One of the most developed states of the Mesopotamia in the IV – III millennium.
N. There were two types of economic organization: Eastern and ancient slavery
Both Eastern and ancient slavery had common features: the technology of manual labor with individual and joint tools, the leading role of agriculture and subsistence farming, non-economic coercion as a means of organizing and appropriating social labor.
In the IV millennium BC. Slavery originated in ancient Egypt. This was due to the favorable strategic and geographical location of these lands. In particular, agriculture developed in the irrigated valleys of the Nile. Another important branch of the economy was animal husbandry. The Egyptians learned to make copper knives, axes, arrowheads, utensils. But the greatest economic achievement of Ancient Egypt was the irrigation system of agriculture. Only large free agricultural communities could build this complex hydraulic complex, maintain it, and produce surplus agricultural products.
Since in the north developed mainly livestock, and in the south – agriculture, between these areas there is a lively trade. The Sinai Peninsula, Nubia, and Libya, which were conquered by Egypt, became involved in market relations. Merchants traded in gold, silver, copper, tin, leather, ivory, wood, and slaves. There were markets in the country where slaves were freely bought and sold. The largest slave owners were the pharaohs, who brought prisoners from the conquered countries. There was also debt slavery. Nevertheless, the main productive force in Egypt were the peasants-communists, and slaves were used by their owners as servants. In 525 BC. Egypt was conquered by the Persians.
The area of Eastern slavery includes the territory of Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia). Like the Nile in Egypt, here the Tigris and Euphrates, overflowing, generously fertilized the fields. At the same time, in order to protect the land from flooding, it was necessary to build powerful flood dams and other irrigation facilities. The most common crops here were barley, millet, flax, peas, onions, garlic, cucumbers, grapes, figs, dates, apple trees. The growth of agricultural production stimulated the development of crafts and trade. One of the most developed states of the Mesopotamia in the IV – III millennium BC. BC was Sumer.
In the third millennium BC, there were few slaves in Sumer, slavery had the status of patriarchal, that is, slaves had the right to start a family and even redeem themselves from captivity. At the end of III millennium BC. BC in Mesopotamia formed a powerful centralized Babylonian kingdom. It reached its greatest development under King Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC). The main branch of the Babylonian economy was agriculture. Under Hammurabi, grand canals were built. Foreign and domestic trade has developed significantly. Babylonian merchants exported dates, figs (figs), grain, wool, handicrafts, and imported slaves, luxuries, wood, metals, and stone. There was usury.
https://123helpme.me/write-my-lab-report/
The economy of Eastern slavery is also characteristic of ancient India and China. Already in the IV millennium BC. In the Indus Valley, irrigated agriculture was born and animal husbandry developed. There are craft cities, trade. Tools were made of both metal (copper, bronze) and stone. Potters were famous for their pottery, weavers – cotton fabrics. The invasion of the conquerors for some time slowed down the economic activities of local residents. In the II – I millennium BC. BC there is a rapid rise in the economy of the Indo-Gangetic plain. Iron tools are mainly used.
In irrigated fields, two crops were harvested per year, cultivating sugar cane, wheat, millet, flax, cotton, and rice. Developed crafts. Blacksmiths, metallurgists, weavers, jewelers, potters, carvers, and others appeared. Entire areas of India joined the barter trade – Kashmir traded wool, the Himalayas – gold, Punjab – horses, the South – precious stones, the East – elephants, etc. There were professional merchants, including moneylenders. Money circulation was weak, and real coins appeared in the form of ingots with the seal only in the V century. BC Slavery was patriarchal in nature, and the rural community continued to dominate the country’s economy.
In conclusion, it should be noted that the countries of the Ancient East were characterized by the sustainability of the rural community and state ownership of land. The community sought to prevent the development of private land ownership. The main sphere of economic life – agriculture – remained outside of slave production. Only partially the labor of slaves was used for tillage, especially in the system of royal and temple economy.
The main sources of slavery were wars, piracy, debt slavery. The labor of slaves was used unilaterally and was unproductive, it was used to serve slave owners, in the construction of pyramids, canals, etc. Eastern slavery was not a classic. Community and slave-owning elements intertwined here.
06.10.2011
Economic condition of the economy of Ukraine in the second half of the XVII-XVIII centuries. Abstract
Shifts in agriculture testified to the formation of qualitatively new relations in the economic community of the Ukrainian people, to the relentless development in the depths of the old feudal system of the capitalist system.
