was no concept of individual land ownership, however. Land belonged to
the community, not to individuals. Familiescould use land in the hamlet or
village as building sites and kitchen gardens. During the growing season,
women controlled the land they cultivated, but between the harvest and the
preparation of the land for the new planting, the fields were common
property; any member of the community could let his cattle forage there.
The rest of the land was the property of the community as a whole through-
out the year. Anyone could use it to pasture livestock, to hunt game, or to
gather plants. But even with cattle and grain, the "owner" was not consid-
ered to have unqualified rights of disposal. He was meant to consult his kin
and to administer the property for the benefit of his dependents. 61
The mixed farmers were highly competitive. Skillful men built up large
herds of cattle; unsuccessful men possessed none at all. The two extremes
were bound by a system of clientage. A rich man would lend beasts to a
poor man, who would have the responsibility for herding them and the
right to consume their milk and to own a proportion of their progeny. This
custom, practiced widely with local variations, saved the impoverished