Page 195 - Panjek, Aleksander, Jesper Larsson and Luca Mocarelli, eds. 2017. Integrated Peasant Economy in a Comparative Perspective: Alps, Scandinavia and Beyond. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 195
dlands as a source of income integration in peasant economies: the pontifical state
Table 8.1: Table of the Italian forest legislation (18th–19thcenturies)
Kingdom of Sardinia 1770 1822–1833
Kingdom of Lombardy–Venetia 1811
Duchy of Parma and Piacenza 1776–1780
Duchy of Modena 1789 1842–1853
Duchy of Lucca 1759 1846
Grand Duchy of Tuscany
Pontifical State 1821–1839–1845
Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
1805
1811–1819–1826
Source: Sansa 2000, 3. Note: The Republic of Venice is not included in the list as it repre-
sented an early case of forest legislation, starting from the late Middle Ages (Di Bérenger
1863; Cacciavillani 1984; Appuhn 2010)
In the Pontifical State the first forest law, also known as the Boncom-
pagni edict, was promulgated in 1789, and was followed by the Consalvi
edict in 1805. These laws provided that all cutting in the forest should be
approved by the Pope himself. Such a statement was of a more formal than
substantial nature, because the Pope just assented to the decision previous-
ly formulated by the Secretariat of State for internal affairs. The exercise of
the jus lignandi by rural populations should have been limited exclusive-
ly to the harvesting of wood that had fallen onto the ground, the so called
“dead wood”, Sansa (2000; 2003). After a first stage of uncertainty concern-
ing the procedure for implementing laws, also due to the transfer of the pa-
pal territories into the Napoleonic empire, it was stated that the Tribunale
della sacra consulta (Tribunal of the holy consult), the highest State court,
which judged political offences and, on appeal, the main criminal offences,
became the competent court dealing with forest offences. Several trials for
illegal tree cutting can be noticed in the collection of the court’s sentences,
from which information about forest offences have been provided.
The matter of rural population’s rights restrictions, concerning the
possibility of supplying timber, met with Karl Marx’s drastic stance. Marx,
in one of his first political-economical writings in the Rheinesche Zeitung,
protested harshly against what he defined as a criminalisation of peasants’
customs:
Even the pilfering of fallen wood or the gathering of dry wood is in-
cluded under the heading of theft and punished as severely as the
193
Table 8.1: Table of the Italian forest legislation (18th–19thcenturies)
Kingdom of Sardinia 1770 1822–1833
Kingdom of Lombardy–Venetia 1811
Duchy of Parma and Piacenza 1776–1780
Duchy of Modena 1789 1842–1853
Duchy of Lucca 1759 1846
Grand Duchy of Tuscany
Pontifical State 1821–1839–1845
Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
1805
1811–1819–1826
Source: Sansa 2000, 3. Note: The Republic of Venice is not included in the list as it repre-
sented an early case of forest legislation, starting from the late Middle Ages (Di Bérenger
1863; Cacciavillani 1984; Appuhn 2010)
In the Pontifical State the first forest law, also known as the Boncom-
pagni edict, was promulgated in 1789, and was followed by the Consalvi
edict in 1805. These laws provided that all cutting in the forest should be
approved by the Pope himself. Such a statement was of a more formal than
substantial nature, because the Pope just assented to the decision previous-
ly formulated by the Secretariat of State for internal affairs. The exercise of
the jus lignandi by rural populations should have been limited exclusive-
ly to the harvesting of wood that had fallen onto the ground, the so called
“dead wood”, Sansa (2000; 2003). After a first stage of uncertainty concern-
ing the procedure for implementing laws, also due to the transfer of the pa-
pal territories into the Napoleonic empire, it was stated that the Tribunale
della sacra consulta (Tribunal of the holy consult), the highest State court,
which judged political offences and, on appeal, the main criminal offences,
became the competent court dealing with forest offences. Several trials for
illegal tree cutting can be noticed in the collection of the court’s sentences,
from which information about forest offences have been provided.
The matter of rural population’s rights restrictions, concerning the
possibility of supplying timber, met with Karl Marx’s drastic stance. Marx,
in one of his first political-economical writings in the Rheinesche Zeitung,
protested harshly against what he defined as a criminalisation of peasants’
customs:
Even the pilfering of fallen wood or the gathering of dry wood is in-
cluded under the heading of theft and punished as severely as the
193