The evolution of social relations and the development of Ukraine’s economy in the period of late feudalism took place in complex, ambiguous socio-political conditions. On the one hand, the unification of Ukraine with the Russian state in 1654 contributed to the accelerated development of productive forces in agriculture, handicrafts and crafts, the rise of manufacturing and the growth of cities as large administrative and cultural centers. On the other hand, the negative role of tsarism in the historical destiny of Ukrainians cannot be denied.
After the death of B. Khmelnytsky (1657), the situation was complicated by the struggle between the pro-Moscow and pro-Polish groups of officers and gentry. The forces that advocated an alliance with Moscow won. Military action between Ukraine and Poland continued. However, even under these conditions, the objective process of the formation of the Ukrainian nation took place, and its economic community was strengthened.
At that time, in the depths of the dominant subsistence economy, the signs of bourgeois society were maturing more and more clearly. First of all, they manifested themselves in the basis of the Ukrainian economy – agriculture.
After 1648, when the territory of Ukraine was liberated from Polish aristocratic rule, there were changes in land relations. Polish magnates, gentry, and tenants were expelled from Ukraine, and their lands, working cattle, and stock were transferred to the Cossacks, peasants, and burghers by way of zaimanschina. The legislation of the Commonwealth lost its force, and the peasants became free landowners.
B. Khmelnytsky tried to prevent the restoration of large feudal landholdings. He refused to let magnates into Ukraine, and Catholic feudal lords were not allowed to come to their estates.
Finally, on the territory of the Ukrainian state, the filwark-serfdom system of management, land ownership of the crown, Polish and Ukrainian magnates and gentry, and the Catholic Church were liquidated after the victory at Batoh (1652). The main part of the liberated territories, as well as uninhabited lands passed to the national fund, which was owned by the Treasury of the Zaporozhian Army. The supreme administrator of the land was the hetman, on the ground commanded by colonels and centurions. The lands of Orthodox monasteries and the higher clergy, petty gentry, Cossacks and burghers remained in private possession.
An important consequence of the war of liberation was the growth of the Cossacks and its transformation into a privileged separate state, legally free. The Cossacks were given the right to live freely in towns and villages, to engage in handicrafts, trade, and crafts, and were exempt from taxes. The main duty was military service. More than half of the population of Ukraine considered themselves Cossacks.
The contradictory nature of Cossack property is emphasized in the historical and economic literature. It is defined as corporate, because the bearer of property was not an individual, but a corporation of Cossacks in the person of the Zaporozhian Army. Only after joining the army, the Cossack received the right of Cossack ownership of the land he owned before. Cossacks could freely sell and buy land, establish settlements, economically realize a monopoly on land ownership. Neither the government nor the local administration could interfere in Cossack land ownership, confiscate land, even when the children were taken care of by a widow when she was a child. At the same time, the right of land ownership was conditional (official), was limited to military service at his own expense in favor of the Zaporozhian Army. Some researchers believe that the full unlimited hereditary property of the Cossacks was private in nature and legally did not differ from the gentry land ownership.
Eldership began to take shape, which existed in two forms: private (hereditary) and rank (temporary). The foreman increased land tenure through zaimanshchina, buying land from the Cossacks, peasants. He sold land and military treasure. As a reward for serving in the Cossack army, the sergeant received the “rank” (position) of land, villages and towns from the state land fund. These were temporary possessions similar to Western European benefits.
The liberation war changed the situation of the peasants. They achieved personal freedom, the right to change their place of residence, to freely join the Cossack state. Peasants living on the lands of the national fund were under the rule of centurions and depended on the policy of the hetman. Peasants considered their land with the right to dispose of and inherit, buy, sell. They used fields, forests, meadows, hayfields, rivers, lakes, cultivated the land without state regulation and freely disposed of the results of labor.
The responsibilities of peasants living on private and high-ranking lands were defined in the form of “habitual obedience” and rarely “robotism.” Labor rent was replaced by cash rent.
In the historical and economic literature there is no single point of view on the nature of peasant land ownership. It is believed that the land belonged to the peasants of free military villages and towns on the property rights.
user user 未分類 Nyc Condition Gaming Commission Prizes Licenses for a few Upstate Casinos Por Becky Upham El 11 de marzo de 2019 es la mejor nueva esperanza para la depresión de la ketamina