"The equal allotment of lands among the different families of a tribe is effected among the Afghans, just as we see itdescribed in the last chapter of Numbers; and, in consequence, marriages are frequently contracted between members of thesame tribe, to avoid alienating, by a foreign union, any portion of the common inheritance. Within the tribe exchanges ofproperty are effected, by virtue of stipulations entirely voluntary, in consequence of the unequal value of the lands granted tothe several families. Every five or six years, according to custom, the lands pass from one hand to another; and, at the end ofa certain lapse of time, each has occupied in turn the good and bad portions of the common soil. Hence arise emigrations ofentire villages, after which the newly- occupied territory is divided among the settling families, by means of a new allotmentwhich the Afghans call sometimes pucka, and sometimes purra . This last word is of Jewish origin, pur in Hebrew signifies alot, or proportional part, whence the commemoration feast of Purim." (13)M. Roscher also quotes many other examples of agrarian communities, Feldgemeinschaft . (14) It may be well to give themhere. In the country of Lowicz, down to the beginning of this century, private property in land was unknown, arabic landbeing subject to a new allotment each year. (15) In the island of Sardinia, also, collective property with annual re-partition oflots was to be found. (16) There is a similar system among the Creek Indians. (17) Among the Tcheremiss all agriculturaloperations are even executed in common, at a fixed time, no one being able to claim exemption. The harvests aresubsequently divided among the families. (18)In certain districts of Norway, the partition of lands by lot had survived; but in 1821 was brought to an end by lands sodivided being subjected to a double land tax. (19) According to John Mill, (20) in certain parts of the province of Madras, arabiclands were subjected to a new partition every ten years. Among the Cossacks of the Ural, an agrarian community exists in allits entirety. In Thuringia traces are still found of the old equal allotment according to families. (21)Throughout the whole of ancient Scandinavia the same system was m force. In Denmark, the collective communal propertywas maintained till nearly the end of the last century. As in the Swiss allmend , the soil was divided among the inhabitants inlots, but each lot contained several parcels, in order that every family might have lands of each quality and that no one mightbe unfairly portioned. Hence it happened that a cultivator had as many as thirty, forty, or even eighty parcels. Towards theend of the eighteenth century, under the influence of the ideas of individualism then prevalent, a series of laws were adoptedwith a view to putting an end to the collective possession. The law of April 23, 1781, abolished the system of community forarable lands; that of 1805 abolished it for the woods; and that of December 30, 1858, for the bog. The partition, called inDanish Udshajning , was effected, by definitely assigning an equal part to every member of the commune. There no longerremain any common lands, except here and there a few peat bogs and a few pasturelands called overdress. Every cultivatormay send on to the overdrew , all the cattle which he keeps on his holding. The allmenden , or alminding in Danish, are nolonger to be found, except in certain names. Thus, for instance, in the isle of Bornholm, there is still a forest called KongensAlmind . (22)
Quite recently traces might still be found even of the labour being carried on in common. Thus Von Haxthausen says that, inAltmark, the heads of families assemble under the presidency of the chief of the commune, to decide on the work to be doneby them all the next day. (23) The same custom also existed formerly in Jutland. (24)The numerous facts just quoted prove the existence of village communities with identically the same characteristics amongthe most widely different nations. If the juridical traditions and archaic agrarian institutions preserved in isolated districtswere carefully studied in each country, there would undoubtedly be found supplementary proof even more complete, thoughnot more decisive.
1. The Turkish dominion in Algeria comprised 40,000,000 hectares :--14,000,000 in Tell, 26,000,000 in Sahara.
In Tell, 1,500,000 hectares form the dominion of the state, as beylick property; 3,000,000, comprising forest, waste-land,steppes, brushwood, rocks, river and torrent beds, and ravines, were the reputed property of the Mussulman community( Bled-el-Islam ) because they had not been the object of any individual, family, or collective appropriation.
5,000,000 hectares , called arch , were appropriated to the tribes, by title of joint occupancy.
8,000,000 hectares , called melk , of traditional Roman origin, might be held to constitute private individual property.
1,500,000 hectares , also melk , of Mussulman origin, were only family appropriations, over which a paramount claim wasreserved to the sovereign.
In the Sahara, 3,000,000 hectares, of oasis or kesour , gained by the labour of man from the desert, were private property,conformably to mussulman law, as waste lands brought under cultivation.
28,000,000 hectares of common land, especially the alfa districts, were classed among the property of the mussulmancommunity, in default of reclamation, or individual, or collective appropriation.
