The English Village Community - Examined in its Relations to the Manorial and Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open Field System of Husbandry; An Essay in Economic History (Reprinted from the Fourth Edition)

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: The English Village Community - Examined in its Relations to the Manorial and Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open Field System of Husbandry; An Essay in Economic History (Reprinted from the Fourth Edition)
Author: Seebohm, Frederic
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The English Village Community - Examined in its Relations to the Manorial and Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open Field System of Husbandry; An Essay in Economic History (Reprinted from the Fourth Edition)" ***

Internet Archive (https://archive.org)

Images of the original pages are available through
Internet Archive. See
https://archive.org/details/englishvillageco00seeb

Some characters might not display in this UTF-8 text
In this case the reader should consult the HTML
version or the original page images cited above.

Transcriber's note:

in square brackets (example: [p052].

Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
Italics markup has been removed from British currency
abbreviations "l.", "s.", and "d.".

A carat character is used to denote superscription. Characters
following the carat and enclosed by curly brackets are
superscripted (example: Esq^{re}).

Small capital letters have been converted to uppercase.

Sidenotes of this form: "Chap. [number]" were eliminated. The
remaining sidenotes were moved from beside paragraphs to the
beginning of the affected one. This may result in several
sidenotes appearing together, between paragraphs. In this
version, sidenotes are marked with double angle quotation
marks "«" and "»".

TRANSLITERATION-CHARACTERS RETAINED: The characters Thorn
and thorn ("Þ" U+00DE, "þ" U+00FE) are retained. Also, the
characters Eth and eth ("Ð" U+00D0, "ð" U+00F0). The letter
"đ", (U+0111) is an abbreviation for "pence", used only twice,
in a Latin section. The abbreviation "ꝥ" (U+A765), meaning
þæt, and the Tironian sign "⁊" (U+204A), abbreviation for
et/and/ond, are retained. The latter two characters are not
supported by many common fonts; "DejaVu Sans" is one that does.

TRANSLITERATION-CHARACTERS CHANGED:

A symbol consisting of three dots arranged in an
equilateral triangle with vertical on the left was employed
at the ends of some paragraphs of Old English. In this
version this symbol has been replaced with a period, space
and black pointer: ". ►".

The letters Wynn and wynn ("Ƿ" U+01F7, "ƿ" U+01BF) are
transliterated as "W", "w".

The letter "insular g" ("ᵹ" U+1D79) is changed to "g".

The letter "insular s" ("ꞅ" U+A785) is changed to "s".

The letter "insular r" ("ꞃ" U+A783) is changed to "r".

The letter "insular t" ("ꞇ" U+A787) is changed to "t".

The letter "y with dot above" is changed to "y".

A letter "p with tilde above" was used twice in Old English
as an abbreviation for pence; this version uses "ƥ" (U+01A5)
instead.

Many other transliterations will need no comment here.

THE ENGLISH VILLAGE COMMUNITY

* * * * * *

WORKS BY FREDERIC SEEBOHM.

THE OXFORD REFORMERS--JOHN COLET, ERASMUS, AND THOMAS MORE: a
History of their Fellow-Work. 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.

THE ERA OF THE PROTESTANT REVOLUTION. With 4 Maps and 12
Diagrams. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d. (_Epochs of Modern History._)

THE ENGLISH VILLAGE COMMUNITY: Examined in its Relations to the
Manorial and Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open Field
System of Husbandry. An Essay in Economic History. With 13 Maps
and Plates. 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.

CUSTOMARY ACRES AND THEIR HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE, being a Series
of Unfinished Essays. 8vo. 12s. 6d. net.

LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO. 39 Paternoster Row;

London, New York, Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras.

* * * * * *

[Illustration: Reduced Tracing of the TITHE MAP of HITCHIN
TOWNSHIP about 1816.]

[Illustration: Reduced Tracing of a Hand Map of the
scattered pieces (coloured red) belonging to W. Lucas
Esq^{re}. in the townfields of Hitchin about 1750.]

[Illustration: _Enlarged Plan of the normal acre strips
in the open fields afterwards adopted as the statute
acre._.]

THE ENGLISH VILLAGE COMMUNITY

Examined in Its Relations to the Manorial and
Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open
Field System of Husbandry

An Essay in Economic History

FREDERIC SEEBOHM
Hon.LL.D.(Edin.), LITT.D.(Camb.)
D.LITT.(Oxford)

REPRINTED FROM THE FOURTH EDITION (1905)

Longmans, Green, and Co.
39 Paternoster Row, London
Fourth Avenue & 30th Street, New York
Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras
1915

DEDICATED BY PERMISSION
TO THE
SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF LONDON

PREFACE.

When I had the honour to lay the two papers which have expanded
into this volume before the Society of Antiquaries, it was with a
confession and an apology which, in publishing and dedicating to them
this Essay, I now repeat.

I confessed to having approached the subject not as an antiquary but
as a student of Economic History, and even with a directly political
interest. To learn the meaning of the old order of things, with its
'community' and 'equality' as a key to a right understanding of the
new order of things, with its contrasting individual independence and
inequality, this was the object which in the first instance tempted
me to poach upon antiquarian manors, and it must be my apology for
treating from an economic point of view a subject which has also an
antiquarian interest.

To statesmen, whether of England or of the new Englands across the
oceans, the importance can hardly be over-estimated of a sound
appreciation of the nature of that remarkable economic evolution
in the course of which the great English speaking nations have,
so to speak, become charged in our time with the trial of the
experiment--let us hope also with the solution of the problem--of
_freedom_ and _democracy_, using the words in the highest political
sense as the antipodes of _Paternal Government_ and _Communism_.

Perhaps, without presumption, it may be said that the future
happiness of the human race--the success or failure of the planet--is
in no small degree dependent upon the ultimate course of what seems,
to us at least, to be the main stream of human progress, upon whether
it shall be guided by the foresight of statesmen into safe channels
or misguided, diverted, or obstructed, till some great social or
political convulsion proves that its force and its direction have
been misunderstood.

It may indeed be but too true that, in spite of the economic lessons
of the past--

The weary Titan! with deaf
Ears, and labour dimmed eyes,
Regarding neither to right
Nor left, goes passively by,
Staggering on to her goal;
Bearing on shoulders immense,
Atlantëan, the load,
Wellnigh not to be borne,
Of the too vast orb of her fate.

And she may continue to do so, however clearly and truthfully the
economic lessons of the past may be dinned into her ear. But still
the deep sense I have endeavoured to describe in these few sentences
of the importance of a sound understanding of English Economic
History as the true basis of much of the practical politics of
the future will be accepted, I trust, as a sufficient reason why,
ill-furnished as I have constantly found myself for the task, I
should have ventured to devote some years of scant leisure to the
production of this imperfect Essay.

It is simply an attempt to set English Economic History upon
right lines at its historical commencement by trying to solve the
still open question whether it began with the _freedom_ or with
the _serfdom_ of the masses of the people--whether the village
communities living in the 'hams' and 'tons' of England were, at the
outset of English history, _free_ village communities or communities
in _serfdom_ under a manorial lordship; and further, what were their
relations to the tribal communities of the Western and less easily
conquered portions of the island.

On the answer to this question depends fundamentally the view to be
taken by historians (let us say by politicians also) of the nature
of the economic evolution which has taken place in England since the
English Conquest. If answered in one way, English Economic History
begins with free village communities which gradually degenerated into
the serfdom of the Middle Ages. If answered in the other way, it
begins with the serfdom of the masses of the rural population under
Saxon rule--a serfdom from which it has taken 1,000 years of English
economic evolution to set them free.

Much learning and labour have already been expended upon this
question, and fresh light has been recently streaming in upon it from
many sides.

A real flash of light was struck when German students perceived the
connexion between the widely prevalent common or open field system
of husbandry, and the village community which for centuries had used
it as a shell. Whatever may be the ultimate verdict upon G. L. von
Maurer's theory of the German 'mark,' there can be no doubt of its
service as a working hypothesis by means of which the study of the
economic problem has been materially advanced.

A great step was taken as regards the English problem when Mr.
Kemble, followed by Mr. Freeman and others, attempted to trace in
English constitutional history the development of ancient German free
institutions, and to solve the English problem upon the lines of the
German 'mark.' The merit of this attempt will not be destroyed even
though doubt should be thrown upon the correctness of this suggested
solution of the problem, and though other and non-German elements
should prove to have been larger factors in English economic history.
The caution observed by Professor Stubbs in the early chapters of
his great work on English Constitutional History may be said to have
at least reopened the question whether the German 'mark system' ever
really took root in England.

Another step was gained on somewhat new lines when Professor Nasse,
of Bonn, pointed out to English students (who hitherto had not
realised the fact) that the English and German land systems were the
same, and that in England also the open-field system of husbandry
was the shell of the mediæval village community. The importance of
this view is obvious, and it is to be regretted that no English
student has as yet followed it up by an adequate examination of
the remarkably rich materials which lie at the disposal of English
Economic History.

A new flash of light at once lit up the subject and greatly widened
its interest when Sir Henry S. Maine, carrying with him to India
his profound insight into 'Ancient Law,' recognised the fundamental
analogies between the 'village communities' of the East and the West,
and sought to use actually surviving Indian institutions as typical
representatives of ancient stages of similar Western institutions.
Undoubtedly much more light may be looked for from the same direction.

Further, Sir Henry S. Maine has opened fresh ground, and perhaps
(if he will permit me to say so) even to some extent narrowed the
area within which the theory of archaic free village communities can
be applied, by widening the range of investigation in yet another
direction. In his lectures on the 'Early History of Institutions'
he has turned his telescope upon the _tribal_ communities, and
especially the 'tribal system' of the Brehon laws, and tried to
dissolve parts of its mysterious nebulæ into stars--a work in which
he has been followed by Mr. W. F. Skene with results which give a
peculiar interest to the third volume of that learned writer's
valuable work on 'Celtic Scotland.'

Lastly, under the close examination of Dr. Landau and Professors
Hanssen and Meitzen, the open-field system itself has been found in
Germany to take several distinct forms, corresponding, in part at
least, with differences in economic conditions, if not directly with
various stages in economic development, from the early tribal to the
later manorial system.

It is very much to be desired that the open-field system of the
various districts of France should be carefully studied in the
same way. An examination of its widely extended modern remains
could hardly fail to throw important light upon the contents of the
cartularies which have been published in the 'Collection de Documents
Inédits sur l'histoire de France,' amongst which the '_Polyptique
d'Irminon_,' with M. Guérard's invaluable preface, is pre-eminently
useful.

In the meantime, whilst students had perhaps been too exclusively
absorbed in working in the rich mine of early German institutions,
Mr. Coote has done service in recalling attention in his 'Neglected
Fact in English History' and his 'Romans of Britain' to the evidences
which remain of the survival of Roman influences in English
institutions, even though it may be true that some of his conclusions
may require reconsideration. The details of the later Roman
provincial government, and of the economic conditions of the German
and British provinces, remain so obscure even after the labours of
Mommsen, Marquardt, and Madvig, that he who attempts to build a
bridge across the gulf of the Teutonic conquests between Roman and
English institutions still builds it somewhat at a venture.

It is interesting to find that problems connected with early English
and German Economic History are engaging the careful and independent
research also of American students. The contributions of Mr. Denman
Ross, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Professor Allen, of the
University of Wisconsin, will be welcomed by fellow-students of these
questions in the old country.

It has seemed to me that the time may have come when an inquiry
directed strictly upon economic lines, and carefully following the
English evidence, might strike a light of its own, in the strength of
which the various side lights might perhaps be gathered together and
some clear result obtained, at least as regards the main course of
economic evolution in England.

The English, like the Continental village community, as we have said,
inhabited a shell--an open-field system--into the nooks and corners
of which it was curiously bound and fitted, and from which it was
apparently inseparable.

The remains of this cast-off shell still survive in parishes where
no Enclosure Act happens to have swept them away. The common or
open field system can even now be studied on the ground within the
township in which I am writing as well as in many others. Men are
still living who have held and worked farms under its inconvenient
rules, and who know the meaning of its terms and eccentric details.
Making use of this circumstance the method pursued in this Essay will
be, first, to become familiar with the little distinctive marks and
traits of the English open-field system, so that they may be readily
recognised wherever they present themselves; and then, proceeding
from the known to the unknown, carefully to trace back the shell
by searching and watching for its marks and traits as far into the
past as evidence can be found. Using the knowledge so acquired about
the shell as the key, the inquiry will turn upon its _occupant_.
Examining how the mediæval English village community in serfdom
fitted itself into the shell, and then again working back from the
known to the unknown, it may be perhaps possible to discern whether,
within historical times, it once had been free, or whether its
serfdom was as old as the shell.

The relation of the 'tribal system' in Wales, in Ireland, and
in Germany to the open-field system, and so also to the village
community, will be a necessary branch of the inquiry. It will embrace
also both the German and the Roman sources of serfdom and of the
manorial system of land management.

It may at least be possible that Economic History may sometimes
find secure stepping stones over what may be impassable gulfs in
constitutional history; and it obviously does not follow that a
continuity lost, perhaps, to the one may not have been preserved
by the other. The result of a strictly economic inquiry may, as
already suggested, prove that more things went to the 'making of
England' than were imported in the keels of the English invaders of
Britain. But whatever the result--whatever modifications of former
theories the facts here brought into view, after full consideration
by others, may suggest--I trust that this Essay will not be regarded
as controversial in its aim or its spirit. I had rather that it were
accepted simply as fellow-work, as a stone added at the eleventh hour
to a structure in the building of which others, some of whose names I
have mentioned, have laboured during the length and heat of the day.

* * * * *

In conclusion, I have to tender my best thanks to Sir Henry S.
Maine for the kind interest he has taken, and the sound advice he
has given, during the preparation of this Essay for the press; also
to Mr. Elton, for similar unsolicited help generously given. To my
friend George von Bunsen, and to Professor Meitzen, of Berlin, I am
deeply indebted as regards the German branches of my subject, and to
Mr. T. Hodgkin and Mr. H. Pelham as regards the Roman side of it. For
the ever ready assistance of my friend Mr. H. Bradshaw, of Cambridge,
Mr. Selby, of the Record Office, and Mr. Thompson, of the British
Museum, in reference to the manuscripts under their charge, I cannot
be too grateful. Nor must I omit to acknowledge the care with which
Messrs. Stuart Moore and Kirk have undertaken for me the task of
revising the text and translations of the many extracts from mediæval
documents contained in this volume.

F. SEEBOHM.

THE HERMITAGE, HITCHIN:
_May_, 1883

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.
THE ENGLISH OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM EXAMINED IN ITS MODERN
REMAINS.

PAGE
1. The distinctive marks of the open-field system 1

2. Scattered and intermixed ownership in the open fields 7

3. The open fields were the common fields of a village
community or township under a manor 8

4. The wide prevalence of the system through Great Britain 13

CHAPTER II.
THE ENGLISH OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM TRACED BACK TO THE DOMESDAY
SURVEY--IT IS THE SHELL OF SERFDOM--THE MANOR WITH A
VILLAGE COMMUNITY IN VILLENAGE UPON IT.

1. The identity of the system with that of the Middle Ages 17

2. The Winslow Manor Rolls of the reign of Edward
III.--example of a virgate or yard-land 22

3. The Hundred Rolls of Edward I. embracing five Midland
Counties 32

4. The Hundred Rolls (_continued_).--Relation of the
virgate to the hide and carucate 36

5. The Hundred Rolls (_continued_).--The services of the
villein tenants 40

6. Description in Fleta of a manor in the time of Edward
I. 45

7. S.E. of England--The hide and virgate under other names
(the records of Battle Abbey and St. Paul's) 49

8. The relation of the virgate to the hide traced in the
cartularies of Gloucester and Worcester Abbeys, and the
custumal of Bleadon in Somersetshire 55

9. Cartularies of Newminster and Kelso, thirteenth
century--The connexion of the holdings with the common
plough team of eight oxen 60

10. The Boldon Book, A.D. 1183 68

11. The 'Liber Niger' of Peterborough Abbey, A.D. 1125 72

12. Summary of the post-Domesday evidence 76

CHAPTER III.
THE DOMESDAY SURVEY (A.D. 1086).

1. There were manors everywhere 82

2. The division of the manor into lord's demesne and land
in villenage 84

3. The free tenants on the lord's demesne 86

4. The classes of tenants in villenage 89

5. The villani were holders of virgates, &c. 91

6. The holdings of the bordarii or cottiers 95

7. The Domesday survey of the Villa of Westminster 97

8. The extent of the cultivated land of England, and how
much was included in the yard-lands of the villani 101

CHAPTER IV.
THE OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM TRACED IN SAXON TIMES--THE
SCATTERING OF THE STRIPS ORIGINATED IN THE METHODS OF
CO-ARATION.

1. The village fields under Saxon rule were open fields 105

2. The holdings were composed of scattered strips 110

3. The open-field system of co-aration described in the
ancient laws of Wales 117

CHAPTER V.
MANORS AND SERFDOM UNDER SAXON RULE.

1. The Saxon 'hams' and 'tuns' were manors with village
communities in serfdom upon them 126

2. The 'Rectitudines Singularum Personarum' 129

3. The thane and his services 134

4. The geneats and their services 137

5. The double and ancient character of the services of the
gebur--Gafol and week-work 142

6. Serfdom on a manor of King Edwy 148

7. Serfdom on a manor of King Alfred 160

8. The theows or slaves on the lord's demesne 164

9. The creation of new manors 166

10. The laws of King Ethelbert--There were manors in the
sixth century 173

11. Result of the Saxon evidence 175

CHAPTER VI.
THE TRIBAL SYSTEM (IN WALES).

1. Evidence of the Domesday Survey 181

2. The Welsh land system in the twelfth century 186

3. The Welsh land system according to the Welsh laws 189

4. Land divisions under the Welsh Codes 199

5. Earlier evidence of the payment of Welsh gwestva, or
food-rent 208

CHAPTER VII.
THE TRIBAL SYSTEM (_continued_).

1. The tribal system in Ireland and Scotland 214

2. The tribal system in its earlier stages 231

3. The distinction between the tribal and agricultural
economy of the West and South-East of Britain was
pre-Roman, and so also was the open-field system 245

CHAPTER VIII.
CONNEXION BETWEEN THE ROMAN LAND SYSTEM AND THE LATER
MANORIAL SYSTEM.

1. Importance of the Continental evidence 252

2. The connexion between the Saxon 'ham,' the German
'heim,' and the Frankish 'villa' 253

3. The Roman 'villa,' its easy transition into the later
manor, and its tendency to become the predominant type of
estate 263

4. The smaller tenants on the 'Ager Publicus' in Roman
provinces--The veterans 272

5. The smaller tenants on the 'Ager Publicus'
(_continued_)--the 'læti' 280

6. The 'tributum' of the later Empire 289

7. The 'sordida munera' of the later Empire 295

8. The tendency towards a manorial management of the 'Ager
Publicus,' or Imperial domain 300

9. The succession to semi-servile holdings, and methods of
cultivation 308

10. The transition from the Roman to the later manorial
system 316

CHAPTER IX.
THE GERMAN SIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL EVIDENCE.

1. The German tribal system and its tendency towards the
manorial system 336

2. The tribal households of German settlers 346

CHAPTER X.
THE CONNEXION BETWEEN THE OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM AND SERFDOM OF
ENGLAND AND OF THE ROMAN PROVINCES OF GERMANY AND GAUL.

1. The open-field system in England and in Germany
compared 368

2. The boundaries or 'marchæ' 375

3. The three fields, or 'zelgen' 376

4. The division of the fields into furlongs and acres 380

5. The holdings--the 'yard-land' or 'hub' 389

6. The hide, the 'hof,' and the 'centuria' 395

7. The gafol and gafol-yrth 399

8. The boon-work and week-work of the serf 403

9. The creation of serfs and the growth of serfdom 405

10. The confusion in the status of the tenants on English
and German manors 407

11. Result of the comparison 409

CHAPTER XI.
RESULT OF THE EVIDENCE.

1. The method of the English settlements 412

2. Local evidence of continuity between Roman and English
villages 424

3. Conclusion 437

APPENDIX 443

INDEX AND GLOSSARY 455

LIST OF MAPS AND PLATES.

facing page
1. MAP OF HITCHIN TOWNSHIP, &C. _title-page_

2. MAP OF PART OF PURWELL FIELD 2

3. SKETCH OF 'LINCES' 5

4. HITCHIN, PURWELL FIELD 6

5. A NORMAL VIRGATE OR YARD-LAND 26

6. DOMESDAY SURVEY, DISTRIBUTION OF SOCHMANNI, LIBERI
HOMINES, SERVI, BORDARII, AND VILLANI 85

7. MANOR OF TIDENHAM, &C. 148

8. GROUP OF PUTTCHERS ON THE SEVERN NEAR TIDENHAM 152

9. MAPS OF AN IRISH 'BALLY' AND 'HALF-BALLY' 224

10. EXAMPLES OF DIVISIONS IN A TOWNLAND 228

11. DISTRIBUTION IN EUROPE OF LOCAL NAMES ENDING IN
'HEIM,' 'INGEN,' &C. 256

12. MAP OF THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF HITCHIN 426

13. MAP OF THE PARISH OF MUCH WYMONDLEY AND ROMAN HOLDING 432

14. ROMAN POTTERY FOUND ON DITTO 434

[p001]

THE
ENGLISH VILLAGE COMMUNITY.

CHAPTER I.
_THE ENGLISH OPEN FIELD SYSTEM EXAMINED IN ITS MODERN
REMAINS._

I. THE DISTINCTIVE MARKS OF THE OPEN FIELD SYSTEM.

The distinctive marks of the open or common field system once
prevalent in England will be most easily learned by the study of an
example.

«Open fields of Hitchin Manor.»

The township of Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, will answer the purpose.
From the time of Edward the Confessor--and probably from much
earlier times--with intervals of private ownership, it has been a
royal manor.[1] And the Queen being still the lady of the manor, the
remains of its open fields have never been swept away by the ruthless
broom of an Enclosure Act.

Annexed is a reduced tracing of a map of the [p002] township without
the hamlets, made about the year 1816, and showing all the divisions
into which its fields wore then cut up.

It will be seen at once that it presents almost the features of a
spiders web. A great part of the township at that date, probably
nearly the whole of it in earlier times, was divided up into little
narrow strips.

«Divided into strips or seliones, _i.e._ acres, by balks.»

«Form of the acre.»

These strips, common to open fields all over England, were separated
from each other not by hedges, but by green balks of unploughed turf,
and are of great historical interest. They vary more or less in size
even in the same fields, as in the examples given on the map of a
portion of the Hitchin Purwell field. There are 'long' strips and
'short' strips. But taking them generally, and comparing them with
the statute acre of the scale at the corner of the map, it will be
seen at once that the normal strip is roughly identical with it.
The length of the statute acre of the scale is a furlong of 40 rods
or poles. It is 4 rods in width. Now 40 rods in length and 1 rod in
width make 40 square rods, or a _rood_; and thus, as there are 4
rods in breadth, the acre of the scale with which the normal strips
coincide is an _acre_ made up of 4 roods lying side by side.

Thus the strips are in fact roughly cut 'acres,' of the proper
shape for ploughing. For the furlong is the 'furrow long,' _i.e._
the length of the drive of the plough before it is turned; and that
this by long custom was fixed at 40 rods, is shown by the use of the
Latin word '_quarentena_' for furlong. The word 'rood' naturally
corresponds with as many furrows in the ploughing as are contained in
the breadth of one rod. And four of these roods lying side by side
made [p003] the acre strip in the open fields, and still make up
the statute acre.

[Illustration: PART OF PURWELL FIELD, HITCHIN.]

«Very ancient.»

This form of the acre is very ancient. Six hundred years ago, in the
earliest English law fixing the size of the statute acre (33 Ed.
I.), it is declared that '40 perches in length and 4 in breadth make
an acre.'[2] And further, we shall find that more than a thousand
years ago in Bavaria the shape of the strip in the open fields for
ploughing was also 40 rods in length and 4 rods in width, but the rod
was in that case the Greek and Roman rod of 10 ft. instead of the
English rod of 16½ ft.

«Half-acres.»

But to return to the English strips. In many places the open fields
were formerly divided into half-acre strips, which were called
'half-acres.' That is to say, a turf balk separated every two rods or
roods in the ploughing, the length of the furrow remaining the same.

The strips in the open fields are generally known by country folk
as 'balks,' and the Latin word used in terriers and cartularies for
the strip is generally '_selio_,' corresponding with the French word
'_sillon_,' (meaning furrow). In Scotland and Ireland the same strips
generally are known as 'rigs,' and the open field system is known
accordingly as the 'run-rig' system.

The whole arable area of an uninclosed township was usually divided
up by turf balks into as many thousands of these strips as its limits
would contain, and the tithing maps of many parishes besides Hitchin,
dating sixty or eighty years ago, show remains of [p004] them still
existing, although the process of ploughing up the balks and throwing
many strips together had gradually been going on for centuries.

* * * * *

«Shots or furlongs, or _quarentenæ_.»

Next, it will be seen that the strips on the map lie side by side
in groups, forming larger divisions of the field. These larger
divisions are called 'shots,' or 'furlongs,' and in Latin documents
'_quarentenæ_,' being always a furrow-long in width. Throughout their
whole length the furrows in the ploughing run parallel from end to
end; the balks which divide them into strips being, as the word
implies, simply two or three furrows left unploughed between them.[3]

The shots or furlongs are divided from one another by broader balks,
generally overgrown with bushes.

«Headlands.»

This grouping of the strips in furlongs or shots is a further
invariable feature of the English open field system. And it involves
another little feature which is also universally met with, viz. the
_headland_.

It will be seen on the map that mostly a common field-way gives
access to the strips; _i.e._ it runs along the side of the furlong
and the ends of the strips. But this is not always the case; and
when it is not, then there is a strip running along the length of
the furlong inside its boundaries and across the ends of the strips
composing it.[4] This is the _headland_. Sometimes when the strips of
the one furlong run at right angles to the strips of its neighbour,
the first strip in the one furlong does [p005] duty as the
headland giving access to the strips in the other. In either case all
the owners of the strips in a furlong have the right to turn their
plough upon the headland, and thus the owner of the headland must
wait until all the other strips are ploughed before he can plough his
own. The Latin term for the headland is '_forera_;' the Welsh, '_pen
tir_;' the Scotch, '_headrig_;' and the German (from the turning of
the plough upon it), '_anwende_.'

[Illustration: 'LINCHES' IN THE OPEN FIELDS OF CLOTHALL, HERTS.]

«Lynches, or linces.»

A less universal but equally peculiar feature of the open field
system in hilly districts is the 'lynch,' and it may often be
observed remaining when every other trace of an open field has
been removed by enclosure. Its right of survival lies in its
indestructibility. When a hill-side formed part of the open field
the strips almost always were made to run, not up and down the
hill, but horizontally along it; and in ploughing, the custom for
ages was always to turn the sod of the furrow downhill, the plough
consequently always returning one way idle. If the whole hill-side
were ploughed in one field, this would result in a gradual travelling
of the soil from the top to the bottom of the field, and it might
not be noticed. But as in the open field system the hill-side was
ploughed in strips with unploughed balks between them, no sod could
pass in the ploughing from one strip to the next; but the process
of moving the sod downwards would go on age after age just the same
within each individual strip. In other words, every year's ploughing
took a sod from the higher edge of the strip and put it on the lower
edge; and the result was that the strips became in time long level
terraces one above the other, and the balks between them [p006]
grew into steep rough banks of long grass covered often with natural
self-sown brambles and bushes. These banks between the plough-made
terraces are generally called _lynches_, or _linces_; and the word is
often applied to the terraced strips themselves, which go by the name
of 'the linces.'[5]

«Butts.»

Where the strips abruptly meet others, or _abut_ upon a boundary at
right angles, they are sometimes called _butts_.

«Gored acres.»

«No man's land.»

Two other small details marking the open field system require only
to be simply mentioned. Corners of the fields which, from their
shape, could not be cut up into the usual acre or half-acre strips,
were sometimes divided into tapering strips pointed at one end, and
called 'gores,' or 'gored acres.' In other cases little odds and ends
of unused land remained, which from time immemorial were called 'no
man's land,' or 'any one's land,' or 'Jack's land,' as the case might
be.

[Illustration: HITCHIN, PURWELL FIELD.

PROPRIETORS NAMES WITH THEIR NUMBERS.]

Thus there are plenty of outward marks and traits by which the open
common field may be recognised wherever it occurs,--the acre or
half-acre [p007] strips or _seliones_, the gored shape of some of
them, the balks and sometimes lynches between them, the shots or
furlongs (_quarentenæ_) in which they lie in groups, the headlands
which give access to the strips when they lie off the field-ways, the
butts, and lastly the odds and ends of 'no man's land.'

II. SCATTERED AND INTERMIXED OWNERSHIP IN THE OPEN FIELDS.

«Scattered or intermixed ownership.»

Passing from these little outward marks to the matter of ownership,
a most inconvenient peculiarity presents itself, which is by far
the most remarkable and important feature of the open field system
wherever it is found. It is the fact that neither the strips nor the
furlongs represented a complete holding or property, but that the
several holdings were made up of a multitude of strips scattered
about on all sides of the township, one in this furlong and another
in that, intermixed, and it might almost be said entangled together,
as though some one blindfold had thrown them about on all sides of
him.

The extent to which this was the case in the Hitchin common fields,
even so late as the beginning of the present century, will be
realised by reference to the map annexed. It is a reduced tracing
of a map showing the ownership of the strips in one division of
the open fields of Hitchin called the _Purwell_ field. The strips
are numbered, and correspond with the owners' names given in the
tally at the side. The strips belonging to two of the owners are
also coloured, so as at once to catch the eye, and the area of each
separate piece is marked upon it. The number [p008] of scattered
pieces held by each owner is also given in the note below; and as the
map embraces only about one-third of the Hitchin fields, it should be
noticed that each owner probably held in the parish three times as
many separate pieces as are there described![6] Further, at the side
of the map of the Hitchin township, is a reduced tracing of a plan of
the estate of a single landowner in the townfields of Hitchin, which
shows very clearly the curious scattering of the strips in a single
ownership all over the fields, notwithstanding that the tendency
towards consolidation of the holdings by exchanges and purchases had
evidently made some progress.

III. THE OPEN FIELDS WERE THE COMMON FIELDS OF A VILLAGE COMMUNITY OR
TOWNSHIP UNDER A MANOR.

The next fact to be noted is that under the English system the
open fields were the common fields--the arable land--of a village
community or township under a manorial lordship. This could hardly be
more clearly illustrated than by the Hitchin example. [p009]

«Periodical presentment of the jurors and the homage of the manor.»

The Hitchin manor was, as already stated, a royal manor. The _Court
Leet_ and _View of Frankpledge_ were held concurrently with the
_Court Baron_ of the manor. Periodically at this joint court a record
was made on the presentment of the jurors and homage of various
particulars relating to both the manor and township.

The record for the year 1819 will be found at length in Appendix A,
and it may be taken as a common form.

The jurors and homage first present that the manor comprises the
township of Hitchin and hamlet of Walsworth, and includes within it
three lesser manors; also that it extends into other hamlets and
parishes.

«The boundaries.»

They then record the _boundaries_ of the township (including the
hamlet of Walsworth) as follows, viz.:--

'From Orton Head to Burford Ray, and from thence to a Water Mill
called Hide Mill, and from thence to Willberry Hills, and from
thence to a place called Bossendell, and from thence to a Water
Mill called Purwell Mill, and from thence to a Brook or River
called Ippollitt's Brook, and from thence to Maydencroft Lane, and
from thence to a place called Wellhead, and from thence to a place
called Stubborn Bush, and from thence to a place called Offley
Cross, and from thence to Five Borough Hills [Five Barrows], and
from thence back to Orton Head, where the boundaries commenced.'

The form in which these boundaries are given is of great antiquity.
It is a form used by the Romans two thousand years ago, and almost
continuously followed from that time to this.[7] Its importance for
[p010] the purpose in hand will be manifest as the inquiry proceeds.

«The courts.»

The jurisdiction of the Court Leet and View of Frankpledge is
recorded to extend within the foregoing boundaries, _i.e._ over
the township, that of the Court Baron beyond them over the whole
manor, which was more extensive than the township. The Court Leet
is therefore the Court of the township, the Court Baron that of the
manor.

It is then stated that in the Court Leet at Michaelmas the jurors of
the king elect and present to the lord--

«The officers.»

Two constables,

Six headboroughs (two for each of the three wards),

Two ale-conners,

Two leather-searchers and sealers, and

A bellman, who is also the watchman and crier of the town.

All the foregoing presentments have reference to the township, and
are those of 'the jurors of our lord the King (_i.e._ of the Court
Leet), and the homage of the Court' [Baron] of the manor.

«Reliefs, fines, &c.»

«Pound and stocks.»

Then come presentments of the homage of the Court of the Manor
alone, describing the reliefs of freeholders and the fines, &c., of
copyholders under the manor, and various particulars as to powers
of leasing, [p011] forfeiture, cutting timber, heriots, &c.; the
freedom of grain from toll in the market, the provision by the lord
of the _common pound_ and the _stocks_ for the use of the tenants of
the manor, and the right of the lord with the consent of the homage
to grant out portions of the waste by copy of court roll at a rent
and the customary services.

Next the _commons_ are described.

«Green commons. Lammas meadows.»

(1) The portions coloured dark green on the map are described
as _Green Commons_, and those coloured light green as _Lammas
Meadows_;[8] and every occupier of an ancient messuage or cottage
in the township has certain defined rights of common thereon, the
obligation to find the common bull falling upon the rectory, and a
common herdsman being elected by the homage at a Court Baron.

«Common fields.»

«The three fields and rotation of crops.»

(2) The _common fields_ are stated to be--

{Purwell field, Welshman's croft,}
{Burford field, Spital field,}
{Moremead field, Bury field;}

and it is recorded that these common fields have immemorially been,
and ought to be, kept and cultivated in three successive seasons
of _tilth grain_, _etch grain_, and _fallow_: Purwell field and
Welshman's croft being fallow one year; Burford field and Spital
field the next year; Moremead field and Bury field the year after,
and so on in regular rotation. [p012]

«Common rights over the open fields when not under crop.»

It is stated that every occupier of unenclosed land in any of the
common fields of the township may pasture his sheep over the rest of
the field after the corn is cut and carried, and when it is fallow.
If he choose to enclose his own portion of the common field he may
do so, but he then gives up for ever his right of pasture over the
rest. It is under this custom that the strips and balks are gradually
disappearing.

«Hamlet.»

The ancient messuages and cottages in the hamlet of Walsworth had
their separate green common and herdsman, but (at this date) no
common fields, because they had already been some time ago enclosed.

It will be seen from the map how very small a proportion of the land
of the township was in meadow or pasture. The open arable fields
occupied nearly the whole of it. The community to which it belonged,
and to whose wants it was fitted, was evidently a community occupied
mainly in agriculture.

«Copyholds and freeholds intermixed.»

Another feature requiring notice was the fact that in the open fields
freehold and copyhold land were intermixed; some of the strips being
freehold, whilst the next strip was copyhold, instead of all the
freehold and all the copyhold lying together. And in the same way the
lands belonging to the three lesser or sub-manors lay intermixed, and
not all apart by themselves. The open field system overrode the whole.

Thus, if the Hitchin example may be taken as a typical one of the
English open field system, it may be regarded generally as having
belonged to a village or township under a manor. We may assume that
the holdings were composed of numbers of strips scattered [p013]
over the three open fields: and that the husbandry was controlled by
those rules as to rotation of crops and fallow in three seasons which
marked the three-field system, and secured uniformity of tillage
throughout each field. Lastly, whilst fallow after the crop was
gathered, the open fields were probably everywhere subject to the
common rights of pasture. The sheep of the whole township wandered
and pastured all over the strips and balks of its fields, while the
cows of the township were daily driven by a common herdsman to the
green commons, or, after Lammas Day, when the hay crop of the owners
was secured, to the lammas meadows.

IV. THE WIDE PREVALENCE OF THE SYSTEM THROUGH GREAT BRITAIN.

But before the attempt is made to trace back the system, it may be
well to ask what evidence there is as to its wide prevalence in
England, and with what reason the particular example of the Hitchin
township may be taken as generally typical.

«Enclosure of open fields.»

In the first place, an examination into the details of an Enclosure
Act will make clear the point that the system as above described
is the system which it was the object of the Enclosure Acts to
remove. They were generally drawn in the same form, commencing with
the recital that the open and common fields lie dispersed in small
pieces intermixed with each other and inconveniently situated, that
divers persons own parts of them, and are entitled to rights of
common on them, so that in their present state they are incapable of
improvement, and that it is [p014] desired that they may be divided
and enclosed, a specific share being set out and allowed to each
owner. For this purpose Enclosure Commissioners are appointed, and
under their award the balks are ploughed up, the fields divided into
blocks for the several owners, hedges planted, and the whole face of
the country changed.

«Number of Acts.»

The common fields of twenty-two parishes within ten miles of Hitchin
were enclosed in this way between 1766 and 1832. All the Acts were
of the same character.[9] And as, taking the whole of England, with,
roughly speaking, its 10,000 parishes, nearly 4,000 Enclosure Acts
were passed between 1760 [p015] and 1844,[10] it will at once be
understood how generally prevalent was this form of the open field
system so late as the days of the grandfathers of this generation.

«Wide extent of open field system.»

The old 'Statistical Account of Scotland,' obtained eighty years ago
by inquiry in every parish, shows that at its date, under the name
of 'run-rig,' a simpler form of the open field system still lingered
on here and there more or less all over Scotland. Traces of it still
exist in the Highlands, and there are well-known remains of its
strips and balks also in Wales. The run-rig system is still prevalent
in some parts of Ireland. But at present we confine our attention to
the form which the system assumed in England, and for this purpose
the Hitchin example may fairly be taken as typical.

«Uneconomical;»

Now, judged from a modern point of view, it will readily be
understood that the open field system, and especially its peculiarity
of straggling or scattered ownership, regarded from a modern
agricultural point of view, was absurdly uneconomical. The waste
of time in getting about from one part of a farm to another; the
uselessness of one owner attempting to clean his own land when it
could be sown with thistles from the seed blown from the neighbouring
strips of a less careful and thrifty owner; the quarrelling about
headlands and rights of way, or [p016] paths made without right;
the constant encroachments of unscrupulous or overbearing holders
upon the balks--all this made the system so inconvenient, that Arthur
Young, coming across it in France, could hardly keep his temper as he
described with what perverse ingenuity it seemed to be contrived as
though purposely to make agriculture as awkward and uneconomical as
possible.

«but must have had meaning once.»

But these now inconvenient traits of the open field system must once
have had a meaning, a use, and even a convenience which were the
cause of their original arrangement. Like the apparently meaningless
sentinel described by Prince Bismarck uselessly pacing up and down
the middle of a lawn in the garden of the Russian palace, there
must have been an originally sufficient reason to account for the
beginning of what is now useless and absurd. And just as in that
case, search in the military archives disclosed that once upon
a time, in the days of Catherine the Great, a solitary snowdrop
had appeared on the lawn, to guard which a sentinel was posted by
an order which had never been revoked; so a similar search will
doubtless disclose an ancient original reason for even the (at first
sight) most unreasonable features of the open field system.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The lesser manors included in it are clearly only _sub_-manors,
and for the present purpose do not destroy its original unity.

[2] _Statutes_, _Record Com._ Ed. i. p. 206.

[3] _Balc_ is a Welsh word; and when the plough is accidentally
turned aside, and leaves a sod of grass unturned between the furrows,
the plough is said by the Welsh ploughman speaking Welsh, to '_balc_'
(balco).

[4] See the map of a portion of the Purwell field.

[5] Striking examples of these lynches may be seen from the railroad
at Luton in Bedfordshire, and between Cambridge and Hitchin, as well
as in various other parts of England. They may be seen often on the
steep sides of the Sussex Downs and the Chiltern Hills. Great numbers
of them are to be noticed from the French line between Calais and
Paris. In some cases on the steep chalk downs, terraces for ploughing
have evidently been artificially cut; but even in these cases there
must always have been a gradual natural growth of the lynches by
annual accretion from the ploughing. In old times, in order to secure
the turning of the sod downhill, the plough, after cutting a furrow,
returned as stated one way idle; but in more recent times a plough
called a 'turn-wrist plough' came into use, which by reversing its
share could be used both ways, to the great saving of time.

[6] The number of parcels held by each owner was as follows:--

Owner Parcels

No. 1 38
2 35
3 28
4 25
5 3
6 8
7 4
8 28
9 6
10 1
11 10
12 2
13 5
14 5
15 8
16 7
17 2
18 1
19 12
20 1
21 3
22 1
23 4
24 0
25 0
26 1
27 1
28 0
29 1
30 3
31 2
32 1
33 3
34 6
35 4
36 1
37 2
38 2
39 1
40 1
41 6
42 3
43 2
44 1
45 1
46 2
47 7
48 1
──────
Total 289

[7] _Hyginus de Condicionibus Agrorum._ _Die Schriften der Römischen
Feldmesser_ (Lachmann, &c.), i. p. 114. 'Nam invenimus sæpe in
publicis instrumentis significanter inscripta territoria, ita ut
_ex colliculo qui appellatur ille ad flumen illud, et super flumen
illud ad rivum illum aut viam illam, et per viam illam ad infima
montis illius, qui locus appellatur ille, et inde per jugum montis
illius in summum, et super summum montis per divergia aquæ ad locum,
qui appellatur ille, et inde deorsum versus ad locum illum, et inde
ad compitum illius, et inde per monumentum illius, ad locum unde
primum cœpit scriptura esse_.' See as an early example, 'Sententia
Minuciorum,' _Corpus Inscript. Lat._ i. 199.

[8] The lammas meadows are divided into strips like the arable land
for the purpose of the hay crop.

[9] These Enclosure Acts were as follows:--

Date of Names of Parishes
Enclosure whose open fields
Acts were thereby enclosed

1766 Hexton [Herts].
1795 Henlow [Beds].
1796 Norton [Herts].
1797 Campton-cum-ShefFord [Beds].
1797 King's Walden [Herts].
1797 Weston [Herts].
1802 Hinxworth [Herts].
1802 Shitlington [Beds]. Holwell [Beds].
1804 Arlsey [Beds].
1807 Offley [Herts].
1808 Luton [Beds].
1809 Barton-in-the-Clay [Beds].
Codicote [Herts].
1810 Welwyn [Herts].
Knebworth [Herts].
1811 Pirton [Herts].
1811 Great Wymondley [Herts]. Little Wymondley [Herts].
Ippollitts [Herts].
1827 Langford [Beds].
1832 Clifton [Beds].

