Agricultural History Review, Volume 67 Part 2 (2019), p. 326

The papers in this edited volume focus on the practice known as emphyteusis. This can be broadly defined as a contract in which one party grants the use rights to agricultural land to another party on the condition that the land is maintained, and in return for a fixed annual rent. The resulting contract may be of a long duration and the holder may be allowed to dispose of the use right by sale or bequest. Contracts often specify conditions attached to exit or eviction and allocate responsibilities for repairs and improvements.

Scholars have been divided in their interpretations of the operation and impact of emphyteusis. Some have proposed that the resulting ‘divided property rights’ hindered economic development and limited opportunities for full ownership. Others have taken a more positive view of the practice, suggesting that it ensured that land was retained for productive purposes and arguing that both parties derived advantages, the landowner in the form of income and the tenant through long-term security. One reason for these contrasting views, according to the editors, is that the operation of emphyteusis varied both between locations and over time. The purpose of the volume is therefore to permit such comparisons. Thirteen papers encompass locations including Italy, Spain, Portugal, France and Germany across the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries.

A number of papers in the volume demonstrate how emphyteutic leases could be employed to encourage land improvement. Challenging economic conditions in Germanic lands during the period 1680–1720, for example, encouraged the adoption of emphyteusis. After a period of disruptive warfare, landowners were looking for incentives to encourage the resettlement of agricultural lands and decided to switch from short-term leases to more generous long-term ones. Introduction of new crops was a second form of land improvement. Catalonia became an important region for wine production from the mid-eighteenth century but a great deal of labour was required to transform uncultivated land into vineyards, and around five years had to pass before the first grapes could be harvested. Landowners therefore used the contracts as an incentive to attract the necessary investment.

Institutional and individual landowners employed emphyteutic leases, but their motivations often varied. Religious houses made such arrangements with local families in central-northern Italy and in France from the middle ages until the late eighteenth century. The process fostered links with the local community and corresponded with the idea that a religious house was a perpetual institution. In Lombardy, meanwhile, long-term contracts were used by landowners during the seventeenth century to limit exposure to economic fluctuations and to transfer maintenance costs and property taxes onto tenants.

The recipients of leases are also discussed in detail in the volume. A number of contributions suggest that emphyteusis provided opportunities for small-scale farmers who would otherwise have faced difficulty in establishing holdings. Agricultural land in eighteenth-century Normandy was of good quality and population density was high. However the agricultural economy was not commercialized and small peasant holdings were the norm. Emphyteutic contracts provided an opportunity for a peasant farmer to consolidate their holdings around a farmstead. Sometimes the state actively encouraged the use of emphyteutic leases, as in Mallorca between the thirteenth to nineteenth centuries when they were first employed to strengthen the rights of large property owners, and subsequently to encourage the dispersal of their estates.

The extent to which contracts were monitored and enforced also varied between locations. In central-northern Italy penalties for non-payment of rent were limited but the land might revert to the owner if the male line of descent was interrupted. The Catalonian system initially contained an exit clause that required the tenant to return the land when the vines died. Some landowners, notably of Germanic lands, were insufficiently observant and allowed their rights to lapse, making their recovery of the land almost impossible. However landlords in sixteenth and seventeenth-century Galicia and those in eighteenth-century Normandy viewed emphyteutic leases as important assets and monitored contracts closely. Tensions arose in north-east Catalonia, meanwhile, when the success of the wine trade, established using emphyteutic contracts, caused landowners to increase rents and entry fines for future contracts.

Emphyteusis, the editors conclude, was a less rigid process than its critics suggest. It was employed by religious institutions who anticipated being a permanent fixture in the local community, but also by peasants to establish, consolidate and expand holdings. Clarification around the duration of contracts was established in some locations. Sometimes the aim was to facilitate the owner’s recovery of the land, for example limiting duration to the life of the tenant or for 99 years and clarifying the procedure around eviction. However processes were also altered to reward tenants whose management and labour inputs had increased the land’s value.

The editors take a more optimistic view of the connection between emphyteusis and economic growth than many previous scholars. They suggest that such long-term leases were particularly effective when they allowed an owner to delegate the clearance and cultivation of previously abandoned land. In such instances the owner was themselves required to absorb a degree of risk, as value of the rent that they set at the start of the contract might depreciate in real terms over its duration.

The book shows an awareness of the nuances in legal process between locations and over time. The introduction is particularly helpful in clarifying the direction of the argument to the reader. The volume will be a useful research resource for agricultural historians seeking to extend their knowledge of land transactions. The geographical coverage draws out some interesting similarities and differences that raise questions for future research, including whether emphyteusis was most frequently employed in periods of economic crisis or those of economic growth.