Tenancy Terms

A little more than six months ago we examined a document that listed the names of a number of Mennonites who wished to leave Volhynia and to settle in Molotschna (see here for the blog post; see here for Glenn Penner’s translation of the document). The previous post mentioned that document in passing, since the time of the list (1833) was reasonably close to Johann Cornies’s comments about the superiority of colonist life over tenancy.

The mere fact that so many Volhynian Mennonite tenants sought to move to Molotschna in 1833 and were willing to make formal application to do so (the purpose of the list) is clear evidence that Cornies was not the only one to regard tenancy as an inferior, more tenuous existence. However, that is not all that we should say about the list. In retrospect, our earlier understanding of several statements on the list may have been mistaken or perhaps imprecise.

The first nineteen names on the list (out of a total of thirty-nine names) were residents of Ostrowka, or Ostrog, a village located in the lower center of Volhynia. All nineteen lived on the estate of  Michael Bischkowsky in the Lutzki region in the colony Ostrowka.

The nineteen names are divided into two groups as follows:

	First and Last Name	Male	Female	Total	Comments
1	Benjamin Wedel	2	2	4	Schaefer (shepherd)
2	Heinrich Wedel	2	7	9	Uhrmacher (clock maker)
3	Johann Wedel	2	1	3	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
4	Cornelius Wedel	4	3	7	Drechsler (wood lathe operator)
5	Heinrich Dirks	4	3	7	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
6	Michael Teske	6	4	10	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
7	David Dirks	1	2	3	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
8	David Nachtigal	6	3	9	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
9	George Nachtigal	4	5	9	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)

These above-mentioned nine families have enjoyed their free years and, since 1818, have paid the royal contributions.

10	Benjamin Buller	5	6	11	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
11	David Koehn	1	3	4	Stellmacher (wheelwright/ wagon maker)
12	Peter Schmidt	2	6	8	Leinweber (linen weaver)
13	Peter Becker	4	3	7	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
14	Benjamin Ratzlaff	4	3	7	Leinweber (linen weaver)
15	Cornelius Balzer	1	2	3	Leinweber (linen weaver)
16	Johann Werbel	1	2	3	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
17	Jacob Pankratz	4	7	11	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
18	Friedrich Kunkel	1	3	4	Landwirth (landowner/farmer)
19	Jacob Wedel	3	5	8	Leinweber (linen weaver)

The above ten families still enjoy the free years.

We observed in the original post and then in even greater detail (here) that there is a clear difference between the two groups: in 1833 the latter ten still enjoyed their free years, while the first nine had to pay the “royal contributions.”

Earlier we concluded (1) that the royal contribution was a tax and (2) that the difference between the two groups (group 1 no longer enjoying free years; group 2 still enjoying free years) indicated that the first nine families must have signed the lease with Michael Bischkowsky some years before the latter ten did. Both conclusions may need to be clarified somewhat in light of Johann Cornies’s comments about the superiority of the colonist life to that of tenants.

First, although we do not know exactly what the royal contribution was, we should not assume that it was a tax paid to the government. As Cornies reminds us, these Mennonite tenants were obligated to the noble on whose land they lived, not the crown per se. Of course, royal officials exercised ultimate control over the realm, but the tenants’ most immediate and direct obligation was to their lord. Thus, the royal contribution was likely paid to the noble, even if he passed it on to the government.

Second and more important, Cornies’s words remind us that nobles could negotiate whatever terms they wanted. Stated differently, it seems likely that nobles offered different terms to different tenants: more appealing terms when the noble was in need of settlers, less appealing terms when the need for tenants was not so acute. What this means for the two groups of Ostrog settlers named above is that the difference between the two groups may have been more a matter of the tenancy terms than when each group settled. The first group may have run out of free years because of the terms of their tenant contract, not necessarily because they had lived on the estate longer than the second group.

Much about the Ostrog situation remains unknown, but one thing is certain: Cornies was completely correct in his opinion that it was far better to live as a colonist on crown land (land originally owned by the crown but deeded to colonists) than as a tenant on some noble’s estate. The actions of our own ancestor Benjamin Buller (number 10 on the list) proves the case.

Of course, this raises yet another perplexing question: Why did Benjamin and family move back to Volhynia (to the village Heinrichsdorf) after he had become a Molotschna colonist (landowner) in 1839?