[10] Porter's _Progress of the Nation_, p. 146:--

1760–69 385
1770–79 660
1780–89 246
1790–99 469
1800–9 847
1810–19 853
1820–29 205
1830–39 136
1840–44 66
─────
3,867

[p017]

CHAPTER II.
_THE ENGLISH OPEN FIELD SYSTEM TRACED BACK TO THE DOMESDAY
SURVEY--IT IS THE SHELL OF SERFDOM--THE MANOR WITH A
VILLAGE COMMUNITY IN VILLENAGE UPON IT._

I. THE IDENTITY OF THE SYSTEM WITH THAT OF THE MIDDLE AGES.

That this open field system, the remains of which have now been
examined, was identical with that which existed in the Middle Ages
might easily be proved by a continuous chain of examples. But it
will be enough for the present purpose to pick out a few typical
instances, using them as stepping-stones.

«Tusser.»

It would be easy to quote Tusser's description of '_Champion
Farming_' in the sixteenth century. In his 'Five Hundred Points of
Good Husbandry' he describes the respective merits of 'several,' and
'champion' or open field farming. But as he describes the latter as
a system already out of date in his time, and as rapidly giving way
to the more economical system of 'several' or enclosed fields, we may
pass on at once to evidence another couple of centuries earlier in
date. [p018]

Of the fact that the open field system 500 years ago (in the
fourteenth century), with its divisions into furlongs and subdivision
into acre or half-acre strips, existed in England, the 'Vision of
Piers the Plowman' may be appealed to as a witness.

«Piers the Plowman.»

What was 'the faire felde ful of folke,' in which the poet saw 'alle
maner of men' 'worchyng and wandryng,' some 'putten hem to the plow,'
whilst others 'in settyng and in sowyng swonken ful harde'?[11] A
modern English field shut in by hedges would not suit the vision
in the least. It was clearly enough the open field into which all
the villagers turned out on the bright spring morning, and over
which they would be scattered, some working and some looking on.
In no other 'faire felde' would he see such folk of all sorts, the
'[hus]bondemen,' bakers and brewers, butchers, woolwebsters and
weavers of linen, tailors, tinkers, and tollers in market, masons,
dikers, and delvers; while the cooks cried 'Hote pies hote!' and
tavern-keepers set in competition their wines and roast meat at the
alehouse.[12]

Then as to the division of the fields into furlongs; remembering
that the wide balks between them and along the headlands were often
covered with 'brakes and brambles,' the point is at once settled by
the _naïve_ confession of the priest who scarce knew perfectly his
Paternoster, and could 'ne solfe ne synge' 'ne seyntes lyues rede,'
yet knew well enough the 'rymes of Robyn hood,' and how to 'fynde an
hare in a _fourlonge_.'[13] [p019]

Further, a chance indication that the furlongs were divided into
half-acre strips occurs most naturally in that part of the story
where the folk in the fair field, sick of priests and parsons and
other false guides, come at last to Piers the plowman, and beg him to
show them the way to truth; and he replies that he must first plow
and sow his 'half-acre:'

I have an _half acre_ to erye · bi the heighe way:
Hadde I eried this half acre · and sowen it after,
I wolde wende with you · and the way teche.[14]

And if there should remain a shadow of doubt whether Piers' half-acre
must necessarily have been one of the strips between the balks into
which the furlongs were divided, even this is cleared up by the
perfect little picture which follows of the folk in the field helping
him to plow it. For in its unconscious truthfulness of graphic
detail, after saying,--

Now is perkyn and his pilgrymes · to the plowe faren:
To erie his halue acre · holpyn hym manye,

the very first lines in the list of services rendered explain that--

Dikeres and delueres · digged up the balkes.[15]

«Terrier of Cambridge open fields in the fourteenth century.»

This incidental evidence of 'Piers the Plowman' is fully borne out
by a manuscript _terrier_ of one of the open fields near Cambridge,
belonging to the later years of the fourteenth or beginning of
the fifteenth century.[16] It gives the names of the owners and
occupiers of all the seliones or strips. They are [p020] divided
by balks of turf. They lie in furlongs or _quarentenæ_. They have
frequently headlands or _foreræ_. Some of the strips are gored, and
called _gored acres_. Many of them are described as _butts_. Indeed,
were it not that the country round Cambridge being flat there are
no _lynches_, almost every one of the features of the system is
distinctly visible in this terrier.

«The system already decaying.»

But this terrier also contains evidence that the system was even then
in a state of decay and disintegration. The balks were disappearing,
and the strips, though still remembered as strips, were becoming
merged in larger portions, so that they lie thrown together _sine
balca_. The mention is frequent of iii. seliones which used to be v.,
ii. which used to be iv., iii. which used to be viii., and so on.
Evidently the meaning and use of the half-acre strips are already
gone.

It will be well, therefore, to take another leap, and at once to pass
behind the Black Death--that great watershed in economic history--so
as to examine the details of the system _before_ rather than after
it had sustained the tremendous shock which the death in one year of
half the population may well have given to it.

«Winslow Manor rolls of Ed. III.»

A remarkably excellent opportunity for inquiry is presented by a
complete set of manor rolls during the reign of Edward III. for the
Manor of Winslow in Buckinghamshire, preserved in the Cambridge
University Library.[17] [p021]

No evidence could possibly be more to the purpose. Belonging to the
Abbey of St. Albans, the rolls were kept with scrupulous accuracy and
care. Every change of ownership during the long reign of Edward III.
is recorded in regular form; and the year 1348–9--the year of the
Black Death--occurring in the course of this reign, and occasioning
more changes of ownership than usual, the MS. presents, if one may
appropriate a geological expression, something like an economic
section of the manor, revealing with unusual clearness the various
economic strata in which its holdings were arranged.

«The open field.»

Before examining these holdings it is needful only to state that
here, as in the later examples, the fields of the manor are open
fields, divided into furlongs, which in their turn are made up with
apparently almost absolute regularity of half-acre strips. Whenever
(with very rare exceptions) a change of ownership takes place, and
the contents of the holding are described, they turn out to be made
up of half-acre pieces, or seliones, scattered all over the fields.

«Half-acre strips.»

The typical entry on these rolls in such cases is that A. B.
surrenders to the lord, or has died holding, a messuage and so many
acres of land, of which a half-acre lies in such and such a field,
and often in such and such a furlong, between land of C. D. and E.
F., another half-acre somewhere else between two other persons' land,
another half-acre somewhere else, and so on. If the holding be of
1½ acres it is found to be in 3 half-acre pieces, if of 4 acres, in
8 half-acre pieces, and so on, scattered over the fields. Sometimes
amongst the half-acres are mentioned still smaller portions, roods
and even half-roods or doles [p022] (chiefly of pasture or meadow
land), belonging to the holdings, but the division into half-acre
strips was clearly the rule.

There can be no doubt, therefore, of the identity of the system seen
at work in these manor rolls with that of which some of the _débris_
may still be examined in unenclosed parishes to-day.

II. THE WINSLOW MANOR ROLLS OF THE REIGN OF EDWARD III.--EXAMPLE OF A
VIRGATE OR YARD-LAND.

Starting with the fact that the fields of the manor of Winslow and
its hamlets[18] were open fields divided into furlongs and half-acre
strips, the chief object of inquiry will be the nature of the
holdings of its various classes of tenants.

«Demesne and villenage.»

In the first place the land of the manor was divided, like that of
almost all other manors, into two distinct parts--land in the _lord's
demesne_, and land in _villenage_.

The land in demesne may be described as the home farm of the lord of
the manor, including such portions of it as he may have chosen to let
off to tenants for longer or shorter terms, and at money rents in
free tenure.

«Three-field system.»

The land in villenage is also in the occupation of tenants, but it
is held in villenage, at the will of the lord, and at customary
services. It lies in open fields. These are divided into three
seasons, according to the [p023] three-field system. There is a
_west field_, _east field_, and _south field_. The demesne land lies
also in these three fields,[19] probably more or less intermixed,
as in many cases, with the strips in villenage, but sometimes in
separate furlongs or shots from the latter.

Throughout the pages of the manor rolls, in recording transfers
of holdings in villenage, the common form is always adhered to of
a surrender by the old tenant to the lord, and a re-grant of the
holding to the new tenant, to be held by him at the will of the lord
in villenage at the usual services. Where the change of holding
occurs on the death of a tenant, the common form recites that the
holding has reverted to the lord, who re-grants it to the new tenant
as before in villenage.

Further examination at once discloses a marked difference in kind
between some classes of holdings in villenage and others.

«Virgates and half-virgates.»

In some cases the holding handed over is simply described by the
one comprehensive word '_virgata_' (the Latin equivalent for
'yard-land'), without any further description. The 'virgate' of A.
B. is transferred to C. D. in one lump; _i.e._ the holding is an
indivisible whole, evidently so well known as to need no description
of its contents.

In other cases the holding is in the same way described as a
'_half-virgate_,' without any details being needful as to its
contents.

But in the case of all other holdings the contents are described in
detail half-acre by half-acre, each half-acre being identified by the
names of the holders [p024] of the strips on either side of it. They
vary in size from one half-acre to 8 or 10 or 12 half-acres, and in
a few cases more. The greater number of them are, however, evidently
the holdings of small cottier tenants. A few cases occur, but only a
few, where a messuage is held without land.

«What is a virgate or yard-land?»

But the question of interest is what may be the nature of the
holdings called virgates and half-virgates--these well-known
_bundles_ of land, which, as already said, need no description
of their contents. Fortunately in one single case a virgate or
yard-land--that of John Moldeson--loses its indivisible unity and is
let out again by the lord to several persons in portions. These being
new holdings, and no longer making up a virgate, it became needful to
describe their contents on the rolls.[20] Thus the details of which a
virgate was made up are accidentally exposed to view.

Putting the broken pieces of it together, this virgate of John
Moldeson is found to have consisted of a messuage in the village of
Shipton, in the manor of Winslow, and the following half-acre strips
of land scattered all over the open fields of the manor.

«The virgate or yard-land of John Moldeson.»

_Where situated._ _Between the Land of_

½ acre in _Clayforlong_. John Boveton and William Jonynges.
½ acre in _Brereforlong_. Richard Lif and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Anamanlond_ by the
king's highway (juxta regiam viam).
½ acre at _Lofthorn_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _le Wawes_. John Hikkes and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Michelpeysforlong_. Henry Warde and John Watekyns.
½ acre above _le Snoute_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre in _le Snouthale_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Livershulle_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Narowe-aldemed_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre in _Shiptondene_. John Hikkes and John Howeprest.
½ acre in _Waterforough_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
2 roods below _Chircheheigh_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Fyveacres_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Sherdeforlong_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Thorlong_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre (of pasture) in John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
_Farnhamesden_.
½ acre (of pasture) in three
parcels.
1 acre (of pasture) below
_Estattemore_.
½ acre (of pasture) at John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
_Brodemore_.
½ acre (of meadow) at John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
_Risshemede_.
2 doles (of meadow) in John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
_Shrovedoles_.
½ acre below _le Knolle_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Brodealdemade_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre above _Brodelangelonde_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Merslade_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Langebenehullesdene_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Hoggestonforde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Clayforde_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Narwelanglonde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Wodewey_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre _Benethenhystrete_. William Jonynges and Henry Boviton.
½ acre _Benethenhystrete_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Langeslo_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Lowe_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _le Knolle_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Brodealdemede_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Shortslo_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Eldeleyen_. John Watekyns and John Janekyns.
½ acre above _Langeblakgrove_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Blakeputtis_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre above _Medeforlong_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _le Thorn_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Overlitellonde_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre above _le Brodelitellonde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Overlitellonde_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre above _Medeforlong_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _le Thorn_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Hoggestonforde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Eldeleyes_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Cokwell_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Brodefarnham_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Langefarnham_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _Farnhamshide_. Henry Boveton and Richard Atte Halle.
½ acre at _Howeshamme_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Stonysticch_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Coppedemore_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Brerebuttes_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Wodeforlonge_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Porteweye_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Litebenhulle_. Henry Boveton and Matthew atte Lane.
½ acre at _Michilblakegrove_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Litelblakegrove_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Brodereten_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Brodeliteldon_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Stoteford_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre at _Brodelangelonde_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre above _Litelbelesden_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.
½ acre in _Anamaneslonde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Litelpeisaere_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
1 rood in _le Trendel_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Merslade_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Merslade_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre at _Brodelitellonde_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre below _le Knolle_. John Watekyns and Henry Warde.
½ acre above _le Brodealdemede_. John Watekyns and John Mayn.

«Summary of the contents of a virgate or yard-land.»

Thus the virgate or yard-land of John Moldeson was composed of a
messuage and

68 half-acre strips of arable land,
3 rood strips of arable land,
2 doles,
1 acre of pasture,
3 half-acres of pasture, and
1 half-acre of meadow,

scattered all over the open fields in their various furlongs.

[Illustration: A NORMAL VIRGATE OR YARDLAND.

The normal holding of the villanus, consisting of a
messuage and 30 scattered acres coloured red, by way of
example on the Map of the open fields of Hitchen.]

«Rotation in the order of the strips.»

But it may be asked, how can it be proved that the other virgates
were like the one virgate of John [p027] Moldeson thus by chance
described and exposed to view on the manor rolls? Is it right to
assume that this virgate may be taken as a pattern of the rest? The
answer is, that in the description of its 72 half-acre strips the
144 neighbouring strips are incidentally involved. And as 66 of its
strips had on one side of them 66 other strips of another tenant,
viz. John Watekyns, and on the other side 43 of the next strips
belonged to Henry Warde, and 23 to John Mayn, and 8 of the strips
only had other neighbours, it is evident that the virgate of John
Moldeson was one of a system of similar virgates formed of scattered
half-acre strips, arranged in a certain regular order of rotation,
in which John Moldeson came 66 times next to John Watekyns, and two
other neighbours followed him, one 43 and the o ther 23 times, in
similar succession.

«A virgate or yard-land is a bundle of 30 or 40 acres in
scattered acre or half-acre strips.»

Thus the Winslow virgates were intermixed, and each was _a holding
of a messuage in the village, and between 30 and 40 modern acres of
land, not contiguous, but scattered in half-acre pieces all over
the common fields_. The half-virgate consisted in the same way of a
messuage in the village with half as many strips scattered over the
same fields. The intermixed ownership complained of in the Inclosure
Acts, and surviving in the Hitchin maps, need no longer surprise us.

«The normal virgate was of 30 acres.»

We know now what a virgate or yard-land was. We shall find that its
normal area was 30 scattered acres--10 acres in each of the three
fields. Using again the map of the Hitchin fields, we may mark upon
it the contents of a normal virgate by way of impressing upon the eye
the nature of this peculiar holding. It must always be remembered
that when [p028] the fields were divided into half-acres instead of
acres the number of its scattered strips would be doubled.

«Two-thirds of the land held in virgates and half-virgates.»

It is not possible to ascertain from a mere record of the changes in
the holdings precisely how many of these virgates and half-virgates
there were in the manor of Winslow. But in the year of the Black
Death it may be assumed that the mortality fell with something like
equality upon all classes of tenants, 153 changes of holding from the
death of previous holders being recorded in 1348–9. Out of these, 28
were holders of virgates and 14 of half-virgates. The virgates and
half-virgates of these holders who died of the Black Death must have
included more than 2,400 half-acre strips in the open fields; and
adding up the contents of the other holdings of tenants who died that
year, it would seem that about two-thirds of the whole area which
changed hands in that memorable year were included in the virgates
and half-virgates. It may be inferred, therefore, that about the
same proportion of the whole area of the open fields must have been
included in the virgates and half-virgates whose holders died or
survived. Clearly, then, the mass of the land in the open fields was
held in these two grades of holdings.[21]

«They are held in villenage.»

Thus much, then, may be learned from the Winslow manor rolls with
respect to the virgates and half-virgates. Not only were they
holdings each composed of a messuage and the scattered strips
belonging to it in the open fields, not only did they form the
[p029] two chief grades of holdings with equality in each grade, but
also they were all alike held in _villenage_. They were not holdings
of the lord's demesne land, but of the land in villenage. The
holders, besides their virgates and half-virgates, often, it is true,
held other land, part of the lord's demesne, as free tenants at an
annual rent. But such free holdings were no part of their _virgates_.
The virgates and half-virgates were held in villenage. Of these they
were not _free_ tenants, but _villein_ tenants. So also the lesser
cottage holdings were held in villenage. But the holders of virgates
and half-virgates were the highest grades in the hierarchy of tenants
in villenage. They not only held the greater part of the open fields
in their bundles of scattered strips; the rolls also show that they
almost exclusively served as jurors in the 'Halimot,' or Court of
the Manor; though occasionally one or two other villein tenants with
smaller holdings were associated with them.[22]

«The villein holders, 'villani,' are '_adscripti glebæ_.'»

It is possible that just as villein tenants could hold in free
tenure land in the lord's demesne, so free men might hold virgates
in villenage and retain their personal freedom; but those at all
events of the holders of virgates who were _nativi_, _i.e._ villeins
by descent were _adscripti glebæ_. They held their holdings at the
will of the lord, and were bound to perform the customary services.
If they allowed their houses to [p030] get out of repair they were
guilty of _waste_, and the jury were fined if they did not report the
neglect.[23]

Yet the entries in the rolls prove that their holdings were
hereditary, passing by the lord's re-grant from father to son by
the rule of primogeniture, on payment of the customary heriot or
relief.[24]

Widows had dower, and widowers were _tenants by the curtesy_, as in
the case of freeholds. The holders in villenage, even 'nativi,' could
make wills which were proved before the _cellerarius_ of the abbey,
and had done so time out of mind, while the wills of free tenants
were proved at St. Albans.[25]

These things all look like a certain recognition of freedom within
the restraints of the villenage. But if the 'nativi' married without
the lord's consent they were fined. If they sold an ox without
licence, again they were fined. If they left the manor without
licence they were searched for, and if found arrested as fugitives
and brought back.[26] If their daughters lost their chastity[27] the
lord again had his fine. And [p031] in all these cases the whole
jury were fined if they neglected to report the delinquent.

«But their serfdom is breaking up.»

Their services were no doubt limited and defined by custom, and so
late as the reign of Edward III. mostly discharged by a money payment
in lieu of the actual service, but they rested nominally on the will
of the lord; and sometimes to test their obedience the relaxed rein
was tightened, and trivial orders were issued, such as that they
should go off to the woods and pick nuts for the lord.[28] In case
of dispute a court was held under the great ash tree at St. Albans,
and the decision of this superior manorial court at head-quarters
settled the question.[29] This villenage of the Winslow tenants was,
no doubt, in the fourteenth century mild in its character; the silent
working of economic laws was breaking it up; but it was villenage
still. It was serfdom, but it was serfdom in the last stages of its
relaxation and decay.

Already, any harking back by the landlord upon older and stricter
rules--any return, for instance, to the actual services instead
of the money payments in lieu of them--produced resentment and
insubordination amongst the villein tenants. Murmurs were already
heard in the courts, and symptoms appear on the rolls in the year
following the Black Death which clearly indicate the presence of
smouldering embers very likely soon to burst into flame.[30] The
rebellion under Wat Tyler was, in fact, not far ahead. But in this
inquiry we are looking backwards into earlier times, in order to
learn what English serfdom was when fully in force, rather than
in the days when [p032] it was breaking up. In the meantime the
practical knowledge gained from the Winslow manor rolls, how a
community in serfdom fitted as it were into the open field system
as into an outer shell, and still more the knowledge of what the
virgate and half-virgate in villenage really were, drawn from actual
examples, may prove a useful key in unlocking still further the
riddle of earlier serfdom.

III. THE HUNDRED ROLLS OF EDWARD I., EMBRACING FIVE MIDLAND COUNTIES.

The facts thus learned from the Winslow Manor Rolls throw just that
flash of light upon the otherwise dry details of the Hundred Rolls of
Edward I. which is needful to make the picture they give in detail of
the manors in parts of five midland counties vivid and clear.

«Surveys of manors in five counties, A.D. 1279.»

English economic history is rich in its materials; and of all the
records of the economic condition of England, next to the Domesday
Survey, the Hundred Rolls are the most important and remarkable. The
second volume, in its 1,000 folio pages, contains _inter alia_ a true
and clear description of every manor in a large district, embracing
portions of Oxfordshire, Berkshire, Bedfordshire, Huntingdonshire,
and Cambridgeshire, in about the year 1279; and as in most cases the
name of every tenant is recorded, with the character of his holding
and a description of his payments and services, the picture of each
manor has almost the detail and accuracy of a photograph. Turning
over its pages, the mass of detail may at first appear confused and
bewildering, and in one sense it is so, because [p033] it relates
to a system which, however simple when fully at work, becomes broken
up and entangled whilst in process of disintegration. But the key to
it once mastered, the original features of the system may still be
recognised. Even the broken pieces fall into their proper places, and
the general economic outlines of the several manors stand out sharply
and clearly marked.

«They are of the Winslow type.»

Speaking generally, in its chief economic features every manor is
alike, as in the record itself one common form of survey serves for
them all. Hence the Winslow example gives the requisite key to the
whole. Bringing to the record the knowledge of how the open fields
were everywhere divided into furlongs, and acre or half-acre strips,
and that virgates and half-virgates were equal bundles of strips
scattered all over the fields, the description of the manors in the
Hundred Rolls becomes perfectly intelligible.

In the first place the manor consists, as in the Winslow example, of
two parts--the land in demesne and the land in villenage.

The land in demesne consists of the home farm, and portions,
irregular in area, let out from it to what are called free tenants
(_libere tenentes_), some of them being nevertheless villeins holding
their portions of the demesne lands in free tenure at certain rents
in addition to their regular holdings.

«Virgates and half-virgates.»

The land in villenage, as in the Winslow manor, is held mostly in
virgates and half-virgates, and below these cottiers hold smaller
holdings, also in villenage.

In describing the tenants in villenage there is first a statement
that A. B. holds a _virgate_ in villenage at such and such payments
and services, which are often [p034] very minutely described. The
money value of each service and the total value of them all is in
many cases also carefully given. This description of the holding and
services of A. B. is then followed by a list of persons who also
_each_ hold a virgate at the same services as A. B.

Secondly, there is a similar statement in detail that C. D. holds a
_half-virgate_ in villenage, and that such and such are his payments
and services, followed by a similar list of persons who also _each_
hold a half-virgate at the same services as C. D.

«Cottier tenants.»

Then follows a list of the little cottier tenants, and their
holdings and services. Amongst some of these cottage holdings there
is equality, some are irregular, and some consist of a cottage and
nothing else.

These holdings are all in villenage, but, as before mentioned, the
names of the villein tenants often occur again in the list of free
tenants (_libere tenentes_) of portions of the lord's demesne or of
recently reclaimed land (_terra assarta_).

This may be taken as a fair description of the common type of manor
throughout the Hundred Rolls, with local variations.

«With exceptional variations the manors are all of one type.»

The chief of these is that in many places in Cambridgeshire and
Huntingdonshire the holdings of the _villani_, instead of being
described as virgates and half-virgates, are described by their
acreage. There are so many holders of 30, 20, 15, 10, or other number
of acres each. They are not the less in grades, with equality in each
grade, but the holdings bear no distinctive name.

There is also in these counties a class of tenants, partly above
the _villani_, called _sochemanni_, which we [p035] shall find
again when we reach the Domesday Survey. But upon exceptional local
circumstances it is not needful to dwell here.

The fact is, then, that in the Hundred Rolls of Edward I. there is
disclosed over the much wider area of five midland counties almost
precisely the same state of things as that which existed in the manor
of Winslow late in the reign of Edward III. That manor was under
the ecclesiastical lordship of an abbey, but here in the Hundred
Rolls the same state of things exists under all kinds of ownership.
Manors of the king or the nobility, of abbeys, and of private and
lesser landowners, are all substantially alike. In all there is the
division of the manor into demesne land and land in villenage. In all
the mass of the land in villenage is held in the grades of holdings
mostly called virgates and half-virgates, with equality in each grade
both as to the holding and the services. In all alike are found the
smaller cottage holdings, also in villenage; and lastly, in all alike
there are the free tenants of larger or smaller portions of the
demesne land.

«The open field system is the shell of serfdom.»

If the picture of a manor and its open fields and virgates or
yard-lands in villenage--_i.e._ both of the shell and of the
community in serfdom inhabiting the shell--drawn in detail from the
single Winslow example, has thrown light upon the Hundred Rolls,
these latter, embracing hundreds of manors in the midland counties of
England, give the picture a typical value, proving that it is true,
not for one manor only, but, speaking generally, for all the manors
of central England.

They also give additional information on the relation [p036] of the
holdings to the _hide_, and reveal more clearly than the Winslow
manor rolls the nature of the serfdom under which the villein tenants
held their virgates. Before passing from the Hundred Rolls it will be
worth while to examine the new facts they give us, and to devote a
section to an examination of the _services_.

IV. THE HUNDRED ROLLS (_continued_)--RELATION OF THE VIRGATE TO THE
HIDE AND CARUCATE.

Before passing to the villein services described in the Hundred
Rolls, evidence may be cited from them showing the relation of the
virgate or yard-land--which is now known to be the normal holding of
the normal tenant in villenage--to the _hide_ and _carucate_. If to
the knowledge of what a virgate was, can be added an equally clear
understanding of what a _hide_ was, another valuable step will be
gained.

In the rolls for Huntingdonshire a series of entries occurs,
describing, contrary to the usual practice of the compilers, the
number of acres in a virgate, and the number of virgates in a hide,
in several manors.

These entries are given below,[31] and they show clearly--

(1) That the bundle of scattered strips called a virgate did not
always contain the same number of acres.

(2) That the _hide_ did not always contain the same number of
virgates.

But at the same time it is evident that the hide in [p037]
Huntingdonshire most often contained 120 acres or thereabouts. It
did so in twelve cases out of nineteen. In one case it contained
the double of 120, _i.e._ 240 acres. In six cases only the contents
varied irregularly from the normal amount.

«The normal _hide_ four virgates or 120 acres; the double
hide of 240 acres: but there are local variations.»

Taking the normal hides of 120 acres, five of them were made up of
four virgates of thirty acres each, which we may take to have been
_normal_ virgates. In one case there were eight virgates of fifteen
acres each in the hide. In other places these probably would have
been called half-virgates, as at Winslow.

There were occasionally five virgates and sometimes six virgates in
the hide, and the fact of these variations will be found to have
a meaning hereafter; but in the meantime we may gather from the
instances given in the Hundred Rolls for Huntingdonshire, that the
_normal_ hide consisted as a rule of four virgates of about thirty
acres each. The really important [p038] consequence resulting from
this is the recognition of the fact that as the _virgate_ was a
bundle of so many scattered strips in the open fields, the _hide_,
so far as it consisted of actual virgates in villenage, was also a
bundle--a compound and fourfold bundle--of scattered strips in the
open fields.

«The ancient hidage or assessment of taxation.»

Whilst, however, marking this relation of the virgate to the hide,
regarded as actual holdings in villenage, it is necessary to observe
also that throughout the Hundred Rolls the assessed value of the
manors is generally stated in hides and virgates; and that, in the
estimate thus given of the _hidage_ of a manor as a whole, the
demesne land as well as the land in villenage is taken into account.
In this case the hide and virgate are used as measures of assessment,
and it does not follow that all land that was measured or estimated
by the hide and virgate was actually divided up by balks into acres,
although the demesne land itself was in fact, as we have seen, often
in the open fields, and intermixed with the strips in villenage.
Distinction must therefore be made between the hide and virgate as
actual holdings and the hide and virgate as customary land measures,
used for recording the assessed values or the extent of manors, just
as in the case of the acre.

The virgate and the hide were probably, like the acre, actual
holdings before they were adopted as abstract land measures. It may
be even possible to learn or to guess what fact made a particular
number of acres the most convenient holding.

«The scutage.»

In the Hundred Rolls for Oxfordshire there is frequent reference to
the payment of the tax called _scutage_. The normal amount of this is
assumed [p039] to be 40s. for each _knight's fee_, or _scutum_. And
it appears that the knight's fee was assumed to contain four normal
hides. There is an entry, 'One hide gives scutage for a fourth part
of one scutum.' And as four virgates went usually to each hide, so
each virgate should contribute 1/16 of a scutum. There are several
entries which state that when the scutage is 40s. each virgate pays
2s. 6d., which is 1/16 of 40s.[32]

«Connexion between acreage of holdings and the coinage.»

And these figures seem to lead one step further, and to connect the
normal acreage of the hide of 120A., and of the virgate of 30A., with
the scutage of 40s. per knight's fee; for when these normal acreages
were adhered to in practice the assessment would be one penny per
acre, and the double hide of 240 acres would pay one pound. In other
words, in choosing the acreage of the standard hide and virgate, a
number of acres was probably assumed, corresponding with the monetary
system, so that the number of pence in the 'scutum' should correspond
with the number of acres assessed to its payment. We shall find this
correspondence of acreage with the coinage by no means confined to
this single instance.

But there remains the question, why the acreage in the virgate and
hide as actual holdings, and the [p040] number of virgates in the
hide, were not constant. Their actual contents and relations were
evidently ruled by some other reason than the number of pence in a
pound.

«_Carucate_, or land of a plough team, used instead of the
hide for later taxation,»

A trace at least of the original reason of the varying contents and
relations of the hide and virgate is to be found in the Hundred
Rolls, as, indeed, almost everywhere else, in the use of another
word in the place of _hide_, when, instead of the anciently assessed
hidage of a manor, its more modern actual taxable value is examined
into and expressed. This new word is 'carucate'--_the land of a
plough or plough team_,--'caruca' being the mediæval Latin term for
both plough and plough team.

«and varied according to the soil.»

The Hundred Rolls for Bedfordshire afford several examples in point.
In some cases the carucate seems to be identical with the normal
hide of 120 acres, but other instances show that the carucate varied
in area.[33] It is the land cultivated by a plough team; varying in
acreage, therefore, according to the lightness or heaviness of the
soil, and according to the strength of the team.

V. THE HUNDRED ROLLS (_continued_)--THE SERVICES OF THE VILLEIN
TENANTS.

«Services often commuted into money payments.»

In the Hundred Rolls for Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire the
services of the villein tenants [p041] are almost always commuted
into money payments. From each virgate a payment of from 16s. to
20s. is described as due, or services to that value (_vel opera
ad valorem_), showing that the actual services have become the
exception, and the money payments the rule. But in many cases
distinguishing marks of serfdom still remained in the fine upon the
marriage of a daughter, the heriot on the death of the holder, and
the restraint on the sale of animals.[34]

In Huntingdonshire and Oxfordshire, on the other hand, the services,
whilst often having their money value assigned, are mostly given in
great detail, as though still frequently enforced.

«Of three kinds.»

Speaking generally, the chief services, notwithstanding variations in
detail, may be classed under three different heads.

«Week work.»

(1) There is the _weekly work_ at ploughing, reaping, carrying,
usually for two or three days a week, and most at harvest-time. In
other cases there are so many days' work required between certain
dates.

«Precariæ.»

(2) There are _precariæ_, or 'boon-days,' sometimes called _bene
works_--special or extra services which the lord has a right to
require, sometimes the lord providing food for the day, and sometimes
the tenant providing for himself.

«Fixed dues in money or in kind.»

(3) There are _payments in kind or in money_ at specified times, such
as Christmas, Easter, Martinmas, and Michaelmas dues; _churchshot_,
an ancient ecclesiastical [p042] due; besides contributions towards
the lord's taxes in the shape of _tallage_ or _scutage_.

Sometimes the services are to be performed with one or two labourers,
showing that the cottier tenants were labourers under the holders of
virgates, or indicating possibly in some cases the remains of a slave
class.

The chief weekly services were those of ploughing, the tenants
sometimes supplying oxen to the lord's plough team, sometimes using
their own ploughs, two or more joining their oxen for the purpose.
This co-operation is a marked feature of the services, and is found
also in connexion with reaping and carrying.

The cottier tenants in respect of their smaller holdings often worked
for their lord one day a week, and having no plough, or oxen, their
services did not include ploughing.

Annexed are typical instances of the services of both classes of
tenants. They are taken from three counties, and placed side by side
for comparison.

EXAMPLES OF VILLEIN SERVICES.

OXFORDSHIRE

_Of a Villanus holding a Virgate._[35]

A. B. holds a virgate, and owes--

82 days' work [about 2 days a week] between Michaelmas and s. d.
June 24, valued at ½d. = 3 5

11½ days' work [rather more than 2 days a week] between
June 24 and s. d. August 1, valued at 1d. = 11½

19 days' work [2½ days a week] between August 1 and
Michaelmas, valued at 1½d. = 2 4½

6 precariæ, with one man, valued at 12

1 precaria, with 2 men, for reaping, with food from the
lord, valued at 2

Half a carriage for carrying the wheat 1

Half a carriage for the hay 1

The ploughing and harrowing of an acre 6

1 ploughing called '_graserthe_' 1½

1 day's harrowing of oat[land] 1

1 horse [load] of wood ½

Making 1 quarter of malt, and drying it 1

1 day's work at washing and shearing sheep, valued at ½

1 day's hoeing ½

3 days' mowing 6

1 day's nutting ½

1 day's work in carrying to the stack ½

Tallage once a year at the lord's will.

_Of a Cotarius._[36]

A. B. holds one croft, and owes from Michaelmas to August
1, each workable week, one day's work of whatever kind the
lord requires.

At Martinmas gives 1 cock and 3 hens for churchshot, and
ought to drive to certain places, and to carry writs,[37]
his food being found by the lord; also to wash and shear
sheep, receiving a loaf and a half, and being partaker of
the cheese with the _servi_; and to hoe. In the autumn, to
work and receive like as each _servus_ works and receives
for the whole week.[38]

(10 cottiers do like services).

* * * * *

HUNTINGDONSHIRE

_Of a Villanus holding a Virgate._[39]

A. B. holds 1 virgate in villenage--

By paying 12d. at Michaelmas.

By doing works from Michaelmas to Easter, with the
exception of the fortnight after Christmas, viz. 2 days
each week, with one man each day.

Item, he shall plough with his own plough one selion and a
half on every Friday in the aforesaid time.

Item, he shall harrow the same day as much as he has
ploughed.

He shall do works from Easter to Pentecost, 2 days each
week, with one man each day.

And he shall plough one selion each Friday in the same
time.

He shall do works from Pentecost till August 1, for 3 days
each week, with one man each day, either hoeing the corn,
or mowing and lifting (_levand_).

He shall do works from August 1 till September 8, for 3
days each week, with two men each day.

He shall make 1 '_love-bonum_' with all his family except
his wife, finding his own food. And from September 8 to
Michaelmas he works 3 days each week, with one man each
day. He shall carry [with a horse or horses] as far as
Bolnhurst, and from Bolnhurst to Torneye.

Also he gives ½ bushel of corn as '_bensed_' in
winter-time.

Also 10 bushels of oats at Martinmas as '_fodderkorn_.'

Also 7d. as '_loksilver_,' that is for 2d. a loaf, and 5
hens.

Also 1d. on Ash-Wednesday, as '_fispeni_' (fishpenny).

Also 20 eggs at Easter.

Also 10 eggs on St. Botolph's Day (June 17).

Also in Easter week 2d. towards digging the vineyard.

Also in Pentecost week 1d. towards upholding the mill-dam
(_stagnum_) of Newetone.

If he sell a bull calf he shall give the lord abbot 4d.,
and this according to custom.

He gives '_merchetum_' and '_herietum_,' and is tallaged
at Michaelmas according to the will of the said abbot.

He gives 2d. as '_sumewode silver_' at Christmas.

_Of a Cotarius._[40]

A. B. holds 1 acre at 12d., and works 4 days in autumn
with one man.

He is tallaged '_quando Rex talliat burgos suos._'

He gives '_garshaves_' each year for pigs killed and sold,
viz. for a pig a year old, ½d.

And when there is pannage in the wood he gives for pig of
a year old, 1d.

And if he keeps his pigs alive beyond a year, he gives
nothing.

* * * * *

CAMBRIDGESHIRE

_Of a Villanus holding ½ Virgate of 15 acres._[41]

A. B. holds a ½ virgate of customable land containing 15
acres, and does 3 days' work each week throughout the
year, and 3 precariæ, with meals found by the lord, and
gives at Martinmas 1d., and a hen at Christmas, and 8 eggs
at Easter; and the same works and customs if '_ad firmam_'
are valued at 9s. per annum.

(20 others each hold 15 acres with like services.)

_Of a Cotarius._[42]

A. B. is a cotarius, and holds 1 cottage and 1 acre, for
which he gives--

1 day's work on Monday in every week unless a festival
prevents him.

1 hen at Christmas

5 eggs at Easter.

VI. DESCRIPTION IN FLETA OF A MANOR IN THE TIME OF EDWARD I.

«Landlords view of a manor.»

Contemporary in date with the Hundred Rolls is the anonymous work
bearing the title of '_Fleta_,' which may be described as the _vade
mecum_ of the landlords of the time of Edward I. It was designed to
put them in possession of necessary legal knowledge; and mixed up
with this are practical directions regarding the management of their
estates. The writer advises landlords on taking possession of their
manors to have a survey made of their property, so that they may know
the extent of their rights and income.

If in the Hundred Rolls we have photographic details of hundreds of
individual manors surveyed [p046] for purposes of royal taxation, so
here is a picture of an ordinary or typical manor--a generalisation
of the ordinary features of a manor--drawn by a contemporary hand,
and regarding all things from a landlord's point of view.

The manor as described in Fleta is a territorial unit, with its own
courts and local customs known only on the spot. Therefore the extent
is to be taken upon the testimony of 'faithful and sworn tenants of
the lord.' And inquiry is to be made[43]--

«Survey of a manor.»

(1) Of castles and buildings in the demesne (_intrinsecis_)
within and without the moat, with gardens, curtilages,
dovecotes, fishponds, &c.

(2) What fields (_campi_) and _culturæ_ there are in demesne,
and how many acres of arable in each _cultura_ of meadow and of
pasture.

(3) What common pasture there is outside the demesne
(_forinseca_), and what beasts the lord can place thereon [he,
like his tenants, being as to this limited in his rights by
custom].

(4) Of parks and demesne woods, which the lord at his will can
cultivate and reclaim (_assartare_).

(5) Of woods outside the demesne (_forinsecis_), in which
others have common rights, how much the lord may approve.

(6) Of pannage, herbage, and honey, and all other issues of the
forests, woods, moors, heaths, and wastes.

(7) Of mills [belonging to the lord, and having a monopoly of
grinding for the tenants at fixed charges], fishponds, rivers
(_ripariis_), and fisheries several and common.

(8) Of pleas and perquisites belonging to the county, manor,
and forest courts.

(9) Of churches belonging to the lord's advowson.

(10) Of heriots, fairs, markets, tolls, day-works
(_operationes_), services, foreign (_forinseci_) customs, and
gifts (_exhenniis_).

(11) Of warrens, liberties, parks, coneyburrows, wardships,
reliefs, and yearly fees.

Then regarding the tenants,--

«Free tenants.»

(1) _De libere tenentibus_, or free tenants, how many are
_intrinseci_ and how many _forinseci_; what lands they hold
of the lord, and [p047] what of others, and by what service;
whether by _socage_, or by _military_ service, or by fee farm,
or 'in eleemosynam'; who hold by charter, and who not; what
rents they pay; which of them do suit at the lord's court, &c.;
and what accrues to the lord at their death.

«Villein tenants»

(2) _De custumariis_, or villein tenants; how many there are,
and what is their suit; how much each has, and what it is
worth, both _de antiquo dominico_ and _de novo perquisito_;
to what amount they can be tallaged without reducing them to
poverty and ruin; what is the value of their '_operationes_'
and '_consuetudines_'--their day-works and customary
duties--and what rent they pay; and which of them can be
tallaged '_ratione sanguinis nativi_,' and who not.

«Officers.»

Then there follows a statement of the duties of the usual officials
of the manor.

«The seneschal, or steward;»

First there is the _seneschal_,[44] or steward, whose duty it is
to hold the Manor Courts and the View of Frankpledge, and there to
inquire if there be any withdrawals of customs, services, and rents,
or of suits to the lord's courts, markets, and mills, and as to
alienations of lands. He is also to check the amount of seed required
by the _præpositus_ for each manor, for under the seneschal there may
be several manors.

«who arranges the ploughing and the plough teams.»

On his appointment he must make himself acquainted with the condition
of the manorial ploughs and plough teams. He must see that the land
is properly arranged, whether on the three-field or the two-field
system. If it be divided into _three parts_, 180 acres should go to
each carucate, viz. 60 acres to be ploughed in winter, 60 in Lent,
and 60 in summer for fallow. If in _two parts_, there should be 160
acres to the carucate, half for fallow, half for winter and Lent
sowing, _i.e._ 80 acres in each of the two 'fields.' [p048]

Besides the manorial ploughs and plough teams he must know also how
many tenant or villein ploughs (_carucæ adjutrices_) there are, and
how often they are bound to aid the lord in each manor.

He is also to inquire as to the stock in each manor, whereof an
inventory indented is to be drawn up between him and the serjeant;
and as to any deficiency of beasts, which he is at once to make good
with the lord's consent.

«The _præpositus_.»

The seneschal thus had jurisdiction over all the manors of the lord.
But each single manor should have its own _præpositus_.

The best husbandman is to be elected by the _villata_, or body
of tenants, as _præpositus_, and he is to be responsible for the
cultivation of the arable land. He must see that the ploughs are
yoked early in the morning--both the demesne and the villein
ploughs--and that the land is properly ploughed (_pure et
conjunctim_) and sown. He is a villein tenant, and acts on behalf of
the villeins, but he is overlooked by the lord's bailiff.

«The bailiff.»

