Domov

Home is the dwelling where a person resides, but in connotation it is much more. It is about what and how we do various activities, it is about family activities and interactions. It is about what we value. Homes form a basic and integral part of a culture. It is about how space (house) becomes a place (home). Space becomes place, according to geographer Yi Fu Tuan, when we endow with value. A Home is a recognition of the valued endowed in the space by the people that reside there. This post will be about some of the daily activities in 17th to 19th century Bohemia which will shed light on our Bohemian ancestors.  This is the fourth in a series of posts on 17th to 19th century Bohemia. My first post was generally about serfs, or peasants in Bohemia and how my ancestors fit and worked within that system.  The second post was about their farms and land they controlled, and the third post was about house numbering and construction. While the prior posts provided an indication of daily life, this post will flush out their daily activities more than what was accomplished in any of the prior posts. My Bohemian ancestors were all from small villages or towns (as I suspect so too were my wife's Bohemian ancestors) and all of mine from southwest Bohemia. They were farmers, and farming was the primary activity of most serfs.  

1844 Baptism/Birth Record in Bohemia of my Wife's
2nd Great Grandfather, Frantisek Vondracek
He arrived in the US in 1864 with Parents and some of his Siblings
Source: Trebon Archives

I suspect we tend to think of life in the 17th to 19th centuries as involving a great deal of drudgery and danger.  After all modern conveniences we have today were few. There were no computers, phones, televisions or radios, there were no cars, and few had even a horse. Even the scrub board, to assist with washing clothes, was not invented until 1797. Pound on rocks it was. Medical care, if any, was rudimentary, and probably involved more bleeding than anything else. Mobility and technology, however, all have limits, and (as I write this on a laptop) we may become overly dependent on technology.  As one commentator said: "Our ancestors may not have had cash money, but life for many was pleasant." Perhaps we Americans think too much about money as a measure of success and capabilities. Food and survival from disease and other hardships in the centuries past would take a toll, but quite frankly such life experiences were not uncommon in that era. 

Rosalie Belenka Duscheck (left)
2nd Great Grandmother
Arrived in the US about 1855
Source: Family Archives

As primarily farmers, our ancestors of that era would have grown and produced much of their own food. The diet was not unlike other Eastern European countries, with good amounts of dumplings, potatoes, and meats--in particular the organ meats such as kidney, liver, and brains.  Little, if anything went to waste, and it is probably the reason why one does not really want to know what goes into the sausages (intestines as the casing) that they would have made. As noted in an earlier post, breakfast was mainly a porridge while stews and soups were common for the large late afternoon meal. Potatoes were also a common part of the diet, but they were not grown in Bohemia until their introduction from America which occurred in southern Bohemia about the 1770's. Other root crops, like potatoes, rutabagas and parsnips also likely played a large role in their diet. Potatoes would store well and were heavy in carbs. Potatoes grown on the farm would be supplemented by other crops common to the era, wheat, rye and barley. Gardens, as discussed in an earlier post had to be fenced to keep out rabbits, and fruit trees berry plants and other perennial plants were subject to deer grazing, particularly in the winter months as deer scavenged for food by the village.  Of course, the prized meat was game: deer, elk, hare and perhaps a bear, but the lord hired persons to patrol their lands to assure no poaching occurred. Domains liked the animals for themselves, probably so they could hang the hide or use it as a rug. That does not mean a farmer perhaps did not catch a Peter Rabbit in, or outside, his garden to have for dinner some night. 

My Wife's 2nd Great Grandparents
Francis Vondracek with his wife, Anna Kabat Vondracek
Source: Shirley Goff

Each village usually had a pond, and also a stream nearby.  The pond provided water for fire fighting and the domesticated ducks and geese would have gathered around the pond for the day. Keeping fires under control was of great importance and is probably why the code requirement for masonry came into being. A fire in the village may not only destroy homes, but also crops and forests. I doubt the pond was used as a source of potable water.   

Dolni Chrastany
Source: Stable Cadastre Survey 1837

Our ancestors would process most of their own food, or take, for example, wheat to the mill, one of which may have been near Ratiborova Lhota, since its German name means flour mill.  Woodlots were important not just for lumber, but for sources of timber to use in crafting furniture, and making homemade equipment such as butter churns, grain and water troughs for the animals, bowls, grain bins, and spinning wheels. Often cookie molds and butter molds were out of wood or clay, with the favorite butter mold being the shape of a lamb, in reference to the Lamb of God. My great grandmother Amelia Duschack Hovel, who was born in the US, had a spinning wheel that is with a relative in Manly, IA. Wood was also used to make household sugar scoops, meat tenderizers among other items common today. Some utensils may have been made out of iron, copper or brass. One of my distant ancestors was a cobbler and he may well have made shoes out of wood. Wood clogs were not in use only in Amsterdam. Even the glass maker would use beech wood as a device to hold the molten glass. The flour mill and the machines requiring large gears would have the gears made of wood, think the flour mill.  The flour provided carbs which was important to the diet due to the high amount of physical activity during the day.

House at 18 Dolni Chrastany, 1993
Photo by M.B. Hovel

Carbs is also a reason why beer was important, with their heavy work loads in the fields, people needed a carb load for energy. I would not be surprised that our ancestors made their own beer, but I doubt they used the equipment and flavoring methods we use today. Once a village reached ten homes it was required to have a tavern. They knew the importance of what we in the planning world call a third place. They liked to socialize as many did in the pre-pandemic world of today. One of the largest adjustments for farmers from Bohemia who emigrated to the United States was the isolation felt due to differences in settlement patterns. In the US, farm residences were each on their own plot, of say 160 acres and the nearest home could be at least a quarter or half mile distant. This is one of the reasons that so many Bohemian associations were created in the US.  However, there was also the issue of acculturation and I suspect that may have played a larger role. Many would have arrived not knowing English or the WASP cultural customs common to the United States. In fact, Eastern Europeans were subjected to prejudice from the predominant WASP culture, and it was a double whammy if you were Catholic. The varied associations allowed them to retain part of their heritage in a foreign land, and ease assimilation. Think about how few likely knew English.  My cousin says that my grandmother's mother never spoke English, but Czech, while her husband only spoke German. Hence the need for associations to help retain culture and to begin the process of assimilation. 

