Agricultural History Review, Volume 66 Part 1 (2018), p. 162

In recent years, Tine De Moor has been a significant figure amongst historians of the commons and commons governance, not least through her recent presidency of the International Association for the Study of the Commons. Her many publications on the commons are listed in the book’s bibliography (though – slightly confusingly – they appear under two different initials) and together constitute a considerable body of scholarly work. In line with much of this earlier work, The dilemma of the commoners offers a bottom-up analysis – ‘an intensive and detailed micro-study’ (p. 15) – of the functioning of the commons in one particular region (Flanders) in the period up to and including the nineteenth century. Yet it is also clearly envisaged by De Moor as a model for work on commons in other times and places and a call for action in developing new institutions for collective action in the twenty-first century present. It is thus a hugely ambitious book.

The introduction and chapter one set up the book and its aims, before moving on to examine institutionalized forms of collective action in historical perspective, arguing that the second half of the medieval period witnessed a ‘silent revolution’ in north-western Europe, whereby both agrarian commons and urban guilds emerged. In De Moor’s view, common rights and commons institutions were neither ‘vestiges of earlier primitive agrarian communism’ (p. 76) nor one step on a progression from common to private property, but a reflection of specific circumstances and changes in medieval Europe. Here De Moor differs in her analysis from those who rely on evolutionary explanations to explain the emergence of commons, but also offers a different chronology of this ‘revolution’ from other recent scholars (for example, Susan Oosthuizen’s The Anglo-Saxon Fenland (2017), where she argues that common rights emerged several centuries earlier than 1000 AD).

The second, third and fourth chapters focus on institutions for managing common land and common rights in Flanders, with a particular focus on non-arable commons: that is, the common-pool resources of the ‘waste’ (pasture, turf, meadow, wood, etc), rather than grazing on open-field stubbles or seasonal commoning on land otherwise held in severalty. Chapter 2 examines these resources, the evolution of the legal rights to the land and differences in management between eastern Flanders (where the commons were extensive and physically open) and western Flanders (where they were generally smaller and demarcated by hedges or fences). The next two chapters offer a careful analysis of the functioning of one particular common – that of Gemene and Loweiden close to the city of Bruges in western Flanders – in the two centuries after about 1700. Drawing on a combination quantitative and qualitative analysis, De Moor focuses not on ‘a momentary description of features’ but on ‘changes within the system’ (p. 119). She points out that the commoners of Assebreok and Oedelem were a heterogeneous rather than a homogeneous group, and explores variations in participation in the use and management of the common over time. In Chapter 4, she identifies a growing number of passive members who neither turned animals onto the common nor involved themselves in its management, the dwindling number of farmers involved in the common (itself part of the more general proletarianization of rural Flanders) and a clear and growing polarization between users and managers. She also highlights the associated problem of the under-exploitation of the common (too few users), which might be as significant as over-exploitation and similarly lead to ‘tragedy’.

In the final section of the book, De Moor lays out her conclusions, while the epilogue considers the contemporary ‘new commons movement’, arguing that government should take a role in building institutions for collective action in the twenty-first century. As De Moor argues early in the book, ‘historical commons can provide us with inspiration on future governance models for natural and other resources’ (p. 3), perhaps especially in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.

The significance of the book lies not just in De Moor’s determination to take on and dismantle Hardin’s ‘tragedy of the commons’ thesis: indeed, others – including Lin Ostrom – have already done this. Rather, it lies in her careful and systematic analysis of the Gememe and Loweiden case study and her insistence that those studying the commons embrace both interdisciplinary approaches and historical analysis. As readers of this journal will undoubtedly be aware, the common wastelands of Flanders were different from both English commons and those elsewhere in Continental Europe. Most significantly, in Flanders – unlike in much of England – rights to the common waste were not linked to the tenure of land in the arable fields or to specific properties, but commoners essentially paid a subscription in order to register their right, though they did not always exercise it (by the nineteenth century, falling participation rates may have contributed to the temporary dissolution of the common). Yet despite regional differences, there is much for rural and agricultural historians of both Britain and Europe to value in the book. Commons were – as De Moor argues – inherently local institutions, whose management was always reflective of specific circumstances, hence the importance of studying them ‘from within’. Moreover, as De Moor persuasively argues, ‘common land did not escape existing power relations’ (p. 178), but was rather caught up in both local and national politics, a theme that might usefully be further explored by others. There are other important reminders too in the book, not least that we need to study not only the rules of commons (as recorded in by-laws, for example), but also the varying application of those rules over time, individual and collective decision making, and problem resolution (as recorded in registration documents, records of sanctions and legal cases).

As for minor gripes: the book occasionally seems to be attempting to tackle rather more than will fit in its 170 pages. I would like to have heard rather more about the Gemene and Loweiden case study – the discussion of which really only occupies two relatively short chapters – and especially the unusual circumstances that led to its reestablishment and survival. As a historical geographer, I note that better (and larger) maps would have been a welcome addition. Finally, De Moor seems to assume that all commoners were male. As she points out in Chapter 3, in the case of her chosen Flanders case study they mainly were: the early sixteenth-century rules of the common show that women could initially claim membership, but from the middle of the seventeenth century women no longer registered as commoners (pp. 103–4). This is a fascinating insight and others scholars might fruitfully investigate the question of gender in other times and places, though the persistent use of male pronouns to describe commoners elsewhere in the book may overstate the case.

Overall, this is a thought-provoking book and a useful addition to a growing body of literature on the functioning of historical commons in north-western Europe and beyond. It is to be recommended as essential reading to both historians and historical geographers of the rural landscape and scholars of the commons in the here-and-now.