The _bailiff's_[45] duties are stated to be--To rise early and have
the ploughs yoked, then walk in the fields to see that all is right.
He is to inspect the ploughs, whether those of the demesne or the
villein or auxiliary ploughs, seeing that they be not unyoked before
their day's work ends, failing which he will be called to account. At
sowing-time the bailiff, _præpositus_, and reaper must go with the
ploughs through the whole day's work until they have completed their
proper quantity of ploughing for the day, [p049] which is to be
measured, and if the ploughmen have made any errors or defaults, and
can make no excuses, the reaper is to see that such faults do not go
uncorrected and unpunished.

Such is the picture, given by Fleta, of the manorial machine at work
grinding through its daily labour on the days set apart for service
on the lord's demesne.

The other side of the picture, the work of the _villani_ for
themselves on other days, the yoking of their oxen in the common
plough team, and the ploughing and sowing of their own scattered
strips; whether this was arranged with equal regard to rigid custom,
or whether in Fleta's time the co-operation had become to some extent
broken up, so that each villein tenant made his own arrangements by
contract with his fellows, or otherwise--this inferior side of the
picture is left undrawn.

In the meantime, returning to the question of the holdings in
villenage, an additional reason for the variations in their acreage
is found in the statement already alluded to, viz. that the extent of
the actual carucate, or land of one plough team, was dependent, among
other things, upon whether the system of husbandry was the two-field
or the three-field system, each plough team being able to cultivate a
larger acreage on the former than on the latter system.

VII. S.E. OF ENGLAND--THE HIDE AND VIRGATE UNDER OTHER NAMES (THE
RECORDS OF BATTLE ABBEY AND ST. PAUL'S).

«Battle Abbey Records.»

Passing now to the south-eastern counties, there are in the Record
Office valuable MSS. relating to the [p050] estates of Battle
Abbey.[46] There are two distinct surveys of these estates, made
respectively in the reigns of Edward I. and Henry VI.

«Surveys of 1284–7.»

The date of the earliest MS. is from 12 to 15 Edward I. (1284–7). It
is, therefore, almost contemporaneous with the Hundred Rolls. The
estates lay in various counties; but wherever situated, the same
general phenomena as those already described are found.

Confining attention to the regular grades of holdings in villenage,
the following are examples from the Battle Abbey estates.

The abbot had an estate at Brichwolton (or Brightwalton), in
Berkshire. In the survey of it 10 holders of a virgate each are
recorded as _virgarii_, and in the MS. of Henry VI., 5 holders of
half-virgates are in the same way called _dimidii virgarii_.

There was another estate at 'Apeldreham,' in Sussex. Here, under the
heading 'Isti subscripti dicuntur _Yherdlinges_,' there is a list of
5 holders of virgates, 4 holders of 1½ virgates each, and one of ½ a
virgate.

At 'Alsiston,' in Sussex, a manor nestling under the chalk downs, the
holdings were as follows:--

«½ hides and wistas.»

1 wista and 1 great wista.
½ hide.
1 hide.
½ hide and 1 wista.
3 wistas and 1 great wista.
½ hide.
½ hide.
½ hide.
½ hide.
1 wista.
½ hide.
½ hide.
½ hide.
1 wista.
½ hide.
The præpositus 1 wista (without services). [p051]

In the description of the services, those for each half-hide are
first given, and then there follows a note that each half-hide
contains two wistas; wherefore the services of each wista are half
those above mentioned.

There is another manor (Blechinton, near the coast), where there
were--

2 holdings of half-hides,
9 of wistas,
6 of half-wistas,

and two other manors where the holders were in one case 5, all of
half-hides; and in the other case one of a hide and 4 of half-hides.

«The double hide of 240 acres.»

These are valuable examples of hides and half-hides, as still actual
holdings in villenage, whilst apparently instead of virgates in some
of these Sussex manors a new holding--the wista--occurs. And among
the documents of Battle Abbey given by Dugdale there is the following
statement, viz., that 8 virgates = 1 hide, and 4 virgates = 1 wista
(_great_ wista?). Supposing the virgate here, as mostly elsewhere, to
have been, normally, a bundle of 30 acres, it is clear that in this
hide of 8 virgates we get another instance of the _double hide of 240
acres_; whilst the '_great_ wista' of 4 virgates would correspond
with the single hide of 120 acres, and the wista would equal the
ordinary half-hide of two virgates.

«Domesday of St. Paul's, A.D. 1222.»

We pass to another cartulary, and of earlier date. In 1222 a
visitation was made of the manors belonging to the Dean and Chapter
of St. Paul's, London. The register of this visitation is known
as the 'Domesday of St. Paul's.'[47] The manors were scattered in
[p052] Herts, Essex, Middlesex, and Surrey--all south-eastern
counties.

In the survey of Thorp,[48] one of the manors in Essex, after a list
of tenants on the demesne land, and others on reclaimed land (_de
essarto_), there follows a list of tenants in villenage who are
called _hydarii_. As in the Battle Abbey records the _virgarii_ were
holders of virgates, so these _hydarii_ were probably, as their name
implies, groups of _villani_ holding a hide. But the holdings had in
fact become subdivided and irregular. Nevertheless, those belonging
to each original hide are bracketed together; and adding together
their acreage, it appears that the hide is assumed to contain 120
acres. The following examples will make it clear that the holdings
were once hides of four virgates of 30 acres each.

«Hides and virgates.»

_Holdings._
─┐
xx. _a._ │ ─┐
x. _a._ │ sum = 30 _a._ │
─┘ │
xxx. _a._ = 30 _a._ │
½ hide = 60 _a._ │ sum = hide of 120 acres.
─┘
─┐
xxx. _a._ = 30 _a._ │
xxx. _a._ = 30 _a._ │
─┐ │
xv. _a._ │ │
xv. _a._ │ sum = 30 _a._ │
─┘ │
─┐ │
v. _a._│ │
v. _a._│ │
vii.½ _a._│ │
v. _a._│ │
vii.½ _a._│ sum = 30 _a._ │ sum = hide of 120 acres.
─┘ ─┘
And so on.

«Services reckoned by the hide.»

The services also were reckoned by the hide, and an abstract of them
is here given, from which it will be seen that for some purposes the
tenants of the now divided hide still clubbed as it were together to
[p053] perform the services required for the hide; whilst for others
'each homestead (_domus_) of the hide' had its separate duties to
perform.

The following were the services on the manor of Thorp:[49]--

Each of the _hidarii_ ought to plough 8 acres, 4 in winter and
4 in Lent.

Also to harrow and sow with the lord's seed.

After Pentecost each house (_domus_) of the hide has to hoe
thrice.

And to reap 4 acres, 2 of rye (_siligine_), and 2 of barley and
oats.

And find a waggon (_carrum_) with 2 men to carry the hard
grain, and another to carry the soft grain; and each waggon
(_plaustrum_) shall have 1 sheaf.

Each house of the hide has to mow 3 half-acres.

Each house of the hide has to provide a man to reap until the
third [day], if aught remains.

Each house of the hide and of the demesne allotted to tenants
has to provide the strongest man whom it has for the lord's
'_precariæ_' in autumn, the lord providing him meals twice a
day.

All men, both of the hide and of the demesne, have to provide
their own ploughs for the lord's '_precariæ_,' the lord
providing their meals.

And each hide ought to thresh out seed for the sowing of 4
acres after Michaelmas Day.

Each hide must thresh out so much seed as will suffice for the
land ploughed by one team in winter and in Lent.

Each house of the whole village owes a hen at Christmas and
eggs at Easter.

These 10 hides ought to repair and keep in repair these houses
in the demesne, viz. the Grange, cowhouse, and threshing house.

Each of these _hidarii_ owes 2 _doddæ_ of oats in the middle of
March.

And 14 loaves for '_mescinga_' (?).

And a '_companagium_' (flesh, fish, or cheese).

Each hide owes 5s. by the year, and ought to make of the lord's
wood 4 hurdles of rods for the fold.

«_Solanda_, or double hide.»

The instance of another manor of St. Paul's (Tillingham), in
Essex,[50] may be cited as further evidence that sometimes, even
where the holdings (as at Winslow) were virgates and half-virgates,
their original relation to the hide was not yet forgotten. For after
giving the list of tenants in demesne, and of 19 [p054] tenants
holding 30 acres each, who 'faciunt magnas operationes,' _i.e._ do
full service, there is a statement that in this manor 30 acres make
a virgate, and 120 acres a hide;[51] so that here also there are 4
virgates to the hide. But there was further in this manor a _double
hide_, called a '_solanda_,'[52] presumably of 240 acres. A double
hide called a _solanda_ is also mentioned in Sutton in Middlesex,[53]
and another in Drayton;[54] and the term _solanda_ is probably the
same as the well-known '_sullung_' or '_solin_' of Kent, meaning a
'plough land.'

It will be remembered that in the Huntingdonshire Hundred Rolls a
double hide of 240 acres was noticed.

«The Kentish _sullungs_ and _yokes_.»

It may also be mentioned that in Kent[55] the division of the
_sullung_, or hide, was called a _yoke_, instead of a yard-land or
virgate; suggesting that the divisions of the plough land in some way
corresponded with the yokes of oxen in the team.

On the whole little substantial difference appears between the grades
of holdings in the south-east of England and those of the midland
counties. We may add also that here, as elsewhere, the humbler class
of cottier tenants are found beneath the regular holders of hides and
virgates, and that on the demesne lands there appears the constantly
increasing class of _libere tenentes_. Also passing from the holdings
in villenage to the serfdom under which they were held, [p055]
and speaking generally, the description obtained from the Hundred
Rolls of the services might with little variation be applied to the
different area embraced in this section.

VIII. THE RELATION OF THE VIRGATE TO THE HIDE TRACED IN THE
CARTULARIES OF GLOUCESTER AND WORCESTER ABBEYS, AND THE CUSTUMAL OF
BLEADON, IN SOMERSETSHIRE.

«Gloucester surveys of 1266.»

Further facts relating to the hide and the virgate are elicited
by extending the inquiry into the west of England. Turning to the
cartulary of the monastery of St. Peter at Gloucester,[56] there are
several 'extents' of manors in the west of England of about the year
1266, which give valuable evidence, not only of the existence of the
open fields divided into _three fields_ or _seasons_, furlongs, and
half-acre strips, but also as regards the holdings.

The virgates in this district varied in acreage, some containing 48
acres, others 40, 38, 36, and 28 acres respectively.[57] In one case
it is incidentally mentioned that 4 virgates make a hide.[58] We have
thus in these extents evidence both of the prevalence and of the
varying acreage of the virgate in the extreme west of England, to add
to the evidence already obtained in respect of the midland counties.

«Worcester surveys of 1240.»

So also the register of the Priory of St. Mary, Worcester,[59] dated
1240, affords still earlier evidence for the west of England of a
similar kind. [p056]

In the first manor mentioned therein the customary services of the
villeins are described as pertaining to each pair of half-virgates,
_i.e._ to each original virgate.[60] In the next manor there were
35 holdings in half-virgates, and so in other manors.[61] It is
sometimes mentioned how many acres in each field belong to the
several half-virgates, thus showing not only the division of the
fields into _seasons_, but the scattered contents of the holdings.

Finally, with local variations serfdom in these two western counties
was almost identical with that in other parts of England.

Two examples of the services of holders of virgates and half-virgates
respectively are appended as before for comparison with others, and
also examples of the services of cottier tenants. The list given in
the note below of the 'common customs' of the villein tenants of
one of the manors of Worcester Priory, describes some of the more
general incidents of villenage, and shows how thorough a serfdom it
originally was.[62] [p057]

«Custumal of Bleadon, in Somersetshire.»

To this evidence from the counties of Worcester and Gloucester we may
add the evidence of the Custumal of Bleadon, in Somersetshire, also
dating from the thirteenth century.

The manor belonged to the Prior of St. Swithin, at Winchester.
There were very few _libere tenentes_. The tenants in villenage
were _virgarii_, or holders of virgates, and _dimidii-virgarii_,
or holders of half-virgates. There were also holders of fardels or
quarter-virgates, and half-fardels, or one-eighth-virgates, and
other small cottier tenants. Four virgates went to the hide. And the
services were very similar to those of the Gloucester and Worcester
tenants. They are described at too great length to be inserted here.
We may, however, notice the importance amongst other items of the
_carrying service_ or _averagium_--a service often mentioned among
villein services, but here defined with more than usual exactness.[63]

In short, without going further into details, it is obvious that
the open field system and the serfdom which lived within it were
practically the same in their general features in the west and in the
east of England.

The following are the examples of the services in Gloucestershire and
Worcestershire:-- [p058]

VILLEIN SERVICES.

GLOUCESTERSHIRE

_Services of a Virgate._[64]

A. B. holds 1 virgate of 48 acres (in the manor of s. d.
Hartpury), with messuage, and 6 acres of meadow land.

From Michaelmas till August 1 he has to plough one day a
week, each day's work being valued at 3½

And to do manual labour 3 days a week, each day's work
being valued at ½

On the 4th day to carry horse-loads (_summagiare_), if
necessary, to Preston and other manors, and Gloucester,
each day's work being valued at 1

Once a year to carry to Wick, valued at 3

To plough one acre called '_Eadacre_,'[65] and to thresh
the seed for the said acre, the ploughing and threshing
being valued at 4

To do the ploughing called '_beneherthe_' with one meal
from the lord, valued _ultra cibum_ at 1

To mow the lord's meadow for 5 days, and more if
necessary, each day's work being valued _ultra opus
manuale_ at 1

To lift the lord's hay for 5 days 2½

To hoe the lord's corn for one day (besides the customary
labour), with one man, valued at ½

To do 1 '_bederipa_' before autumn with 1 man, valued at 1½

To work in the lord's harvest s. d. 5 days a week with 2
men, from August 1 to Michaelmas, valued per week at 1 3

To do 1 '_bederipa_,' called '_bondenebedripa_,' with 4
men, valued at 6

To do 1 harrowing a year, called '_londegginge_,' valued
at 1

To give at Michaelmas an aid of 3 3

To [pay] '_pannage_,' viz. for a pig of a year old 1

For a younger pig that can be separated ½

If he brew for sale, to give 14 gallons of ale as toll.

To sell neither horse nor ox without licence.

Seller and buyer to give 4d. as toll for a horse sold
within the manor.

To redeem son and daughter at the will of the lord.

If he die, the lord to have his best beast of burden as
heriot, and of his widow likewise, if she outlive her
husband.

_Services of a Lundinarius._[66]

A. B. holds one 'lundinarium' (in the manor of Highnam),
to wit, a messuage with curtilage, 4 acres of land, and
a half-acre of meadow, and has to work one day a week
(probably Monday, Lunæ-dies, Lundi, whence the title of
the holding), from Michaelmas to August 1, and each day's
work is valued at . . . . s. d.

To mow the lord's meadow for 4 days if necessary, and a
day's mowing is valued at 2

To aid in cocking and lifting the hay for 6 days at least,
and the day's work is valued at ½

To hoe the lord's corn for 1 day, valued at ½

To do 2 'bederipæ' before August 1, valued at 2

From August 1 to Michaelmas to do manual labour 2 days a
week, and each day's work is valued at 1½

To gather rushes on August 1, valued at ½

And in all other 'conditions' he shall do as the customers.

The total value of the service of a 'lundinarius' is 6 8

To give 4d. as aid at Michaelmas.

(15 other 'lundinarii' hold on a like tenure.)

* * * * *

WORCESTERSHIRE

_Services of a Half-virgate._[67]

Of the villenage of Neweham, with appurtenances (or
members), and of the villeins' works and customs.

In this manor are 35 half-virgates with appurtenances,
exclusive of the half-virgate belonging to the
'_præpositus_.'

Each half-virgate _ad censum_ pays on St. Andrew's Day
12d. (November 30); on Annunciation Day, 12d. (March 25);
on St. John's Day, 12d. (June 24).

From June 24 till August 1, each villein to work 2 days a
week, and, if the serjeant (_serviens_) shall so will, to
continue the same work till after August 1.

From August 1 to Michaelmas--

To work 4 days a week.

To do 2 '_benripæ_' (reapings at request), with 1 man.

To plough about Michaelmas a half-acre, to sow it with his
own corn, and to harrow it.

Also to plough for winter corn, spring corn, and
fallowing, for 1 day, exclusive of the work, and it is
called '_benherthe_.'

To give on February 2 one quarter of oats, and 2½d. as
'_fisfe_' (fish-fee).

To hoe as [one day's] work after June 24.

All to mow as [one day's] work, and each to receive on
mowing day as much grass as he can lift with his scythe,
and if his scythe break he shall lose his grass and be
amerced.

All to receive 6d. for drink.

In this manor 8 gallons of beer are given as toll, besides
the toll of the mills.

Each half-virgate, if _ad operationem_, from Michaelmas
till August 1, to work 2 days a week.

To plough and sow with its own corn half an acre, and to
harrow the same.

To plough and harrow one day in winter, and the prior
to provide the seed; and, if necessary, each virgate to
harrow as [a day's work] till ploughing time.

To plough one day in spring.

And to plough for fallowing for 1 day (warrectare) as
above.

_Services of a Cottarius._[68]

In the manor of Neweham are 10 cottiers (omitting William
the miller and Adam de Neweham), each holding 1 messuage
with appurtenances, and 6 acres.

[If _ad operationem_] each to work 2 days a week
(excepting Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas weeks).

To drive, take messages, and bear loads.

To give '_thac_,' '_thol_,' aid, and such like.

But they give neither oats nor '_fisfe_.'

If '_ad firmam_,' to render at each quarter-day
(_terminum_) 6d.

IX. CARTULARIES OF NEWMINSTER AND KELSO (XIII. CENTURY)--THE
CONNEXION OF THE HOLDINGS WITH THE COMMON PLOUGH TEAM OF EIGHT OXEN.

Passing to the north of England, substantially the same system is
found, along with customs and details which still further connect the
gradations of the holdings in villenage with the plough team and the
yokes of oxen of which it was composed.

«Bovates or oxgangs.»

North of the Tees, in the district of the old Northumbria, virgates
and half-virgates were still the [p061] usual holdings, but they
were called 'husband-lands.' The full husband-land, or virgate, was
composed of two _bovates_, or _oxgangs_, the bovate or oxgang being
thus the eighth of the hide or carucate.

In the cartulary of Newminster,[69] under date 1250, amongst charters
giving evidence of the division of the fields into 'seliones,' or
strips,[70] the holdings of which were scattered over the fields,[71]
as everywhere else, is a grant of land to the abbey containing 8
bovates in all, made up of 4 equal holdings of _two bovates_ each.

«Husband lands of two bovates.»

«_Stuht_, or outfit of two oxen.»

In the '_Rotulus Redituum_' of the Abbey of Kelso, dated 1290,[72] the
holdings were 'husband-lands.' In one place[73]--Selkirk--there were 15
_husband-lands, each containing a bovate_. In another[74]--Bolden--the
record of which, with the services of the husband-lands, is referred
to several times in the document as typical of the rest, there were 28
husband-lands, owing equal payments and services. The contents are not
given, but as the services evidently are doubles of those of Selkirk,
it may be inferred that the husband-lands each contained 2 bovates
(_i.e._ a virgate), and that so did the usual husband-lands of the
Kelso estates. This inference is confirmed by the record for the manor
of Reveden, which states that the monks had there 8 husband-lands,[75]
from each of which were due the services set out at length at the
end of this section; and then goes on to say that formerly each
'husband' took with his 'land' his _stuht_, viz. 2 _oxen_, 1 horse, 3
chalders of oats, 6 bolls [p062] of barley, and 3 of wheat. 'But when
Abbot Richard commuted that service into money, then they returned
their _stuht_, and paid each for his husband-land 18s. per annum.'
The allotment of 2 oxen as _stuht_, or outfit, to the husband-land
evidently corresponds with its contents as two bovates.

If the holding of 2 bovates was equivalent to the virgate, and the
bovate to the half-virgate or one-eighth of the hide, then the hide
should contain 8 bovates or oxgangs; and as the single oxgang had
relation to the single ox, and the virgate or 'two bovates' to the
pair of oxen allotted to it by way of 'stuht,' or outfit, so the
hide ought to have a similar relation to a team of 8 oxen. Thus, if
the full team of 8 oxen can be shown to be the _normal_ plough team,
a very natural relation would be suggested between the gradations
of holdings in villenage, and the number of oxen contributed by the
holders of them to the full plough team of the manorial plough. And,
in fact, there is ample evidence that it was so.

«Full _caruca_ or plough team of eight oxen.»

In the Kelso records there is mention of a 'carucate,' or
'plough-land'[76] ('plough' being in these records rendered by
'caruca'); and this plough-land turns out, upon examination, to
contain 4 husband-lands, _i.e._ presumably 8 bovates.

Further, among the 'Ancient Acts of the Scotch Parliament' there
is an early statute[77] headed '_Of Landmen telande with Pluche_,'
which ordains that '_ilk man teland with a pluche of viii. oxin_'
shall sow at the least so much wheat, &c.: showing that the team of
8 oxen was the normal plough team in Scotland. [p063] Again, among
the fragments printed under the heading of 'Ancient Scotch Laws and
Customs,' without date, occurs the following record:[78]--

'In the first time that the law was made and ordained they began at
the freedom of "halikirk," and since, at the measuring of lands, the
"_plew-land_" they ordained to contain _viii. oxingang_, &c.'

Even so late as the beginning of the present century, we learn from
the old 'Statistical Account of Scotland' that in many districts the
old-fashioned ploughs were of such great weight that they required 8,
10, and sometimes 12 oxen to draw them.[79]

«Four oxen yoked abreast.»

Information from the same source also explains the use of the word
'_caruca_' for plough. For the construction of the word involves
not 4 yoke of oxen, but 4 oxen yoked abreast, as are the horses in
the _caruca_ so often seen upon Roman coins. And the 'Statistical
Account' informs us that in some districts of Scotland in former
times 'the ploughs were drawn by 4 oxen or horses _yoked abreast_:
one trod constantly upon the tilled surface, another went in the
furrow, and two upon the stubble or white land. The driver walked
backwards holding his cattle by halters, and taking care that each
beast had its equal share in the draught. This, though it looked
awkward, was contended to be the only mode of yoking by which 4
animals could best be compelled to exert all their strength.'[80]

«So also in Wales.»

The ancient Welsh laws, as we shall see by-and-by, also speak of the
normal plough team as consisting from time immemorial, throughout
Wales, of 8 [p064] oxen yoked 4 to a yoke. The team of 8 oxen seems
further to have been the normal manorial plough team throughout
England, though in some districts still larger teams were needful
when the land was heavy clay.

In the 'Inquisition of the Manors of St. Paul's'[81] it is stated
of the demesne land of a manor in Hertfordshire, that the ploughing
could be done with two plough teams (_carucæ_), of 8 head each. And
in another case in the same county 'with 2 plough teams of 8 heads,
"cum consuetudinibus villatæ"--with the customary services of the
villein tenants.'[82] In another, 'with 5 ploughs, of which 3 have 4
oxen and 4 horses, and 2 each 6 horses.' In another, 'with 3 ploughs
of 8 heads.'

In manors in Essex, on the other hand, where the land is heavier,
there are the following instances:[83]--

4 plough teams, 10 in each.
2 plough teams, 8 in each.
1 plough team, 10.
3 plough teams, 8 oxen and 2 horses.
2 plough teams, 10 oxen and 10 horses for the two.
2 plough teams, 12 oxen and 8 horses the two.
2 plough teams, 4 horses and 4 oxen in each.
2 plough teams, 10 each.
1 plough team, 6 horses and 4 oxen.

In two manors in Middlesex the teams were as under:[84]--

1 of 8 heads.
2 of 8 oxen and 2 horses. [p065]

In the Gloucester cartulary[85] there are the following instances:--

To each plough team 8 oxen and 4 over.
To each plough team 12 oxen and 1 over.
To each plough team 12 oxen and 1 over.

«Normal English plough team of eight oxen.»

All these instances are from documents of the thirteenth century,
and they conspire in confirming the point that the normal plough
team was, by general consent, of 8 oxen; though some heavier lands
required 10 or 12, and sometimes horses in aid of the oxen.

Nor do these exceptions at all clash with the hypothesis of the
connexion of the grades of holdings with the number of oxen
contributed by the holders to the manorial plough team of their
village; for as the number of oxen in the team sometimes varied from
the normal standard, so also did the number of virgates in the hide
or carucate.

«Connexion between the oxen and the holdings.»

So that, summing up the evidence of this chapter, daylight seems to
have dawned upon the meaning of the interesting gradation of holdings
in villenage in the open fields. The hide or carucate seems to be the
holding corresponding with the possession of a full plough team of
8 oxen. The half-hide corresponds with the possession of one of the
2 yokes of 4 abreast; the virgate with the possession of a pair of
oxen, and the half-virgate or bovate with the possession of a single
ox; all having their fixed relations to the full manorial plough team
of 8 oxen. And this conclusion receives graphic illustration when
the Scotch chronicler Winton thus quaintly describes [p066] the
efforts of King Alexander III. to increase the growth of corn in his
kingdom:--

Yhwmen, pewere karl, or knawe
That wes of mycht an ox til have
He gert that man hawe part in pluche:
Swa wes corn in his land enwche:
Swa than begouth, and efter lang
Of land wes mesure, ane oxgang.
Mychty men that had mâ
Oxyn, he gert in pluchys ga.
Be that vertu all his land
Of corn he gert be abowndand.[86]

Not that Alexander III. was really the originator of the terms
'plow-land' and 'oxgate,' but that he attained his object of
increasing the growth of corn by extending into new districts of
Scotland, before given up chiefly to grazing, the same methods of
husbandry as elsewhere had been at work from time immemorial, just as
the monks of Kelso probably had done, by giving each of their villein
tenants a 'stuht' of 2 oxen with which to plough their husband-lands.

One point more, however, still remains to be explained before the
principle of the open field system can be said to be fully grasped,
viz. why the strips of which the hides, virgates, and bovates were
composed were scattered in so strange a confusion all over the open
fields.

«Services on _Kelso_ manors.»

In the meantime the following examples of the services of the villein
tenants of _Kelso_ husband-lands and bovates are appended for the
purpose of comparison with those of other districts:-- [p067]

BOLDEN[87]

At Bolden--

The monks have 28 'husbands'-lands in the villa of Bolden, each
of which used to render 6s. 8d. at Pentecost and Martinmas, and
to do certain services, viz.:

To reap in autumn for 4 days with all his family, himself and
wife.

To perform likewise a fifth day's work in autumn with 2 men.

To carry peat with one waggon for one day from Gordon to the
'pullis.'

To carry one waggon-load of peat from the 'pullis' to the abbey
in summer, and no more.

To carry once a year with one horse from Berwick.

And to have their meals from the abbey when doing this service.

To till 1½ acre at the grange of Neuton every year.

To harrow with one horse one day.

To find one man at the sheepwashing and another man at the
shearing, without meals.

To answer likewise for foreign service and for other suits.

To carry corn in autumn with one waggon for one day.

To carry the abbot's wool from the barony to the abbey.

To find him carriage over the moor to Lessemahagu.

REVEDEN[88]

At Reveden--

The monks have 8 'husbands'-lands and 1 bovate, each of which
performed certain services at one time, viz.:

Each week in summer the carriage with 1 horse to Berwick.

The horse to carry 3 '_bollæ_' of corn, or 2 '_bollæ_' of salt,
or 1½ '_bollæ_' of coals.

In winter the same carriage, but the horse only carried 2
'_bollæ_' of corn, or 1½ '_bollæ_' of salt, or 1 '_bolla_' and
'_ferloth_' of coal.

Each week, when they came from Berwick, each land did one day's
work according to order.

When they did not go to Berwick, they tilled 2 days a week.

In autumn, when they did not go to Berwick they did 3 days'
work.

At that time each 'husband' took with his land '_stuht_,' viz.:

2 oxen, 1 horse,

3 'celdræ' of oats,

6 'bollæ' of barley,

3 'bollæ' of corn.

And afterwards, when Abbot Richard commuted that service into
money, they returned their '_stuht_,' and each one gave for his
land 18s. a year. [p068]

X. THE BOLDON BOOK, A.D. 1183.

We are now in a position to creep up one step nearer to the time
of the Domesday Survey, and in the Boldon Book to examine earlier
examples of North Country manors.

The Boldon Book is a survey of the manors belonging to the Bishop of
Durham in the year 1183, nearly a century earlier than the date of
the Hundred Rolls.

«Survey of _Boldon_.»

The typical entry which may be taken as the common form used
throughout the record relates to the village of Boldon, from which
the name of the survey is taken.

It is as follows:[89]--

«The services of villani.»

In Boldon there are 22 villani, each holding 2 bovates, or
30 acres, and paying 2s. 6d. for 'scat-penynges' [being in
fact 1d. per acre], a half '_shaceldra_' of oats, 16d., for
'averpenynges' [in lieu of carrying service], 5 four-wheel
waggons of 'woodlade' [lading of wood], 2 cocks, and 10 eggs.

They work 3 days a week throughout the year, excepting Easter
week and Pentecost, and 13 days at Christmas.

In autumn they do 4 dayworks at reaping, with all their family
except the housewife. Also they reap 3 roods of '_averype_,'
and plough and harrow 3 roods of '_averere_.'

Also each villein plough-team ploughs and harrows 2 acres, with
allowance of food ('_corrodium_') once from the bishop, and
then they are quit of that week's work.

When they do '_magnas precationes_,' they have a food allowance
(_corrodium_) from the bishop, and as part of their works do
harrowing when necessary, and '_faciunt ladas_' (make loads?).
And when they do these each receives 1 loaf.

Also they reap for 1 day at Octon till the evening, and then
they receive an allowance of food.

And for the fairs of St. Cuthbert, every 2 villeins erect a
booth; and when they make '_logiæ_' and 'wodelade' (load wood),
they are quit of other labour. [p069]

There are 12 '_cotmanni_,' each of whom holds 12 acres, and
they work throughout the year 2 days a week except in the
aforesaid feasts, and render 12 hens and 60 eggs.

Robertus holds 2 bovates or 36 acres, and renders half a mark.

The _Punder_ holds 12 acres, and receives from each plough 1
'_trave_' of corn, and renders 40 hens and 500 eggs.

The _Miller_ [renders] 5½ marks.

The '_Villani_' are, if need be, to make a house each year 40
feet long and 15 feet wide, and when they do this each is quit
of 4d. of his 'averpenynges.'

The whole 'villa' renders 17s. as '_cornagium_' (_i.e._ tax on
horned beasts), and 1 cow '_de metride_.'

The demesne is at farm, together with the stock for 4 ploughs
and 4 harrows, and renders for 2 ploughs 16 'celdræ' of corn,
16 'celdræ' of oats, 8 'celdræ' of barley, and for the other 2
ploughs, 10 marks.

«They hold yard-lands of two bovates, or single bovates.»

Here then at Boldon were 22 villani, each holding two bovates or
30 acres, equivalent to a virgate or yard-land. In another place
(Quycham) there are said to be thirty-five '_bovat-villani_,' each
of whom held a bovate of 15 acres, and performed such and such
services.[90] These correspond with holders of half-virgates.

Below these villani, holding one or two bovates, as in all other
similar records, were cottage holdings, some of 12 acres, some of
6 acres each. There seems to have been a certain equality in some
places, even in the lowest rank of holdings.

Here then, within about 100 years of the Domesday Survey, are found
the usual grades of holdings in villenage. The services, too, present
little variation from those of later records and other parts of
England.

From the Boldon Book may be gathered a few points of further
information, which may serve to complete the picture of the life of
the village community in villenage. [p070]

«Manor sometimes farmed by villani.»

The unity of the 'villata' as a self-acting community is illustrated
by the fact that in many instances the services of the villani
are _farmed_ by them from the monastery _as a body_, at a single
rent for the whole village[91]--a step in the same direction as
the commutation of services and leasing of land to farm tenants,
practices already everywhere becoming so usual.

«Village officials: the faber.»

The corporate character of the 'villata' is also illustrated by
frequent mention of the village officials. The _faber_,[92] or
blacksmith, whose duty it was to keep in repair the ironwork of the
ploughs of the village, usually held his bovate or other holding in
respect of his office free from ordinary services. The carpenter[93]
also held his holding free, in return for his obligation to repair
the woodwork of the ploughs and harrows.

«The punder.»

«The præpositus.»

The _punder_[94] (pound-keeper) was another official with a
recognised position. And, as a matter of course, the villein tenant
holding the office of _præpositus_ for the time being was freed by
virtue of his office from the ordinary services of his virgate or two
bovates,[95] but resumed them again when his term of [p071] office
ceased, and another villein was elected in his stead.

«Cornage.»

In addition to the ordinary agricultural services in respect of the
arable land, there is mention, in the services of Boldon and other
places, of special dues or payments, probably for rights of grazing
or possession of herds of cattle. This kind of payment is called
'cornagium,' either because it is paid in horned cattle, or, if in
money, in respect of the number of horned cattle held.

«Drengage.»

There are also services connected with the bishop's hunting
expeditions. Thus there are persons holding in 'drengage,' who have
to feed a horse and a dog, and 'to go in the great hunt' (_magna
caza_) with two harriers and 15 'cordons,' &c.[96]

«Hunting services.»

«Booths at the fairs of St. Cuthbert.»

So of the villani of 'Aucklandshire'[97] it is recorded that they are
'to furnish for the great hunts of the bishop a "cordon" from each
bovate, and to make the Bishop's hall (_aula_) in the forest, sixty
feet long and sixteen feet wide between the posts, with a buttery, a
steward's room, a chamber and "privat." Also they make a chapel 40
feet long by 15 wide, receiving two shillings, of charity; and make
their portion of the hedge (_haya_) round the lodges (_logiæ_). On
the departure of the bishop they have a full tun of beer, or half a
tun if he should stay on. They also keep the eyries of the hawks in
the bailiwick of Radulphus Callidus, and put up 18 booths (_bothas_)
at the fairs of St. Cuthbert.'

The last item, which also occurs in the services of Boldon, is
interesting in connexion with a passage in a letter of Pope
Gregory the Great to the Abbot [p072] Mellitus (A.D. 601), in
which he requests the Bishop Augustine to be told that, after due
consideration of the habits of the English nation, he (the Pope)
determines that, 'because they have been used to slaughter many oxen
in the sacrifices to devils, some solemnity must be exchanged for
them on this account, as that on the day of the dedication, or the
nativities of the holy martyrs, whose relics are there deposited,
they may build themselves huts of the boughs of trees, about those
churches which have been turned to that use from temples, and
celebrate the solemnity with religious feasting, and no more offer
beasts to the devil, but kill cattle to the praise of God in their
eating, it being impossible to efface everything at once from their
obdurate minds: because he who tries to rise to the highest place
rises by degrees or steps, and not by leaps.'[98]

The villeins of St. Cuthbert's successor are found 500 years after
Pope Gregory's advice still, as a portion of their services, yearly
putting up the booths for the fairs held in honour of their patron
saint--a fact which may help us to realise the tenacity of local
custom, and lessen our surprise if we find also that for the origin
of other services we must look back for as long a period.

XI. THE 'LIBER NIGER' OF PETERBOROUGH ABBEY, A.D. 1125.

Fifty or sixty years earlier than the Boldon Book, was compiled the
'Liber Niger'[99] of the monastery of St. Peter de Burgo, the abbey
of Peterborough. [p073]

This record is remarkably exact and full in its details. Its date is
from 1125 to 1128; and its evidence brings up our knowledge of the
English manor and serfdom--the open field and its holdings--almost to
the threshold of the Domesday Survey, _i.e._ within about 40 years of
it.

The first entry gives the following information:[100]--

In Kateringes, which is assessed at 10 hides, 40 villani held
40 yard-lands (_virgas terræ_, or virgates), and there were 8
cotsetes, each holding 5 acres. The services were as follows:

The holders of virgates for the lord's work plough in spring
4 acres for each virgate. And besides this they find plough
teams (_carucæ_) three times in winter, three times for spring
plowing, and once in summer. And they have 22 plough teams,
wherewith they work. And all of them work 3 days a week. And
besides this they render per annum from each virgate of custom
2s. 1½d. And they all render 50 hens and 640 eggs. One tenant
of 13 acres renders 16d., and [has] 2 acres of meadow. The
mill with the miller renders 20s. The 8 cotsetes work one day
a week, and twice a year make malt. Each of them gives a penny
for a goat, and if he has a she-goat, a halfpenny. There is a
shepherd and a swineherd who hold 8 acres. And in the demesne
of the manor (_curiæ_) are 4 plough teams with 32 oxen (_i.e._
8 to each team), 12 cows with 10 calves, and 2 unemployed
animals, and 3 draught cattle, and 300 sheep, and 50 pigs, and
as much meadow over as is worth 16s. The church of the village
is at the altar of the abbey church. For the love-feast of St.
Peter[101] [they give] 4 rams and 2 cows, or 5s.

This entry may be taken as a typical one.

«Holdings, virgates and half-virgates.»

Here, then, within forty years of the date of the Domesday Survey is
clear evidence that the normal holding of the villanus was a virgate.
Elsewhere there were semi-villani with half-virgates.[102] [p074]

«The manorial plough team of eight oxen.»

Further, throughout this record fortunately the number of ploughs and
oxen on the lord's demesne happens to be mentioned, from which the
number of oxen to the team can be inferred. And the result is that in
15 out of 25 manors there were 8 oxen to a team; in 6 the team had 6
oxen, and in the remaining 4 cases the numbers were odd.

«Smaller teams of the _villani_.»

So far as it goes, this evidence proves that, as a rule, 8 oxen made
up the full normal manorial plough team in the twelfth as in the
thirteenth century. But it should be observed that this seems to hold
good only of the ploughs on the lord's demesne--_in dominio curiæ_.
The villani held other and apparently smaller ploughs, with about 4
oxen to the team instead of 8, and with these they performed their
services.[103] [p075]

But this fact does not appear to clash with the supposed connexion
between the hide of 8 bovates and the manorial plough with its team
of 8 oxen. It probably simply shows that the connexion between them
on which the regular gradation of holdings in villenage depended had
its origin at an earlier period, when a simpler condition of the
community in villenage existed than that to be found in those days
immediately following the Domesday Survey. There were, in fact, many
other symptoms that the community in villenage had long been losing
its archaic simplicity and wandering from its original type.

«Symptoms of the breaking up of serfdom.»

One of these symptoms may be found in the fact observed in the later
evidence, that the number of irregular holdings increased as time
went on. In the 'Liber Niger,' with the exception of the peculiar
and local class of 'sochmanni' found in some of the manors, these
irregular holdings seldom occur--a fact in itself very significant.

Another symptom may be noticed in the circumstance mentioned in the
Boldon Book, and also in other cartularies, of the land in demesne
being as a whole sometimes let or farmed out to the villani. Another
was the fact, so apparent in the Hundred Rolls and cartularies, of
the substitution of money payments for the services. There is no
mention in the 'Liber Niger' of either of these practices.

All these are symptoms that the system was not a system recently
introduced, but an old system gradually breaking up, relaxing its
rules, and becoming in some points inconsistent with itself. [p076]

XII. SUMMARY OF THE POST-DOMESDAY EVIDENCE.

«Manors everywhere.»

«Land in demesne and in villenage.»

«Open field system.»

To sum up the evidence already examined, and reaching to within forty
years of the date of the Domesday Survey, it is clear that England
was covered with manors. And these manors were in fact, in their
simplest form, estates of manorial lords, each with its village
community in villenage upon it. The land of the lord's demesne--the
home farm belonging to the manor-house--was cultivated chiefly by
the services of the _villata_, _i.e._ of the village community, or
tenants in villenage. The land of this village community, _i.e._
the land in villenage, lay round the village in open fields. In the
village were the messuages or homesteads of the tenants in villenage,
and their holdings were composed of bundles of scattered strips in
the open fields, with rights of pasture over the latter for their
cattle after the crops were gathered, as well as on the green commons
of the manor or township.

The tenants in villenage were divided into two distinct classes.

«Villani with yard-lands, &c.»

First, there were the villani proper, whose now familiar holdings,
the hides, half-hides, virgates, and bovates, were connected with
the number of oxen allotted to them or contributed by them to the
manorial plough team of 8 oxen, the normal holding, the virgate or
yard-land, including about 30 acres in scattered acre or half-acre
strips.

And further, these holdings of the villani were indivisible bundles
passing with the homestead which [p077] formed a part of them by
re-grant from the lord from one generation of serfs to another in
unbroken regularity, always to a single successor, whether the eldest
or the youngest son, according to the custom of each individual
manor. They possessed all the unity and indivisibility of an entailed
estate, and were sometimes known apparently for generations by the
family name of the holders.[104] But the reason underlying all this
regular devolution was not the preservation of the family of the
tenant, but of the services due from the yard-land to the lord of the
manor.

«Bordarii, or cottiers.»

Below the villani proper were the numerous smaller tenants of what
may be termed the cottier class--sometimes called in the 'Liber
Niger,' as it is important to notice, _bordarii_[105] (probably
from the Saxon 'bord,' a cottage). And these cottagers, possessing
generally no oxen, and therefore taking no part in the common
ploughing, still in some manors seem to have ranked as a lower grade
of villani, having small allotments in the open fields,--in some
manors 5 acre strips apiece, in other manors more or less.

«Slaves.»

Lastly, below the villeins and cottiers were, in some districts,
remains, hardly to be noticed in the later cartularies, of a class
of _servi_, or slaves, fast becoming [p078] merged in the cottier
class above them, or losing themselves among the household servants
or labourers upon the lord's demesne.

«Open field the shell of serfdom.»

Thus the community in villenage fitted into the open field as into
its shell--a shell which was long to survive the breaking up of the
system of serfdom which lived within it. The _débris_ of this shell,
as we have seen, still remains upon the open fields of some English
villages and townships to-day; but for the full meaning of some of
its features, especially of the scattering of the strips in the
yard-lands, we have to look still farther back into the past even
than the twelfth century.

«Analysis of the services.»

Passing from the shell to the serfdom which lived within it, we
have found it practically alike in the north and south and east and
west of England, and from the time of the Black Death back to the
threshold of the Domesday Survey. Complicated as are the numerous
little details of the services and payments, they fall with great
regularity under three distinct heads:--

«Week-work.»

1. _Week-work_--_i.e._ work for the lord for so many days a
week, mostly three days.

«Boon-work.»

2. _Precariæ_, or _boon-work_--_i.e._ special work at request
('ad precem' or 'at bene'), sometimes counting as part of the
week-work, sometimes extra to it.