My Great Grandmother, Teresia Kamen Pitzenberger with my Dad
Arrived in the US in 1872 at age 24.  She traveled alone to the US. 
She spoke mainly Czech
Source: Madalyn Conklin

The tavern, in the old country, was not just for drinking and socializing. In the morning, particularly when robota (which gives us the English word robot) was due, the men would gather at the tavern to get their assignments for the day from the director of the domain. Or, day laborers would find a sedlack for whom they could work for the day. Day laborers had a more difficult life.  After my 3rd great grandmother Teresia (Frantisek's wife, mother of Josef) died in September 1819, Frantisek would remarry Katherina Borovka, whose father, Mathias, was a day laborer. Mathias and his wife Maria would move into the Hawel house at 18 Dolni Chrastany, and live with the family. 

Albert (Vojtech) Vondracek b. 1813
Father of Frantisek (Francis), arrived in the US in 1864
My wife's 3rd Great Grandfather
Source: Shirley Goff

Also important was prayer and faith. While not every village had their own church, they all had a chapel, the size of which depended upon the size of the village. While most attended Sunday Mass at the main church, for Dolni Chrastany, it was in Netolice, the chapel was used for weekday mass and of course baptisms. The church bell, our ancestors version of twitter, would announce births, deaths and fires. Shortly after a baby was born the father would take the infant to find the local priest to have the baby baptized. Who knows, they may even have visited the local tavern. In the parish records the date recorded is usually the date of baptism, which most often comports to the day of birth. Sometimes two dates are provided in the records, the first the birth date and the second the baptismal date. The infant was often baptized the day it was born. The small chapel in Dolni Chrastany, where perhaps my great grandfather and his father were baptized, still stands today. Most notable in a house of that era is what historian and genealogist Eliska Schoenfeld says was called "God's Corner." She says that "God’s Corner was very important. Usually located above the kitchen table it included a crucifix plus glass paintings with religious pictures purchased at pilgrimages. Everyone tried to go on a nearby pilgrimage once a year with certain sites hoped for once in a lifetime."

Martin Hovel prayer book, in German

In the more temperate months  men would work the fields. Women would often use the pleasant weather to work outside weaving or embroidering table cloths and napkins, and even clothes.  During the summer, the dinner table would be decorated with wild flowers. Flowers would be dried in the summer and fall and used for wall hangings in the winter. Trunks, doors and chests of drawers (dressers, as a possible example) would be painted, usually white, with flowers painted on the white back ground. So, too would some of the canisters also be painted. Furniture was usually made of thick logs, and with a heart carved in the back rest. Carvings were added to doors and window areas creating what we today recognize as gingerbread. Perhaps it is the house from where Goldilocks originated. Our ancestors were required to be crafty and resilient.

Katherine Borowka Hawel (Frantisek's second wife) Death Record
Step mother to my 2nd Great Grandfather Joseph Hawel (b 1808),
this record indicates her father, Mathias, was a innmann, day laborer
Source: Trebon Archives

A woman would make and craft her own wedding dress, often spending years on the project and likely hoped she had not gained too much weight. Like the table cloths it was often embroidered linen and it is a dress she would wear to weddings, major church functions and the dress in which she would be buried. Today we can often tell an American by how they are dressed.  Our wardrobes vary little from that of another person in the Midwest or other parts of the US. Schoenfeld, however says that in Bohemia "Men and women loved handsomely embroidered clothes, often with hearts and flowers. Each village had its own style and colors of clothing." Instead of flowers we see the name, or logo, of company imprinted on clothes--Underarmour, Nike, Carhart, to list just three. Our colors relate to our sports teams, UW is red, Michigan is blue, as two examples. In a sense team wear designates a tribe that we are apart, whereas my ancestors clothes distinguished them by the village, their tribe, from which they came. The flowers were a way to light up their world.

Land Register Record of Jakub Hawel
Ratiborova Lhota, 1603
Source: Trebon Archives

A woman would make her dresses, but they made plenty of clothes and other items for the household.  A prized item was pottery, and some may have made pottery themselves or purchased.  A special white clay was found in parts of Southern Bohemia and families would mine the clay to make pottery and decorate the pottery with different glazes. 

Showing why they had so many children, the bed the parents shared was more narrow than today's twin bed. To stay in bed there was a good deal of cuddling. A big difference from our king and queen sized beds of today.  The cradle was by the parents bed, placing both generally in the kitchen, or the living room.  When out of the cradle the children would sleep on the floor in a loft, the living room (depending upon the house) or even on the kitchen floor depending upon the weather.  Having young children in the same room with the parents did not overcome the human nature implicit in the narrowness of the bed. 

Great Grandparents, Martin Hovel, and Amelia Duscheck
Martin arrived in the US with his Parents and Siblings in July 1868
Source: Family archives

While 21st century United States is today far distant in time, place, privileges, and technology from 17th century Bohemia, that does not mean that they did not enjoy life. Life is what you make of it, and our ancestors, even given their station as serfs, would overcome the dangers and drudgery of the circumstances in which they lived.  They had disappointments to be sure, but they used resiliency and creativity to better their lives. Their house became a home by the values they imparted which in part came from the activities of their daily lives.  The next post in my series on the life of our ancestors will focus on a few activities that they probably enjoyed and which assisted in making the dum even more of a domov.  

Sources: 

Eliska Schoenfeld, 1990 Sept. Presentation, Czech workshop in St. Paul, Minnesota. Found at: http://www.oxfordjctgenealogy.com/main/?page_id=208

Trebon Archives

https://sites.google.com/site/johnaricecv/bohemia-and-minas-gerais

https://www.everyculture.com/Cr-Ga/Czech-Republic.html, the below is from this link

Dum

Continuing with the theme of the prior two posts about the life of my ancestors in 18th and 19th century Bohemia, this post will primarily be on house numbering, and their dum (Czech with a little o above the u), or house was like.  One thing is quite clear, these houses may look large, but much of the space was for the animals or farm equipment, not for people. From the varied surveys completed and air photos of today we can get an idea of the houses in which my ancestors lived. My 3rd great grandfather, Frantisek Hawel moved to Dolni Chrastany about the time of his marriage from Ratiborova Lhota, which for all intents and purposes is the ancestral village for the family that provides my surname.  

