Andrew Abrams

So are we posting here now?

It’s not an either or, settlers frequently did both, but the object was to ensure their towns weren’t wiped off the face of the earth. It’s wasn’t because they were concerned with real estate prices in the Berkshires.

Solution B, you start dividing up the commons, ensure there’s no generational rupture in the town, and kick the can of expansion down the road for a little bit until it becomes your son’s problem to deal with.

Solution A, you try to acquire more land from the Indigenous people who hold all the cards, would rather you not be there, and aren’t too keen on selling it to you. Worst case scenario, you don’t have a town anymore.

If you’re a New England town in the 1680s you’ve got the problem of too many sons and too few acres of cleared land to bequeath to them. If you don’t solve this problem, your township is screwed, so you’ve got two possible solutions.

All else aside, the idea that the commons in early America were carved up into real estate misses a key aspect of enclosure, namely that to a significant degree it was done to PRESERVE the communal bonds among settler groups that Stoll associates with common land ownership

t.co/3SUYjUYQwi

This book is nothing short of amazing

Hard to demonstrate given how dark it is, but the fig mead is just about finished clarifying. I’m really proud with how this one turned out. Processing +15 lbs of fresh figs was a multi-day affair

Reckoned it was time to jump ship