«Gafol.»

3. Payments in money or kind or work, rendered by way of
rent or 'Gafol'; and various dues, such as _Kirkshot_,
_Hearth-penny_, _Easter dues_, &c.

The first two of these may be said to be practically quite distinct
from the third class, and intimately connected _inter se_. The
boon-work would seem to be a necessary corollary of the _limitation_
of the week-work. If the lord had had unlimited right to the whole
work [p079] of his villein tenant all days a week, and had an
unrestricted choice as to what kind of work it should be, week-work
at the lord's bidding might have covered it all. But custom not
only limited the number of days' work per week, but also limited
the number of days on which the work should consist of ploughing,
reaping, and other work of more than usual value, involving oxen or
piece-work, beyond the usual work of ordinary days.

The _week-work_, limited or otherwise, was evidently the most
_servile_ incident of villenage.

The payments in money or kind, or in work of the third class, to
which the word _gafol_, or tribute, was applied, were more like
modern rent, rates, and taxes than incidents of serfdom.

Comparing the services of the villani with those of the cottiers
or bordarii, the difference evidently turns upon the size of the
holdings, and the possession or non-possession of oxen.

«Cottiers' services.»

Naturally ploughing was a prominent item in the services of the
villanus holding a virgate, with his 'stuht,' or outfit of two oxen.
As naturally the services of the bordarius or cottager did not
include ploughing, but were limited to smaller services.

But apparently the services of each class were equally servile. Both
were in villenage, and _week-work_ was the chief mark of the serfdom
of both.

Besides the servile week-work and '_gafol_,' &c., there were also
other incidents of villenage felt to be restrictions upon freedom,
and so of a servile nature. Of these the most general were--

«Other servile incidents.»

The requirement of the lord's licence for the marriage of a
daughter, and fine on incontinence. [p080]

The prohibition of sale of oxen, &c., without the lord's
licence.

The obligation to use the lord's mill, and do service at his
court.

The obligation not to leave the land without the lord's licence.

It was the week-work of the villanus, and these restrictions on his
personal liberty, which were felt to be serfdom.[106]

«All limited by custom.»

But these servile incidents were limited by custom, and this
limitation by custom of the lord's demands, as well as the more and
more prevalent commutation of services into money payments in later
times, were, as has been said, notes and marks of a relaxation of the
serfdom. The absence of these limitations would be the note and mark
of a more complete serfdom.

Thus, in pursuing this economic inquiry further back into Saxon
times, the main question will be whether the older serfdom of the
holder of yard-lands was more or less unlimited, and therefore
complete, than in the times following upon the Norman conquest.

«The evidence has led up to the Domesday Survey.»

In the meantime the Domesday Survey is the next evidence which
lies before us, and judging from the tenacity of custom, and the
extreme slowness of economic changes in the later period, it may
be approached with the almost certain expectation that no great
alteration can well have taken place in the English open-field and
manorial system in the forty [p081] years between its date and that
of the _Liber Niger_ of Peterborough Abbey.

If this expectation should be realised, the Domesday Survey,
approached as it has been by the ladder of the later evidence leading
step by step up to it, ought easily to yield up its secrets.

«and must give the key to it.»

If such should prove to be the case, though losing some of its
mystery and novelty, the Domesday Survey will gain immensely in
general interest and importance by becoming intelligible. The picture
it gives of the condition of rural England will become vivid and
clear in its outlines, and trustworthy to a unique degree in its
details. For extending as it does, roughly speaking, to the whole of
England south of the Tees and east of the Severn, and spanning as it
does by its double record the interval between its date and the time
of Edward the Confessor, it will prove more than ever an invaluable
vantage-ground from which to work back economic inquiries into the
periods before the Norman conquest of England. It may be trusted to
do for the earlier Saxon records what a previous understanding of
later records will have done for it.

FOOTNOTES:

[11] _Prologus_, lines 17 to 21.

[12] _Prologus_, 216 to end.

[13] _Passus_, v. 400 to 428.

[14] _Passus_, vi. 4 to 6.

[15] _Passus_, vi. 107–9.

[16] I am indebted to Mr. Bradshaw for having called my attention to
this MS., which is now in the Cambridge University Library.

[17] MS. Dd. 7. 22. I am much indebted to Mr. Bradshaw for the loan
of this MS. from the Library.

[18] The MS. is headed 'Extracta Rotulorum de Halimotis tentis apud
Manerium de Wynselowe tempore Edwardi tercii a Con uestu' and it
embraced _Wynselowe_, _Horelwode_, _Greneburgh_, _Shipton_, _Nova
Villa de Wynselowe_, _Onyng_, and _Muston_.

[19] See entry under 44 Ed. III.

[20] Sub anno 35 Ed. III.

[21] The number of tenants with smaller holdings was considerably
larger than the number of holders of virgates and half-virgates, but
their holdings were so small that in the aggregate they held a much
smaller acreage than the other class.

[22] Out of 43 jurymen who had served in 1346, 1347, and 1348, 27
died of the Black Death in 1348–9. Out of these 27 who died, and
whose holdings therefore can be traced, 16 held virgates, 8 held
half-virgates, and of the other 3 one held 1 messuage and 2 cottages,
another a messuage and 15 acres in villenage (equivalent to a
half-virgate), and the third 8 acres arable and 2½ of meadow.

[23] Cases of this are numerous after the Black Death. See in 27 Ed.
III. one case, in 28 Edward III. 11 cases, in 30 Ed. III. five cases.

[24] All the 153 holdings which changed hands on the death of the
tenants of the Black Death were re-granted to the single heir of
the deceased holder or to a reversioner, or in default of such
were retained by the lord. In no case was there a subdivision by
inheritance. The _heriot_ of a virgate was generally an ox, or money
payment of its value. But the amount was often reduced 'propter
paupertatem;' and sometimes when a succeeding tenant could not pay, a
half-acre was deducted from the virgate and held by the lord instead
of the heriot.

[25] See under 23 Ed. III. a record of the unanimous finding of the
jury to this effect.

[26] The instances of fugitive villeins are very numerous for years
after the Black Death; and inquiry into cases of this class formed a
prominent part of the business transacted at the halimotes.

[27] There were 22 cases of 'Lerewyt' recorded on the manor rolls in
the first 10 years of Edward III.

[28] See a case in 25 Ed. III.

[29] See a case of this in 6 Ed. III.

[30] See under 6 Ed. III.

[31]

Rot. Hund. No. of Acres in Acres in
virgates a virgate a hide
in each
hide
II. p. 629 VI. 40 240
VI. 28 168
IV. 48 192
631 VI. 30 180
635 VI. 25 150
636 IV. 30 120
V. 25 125
637 VIII. 15 120
640 IV. 30 120
640 V. 25 125
645 IV. 30 120
646 V. 26 130
648 IV. 30 120
653 IV. 30 120
654 IV. 30 120
656 IV. 24 144
658 V. 25 125
660 V. 25 125
661 VI. 20 120

[32] _Hundred Rolls, Oxon._

II. 708. Every virgate gives scutage 2s. 6d.,
2 virgates give scutage 5s.,
1 virgate gives scutage 2s. 6d.,
4 virgates give scutage 10s.,
2 virgates give scutage 5s.,
each when the scutage is 40s..

II. 709. 4 virgates give scutage 8s.,
5 virgates give scutage 11s. 5d.,
each when the scutage is 40s..

II. 830. 1 hide gives scutage for a fourth part of a scutum.

From these instances it is evident that normally 4 virgates = 1 hide,
and 4 hides make a knight's fee.

[33]

_Hundred Rolls, Beds._

II. 321. Carucate of 120 acres.
324 Carucate of 80 acres.
325 Carucate of 100 acres.
326 Carucate of 120 acres.

II. 328. Carucate of 200 acres.
329 Carucate of 80 acres.
332 Carucate of 100 acres.

[34] _Hundred Rolls, Bedfordshire._--'Et sunt illi villani ita servi
quod non possunt maritare filias nisi ad voluntatem domini' (II. 329).

'Nec pullos sibi pullatos mas- (II. 328).

_Buckinghamshire._--'Sunt ad voluntatem domini, et ad alia facienda
quæ ad servilem conditionem pertinent' (II. 335–6). And so on.

[35] II. 744 _b_.

[36] II. 758 _a_.

[37] In another manor in Huntingdonshire certain cottiers ought to
make summonses. II. 616.

[38] The Latin text is badly printed here, but the original has been
inspected.

[39] II. 642 _a_.

[40] II. 613 _b_.

[41] II. 554 _b_.

[42] II. 535 _b_.

[43] _Fleta_, lib. 2, c. 71. Compare also '_Extenta Manerii_:'
_Statutes of the Realm_, i. p. 242.

[44] _Fleta_, lib. 2, c. 72.

[45] _Fleta_, lib. 2. c. 73.

[46] Augmentation Office, _Miscellaneous Books_, Nos. 56 and 57.

[47] _The Domesday of St. Paul's_, edited by Archdeacon Hale, Camden
Society, 1858.

[48] Pp. 38 _et seq._

[49] P. 42.

[50] P. 64.

[51] 'In manerio isto sexcies xx. acre faciunt hidam, et xxx. acre
faciunt virgatam' (p. 64).

[52] 'Cum vi. hidis trium solandarum' (p. 58).

[53] _Sutton_, where mention is made of a 'solanda quæ per se habet
duas hidas' (p. 93).

[54] _Draitone_, 'cum una hida de solande' (p. 99).

[55] For the _sullung_ of Kent, see Mr. Elton's _Tenures of Kent_.

[56] Published in the Rolls Series.

[57] iii. p. cix.

[58] iii. p. 55. 'Quatuor virgatæ terræ continentes unam hidam.'

[59] Edited by Archdeacon Hale, in the Camden Society's Series, 1865.

[60] P. 10 _b._

[61] P. 14 _b._

[62] Worcester Cartulary, p. 15 _a._ Of the common customs of the
villeins on the manor of Newenham--to give '_Thac_' on Martinmas Day;
for pigs above a year old (sows excepted), 1d., and for pigs not
above a year, ½d.; to sell neither ox nor horse without licence; to
give 1d. toll on selling an ox or horse; also 'aid' and '_leyrwite_'
(fine for a daughter's incontinence); to redeem his sons, if they
leave the land; to pay '_gersuma_' for his daughters; no one to leave
the land, nor to make his son a clerk, without licence; natives
coming of age, unless they directly serve their father or mother,
to perform 3 '_benripæ_'; and '_forinseci_' (_i.e._ villeins not
born in the manor) shall do likewise; to carry at the summons of
the '_serviens_' (bailiff or serjeant) besides the work: and if he
carry '_ex necessitate_,' to be quit of [a day's] work; to give at
death his best chattel (_catallum_); the successor to make a fine, as
he can; the widow to stay on the land as long as she continues the
service; all to attend their own mill; 'Cotmanni' to guard and take
prisoners [to jail].

[63] 'Et idem faciet _averagium_ apud Bristoll' et apud Wellias per
totum annum, et apud Pridie, et post hokeday apud Bruggewauter, cum
affro suo ducente bladum domini, caseum, et lanam, et cetera omnia
quæ sibi serviens præcipere voluerit, et habebit unam quadrantem et
dayuam suam quietam. Et debet facere _averagium_ apud Axebrugge et
ad navem quotiens dominus voluerit, et nichil habebit propter idem
averagium.'--_Proceedings of Archæological Institute_, Salisbury, p.
203. App. to _Notice of the Custumal of Bleadon_, pp. 182–210.

[64] _Gloucester Cartulary_, vol. iii. p. 78.

[65] '_Radacre_' in other places, pp. 80, 116.

[66] _Gloucester Cartulary_, vol. iii. p. 118.

[67] _Worcester Cartulary_, p. 14 _b._

[68] _Worcester Cartulary_, p. 15_a._

[69] _Surtees Society_, p. 57.

[70] P. 57.

[71] P. 59.

[72] Published by the Bannatyne Club, 1846.

[73] Vol. ii. p. 462.

[74] P. 461.

[75] P. 455.

[76] P. 361.

[77] P. 18.

[78] _Acts of Parliament of Scotland_, App. V. p. 387.

[79] _Analysis_, p. 232.

[80] Id. p. 232.

[81] _Domesday of St. Paul's_, p. 1.

[82] _Id._ p. 7.

[83] _Id._ pp. 28, 33, 48, 53, 86.

[84] _Id._ pp. 99, 104.

[85] _Gloucester Cart._ pp. 55, 61, 64.

[86] _Winton_, vol. i. p. 400 (A.D. 1249–92).

[87] _Rot. Red. Kelso_, p. 461.

[88] _Ib._ p. 456.

[89] P. 566.

[90] P. 579.

[91] P. 568. 'Villani de Southby-dyk tenent villam suam ad firmam et
reddunt v. libras, et invenient viii^{xx.} homines ad metendum in
autumpno et xxxvi. quadrigas (_i.e._ waggons) ad quadriganda blada
apud Octonam' (_i.e._ a neighbouring village where was probably the
bishop's chief granary) (568 _a_).

[92] 'Faber (de Wermouth tenet) xii. acras pro ferramentis carucæ et
carbones invenit' (567 _a_).

'Faber (de Queryndonshire) tenet xii. acras pro ferramento carucæ
fabricando' (596 _b_).

'Faber 1 bovat' pro suo servicio' (569 _a_).

Compare _Hundred Rolls_, p. 551 _a_, and _Domesday of St. Paul's_, p.
67.

[93] 'Carpentarius (de Wermouth) qui senex habet in vita sua xii.
acras pro carucis et herceis (_i.e._ harrows) faciendis' (567 _a_).

[94] 'Punder (de Neubotill) tenet xii. acras et habet de unaquaque
caruca de Neubotill, de Bydyk et de Heryngton (_i.e._ three villatæ)
unam travam bladi et reddit xl. (vel lx.) gallinas et ccc. ova' (p.
568 _a_).

[95] (In Seggefeeld). 'Johannes præpositus habet ii. bovatas pro
servicio suo et si servicium præposituræ dimiserit, reddit et
operatur sicut alii Firmarii' (570 _a_).

[96] P. 572.

[97] P. 575.

[98] _Bede_, bk. i. c.xxx

[99] Published by the Camden Society, 1849, as an appendix to the
_Chronicon Petroburgense_.

[100] P. 157.

[101] The love-feast (_caritas_) of St. Peter may possibly, like the
fairs of St. Cuthbert, be a survival of ancient pagan sacrifices
allowed to continue by the permission of Pope Gregory the Great. See
Hazlitt under 'Wakes' and 'Fairs.' And Du Cange under 'Caritas.'

[102] In the next place mentioned 20 men hold 20 virgates, and 13
hold 6½ virgates among them, or half a virgate each; and so on. In
one place 8 villani hold 1 hide and 1 virgate among them (_i.e._ 2
probably hold virgates, and 6 of them half-virgates), and 2 others
hold 1 virgate each. In another, 20 _pleni villani_ [of 1 virgate
each] and 29 _semi-villani_ [of half-virgate each] hold in all 34
virgates and a half. In another, 8 villani hold 8 bovates, and 3
bovates are waste. In the rest of the record it is generally assumed
that the 'pleni villani' have a virgate each, and the 'dimidii
villani' half a virgate each.

[103] The following are instances of the villein plough teams:--

The holders of 40 virgates hold 22 plough teams.
The holders of 20 virgates hold 12 plough teams.
The holders of 20 virgates hold 9 plough teams.
The holders of 8 virgates hold 2 plough teams.

There seems to have been as nearly as possible one plough team to
each two virgates, which at two oxen the virgate would give four oxen
to the plough instead of eight. Speaking generally, it may therefore
be said that there were on the Peterborough manors the greater
ploughs of the lord's demense with their separate teams of eight oxen
belonging to the lord, and the lesser ploughs of the villani, to work
which two clubbed together, for which four oxen made a sufficient
team; and it would seem, further, that not only had the villani to
work at the great manorial ploughs, but also to do service for their
lord with their own lesser ploughs in addition. This seems to explain
the expressions used in the Gloucester cartulary that the demesne
land of this or that manor can be ploughed with so many ploughs of
eight head of oxen in the team '_cum consuetudinibus villatæ_;' and
also the mention in Fleta of the '_carucæ adjutrices_' of the villani.

[104] 'Galfridus Snow tenet quoddam tenementum nativum vocatum
_Snowes_. . . . Willelmus Biesten tenet tenementum nativum vocatum
_Biestes_,' and so on.

Extent of 'Byrchsingeseie,' near Colchester.

_Leger Book of St. John the Baptist_, Colchester.

Wrest Park MSS., No. 57.

I am indebted to Earl Cowper for the opportunity of referring to this
interesting MS., containing valuable examples of extents of manors
from the reign of Edward I., and of the services of the tenants. See
particularly the extent of '_Wycham_,' 17 Ed. I., as a good example
of the three field system and serfdom.

[105] Pp. 162–4, &c.

[106] The question of the _personal status_ of the villein tenant
is a different one from that of villein _tenure_. Sir H. S. Maine
(_Early Law and Custom_, p. 333) and Mr. F. Pollock (in his _Notes
on Early English Land Law_, 'Law Mag. and Review' for May 1882) have
pointed out that, according to Bracton, free men might be subject to
villein tenure and its incidents (except the _merchetum_ on marriage
of a daughter) and yet personally be free, as contrasted with the
nativi' or villeins by blood. Compare Bracton f. 4 b with f. 26 a
and 208 b. The question of the origin of the confusion of status in
serfdom will be referred to hereafter.

[p082]

CHAPTER III.
_THE DOMESDAY SURVEY_ (A.D. 1086).

I. THERE WERE MANORS EVERYWHERE.

«The manor.»

In the Domesday Survey, as might be expected from the evidence of
the foregoing chapter, the unit of inquiry is everywhere the manor,
and the manor was a landowner's estate, with a township or village
community in villenage upon it, under the jurisdiction of the lord of
the manor.

But the same person was often the lord of many manors.

«Manors of the king,»

1,422 manors were in the ancient demesne of the Crown at the date of
the Survey,[107] and most of them had also been Crown manors in the
time of Edward the Confessor. Thus, for centuries after the Conquest,
the Domesday book was constantly appealed to as evidence that this
manor or that was of 'ancient demesne,' _i.e._ that it was a royal
manor in the time of Edward the Confessor; because the tenants of
these manors claimed certain privileges and immunities which other
tenants did not enjoy. [p083]

«of the monastic houses,»

The monasteries also at the time of Edward the Confessor were holders
of many manors, often in various counties, and the Survey shows that
they were generally permitted to retain them after the Conquest.

«and of thanes.»

Earls and powerful thanes were also at the time of Edward the
Confessor possessors of many manors, and so were their Norman
successors at the date of the Survey. The resident lord of a manor
was often the mesne tenant of one of these greater lords. However
this might be, every manor had its lord, resident, or represented by
a steward or reeve (_villicus_).

«Divided manors.»

Sometimes the Survey shows that a village or township, once probably
under a single lord, had become divided between two or more manors;
and sometimes again, by what was called subinfeudation, lesser and
dependent manors, as in the Hitchin example, had been carved out of
the original manor, once embracing directly the whole village or
township.

But these variations do not interfere with the general fact that
there were manors everywhere, and that the typical manor was a
manorial lord's estate, with a village or township upon it, under his
jurisdiction, and in villenage.

Further, this was clearly the case both after the Conquest at the
date of the Survey, and also before the Conquest in the time of
Edward the Confessor.

«Terra regis.»

What land was extra-manorial or belonged to no township was probably
royal forest or waste. At the date of the Survey this unappropriated
forest, as well as the numerous royal manors already alluded to, was
included in the royal demesne. Whatever belonged to the latter was
excluded from the jurisdiction [p084] of the courts of the hundreds.
It acknowledged no lordship but that of the king, and was described
in the Survey as _terra regis_.

II. THE DIVISION OF THE MANOR INTO LORD'S DEMESNE AND LAND IN
VILLENAGE.

Not only were there manors everywhere, but throughout the Domesday
Survey the division of the land of the manor into lord's demesne and
land in villenage was all but universal, both in the time of Edward
the Confessor and at the later date. It was so equally in the case of
manors both in royal and in private hands.

«Hides _ad geldum_.»

The record generally begins with the number of hides or carucates
at which the whole manor was rated according to ancient assessment.
Generally, except in the Danish district of England (where the
_carucate_ only is used), the word _hide_ (though often originally
meaning, as already mentioned, the same thing as a carucate, viz.
the land of one plough) was used in the Survey exclusively as the
ancient unit of assessment, while the actual extent of the manor was
described in _carucates_, and thus the number of hides often fell far
short of the number of carucates.

«Actual _carucæ_ or plough teams.»

In the _Inquisitio Eliensis_ the Huntingdonshire manors of the abbey
are described as containing so many _hides_ '_ad geldum_,' and so
many _carucates_ '_ad arandum_,' thus exactly explaining the use of
the terms.

[Illustration: Domesday Surveys: Sochmanni and Liberi
Homines; Servi; Boroarii and Cotarii; and Villani.]

In Kent the ancient assessment was, consistently with later records,
given by the number of [p085] solins--_sulung_ being an old word
used both long before and afterwards, as we have seen, in the
south-east of England for 'plough land.'

Generally, whatever the terms made use of, the basis of the
assessment seems to have been the number of plough teams at the
time it was made, and (except in the west of England) this probably
had been the case also as regards the ancient one quoted in the
Survey. The actual circumstances of the manors had at the date of
the Survey wandered far away from those at the date of the ancient
assessment, and therefore it was needful to state the present actual
number of carucates (_carucatæ_) or plough teams (_carucæ_).[108]
The devastations of the Norman Conquest had not been wholly repaired
at the date of the Survey, and therefore after the number of actual
plough teams in demesne and in villenage it is often stated that so
many more might be added.

«In demesne and in villenage.»

The total number of plough teams being given, information is almost
always added how many of them were _in demesne_ and how many belonged
to the villeins. And it is to be noticed that the plough teams of
the villeins were smaller than the typical manorial plough team of 8
oxen, just as was the case on the Peterborough manors, according to
the Liber Niger.

There were on an average in most counties about half as many ploughs
in villenage as there were villeins; so that, roughly speaking, two
villeins, as in [p086] the Peterborough manors, seem to have joined
at each villein plough, which thus can hardly have possessed more
than 4 oxen in its team.

III. THE FREE TENANTS ON THE LORD'S DEMESNE.

In the Domesday Survey for the greater part of England there is no
mention of free tenants, whether '_liberi homines_' or '_libere
tenentes_.'

«_Liberi homines_ and _sochmanni_ in Danish district only.»

Nor, considering the extreme completeness of the Survey, is it easy
to explain their absence on any other hypothesis than that of their
non-existence.[109] A glance at the map will show that throughout
those [p087] counties of England most completely under Danish
influence there were plenty of _liberi homines_ and of the allied
class of _sochmanni_, but nowhere else. And that these two classes
were distinctly and exceptionally Danish there is evidence in a
passage in the laws of Edward the Confessor, in which the 'Manbote
in Danelaga' is given separately and as different from that of the
rest of England, viz. 'de vilano et _socheman_ xii. oras: de _liberis
hominibus_ iii. marcas.'[110]

That the existence of these classes in a manor was local and quite
exceptional is also confirmed by the place in which they are
mentioned in the list of classes of tenants, the numbers of whom were
to be recorded. They are placed last of all, even after the 'servi.'
Inquiry was to be made, 'quot villani, quot cottarii, quot servi,
_quot liberi homines, quot sochemanni_.' These were the words used in
the statement of the inquiry to be made in the manors of the monks
of Ely, [p088] which manors lay in the Danish district; and the two
last-mentioned classes were added out of order at the end of a common
form, to meet its special needs.[111]

It is remarkable, however, that by common law (which generally
represents very ancient custom) the existence of free tenants was
essential to the Court Baron of a manor. Without some freemen,
according to the old law books, it could not be held.[112] And there
is a curious instance, in the Survey, of three sochmanni being lent
by one lord to another, so that he might hold his court.[113]

«Norman dependants of the lord of the manor and men of the
hundred.»

This being so, it is curious and important to notice that the survey
of the manors of the monks of Ely was to be taken upon the oaths of
the sheriff of the county, and of all the barons and of their Norman
associates (_eorum Francigenarum_), and of the whole hundred (_tocius
centuriatus_), the priests, præpositi, and six villani of each manor
(_villa_).[114]

The sochmanni and liberi homines must here be included either among
the 'Norman associates' or the 'whole hundred.'

It may be concluded, therefore, that the liberi homines and sochmanni
were of Danish or Norman origin, as also probably was the Court Baron
itself; whilst in those districts of England not so much under Danish
or Norman influence, the demesne lands were not let out until a later
period to permanent freeholding tenants. Upon the lord's demesne, and
perhaps [p089] in the manorial hall, may have been the '_Francigenæ
eorum_' belonging to the 'Comitatus,' not necessarily holders of
land, but more or less dependants of the lord of the manor. Out of
the Danish district nearly all the population on the manor seems
clearly to have been tenants in villenage or slaves.

IV. THE CLASSES OF TENANTS IN VILLENAGE.

We turn now to the tenants in villenage, who formed the bulk of the
population, and with whom this inquiry has most to do.

The terms of the writ ordering the survey to be made on the Ely
manors show clearly what classes of tenants in villenage were
expected to be found on the manors. The jury were to inquire--

(1) Quot villani.
(2) Quot cotarii.
(3) Quot servi.

The three classes of tenants in villenage actually mentioned in the
Survey are almost universally the--

(1) Villani.
(2) Bordarii [or cottarii].
(3) Servi.

«The servi»

As regards the servi, the map will show that whilst only embracing
nine per cent. of the whole population of England, they were most
numerous towards the south-west of England, less and less numerous as
the Danish districts were approached, and absent [p090] altogether
from Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, and bordering districts.

Even when most numerous they were hardly tenants in villenage. They
seem to have held no land, and often to have been rather household
thralls of the lord of the manor than _tenants_ in any ordinary sense
of the word.[115]

Thus the real tenants in villenage were confined mainly to the two
classes of villani and bordarii, or cottiers.

«The cottiers.»

Taking the _bordarii_ or cottage tenants first, the map will show
how evenly they were scattered over the whole country. They embraced
32 per cent.--roughly one-third--of the whole population in their
number, and in no county were there less than 12 per cent. of them.

«The villani.»

But the _villani_ were evidently at the date of the Survey, and at
the earlier date of Edward the Confessor, as they were afterwards, by
far the most important and typical tenants in villenage.

«Same classes of tenants as afterwards.»

They were at the date of the Survey even more numerous than the
cottier class below them. They embraced 38 per cent. of the whole
population, and, except where partially displaced by the sochmanni of
the Danish district, were pretty evenly dispersed all over England.
Except in Norfolk and Suffolk, they were seldom less than one-third
of the population. And if at the time of the Survey they were holders
of virgates and half-virgates, as their successors were afterwards,
then it follows that they held by far the largest proportion of the
land of England [p091] in their holdings. But before we assume this,
some proof may fairly be required that it was so. In the meantime
it is clear that the classes of tenants in villenage _bore the
same names_ at the time of the Survey as they did afterwards. The
presumption evidently is that they held similar holdings.

V. THE VILLANI WERE HOLDERS OF VIRGATES, ETC.

The compilers of the Survey were not in the habit of describing in
detail the character of the holdings of the villani. Whilst recording
how many villani there were in a manor, the Domesday Survey does not,
like the Hundred Rolls, usually go on to state how many of them held
a virgate and how many a half-virgate each.

«The holdings of the villani hides, virgates, and
half-virgates.»

Still, notwithstanding this general silence of the Survey on this
point, treating the matter manor by manor, and taking for example the
Peterborough manors, it might be inferred almost with certainty that
as the villani of the _Liber Niger_ in 1125 were holders of virgates
and half-virgates, so their fathers and grandfathers before them must
also have held virgates and half-virgates at the time of the Domesday
Survey and of Edward the Confessor. And such an inference would
be strengthened by the occasional use in the Survey of the terms
_integri villani_[116] and _villani dimidii_,[117] answering no doubt
to the same terms, and to the _pleni virgarii_ and _semi-virgarii_ of
the _Liber Niger_ and the Battle Abbey records. [p092]

That the land was really held at the date of the Survey in hides and
virgates may also be gathered from the well-known statement of the
Saxon Chronicle that '_næs an ælpig hide ne an gyrde landes_' was
omitted from the Survey--a statement which does not mean that not a
hide nor a yard of land was omitted, but not a hide or a yard-land,
_i.e._ a _virgate_.[118] So that it might fairly be inferred from
this passage that the virgate was the normal or typical holding of
the villanus, and this inference might well cover the whole area of
the Survey.

But there is more direct evidence than these general inferences.
It so happens that there are a few local exceptions to the general
silence of the Survey as regards the holdings of the villani.

«Examples in survey of Middlesex.»

The most remarkable exception to the general reticence occurs in the
survey for Middlesex, the compilers of which go out of their way
fortunately to give precisely the desired information. And wherever
they do so the holdings are found to be in the now familiar grades of
hides, half-hides, virgates, and half-virgates.

The following are a few examples:--

(F. 127 _a._)--_Hesa._

The priest holds 1 hide.
3 milites hold 6½ hides.
2 villani hold 2 hides. [_i.e._ a hide each].
12 villani hold 6 hides. [_i.e._ ½ hide each].
20 villani hold 5 hides. [_i.e._ ¼ hide each, or virgate].
40 villani hold 5 hides. [_i.e._ ⅛ hide each, or ½ virgate].
16 villani hold 2 hides. [_i.e._ ⅛ hide each, or ½ virgate]. [p093]

(F. 128 _a._)--_In Villa ubi sedet Æcclesia Sti. Petri_
(_Westminster_).

9 villani each of a virgate.
1 villanus of 1 hide.
9 villani each of ½ virgate.
1 cotarius of 5 acres.
41 cotarii with gardens.

(F. 128 _b._)--_Hermodesworde._

1 miles holds 2 hides.
2 villani hold 1 hide each.
2 villani of 1 hide (_i.e._ ½ hide each).
14 villani each of 1 virgate.
6 villani each of ½ "
6 bordarii each of 5 acres.
7 cotarii.
6 servi.
And so on throughout the survey for the county.

As might be expected, most of the villani held virgates and
half-virgates, but there are a sufficient number of cases of hides
and half-hides to show conclusively the relation to each other of the
four grades in the regular hierarchy of villenage.

«Examples in Herts.»

Another local and solitary exception occurs in the record for
_Sawbridgeworth_, in Hertfordshire. The holdings in this case were as
follows:--

(F. 139 _b._)--_Sabrixteworde._

The præpositus holds a ½ hide.
The priest holds 1 hide.
14 villani hold each 1½ virgate.
35 villani hold each ½ virgate, and among them
1½ virgate with 9 acres, paying 17s. 4½d.
46 bordarii hold each 8 acres.
2 bordarii hold 10 acres (_i.e._ 5 acres each).
20 cotarii hold 26 acres (_i.e._ among them).

A few other exceptional cases occur in the [p094] _Liber Eliensis_.
The abbey had three manors in Hertfordshire, and in these the
holdings were as follows:

(P. 509–10.)--IN OEDWINESTREU HUNDRED.

_Hadam._ 1 'villanus' of 1 virgate.
18 'villani,' each of ½ virgate.
7 'cotarii' of ½ virgate (_i.e._ together).

IN THE TWO HUNDREDS OF BRADEUTRE.

_Hatfield._ 18 'villani' each of 1 virgate.
The priest of ½ hide.
4 'homines' of 4 hides (_i.e._ a hide each).

IN ODESEIE HUNDRED.

_Chyllessella._ 2 villani of ½ hide (_i.e._ 1 virgate each).
10 villani of 5 virgates (_i.e._ ½ virgate each).
9 bordarii of 1 virgate (_i.e._ together).
7 servi.

«In the Fen Country.»

The monks of Ely also had several manors in the Fen country, but
the holdings in this district seem to have been peculiar. Instead
of being 'each of a virgate,' or 'each of a half-virgate,' they are
'each of so many acres,' as was also found to be the case in some
districts of Cambridgeshire in the Hundred Rolls. The Fen district
seems to have had its own local peculiarities, both in the eleventh
and in the fourteenth centuries, just as Kent also had. But here was
no exception to the rule that the villani were classed in grades,
each grade with equal holdings.

«The yard-land the normal holding of the villanus.»

These accidental instances in the Domesday Survey in which the
required information is given are numerous enough to make it clear
that at the date of the Survey the holdings of the villani were
generally hides, half-hides, virgates, and half-virgates. The
virgate or yard-land was the normal holding, as it was afterwards.
And this being so, it may reasonably be [p095] concluded also
that the virgates and half-virgates were themselves what they were
afterwards--bundles of strips scattered over the open fields, and
having some connexion not yet fully explained, but clearly indicated,
with the number of oxen allotted to their holders or contributed by
them to the manorial plough team of eight oxen.

VI. THE HOLDINGS OF THE BORDARII OR COTTIERS.

It has already been noticed that in the _Inquisitio Eliensis_ the
particulars to be recorded as regards the tenants were--

1. Quot villani.
2. Quot _cottarii_.
3. Quot servi, &c.

And that with few exceptions throughout the Survey the three classes
actually found in the Survey were--

1. Villani.
2. _Bordarii_.
3. Servi.

From this fact alone it would not be wrong to conclude that to a
great extent the words _bordarii_ and _cottarii_ were interchangeable.

This inference gains much weight from the fact that a great many
bordarii as well as cottarii are found even in the _Inquisitio
Eliensis_ itself. The facts, however, when collected together are
somewhat [p096] curious, as a reference to the note below will
show.[119]

«Cottiers and bordarii very much alike.»

In a few cases there are both bordarii and cottarii mentioned, which
would lead to the conclusion that they were distinct classes. But
in most cases there are either one or the other of the two classes
mentioned, but not both. Examining their holdings there seems to be
no difference between them.

There are bordarii holding so many acres each, generally _five_, but
varying sometimes from one to ten. There are cottarii with all these
variations of holdings. There are 'bordarii with their gardens,' and
there are likewise 'cottarii with their gardens.' There are both
bordarii and cottarii who, as their holdings are not described at
all, may, for anything we know, have held cottages only, and no land
or gardens.

Comparing these Cambridgeshire examples with those in Hertfordshire,
and others in the Domesday Survey for Middlesex, we may conclude
that for all [p097] practical purposes the _bordarius_ was a
_cottier_--sometimes with no land, sometimes with a garden, sometimes
with one solitary acre strip in the open fields, sometimes with more,
even up to 10 acres, but that the typical bordarius was a cottager
who held, in addition to his cottage, 5 acres in the open fields. His
was, therefore, a subordinate position to that of the villanus proper
in the village hierarchy, and he differed from the villanus probably
most clearly in this, that he put no oxen into the village plough
teams, and took no part in the common ploughing.

His services were no less servile than those of the villanus, but of
a more trivial kind. He was above the _servus_, or slave, but his
was the class which most easily would slide into that of the modern
labourer, and in which the _servus_ himself in his turn might most
easily merge. The word 'bordarius' was noticed in the _Liber Niger_
of Peterborough, but though so universal in the Domesday Survey it
soon slipped out of use; and as 'bord' gave place to 'cottage' in the
common speech, so the whole class below the villani came to be known
as cottagers.

VII. THE DOMESDAY SURVEY OF THE VILLA OF WESTMINSTER.

It may be worth while to test the value of the key which the results
of this inquiry have put into our hand by applying it to the Domesday
description of a particular manor.

«Survey of Westminster.»

For this purpose the survey of the manor of [p098] Westminster may
be chosen as one of great national and historical interest. It is as
follows:[120]--

In the villa where is situated the church of St. Peter [_i.e._
the abbey] the abbot of the same place holds 13½ hides [_i.e._
land rated at so much]. There is land for 11 plough teams.

To the _demesne_ belong 9 hides and 1 virgate, and there are 4
plough teams.

The _villeins_ have 6 plough teams, and one more might be made.

There are 9 villani with a virgate each.
1 villanus with a hide.
9 villani with a half-virgate each.
1 cottier with 5 acres.
41 cottiers rendering a shilling each yearly for their gardens.
There is meadow for 11 plough teams,
Pasture for the cattle of the village,
Wood for 100 pigs.

There are 25 houses of the abbot's soldiers and of other men,
who render 8s. per annum or 10l. in all; when he received them,
the same; in the time of King Edward, 12l.

This manor was and is in the demesne of the Church of St. Peter
of Westminster.

In the same villa _Bainiardus_ holds 3 hides of the abbot.
There is land for 2 plough teams, and they are there, in
demesne, and one cottier. Wood for 100 pigs. Pasture for
cattle. Four arpents of vineyard newly planted. All these are
worth 60s.; when he received them, 20s.; in the time of King
Edward, 6l. This land belonged, and belongs, to the Church of
St. Peter.

«The abbot's manor.»

«The open fields.»

It is clear from this description that the village which nestled
round the new minster just completed by Edward the Confessor, was
on a manor of the abbot. It consisted of 25 houses of the abbot's
immediate followers, 19 homesteads of villani, 42 cottages with their
little gardens, and one of them with 5 acres of land. There was also
the larger homestead of the sub-manor of the abbot's under-tenant,
with a single cottage and a vineyard of 4 half-acres newly planted.
There was meadow enough by the river side to make hay for the herd
of oxen [p099] belonging to the dozen plough teams of the village,
and pasture for them and other cattle. Further round the village in
open fields were about 1,000 acres of arable land mostly in the acre
strips, lying no doubt in their shots or furlongs, and divided by
green turf balks and field-ways. Lastly, surrounding the whole on the
land side were the woods where the swineherd found mast for the 200
pigs of the place. On every one of these points we have the certain
evidence of sworn eye-witnesses.

«Incidental evidence.»

And so with little variation must have been the condition of things
in all material points twenty years earlier,[121] when King Edward
lay on his death-bed and wandered in his mind, and saw in his
delirium two holy monks whom he remembered in Normandy, who foretold
to him the coming disasters to the realm, which should only be ended
when 'the green tree, after severance from its trunk and removal for
the space of three acres (_trium jugerum spatio_), should return to
its parent stem, and again bear leaf and fruit and flower.' It may be
that the delirious king as 'he sat up in bed' dreamily gazed through
the window of his chamber upon the open fields, and the turf balks
dividing the acres. The green tree may have been suggested to his
mind by an actual tree growing out of one of the balks. The uneven
glass of his window-panes would be just as likely as not as he rose
in his bed to sever the stem from the root to his eye, moving it
apparently three acres' breadth higher up the open field, restoring
it again to its root as he sank back on his pillow. The very delirium
of [p100] the dying king thus becomes the most natural thing in the
world when we know that all round were the open fields, and balks,
and acres. Without this knowledge even the learned and graphic
historian of the Norman Conquest can make nothing of the 'trium
jugerum spatio,' and casts about for other renderings instead of the
perfectly intelligible right one.[122]

«Further incidental evidence.»

Once more; the contemporary biographer of Edward the Confessor, with
the accuracy of one to whom Westminster was no doubt familiar, tells
us that 'the devout king destined to God that place, both for that
it was near unto the famous and wealthy city of London, and also had
a pleasant situation _amongst fruitful fields lying round about it_,
with the principal river running hard by, bringing in from all parts
of the world great variety of wares and merchandise of all sorts to
the city adjoining; but chiefly for the love of the apostle, whom
he reverenced with a special and singular affection.'[123] Even the
delicate historical insight of the late historian of the abbey, to
whom all its picturesque surroundings were so dear, failed to catch
the full meaning of this passage. Whilst referred to in a note
it becomes paraphrased thus in the text:--'By this time also the
wilderness of Thorney was cleared; and the crowded river with _its
green meadows_, and the sunny aspect of the island, may have had
a charm for the king whose choice had hitherto lain in the rustic
fields of Islip and Windsor.'[124] Yes, 'meadows of Thorney' there
were, [p101] on which the oxen of a dozen plough teams were grazing,
but the contemporary writer's '_fruitful fields lying round about
the place_' were the 1,000 acres of corn land of which Dean Stanley
was unconscious. No blame to him, for what economic student had
sufficiently understood the Domesday Survey to tell him that every
virgate of the villani of the '_villa ubi sedet Æcclesia Sancti
Petri_' was a bundle of strips of arable land scattered all over the
three great fields stretching away from the village, and the river,
and the 'meadows of Thorney' for a mile or two round?

VIII. THE EXTENT OF THE CULTIVATED LAND OF ENGLAND, AND HOW MUCH WAS
INCLUDED IN THE YARD-LANDS OF THE VILLANI.

Knowing now that the virgate or yard-land was the normal holding of
the villanus, though some villani held hides and half-hides, _i.e._
more virgates than one, and others half-virgates; and knowing that
the normal holding of the villanus, whether called a yard-land or a
husband-land, or by any other name, was a bundle of scattered strips,
containing normally thirty acres; and knowing also the number of
villani in the several counties embraced in the Survey, it becomes
perfectly possible to estimate, roughly no doubt, but with remarkable
certainty, the total area contained in their holdings.

«Area in yard-lands of villani.»

The total number of villani in these counties was 108,407.[125] If
each villanus held a yard-land or virgate of 30 acres, then about
3,250,000 acres were [p102] contained in their holdings. The number
of villani holding half-virgates was, however, probably greater than
the number holding half-hides and hides; so that the average holding
would perhaps hardly be equal in acreage to the normal holding of
30 acres. Taking the average holding at 20 acres instead of 30, we
should probably under-estimate the acreage. It would even then amount
to 2,168,000. We shall be safe if we say that the villani held in
their bundles of strips 2¼ millions of acres.[126]

«Area in the holdings of cottiers,»

We must add the holdings of the 82,000 bordarii and of the 6,000 or
7,000 cottier tenants.[127] If these lesser holdings averaged three
acres each, we must add another quarter of a million acres for them.
The total of two and a half millions of acres can thus hardly be an
over-estimate of the acreage of the arable strips in the open fields
held by the villani and bordarii in villenage. What proportion did
this bear to the whole cultivated area of these counties?

«and of free tenants.»

To include the total acreage under the plough, the holdings of the
_sochmanni_ and _liberi homines_ of the Danish district must be
added, and also the arable land (ploughed mainly by the villani) on
the lord's demesne. The 23,000 _sochmanni_[128] can hardly have held
as little as a similar number of villani--say half a million acres.
The 12,000 _liberi homines_ may have held another half-million. And
one or two million acres can hardly be an excessive estimate for the
arable portion of the lord's demesne.