II Military Survey
Dolni Chrastany

House numbering is a great identifier for houses and associated lots. When I first started working at Fitchburg they had many records filed by parcel number, on the idea that parcel numbers don't change, but an address could. Low and behold, a few years after I started working there the county changed the parcel numbering system.  Luckily the planning and zoning records were filed by address. House numbers are vital to a variety of records today, and were vital to records back in the 18th and 19th century Bohemia. In the latter part of the 18th century we start to see records referring to house numbers. This often gives an easy clue when searching through records as the house number pops out more easily than does the name. I can read the number, but often have trouble reading the name, without in-depth study.

Dolni Chrastany Indication Map, ~1837

Empress Maria Theresia, who ruled from 1740 until her death in 1780, made many prominent reforms to benefit of the peasant class in the Austro-Hungarian empire. In February 1770 she issued a proclamation regarding house numbering. In Bohemia, and other areas of the empire, the system was started in fall of 1770 and completed within about one year. The first number, No. 1, was for a prominent building in the village, perhaps a manor house, or a monastery. The numbering then went counter clockwise. The numbering pattern was determined by an Imperial Committee.  If the village lacked an important house, the committee would probably choose which house would be given the first house number, No. 1.  Of course, there were different settlement patterns and so alterations, or adjustments occurred at the discretion of the committee.  Afterwards, when a new house was constructed the next sequential number was assigned from where the numbering had left off, regardless of position in the village. For example, peasant Joe was granted a right by his domain for control of property and was allowed to build a house in Ratiborova Lhota.  Let's further say the village had 20 house numbers assigned in 1771, and Joe, constructing his house in 1772, is the first to build a house since the numbering system went into effect in 1771.  He builds on a parcel between houses 12 and 13.  His house would be assigned number 21.  Hence a weird break not consistent with our sequential method of assigning addresses. 

Dolni Chrastany, present day house numbering

The following image is of a parish book which contains Ratiborova Lhota among other villages.  The left side of the image is for the last part of 1770 and the first part of 1771.  January 1771 is carried over the right side.  (The full page is not part of the image, but click here to see the full page. ) The prior page in the book did not have a space for a house number. One can see that in the latter part of 1770 the priest has provided a column on the far right side where he is anticipating the house number. In January 1771, on the right, some entries are now including house numbers.  

1770 to 1771 Parish Register 
In Jan. 1771 one can see some house numbers (right edge)
 are starting to be used

The Stable Cadastre Indication maps, discussed in a previous post, provide both parcel and address. In Ratiborova Lhota the Hawel house (see below image), which Frantisek left upon marriage to Teresia Jiral in 1769 was house #15. This seems to have been the Hawel house site back to the early 1600's, and was the house in which Frantisek was born.  As shown in the image below (house #15, parcel #70), this house and associated buildings had more of a J shape, and consequently an almost fully enclosed courtyard.  We know a house was present in 1771 as records indicate the family at the property in the early 17th century (1603). It was, however, the last numbered house in the village as just to its right is house #1 and to its left #14. One clear difference,  to Frantisek's house in Dolni Chrastany is that many of the outer buildings are wood rather than masonry buildings. The only masonry building shown in the stable cadastre is the front portion, a portion of which was probably the main dwelling. While the land associated with house #15 was not owned by a Hawel at the time of the Stable Cadastre that does not mean it was not a relative who owned the property.  

Ratiborova Lhota, Former Hawel House 
on parcel #70, Stable Cadastre Indication Map

Dolni Chrastany's map is easier to read than Ratiborova Lhota. House numbers for the village are in red, the black numbers are parcel numbers (which is funny since the outer lands the parcel numbers are red, and house numbers are black). Given that house 18 is between 17 and 19 we can discern that the house, or a version of the house, was present in 1771 when numbering was assigned. One can see a number of changes since the Stable Cadastre map to present day. The Stable Cadastre shows a long narrow building set to the left side of the lot with two additions or buildings forming an upside down L (as view with north at the top).  

Hawel House Cadastre Survey Final Map
The House is on Parcel #23

In Dolni Chrastany, the former Jiral house is an upside down L and is parcel #23.  Looking closely at the above image with the upside down L, you can see two different colors, one is red and the other yellow.  The red color indicates a brick building and yellow a wood building.  If you compare the 19th century stable cadastre to the present day map you see that a court yard is formed by #18 having built across the front of its property.  The remaining buildings appear to still remain, including the (what then, may not be today) wood upside down L shape remain. However, another masonry building exists to the right side. The 1965 to 1990 real estate map for Dolni Chrastany provides an indication of the buildings that are assigned to house #18 (parcel #23 in the below map).  Since at least the 19th century parcels numbers have not changed in Dolni Chrastany, unlike here in Dane County when they changed in the 1990's. 

Present day#18 (parcel #23)
Unlike Dane Co., WI these parcel numbers have
not changed since at least the 1830's.

Josef Hawel and his family departed Dolni Chrastany 31 years after the completion of the Stable Cadastre in 1837 for Dolni Chrastany.  The second military survey (completed from 1836- 1852) shows an arrangement similar to the 1837 map. Josef may have put the addition on the house, but perhaps it is more likely to have been completed by a later owner.  The addition, with the first narrow but deep house is what is prominent in the 1993 photo of the former family home. The house now spans side yard to side yard. This 1993 photo seems to show a home with a stucco coating. 

