 3, 31 March 2001.
PolishRoots(tm): http://PolishRoots.org/.