«Total about five million acres, nearly one-half of what is
now arable.»

Putting all these figures together, the evidence of the Domesday
Survey seems therefore to show that [p103] at its date about
five million acres were under the plough, _i.e._ from one-third
to one-half of the acreage now in arable cultivation in the same
counties of England.[129]

This is not mere conjecture. It rests upon facts recorded in detail
in the Survey for each manor upon the oath of the villani themselves;
with no chance of exaggeration, because upon the result was to be
founded a tax; with little chance of omission, because the men of the
hundred, who also were sworn, would take care in their own interests
that one place was not assessed more lightly than others. The general
opinion was that 'not a single hide or yard-land was omitted.'

The acreage under arable cultivation at the time of the Survey, and
twenty years earlier in the time of Edward the Confessor, was thus
really very large. And the villani in their yard-lands held nearly
half of it, and together with the bordarii fully half of it, in
villenage. It must be borne in mind also that by their services they
tilled the greater part of the rest.

«Tilled by serf labour.»

This was the economic condition in which England was left by the
Saxons as the result of the 500 years of their rule. The agriculture
of England, _as they left it_, was carried on under the open field
system by village communities in villenage. It was under the system
of Saxon serfdom, with some little help from the actual slaves on
the lord's demesne, that the land was tilled throughout all those
counties which the Saxons had thoroughly conquered, with some
partial exception [p104] as regards the Danish districts, where the
_sochmanni_ and _liberi homines_ were settled.

This is the solid foundation of fact firmly vouched for by the
Domesday Survey, read in the light of the evidence leading up to it.

From this firm basis the inquiry must proceed, carefully following
the same lines as before--working still from the known to the
unknown--tracing the open field system, its villani, and their
yard-lands still farther back into the earlier periods of Saxon rule.

The question to be answered is, how far back into the earlier Saxon
times the open field system and its yard-lands can be followed, and
whether the serfdom connected with them was more or was less complete
and servile in its character in the earlier than in the later period.

FOOTNOTES:

[107] Ellis's _Introduction_, i. p. 225.

[108] Unfortunately the same contracted form serves in the Survey for
both _carucata_ and _caruca_.

[109] An elaborate argument was raised by Archdeacon Hale in the
valuable introduction to the Camden Society's edition of the
_Domesday of St. Paul's_, to show that the values given at the end
of the entry for each manor in the Domesday Survey consisted of the
rents of free tenants. He based his view on the fact that in two
cases quoted by him the amount of the value so given was exceeded by
the amount for which the manor, in these cases, was let 'ad firmam;'
and, further, upon a comparison of the Domesday values of the
manors of St. Paul's with the recorded 'Summæ denariorum' in 1181,
and 'Tenants' rents' in 1222. But the figures given are probably
a sufficient refutation of the view taken, inasmuch as though the
latter have a certain general correspondence with the Domesday values
in almost every case, if the view were correct, there must have been
a falling off in the number and value of the tenants' rents between
the two periods. The falling off for the whole of the 18 manors must
have been in this case from 155l. 10s. T.R.E., and 157l. 13s. 4d.
T.R.W., of Domesday amounts, to 112l. 16s. 4d. in 1181, and 126l.
10s. 3d. in 1222. The true reading of these figures, there can hardly
be a doubt, is that the amount of _tenants' rents alone_ at the later
date had become in the interval nearly as great as the _whole value_
of the manors (including the land both in demesne and in villenage)
at the time of the Domesday Survey. There is abundant evidence of
the rapid growth of population, and especially of the class of free
tenants, between the eleventh and the thirteenth century. The value
of manors is given in many cases in the Hundred Rolls for Oxfordshire
(including demesne land rents and services), and the figures in the
following six cases in which the comparison is complete show a large
rise in value, as might be expected:

DOMESDAY SURVEY
Name Value
£ £
P. 156_b._ Lineham (T.R.E.) 12 modo 10
P. 157_a._ Henestan (T.R.E.) 20 modo 18
P. 158_b._ Esthcote (T.R.E.) 5 modo 8
P. 158_b._ Fulebroc (T.R.E.) 16 modo 16
P. 159_a._ Ideberie (T.R.E.) 12 modo 12
P. 159_b._ Caningeham (T.R.E.) 12 modo 15
── ──
£77 modo £79

HUNDRED ROLLS
Name Value
£ s. d.
P. 743. Lynham 27 8 4
P. 739. Ennestan 38 19 2
P. 730. Estcot 32 3 4
P. 744. Folebrok 28 7 7
P. 734. Iddebir 31 12 10½
P. 733. Keyngham 37 4 2
────────────
£195 15 5½

It is thus almost certain that both surveys were taken on the same
plan, and embrace the value of the whole manor in each case.

[110] _Ancient Laws, &c., of England_, Thorpe, 192.

[111] _Inquisitio Eliensis_, f. 497 _a._

[112] _Ellis_, i. 237.

[113] _Ibid._ i. 237, note. _Domesday_, i. 193 _b._ _Orduuelle_.

[114] Ellis, i. 22. See, as to _Francigenæ, Laws of W. Conq._
iii. Nos. III. and IV. Thorpe, p. 211. As to the 'centuriatus,'
see _Capitulare de Villis Caroli Magni_, s. 62--'Quid de liberis
hominibus et centenis.' _Monumenta Germaniæ Historica_, Hanover,
1881, p. 89.

[115] The servi are mentioned sometimes as on the lord's demesne, and
sometimes at the end of the tenants in villenage.

[116] _Survey_, i. f. 252.

[117] _Ibid._ i. ff. 162, 168, 169 _b_, 252.

[118] Sub anno MLXXXV. Rolls Edition, by Thorpe, i. p. 353.

[119] In the _Inquisitio Eliensis_ the instances of bordarii and
cottarii in Cambridgeshire are as follows:--

iii. cot.
iii. bor.
ii. bor.
iiii. bor.
vi. bor.
ii. bor.
xiiii. bor. de suis ortis.
ii. bor.
v. bor.
v. bor. de v. acris.
v. bor. de v. ac.
vii. bor.
iii. bor. de iii. ac.
iiii. bor.
xii. bor. de x. ac. quisque.
v. bor.
iiii. bor.
viii. bor.
iv. bor.
iiii. bor.
xv. bor. cum suis ortis.
xv. bor. et iii. cot.
x. bor. et iii. cot.
ix. bor. et iii. cot.
xviii. bor. et x. cot.
iii. bor. de xv. ac. (_i.e._ 5 a. each).
viii. cot.
iii. cot. de ortis.
iv. quisq. de v. ac.
ii. bor. et iv. cot. quisq. de x. a.
xii. bor. et ix. cot.
ix. cot. de ortis suis.
viii. cot.
i.
iiii. cot.
viii. cot.
ii. cot.
viii. cot. de i. a.
v. cot.
iiii. cot.
x. cot. quisq. de i. a.
x. cot.
ix. cot.
iiii. cot.
vi. cot. et iiii. bor. quisq. de v. a.

[120] F. 128 _a._

[121] The value of the rentals had decreased since T.R.E., so that
the village had not increased in the interval.

[122] Freeman's _Norman Conquest_, iii. 12.

[123] Contemporary Life of Edward the Confessor in the Harleian MSS.,
pp. 980, 985.

[124] _Memorials of Westminster Abbey_, p. 15.

[125] See Ellis's _Introduction_, vol. ii. p. 514.

[126] Ellis, ii. p. 511.

[127] _Id._

[128] _Ibid._ p. 514.

[129] The arable acreage in these counties in 1879 was about twelve
million acres.

[p105]

CHAPTER IV.
_THE OPEN FIELD SYSTEM TRACED IN SAXON TIMES--THE
SCATTERING OF THE STRIPS ORIGINATED IN THE METHODS OF
CO-ARATION._

I. THE VILLAGE FIELDS UNDER SAXON RULE WERE OPEN FIELDS.

«Traces of the open field in Saxon times.»

We have learned from a long line of evidence, leading backwards to
the date of the Domesday Survey, that the community in villenage
fitted into the open field system as a snail fits into a shell. Let
us now, following the same method, and beginning again with the
shell, inquire whether its distinctive features can be traced on
English fields in early Saxon times from the date of the Domesday
Survey, and of Edward the Confessor, backwards.

And first it will be convenient to find out whether traces can be
found of the 'strips,' and the 'furlongs,' 'headlands,' 'linches,'
'gored acres,' 'butts,' and odds and ends of 'no-man's-land,' the
remains of which are still to be seen wherever the open fields are
unenclosed.

It will be remembered that the strips upon examination were found
to be _acres_ laid out for ploughing [p106] on the open fields.
They were, in fact, the original actual divisions, from the general
dimensions of which the statute acre, with its four roods, was
derived.

«In the Saxon translation of the Gospels.»

Bearing this in mind, the Anglo-Saxon translation of the Gospels may
be quoted in proof that the fields round a Saxon village were open
fields, and generally divided into acre strips in the tenth century,
just as the vision of _Piers Plowman_ was quoted in proof that it was
so in the fourteenth century.

The Saxon translator of the story of the disciples walking through
the corn-fields describes them as walking over the '_æceras_.'

Obviously the translator's notion of the corn-fields round a village
was that of the open fields of his own country. They were divided
into 'acres,' and he who walked over them walked over the 'acres.'

«In Saxon charters.»

But by far the best evidence occurs in the multitudes of charters,
from the eighth century downwards, so many of which are contained in
the cartularies of the various abbeys, and more than 1,300 of which
are collected in Kemble's _Codex Diplomaticus_.

These charters are generally in Latin. They most often relate to the
grant of a whole manor or estate with the village upon it. And to the
charters is generally added in Saxon a description of the boundaries
as known to the inhabitants. These descriptions are in precisely the
same form as the description of the boundaries on the Hitchin manor
rolls as presented by the homage in 1819.[130]

«In the boundaries.»

The boundary is always described as starting at [p107] some
well-known point--perhaps a road or stream--as passing on from it to
some other, and so on, from point to point, till the starting-place
is reached again. The chance of finding out from these boundaries
whether they contained within them open fields lies simply in the
possibility that some one or another of the distinctive features of
the system may happen to occur at the edge of the estate or township,
and so to be mentioned among the links in the chain of objects making
up the boundary.

The fact is that this happens very often.

«Example of _Hordwell_.»

By way of example, the boundaries of _Hordwell_ in Hampshire may be
taken. They are appended to a charter[131] by which King Edward, the
son of King Alfred, gave the estate to the Abbey of Abingdon, and
they are as follows:--

_Metæ de Hordwella._

An Swinbroc ærest, thæt up of Swinebroce in on riscslæd,
of thæs riscslædes byge foran ongean Hordwylles weg, thæt
andlang thæs weges oth hit cymth to Iecenhilde wege,
thonne of thæm wege, up on thone ealdan wude weg, thonne
of thæn wude waga be eastan Tellesbyrg on ænne garan,
thonne of thæm garan on næne garæcer, thæt andlangs
thære furh to anum andheafdum to anre forierthe, and
sio forierth gæth in to tham lande, thanne on gerihte
to tham stane on hricg weg, thanon west on anne goran,
andlanges thære furh to anum anheafdum, thanon of dune
on fearnhylles slæd, thæt thanon on ane furh an æcer
near thæm hlince, thonne on thæt hlinc æt fearnhylles
slæde suthewearde, of thæm hlince on anon heafde, forth
thær on ane furh, on ane stanræwe, thanon on gerihte on
hricgweg thæt thanone on ane garæcer on anon heafde, and
se garæcer in on thæt land, thanone andlanges anre furh
oth hitcymth to anum byg, thanone of thæm byge forth on
ane furh oth hit cymth to anre forierthe, and sio forierth
into tham lande, thonne on Icenhilde weg be Tellesburh
westan, thanone north ofer Icenhilde weg on sican wylle,
thæt hthweres ofer an furlang on gerihte on an ælrbed on
hæghylles broces byge, anlang thæs broces oth hit cymth to
twam garæcer, and than garæceras in on thæt land, thanon
on ane forierthe on anon heafde, thanon on gerihte on
readan clif on Swinbroc, thonne andlang thæs broces on
thæt riscslæd.

* * * * *

On Swinbroc first, thence up from Swinbroc on to
rush-slade, from this rush-slade's corner fore-against
Hordwell-way, thence along this way until it comes to the
Icknild way, then from these ways upon the old wood-way,
then from that wood-way by east Tellesburg to a corner,
then from that corner to a _goreacre_, thence along its
furrow to the head of a _headland_, and which headland
goes into the land, then right on to the stone on ridge
way, then on west to a _gore_ along the furrow to its
head, then adown to fernhills slade, thence on a furrow
in the acre nearer the _lince_, then on that lince at
fernhills slade southward from that lince to its head,
forward then on a furrow to a stonerow, then right on to
the ridge-way, thence thereon to a _goreacre_ at its head,
the goreacre being within that land, thence along a furrow
till it comes to a corner, thence from that corner forward
on a furrow till it comes to a _headland_, which headland
is within the land, then on the Ickenild way by Tellesburg
west, thence north over the Ickenild way to Sican-well,
thence . . . over a _furlong_ right on to an alder-bed
at hedgehill's brook corner, along this brook till it
comes to two _goreacres_, which goreacres are within that
land, thence on a _headland_ to its head, then right on
to Redcliffe on Swinbrook, then along this brook on that
rush-slade.

In this single instance there is mention of _acres_ or strips, of
_gores_ or _gored-acres_, of _headlands_, of _furlongs_, and of
_linches_.

«All the marks are found.»

Scores of similar instances might be given from the Abingdon
charters, 'Liber de Hyda,' and the 'Codex Diplomaticus,' showing
that the boundaries constantly make mention of one or another
of the distinctive marks by which the open field system may be
recognised.[132] [p109]

«1,000 years ago.»

There can, therefore, be no doubt that the fields of Saxon manors
or villages were open fields divided into furlongs and strips, and
having their headlands and linches. Even the little odds and ends of
'_no mans land_' are incidentally found to have their place in the
Saxon open fields 1,000 years ago.

But how far back can these Saxon open fields be traced? The answer
is, as far back as the laws of King Ine can be held to reach into the
past.

These laws were republished by King Alfred as 'The Dooms of Ine,'
who came to the throne in A.D. 688. In their first clause they claim
to have been recorded by King Ine with the counsel and teaching of
his father _Cenred_, and of _Hedde_, his bishop (who was Bishop of
Winchester from A.D. 676 to 705), and of _Eorcenwold_, his bishop
(who obtained the see of London in 675); and so, if genuine, they
seem to represent what was settled customary law in Wessex during the
last half of the seventh century--the century after the conquest of
the greater part of Wessex.

In these laws there occurs a section which so clearly refers to open
common fields divided into acres, and to common meadows also divided
into strips or doles, that it would have been perfectly intelligible
and reasonable if it had been included word for word in the record of
the customs of the Hitchin manor as regards the three common fields
and the green commons and Lammas land:-- [p110]

_Be Ceorles Gærs-tune._[133]

(xlii.) Gif ceorlas gærs-tun hæbben gemænne. oþþe oðer
gedál-land to tynanne. ⁊ hæbben sume getyned hiora dæl. sume
næbban. ⁊ . . . etten hiora gemænan æceras oþþe gærs, gán
þa þonne þe ꝥ geat agan. ⁊ gebete[n] þam oðrum þe hiora dæl
getynedne. . . .

_Of a Ceorle's grass-tun (meadow)._

(42) If ceorls have common meadow or other _land divided into
strips_[134] to fence, and some have fenced their strip, some
have not, and . . . [stray cattle (?)] eat their common acres
or grass, let those go who own the gap, and compensate the
others who have fenced their strip. . . .

There is here in the smallest possible compass the most complete
evidence that in the seventh century the fields of Wessex were common
open fields, the arable being divided into _acres_ and the meadows
into _doles_[134]; and as the system is incidentally mentioned as
a thing existing as a matter of course, it is not likely to have
been suddenly or recently introduced. The evidence throws it back,
therefore, at least to the earliest period of Saxon rule.

II. THE HOLDINGS WERE COMPOSED OF SCATTERED STRIPS.

«The holdings were _hides_ and _yard-lands_.»

Let us next ask whether there are traces of the _scattered
ownership_--the scattering all over the open fields of the strips
included in the holdings--which was so essential a characteristic of
the system; and, further, whether in tracing it back into early Saxon
[p111] times any clue to its original meaning and intention can be
found.

First, it may be stated generally that, when the nature and incidents
of the holdings are examined hereafter, it will be found that
throughout the period of Saxon rule, from the time of Edward the
Confessor backward to the date of the laws of King Ine, 300 years
earlier, the holdings were mainly the same as those with which we
have become familiar, viz. _hides_, _half-hides_, and _yard-lands_,
and that, generally speaking, there were no other kinds of holdings
the names of which are mentioned.

«Holdings composed of scattered strips.»

That these Saxon hides and yard-lands were composed of scattered
strips in the open fields, as they were afterwards, might well be
inferred from the mere fact that they bore the same names as those
used after the Conquest. It would be strange indeed if the same names
at the two dates meant entirely different things--if the virgate or
yard-land before the Conquest was a thing wholly different from what
it was after it.

But there is other evidence than the mere names of the holdings.

There is a general characteristic of the numerous Saxon charters of
all periods, which, when carefully considered, can hardly have any
other explanation than the fact that the holdings were composed not
of contiguous blocks of land, but of scattered strips.

«The boundaries were of whole manors,»

It is this--that whatever be the subject of the grant made by the
charter, _i.e._ whether it be a whole manor or township that is
granted, or only some of the holdings in it, the boundaries appended
are the boundaries of the _whole_ manor or township. No doubt the
royal gifts to the monastic houses generally [p112] did consist of
whole manors, and thus the boundaries in most cases naturally were
the boundaries of the whole, and could not be otherwise. But it was
not always so. Thus, among the Abingdon charters there are two of
Edward the Martyr, one of vii. hides (cassatos), in 'Cingestune,' and
another of xiii. 'mansas' in 'Cyngestun,' one to the Church of St.
Mary at Abingdon, the other to a person named _Ælfstan_;[135] and to
both charters are appended _the same boundaries_ in substantially the
same words. And these are the boundaries of the _whole township_.[136]

There can hardly be any other explanation of this peculiarity than
the fact that the holdings were not blocks of land, the boundaries
of which could be easily given, but, in fact, like the hides and
virgates after the Conquest, bundles of strips scattered over the
open fields, and intermixed with strips belonging to other holdings.
Indeed, there is in a charter of King Ethelred (A.D. 982) among
the Abingdon series relating to five hides at '_Cheorletun_,' a
direct confession of the reason why in this case all boundaries are
omitted. Instead of the usual boundaries of the whole township there
is the statement that the estate is 'the less distinctly defined by
boundaries, _quia jugera altrinsecus copulata adjacent_'--because the
acres are intermixed.[137]

«of which they were shares.»

On the hypothesis already suggested that the hides, half-hides,
virgates, and bovates were the shares in the results of the ploughing
of the village plough [p113] teams--in other words, the number of
strips allotted to each holder in respect of the oxen contributed by
him to the plough team of eight oxen--it is perfectly natural that in
a grant of _some_ only of the holdings the boundaries given should be
those of the whole township, viz. of the whole area, an intermixed
share in which constituted the holding.

«Other evidence.»

There is another fact, which has, perhaps, never yet been explained,
but which is nevertheless perfectly intelligible on the same
hypothesis.

It will be remembered that there was observed in the Winslow example
of a virgate a certain regular turn or rotation in the order of the
strips in the virgates--that John Moldeson's strips almost always
came next after the strips of one, and were followed by those of
another, particular neighbour. Now this fact strongly suggests that
originally the holdings had not always and permanently consisted of
the same actual strips, but that once upon a time the strips were
perhaps allotted afresh each year in the ploughing according to a
certain order of rotation, the turn of the contributor of two oxen
coming twice as often as that of the contributor of one ox, and so
making the virgate contain twice as many strips as the bovate. This,
and this alone, would give the requisite elasticity to the system so
as to allow, if necessary, of the admission of new-comers into the
village community, and new virgates into the village fields.

So long as the limits of the land were not reached a fresh tenant
would rob no one by adding his oxen to the village plough teams, and
receiving in regular turn the strips allotted in the ploughing to
his oxen. In the working of the system the strips of a new holding
[p114] would be intermixed with the others by a perfectly natural
process.

Now, that something like this process did actually happen in Saxon
times is clear from the way in which the Church was provided for
under the Saxon laws.

«The mode in which _tithes_ were taken.»

In the light which is given by the knowledge of what the open field
system really was, there is nothing intrinsically impossible even in
the alleged but doubtful donation by King Ethelwulf of one-tenth of
the whole land of England by one stroke of the pen to the Church. It
has been said that he could not do it except on the royal domains
without robbing the landowners and their tenants of their holdings.
It would be so if the holdings were blocks. But there is nothing
impossible in the supposition that a Saxon king should enact a law
that every tenth strip ploughed by the common ploughs throughout the
villages of England should be devoted to the Church. It would create
no confusion or dislocation anywhere. And it would have meant just
the same thing if Ethelwulf had enacted that every tenth virgate, or
every tenth holding, should be devoted to the Church. For the sum of
every tenth strip ploughed by the villagers, when the strips were
tied, as it were, together into the bundles called virgates or hides,
would amount to every tenth virgate, or hide, as the case might be.
Nor would there be anything strange in his freeing the strips thus
granted to the Church from all secular services.[138]

The alleged donation may be spurious, the documents relating to it
may be forgeries, but there is [p115] nothing impossible or unlikely
in the thing itself. And the very fact of the forgery of such a grant
is evidence of its intrinsic possibility. And, whatever may be said
as to the donation of Ethelwulf, whether it be spurious or not, there
are other proofs that something of the kind was afterwards effected.

«Priests often have yard-lands.»

In No. XXV.[139] of the 'Excerptiones' of Archbishop Egbert (A.D.
735–766) it is ordained that 'to every church shall be allotted one
complete holding (mansa), and that this shall be free from all but
ecclesiastical services.' This was simply putting the priest in the
position of a recognised village official, like the _præpositus_ or
the _faber_. They held their virgates free of service, and perhaps
their strips were ploughed by the common ploughs in return for their
services without their contributing oxen to the manorial plough team.
The Domesday Survey proves that, in a great number of instances at
least, room had in fact been made in the village community for the
priest and his _virgate_.[140]

«Tithe taken in acres, _i.e. every tenth strip_.»

The following passages in the Saxon laws also show that for some
time, at all events, the tithes were actually taken, not in the
shape of every tenth sheaf, but exactly in accordance with the plan
suggested by the spurious grant of Ethelwulf, by every tenth strip
being set aside for the Church in the ploughing.

In the laws of King Ethelred[141] (A.D. 978–1016) [p116] there is a
command that every Christian man shall 'pay his tithe justly, _always
as the plough traverses the tenth "æcer."_'

VII. And pite cristenra manna gehpilc. ꝥ he his Drihtene his
teoðunge. á spa seo sulh þone teoðan æcer gegá. rihtlice
gelǽste. be Godes miltse.[142]

And be it known to every Christian man that he pay to his lord
his tithe rightly always _as the plough traverses the tenth
acre_, on peril of God's mercy.

Further, in a Latin law of King Ethelred there is the following
direction:-

Et præcipimus, ut omnis homo . . . det cyricsceattum, et rectam
decimam suam, . . . hoc est, sicut aratrum peragrabit decimam
acram.[143]

And we command, that every man . . . give his _churchshot_, and
just _tithe_, . . . that is, _as the plough traverses the tenth
acre_.

And that this applied to land in villenage as well as to land in
demesne is clear from a still earlier law of King Edgar (A.D. 959,
975): 'That every tithe be rendered to the old minster to which the
district belongs, and that it be then so paid both from a _thane's
in-land and from geneat-land, so as the plough traverses it_.'

1. Dæt syndyon þonne ærest. ꝥ Godes cyrican syn ælces rihtes
þyrðe. ⁊ man agífe ælce teoðunge to þam ealdan mynstre þe seo
hyrnes to-hyrð. ⁊ ꝥ sy þonne spa gelæst. ægðer ge of þegnes
in-lande ge of geneatlande. spa spa hit seo sulh gegange.[144]

1. These then are first: that God's churches be entitled to
every right; and that every tithe be rendered to the old
minster to which the district belongs; and that it be then so
paid, both from a thane's _in-land_, and from _geneat-land_, so
_as the plough traverses it_.

«_Acres_ of tithe in Domesday Survey.»

There is very little reference in the Domesday Survey to the churches
and their tithes, but there happens to be one entry at least in which
there seems [p117] to be a clear reference to this practice of the
tithes being taken in actual strips and acres. It relates to the
church at _Wallop_, in Hampshire (the place from which the family
name of the Earls of Portsmouth is derived), and it states that 'to
the church there pertains one hide, also half of the tithes of the
manor, also the whole kirkshot. And of the tithes of the villani
xlvi. pence and _half of the acres_. There is in addition a little
church to which pertain _viii. acres of the tithes_.'[145]

It may be taken then as certain that the holdings in villenage in
the open fields of the Saxon 'hams' and 'tuns' were composed, like
the virgate of John Moldeson, in the manor of Winslow, centuries
afterwards, of strips scattered, one in this furlong and another in
that, all over the village fields; and it may be taken as already
almost certain that the scattering of the strips was in some way
connected with the order in which the strips were allotted in respect
of the oxen contributed to the village plough teams.

III. THE OPEN FIELD SYSTEM OF CO-ARATION DESCRIBED IN THE ANCIENT
LAWS OF WALES.

«Strips taken in an order of rotation,»

The law that every tenth strip as it was traversed by the plough was
to be set apart for the tithe is certainly the clearest hint that
has yet been discovered of the perhaps annual redistribution of the
strips among the holdings in a certain order of rotation, [p118]
though it is possible of course that a redistribution being once
made, to make room for the acres set apart for the tithe, the same
strips might always thereafter be assigned to the tithe and to each
particular yard-land year after year without alteration.

«according to the oxen contributed.»

What is still wanted to lift the explanation already offered of
the connexion of the grades of holdings in the open fields and the
scattering of the strips in each holding, with the team of 8 oxen,
out of the region of hypothesis into that of ascertained fact is the
discovery if possible somewhere actually at work of the system of
common ploughing with eight oxen, and the assignment of the strips
in respect of the oxen to their several owners. Were it possible to
watch such an example of the actual process going on, there probably
would be disclosed by some little detail of its working the reason
and method of the scattering of the strips, and of the order of
rotation in which they seem to have been allotted.

«The system at work under the ancient laws of Wales.»

Now it happens that such an instance is at hand, affording every
opportunity for examination under the most favourable circumstances
possible. We find it in the ancient Welsh laws, representing to a
large extent ancient Welsh traditions collected and codified in the
tenth century, but somewhat modified afterwards, and coming down
to us in a text of the fourteenth century. In these laws is much
trustworthy evidence from which might be drawn a very graphic picture
of the social and economic condition of the unconquered Welsh people,
at a time parallel to the centuries of Saxon rule in England. And
amongst other things fortunately there is an almost perfect picture
of the method of ploughing. Nor is it too [p119] much to say that
in this picture we have a key which completely fits the lock, and
explains the riddle of the English open field system.

For the ancient Welsh laws describe a simple form of the open field
system at an earlier stage than that in which we have yet seen it--at
a time, in fact, when it was a living system at work, and everything
about it had a present and obvious meaning, and its details were
consistent and intelligible.

Let us examine this Welsh evidence.

«The Welsh erws, or acre strips.»

«Divided by turf balks.»

Precisely as the modern statute acre had its origin in the Saxon
_æcer_, which was an actual division of the fields, so that the Saxon
_æceras_ were the strips divided by balks--the _seliones_--of the
open field system; so the modern Welsh word for _acre_ as a quantity
of land is '_erw_,' and the same word in its ancient meaning in the
Welsh laws was the actual strip in the open fields. This is placed
beyond a doubt by the fact that its measurements are carefully given
over and over again, and that it was divided from its neighbours by
an unploughed balk of turf two furrows wide.[146]

«Measured by a rod.»

The Welsh laws describe the primitive way in which the erw was to
be measured. In one province this was to be done by a man holding
a rod of a certain length and stretching it on both sides of him
to fix the width, while the length is to be a certain multiple of
its breadth.[147] In other provinces of Wales the width was to be
fixed by a rod equal in length to the [p120] _long yoke_ used in
ploughing with four oxen abreast.[148] The erw thus ascertained
closely resembled in shape the English strips, though it varied in
size in different districts, and was less than the modern acre in its
contents.

Next there was, according to the Welsh laws, a certain regulated
rotation of ownership in the erws '_as they were traversed by the
plough_,' resulting from a well-ordered system of co-operative
ploughing. In the _Venedotian_ Code especially are elaborate rules as
to the '_cyvar_' or _co-aration_, and these expose the system in its
ancient form actually at work, with great vividness of detail.

«Team of eight oxen in the co-aration.»

The chief of these rules are given below,[149] from [p121] which
it will be seen that in the co-tillage the team, as in England and
Scotland, was assumed to be of eight oxen. And those who join in
co-ploughing must bring a proper contribution, whether oxen or plough
irons, handing them over during the common ploughing to the charge
of the common ploughman and the driver, who together are bound to
keep and use everything as well as they would do their own, till, the
co-ploughing being done, the owners take their own property away.

«Rotation in 'erws' according to the oxen.»

So the common ploughing was arranged. But how was the produce of
the partnership to be divided? This, too, is settled by the law,
representing no doubt immemorial custom. The first erw ploughed was
to go to the ploughman, the second to the irons, the third to the
outside sod ox, the fourth to the outside sward ox, the fifth to the
driver, the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh to
the other six oxen in order of worth; and lastly, the twelfth was
the plough erw, for ploughbote, _i.e._ for the maintenance of the
woodwork of the plough; and so, it is stated, 'the tie of 12 erws was
completed.' Further, [p122] if any dispute should arise between the
co-tillers as to the fairness of the ploughing, the common-sense rule
was to be followed that the erw which fell to the ploughman should
be examined as to the depth, length, and breadth of the furrows and
every one's erw must be ploughed equally well.

Here, then, in the Welsh laws is the clearest evidence not only of
the division of the common fields by turf balks two furrows wide
into the long narrow strips called _erws_, or acres, and roughly
corresponding in shape, though not in area, with those on English
fields, but also of the very rules and methods by which their size
and shape, as well as the order of their ownership, were fixed in
Wales.

«It is the method of division of the results of co-tillage.»

And this order in the allotment of the erws turns out to be an
ingenious system for equitably dividing year by year the produce of
the co-operative ploughing between the contributors to it.

Now, without entering at present into the question of its connexion
with the tribal system in Wales, which will require careful
consideration hereafter, several interesting and useful flashes of
light may be drawn from this glimpse into the methods and rules of
the ancient Welsh system of co-operative ploughing.

«The size of the team necessitates co-operation,»

In the first place, ancient Welsh ploughing was evidently not like
the classical ploughing of the sunny south, a mere scratching of the
ground with a light plough, which one or two horses or oxen could
draw. In the Welsh laws a team of eight oxen, as already said, is
assumed to be necessary. And hence the necessity of co-operative
ploughing. The plough was evidently heavy and the ploughing deep,
just as was the case in [p123] the twelfth century, and probably
from still earlier to quite modern times in Scotland, where, as we
have seen, the plough was of the same heavy kind, and the team of
eight or of twelve oxen. And it is curious to observe that the Welsh,
like the Scotch oxen in modern times, were driven four abreast,
_i.e._ yoked four to a yoke. So that, as already suggested, the
plough was aptly described by the monks in their mediæval Latin as a
'caruca,' and the ploughed land as a 'carucate.'

«and the strips go with the oxen.»

But the most interesting point about the ancient Welsh co-operative
ploughing was the fact that the key to a share in the produce was
the contribution of one or more oxen to the team. He who contributed
one ox was entitled to one erw in the twelve. He who contributed
two oxen was entitled to two erws. He who contributed a whole yoke
of four oxen would receive four erws, while only the _owner_ of the
full team of eight oxen could possibly do without the co-operation
of others in ploughing. Surely this Welsh evidence satisfactorily
verifies the hypothesis already suggested by the term _bovate_, and
by the allotment of two oxen as outfit to the yard-land or virgate,
and by the taking of tithes in the shape of every tenth strip as it
was traversed by the plough, and lastly by the order of rotation in
the strips disclosed by the Winslow example.

It explains how the possession of the oxen came to be in Saxon, as
probably in still earlier British or Roman times, the key to the
position of the holder, and his rank in the hierarchy of the village
community. And it points to the Saxon system of hides and yard-lands
having possibly sprung naturally out [p124] of pre-existing British
or Roman arrangements, rather than as having been a purely Saxon
importation.

«Hence the yard-land became a bundle of scattered strips.»

It also suggests a ready explanation of how when the common tillage
died out, and the strips included in a hide, yard-land, or virgate,
instead of varying with each year's arrangements of the plough teams,
became occupied by the villein tenant year after year in permanent
possession, there would naturally be left, as a survival of the
ancient system, that now meaningless and inconvenient scattering of
the strips forming a holding all over the open fields which in modern
times so incensed Arthur Young, and made the Enclosure Acts necessary.

«The strip the day's ploughing.»

There is, lastly, another point in which the Welsh laws of co-aration
suggest a clue to the reason and origin of a widely spread trait of
the open field system. Why were the strips in the open field system
uniformly so small? The acre or _erw_ was obviously a furrow-long for
the convenience of the ploughing. But what fixed its breadth and its
area? This, too, is explained. According to the Welsh laws it was the
measure of a _day's co-ploughing_. This is clear from two passages in
the laws where it is called a '_cyvar_,' or a 'co-ploughing.'[150]
And it would seem that a day's ploughing ended at midday, because in
the legal description of a complete ox it is required to plough only
to midday.[151] The Gallic word for the acre or strip, '_journel_,'
in the Latin of the monks '_jurnalis_,' and [p125] sometimes
_diurnalis_,[152] also points to a day's ploughing; while the German
word 'morgen' for the same strips in the German open fields still
more clearly points to a day's work which ended, like the Welsh
'cyvar,' at noon.

FOOTNOTES:

[130] The boundaries of the charters contained in first two volumes
of the Codex Div. are collected in the Appendix to vol. iii. After
this they are given with the charters.

[131] _Hist. Monasterii de Abingdon_, vol. i. p. 57.

[132] _Codex Dip._ cclxxii. '_grenan hlinc_,' cccliii. '_hlinces_,'
ccclxxvii. 'ealde gare quod indigenæ _nane monnes land_ vocant.' (See
also dlxx. '_nane mannes land_'), cccxcix. '_furlang_,' ccccvii.
'_forlang_,' '_heued lande_,' ccccxiii. '_furlang_,' '_hlinces_,'
ccccxiv. '_mær hlinces_,' ccccxvii. '_forerth akere_,' ccccxviii.
'_furlanges_,' ccccxix. and xx. '_foryrthe_,' '_greatan hlinces_,'
and so on. Instances are equally numerous in the Abingdon charters
and those of the _Liber de Hyda_. For linces, see _Hist. Abingdon_,
i. pp. 111, 147, 158, 188, 259, 284, 315, 341, 404. _Liber de Hyda_,
pp. 86, 103, 107, 176, 235, 239.

[133] Laws of King Ine. _Ancient Laws, &c., of England_, Thorpe, p.
55.

[134] It will be remembered that Lammas land is divided into strips
for the hay crop. In the Winslow Rolls, in the list of strips
included in the virgate of John Moldeson were some strips or _doles_
of meadow--hence _dǽl_ and _gedál-land_. That gedal-land = open
fields divided into strips, see _Hist. Abingdon_ (p. 304), where
there is a charter, A.D. 961, making a grant of '9 mansas' and 'thas
nigon hida lieggead on gemang othran _gedal-lande_, feldes gemane and
mæda gemane and yrthland gemane.'

[135] Vol. i. pp. 349–352.

[136] So also see _Codex Diplomaticus_, dii. and dxvi., and
cccclxvii. and cccxxxv.

[137] Vol. i. p. 384. Compare also the boundaries of Draitune, '_æcer
under æcer_,' p. 248. Also the same expression, pp. 350 and 353.

[138] See, with regard to this donation, Kemble's _Saxons in
England_, c. x.; and Stubbs' _Const. Hist._ i. pp. 262–71.

[139] Thorpe, p. 328. 'Item--Ut unicuique æcclesiæ vel una mausa
integra absque alio servitio adtribuatur, et presbiteri in eis
constituti non de decimis, neque de oblationibus fidelium, nec de
domibus, neque de atriis vel ortis juxta æcclesiam positis, neque de
præscripta mansa, aliquod servitium faciant præter æcclesiasticum; et
si aliquid amplius habuerint, inde senioribus suis secundum patriæ
morem, debitum servitium impendant.'

[140] See especially the Survey Middlesex, and _supra_ pp. 92–95.

[141] Thorpe, p. 146.

[142] Thorpe, p. 146.

[143] _Ibid._ p. 144. So also in the Laws of Cnut, 'The tenth acre as
the plough traverses it.' Thorpe, p. 156.

[144] _Ibid._ p. 111.

[145] _D._ i. 38_b_. Wallope (Hants). 'Ibi æcclesia cui pertinet
una hida et medietas decimæ manerii et totum Cirset, et de decima
villanorum XLVI. denarii et medietas agrorum.'

'Ibi est adhuc æcclesiola, ad quam pertinent viii. acræ de decima.'

[146] (5) The breadth of a boundary (_fin_) between two trevs, if it
be of _land_, is a fathom and a half. . . .

(7) Between two erws, two furrows (_Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, p.
373). 'The boundary (tervyn) between two erws, two furrows, and that
is called a _balk_ (synach).' (P. 525.)

[147] _Ancient Laws_: _Venedotian Code_, pp. 81 and 90. _Leges
Wallicæ_, p. 831.

[148] _Ancient Laws_, p. 263 (_Dimetian Code_); p. 374 (_Gwentian
Code_).

[149] _Ancient Laws_, p. 153. (_Venedotian Code._)

XXIV. _Of Co-tillage this treats._

1. Whoever shall engage in co-tillage with another, it is right for
them to give surety for performance, and mutually join hands; and,
after they have done that, to keep it until the tye be completed: the
tye is twelve erws.

2. The measure of the erw, has it not been before set forth?

3. The first erw belongs to the ploughman; the second to the irons;
the third to the exterior sod ox; the fourth to the exterior sward
ox, lest the yoke should be broken; and the fifth to the driver: and
so the erws are appropriated, from best to best, to the oxen, thence
onward, unless the yoke be stopped between them, unto the last; and
after that the plough erw, which is called the plough-bote cyvar; and
that once in the year

* * * * *

10. Every one is to bring his requisites to the ploughing, whether
ox, or irons, or other things pertaining to him; and after everything
is brought to them, the ploughman and the driver are to keep the
whole safely, and use them as well as they would their own.

The driver is to yoke in the oxen carefully, so that they be not too
tight, nor too loose; and drive them so as not to break their hearts:
and if damage happen to them on that occasion, he is to make it good;
or else swear that he used them not worse than his own.

12. The ploughman is not to pay for the oxen, unless they be bruised
by him; and if he bruise either one or the whole, let him pay, or
exonerate himself. The ploughman is to assist the driver in yoking
the oxen; but he is to loosen only the two short-yoked.

13. After the co-tillage shall be completed, every one is to take his
requisites with him home.

* * * * *

16. If there should be a dispute about bad tillage between two
co-tillers, let the erw of the ploughman be examined as to the depth,
length, and breadth of the furrow, and let every one's be completed
alike.

* * * * *

28. Whoever shall own the irons is to keep them in order, that
the ploughman and driver be not impeded; and they are to have no
assistance.

The driver is to furnish the bows of the yokes with wythes; and, if
it be a long team, the small rings, and pegs of the bows.

See also _Gwentian Code_, p. 354; and the _Leges Wallice_, p. 801.

[150] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 150, _Venedotian Code_. The worth of
'winter tilth of a _cyvar_ two legal pence;' and so p. 286, _Dimetian
Code_.

P. 153. 'The plough erw, which is called the ploughbot cyvar.'

P. 354, _Gwentian Code_. 'The worth of one day's ploughing is two
legal pence.'

[151] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 134.

[152] See Du Cange under '_Diurnalis_,' who quotes a passage of A.D.
704.

[p126]

CHAPTER V.
_MANORS AND SERFDOM UNDER SAXON RULE._

I. THE SAXON 'HAMS' AND 'TUNS' WERE MANORS WITH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES
IN SERFDOM UPON THEM.

«The _hams_ and _tuns_ were manors.»

Having now ascertained that the open field system was prevalent
during Saxon, and probably pre-Saxon times, we have next to inquire
whether the 'hams' and 'tuns' to which the common fields belonged
were manors--_i.e._ estates with a village community in serfdom upon
them--or whether, on the contrary, there once dwelt within them
a free village community holding their yard-lands by freehold or
allodial tenure.

Let us at once dismiss from the question the word 'manor.' It was
the _name_ generally used in the Domesday Survey, for a _thing_
described in the Survey as already existing at the time of Edward the
Confessor. The estate called a manor was certainly as much a Saxon
institution under the Confessor as it was a _Norman_ one afterwards.

The Domesday book itself does not always adhere to this single word
'_manor_' throughout its pages. [p127]

The word _manerium_ gives place in the Exeter Survey to the word
_villa_ for the whole manor, and _mansio_ for the manor-house;
and the same words, _villa_ and _mansio_, are also used in the
instructions[153] given at the commencement of the _Inquisitio
Eliensis_. It is perfectly clear, then, that what was called a
_manor_ or _villa_, both in the west and in the east of England, was
in fact the estate of a lord with a village community in villenage
upon it.

In the Boldon Book also the word _villa_ is used instead of manor.

So in Saxon documents the whole manor or estate was called by various
names, generally '_ham_' or '_tun_.'

«King Alfred's will.»

In King Alfred's will[154] estates in the south-east of England,
including the villages upon them, which by Norman scribes would have
been called manors, are described as _hams_ (the _ham_ at such a
place). In the old English version of the will given in the 'Liber de
Hyda'[155] the word '_twune_' is used to translate 'ham,' and in the
Latin version the word 'villa.'[156]

«Parable of the prodigal son.»

