>>1421857
You're not a peasant if you own land. But really we're not living in a feudal system so the distinction is meaningless.

>>1421857
Lot's of things defined one's class such as clothing, lineage, occupation and property. what exactly made someone a "peasant" could differ in different cultures.
>>1421978
essentially this. Although heir were exceptions for people such as caravan merchants and some members of the royal palace. In the same sense, you could own a parsle of land on the very edge of a city state making just enough to get by and still be considered a peasant.

>townies
Please elaborate on this.
>farmers
As in farm owners, or field hands and the like?
>small businessmen
Usually this is a trial-by-trial basis sort of thing, but generally, business owners are middle-class

Peasant was a pretty vague term that people constantly misuse. There could be land owning peasants, business owning peasants, etc.

I think what you're thinking of is serf.

>>1421857
The concept of the "peasant" is linked to social mobility.

If you're living in a feudal/caste-based society where you're almost invariably destined to live in the same social class as that of your parents, then the poor are peasants and the rich are aristocrats.

If you're living in a western liberal society, where you have a decent chance at upward mobility, then the poor are just poor, not peasants, and the rich are just rich, not aristocrats.

>>1422003
>In the same sense, you could own a parsle of land on the very edge of a city state making just enough to get by and still be considered a peasant.

No you;d be a yeoman. A poor yeoman for sure, but not a peasant.