528 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



character of the surplus was such as to call for cooperation among pas- 

 toral peoples and intensive agriculturists, while among extensive agri- 

 culturists the familial or domestic system was found sufficient. 



The sources of the pastoral surplus might be monopolized to a con- 

 siderable extent, since herds of domesticated animals were not goods 

 freely reproducible by labor alone. A single individual or a company 

 of cooperating individuals might by labor alone bring down the wild 

 beasts of the forest and plain, but they could not secure a herd of 

 domesticated animals in this way. Herds and flocks were products of 

 generation and their possession was accordingl}^ confined to the com- 

 paratively few who had inherited such stocks from their ancestors. 

 These proprietors were, therefore, in their way monopolists who con- 

 trolled the pastoral surplus source. As for the rest, they could only gain 

 access to this surplus source by serving the proprietors and receiving in 

 return from them either the products of the existing herd or the nucleus 

 of a new. To the extent, then, that the non-proprietors were dependent 

 upon the herd for their livelihood, they could be coerced by the pro- 

 prietors. It should be borne in mind, however, that the proprietors 

 were also dependent to some extent upon the non-proprietors for the 

 defense of their herds and pasture lands. For this reason they were 

 forced to mitigate the rigor of coercion in order to secure the advan- 

 tages of cooperation. 



The sources of the agricultural surplus were either widespread or 

 confined. In the subtropical zone where the sources of the agricultural 

 surplus were confined it was a comparatively simple matter for a group 

 of conquerors or usurpers to secure control. In the temperate zone, 

 however, where the sources of the agricultural surplus were spread out 

 over a wide area, monopolization was more difficult. By conquest and 

 through inheritance such control was, however, eventually obtained, 

 except where the surplus was not rich enough to make such monopoliza- 

 tion worth while. In both cases when proprietorship was established 

 the disinherited peasants were henceforth dependent upon their land- 

 lords for their livelihood, for they no longer had free access to the sur- 

 plus source. As a result, in agricultural regions the coercive system 

 was established in all its rigor during what we speak of as the feudal 

 ages. 



The commercial era may be said to have begun with the differentia- 

 tion of occupations, the institution of markets and the introduction 

 of coined money. With the resultant development of exchange a new 

 surplus source was opened up whose utility producing capacity was 

 practically boundless, provided appropriate means and methods for its 

 exploitation could be devised. In this enquiry we are concerned with 

 the metliods rather than with the means of production, with the system 