In the Saxon translation of the parable of the prodigal son, the
country estate of the citizen--the '_burh-sittenden man_'--to which
the prodigal was sent to feed swine, and where he starved upon the
'bean-cods' that the swine did eat, was the citizen's '_tune_.'[157]

So that the '_hams_' and '_tuns_' of Saxon times were in fact
commonly private estates with villages upon them, _i.e._ manors.

«Grants of whole manors.»

This fact is fully borne out by the series of Saxon [p128] charters
from first to last. They generally, as already said, contain grants
of _whole_ manors in this sense, including the villages upon them,
with all the village fields, pastures, meadows, &c., embraced within
the boundaries given. And these boundaries are the boundaries of the
_whole village or township_--_i.e._ of the whole estate.

«Saxon words.»

Further, a careful examination of Anglo-Saxon documents will show
that the Saxon manors, not only at the time of Edward the Confessor,
as shown by the Domesday Survey, but also long previously, were
divided into the land of the lord's _demesne_ and the land _in
villenage_, though the Norman phraseology was not yet used. The lord
of the manor was a _thane_ or '_hlaford_.' The demesne land was the
_thane's inland_. All classes of villeins were called _geneats_. The
land in villenage was the _geneat-land_, or the _gesettes-land_,
or sometimes the _gafol-land_. And further, this _geneat-_, or
_gesettes-_, or _gafol-land_ was composed, like the later land in
villenage, of hides and yard-lands, whilst the villein tenants of it,
as in the Domesday Survey, were divided mainly into two classes: (1)
the _geburs_ (villani proper), or holders of yard-lands; and (2) the
_cottiers_ with their smaller holdings. Beneath these two classes of
holders of _geneat_ land were the _theows_ or slaves, answering to
the _servi_ of the Survey. Lastly, there is clear evidence that this
was so as early as the date of the laws of King Ine, which claim to
represent the customs of the seventh century.

To the proof of these points attention must now be directed. [p129]

II. THE RECTITUDINES SINGULARUM PERSONARUM.

In order to make these points clear, attention must be turned to a
remarkable document, the Saxon version of which dates probably from
the tenth, and the Latin translation from the twelfth century.[158]

«The '_Rectitudines_,' tenth century.»

It is entitled the '_Rectitudines Singularum Personarum_,' which may
be translated '_the services due from various persons_.'

It commences with two general sections, the first relating to the
services of the '_thane_,' and the second to those of the '_geneat_.'

«Thane's services.»

«Geneat's or villein's services.»

ÐEGENES LAGU.

Degenes lagu is ꝥ he sy his boc-rihtes wyrðe. ⁊ ꝥ he ðreo ðinc
of his lande do. fyrd-færeld. ⁊ burhbote ⁊ bryc-geweorc. Eac of
manegum landum mare land-riht arist to cyniges gebanne. swilce
is deorhege to cyniges hame. ⁊ scorp to frið-scipe. ⁊ sæ-weard.
⁊ heafod-weard. ⁊ fyrd-weard. ælmes-feoh. ⁊ cyric-sceat. ⁊
mænige oðeremistliceðingc. ►

TAINI LEX.

Taini lex est, ut sit dignus rectitudine testamenti sui, et ut
ita faciat pro terra sua, scilicet, expeditionem, burh-botam
et brig-botam. Et de multis terris majus landirectum exurgit
ad bannum regis, sicut est deorhege ad mansionem regiam et
sceorpum inhosticum, et custodiam maris et capitis, et pacis,
et elmesfeoh, id est pecunia elemosine et ciricsceatum, et alie
res multimode.

THANE'S LAW.

_The thane's law is that he be worthy of his_ boc-rights, _and
that he do three things for his land_, fyrd-færeld, burh-bot,
_and_ brig-bot. _Also from many lands more land-services are
due at the king's bann, as deer-hedging at the king's_ ham,
_and apparel for the guard, and_ sea-ward _and_ head-ward _and_
fyrd-ward _and_ almsfee _and_ kirkshot, _and many other various
things_. [p130]

GENEATES RIHT.

Geneat-riht is mistlic be ðam ðe on lande stænt. On sumon he
sceal land-gafol syllan ⁊ gærsswyn on geare. ⁊ ridan ⁊ auerian
⁊ lade lædan. wyrcan ⁊ hlaford feormian. ⁊ ripan ⁊ mawan.
deorhege heawan. ⁊ sæte haldan. bytlian. ⁊ burh hegegian
nige faran to tune feccan. cyric-sceat syllan ⁊ ælmes-feoh.
heafod-wearde. healdan ⁊ hors-wearde. ærendian. fyr swa nyr.
swa hwyder swa him mon to-tæcð. ►

VILLANI RECTUM.

Villani rectum est varium et multiplex, secundum quod in terra
statutum est. In quibusdam terris debet dare landgablum et
gærsswin, id est, porcum herbagii, et equitare vel averiare, et
summagium ducere, operari, et dominum suum firmare, metere et
falcare, deorhege cedere, et stabilitatem observare, edificare
et circumsepire, novam faram adducere, ciricsceatum dare et
almesfeoh, id est, pecuniam elemosine, heafod-wardam custodire
et horswardam, in nuncium ire, longe vel prope, quocunque
dicetur ei.

GENEAT'S SERVICES.

_The geneat's services are various as on the land is fixed. On
some he shall pay_ land-gafol _and_ grass-swine _yearly, and
ride, and carry, and lead loads; work and support his lord, and
reap and mow, cut deer-hedge and keep it up, build, and hedge
the_ burh, _make new roads for the_ tun: _pay_ kirkshot _and_
almsfee: _keep_ head-ward _and_ horse-ward: _go errands far or
near wherever he is directed_.

Then follow what really are sub-sections of the latter clause, and
they describe the services of the various classes of _geneats_; first
of the cottiers.

«Cottier's services.»

KOT-SETLAN RIHT.

Kote-setlan riht. be ðam ðe on lande stent. On sumon he sceal
ælce Mon-dæge ofer geares fyrst his laforde wyrcan. oðð .III.
dagas ælcre wucan on hærfest.

ne ðearf he land-gafol syllan. Wim ge-byriað [.V.] æceras to
habbanne. mare gyf hit on lande ðeaw sy. ⁊ to lytel hit bið beo
hit a læsse. forðan his weorc sceal beon oft-ræde. sylle his
heorð-pænig on halgan Ðunres dæg. eal swa ælcan frigean men
gebyreð. ⁊ werige hid hlafordes inland. gif him man beode. æt
sæ-wearde ⁊ æt cyniges deor-hege. ⁊ æt swilcan ðingan swilc his
mæð sy. ⁊ sylle his cyric-sceat to Martinus mæssan. ►

COTSETLE RECTUM.

Cotsetle rectum est juxta quod in terra constitutum est. Apud
quosdam debet omni die Lune per anni spatium operari domino
suo, et tribus diebus unaquaque septimana in Augusto. Apud
quosdam operatur per totum Augustum, omni die, et unam acram
avene metit pro diurnale opere. Et habeat garbam suam quam
præpositus vel minister domini dabit ei. Non dabit landgablum.
Debet habere quinque acras ad perhabendum, plus si consuetudo
sit ibi, et parum nimis est si minus sit quod deservit, quia
sepius est operi illius. Det super heorðpenig in sancto die
Jovis, sicut omnis liber facere debet, et adquietet inland
domini sui, si submonitio fiat de sewarde, id est de custodia
maris, vel de regis deorhege, et ceteris rebus que sue mensure
sunt; et det suum cyricsceatum in festo Scĩ Martini.

COTTIER'S SERVICES.

_The cottier's services are what on the land is fixed. On some
he shall each Monday in the year work for his lord, and three
days a week in harvest._

_He ought not to pay_ land-gafol. _He ought to have_ five
acres _in his holding, more if it be the custom on the land,
and too little it is if it be less: because his work is often
required. He pays_ hearth-penny _on Holy Thursday, as pertains
to every freeman, and defends his lord's inland, if he is
required, from_ sea-ward _and from king's_ deer-hedge, _and
from such things as befit his degree. And he pays his kirkshot
at Martinmas_.

Then the services of the _gebur_ or holder of a _yard-land_ are
described as follows:--

«Gebur's services.»

«Week-work.»

«Gafol.»

«Bene-work.»

«Gafol-yrth.»

«Outfit of two oxen to yard-land.»

GEBURES GERIHTE.

Gebur-gerihta syn mislice. gehwar hy syn hefige. gehwar eac
medeme. on sumen lande is ꝥ he sceal wyrcan to wic-weorce .II.
dagas. swilc weorc swilc him man tæcð ofer geares fyrst. ælcre
wucan. ⁊ on hærfest .III. dagas to wic-weorce. ⁊ of Candelmæsse
oð Eastran .III. gif he aferað ne ðearf he wyrcan ða hwile
ðe his hors ute bið. He sceal syllan on Michaeles mæsse-dæig
.X. gafol-ƥ. ⁊ on Martinus mæsse-dæg .XXIII. systra beres.
⁊ II. henfugelas. on Eastran an geong sceap. oððe .II. ƥ. ⁊
he sceal licgan of Martinus mæssan oð Eastran æt hlafordes
falde. swa oft swa him to-begæð. ⁊ of ðam timan ðe man ærest
ereð oð Martinus mæssan he sceal ælcre wucan erian .I. æcer.
⁊ rædan sylf ꝥ sæd on hlafordes berne. to-eacan ðam .III.
æceras to bene. ⁊ .II. to gærsyrðe. gyf he maran gærses beðyrfe
ðonne earnige [erige?] ðæs swa him man ðafige. His gauol-yrðe
.III. æceras erige ⁊ sawe of his aganum berne. ⁊ sylle his
heorð-pænig. twegen ⁊ twegen fedan ænne heador-hund. ⁊ ælc
gebur sylle .VI. hlafas ðam in-swane ðonne he his heorde to
mæs-tene drife. On ðam sylfum lande ðe ðeos ræden on-stænt
gebure gebyreð ꝥ him man to land-setene sylle .II. oxan ⁊ .I.
cu. ⁊ .VI. sceap. ⁊ .VII. æceras gesawene on his gyrde landes.
forðige ofer ꝥ gear ealle gerihtu ðe him to-gebyrigean. ⁊ sylle
him man tol to his weorce ⁊ andlaman to his huse. Ðonne him
forð-sið gebyrige gyme his hlaford ðæs he læfe. ►

Ðeos land-lagu stænt on suman lande. gehwar hit is swa ic ær
cwæð hefigre gehwar eac leohtre. forðam ealle land-sida ne syn
gelice. On sumen lande gebur sceal syllan hunig-gafol. on suman
mete-gafol. on suman ealu-gafol. Þedeseðe scirehealde ꝥ he wite
á hwæt eald land-ræden sy. ⁊ hwæt ðeode ðeaw. ►

GEBURI CONSUETUDINES.

Geburi consuetudines inveniuntur multimode, et ubi sunt
onerose et ubi sunt leviores aut medie. In quibusdam terris
operatur opus septimane, II. dies, sic opus sicut ei dicetur
per anni spatium, omni septimana; et in Augusto III. dies pro
septimanali operatione, et a festo Candelarum ad usque Pascha
III. Si averiat, non cogitur operari quamdiu equus ejus foris
moratur. Dare debet in festo Scĩ Michaelis X. đ. de gablo, et
Scĩ Martini die XXIII., et sestarium ordei, et II. gallinas.
Ad Pascha I. ovem juvenem vel II. đ. Et jacebit a festo Scĩ
Martini usque ad Pascha ad faldam domini sui, quotiens ei
pertinebit. Et a termino quo primitus arabitur usque ad festum
Scĩ Martini arabit unaquaque septimana I. acram, et ipse
parabit semen domini sui in horreo. Ad hæc III. acras precum,
et duas de herbagio. Si plus indigeat herbagio, arabit proinde
sicut ei permittatur. De aratura gabli sui arabit III. acras,
et seminabit de horreo suo et dabit suum heorðpenig; et duo
et duo pascant unum molossum. Et omnis geburus det VI. panes
porcario curie quando gregem suum minabit in pastinagium. In
ipsa terra ubi hec consuetudo stat, moris est ut ad terram
assidendam dentur ei II. boves et I. vacca, et VI. oves, et
VII. acre seminate, in sua virgata terra. Post illum illum
annum faciat omnes rectitudines que ad eum attinent; et
committantur ei tela ad opus suum et suppellex ad domum suam.
Si mortem obeat, rehabeat dominus suus omnia.

Hæc consuetudo stat in quibusdam locis, et alicubi est, sicut
prediximus, gravior, et alicubi levior; quia omnium terrarum
instituta non sunt equalia. In quibusdam locis gebur dabit
hunigablum, in quibusdam metegablum, in quibusdam ealagablum.
Videat qui scyram tenet, ut semper sciat que sit antiqua
terrarum institutio, vel populi consuetudo.

GEBUR'S SERVICES.

_The Gebur's services are various, in some places heavy, in
others moderate. On some land he must work at_ week-work _two
days at such work as he is required through the year every
week, and at harvest three days for_ week-work, _and from
Candlemas to Easter three. If he do carrying he has not to
work while his horse is out. He shall pay on Michaelmas Day_
x. _gafol-pence, and on Martinmas Day_ xxiii. _sesters of
barley and two hens; at Easter a young sheep or two pence;
and he shall lie from Martinmas to Easter at his lord's fold
as often as he is told. And from the time that they first,
plough to Martinmas he shall each week plough one acre, and
prepare himself the seed in his lord's barn. Also_ iii. _acres_
bene-work, _and_ ii. _to_ grass-yrth. _If he needs more grass
then he ploughs for it as he is allowed. For his_ gafol-yrth
_he ploughs_ iii. _acres, and sows it from his own barn. And he
pays his_ hearth-penny. _Two and two feed one hound, and each
gebur gives_ vi. _loaves to the swineherd when he drives his
herd to mast. On that land where this custom holds it pertains
to the gebur that he shall have given to him for his outfit_
ii. _oxen and_ i. _cow and_ vi. _sheep, and_ vii. _acres sown
on his_ yard-land. _Wherefore after that year he must perform
all services which pertain to him. And he must have given to
him tools for his work, and utensils for his house. Then when
he dies his lord takes back what he leaves._

_This land-law holds on some lands, but here and there, as I
have said, it is heavier or lighter, for all land services are
not alike. On some land the gebur shall pay_ honey-gafol, _on
some_ meat-gafol, _on some_ ale-gafol. _Let him who is over the
district take care that he knows what the old land-customs are,
and what are the customs of the people._

Then follow the special services of the beekeeper, oxherd, cowherd,
shepherd, goatherd, &c, upon which we need not dwell here; and the
document concludes with another declaration that the services vary
according to the custom of each district. [p134]

«Correspondence with the Domesday Survey.»

This important document is therefore a general description of the
services due from the thane to the king, and from the classes in
villenage to their manorial lord. And it might be the very model
from which the form of the Domesday Survey was taken. Both, in
fact, first speak of the lord of the manor, and then of the villein
tenants; the latter being in both cases divided into the two main
classes of villani and cottiers; for, as already stated, the Saxon
_thane_ answered to the Norman _lord_, the Saxon _gebur_ answered to
the _villanus_ of the Survey, and the _cotsetle_ to the cottier or
_bordarius_ of the Survey. But these various classes require separate
consideration.

III. THE THANE AND HIS SERVICES.

«The thane's 'three needs.'»

The '_Rectitudines_' begins with the thane or lord of the manor;
and informs us that he owed his military and other services (for
his manor) to the king--always including the three great needs--the
_trinoda necessitas_; viz. (1) to accompany the king in his military
expeditions, or _fyrd_; (2) to aid in the building of his castles, or
_burhbote_; (3) to maintain the bridges, or _brigbote_.

«Thane's 'inland.'»

The lord's demesne land was called the 'thane's inland.' So, too, in
a law of King Edgar's already quoted, the tithes are ordered to be
paid 'as well on the _thane's inland_ as on _geneat land_,' showing
that this distinction between the two was exhaustive.

So also in Scotland, where the old Saxon words were not so soon
displaced by Norman terms as in [p135] England, the lord of a
manor was long called the _thane_ of such and such a place. In the
chronicler Wintoun's story of Macbeth, as well as in Shakespeare's
version of it, there are the 'thane of Fyfe' and the 'thane of
Cawdor.'

«Scotch example of burhbote.»

And the circumstance which, according to Wintoun, gave rise to
Macbeth's hatred of Macduff is itself a graphic illustration of the
'burhbote,' or aid in castle-building due from the thane to his
king:--

And in Scotland than as kyng
This Makbeth mad gret steryng
And set hym than in hys powere
A gret hows for to mak off were
Upon the hycht off Dwnsynane.
Tymbyr thare-till to draw and stane
Off Fyfe and off Angws he
Gert mony oxin gadryd be.
Sa on a day in thare traivaile
A yhok off oxyn Makbeth saw fayle,
Than speryt Makbeth quha that awcht
The yhoke that fayled in that drawcht.
Thai awnsweryd till Makbeth agayne,
And sayd, 'Makduff off Fyffe the Thane
That ilk yhoke off oxyn awcht
That he saw fayle in to the drawcht.'
Than spak Makbeth dyspytusly,
And to the Thane sayd angryly,
Lyk all wythyn in hys skin,
Hys awyn nek he suld put in
The yhoke and gev hym drawchtis drawe.[159]

«The thane as a soldier.»

But the military service was by far the most important of 'the three
needs' or services due from the thane to the king. The thane was a
_soldier_ first of all things. The very word _thane_ implies this. In
translating the story of the centurion who had soldiers under him,
the Saxon Gospel makes the [p136] 'Hundredes ealdor' say, '_I have
thanes_ under me' (ic hæbbe þegnas under me).[160] And though the
text of the translation may not be earlier than the tenth century,
yet, as the meaning of words does not change suddenly, it shows that
the military service of the thane dated from a still earlier period.

And just as in Norman times the barons and their Norman followers
(_Francigenæ eorum_) were marked off from the population in villenage
as companions or associates of the king or some great earl, or as
they might now be called 'county men,' so the Saxon thanes 400 years
before the Norman Conquest were 'Gesithcundmen,' in respect of
their obligation to 'do fyrd-færeld,' _i.e._ to accompany the king
in his royal expeditions. But this association with the king did
not break the bond of _service_. By the laws of King Ine[161] the
_gesithcundmen_ were fined and forfeited their land if they neglected
their 'fyrd:'--

LI. Gif gesiðcund mon land-agende forsitte fyrde geselle .c.xx.
scill. ⁊ þolie his landes.

51. If a gesithcund man owning land neglect the _fyrd_, let him
pay cxx. shillings and forfeit his land.

«As a landlord.»

But the 'gesithcund' thanes were landlords as well as soldiers. And
King Ine found it needful to enact laws to secure that they performed
their landlord's duties. They must not absent themselves from their
manors without provision for the cultivation of the land. When he
_færes_, _i.e._ goes on long expeditions, a gesithcundman may take
with him on his journey his reeve, his smith to forge his weapons,
and his child's fosterer, or nurse.[162] But if he have xx. hides of
land, he must show xii. hides at least of [p137] gesettes land on
his manor; if he have x. hides, vi. hides of gesettes land; and if
he have iii. hides, one and a half hides of gesettes land before he
absents himself from his manor.[163]

«The _geneat_, _geset_, or _gafol_ land.»

That 'geset land' was a general and rather loose term meaning the
same thing as 'geneat land' is clear from a charter of A.D. 950,
which will be referred to hereafter, wherein a manor is described
as containing xxx. hides, ix. of inland and xxi. of 'gesettes
land,' and the latter is said to contain so many yard-lands ('gyrda
gafol-landes'). This instance also helps us to understand how
_gafol land_, and _gesettes land_, and _geneat land_ were all
interchangeable terms--all, in fact, meaning 'land in villenage,' to
the tenants on which we must now turn our attention.

IV. THE GENEATS AND THEIR SERVICES.

«_Geneat_ land was land in villenage.»

It has been shown that the Saxon thane's estate or manor was divided
into _thane's inland_ or demesne land, and _geneat land_ or _gesettes
land_, answering to the land in villenage of the Domesday Survey. Let
us now examine into the nature of the villenage on the geneat land
under Saxon rule.

'Gesettes land' etymologically seems to mean simply land set or let
out to tenants. In the parable of the vineyard, the Saxon translation
makes the '_wíngeardes hlaford[164] gesette_' it out to husbandmen
(gesette þone myd eorð-tylion) before he takes his journey into a far
country, and the husbandmen are to pay him as tribute a portion of
the annual fruits. [p138]

«Need of husbandmen.»

In early times, when population was scanty, there was a lack of
husbandmen.

King Alfred, in his Saxon translation of Boethius, into which
he often puts observations of his own, expresses in one of the
most often quoted of these interpolations what doubtless his own
experience had shown him, viz., that 'a king must have his tools to
reign with--his realm must be well peopled--full manned.' Unless
there are priests, soldiers, and workmen--'_gebedmen_, _fyrdmen_, and
_weorcmen_'--no king, he says, can show his craft.[165]

We are to take it, then, that population was still scanty, that a
thane's manor was not always as well stocked with husbandmen as the
necessities of agriculture required. The nation must be fed as well
as defended, and both these economic needs were imperative. How,
then, was a thane to plant new settlers on his 'gesettes-land'?

«_Settene stuht_, or outfit of _geburs_.»

We have seen the Kelso monks furnishing their tenants with their
outfit or '_stuht_'--the two oxen needful to till the husbandland
of two bovates; also a horse, and enough of oats, barley, and wheat
for seed. The '_Rectitudines_' shows that in the tenth century this
custom had long been followed by Saxon landlords. It further shows
that the new tenants so created were settled on _yard-lands_, and
called _geburs_.

«Two oxen to yard-land.»

It states that in some places it is the custom that in settling the
_gebur_ on the land, there shall be given to him 'to _land setene_'
(_i.e._ as 'stuht' or outfit) two oxen, one cow, six sheep, and seven
acres sown on his _yard-land_ or virgate. Then after the first year
[p139] he performs the usual services. Having been supplied by his
lord, not only with his stuht, but also even with tools for his work
and utensils for his house, it is not surprising that on his death
everything reverted to his lord.

The gebur here answers exactly to the villanus of post-Domesday
times.[166] His normal holding is the _yard-land_ or virgate. His
_stuht_, which goes with the yard-land 'to setene,' or for outfit,
is two oxen, one cow, &c.; _i.e._ one ox for each of the two bovates
which made up the yard-land.

That this was the usual outfit of the yard-land, and that the
yard-land at the same time was the one-fourth part of the _sulung_
or full plough-land, in still earlier times than the date of the
'_Rectitudines_,' receives clear confirmation from an Anglo-Saxon
will dated A.D. 835, in which there is a gift of '_an half swulung_,'
and 'to ðem londe iiii oxan & ii cy & 1 scepa,' &c.[167] The
_half-sulung_ being the double of the yard-land, it is natural that
the allowance for outfit in [p140] the bequest of oxen and cows
should be just double the outfit assigned by custom to the yard-land.
It is obvious that the allotment to the whole _sulung_ would be a
full team of eight oxen.

«Services.»

The gebur, then, having been 'set' upon his yard land by his lord,
and supplied with his _setene_ or 'stuht,' had to perform his
services.

What were these services?

An examination of them as stated in the '_Rectitudines_' will show at
once their close resemblance to those of the holders of virgates in
villenage in post-Domesday times.

They may be classified in the same way as these were classified.

«Gafol.»

Some of them are called _gafol_; _i.e._ they were _tributes_ in money
and in kind, and in work at ploughing, &c., in the nature rather of
rent, rates, and taxes than anything else. They were as follows:

«_Gafol-yrth._»

At _Michaelmas_ x. gafol-pence.

At _Martinmas_ xxiii. sesters of barley and ii. hens.[168]

At _Easter_ a young sheep, or ii.d.

Of gafol-ploughing (_gafol_-yrð) to plough three acres, and sow
it from his barn.

The hearth-penny.

With another gebur to feed a hound.

Six loaves to the swineherd of the manor, when he takes the
flock to pasture.

In some places the gebur gives _honey-gafol_, in some
_mete-gafol_, and in some _ale-gafol_.

«_Bene_-work.»

Next there were the _precariæ_ or _bene-work_, extra special services:

To plough three acres 'to bene' (_ad precem_), and two to
'gærsyrðe.'[169] [p141]

«Week-work.»

Lastly, the chief services were the regular _week-work_ (wic-weorc),
generally limited to certain days a week according to the season.

'He shall work for week-work two days at such work as he is
bid throughout the year, each week; and in August three days'
week-work, and from Candlemas to Easter three days.'

«Thirty acres in yard-land; ten in each field.»

These were the services of the _gebur_ or _villanus_, and we may
gather that his yard-land embraced the usual thirty acres or strips,
_i.e._ ten strips in each of the three common fields of his village.
This seems to follow from the fact that his outfit included '_seven
acres sown_.' These seven acres were no doubt on the wheat-field
which had to be sown before winter. It was seven acres, and not ten,
because the crop on the other three counted as 'gafolyrð' to his
lord, and this was not due the first season. The oats or beans on the
second or spring-sown field he could sow for himself. The third field
was in fallow. The only start he required was therefore the seven
acres of wheat which must be sown before winter.

So much for the _gebur_; now as to the _cottier_.

«Cottier's holding of five acres, and his services.»

The cottier tenant, in respect of his five acres (more or less),
rendered similar services on an humbler scale. His week-work was on
Mondays each week throughout the year, three days a week at harvest.
He was free from land-gafol, but paid hearth-penny and church-scot
at Martinmas. The nature of his work was the ordinary service of
the geneat as [p142] required by his lord from time to time; only,
having no oxen, he was exempt from ploughing, as he was also after
the Norman Conquest.

V. THE DOUBLE AND ANCIENT CHARACTER OF THE SERVICES OF THE
GEBUR--GAFOL AND WEEK-WORK.

Returning to the services of the gebur, stress must be laid upon
their double character. Like the later _villanus_ he paid a double
debt to his lord in respect of his yard-land and outfit, or
'_setene_'--(1) _gafol_; (2) week-work.

«Laws of King Ine.»

This is a point of great importance at this stage of the inquiry;
for it gives us the key to the meaning of an otherwise almost
unintelligible passage in the laws of King Ine[170], which bears
directly upon the matter in hand.

«Geset-land.»

This passage immediately follows those already quoted, requiring
one-half or more of the land of the absentee landlord to be 'gesettes
land.'

It follows in natural order after this requirement, because it
evidently relates to the process of increasing the number of tenants
on the gesettes land, so introducing new geburs or villani, with new
yard-lands or virgates, into the village community. The clause is as
follows:

«Yard-land.»

«_Gafol_ and _weorc_.»

BE GYRDE LONDES.

Gif mon geþingað gyrðe lander oþþe mære to pæðe-gafole. ⁊
geereð. gif se hlaforð him pile ꝥ lanð aræran to weorce ⁊ to
gafole. ne þearf he him onfón gif he lum nan botl ne selð. . . .

OF A YARD OF LAND.

If a man agree for a yard-land or more at a fixed _gafol_ and
plough it, if the lord desire to raise the land to him _to work
and to gafol_, he need not take it upon him, if the lord do not
give him a dwelling. . . . [p143]

The meaning of it apparently is that if a man agree for a yard-land
or more to 'ræd-gafol' (_i.e._ at such gafol payments as have been
described), and plough it, still the lord cannot put the new holding
'_to weorce_ and _to gafole_,' that is, make the holder completely
into a _gebur_ or villanus, owing both gafol and week-work to his
lord, unless the lord also supply the homestead ('botl').

That the 'botl' or homestead was looked upon as the essential part of
a man's holding is shown by another law of King Ine:--

LXVIII. Gif mon gesiðcundne monnan adrife. fordrife þy botle.
næs þære setene. ►

68. If a gesithcund man be driven off, it must be from the
_botl_, not the _setene_.

«The manor and serfdom in seventh century.»

Now the importance of these passages can hardly be exaggerated;
for, if we may trust the genuineness of the laws of King Ine,[171]
they show more clearly than anything else could do, that in the
seventh century--400 years before the Domesday Survey--the manor was
already to all intents and purposes what it was afterwards. They
show that at that early date part of the land was in the lord's
demesne and part let out to tenants, who when supplied by the lord
with everything--their homestead and their yard-land--owed, not
only customary tribute or _gafol_, but also '_weorc_' or service
to the lord; and how otherwise could this 'weorce' be given then
or afterwards [p144] except in the shape of labour on the lord's
demesne, as is described in the '_Rectitudines_'?

It is worth while to notice that while the double debt of both gafol
and week-work was due from the _gebur_ or _villanus_ proper, and the
week-work was the most servile service, yet even the mere payment
of gafol was the sign of a submission to an overlordship. It had a
servile taint about it, as well it might, being paid apparently part
in kind and part in work. As the class of free hired labourers had
not yet been born into existence under these early Saxon economic
conditions, in times when the _theows_ were the servants, so the
modern class of farmers or free tenants at a rent of another's land
had not yet come into being. It was the 'ceorl' who lived on 'gafol
land,'[172] and to pay gafol was to do service, though of a limited
kind.

«_Gafol_ a servile _tribute_.»

The Saxon translators of the Gospels rendered the question, 'Doth
your master pay tribute?'[173] by the words '_gylt he gafol?_' And
they used the same word _gafol_ also in translating the counter
question, 'Of whom do kings take _tribute_, of their own people or of
aliens?'

«Bede.»

So when Bede described the northern conquest of Ethelfred, king of
the Northumbrians, over the Britons in A.D. 603, and spoke of the
inhabitants as being either exterminated or subjugated, and their
lands as either cleared for new settlers or _made tributary_ to
the English, King Alfred in his translation expressed [p145] the
latter alternative by the words 'set to gafol'--_to gafulgyldum
gesette_.[174]

No doubt the Teutonic notion of a subjugated people was that of a
people reduced to serfdom or villenage. _They_--the conquerors--were
the nation, the freemen. The conquered race were the aliens,
subjected to _gafol_ and servitude.

«Parable of 'the unjust steward.'»

Thus, recurring to the Saxon translation of the parable of 'the
unjust steward,' one may recognise how perfectly naturally everything
seemed to the translators to transfer itself to a Saxon thane's
estate, and to translate itself into Saxon terms.[175]

The '_hlaford_' of the '_tun_' or manor had his '_tun-gerefa_'
or reeve, just as the Saxon thane had. The land in villenage was
occupied not by mere trade debtors of the lord, as our version has
it, but by '_gafol-gyldan_'--tenants to whom land and goods of the
lord had been entrusted, as Saxon tenants were entrusted with their
'setene,' and who, therefore, paid _gafol_ or tribute in kind. The
natural _gafol_ of the tenant of an olive-garden would be so many
'sesters' of oil. The tenant of corn land would pay for _gafol_,
like the English tenant of a yard-land _inter alia_ so [p146]
many 'mittan' of wheat; and it was the duty of the unrighteous
'tun-gerefa,' or reeve of the manor, to collect the _gafol_ from
these tenants, as it was the duty of the Saxon thane's reeve to
gather the dues from his servile tenants.

How many otherwise free tenants hired yard-lands without becoming
_geburs_, and rendering the full _week-work_ as well as _gafol_, we
do not know. Except in the Danish district they seem to have left,
as we have seen, no trace behind them on most manors in the Domesday
Survey. The fact already mentioned, that the yard-lands of _geburs_,
who owed both gafol and services, were sometimes called '_gyrda
gafollandes_,' shows how completely the _gafol_ and the services had
become united as coincidents of a common villein tenure. All villein
tenants were apparently 'geneats' and paid 'gafol,' and there is a
passage in the laws of King Edgar which states that if a _geneat-man_
after notice should persist in neglecting to pay his lord's _gafol_,
he must expect that his lord in his anger will spare _neither his
goods nor his life_.[176]

«Completeness of the evidence to the seventh century.»

On the whole, leaving out of notice doubtful and exceptional tenants,
as well we may, we are now in a position to state generally what were
the main classes of villein tenants in early Saxon times, and what
were their holdings on the land in villenage, whether it were known
as _geneat_, or _geset_, or _gafol_ land.

_First_, the '_Rectitudines_,' of the tenth century, describes, as we
have seen, these tenants as all _geneats_ or villeins, and records
their services in general terms. [p147] It then divides them into
classes, just as the Domesday Survey does. And the two chief classes
of the geneats are the _geburs_ and the cottiers. These two classes
are evidently the _villani_ and the _bordarii_ or cottiers of the
Domesday Survey.

_Secondly_, the same document describes the holdings of these two
classes. It speaks of the cottiers as holding mostly five acres
each--sometimes more and sometimes less--in singular coincidence with
the Domesday Survey and later evidence. And it describes the _gebur_,
as we have seen, as holding a _yard-land_ or _virgate_, the typical
holding of the Domesday villanus, and as having allotted to him as
'outfit' two oxen, just as was the case with the Kelso husbandmen.

_Thirdly_, the laws of King Ine bring back the evidence to the
seventh century by their incidental mention of the _yard-land_ as a
typical holding on _geset-land_; and also of _half-hides_[177] and
_hides_, as well as of _geneats_[178] and _geburs_,[179] with their
_gafol_ and _weorc_.

When this concurrence of the evidence of the tenth and the seventh
century is duly considered, it will be seen how complete is the proof
that in the seventh century the West Saxon estate, though called a
'_tun_' or a '_ham_,' was in reality a _manor_ in the Norman sense
of the term--an estate with a village community in villenage upon it
under a lord's jurisdiction. [p148]

VI. SERFDOM ON A MANOR of KING EDWY.

The evidence hitherto given on the nature of the serfdom on
Anglo-Saxon manors has been of a general character.

We are fortunately able to confirm and illustrate it by reference to
actual local instances.

«Manor of Tidenham.»

The first example is that of the manor of _Tidenham_, and it derives
a more than ordinary value from its peculiar geographical position.

The parish of Tidenham comprises the wedge-shaped corner of
Gloucestershire, shut in between the Wye and the Severn, where they
join and widen into the Bristol Channel; while to the north-east, on
its land side, it was surrounded by the Forest of Dean.

In the belief of local antiquaries, the Roman road from Gloucester
to Caerleon-upon-Usk--the key to South Wales--passed through it as
well as the western continuation of the old British road of Akeman
Street from the landing-place of the Severn, opposite Aust (where St.
Augustine is said to have met the Welsh Christians) to the further
crossing-place on the Wye. Lastly, upon it was the southern end of
_Offa's Dyke_, the mysterious rampart which, commencing thus at the
mouth of the Wye, extended to the mouth of the Dee.[180]

«Saxon since A.D. 577,»

The manor probably has been in English hands ever since about the
time when, according to the Saxon Chronicle, after Deorham battle
in A.D. 577, Bath, Gloucester, and Cirencester were wrested from
[p149] the Welsh by Ceawlin, king of the West Saxons. According to
the Welsh legends of the _Liber Landavensis_[181] this was about the
time when the diocese of Llandaff was curtailed by the Wye instead
of the Severn becoming the boundary between the two kingdoms. It
may therefore have been for nearly five centuries before the Norman
Conquest the extreme corner of West Saxon England on the side of
South Wales.

[Illustration: THE MANOR OF TIDENHAM.]

«was a royal manor,»

Conquered probably by Ceawlin, or soon after the year 577, the manor
of Tidenham seems to have remained folkland or _terra regis_ of the
West Saxon kings, till Offa conquered it from them and gave his name
to the dyke upon it. One of its hamlets bore, as we shall find, the
name of _Cinges tune_, and Tidenham Chase remained a royal chase till
after the Norman Conquest.

«given by King Edwy, A.D. 956, to the Abbey of Bath.»

The manor itself was granted by King Edwy in A.D. 956 by charter[182]
to the Abbot of Bath, under whose name it is registered in the
Domesday Survey. It is in this charter of King Edwy that the
description of the manor and of the services of the tenants is
contained. The services must be regarded, therefore, as those of a
royal manor before it was handed over to ecclesiastical hands.

«The boundaries still to be traced.»

The boundaries as appended to the charter are given below,[183] and
may still, with slight exceptions, be traced on the Ordnance Survey.
[p150]

The northern limit on the Severn is described as _Astege pul_, now,
after a thousand years, known as _Ashwell Grange Pill_, the _puls_
of 1,000 years ago and the present _pills_ being the little streams
which wear away a sort of miniature tidal estuary in the mudbanks as
they empty themselves into the Severn and the Wye. Numbers of pills
are marked in the Ordnance map, and as many 'puls' are mentioned in
the boundaries of Saxon charters and those inserted in the _Liber
Landavensis_.

«_Inland_ and _gesettes_ land.»

After the boundaries, under the heading '_Divisiones et consuetudines
in Dyddanhamme_,'[184] the document proceeds to state that 'at
Dyddanhamme are xxx. hides, ix. of _inland_ and xxi. of _gesettes
land_.' The manor was therefore in the tenth century divided into
demesne land and land in villenage.

Next are stated separately the contents of each hamlet on the manor,
as follows:--

«Yard-lands.»

«_Hæc-_ and _cyt-_ weirs.»

At _Stræt_ are xii. hides--xxvii. gyrda gafollandes, and on the
Severn xxx. cytweras.

At _Middeltun_ are v. hides--xiiii. gyrda gafollandes, xiiii.
cytweras on the Severn, and ii. hæcweras on the Wye.

At the _Cinges túne_ are v. hides--xiii. gyrda gafollandes, and
i. hide above the dyke, which is now also gafolland; and that
outside the hamme is still part inland and part gesett to gafol
to 'scipwealan.' At the Cinges túne on the Severn are xxi.
cytweras, and on the Wye xii.

At the _Bishop's túne_ are iii. hides, and xv. cytweras on the
Wye.

At _Landcawet_ are iii. hides and ii. hæcweras on the Wye, and
ix. cytweras.

«The hamlets.»

Thus this manor, like the Winslow manor, had hamlets or small
dependencies upon it, and these are [p151] still traceable on the
map. _Street_ is still _Stroat_ on the old Roman street--the _Via
Julia_ (?)--from Gloucester to Caerleon. The _Cinges túne_, now
_Sudbury_, lay on the high wedge-shaped southern promontory above the
cliffs, between the Wye and Severn where they join; and it lies as it
did then, part on one side and part on the other side of Offa's Dyke,
as if the dyke had been cut through its open fields. Its fisheries
were naturally some on the Severn and some on the Wye. The '_Bishop's
túne_' is still traceable in _Bishton_ farm. Lastly, _Llancaut_, the
only hamlet on this Saxon manor 900 years ago with a Welsh name,
bears its old name still. This hamlet is surrounded almost entirely
by a bend of the Wye, and its situation backed by its woods (_coit_
= _wood_) may well have protected it from destruction at the time of
the Saxon conquest.

Next, it is clear that the _geset land_ in the open fields round
each 'túne' or hamlet, except at _Llancaut_ and _Bishop's tune_,
was divided, as usual, into yard-lands--_gyrda gafollandes_. These
yard-lands and the open fields have long since been swept away by the
enclosure of the parish.

«The fishing _weirs_.»

Besides the yard-lands there were belonging to each hamlet the
numerous fisheries--_cytweras_ and _hæcweras_--some on the Severn and
some on the Wye. What were these '_cyt_' and '_hæc_' weirs?

They certainly were not the ancient dams or banks across the river
which are now called 'weirs,' over which the tidal wave sweeps, thus--

'Hushing half the babbling Wye.'

It is impossible that there can have been so many of these as there
were _cytweras_ and _hæcweras_ 900 [p152] years ago--as many as
thirty together at Street, fourteen at Middletune, and twenty-one
at Cingestune. The fact is that the old Saxon word _wera_ meant any
structure for entrapping fish or aiding their capture. And no doubt
arrangements which would not be called 'weirs' now were so called
then. The words _cyt_ and _hæc_ weras seem to point rather to wattled
basket and hedge weirs than to the solid structures now called weirs.

But the best illustration of what they were may be derived from the
arrangements now at work for catching salmon in the Wye and Severn.

«Cytweras.»

«Hæcweras.»

The stranger who visits this locality will find here and there
across the muddy shore of the Severn structures which at a distance
look like breakwaters; but on nearer inspection he will find them
to be built up of rows two or three deep of long tapering baskets
arranged between upright stakes at regular distances. These baskets
are called _putts_ or _butts_ or _kypes_, and are made of long rods
wattled together by smaller ones, with a wide mouth, and gradually
tapering almost to a point at the smaller or butt end. These _putts_
are placed in groups of six or nine between each pair of stakes,
with their mouths set against the outrunning stream; and each group
of them between its two stakes is called a 'puttcher.' The word
'puttcher' can hardly be other than a rapidly pronounced _putts
weir_, _i.e._ a weir made of _putts_. If the baskets had been called
'cyts' instead of 'putts,' the group would be a _cytweir_. So,
_e.g._, the thirty _cytweras_ at Street would represent a breakwater
such as may be seen there now, consisting of as many puttchers. This
use of what may be called basket weirs [p153] is peculiar to the
Wye and the Severn, and has been adopted to meet the difficulty
presented by the unusual volume and rapidity of the tidal current.

[Illustration: Group of Puttchers on the Severn near
Tedenham.]

Then as to the _hæcweras_ there is nothing unusual in the use of
barriers or fences of wattle, or, as it is still called, _hackle_, to
produce an eddy, or to entrap the fish. Thus a statute (1 Geo. I. c.
18, s. 14) relating to the fisheries on the Severn and the Wye uses
the following words: 'If any person shall make, 'erect, or set any
bank, dam, _hedge_, stank, or net across the same,' &c.

These wattled hedges or hackle-weirs are sometimes used to guide
the fish into the puttchers, but generally in the same way as more
permanent structures on the Wye, now called _cribs_, to make an
eddy in which the fish are caught from a boat in what is called a
_stop-net_.

«Salmon fisheries.»

This mode of fishing is also peculiar to the Wye and Severn. The boat
is fixed by two long stakes sideways across the eddy, and a wide net,
like a bag with its open end stretched between two poles, is let down
so as to offer a wide open mouth to the stream which carries the
closed end of the bag-net under the boat. When a salmon strikes the
net the open end is raised out of the water, and the fish is taken
out behind. This clumsy process of catching salmon is the ancient
traditional method used in the Wye and Severn fisheries, and so
tenaciously is it adhered to that the fishermen can hardly be induced
to substitute more efficient modern improvements.