Hawel House 18 Dolni Chrastnay
Photo by MB Hovel, 1993
The house was not this wide in 1837

But, what about construction of the home, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries? Original Bohemian construction was of wood timbers, often square timbers. Square timber construction was particularly in use in the later part of the 17th century. These log homes, with white chinking, would have probably had a dirt floor, and open fire. Wood homes usually had thatched or grass roofs.  Thatch roofs in a cold climate requiring heat probably posed a major fire issue. The log home was built on a stone foundation.  However, at some point masonry construction, rock, stucco, or perhaps from adobe bricks, became the norm. The adobe bricks could have been homemade.  One commentator indicates that the move to masonry homes was by order of Maria Theresa. There is also a construction method  using wood forms and stamping clay down between the forms with mallets to form the walls.  The forms would be moved up the wall as the height of the wall advanced as the clay was compacted. Masonry homes generally had clay tile as the roofing material, but the interior support was most likely wood beams and joists. Whichever method of construction, the walls were probably much thicker than what we see in stick built homes of today.  With all the masonry there would have been good sound deadening capabilities. Windows were generally double pane, with one window flush with the inside wall, and the other flush with the outside wall, so no window sill. It may be possible that masonry, or stucco cladding occurred over the original timber construction. Dirt floors, common in early homes gradually gave way to wood plank or clay tile flooring.  Clay flooring was particularly in use in the kitchen due to the open fire or wood stove.  

Small Log Home in Slovakia
Image from Czech Genealogy for Beginners

Most houses had an interior courtyard, but that is not the case with the Hawel house as one side was partially open to the street.  An enclosed courtyard came to be in place sometime after the second military survey. Thus, the Hawel dum had an adaptation from the standard plan, which, looking at Dolni Chrastany was not untypical. The following floor plans show interior courtyards (of plans I am able to locate) and most closely resemble the Hawel house. Simply place some of the right-hand farm buildings to the left beyond the house, leave part of a right-hand building in place and you get close to the Hawel home. The wood structures may have been the three sided buildings with a roof, for storage and some animals. Orientation of the spaces is not necessarily as important as what is going on in the home. Further down in the post are two floor plans with the room designation in red.  

 Log House in 2016 in Rtyne, Bohemia
dates from about 1547-1548
For source and more information see this link

The living quarters was comprised of perhaps two to three rooms, with the living room serving as a bedroom. From looking at the "outbuildings" on Google maps I surmise that the Hawel house in Dolni Chrastany was probably 20 to 22 feet in width.  Depth of the living quarters is more difficult to contemplate. Mapping shows us that the length of the two main legs for the "out" buildings was nearly 200 feet. For many peasants the house was occupied by a great number of people--the family, usually extended family, and for some sedlacks, probably some workers and their families. Most peasant homes would only have one living room/bedroom. Not much space for privacy, and it is a wonder the families were so big. 

Plan 1

Plan 2
Plan 1 and 2 from: Czech Genealogy for Beginners.

Floor plan 2 is of interest, since we know that Frantisek Hawel, at the time of his death in 1847 was living in what was termed the outer house, which would be the ancillary dwelling unit, which in plan 2 is to the lower right, marked secondary dwelling.  They still would have joined the family for meals in the kitchen, or perhaps in the living room/bedroom. As today, the kitchen was the focal point of the house.

As the focal point of the house, where the cooking, cleaning and eating was usually done, the kitchen was the one room that had heat. Light for the kitchen would come from a large window.  The kitchen cooking, and the heating for the home would generally come from a kuchyne, or open fire. The floor around the open fire, originally of dirt would later become clay tile.  A wood beam would likely have existed at the ceiling, and a conical shaped chimney would have been at that point.  Clearly, the chance of fires was great, and that likely led to the proclamation for primarily masonry construction. Wood stoves did not start to appear in peasant homes in Bohemia until the first third of the 19th century, so say about 1800 to 1835. Frantisek would likely have spent most of his life in a home with an open fire.  Although, I have heard from others that some of their descendants from Eastern Europe had open fire until the 20th century. If the family, being sedlacks, changed from open to wood stove in about 1815, most of Josef's (born 1808) life would have been with an wood stove.  

Cross Section of a typical Bohemian Home
with Open Fire, see chimney and ceiling shape
(#'s 10 and 11)
Source: Vernacular Architecture in Czech Villages

Given that they were peasants in a climate not unlike that of Wisconsin, the house required heating, and the open fire or wood stove would have provided the method of heat.  What they used to heat with may have been wood, or soft coal, or perhaps a combination.  Frantisek died of lungenshut, often referred to as lung sickness. if he had TB, it probably would have been marked as consumption. However, another theory is that the burning of soft brown coal for heat may have been part of the issue. Brown coal was a common heat source in Eastern Europe. The breathing in of the toxic fumes may well have led to his lung disease.  

Ratiborova Lhota, Stable Cadastre Indication Map
(German name Melhutka) about 1837

As sedlack peasant farmers, the Hawel family in Dolni Chrastany could probably afford a stove earlier than peasants on the lower rungs of the socio-economic scale in Eastern Europe. The stove would have decreased the chances of fire, even in cases of masonry construction, and the ability to suffer from a lung disorder. As I write this, on a Monday, sitting in a house with forced air heat and is about 65 degrees, with an outdoor temperature below zero, I can only imagine what it have been like living in the cold rooms of Bohemia with little heat, but that produced from an open fire, and maybe later a stove.  I am sure they had a lot of blankets to keep them warm.  Perhaps the blankets muffled the sound of nocturnal marital activity. More important than the house and its construction are the activities of the family and residents of the dum (house), that lead to it being a domov (home). Making a dum a domov is on what a future blog post will focus.

Sources:

http://czechgenealogy.nase-koreny.cz/2015/08/houses-of-our-ancestors-part-i-farm.html

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850065_Vernacular_architecture_in_Czech_villages

http://www.oxfordjctgenealogy.com/main/?page_id=208

Cadastre Survey (~1837)

II Military Survey

Hide

Today when we think of hide we think of concealing something, or the hide of animal. In Bohemia, in past centuries, hide described something completely different. My prior blog post discussed how far back in time I have found the ancestors from whom my surname is derived, but more importantly their involvement the serf system of 18th and 19th century Bohemia. The Hovel (Havel, Hawel, Hawle) family has been traced to the Bohemian Village of Ratiborova Lhota. My third great grandfather, Frantisek, would marry Teresia Jiral from the nearby Village of Dolni Chrastany in 1796, and it is in Dolni Chrastany where he would remain until his death and where my second great grandfather, Josef would buy out his farm and then in 1868 decide to emigrate to the United States. This post will focus on the farms and land controlled by these peasant farmers. Cultures vary on descriptors for land and area of land, in rural Bohemia of the 18th and 19th century they used hide.  

