No abstract

This article studies gender roles in the economic decision-making of peasant farms in Southwest Finland in the late eighteenth century and the early nineteenth century. This is a new perspective on enclosure and a new context to study gender roles in economic matters. Decisions concerning enclosure were primarily made by male household heads. Exceptions to the decision-making norm open up a perspective onto a more detailed picture of gendered responsibility in economic matters in peasant households. The results show that the responsibility of a male head of a household for making decisions regarding the land was binding. Whereas men used representatives in extremely exceptional circumstances only, a half of the female household heads used a representative at least at some point. Both men and women primarily trusted the younger generation when it came to choosing representatives. Women attended enclosure meetings rarely, but when they did, their participation was not questioned. Women acted just like other stakeholders at the meeting.

This article examines peasants’ goals and means of negotiation in the reallocation of land or enclosure reform called storskifte in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century in Southwest Finland. It stresses the agency of peasants and their actions in the quest for best practices. The study is based on the meeting minutes of the storskifte reform of 230 villages with mainly freeholders or crown tenants as stakeholders. This article shows how peasants balanced between individualism and collectivism in their decision making because their goals were opposite. They aimed to increase the freedom of work and decision making in the household economy. At the same time, the cooperation with neighbours was an important method of decreasing the workload and costs of farming. Sources indicate that peasants made agreements with each other so they could combine both goals. They achieved independence as farmers as well as low costs by combining consolidation of land with mutual agreements about cooperation in specific issues, but they allowed each other to do individual decisions, too. This kind of flexible solution-seeking behaviour provides a new perspective on the discussion about peasants and agricultural change.