So much for the _cytweras_ and the _hæcweras_.

The fisheries are now almost exclusively devoted to salmon. About
the date of the Norman Conquest [p154] the manor of Tidenham
was let on lease by the Bishop of Bath to Stigand, Archbishop
of Canterbury,[185] and as a portion of the rent reserved was 6
porpoises (merswin) and 30,000 herrings, it would seem at first sight
that the main fisheries there were for herrings rather than salmon,
but it is more probable that the lease was a mutual arrangement
whereby the archbishop's table was provided with salmon from the
west, and the monks of Bath with herrings from the east.

Turning from the fisheries to the services, they are described as
follows:[186]--

«General services of _geneats_.»

Of Dyddanhamme gebyreð micel weorcrǽden.

Se geneát sceal wyrcan swá on lande, swá of lande, hweðer swá
him man byt, and ridan and auerian, and láde lǽdan, dráfe
drífan, and fela óðra þinga dón.

To Tidenham belong many services.

The geneat shall work as well on land as off land, whichever he
is bid; and ride, and carry and lead loads, and drive droves,
and do other things.

And after thus stating, to begin with, the general services of
all _geneats_, the document proceeds, like the '_Rectitudines_,'
to describe the special services of the _gebur_, or holder of a
yard-land.

«Services of _geburs_.»

«Week-work.»

Se gebúr sceal his riht dón.

He sceal erian healfne æcer tó wíceworce, and ræcan sylf ðæt
sæd on hláfordes berne gehálne tó cyrcscette, sá hweðere of his
ágenum berne.

Tó werbolde xl. mæra oððe án foðer gyrda; oððe viii. geocu
byld. iii. ebban tyne. Æcertyninge xv. gyrda, oððe díche
fiftyne; and dície i. gyrde burhheges, ripe óðer healfne æcer,
máwe healfné; on oðran weorcan wyrce, á be weorces mæðe.

The gebur shall do his '_riht_.'

He shall plough a half-acre as week-work, and himself prepare
the seed in the lord's barn ready for kirkshot, or else from
his own barn.

For weir-building 40 large rods or 1 load of small rods, or
build 8 yokes and wattle 3 ebbs. Of acre-fencing 15 yards,
or ditch 15; and ditch 1 yard of burh-hedge, reap 1 acre and
a half, mow half an acre. At other work, work as the work
requires. [p155]

These are the various details of his _week-work_. Then follow the
_gafol_-payments.

«Gafol.»

Sylle vi. penegas ofer éstre, healfne sester hunies tó
Hlafmæssan. vi. systres mealtes tó Martines mæsse, an cliwen
gódes nettgernes. On ðam sylfum lande stent seðe vii. swýn
hæbbe ðæt he sylle iii. and swá forð á ðæt teoðe, and ðæs
naðulæs mæstenrǽdene ðonne mæsten beó.

Pay 6d. after Easter, half a sester of honey (or mead?)
at Lammas. 6 sesters of malt at Martinmas, 1 clew of good
net-yarn. On the same land, if he has 7 swine, he pays 3, and
so forth at that rate, and nevertheless give mast dues if there
be mast.

It will be observed that in their _week-work_ the geburs of Tidenham,
in addition to strictly agricultural services, had to provide the
materials for the puttchers and hedge-weirs, as well as other
requisites for the fisheries.

What the eight _geocu_ to be built may have been is doubtful; but the
tyning or wattling of three ebbs was at once explained on the spot by
the lessee of the fisheries, who pointed out that when hackle weirs
were used, three separate wattled hedges would always be needed, as,
owing to the very various heights of the tide, the hedge must be
differently placed for the spring tides, the middle tides, and the
neap tides respectively.

The '_week-work_' was shown by the '_Rectitudines_' to be the chief
service of the gebur, and this _work_, added to the _gafol_, made the
holder of the yard-land into a _gebur_, according to the laws of Ine.

«No limitation of week-work to three days.»

Two things are very striking about the week-work on the manor of
Tidenham. (1) There is no limit to three days a week more or less,
as in the '_Rectitudines_.' (2) There is a clear adaptation of the
week-work [p156] to local circumstances. In particular the fisheries
have a prominent regard in its arrangement. As described in the
'_Rectitudines_,' the work varied according to the customs of each
place.

So much for the 'week-work.'

«No _bene-work_.»

Next, there were at Tidenham no '_precariæ_,' or '_bene_' works,
which formed so prominent a feature in the later services. When the
week-work was not limited to some days only, clearly there was no
need or room for these additional services.

Lastly, as to the _gafol_--this formed a prominent feature of the
_weorc-ræden_ of the Tidenham yard-land.

«_Gafol_ chiefly in produce: honey, &c.»

It consisted mainly of the produce of the land, like the gafol of
the _gafolgylders_ in the Saxon translation of the parable of 'the
unjust steward.' Honey and malt, or ale, and yarn and pork--these,
as we shall see by-and-by, were the chief products of this and the
adjoining districts of Wales.

These, then, were the services of the geburs of Tidenham in respect
of their yard-lands in A.D. 950, while the manor was still in royal
hands just before it was handed over to the Abbot of Bath.

«Comparison of services in the thirteenth century.»

Now let us compare these services with the services on the same
manor 350 years afterwards, in the time of Edward I. An _Inquisitio
post mortem_ of the 35th year of Edward I. enables us to make this
comparison.[187]

The following is an abstract of the services of a tenant who held
a messuage and xviii. acres of land in villenage (probably a
half-virgate). [p157]

His _week-work_ was--

5 days in every other week for xxxv. weeks in the year
from Michaelmas to Midsummer, except the festival works of
Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost; 87½ works.

2½ days every week for 6 weeks from Midsummer to Gules of
August; 15 works.

3 days every week for 8 weeks from Gules of August to
Michaelmas; 24 works.

And of this week-work between Michaelmas and Christmas, 1 day's
work every other week was to lie ploughing and harrowing a
half-acre. Each ploughing was accounted for a day's work.

Then as to his _precariæ_,--

He made 1 _precaria_ called 'cherched,' and he ploughed and
harrowed a half-acre for corn, and sowed it with 1 bushel of
corn from his own seed; and in the time of harvest he had to
reap and bind and stack the produce, receiving one sheaf for
himself on account of the half-acre, 'as much as can be bound
with a binding of the same corn, cut near the land.'

And he had to plough 1 acre for oats, and this was accounted
for 2 days' manual work.

And he made another _precaria_, ploughing a half-acre with his
own plough for winter sowing with as many oxen as he possessed,
so that there should be a team of 8 oxen. But if he had no oxen
he did not plough.

And he made [several other _precariæ_ of various kinds].

Lastly came his _gafol_, &c.

He gave i. hen, which was called 'wodehen,' at Christmas.

And 5 eggs at Easter.

And 1D. for every yearling pig, and ½d. for those only of
half-year, by way of pannage.

He paid . . . for every horse or mare sold.

And viii. gallons of beer at every brewing.

And he could not marry his daughter without licence.

Now, comparing the services on the manor of Tidenham at these dates
300 years apart, at which period was the service most complete
serfdom? at the later date, when the week-work of the villeins was
limited to two and a half or three days a week, and in addition he
made _precariæ_ or extra works; or at the earlier date, _when his
week-work was unlimited_ [p158] as to the days, and therefore there
was no room for the extra work?

«Saxon services more complete.»

Surely the unlimited week-work marked the most complete serfdom.
Surely the later services, limited in their amount and commutable
into money payments, were clearly a mitigated service fast growing
into a fixed money rent. In fact, the _gebur_ or _villanus_ was
fast growing into a mere customary tenant in the time of Edward I.
Indeed, he is not called in the 'Inquisition' a '_villanus_,' but
a '_custumarius_,' and such he was. He was halfway on the road to
freedom. Another sign of the times was this, that at the later date,
side by side with the customary tenants on the land in villenage, a
whole host of _libere tenentes_ had already grown up upon the lord's
demesne, not, as we have more than once observed, necessarily _liberi
homines_ at all, but some of them villein tenants or _custumarii_
holding additional pieces of free land of the lord's demesne. Of
these free tenants there were none at the earlier period. So that
the _gebur_, with his _weorc-ræden_ 100 years and more before the
Norman Conquest, was much more clearly a serf, and rendered far more
complete and servile services than his successor in the thirteenth
century, with the Black Death and Wat Tyler's rebellion in the near
future before him.

Finally, let us look backward and ask how long this more complete
serfdom had lasted on the manor of Tidenham.

«They probably go back to near the first conquest.»

If in the laws of King Ine are found, as we have seen, the '_geset
land_' and '_gyrd lands_,' and the '_gafol_,' and the '_weorc_,' and
the '_geneat_,' and the '_gebur_,' and the obligation not to leave
the lord's [p159] land; and if all those were incidents of what in
the '_Rectitudines_' and in the charter of King Edwy just examined
was in fact serfdom--if the laws of Ine are good evidence that this
serfdom existed in full force in the seventh century _anywhere_--they
must surely be good evidence that it existed on the manor of
Tidenham. For it was, as we have seen, a royal manor of King Edwy,
and most probably he had received it through a succession of royal
holders from King Ine. There is no evidence of its having ceased to
be folcland, and so to be in the royal demesne of the kings of Wessex
or of Mercia, from Ine's time to Edwy's. And if it was a royal manor
of King Ine's, surely the laws of King Ine may be taken to interpret
the serfdom on his own estate. Lastly, looking further back still, as
King Ine probably held the manor in direct succession from Ceawlin,
or whoever conquered it from the Welsh, and cut it from the diocese
of Llandaff in A.D. 577 or thereabouts, the inference is very strong
indeed that the _weorc-ræden_ had remained much the same ever since,
100 years before the date of King Ine's laws, it first fell under
Saxon rule.

«Changes in local customs very slow.»

The lesson to be learned from a careful tracing back of the customs
of such a manor as Tidenham, and we might add also the methods of
fishing, and the construction of the '_cyt_' and '_hæcweras_,' surely
is, that in those early times changes in custom and habit were slow,
and not easily made. It would be as unlikely that between the days
of King Ceawlin and those of King Ine great changes should have been
made in the internal economic structure of a Saxon manor, as that in
the same period bees should have changed the shape of their hexagonal
cells. [p160]

VII. SERFDOM ON A MANOR OF KING ALFRED.

«Manor of Hysseburne, which had belonged to Egbert,
Ethelwulf, and Alfred.»

The second example of a Saxon manor is that of 'Stoke-by-Hysseburne,'
a royal estate in Hampshire.[188] It had belonged in succession to
King Egbert, King Ethelwulf, and King Alfred, and was by his son
Edward given over to the monks of the 'old minster' at Winchester
under the following curious circumstances.

King Alfred, towards the close of his reign, in his anxiety for
the better education of the children of his nobles, called to his
aid the monk Grimbald, from the monastery of St. Bertin, near St.
Omer in Picardy, in which he himself had spent some time in his
childhood on his way to Rome. It was the plan of Grimbald and King
Alfred to build a new monastery (the 'new minster') at Winchester
where Grimbald should carry out the royal object. But King Alfred
died before this wish was fully accomplished. He had bought the land
for the chapel and dormitory in [p161] the city, but the building
and endowment of the monastery was left for his son King Edward to
complete. Grimbald, then eighty-two years old, was the first abbot,
but within a year died and was canonised. The body of King Alfred
lay enshrined in Winchester Cathedral, in the 'old minster' of the
bishop; but the canons of the old foundation having, according to
the Abbey Chronicle, conceived 'delirious fancies' that the royal
ghost, roaming by night about their cloisters, could not rest in
peace, the remains of Alfred and his queen were removed to the 'new
minster.'[189]

«Granted to the 'old minster' at Winchester.»

Now, King Ethelwolf, when dying, having left to King Alfred his son
certain lands at '_Cyseldene_' and elsewhere, with instructions when
he died to give them over to the refectory of the old minster, King
Alfred in his will gave his land at that place to the proper official
at Winchester accordingly. In other words, the body of King Alfred
lay in the 'new minster,' and this land given for the good of his
soul belonged to the 'old minster.' So it came to pass--whether this
time the 'delirious fancies' of the superstitious canons had anything
to do with it or not cannot be told--that this property at Cyseldene,
like the royal donor's body, could not rest in the hands of the 'old
minster,' but must be transferred to the 'new minster.' So King
Edward in the year 900 made an arrangement with the monks, whereby
the lands at Cyseldene were transferred to the 'new minster,' and by
charter he gave instead of them to the 'old minster' ten holdings
(_manentes_) at [p162] _Stoke-be-Hisseburne, with all the men who
were thereon, and those at 'Hisseburne,' when King Alfred, died_.

«The '_hiwisc_,' or family holding, equal here to
yard-land.»

It is in the charter[190] effecting this object that the services are
described. 'Here are written the _gerihta_ 'that the ceorls shall do
at Hysseburne.' From every '_hiwisc_' such and such services. The
_hiwisce_ or _family holding_ seems from the services to have been a
yard-land of 30 acres. The services were as follows:--

«Services.»

Hér synd gewriten ða gerihta ðæ ða ceorlas sculan dón tó
Hysseburnan.

Ærest æt hilcan hiwisce feorwerti penega tó herfestes emnihte:
and vi. ciricmittan ealað; and iii. sesðlar hláfhwétes: and
iii. æceras ge-erian on heora ægenre hwíle, and mid heora
ágenan sæda gesáwan, and on hyra ágenre [h]wíle on bærene
gebringan: and þréo pund gauolbæres and healfne æcer gauolmǽde
on hiora ágienre hwíle, and ðæt on hreace gebringan: and iiii.
fóðera áclofenas gauolwyda tó scidhræce on hiora ágenre hwíle:
and xvi. gyrda gauoltininga eác on hiora ágenre hwíle: and tó
Eástran twó ewe mid twam lamban, and we [talað] twó geong sceap
tó eald sceapan: and hí sculan waxan sceap and scíran on hiora
ágenre hwíle.

Here are written the services that the ceorls shall do at
Hysseburne.

From each _hiwisc_ (family) 40d. at harvest equinox, and 6
church-mittans of ale, and 3 sesters of bread-wheat: and plough
3 acres in their own time, and sow it with their own seed,
and in their own time bring it to the barn: and 3 pounds of
gafol-barley, and a half-acre of gafol-mowing in their own
time, and to bring it to the rick: and split 4 fothers (loads)
of gafol-wood and stack it in their own time, and 16 yards of
gafol-fencing in their own time; and at Easter two ewes with
two lambs, and two young sheep may be taken for one old one:
and they shall wash sheep and shear them in their own time.

«Gafol and gafol-_yrthe_.»

Here we have clearly, as in the '_Rectitudines_,' the _gafol_,
including the three acres of _gafol-yrth_ or ploughing, as well as
other gafol-work and payments in [p163] kind. And if the services
had stopped here, we might have concluded that the 'ceorls' of
Hysseburne were gafolgelders, and not serfs. But there is another
clause which forbids such a conclusion--which shows that, in the
words of the laws of King Ine, they were 'set to _work_ as well as to
_gafol_.' It is this:--

«Week-work.»

And ǽlce wucan wircen ðæt hí man háte bútan þrim, án tó
middan-wintra, oðeru tó Eástran, þridde to Gangdagan.

And every week do what work they are bid, except three
weeks--one at midwinter, the second at Easter, and the third at
'Gang days.'

«Unlimited.»

Comparing these services with the other examples, they do not seem to
be any more the services of freemen, or any less those of serfs. They
seem to plainly bear the ordinary characteristics of what is meant by
serfdom wherever it is found. There is the _gafol_ and there is the
_week-work_; and the latter is not limited to certain days each week,
as in the '_Rectitudines_,' but '_each week, except three in the
year, they are_ TO WORK AS THEY ARE BID.'

And these are the services--this is the serfdom--on a manor which was
part of the royal domain of King Alfred, which for three successive
reigns at least, and probably for generations earlier, had been royal
domain, and now by the last royal holder is handed over, with the
men that were upon it, to the perpetual, never-dying lordship of a
monastery, as an eternal inheritance.

«The chain of evidence complete.»

Finally, the evidence of these Saxon documents--the '_Rectitudines_'
and the charters of Tidenham and Hysseburne--read in the light
of the later evidence and of the earlier laws of King Ine, is so
clear that it seems needful to explain how it has happened that
[p164] there has ever been any doubt as to the servile nature
of the services of the holders of yard-lands in Saxon times. The
explanation is simple. Mr. Kemble quotes from all these documents in
his chapter on '_Lænland_;'[191] but for want of the clear knowledge
what a yard-land was, it never seems to have occurred to him that
in these services of the _geburs_ or holders of yard-lands we have
the services of the later _villani_ of the Domesday Survey--the
services of the holdings embracing by far the greater part of the
arable land of England. Dr. Leo, in his work on the '_Rectitudines_,'
confesses that he does not know what is meant by the yard-land of
the gebur.[192] It is only when, proceeding from the known to the
unknown, we get a firm grasp of the fact that the yard-land was the
normal holding of the _gebur_ or _villanus_, that it was a bundle
of normally thirty scattered acres in the open fields, that it was
held in villenage, and that these were the services under which it
was held of the manorial lord of the _ham_ or _tun_ to which it
belonged--it is only when these facts are known and their importance
realised, that these documents become intelligible, and take their
proper place as links in what really is an unbroken chain of evidence.

VIII. THE THEOWS OR SLAVES ON THE LORD'S DEMESNE.

«The _theows_, or slave class.»

One word must be said of the _theows_ or slaves on the lord's
demesne--the thane's _inland_--lest we should [p165] forget the
existence of this lowest class of all, in contrast with whose slavery
the _geburs_ and cottiers on the _geneat_ land, notwithstanding their
serfdom, were '_free_.' These latter were prædial serfs 'adscripti
glebæ,' but not slaves. The _theows_ were slaves, bought and sold
in the market, and exported from English ports across the seas as
part of the commercial produce of the island. Some of the _theows_
were slaves by birth. But it seems to have been a not uncommon thing
for freemen to sell themselves into slavery under the pressure of
want.[193]

«The servi of the Domesday Survey.»

The 'servi' of the Domesday Survey were no doubt the successors of
the Saxon _theows_. And as in the Survey the _servi_ are mostly found
on the demesne land of the lord, so probably in Saxon times the
_theows_ were chiefly the slaves of the manor-house. Most of the farm
work on the thane's _inland_, especially the ploughing, was done no
doubt by the services of the villein tenants; but as, in addition to
the villein ploughs, there were the great manorial plough teams, so
also there were _theows_ doing slave labour of various kinds on the
home farm of the lord, and maintained at the lord's expense.

In the bilingual dialogue of Ælfric,[194] written in Saxon and Latin
late in the tenth century as an educational lesson, in the reply of
the '_yrthling_' or ploughman to the question put as to the nature of
his daily work, a touching picture is given of the work of a theow
conscious of his thraldom:-- [p166]

«Feelings of the theow.»

Hwæt sægest þu yrþlinge?

Hu begæst þu weorc þin?

Eala leof hlaford þearle ic deorfe ic ga ut on dægræd þywende
oxon to felda and iugie hig to syl. Nys hyt swa stearc winter
þæt ic durre lutian æt ham for ege hlafordes mines ac geiukodan
oxan and gefæstnodon sceare and cultre mit þære syl ælce dæg ic
sceal erian fulne æþer (æcer) oþþe mare.

Hæfst þu ænigne geferan?

Ic hæbbe sumne cnapan þywende oxan mid gad isene þe eacswilce
nu has ys for cylde and hreame.

Hwæt mare dest þu on dæg?

Gewyslice þænne mare ic do. Ic sceal fyllan binnan oxan mid hig
and wæterian hig and sceasn (scearn) heora beran ut. hig hig
micel gedeorf ys hyt geleof micel gedeorf hit ys forþam ic neom
freoh.

What sayest thou, plowman?

How dost thou do thy work?

Oh, my lord, hard do I work. I go out at daybreak driving the
oxen to field, and I yoke them to the plough. Nor is it ever so
hard winter that I dare loiter at home, for fear of my lord,
but the oxen yoked, and the ploughshare and coulter fastened to
the plough, every day must I plough a full acre, or more.

Hast thou any comrade?

I have a boy driving the oxen with an iron goad, who also is
hoarse with cold and shouting.

What more dost thou in the day?

Verily then I do more. I must fill the bin of the oxen with
hay, and water them, and carry out the dung. Ha! ha! hard work
it is, hard work it is! because _I am not free_.

Perhaps some day his lord will provide him with an outfit of oxen,
give him a yard-land, and make him into a _gebur_ instead of a
_theow_. This at least seems to be his yearning.

IX. THE CREATION OF NEW MANORS.

We have hitherto spoken only of the manors. Are we therefore to
conclude that there was no land extra-manorial?

«Folkland, or _terra regis_, included royal _hams_ or
manors.»

It may be asked whether 'folkland' was not extra-manorial.

Now in one sense all that belonged to the ancient demesne of the
Crown was folkland and extra-manorial. All estates with the villages
and towns upon them, which had no manorial lord but the king, [p167]
were in the demesne of the Crown, as also were the royal forests.

Formerly, while there were many petty kings in England, and
before the kingship had attained its unity and its full growth,
_i.e._ before it had, as we are told by historians, absorbed in
itself exclusively the sole representation of the nation, the
term _folkland_ was apparently applied to all that was afterwards
included in the royal demesne. All that had not become the _boc-land_
or private property either of members of the royal house or of a
monastery or of a private person was still folkland. And it would
appear that the kings had originally no power to alienate this
folkland without the consent of the great men of their witan.

But inasmuch as the royal demesne or folkland included an endless
number of manors as well as forest, it cannot properly be said that
it was necessarily extra-manorial. More correctly it was in the
manor of the king. The king was its manorial lord, and the _geburs_
and cottiers upon it were _geneats_ or _villani_ of the king. The
Tidenham and Hysseburne manors were both of them manors of the royal
demesne until they were granted by charter to their new monastic
owners.

Now, it is clear that in the course of time, after that in a similar
way grant after grant had been made of 'ham' after 'ham,' with its
little territory--its _ager_ or _agellus_, or _agellulus_, as the
ecclesiastical writers were wont to describe it in the charters--to
the king's thanes or to monasteries, as _boc-land_ or private estate,
the number of 'hams' still remaining folkland would grow less and
less. [p168]

«These were granted as lænland to thanes in reward for
services.»

In the meantime the royal forests were managed by royal foresters
under separate laws and regulations of great severity, whilst the
royal _hams_ or manors were put under the management of a resident
steward, _præpositus_ or _villicus_--in Saxon '_tun-gerefa_,'--or
were let out for life as _lænland_ to neighbouring great men or their
sons, or to thanes in the royal service.

This granting of life-leases of folkland or _hams_ on the royal
demesne seems to have been a usual mode of rewarding special
military services, and Bede bitterly complained that the profuse and
illegitimate grants which were wheedled out of the king for pretended
monastic purposes had already in his time seriously weakened the
king's power of using the royal estates legitimately as a means of
keeping up his army and maintaining the national defences.[195] To be
able to provide some adequate maintenance for the thanes, on whose
services he relied, was a king's necessity; for well might King
Alfred enforce the truth of the philosophy of his favourite Boethius
by exclaiming that every one may know how 'full miserable and full
unmighty' kings must be who cannot count upon the support of their
thanes.[196]

«Tendency for them to pass into private hands.»

But from the nature of the case it was inevitable that the area
of folkland or royal demesne must constantly be lessened as each
succeeding grant increased the area of the _boc-land_. In other
words, to use the later phrase, the tendency was not only for new
[p169] manors to be created out of the royal forests and wastes, but
also for more and more of the royal manors to pass from the royal
demesne into private hands.

«King Alfred's sketch of the growth of a new _ham_.»

Now there is a remarkable passage in one of King Alfred's
treatises[197] which incidentally throws some light upon this
process, and explains the way in which new manors may have been
created. He describes how the forest or a great wood provided every
[p170] requisite of building, shafts and handles for tools, bay
timbers and bolt timbers for house-building, fair rods (_gerda_)
with which many a house (_hus_) may be constructed, and many a fair
_tun_ timbered, wherein men may dwell permanently in peace and quiet,
summer and winter, which, writes the king with a sigh, 'is more than
I have yet done!' There was, he said, an eternal '_ham_' above,
but He that had promised it through the holy fathers might in the
meantime make him, so long as he was in this world, to dwell softly
in a log-hut on _lænland_ ('_lænan stoclif_'[198]), waiting patiently
for his eternal inheritance. So we wonder not, he continued, that men
should work in timber-felling and in carrying and in building,[199]
for a man hopes that if he has built a cottage on lænland of his
lord, with his lord's help, he may be allowed to lie there awhile,
and hunt and fowl and fish, and occupy the _læn_ as he likes on
sea and land, until through his lord's grace he may perhaps some
day obtain _boc-land_ and permanent inheritance. Then finally he
completes his parable by reverting once more to the contrast between
'thissa lænena stoclife' and '_thara ecena hama_'--between the log
hut on lænland and the permanent freehold '_ham_' on the _boc-land_,
or hereditary manorial estate.

It is true that in this passage King Alfred does not suggest
distinctly that the lord would make the actual holding of lænland
into boc-land, thus converting a clearing in his forest into a new
manor for his thane; but, on the other hand, there was a good reason
[p171] for this omission, seeing that such a suggestion would have
just overreached the point of his parable.

Be this as it may, the vivid little glimpse we get into the _modus
operandi_ of the possible growth of a Saxon manorial estate, out of
folkland granted first as _lænland_, and then as _boc-land_, or out
of the woods or waste of an ealdorman's domain, may well be made use
of to illustrate the matter in hand.

«The _rod_, _gyrd_, or _virga_ in the growth of a new
_ham_.»

The typical importance in so many ways of the _gyrd_, or _rod_, or
_virga_ in the origin and growth of the Saxon 'tun' or 'ham' is worth
at least a moment's notice.

The typical site for a new settlement was a clearing in a wood or
forest, because of the 'fair rods' which there abound. The clearing
was measured out by rods. An allusion to this occurs in Notker's
paraphrase of Psa. lxxviii. 55--'He cast out the heathen before
them, and divided them an inheritance by line.' The Vulgate which
Notker had before him was 'Et sorte divisit eis terram in funiculo
distributionis;' and he translated the last clause thus--'teilta er
daz lant mit mazseile,'--to which he added, '_also man nu tuot mit_
RUOTO,' as they now do it with _rods_, _i.e._ at St. Gall in the
tenth or eleventh century.[200]

So in England the typical holding in the cleared land of the open
fields was called _yard_-land, or in earlier Saxon a _gyrd_ landes,
or in Latin a _virgata_ terræ; _yard_, _gyrd_, and _virga_ all
meaning _rod_, and all meaning also in a secondary sense a yard
measure. The holdings in the open fields were of _yarded_ or [p172]
_rooded_ land--land measured out with a rod into acres four rods
wide, each _rod_ in width being therefore a _rood_, as we have seen.

Again, the whole homestead was called a _tun_ or a _worth_, because
it was _tyn_ed or _gird_ed with a wattled fence of _gyrds_ or rods.
And so, too, in the Gothic of Ulfilas the homestead was a '_gard_.'
So that in the evident connexion of these words we seem to get
confirmation of the hint given by King Alfred of the process of the
growth of new manors.

«It begins with a clearing in the forest.»

The young thane, with his lord's permission, makes a clearing in
a forest, building his log hut and then other log huts for his
servants. At first it is forest game on which he lives. By-and-by
the cluster of huts becomes a little hamlet of homesteads. He
provides his servants with their outfits of oxen, and they become his
_geburs_. The cleared land is measured out by rods into acres. The
acres ploughed by the common plough are allotted in rotation to the
yard-lands. A new hamlet has grown up in the royal forest, or in the
outlying woods of an old _ham_ or manor. In the meantime the king
perhaps rewards his industrious thane, who has made the clearing in
his forest, with a grant of the estate with the village upon it, as
his boc-land for ever, and it becomes a manor, or the lord of the old
manor of which it is a hamlet grants to him the inheritance, and the
hamlet becomes a subject manor held of the higher lord.

So we seem now to see clearly how new _tuns_ and _hams_ or manors
were always growing up century after century, on the royal demesne
and on private estates or manors, as in a former chapter it became
[p173] clear incidentally how new geburs with fresh yard-lands could
be added to the village community, and the strips which made up the
yard-lands intermixed with those of their neighbours in the village
fields.

X. THE LAWS OF KING ETHELBERT--THERE WERE MANORS IN THE SIXTH CENTURY.

«_Tuns_ and _hams_ in the time of Ethelbert,»

We have seen that not only the general description of serfdom
contained in the '_Rectitudines_,' but also the two examples we have
been able to examine of serfdom upon particular manors in Saxon
times, testify clearly to the existence of a serfdom upon Saxon
manors as complete and onerous as the later serfdom upon Norman
manors. And we have seen that, connecting this evidence with that of
the laws of King Ine, the proof is clear of the existence of manors
and serfdom in the seventh century, _i.e._ 400 years before the
Norman Conquest. There remains to be quoted the still earlier though
scanty evidence of the laws of King Ethelbert, A.D. 597–616; which,
if genuine, bring us back to the date of the mission of St. Augustine
to England.

«in single ownership.»

The evidence of these laws is accidental and indirect, but taken in
connexion with that already considered, it seems to show conclusively
that the 'hams' and 'tuns' of that early period were already manors.
Upon one point at least it is clear. It goes so far as to indicate
that they were in the ownership of individuals, and not of free
village communities.

The following passages occur:-- [p174]

III. Gif cyning æt mannes ham drincæð, &c.

V. Gif in cyninges túne man mannan ofslea, &c.

XIII. Gif on eorles túne man mannan ofslæhð, &c.

XVII. Gif man in mannes tun ærest geirneð, &c.

3. If the king drink at a man's _ham_, &c.

5. If in the king's _tun_ a man slay another, &c.

13. If in an earl's _tun_ a man slay another, &c.

17. If a man into a man's _tun_ enter, &c.

If there be any doubt as to the manorial character of these 'hams'
and 'tuns,' it lies not in the point of the single ownership of them,
but in other points, whether they were worked and tilled by the
owners' slaves, or by a village community in serfdom.

The only classes of tenants which are mentioned in the laws of King
Ethelbert are the three grades of _læts_ referred to in the following
passage:

XXVI. Gif [man] læt ofslæhð þone selestan. lxxx. scill.
forgelde. Gif þane oðerne ofslæhð. lx. scillingum forgelde.
þane þriddan. xl. scillingum forgelden.

26. If [a man] slay a _læt_ of the best [class], let him pay
lxxx. shillings: if he slay one of the second, let him pay lx.
shillings: of the third, let him pay xl. shillings.

«with _semi_-servile tenants or 'læts.'»

The word _læt_ is of doubtful meaning in this passage. It might have
reference to the Roman _læti_, or people of conquered tribes deported
into Roman provinces at the end of a war; or it might refer to the
_liti_ or _lidi_--the servile tenants mentioned in so many of the
early Continental codes. We are not yet in a position to decide. But
in any case these _læts_ of King Ethelbert's laws were clearly of
a semi-servile class here in Kent, as were the _lidi_ in Frankish
Gaul,[201] for their 'wergild' was distinctly less than that of the
Kentish freemen.[202] Whether they were a [p175] different class
from the _geburs_ or _villani_, or identical with them, it is not
easy to decide.

XI. RESULT OF THE SAXON EVIDENCE.

The evidence of the earliest Saxon or Jutish laws thus leaves us
with a strong presumption, if not actual certainty, that the Saxon
_ham_ or _tun_ was the estate of a lord, and not of a free village
community, and that it was so when the laws of the Kentish men were
first codified a few years after the mission of St. Augustine.

«The manorial system not of ecclesiastical origin.»

It becomes, therefore, all but impossible that the manorial character
of English _hams_ and _tuns_ can have had an ecclesiastical origin.
The codification of the laws was possibly indeed the direct result of
ecclesiastical influence no less than in the case of the Alamannic,
and Bavarian, and Visigothic, and Burgundian, and Lombardic codes.
In all these cases the codification partook, to some extent, of
the character of a compact between the king and the Church. Room
had to be made, so to speak, for the new ecclesiastical authority.
A recognised status and protection had to be given to the Church
for the first time, and this introduction of a new element into
national arrangements was perhaps in some cases the occasion of the
codification. This may be so; but at the same time it is impossible
that a new system of land tenure can have been suddenly introduced
with the new [p176] religion. The property granted to the Church
from the first was already manorial. A _ham_ or a _tun_ could not
be granted to the Church by the king, or an earl, unless it already
existed as a manorial estate. The monasteries became, by the grants
which now were showered down upon them, lords of manors which were
already existing estates, or they could not have been transferred.

«The holdings in yard-lands implied serfdom,»

«because inconsistent with the equal division of allodial
property among heirs.»

Further, looking within the manor, whether on the royal demesne
or in private hands, it seems to be clear that as far back as the
evidence extends, _i.e._ the time of King Ine, the holdings--the
yard-lands--were held in villenage, and were bundles of a recognised
number of acre or half-acre strips in the open field, handed
down from one generation to another in single succession without
alteration.

Now let it be fully understood what is involved in this indivisible
character of the holding, in its devolution from one holder to
another without division among heirs. We have seen that the theory
was that as the land and homestead, and also the _setene_, or outfit,
were provided by the lord, they returned to the lord on the death
of the holder. The lord granted the holding afresh, most often, no
doubt, to the eldest son or nearest relation of the landholder on his
payment of an ox or other relief in recognition of the servile nature
of the tenure, and thus a custom of primogeniture, no doubt, grew up,
which, in the course of generations--how early we do not know--being
sanctioned by custom, could not be departed from by the lord. The
very possibility of this permanent succession, generation after
generation, of a single holder to the indivisible bundle of strips
[p177] called a yard-land or virgate, thus seems to have implied the
servile nature of the holding. The lord put in his servant as tenant
of the yard-land, and put in a successor when the previous one died.
This seems to be the theory of it. It was probably precisely the
same course of things which ultimately produced primogeniture in the
holding of whole manors. The king put in a _thane_ or _servant_ of
his (sometimes called the '_king's geneat_'), or a monastery put in
a steward or _villicus_ to manage a manor. When he died his son may
have naturally succeeded to the _office_ or _service_, until by long
custom the office became hereditary, and a succession or inheritance
by primogeniture under feudal law was the result. The benefice, or
_læn_, or office was probably not at first generally hereditary;
though of course there were many cases of the creation of estates of
inheritance, or _boc-land_, by direct grant of the king. As we have
seen from the passage quoted from Bede, the _læn_ of an estate for
life was the recognised way in which the king's thanes were rewarded
for their services.

Thus it seems that in the very nature of things the permanent
equality of the holdings in yard-lands (or double, or half
yard-lands), on a manor, was a proof that the tenure was servile,
and that the community was not a free village community. For imagine
a free village community taking equal lots, and holding these lots,
as land of inheritance, by allodial tenure, and with (what seems to
have been the universal custom of Teutonic nations as regards land
of inheritance) equal division among heirs, how could the _equality_
be possibly maintained? One holder of a yard-land would have seven
sons, and another two, and another [p178] one. How could equality
be maintained generation after generation? What could prevent the
multiplication of intricate subdivisions among heirs, breaking up
the yard-lands into smaller bundles of all imaginable sizes? Even
if a certain equality could be restored, which is very unlikely, at
intervals, by a _re-division_, which should reverse the inequality
produced by the rule of inheritance, what would become of the
_yard-lands_? How could the contents of the yard-land remain the
same on the same estate for hundreds of years, notwithstanding the
increase in the number of sharers in the land of the free village
community?

We may take it, then, as inherently certain that the system of
yard-lands is a system involving in its continuance a _servile
origin_. The community of holders of yard-lands we may regard
as a community of servile tenants, without any strict rights of
inheritance--in theory tenants at the will of their lord, becoming
by custom _adscripti glebæ_, and therefore tenants for life, and by
still longer custom gaining a right of single undivided succession by
primogeniture, or something very much like it.

«Result of the Saxon evidence.»

Now we know that the holdings were _yard-lands_ and the holders
_geburs_, rendering the customary _gafol_ and _week-work_ to their
lords, in the time of King Ine, if we may trust the genuineness of
his 'laws.' There was but an interval of 100 years between Ine and
Ethelbert; whilst Ine lived as near to the first conquest of large
portions of the middle districts of England as Ethelbert did to the
conquest of Kent.

«No room for a system of free village communities, which
afterwards sank into serfdom.»

The laws of Ethelbert, taken in connexion with the subsequent laws
of Ine, and the later actual [p179] instances of Saxon manors which
have been examined, form a connected chain, and bring back the links
of the evidence of the manorial character of Saxon estates to the
very century in which the greater part of the West Saxon conquests
took place. The existence of earl's and king's and men's _hams_ and
_tuns_ in the year of the codification of the Kentish laws, A.D. 602
or thereabouts, means their existence as a manorial type of estate in
the sixth century; and with the exception of the southern districts,
the West Saxon conquests were not made till late in the sixth
century. Surely there is too short an interval left unaccounted for
to allow of great economic changes--to admit of the degeneracy of an
original free village community if a widely spread institution, into
a community in serfdom. So that the evidence strongly points to the
_hams_ and _tuns_ having been manorial in their type from the first
conquest. In other words, so far as this evidence goes, the Saxons
seem either to have introduced the manorial system into England
themselves, founding _hams_ and _tuns_ on the manorial type, or to
have found them already existing on their arrival in Britain. There
seems no room for the theory that the Saxons introduced everywhere
free village communities on the system of the German 'mark,' which
afterwards sank into serfdom under manorial lords.

«The tribal system must be investigated.»

But before we can be in a position to understand what probably
happened we must turn our attention to those portions of Britain
_which were not manorial_, and where village communities did not
generally exist. They form an integral part of our present England,
and English economic history has to do with the [p180] economic
growth of the whole people. It cannot, therefore, confine itself to
facts relating to one element only of the nation, and to one set of
influences, merely because they became in the long run the paramount
and overruling ones. And, moreover, the history of the manorial
system itself cannot be properly understood without an understanding
also of the parallel, and perhaps older, _tribal system_, which in
the course of many centuries it was destined in some districts to
overrule and supplant; in others, after centuries of effort, to fail
in supplanting.

FOOTNOTES:

[153] '--_villani uniuscujusque villæ._ Deinde quomodo vocatur
_mansio_' (f. 497).

[154] _Liber de Hyda_, p. 63.

[155] _Id._ p. 68.

[156] _Id._ p. 72.

[157] Luke xv. 16.

[158] See _Ancient Laws and Institutes of England_, Thorpe, p. 185.
This document was the subject of a special treatise by Dr. Heinrich
Leo, Halle, 1842.

[159] _The Cronykil of Scotland_, B. VI. c. xviii.

[160] Matt. viii. 9.

[161] _Ines Domas_, s. 51. Thorpe, p. 58.

[162] _Id._ s. 63. Thorpe, p. 62.

[163] _Id._ s. 63–6. Thorpe, pp. 62–3.

[164] Matt. xxi. 33.

[165] Boethius, c. xvii.

[166] In the _Codex Diplomaticus_, No. MCCCLIV., there is an
interesting document early in the eleventh century, the original
of which is in the British Museum (_MS. Cott. Tib._ B. v. f. 76
_b_), written on the back of a much older copy of the Gospels, and
containing particulars respecting the _geburs_ on the Hatfield estate
in Hertfordshire--their _pedigrees_, in fact--showing that they had
intermarried with others of the following manors in Hertfordshire,
viz.:--_Tæccingawyrde_ (Datchworth), _Wealaden_ (King's or Paul's
Walden), _Welugun_ (Welwyn), _Wadtune_ (Watton), _Munddene_ (Mundon),
_Wilmundeslea_ (Wymondley), and _Eslingadene_ (Essenden). The fact
that it was worth while to preserve a record of the pedigree of
the _geburs_ shows that they were _adscripti glebæ_. And there can
be no doubt of the identity of the _geburs_ of this document with
the _villani_ of the Domesday Survey of these various places. The
pedigrees of _villani_ or _nativi_ were carefully kept in some manors
even after the _Black Death_.

[167] Cotton MS. _Augustus_, ii. 64. Fac-similes of Ancient Charters
in the British Museum, Part II.

[168] This may be read 23d. and a sester of barley; or, perhaps, 20d.
and three sestras of barley. But the best reading seems to be that in
the text.

[169] This is a word often used in later documents, and seems to
mean a certain amount of ploughing done as an equivalent for an
allowance of grass. _Grass-yrth_ may be the _gafol_ for the share
in the _Lammas meadows_, and the _gafol-yrth_ for the arable in the
_yard-land_.

[170] _Laws of Ine_, s. 67. Thorpe, p. 63.

[171] The opening clause of Ine's laws, as republished by King Alfred
with his own, states that they were recorded under the counsel and
teaching of his father _Cenred_, who resigned his kingship to Ine in
A.D. 688.

[172] _Alfred and Guthrum's Peace_, Thorpe, p. 66. 'We hold all
equally dear, English and Danish, at viii. half marks of pure gold,
except the "ceorle þe on _gafol-lande sit_, and heora _liesingum_"
(_lysingon_); they also are equally dear at cc. shillings,' _i.e._
they are '_twihinde men._'

[173] Matt. xvii. 25.

[174] _Beda_, i. c. 34:--

Nemo enim in tribunis, nemo in regibus plures eorum terras,
exterminatis vel subjugatis indigenis, aut tributarias genti
Anglorum, aut habitabiles fecit.

Ne wæs æfre ænig cyning ne ealdorman ꝥ ma heora landa ute
amærde ⁊ him to gewealde underþeodde forþon ðe he hi to
gafulgyldum gesette on Angel ðeodde. oþþe of heora lande adraf.

Never was there ever any king nor ealdorman that more their
lands exterminated, and to his power subjected, for that he
them to gafol set to the English people, or else off their land
drove.

[175] Luke xvi.

[176] _Supplement to Edgar's Laws_, i. Thorpe, p. 115.