First Military Survey (18th century) of Dolni Chrastany
Unter Groschum in German

A hide, a measure of area, had two different measures, one is equivalent to about 33 acres and the other to about 45 acres. The equivalent to 45 acres seems to be the one used in rural areas of Bohemia. Only a small percent of Bohemians lived in urban areas, and therefore the small rural villages were the mainstay of Bohemian life. One cannot call the rural serfs of Bohemia the economic engine since few markets existed for their products. They provided in-kind contributions to the lord and mainly fed themselves. Larger farmers also tended have more sons. A typical serf farmer had about 5 to 10 acres of land, so under a quarter hide.  These lord-dominated cultures also had different terms to not only describe the different farmers, but also day laborers, live-in laborers and their families (who probably were never paid, but given shelter, food, and other essentials) among others involved in the agricultural operation. 

Stable Cadastre (19th century)
showing Dolni Chrastany

To be considered a sedlak, the highest level of serf farmer in Bohemia, one had to have control of  at least a quarter hide of land.  Hence, a sedlak would need to have over 11 acres in "ownership".  The thing is, given parcel delineation, a sedlak, or any farmer, often had several parcels in varied locations around the village. Woodlots, steep hills and marshes, the prime farmland, the idea was, would be more equitably distributed by the long narrow parcels. While the serfs paid for the right to use the land as their own, that long-term lease described in the prior post, they were always at the behest of the lord. Their earthly lord could giveth could taketh away.  For example, if the lord felt the farm was being run down or not sufficiently productive the lord could claim back the rights given. 

Second Military Survey (19th century) of Dolni Chrastany
Unter Groschum in German

At the time of his death in 1802 Matheus Hawel, the father of Frantisek, had been living in the family home in Ratiborova Lhota.  His death record notes him as a Sedlak, which is the highest level of peasant serf farmer. Sedlaks were comparatively better off than the lower classes of peasant farmer. This does not mean he was the first Hawel to be a sedlak, but it is the first known reference I have been able to interpret. Therefore, we can conclude that he would have had a minimum of a quarter hide, or say at least eleven acres of property under his control.  

Hlavatce final Stable Cadastre map

The best method to determine land holdings is from the Stable Cadastre (1826-1843) maps produced by the Austro-Hungarian Empire for taxation purposes.  The purpose of this survey was to provide a more equitable taxation measure for the Empire based on land quality for agricultural production.  The Empire had high expenses due to the little General of France having tried to conquer the world, and the Austro-Hungarian Emperor realized the need to offset the war costs and other expenses through a more suitable and even method of taxation. The in-depth cadastre survey produced two types of maps. First was the Indication  Map, or really the map that contained the notes, and second, the final map.  The indication map provides land owner, house number and parcel number. The final map identifies parcels only by parcel number. About the same time as the stable cadastre was being completed there was also, in 1836-1852, the Second Military Survey, a much more accurate version than the earlier First Military Survey, which was done by saddle. What is interesting is that a table to the side of the second military survey provides notes which could be of importance to a military operation.  This table contains the number of houses, available stables, number of men and number of horses, for each village.  

Hlvatce, Bohemia.  Hometown of gg grandma Anna Jodl 
Indication Stable Cadastre showing parcel lines 
owners, and parcel numbers

The recording of these components made sense militarily, places to house soldiers, horses available to commandeer, men to assist in the effort, and stables to house the horses so vital to 19th century military operations. The first military survey did not produce such numbers for each village rather it was by a collection of villages. These facts show, to a amateur historian, the small nature of the villages near the mid-point of the 19th century, but also how generally poor the serfs must have been. The whole village of Ratiborova Lhota had 22 homes, 11 stables, ten men and only two horses for the entire village; so not even one horse for every ten homes.  Certainly, the only way to get around was to walk, limiting their ability to leave the village. Dolni Chrastany, where Frantisek and Josef lived at the time of the second military survey, must have had a higher level of wealth since they had seven horses for 20 homes, and also ten men. Hlavatce, Bohemia, a good ten miles from Dolni Chrastany, is where my second great grandmother, Anna Jodl (Judl) Hawel was born and raised.  This was a larger village, per the second military mapping, with 42 homes, 20 stables, 33 men, and 20 horses, so almost one horse per every two households. Sedlack farmers were the ones who could afford to own horses and livestock.  However, they also had an obligation to breed oxen or horses as part of the robota system. They also likely would have had assistance in farming from day laborers or even live-in laborers. 

Second Military Census information
Compiled by author

Also surprising, from the survey, is the few men recorded in each town. For example, of the 42 households in Hlavatce only 33 men are available.  I tend to believe it was not a recording of all men in the village, but perhaps men who met a certain definition of age and capability.  For example, military aged men. Men of military age would be a lesser amount than total men in the village.   

Franz Hawel ownership south of Dolni Chrastany
Stabile Cadaster Indication map

The stable cadastre survey shows that Frantisek Hawel (Franc Habl) owns a good number of parcels scattered in and about the environs of Dolni Chrastany. It would not have been easy to access all of the varied parcels of land under his control, as they were in all directions from the village. Showing the love of forests passed down to descendants, Frantisek owned two pieces of mixed (hardwood and coniferous) forest south of Dolni Chrastany, these two parcels were separated by another ownership. Rather than being a long narrow piece, these properties are generally square although landlocked, so access would be provided through another property. Although there probably existed trails through some of the wooded areas.  A few other smaller areas of mixed forest bear the house number, but with no associated name, so it is likely he also controlled these forest areas.

