Pylos Regional Archaeological Project, Part VI: administration and settlement in Venetian Navarino

Hesperia, Wntr, 2004 by Siriol Davis

   Provenendo il modo della sussistenza tutta di quasi il corpo
   intiero de cittadini habitanti a Cavallaria e Ligudista dal
   tratto de vini, che sono di loro special ragione non havendo ne
   terreni da grano, ne ogli, ne mercatura, ne altra industria, si
   supplica, com'e anco di costume nell'altre parti del Regno, che
   non sia posta a niuni stessi alcuna servitu, ma habbiano i loro
   padroni la liberta di venderli conforme al proprio interesse;
   ben quelli che saranno condotti nel borgo, o piazza habbino a
   dipender dalle stime de giustitieri. (132)

   Since almost the entire body of citizens resident in Cavallaria
   and Ligudista derive their means of subsistence from the sale of
   wines, which are their private property, as they have neither land
   for cereals, nor oil, nor business, nor any other industry, it
   is requested that, as is the custom in other parts of the kingdom,
   the wines should not be subject to any duty, but their owners
   should be free to sell them according to their own interest;
   although those which are conducted into the suburb or piazza
   should be dependent on the valuation of the justices.

This claim by the villagers to have no property except vines is interesting, especially in light of the provveditore's comment that oil was an important part of the villages' revenue. The reason for their apparent lack of access to olive trees will become clear in the discussion of land distribution.

LAND DISTRIBUTION

In this section I turn to the issue of land distribution and agricultural labor. Careful comparison of information derived from census, taxation, and property records allows us to create a detailed picture of the extent of cultivation and the settlement pattern in this period. While space does not allow a full analysis of the data, examples are given and the strengths and weaknesses of the sources discussed. The letters of Venetian administrators also allow us a glimpse into terms of labor and distribution of resources between immigrant settlers and the native population. Finally, a preliminary comparison with Ottoman data allows us to fill in some of the gaps in the Venetian sources and draw more concrete conclusions about the spatial distribution of cultivated areas.

Reports of the Venetian authorities suggest that, prior to their arrival, the Turks controlled the fertile land in the coastal plains, while Christians only held property in the mountains, yet there is some documentary evidence from the northern Peloponnese of Christian property-holding in the plains, suggesting that the reality was more complex. (133) The evidence presented here demonstrates how Venetian policies of land distribution perpetuated the preexisting pattern of estates on the plains cultivated by sharecroppers, while villages of independent households inland, with little access to arable land, derived their income primarily from vineyards under their control. The ability of local people to acquire property nearer the sea, through renting public land, was curtailed by the termination of tenancies in favor of concessions to immigrants from Chios. While there were a number of deserted villages around the Bay of Navarino, the land within their borders was still under cultivation by neighboring villages. There is evidence for abandonment of the vineyards in the plain, however, that may be related to the question of exemption from public services discussed above. Both Venetian and Ottoman sources indicate reduced cultivation in this period compared to levels during the preconquest era.