Page 63 - Mocarelli, Luca, and Aleksander Panjek. Eds. 2020. Maize to the People! Cultivation, Consumption and Trade in the North-Eastern Mediterranean (Sixteenth-Nineteenth Century). Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 63
maize in umbr ia (centr al italy)
reals, with the peaks of production of 62% and 67% in 1811 and 1820 respec-
tively. These high rates lasted a long time, since from 1868 to 1879 maize still
represented 55% of the cereal crops on this family’s properties. This is an in-
disputable demonstration of the relevance of the maize crops, though a fur-
ther investigation is still needed in order to better understand the farming
choices of any single landowner. Unfortunately, this research did not con-
sider the production choices of the small owners, with reference to both the
owners who lived in a composite rural society as well as those who owned
agricultural plots close to their homes. In order to draw a wider picture
combining both larger and smaller production strategies, it will be neces-
sary to broaden this research by including data from the accounting books
of other local properties, regardless of their dimension. It will be further
necessary to analyse not only the general trend, but also the choices made
by any single producer, both large and small ones, as well as urban and ru-
ral ones, in order to adapt their activities to the commercial policies im-
posed by the public authorities during the nineteenth century (Pescosolido
2004, 100-102).
In any case, the existing documentation concerning large farms al-
lows us to examine other examples of cereal cultivation practices, such as
the case of the beni adiacenti property, a cultivated land owned by the San
Pietro monastery in Perugia. As the name reveals (beni adiacenti = adjacent
properties), this property consisted of the cultivated lands located just out-
side the religious building and therefore considered a privileged asset, man-
aged with special care for the introduction of the latest agricultural inno-
vations. On this property, in fact, the production scenario was much more
diversified than one could imagine, with a variety of cereal crops which in-
cluded wheat, maize and durum wheat (grano duro). By comparing the vol-
umes of the Casalina company’s production with those of the beni adiacen-
ti, it is possible to observe that in quantitative terms the first company was
undoubtedly the larger one, while the second company prevailed in terms of
wheat and durum wheat production, two kinds of cereals traditionally em-
ployed in the pasta industry. The beni adiacenti company therefore demon-
strates a much more varied cereal production, combining different wheats
and maize, together with the search for a finer quality in order to satisfy
the demand of the nascent pasta factories. Evidence of the presence of these
three cereals on the beni adiacenti lands dates back to the early nineteenth
century and, though it needs to be confirmed by further research, it suggests
that this company had adopted a diversified production strategy that, be-
61
reals, with the peaks of production of 62% and 67% in 1811 and 1820 respec-
tively. These high rates lasted a long time, since from 1868 to 1879 maize still
represented 55% of the cereal crops on this family’s properties. This is an in-
disputable demonstration of the relevance of the maize crops, though a fur-
ther investigation is still needed in order to better understand the farming
choices of any single landowner. Unfortunately, this research did not con-
sider the production choices of the small owners, with reference to both the
owners who lived in a composite rural society as well as those who owned
agricultural plots close to their homes. In order to draw a wider picture
combining both larger and smaller production strategies, it will be neces-
sary to broaden this research by including data from the accounting books
of other local properties, regardless of their dimension. It will be further
necessary to analyse not only the general trend, but also the choices made
by any single producer, both large and small ones, as well as urban and ru-
ral ones, in order to adapt their activities to the commercial policies im-
posed by the public authorities during the nineteenth century (Pescosolido
2004, 100-102).
In any case, the existing documentation concerning large farms al-
lows us to examine other examples of cereal cultivation practices, such as
the case of the beni adiacenti property, a cultivated land owned by the San
Pietro monastery in Perugia. As the name reveals (beni adiacenti = adjacent
properties), this property consisted of the cultivated lands located just out-
side the religious building and therefore considered a privileged asset, man-
aged with special care for the introduction of the latest agricultural inno-
vations. On this property, in fact, the production scenario was much more
diversified than one could imagine, with a variety of cereal crops which in-
cluded wheat, maize and durum wheat (grano duro). By comparing the vol-
umes of the Casalina company’s production with those of the beni adiacen-
ti, it is possible to observe that in quantitative terms the first company was
undoubtedly the larger one, while the second company prevailed in terms of
wheat and durum wheat production, two kinds of cereals traditionally em-
ployed in the pasta industry. The beni adiacenti company therefore demon-
strates a much more varied cereal production, combining different wheats
and maize, together with the search for a finer quality in order to satisfy
the demand of the nascent pasta factories. Evidence of the presence of these
three cereals on the beni adiacenti lands dates back to the early nineteenth
century and, though it needs to be confirmed by further research, it suggests
that this company had adopted a diversified production strategy that, be-
61