635 and 638 Mixed Forest Parcels owned by Franz Hawel

Frantisek had farm and pasture land in many locations around the village. Perhaps one of his widest parcels that was able to be farmed was northeast of the village, parcel 734. He also had a small wet meadow area west-southwest (parcel 500) of the village with one of his longer fields.  The wet meadow has a separate parcel number probably because it was taxed at a reduced rate from the tillable land. The wet meadow may have been able to be used as pasture in drier years, but it was a good distance from the house, and, as noted, is not counted as a pasture in the land survey. He did control a small pasture area behind the house which adjoined his garden. Just beyond the pasture was a small farm field he also owned. (Parcels 445-447) In addition, a parcel or so beyond his there existed, just north and east of the village, significant grazing land identified for use by the parish or community.  It is likely his animals grazed in this property not too distant from his home, particularly if his small pasture needed to lie fallow to allow for regeneration.  

Stable Cadastre showing Hawel land by house
Hawel house is at parcel #23
Garden-#447,Pasture-#446,field-#445, 
The tree in 447 indicates orchard

While Frantisek, and Josef would have had to travel to forest and most all fields, they did have a large garden behind their house. Their respective spouses and probably the young children were the ones who, by tradition, would do most of the work in the garden. The garden, parcel 447, stretches back to the meandering Babicky Potok (Grandmother Stream). Meandering streams are older streams, and the age of the stream is even suggested by its name. According to the map it appears the Hawel household also had a small orchard in the garden area. 

Franz Hawel owned property
Dolni Chrastany

The serf farm life of Frantisek Hawel in Dolni Chrastany was not likely much different from the farm life of his third great grandfather Jakub (died mid-1600's).  Frantisek is my 3rd great grandfather, yet there is no doubt my life has been significantly different from the life of Frantisek.  Even though Frantisek would have been considered a wealthy peasant, their farm life would be drastically different from the mechanized farm operations of today.  Yet somethings never change for many farmers--long hours and unstable markets. Today in the United States acres is the preferred measure of large land areas, with square feet for small areas. In 18th and 19th century Bohemia they used hide as a measure of area.  Just as in 19th century Bohemia, a hide was important for taxation, so too today with acreage. I hope you are enjoying the blog posts of family life in Bohemia. 

Present day Dolni Chrastany

Sources of Map Images: 

First Military: http://oldmaps.geolab.cz/map_region.pl?lang=en&map_root=1vm&map_region=ce          Second Military: http://oldmaps.geolab.cz/map_region.pl?lang=en&map_root=2vm&map_region=ce    Stable Cadastre: https://ags.cuzk.cz/archiv/

Serfing

Due to being grounded the past few weeks I have been kept busy serfing. No, that is not a misspell of surfing. I may have conjured a new word. I have been doing a great deal of surfing for serfs. In other words, I have been working on genealogy, or my family tree. I have attempted to branch out from the usual vital statistics encountered in the Trebon Archives parish records of births, marriages and deaths and see what other sources may provide, specifically the seigniorial registers and land registers for the Hovel (Hawel, Havel, and as I  recently found, even Hawle) ancestors. The purpose of this post is to provide some general information from these records on the lives of our ancestors, and how their lives interacted with certain notable societal influences.  

Hovel House, Dolni Chrastany
Frantisek moved here upon marriage
 photo by MB Hovel, 1993

First, my great great grandfather, Josef Hawel, his wife Anna Jodl (Judl) and their children emigrated from Dolni Chrastany Bohemia in 1868, or twenty years after Austro-Hungarian Emperor Ferdinand proclaimed, on 1 Sept. 1848, an official end to serfdom. After that date, the serfs, or peasants, could buy land from the lord, or manor, holding ownership. Release of restrictions on serfs was, prior to that proclamation, a two steps forward one step back process. Empress Marie Theresia and in particular her son Josef II each moved to reform the serf system in the 18th century. In particular, in 1781 Josef II eased a number of significant limitations on the serfs. Josef's executive order allowed serfs free movement, freedom to marry, among other rights.  However, the lords under whom the serfs worked ignored many of these new rules. Few would tell their serfs about the new law.  However, they both kept the corvee' system was kept in place.  This system required the serf to provide labor free of charge to the lord. The labor may involve only a few weeks out of a year, or a few days a week.  Interestingly, human labor demand increased as animal labor became more common.

15 Ratiborova Lhota, present time (blue asterisk)
Google maps

Serfdom, common in Eastern Europe into the 19th century, was an institution that took on a life of its own. Two British economists, Klein and Ogilvie,  wrote in 2018, there is no definitive answer to why certain institutions formed. They acknowledged that "Institutions are widely viewed as a fundamental cause of economic performance", but, they wondered how does that work?  In other words the interplay between economics and institutional formation. To figure this out they examined micro-data from over 11,600 rural villages in Bohemia in the year 1757.  Their conclusion was that manorial (aka robota) labor became greater over time as beasts of burden became more common.  Less labor was required when only manual labor was the mainstay.  This explains why corvee' increased over time.  Being peasant farmers most of our ancestors likely worked the fields by hand, and as they could afford they perhaps bought beasts of burden--horses or other animals to assist with farm work.  Many likely had their own (leased) small acreage to farm, their own rustikat, as it was known. Much of the unpaid labor for the lord, was on the dominikat, the domains farm.  However, they may have assisted with road upkeep or other labor intensive services. In essence the theory these authors reviewed proved correct.  Klein and Oglivie concluded that the robota (serf labor) requirements increased as labor became more expensive. Economic factors, therefore, played a role in the serf system.  After all these were rural economies and "towns in Bohemia, and in most European societies where serfdom survived in the 18th century, were usually too feeble to provide outside options to either serfs or landlords, and thus did not alleviate coercion – if anything, they sometimes slightly intensified it." Beholden to the lord of the estate, with little other markets available was the reality of my ancestors, at least until 1848.

Dolni Chrastany, ~1835

Yet, besides giving labor to the lord, our ancestors were often required to provide goods, such as grain, milk, butter, or perhaps weaved cloth (weaver) or shoes (cobbler).  Land is a commodity, but it was more plentiful than the labor required for many operations. Farming, particularly in the pre-industrial revolution, was a very hard and labor intensive operation. Until 1848 serfs could not own land, as we know owning land, but they had purchased rights to use land including building a house so this was similar to a long-term lease. In the vernacular of the time this form of "ownership" was known as emphyteusis--certain rights granted to the serf, similar to a long-term lease. They could build a house and farm the fields, but true ownership was elusive. The Hawel family and their interaction with the village and the domain is like our other Eastern European ancestors, and they represent a microcosm of the peasant society in 17th to 19th century Bohemia. 

Ratiborova Lhota present time
Google Maps

From a genealogical standpoint the lack of mobility of serfs or peasants, their villeinage (tied to the land) has some advantage, once you find the ancestral village, it is a matter of going through the varied registers and vital record books, and if you are lucky you may find something within all those records that have handwriting hard to discern.  Most look like scribbles. Records vary in language:  German, Latin and Czech, and sometimes a mixture. Their script, my wife says is not unlike the legacy of my own handwriting.  From work accomplished for one of my sisters we know that my 3rd great grandfather, Frantisek Hawel was from Ratiborova Lhota (RL) in Bohemia (in German it was known as Melhutka).  This was tracked backward to Frantisek's father Matheus, and from Matheus to his father  Matheo.  Matheo's birth record identified his father as Simon Hawel.  At present since the RL vital records online do not exist pre-1694, (although some records may be available in other nearby villages depending upon when a church/parish was established) I could not find Simon's birth record. However, I did find that Simon was married on 8 July 1703 to Elisabeth Pesek, who appears to have been from the village of  Vrbice.  In Matheo's 1711 birth record, Simon is identified as a tenant and a weaver.  Simon's father, according to the marriage record, was Georg Hawel.  This is at the point where things get tricky as, lacking vital (first source) records, information becomes dependent upon secondary sources, or the seigniorial and land registers.  

Hovel Family Generation

The seigniorial register was generally an annual accounting of serfs under a lord's domain. Consider it a basic census. The lord wanted to know the available households and manpower to assure the proper funds, service, and goods were received. The 1702-1756 register notes that in 1702 Georg Hawel and his wife Magdalena and some of their children are at the family home in RL.  This spreadsheet like record also notes that around 1713 Simon is probably now the head of the household and appears to be a rutikat, a farmer on his own land (and giving labor to the domain), and Georg, who lived to 1719 is probably in retirement. The land register records payments from one lease holder to another.  For example, the 1707-1882 land register for RL records payments being made by Simon to Georg.  I conclude that Simon is taking over the family farm, and is paying his father for shares to perhaps be distributed to other children. This same register, a page later, notes payments by Frantisek's grandfather  (Matheo, b 1711) to his dad, Simon. Matheo (Franc's grandfather), born in 1711 and his wife and children are living with Simon and by about 1742 it appears Matheo has bought his father out and is now the presumed head of the household. Simon died in 1749. The circle of peasant Bohemian life is evident in these records.

Ratiborova Lhota Seigniorial Register (1702-1756)
Georg Hawel family

Showing the connection that the family had to the domain, the 1702-1756 seigniorial register notes that Matheo (b 1711), was at age 13 (so about 1724) in "Feudal service with consideration."  It would appear that the 13 year old boy was at duty to the manor, perhaps a farm hand, livery boy, or in some other service.  Matheo, maybe, was dispatched to work as part of robota service, or perhaps in consideration of a loan provided. In any event it is an interesting notation.

Bohemia was a rural, land-based economy, with less than 5% of the population living in urban centers of 5,000 or more persons in the 18th century. Much of the production for sustenance was in the small villages.  From a land register we know that RL was the home of a flour mill, and so it would not be surprising for labor from the village residents to be accorded to the flour mill. I suspect it is possible that some of the Hawel family worked at the mill. The mill also had cottages to house itinerant laborers. Villages would provide housing for the poor, with up to four families sharing a 150 sq ft home. 

15 Ratiborova Lhota, present day
Google Maps

The seigniorial register for 1702-1756, has Frantisek's grandfather, Matheo, with his spouse and children living with Simon and some other family members.  The next register (1756-1766) mainly focuses on Matheo's son Matheus.  One can glean some of Frantisek's (b 1769) siblings, Urusla-14, Matheu-13, Dorothea-10, Marie-6 (who died young), Anton-3, Teresia born about 1758, Johann born about 1760 and Matej born 1762.  We know that Agnete, also seen as Ann in some records, was probably Matheus' first wife. The record indicates that Agnete had passed away by 1765.  In February 1765 Mathous would marry Marie Pannusch (varied surname spellings) probably from house #9 in RL.  The Hawel house was #15. (Many, particularly pre-19th century, records do not indicate house numbers.) The households were inter-generational and the older generations, as they retired, depended upon the children for support. In fact, it was not uncommon for the in-laws, whose daughter may have died, to be living with the son-in-law and his new spouse. The grandparents may live in the same house, or if of sufficient ability there may be a secondary or auxiliary dwelling unit, often referred to as an outer house.  For example, we know that when Frantisek died in 1847 the parish death record states that he lived at 18 Dolni Chrastany, "outer house."  

Matheo Hawel Family in Seignorial Register
1756 to 1767

Peasant life was hard, during the spring through fall the family would awake with or before dawn. In the winter before daybreak. They would feed and check the animals, let the poultry out of their pen and then move on to breakfast.  Breakfast was usually a mash or porridge, and if fortunate perhaps a piece of bread and some cheese.  After breakfast, the father, with older sons, would head to fields to work for the day. Their task would depend on the time of year.  The mother would tend the children, cook, clean, and do the gardening work. The same breakdown of chores my grandparents, Rudy and Ida Hovel, performed in the 20th century. The whole family would gather in the kitchen-dining room to eat dinner, usually late afternoon.  After dinner, household chores were completed. As dark enveloped the dwelling, the evening or night would be spent telling tales and stories.  In the inter-generational households of the time there was no shortage of tales or stories to pass on to other household members. Family history was probably told, not written. The father was the head of the household, until such point, as discussed, a son bought him out. The household roles were common for the culture. 

~1825 Cadastral Map Ratiborova Lhota
Shows that the Hawel family no longer owns 
land associated with No 15.

In 1774 Empress Marie Theresia would require six years of mandatory education for children.  While taking away some farm help, it also got some of the kids out of the house. The mother's or step mother's breathed a sigh of relief as the kids went to school, and conversely, the teachers looked forward to getting home.

Hawel in 1624-1707 Land Register

Families were generally large, and it was a fact of life that a good number of children died at a young age.  Although fathers and mothers did not always live to a ripe old age. It appears both Frantisek and his father married twice.  Men often married within a few months of the death of a spouse, in order to have a person care for the children. This dynamic likely is the claim to the evil step mother of Disney fame, and Brother Grimm tales. The second marriage was often to a younger woman. For women, the loss of the husband posed a much more difficult situation.  If they lacked any long term leased property to bring to a marriage they were, well, not in high demand. Older woman, who had property, may fare better in finding a spouse. I heard indirectly heard a story told by a woman who worked at the Trebon Archives in the Czech Republic.  She noted that a 50 year old woman's husband died, but she had some property to bring which young males found attractive.  She played the cougar role and married a much younger man. However, as she was barren the man would have relations with a younger woman who bore his children, and upon his wife's death they would marry. The archivist suspects it was something that was not irregular, likely known and understood in the village.

Georg Hawel in 1707-1882 Land Register for
 Ratiborova Lhota

Younger widows and their children, lacking property would become dependent upon a brother or other surviving relative for shelter and sustenance. The safety net was the extended family. The seigniorial registers separately record widows and orphans. The oldest seigniorial record available for RL is from 1670, and in that record, with no last name, one can see Georg, wife Magdalena, and their children Georg-8, Ludmila-6, Catherine-4, and Elisabeth-3.  While lacking records, the 1675 register interestingly only gives two persons: Georg and son Simon, age 3; this puts Simon's birth around 1672. This is a few years off Simon's recorded death age, but we know that ages in death records were often not accurate.  Age meant little to the peasants whose daily grind went day-to-day. 

1670 (part) Seigniorial Register
Oldest Such Register for Ratiborova Lhota

The day-to-day grind, however, could be disrupted by a tragedy--the death of a spouse being the main one. From another secondary source, the 1624-1707 land register, this appears to be the case of the Hawel family, many generations distant. Georg's probable father Jakub is dead somewhere near the year 1740, and the land register identifies his widow and some of the children, including Georg at age 5 (putting his birth about 1635).  In the mid 1650's there are references to the orphans of Jakub Hawel. (In terms of reliability, the Seigniorial Register is likely closer to correct age).

1624-1707 Land Register 
Ratiborova Lhota, between the two + signs
is Georg, his age of 5 is covered by other letting

The oldest online record I have seen for the Hawel family is the 1603-1623 Land Register.  The top of the page clearly shows the name Hawel and possibly Jakub or Josef following, with a reference to 1603.  The ancestral village of the Hawel family, at least as of the early 17th century, is Ratiborova Lhota, Bohemia. Movement between villages in this era was not allowed unless approved by the lord, and this stability has made it easier to locate records. What is often referred to as the second serfdom started 60 to 70 years before 1603, and so it was about 1530 to 1540 that movement apparently became more restricted than in the first serfdom. The lord's needed their laborers. This small village set among the hills and valleys of southwest Bohemia is the home of my ancestors from which my surname has evolved.

1603-1623 Land Register Ratiborova Lhota
Hawel Family back to 1603
Oldest found Record of Hawel Family

This secondary source indicates that Georg's father was Jakub, and that for about 200 years the family kept its residence in Ratiborova Lhota.  It appears that after marriage in 1796 Frantisek made his home in Dolni Chrastany. How did he end up in Dolni Chrastany?  When Emperor Josef II abolished many aspects of sefdom in 1781, most were not followed, and many of those reforms were repealed after his death in 1790. One reform, however, remained--the ability of serfs to move without permission.  At this time the main daily movement of a person was perhaps 6 to 10 miles in a day, due to most having to walk. Ten miles is considered the greatest distance a man laden with goods could walk in a day,and get back home. Dolni Chrastany is, by a present day route, 6.7 miles from Ratiborova Lhota.  Frantisek would marry Teresia Jiral of 18 Dolni Chrastany on 25 Oct 1796, with his freedom to find a new residence being related to the reform of Josef II.  My great grandfather, Martin (b 1850), and his father, Josef (b 1808) would be born in the same house in which Josef's mother Teresia was born. 

Route between Dolni Chrastany and Ratiborova Lhota 
Google Maps

In the small Bohemian village of Ratiborova Lhota the Hawel family were not dukes, lords, or knights, but peasants, or commoners, much like most all of the other families living in the collection of houses in the village with farm land radiating out from village in long thin parcels. Farmsteads consisted of a house with an attached barn, or perhaps in earlier times the family lived on the floor above animals.As farmers they were part of the backbone to the rural serf-dependent economy of Bohemia and the larger Austro-Hungarian Empire. 

Frantisek and Josef Hawel (Habl)
Mentioned in the Dolni Chrastany Land Register
Appears Josef is buying the farm in 1846

My serf ancestors did not own land, but had the equivalent of a long-term lease, through the Lord-Serf institution that began in the middle ages. It was a subsistence type of living, with most goods staying for household use. Of course, they had to provide labor, services, and goods to the domain for a few weeks every year or perhaps a few days every week. As many have written, they were a step above a slave. Over time the family would move up the scale to the higher level of peasant farmer a sedlak. Josef and Anna Hawel with their children would migrate to Wisconsin in 1868, forever changing the course of their descendants. What is my key take away from serfing through my Hovel family?  The family worked hard, persevered through trails of war, famine, death, tragedy, disease; showed resiliency in the the domineering serf system; and looked to provide a better life for their children. Their values, traits, and decisions laid the groundwork for the success for their descendants.  

Author Note:  To better understand some of the records, I engaged the services of a transcriber who assisted in attempting to read the old script in the languages of German, Czech and Latin.  

Sorry for the length of the post.

The 2018 Klein and Ogilvie study may be found at: https://voxeu.org/article/labour-scarcity-and-labour-coercion-serfdom-bohemia