[177] Thorpe, p. 53, where they are mentioned as sometimes held by
even '_Wiliscmen_,' _i.e._ tenants not of Saxon blood.

[178] Thorpe, p. 50.

[179] _Ibid._ p. 46.

[180] For the archæology of Tidenham see _Proceedings of the
Cotteswold Naturalists' Field Club_, 1874–5, and Mr. Ormerod's
_Archæological Memoirs_ relating to the district adjacent to the
confluence of the Severn and the Wye. London, 1861 (not published).

[181] Pp. 374–6.

[182] Kemble's _Cod. Dip._ CCCCLII. (vol. ii. p. 327).

[183] _Codex Dip._ iii. p. 444; App. CCCCLII. 'Ðis synd ða landgemæra
tó Dyddenháme. Of Wægemúðan to iwes héafdan; of iwes héafden on
Stánræwe; of Stánræwe on hwítan heal; of hwítan heale on iwdene; of
iwdene on brádan mór; of brádan mór on Twyfyrd; of Twyfyrd on astege
pul ut innan Sæfern.'

[184] _Cod. Dip._ iii. p. 450, where they are evidently misplaced.

[185] _Cod. Dip._ DCCC., XXII.

[186] _Cod. Dip._ iii. p. 450.

[187] Record Office, _Chancery Inquisitions post mortem_, Anno 35
Edw. I. No. 46_b._ Gloucestria, § _Manerium de Tudenham_.

[188] Mr. Kemble identifies this place with Stoke near Hurstbourne
Priors, near Whitechurch; but it may possibly be one of the Stokes on
the Itchin River near Winchester.

That the upper part of the Itchin was called 'Hysseburne' and
'Ticceburne,' see _Cod. Dip._ MLXXVII., CCCXLII., MXXXIX. & CLVIII.
The boundaries in MLXXVII. of 'Hysseburna' (beginning at Twyford)
correspond at a few points with those of 'Hisseburne' in Abingdon,
i. p. 318, and of Eastune appended thereto, and of Eastune in _Cod.
Dip._ MCCXXX. The position of Twyford and Easton seems to fix this
locality on the Itchin. The parishes of Itchin Stoke and Titchbourne
('æt Hisseburne') still nearly adjoin those of Twyford and Easton,
but the parishes here are intermixed, and the 'Hysseburne' of the
charters may have been a district with different boundaries, and may
not be the Hysseburne of King Alfred's will. Compare Domesday Survey,
i. 40, where _Twyford_, _Eastune_, and _Stoches_ occur together among
the '_Terra Wintonensis Episcopi_.'

[189] See _Liber de Hyda_, Mr. Edwards' Introduction.

[190] _Codex Dip._ MLXXVII.; and Dugdale, Winchester Monastery, Num.
X. This charter is preserved in a copy of the twelfth century in the
Winchester Cartulary (St. Swithin's) now in the British Museum. Add.
MSS. 15350, f. 69_b._

[191] _Saxons in England_, pp. 319 _et seq._

[192] H. Leo, _Rectitudines_. Halle, 1842, p. 231. 'Wenigstens weisz
ich "on his gyrde landes" (auf seiner rute des gutes, oder des
landes) an dieser stelle nicht anders zu erklären.'

[193] See Kemble's _Saxons in England_, i. p. 196.

[194] _British Museum_ Cotton MS. Tib. A. III. f. 58_b._ For the text
of this passage I am indebted to Mr. Thompson of the British Museum.

[195] Bede's letter to Bishop Egbert. Smith, p. 309. 'Quod enim turpe
est dicere, tot sub nomine monasteriorum loca hi qui monachicæ vitæ
prorsus sunt expertes in suam ditionem acceperunt, sicut ipsi melius
nostis, _ut omnino desit locus, ubi filii nobilium aut emeritorum
militum possessionem accipere possint_,' &c.

[196] King Alfred's Boethius, c. xxix. s. 10.

[197] Alfred's _Blossom Gatherings out of St. Augustine_. British
Museum, Vit. A. xv. f. 1:--Gaderode me þonne kigclas ⁊ stuþan
sceaftas ⁊ lohsceaftas ⁊ hylfa to ælcum þara tola þe ic mid pircan
cuðe ⁊ bohtimbru ⁊ bolt timbru ⁊ to ælcum þara peorca þe ic pyrcan
cuðe þa plitegostan treopo be þam dele ðe ic aberan meihte. ne com
ic naþer mid anre byrðene ham þe me ne lyste ealne þane pude ham
brengan gif ic hyne ealne aberan meihte. on ælcum treopo ic geseah
hpæt hpugu þæs þe ic æt ham beþorfte. For þam ic lære ælcne ðara þe
maga si ⁊ ma[nigne] wæn hæbbe ꝥ he menige to þam ilcan puda þar ic
ðas stuðan sceaftas cearf. Fetige hym þar ma ⁊ gefeðrige hys pænas
mid fegrum gerdum þat he mage pindan manigne smicerne pan ⁊ manig
ænlic hus settan ⁊ fegerne tun timbrian ⁊ þara ⁊ þær murge ⁊ softe
mid mæge oneardian ægðer ge pintras ge sumeras spa spa ic nu ne gyt
ne dyde. Ac se þe me lærde þam se pudu licode se mæg gedon ꝥ ic
softor eardian ægðer ge on þisum lænan stoclife be þis pæge ða phile
þe ic on þisse peorulde beo ge eac on þam hecan hame ðe he us gehaten
hefð þurh scanctus augustinus ⁊ sēs gregorius ⁊ scanctus Ieronimus
⁊ purh manege oððre halie fædras spa ic gelyfe. eac ꝥ he gedo for
heora ealra earnum ge ægðer ge þisne peig gelimpfulran gedo þonne he
ær þissum pes ge hure mines modes eagan to þam ongelihte ꝥ ic mage
rihtne peig aredian to þam ecan hame ⁊ to þam ecan are ⁊ to þare ecan
reste þe us gehaten is þurh þa halgan fæderas sie spa. Nis hit nan
pundor þeah m[an] sp[ylce] on timber gepirce ⁊ eac on þæ[re] lade ⁊
eac on þære bytlinge. ac ælcne man lyst siððan he ænig cotlyf on his
hlafordes læne myd his fultume getimbred hæfð ꝥ he hine mote hpilum
þar ongerestan. ⁊ huntigan. ⁊ fulian. ⁊ fiscian. ⁊ his on gehpilce
pisan to þære lænan tilian ægþær ge on se ge on lande oð oð þone
fyrst þe he bocland ⁊ æce yrfe þurh his hlafordes miltse geearnige.
spa gedo se pile ga gidfola seðe egðer pilt ge þissa lænena stoclife
ge þara ecena hama. Seðe ægþer gescop ⁊ ægðeres pilt forgife me ꝥ
me to ægðrum onhagige ge her nytpyrde to beonne ge huru þider to
cumane.--For the text of this passage I am indebted to Mr. Thompson.

[198] '_Stoc-lif_,' literally _stake-hut_. The logs were put upright,
as in the case of the Saxon church at _Greenstead_ in Essex.

[199] 'Bytlinge;' hence the house was a '_botl_.'

[200] _Schilteri Thesaur. Antiq. Teut._ i. p. 158. Ulm, 1728.

[201] See M. Guérard's _Introduction to the Polyptyque de l'Abbé
Irminon_, pp. 250–75.

[202] The _leod-geld_ or _wer-gild_ of a 'man' was 200 shillings
(see mention of the half leod-geld of c. shillings, s. 21). As
regards the three grades of _læts_, there were also three grades of
female _theows_ of the king (see s. 10–11), the _cup-bearer_, the
_grinding-theow_, and the _lowest class_. See also s. 16, where again
there is mention of three classes of _theows_, each with its value.

[p181]

CHAPTER VI.
_THE TRIBAL SYSTEM (IN WALES)._

I. EVIDENCE OF THE DOMESDAY SURVEY.

The Saxon land system has now been examined. No feature has been
found to be more marked and general than its universally manorial
character; that is to say, the Saxon 'ham' or 'tun' was an estate or
manor with a village community in villenage upon it. And the services
of the villein tenants were of a uniform and clearly defined type;
they consisted of the combination of two distinct things--fixed
_gafol_ payments in money, in kind, or in labour, and the more
servile _week-work_.

It is needful now to examine the land system beyond the border of
Saxon conquest.

A good opportunity of doing this occurs in the Domesday Survey.

The Tidenham manor has already been examined. It afforded a
singularly useful example of the Saxon system. Its geographical
position, at the extreme south-west corner of England, on the side of
Wales, enabled us to trace its history from its probable conquest in
577, or soon after, and to conclude that it remained Saxon from that
time to the date of [p182] the Survey; and distinctly manorial was
found to be the character of its holdings and services.

«West side of the Wye.»

Now, the neighbouring land, on the west side of the Wye, was equally
remarkable in its geographical position. For as long as Tidenham
had been the extreme south-west corner of England, so long had the
neighbouring land between the Wye and the Usk been the extreme
south-east corner of unconquered Wales.

«Gwent.»

«Remained Welsh till conquered by Harold.»

It was part of the district of _Gwent_, and it seems to have remained
in the hands of the Welsh till Harold conquered it from the Welsh
king Gruffydd, a few years only before the Norman Conquest.

Harold seems to have annexed whatever he conquered between the Wye
and the Usk--_i.e._ in Gwent--to his earldom of Hereford; and after
the Norman Conquest it fell into the hands of William FitzOsborn,
created by William the Conqueror Earl of Hereford and Lord of
Gwent.[203]

It was he[204] who built at Chepstow the Castle of _Estrighoiel_,
the ruins of which still stand on the west bank of the Wye, opposite
Tidenham. His son, Roger FitzOsbern, succeeded to the earldom of
Hereford and the lordship of Gwent; and, upon his rebellion [p183]
and imprisonment, this region of Wales became _terra regis_, and as
such is described in the Domesday Survey, mostly as a sort of annexe
to Gloucestershire,[205] but partly as belonging to the county of
Hereford.[206]

«So also the district of Archenfield.»

Nor is _Gwent_ the only district very near to Tidenham whose Welsh
history can be traced down to the time of the Domesday Survey. There
was another part of ancient Wales, the district of _Ergyng_, or
_Archenfield_,--which included the 'Golden Valley' of the _Dour_.
It lay, like Gwent--but further north--between the unmistakable
boundaries of the Wye and the Usk, and it remained Welsh till
conquered by Harold; and this is confirmed by the fact that the
district of '_Arcenefelde_' is brought within the limits of the
Domesday Survey[207] as an irregular addition to Herefordshire, just
as Gwent was an annexe to Gloucestershire.

«Both districts described in the Domesday Survey.»

Here, then, we have two districts, one to the west and the other to
the north of Tidenham, both of which clearly remained Welsh till
conquered by Harold a few years before the Norman Conquest, and both
of them are described in the Domesday Survey. Further, it so happens
that because they had been but recently conquered, and had not yet
been added to any English county, and because also their customs
differed from those of the neighbouring English manors, the services
of their tenants, quite out of ordinary course, are described.

So that, by a convenient chance, we are able to bring together upon
the evidence of the Domesday [p184] Survey the _land systems_ of a
district which for five hundred years before the Norman Conquest had
been the extreme south-east edge of Wales, and of a district which
for the same five hundred years had been the extreme south-west
corner of Saxon England, beyond the Severn.

We have seen what was the Saxon land system on one side of the Wye,
which divided the two districts; let us now see what was the Welsh
land system on the other side of the river, so far as it is disclosed
in the Survey.

«Gwent.»

Part of the Welsh district of Gwent is thus described in the Domesday
annexe to Gloucestershire:--

'Under Waswic, the præpositus, are xiii. villæ; under [another
præpositus] xiiii. villæ, under [another præpositus] xiii.,
under [another præpositus] xiiii. (_i.e._ 54 in all). These
render xlvii. sextars of honey, and xl. pigs, and xli. cows,
and xxviii. shillings for hawks.[208] . . .

'Under the same præpositi are four villæ wasted by King
Caraduech.'[209]

Again, a little further on, this entry occurs:--

'The same A. has in Wales _vii. villæ_ which were in the
demesne of Count William and Roger his son (_i.e._ Fitz-Osbern,
Earl of Hereford and Lord of Gwent). These render _vi. sextars
of honey_, vi. pigs, and x. shillings.'[210]

Passing to the Domesday description of the district of _Archenfield_,
we find a similar record.

«Archenfield.»

The heading of the survey for Herefordshire[211] is as follows: 'Hic
annotantur terras tenentes in [p185] Herefordscire et in Arcenefelde
et in Walis.' And further on[212] we learn that--

'In _Arcenefelde_ the king has 100 men less 4, who with their
men have 73 teams, and give of custom 41 sextars of honey
and 20s. instead of the sheep which they used to give, and
10s. for _fumagium_; nor do they give _geld_ or other custom,
except that they march in the king's army if it is so ordered
to them. If a _liber homo_ dies there, the king has his horse,
with arms. From a _villanus_ when he dies the king has one ox.
King Grifin and Blein devastated this land in the time of King
Edward, and so what it was then is not known.' _Lagademar_
pertained to Arcenefelde in the time of King Edward, &c. There
is a manor [at Arcenefelde] in which 4 _liberi homines_ with
4 teams render 4 sextars of honey and 16d. of custom. Also a
villa with its men and 6 teams, and a forest, rendering a half
sextar of honey and 6d.

There are other instances of similar honey rents, _e.g._--

In _Chipeete_ 57 men with xix. teams render xv. sextars of
honey and x. shillings.

In _Cape_ v. Welshmen having v. teams render v. sextars of
honey, and v. sheep with lambs, and xd.

In _Mainaure_ one under-tenant having iv. teams renders vi.
sextars of honey and x.s.

In _Penebecdoc_ one under-tenant having iv. teams render vi.
sextars of honey and x.s.

In _Hulla_ xii. villani and xii. bordarii with xi. teams render
xviii. sextars of honey.

«Food rents and clusters of villas under a præpositus.»

The distinctive points in these descriptions of the recently Welsh
districts west and north of Tidenham are obviously (1) the prevalence
of produce or food rents--honey, cows, sheep, pigs, &c.--_honey_
being the most prominent item; (2) the absence of the word
'manor,' used everywhere else in the survey of Gloucestershire and
Herefordshire; (3) the remarkable grouping in the district of _Gwent_
of the 'villas' _in batches of thirteen or fourteen_, each batch
under a separate _præpositus_. [p186]

It is clear that on the Welsh side of the Wye Welsh instead of Saxon
customs prevailed, and that these were some of them.[213] So much we
learn from these irregular additions of newly conquered Welsh ground
to the area of the Domesday Survey.

The meaning of the peculiarities thus indicated will become apparent
when the Welsh system has been examined upon its own independent
evidence.

II. THE WELSH LAND SYSTEM IN THE TWELFTH CENTURY.

There is no reason why, in trying to learn the nature of the Welsh
land system, the method followed throughout, of proceeding backwards
from the known to the unknown, should not be followed.

«Open-field system in Wales.»

It has already been shown that such arable fields as there are in
Wales, like the Saxon arable fields, were _open_ fields. They were
shown to be divided by turf balks, two furrows wide,[214] into strips
called erws--representing a day's work in ploughing. The Welsh
laws were also found to supply the simplest and clearest solution
given anywhere of the reason of the scattering of the strips in the
holdings, as well as of the relations of the grades of holdings to
the number of oxen contributed by the holders to the common plough
team of eight oxen.

In fact, the Welsh codes clearly prove that, as regards arable
husbandry, the open field system was the system prevalent throughout
all the three districts of Wales. [p187]

«The Welsh mainly pastoral.»

But partly from the mountainous nature of the country, and partly
from the peculiar stage of economic development through which the
Welsh were passing, long after the Norman Conquest they were still
a _pastoral_ people. Cattle rather than corn claimed the first
consideration, and ruled their habits; and hence the Welsh land
system, even in later times, was very different from that of the
Saxons.

In fact, the two land systems, though both using an open-field
husbandry, were in their main features radically distinct. In those
parts of Wales which were unconquered, and therefore uncivilised,
till the conquest of Edward I., we look in vain in the early surveys
for the manor or estate with the village community in villenage upon
it.

«No manors or villages.»

The Welsh system was not manorial. Its unit was not a village
community on a lord's estate.

«Scattered green timber houses.»

As late as the twelfth century _Giraldus Cambrensis_[215] described
the houses of the Welsh as not built either in towns or even in
villages, but as scattered along the edges of the woods. To his eye
they seemed mere huts made of boughs of trees twisted together,
easily constructed, and lasting scarcely more than a season. They
consisted of one room, and the whole family, guests and all, slept on
rushes laid along the wall, with their feet to the fire, the smoke
of which found its way through a hole in the roof.[216] The Welsh,
in fact, being a _pastoral_ people, had two sets of homesteads. In
summer their herds fed on the higher ranges of the hills, and in
winter in the valleys. So they themselves, following their cattle,
had separate [p188] huts for summer and for winter use, as was also
the custom in the Highlands of Scotland, and is still the case in the
higher Alpine valleys. Giraldus Cambrensis describes the greater part
of the land as in pasture and very little as arable; and accordingly
the food of the Welsh he describes, just as Cæsar had described it
eleven centuries earlier, as being chiefly the produce of their
herds--milk, cheese and butter, and flesh in larger proportions than
bread.[217] The latter was mostly of oats.

«Welsh ploughing.»

The Welsh ploughed for their oats in March and April, and for
wheat in summer and winter, yoking to their ploughs seldom fewer
than four oxen; and he mentions as a peculiarity that the driver
walked backward in front of the oxen, as we found was the custom in
Scotland.[218]

«Love of war.»

«Genealogies.»

Another marked peculiarity of the Welsh was their hereditary liking
and universal training for warlike enterprise. They were soldiers
as well as herdsmen; even husbandmen eagerly rushed to arms from
the plough.[219] Long settlement and the law of division of labour
had not yet brought about the separation of the military from
the agricultural population of Wales even so late as the twelfth
century. And here we come upon traces of their old tribal economy.
For the facts that they had not yet attained to settled villages and
townships, that they had not yet passed from the pastoral to the
agricultural stage, that they were still craving after warfare and
wild enterprise--all [p189] these are traces of tribal habits still
remaining. And a still clearer mark of the same thing was the stress
they laid upon their genealogy. Even the common people (he says)
keep their genealogies, and can not only readily recount the names
of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers, but even refer back to
the _sixth_ or _seventh_ generation, or beyond them, in this manner:
_Rhys_, son of _Gruffydh_, son of _Rhys_, son of _Theodor_, son of
_Eineon_, son of _Owen_, son of _Howel_, son of _Cadelh_, son of
_Roderic Mawr_, and so on.[220]

«Survivals of the tribal system.»

Thus in the twelfth century there were in Wales distinct survivals
of a tribal economy. Instead of a system like the Saxons, of village
communities and townships, the Welsh system was evidently a tribal
system in the later stages of gradual disintegration, tenaciously
preserving within it arrangements and customs pointing back to a
period when its rules had been in full force.

But the Welsh codes must be further examined before the significance
of the Domesday entries can be fully appreciated.

III. THE WELSH LAND SYSTEM ACCORDING TO THE WELSH LAWS.

«Laws of Howel in the tenth century.»

The Welsh version of the ancient laws of Wales contains three several
codes: The Venedotian of North Wales, the Dimetian and Gwentian
of South Wales. They profess to date substantially from _Howel
dda_, who codified the local customs about the middle of the tenth
century. They contain, however, later [p190] additions, and the
MSS. are not earlier than the end of the thirteenth century. There
is a Latin version of the Dimetian code in MS. of the early part of
the thirteenth century, which is especially valuable as giving the
received Latin equivalent of the Welsh terms used in the laws. And
there are also, apart from these codes, triads of doubtful date, but
professing to preserve traditional customs and laws of the Welsh
nation before the time of the Saxon conquest of Britain.[221]

For the present purpose the actual date of a law or custom is not
so important as its own intrinsic character. We seek to gain a true
notion of the tribal system, and an economically early trait may well
be preserved in a document of later date.

«Saxon and Welsh systems contemporary.»

There is no reason why we should be even tempted to exaggerate the
antiquity of the evidence. The later the survival of the system the
more valuable for our purpose. The Saxon and Welsh systems were
contemporary systems, and it is best to compare them as such.

It would appear that under this tribal system a district was occupied
by a tribe (_cenedl_) under a petty king (_brenhin_) or chief.

«Free tribesmen of tribal blood.»

The tribe was composed of households of free Welshmen, all blood
relations; and the homesteads of these households were scattered
about on the country side, as they were found to be in the time of
Giraldus Cambrensis. They seem to have been grouped into artificial
clusters mainly, as we shall see, for purposes of tribute or legal
jurisdiction. [p191]

«Taeogs without tribal blood.»

But all the inhabitants of Wales were not members of the tribes.
Besides the households of tribesmen of blood relations and pure
descent, there were hanging on to the tribes or their chiefs, and
under the overlordship of the latter, or sometimes of tribesmen,
strangers in blood who were not free Welshmen; also Welshmen
illegitimately born, or degraded for crime. And these classes, being
without tribal or family rights, were placed in groups of households
and homesteads by themselves. If there were any approach to the Saxon
village community in villenage upon a lord's estate under Welsh
arrangements, it was to be found in this subordinate class, who
were not Welshmen, and had no rights of kindred, and were known as
_aillts_ and _taeogs_ of the chief on whose land they were settled.
Further, as there was this marked distinction between tribesmen and
non-tribesmen, so also there was a marked and essential distinction
between the free tribe land occupied by the families of free Welsh
tribesmen, called '_tir gwelyawg_,' or _family land_, and the
'_caeth land_' or _bond land_ of the taeogs and aillts, which latter
was also called '_tir-cyfrif_' or _register land_, and sometimes
'_tir-kyllydus_' or _geldable land_ (gafol-land?).[222]

The main significance of the Welsh system, both as regards individual
rights and land usages, turns [p192] on this distinction between the
two different classes of persons and the two different kinds of land
occupied by them. They will require separate examination.

* * * * *

Let us first take the free tribesmen ('Uchelwyrs' or 'Breyrs') and
their 'family land.'

«The free tribesmen.»

If the professed triads of _Dyvnwal Moelmud_ may be taken to
represent, as they claim to do, the condition of things in earlier
centuries, the essential to membership in the _cenedl_, or tribe, was
_birth_ within it of Welsh parents.

Free-born Welshmen were 'tied' together in a 'social state' by the
three ties of--

(1) Common defence (cyvnawdd).
(2) Common tillage (cyvar).
(3) Common law (chyvraith).[223]

Every free Welshman was entitled to three things:--

(1) Five free _erws_ (or acre strips).
(2) Co-tillage of the waste (cyvar gobaith).
(3) Hunting.[224]

«The homestead or _tyddyn_.»

The free tribesman's homestead, or _tyddyn_, consisted of three
things:--

(1) His house (ty).
(2) His cattle-yard (bu-arth).
(3) His corn-yard (yd-arth).[225]

And the five free strips, afterwards apparently [p193] reduced to
four, of each head of a house--free, possibly, in the sense of their
having been freed from the common rights of others over them, as well
as being free from charges or tribute--we may probably regard as
contained in the _tyddyn_, or as lying in croft near the homesteads.

«The holding that of a household or family.»

The _Gwentian_, _Dimetian_, and _Venedotian_ codes all represent
the homestead or tyddyn and land of the free Welshman as a _family
holding_. So long as the head of the family lived, all his
descendants lived with him, apparently in the same homestead, unless
new ones had already been built for them on the family land. In any
case, they still formed part of the joint household of which he was
the head.[226]

When a free tribesman, the head of a household, died, his holding
was not broken up. It was held by his heirs for three generations
as one joint holding; it was known as the holding of 'the heirs
of So-and-so.'[227] But within the holding there was equality of
division between his sons; the younger son, however, retaining the
original _tyddyn_ or homestead, and others having tyddyns found
for them on the family land. All the sons had equal rights in the
scattered strips and pasture belonging to the holding.[228]

«Equality within the family»

Thus, in the first generation there was equality between brothers;
they were co-tenants in equal [p194] shares of the family holding of
which they were co-heirs.

When all the brothers were dead there was, if desired, a re-division,
so as to make equality between the co-heirs, who were now first
cousins.

When all the first cousins were dead there might be still another
re-division, to make equality between the co-heirs, who were now
second cousins.

«to second cousins.»

But no one beyond second cousins could claim equality; and if a man
died without heirs of his body, and there were no kindred within
the degree of second cousins, the land reverted to the chief who
represented the tribe.[229]

«Great-grandfather the common ancestor.»

The great-grandfather was thus always looked back to as the common
ancestor, whose name was still given to the family holding of his
co-heirs. The family tie reached from him to his great-grandchildren,
and then ceased to bind together further generations.[230]

«The Gwely or family couch.»

We have seen that even in the twelfth century the household all used
one couch, extending round the wall of the single room of the house;
this couch was called the 'gwely.' The 'tir gwelyawg' was thus the
land of the family using the same couch; and the descendants of
one ancestor living together were a 'gweli-gordd.'[231] As late as
the fourteenth century, in the _Record of Carnarvon_, the holdings
[p195] are still called 'Weles' and 'Gavells.' They are essentially
'family' or tribal holdings.[232]

And now as to the tenure upon which these holdings of the free
tribesmen were held.

«The Gwestva or food rent.»

It was a free tenure, subject to the obligation to pay _Gwestva_,
or 'food rent,' to the chief, and to some incidents which marked an
almost feudal relationship to the chief, viz.:--

(1) The _Amobr_, or marriage fee of a female.

(2) The _Ebediw_,[233] or death payment (heriot).

(3) Aid in building the king's castles.

(4) Joining his host in his enterprises _in_ the country whenever
required, _out_ of the country six weeks only in the year.[234]

These were the usual accompaniments of free tenure everywhere, and
are no special marks of serfdom.

«The _tunc pound_ in lieu of it.»

Several homesteads were grouped together in '_maenols_' or '_trevs_'
for the purpose of the payment of the _Gwestva_, as we shall see
by-and-by. This consisted in _Gwent_, of a horse-load of wheat-flour,
an ox, seven threaves of oats, a vat of honey, and 24 pence of
silver.[235] And as the money value of the _Gwestva_ was always one
pound, so that its money equivalent was known as 'the tunc pound,'
holdings of family land were spoken of, as late as the fourteenth
century, as 'paying tunc'[236]--the _gwestva_, or _tunc pound_
in lieu [p196] of it, being the distinctive tribute of the free
tribesmen.

Such was the tenure of the family land, and these were the services
of the free tribesmen.

«A free tribal tenure.»

There is no trace here of villenage, or of the servile _week-work_
of the Saxon serf. The tribesmen had no manorial lord over them but
their chief, and he was their natural and elected tribal head. So,
when Wales was finally conquered, the _tunc_ was paid to the Prince
of Wales, and no mesne lord was interposed between the tribesman and
the Prince.

Thus the freedom of the free tribesman was guarded at every point.

* * * * *

«The _aillts_ or _taeogs_.»

«Their tyddyns and ploughs.»

Turning now to the other class, the _aillts_ or _taeogs_--who in the
Latin translations of the laws are called _villani_--the key to their
position was their non-possession of tribal blood, and therefore of
the rights of kindred. They were not free-born Welshmen; though,
on the other hand, by no means to be confounded with _caeths_, or
slaves. They must be sworn men of some chieftain or lord, on whose
land they were placed, and at whose will and pleasure they were
deemed to remain.[237] Each of these taeogs had his _tyddyn_--his
homestead, with corn and cattle yard. In his tyddyn he had cattle
of his own. In South Wales several of these taeogs' homesteads were
grouped together into what was called a _taeog-trev_. Further, the
arable fields of the 'taeog-trev' were ploughed on the open-field
system by the taeogs' [p197] common plough team, to which each
contributed oxen.

«Equality in the taeog-trev.»

But the distinctive feature of the taeog-trev was that an _absolute
equality_ ruled, not between brothers or cousins of one household, as
in the case of the family land of the free tribesmen, but _throughout
the whole trev_. Family relationships were ignored. All adults in the
trev--fathers and sons, and strangers in blood--took equal shares,
with the single exception of _youngest sons_, who lived with their
fathers, and had no tyddyn of their own till the parent's death. This
principle of equality ruled everything.[238] The common ploughing
must not begin till every taeog in the trev had his place appointed
in the co-tillage.[239] Nor could there be any escheat of land in the
taeog-trev to the lord on failure of heirs; for there was nothing
hereditary about the holdings. Succession always fell (except in the
case of the youngest son, who took his father's tyddyn) to the whole
trev.[240] When there was a death there was a re-division of the
whole land, care, however, being taken to disturb the occupation of
the actual tyddyns only when absolutely needful.[241]

«_Per capita_ no account of blood relationship.»

The principle upon which the taeog's rights rested was simply this:
where there was no true Welsh blood no family rights were recognised.
In the absence of these, equality ruled between individuals; they
shared 'per capita,' and not 'per stirpes.'

«Their register land.»

The land of a taeog-trev was, as already said called 'register
land'[242]--_tir cyfrif_. [p198]

There were other incidents marking off the taeog from the free
Welshman. He might not bear arms;[243] he might not, without his
lord's consent, become a scholar, a smith, or a bard, nor sell his
swine, honey, or horse.[244] Even if he were to marry a free Welsh
woman, his descendants till the fourth, and in some cases the ninth
degree, remained taeogs. But the fourth or ninth descendant of the
free Welsh woman, as the case might be, might at last claim his five
free strips, and become the head of a new kindred.[245]

«Incidents to their tenures.»

Even the taeog was, however, under these laws, hardly a serf. With
the exception of his duty to assist the lord in the erection of
buildings, and to submit to _kylch_, _i.e._ to the lord's followers,
being quartered upon him when making a 'progress,' and to _dovraith_,
or maintenance of the chief's dogs and servants, there seems to have
been no exaction of menial personal services.[246]

«Food-rents.»

The taeogs' dues, like those of free Welshmen, consisted of fixed
summer and winter contributions of food for the chief's table.
In _Gwent_ they had to provide in winter a sow, a salted flitch,
threescore loaves of wheat bread, a tub of ale, twenty sheaves of
oats, and pence for the servants. In summer, a tub of butter and
twelve cheeses and bread.[247]

These tributes of food were called 'dawnbwyds,' gifts of food, or
'board-gifts,' and from these the taeog or register land is in one
place in the Welsh laws called _tir bwrdd_, or 'board-land' (_terra
mensalia_, [p199] or 'mensal land'[248]), a term which we shall find
again when we come to examine the Irish tribal system.

* * * * *

«The caeth or slave.»

Lastly, it must not be forgotten that beneath the taeogs, as beneath
the Saxon _geneat_ and _gebur_, were the 'caeths,' or bondmen, the
property of their owners,[249] without tyddyn and without land,
unless such were assigned to them by their lord. These caeths were,
therefore, not settled in separate trevs, but scattered about as
household slaves in the tyddyns of their masters.

IV. LAND DIVISIONS UNDER THE WELSH CODES.

There were, then, these two kinds of holdings--those of the free
tribesmen, of 'family land,' and those of the taeogs, of 'register
land.' There remains to be considered the system on which the
holdings were clustered together.

«The holdings grouped for payment of the food-rent or tunc
pound.»

The principle of this it is not very easy at first to understand,
and the difficulty is increased by a confusion of terms between the
codes. But there is one fact, by keeping hold of which the system
becomes intelligible, viz., that the grouping seems to have been
based upon the collective amount of the _food-rent_. The homesteads,
or tyddyns, each containing its four free erws, were scattered over
the country side. But they were artificially grouped together for the
purpose of the payment of the food-rent, or _tunc pound_ in lieu of
it. And by following the group which pays the [p200] 'tunc pound' as
the unit of comparison, the at first conflicting evidence falls into
its proper place.

In the Venedotian Code the _maenol_ is this unit. In the Dimetian and
Gwentian Codes this unit is the _trev_.

«In North Wales the _maenol_ the unit for food-rent.»

According to the Venedotian Code of North Wales,[250]

4 erws = 1 tyddyn.
4 tyddyns = 1 randir.
4 randirs = 1 gavael.
4 gavaels = 1 trev.
4 trevs = 1 maenol.
12 maenols and 2 supernumerary trevs = 1 cymwd (or comote).
2 cymwds = 1 cantrev (100 trevs).

«The _cymwd_ or half-hundred of twelve maenols.»

The _cymwd_ was thus a half-hundred, and each cymwd had its court,
and so was the unit of legal jurisdiction. At its head was a
_maer_ and a _canghellor_, the two officers of the chief who had
jurisdiction over it.

The twelve maenols in the cymwd were thus disposed:--

1 free maenol for the support of the office of maer.
1 free maenol for the support of the office of canghellor.
6 occupied by '_uchelwrs_,' or tribesmen.
──
Making 8 free maenols of 'family land,' from each of which a
gwestva or _tunc pound_ was paid.

The other 4 maenols were 'register land' occupied by aillts or
taeogs, paying 'dawn bwyds.'
──
12 in the 'cymwd.'[251]

Now, it must be admitted that all this singular system, arranged
according to strict arithmetical rules, _looks_ very much like a
merely theoretical arrangement, plausible on paper but impossible in
practice.

It will be found, however, that there is more [p201] probability, as
well as reason and meaning in it, than at first sight appears.

«Threescore pence of the tunc pound to each trev.»

In the first place, as regards the twelve maenols making up the
_cymwd_, there is no difficulty; four of them were taeog maenols and
eight were free maenols. But there is an obvious difficulty in the
description of the contents of each maenol. Taken literally, the
description in the Venedotian Code seems to imply that every maenol
was composed of four trevs, each of which contained four gavaels
composed of four randirs, each of which contained four tyddyns
composed of four erws. But in this case the maenol would contain
nothing but tyddyns--nothing but homesteads!--there would be no
arable and no pasture. This cannot be the true reading. A clue to the
real meaning is found in a clause which, after repeating that from
each of the eight free maenols in the cymwd the chief has a _gwestva_
yearly, 'that is a pound yearly from each of them,' goes on to say,
'Threescore pence is charged on each trev of the four that are in a
maenol, and so subdivided into quarters in succession until each erw
of the tyddyn be assessed.'[252]

«Four gavaels or holdings in each trev.»

Now, from this statement it may be assumed that there must be some
correspondence between the number of pence in the tunc pound and the
number of erws in the maenol, otherwise why speak of each erw being
assessed? But, according to the foregoing figures, there would be
1,024 erws in the maenol.[253] [p202] Each trev, which thus contains
256 erws, is to pay threescore pence. How can 256 erws be divided
into quarters till each erw is assessed? Dividing the trev by four
we get the gavael of sixty-four erws, and threescore pence divided
by four is sixty farthings. It is evident that sixty farthings
cannot be divided between sixty-four erws. But if we suppose each
trev to contain four homesteads or tyddyns, then the _gavael_[254]
of sixty-four erws would be the single holding belonging to a tyddyn
or homestead, and the four erws in the actual tyddyn (which are to
be _free_ erws) being deducted, then the sixty farthings exactly
correspond with the remaining sixty erws forming the holding of land
appendant to the tyddyn, and each erw would pay one farthing. We may
take it then as possible that each Venedotian maenol contained four
trevs, paying sixty pence each, and that each trev was a cluster of
four holdings of sixty erws each, in respect of which the holders
paid sixty farthings each to the _gwestva_, holding their actual
tyddyns free.

«A group of sixteen homesteads paid the tunc pound.»

In other words, each of the eight free maenols contained sixteen
homesteads, which sixteen homesteads were first classified in groups
of four called trevs. Or, to put the case the other way, the eight
free maenols, were divided into quarters or trevs, and these trevs
again each contained four homesteads.

It is evidently a tribal arrangement, clustering the homesteads
numerically for purposes of the payment of gwestva, and probably
the discharge of other [p203] public duties, and not a natural
territorial arrangement on the basis of the village or township.

«In South Wales the _trev_ is the unit for gwestva.»

Turning now to the Dimetian and Gwentian Codes, according to
which the free _trev_ instead of the maenol is the gwestva-paying
unit:[255] there is first the group of twelve trevs (instead of
twelve maenols) under a single maer, and under the name of _maenol_
instead of _cymwd_; but apparently all the trevs in the group
of twelve[256] are free trevs. There are other groups of seven
taeog-trevs making a taeog-maenol, and the maenol (instead of the
cymwd) has its court, and becomes the unit of legal jurisdiction.[257]

Confining attention to the free maenol, the first thing to notice is
that each of the twelve free trevs of which it was composed paid its
gwestva, or tunc pound in lieu of it. The trev, therefore, was the
gwestva-paying unit.

And as to the interior of the trev we read,--

'There are to be four randirs in the trev, from which the
king's gwestva shall be paid.'

'312 erws are to be in the randir between clear and brake, wood
and field, and wet and dry, except a supernumerary trev [the
upland has in addition].'[258]

In this case the 'tunc pound' of 240d. was paid by each trev of 4
randirs, each randir containing 312 erws, and the trev 1,248 erws in
all. The _trev_ in South Wales is, therefore, slightly larger than
the [p204] Venedotian _maenol_. Here we are bound by no law that
the pence in the gwestva should exactly correspond with the number
of erws. But in the other versions the 12 odd erws in the randir are
stated to be for 'domicilia,'[259] or buildings, and 12 erws would
allow of 3 tyddyns of the requisite 4 erws each.

This fixes for us the number of homesteads or tyddyns in the trev.
There were 3 tyddyns to each randir, and 4 randirs to the trev, and
so there were 12 tyddyns in each trev, and to each tyddyn there were
appendant 100 erws in the arable, pasture, and waste.

«The trev a cluster of twelve holdings, each paying an
ounce or score of silver, so between them the tunc pound.»

The trev which paid its tunc pound of 240d. was thus made up of 12
holdings, each paying a score pence. And as in the Latin version
of the Dimetian Laws (p. 825) a score pence is translated _uncia
argenti_, the connexion is at once made clear between the system of
grouping the holdings so as to pay the tunc pound, and the monetary
system which prevailed in Wales, viz., that according to which 20d.
made an ounce, and 12 ounces one pound. The 12 holdings each paying
a score of pence, or ounce of silver, made up between them the tunc
pound of the trev.

«The tribal households shifted among the holdings.»

This curious geometrical arrangement or classification of tyddyns and
trevs, with an equal area of land to each, is at first sight entirely
inconsistent with the division of the family land among the heirs of
the holder, inasmuch as the great grandchildren when they divided the
original family holding must, one would suppose, have held smaller
shares than their great [p205] grandfather. And there is only one
answer to this. It would have been so if the tribe, and the families
composing it, were permanently fixed and settled on the same land,
and pursuing a regular agriculture, with an increasing population
within certain boundaries. But the Welsh were still a _pastoral_
people, and, as we shall see when we come to examine the Irish tribal
system, while the homesteads and land divisions were fixed, the
occupants were shifted about by the chiefs from time to time, each
sept, or clan, or family receiving at each rearrangement a certain
number of tyddyns or homesteads, according to certain tribal rules of
blood relationship of a very intricate character.

This permanence of the geographical divisions and homesteads, and
shifting of the tribal households whenever occasion required it, was
only possible with a pastoral and scanty population. Long before the
fourteenth century the households were settled in their homesteads,
geometrical regularity had ceased, and the land was divided and
subdivided into irregular fractions. This is the state of things
disclosed in the _Record of Carnarvon_. But in the tenth century,
according to the Welsh laws, the old tribal rules were apparently
still in force.

«The clustering of households the distinctive mark of the
tribal system.»

Without pretending to have mastered all the details of these obscure
tribal arrangements, the point to be noted is that the scattering of
the tyddyns all over the country side, and the clustering of them
by fours and sixteens, or twelves, into the group which was the
unit paying the gwestva or tunc pound, and again into clusters of
twelve or thirteen[260] under a [p206] maer, as the unit of civil
jurisdiction, were obviously distinctive features arising from the
tribal holding of land, and that the system was adopted apparently to
facilitate the division of the land among the families in the tribe
somewhat in the same way as in the open field system the division
of the arable land by turf balks into actual erws facilitated the
division of the ploughed land among the contributors to the plough
team.

* * * * *

Bearing this in mind we may now turn back to the Domesday Survey,
and compare its description of the land system of _Gwent_ and
_Archenfield_ with the results obtained from the Welsh laws.

In order, however, to make this comparison the Welsh terms must be
translated into Latin, otherwise it will be difficult to recognise
the trev, and maer, and maenol, and gwestva in the Domesday
description.

«Latin equivalent of tribal words in the Domesday Survey.»

The before-mentioned Latin version of the Dimetian Code, the MS.
of which dates from the early thirteenth century, will do this for
us.[261]

It translates _trev_, the unit of the tunc pound, by _villa_. It
takes the Welsh word 'maenol' as equivalent to _manor_, and indeed
it did resemble the Saxon and Norman manor in this, that it was
the unit of the jurisdiction of each single steward or _villicus_
of the chief. This officer was called in Welsh the _maer_, which
was translated into the Latin _præpositus_. He did to some extent
resemble the English præpositus, but he differed in this--that
instead of being set over the 'trev' or 'villata' of a single manor,
[p207] the Welsh maer was, as we have seen, set over a number
of 'villas' or trevs--thirteen free trevs or seven taeog-trevs,
in Gwent--each free trev of which rendered its 'tunc pound' or
'gwestva,' and each taeog or villein-trev its 'dawn-bwyd' of food.

Now, this is precisely what is described in the Domesday Survey of
Gwent.

«The clusters of _villas_ under a _præpositus_ paying
food-rent.»

There are four groups of thirteen or fourteen 'villas' or trevs, each
group under a 'præpositus' or maer; and these four groups, which were
in fact Gwentian 'maenols,' rendered as gwestva a food-rent amounting
to 47 sextars of honey, 40 pigs, 41 cows, and 28 shillings for hawks.

In the district of _Archenfield_ the clusters of trevs do not
appear, but the food-rents were similar--_honey_ being a marked item
throughout.

«Honey rents.»

In the Welsh gwestva, also, _honey_ was an important element. It is
mentioned as such in the Welsh codes, and it is conspicuous also in
the Domesday Survey both of Gwent and Archenfield.

«Importance of honey.»

Its importance is shown by the fact that in the Gwentian Code a
separate section was devoted to 'The Law of Bees.' It begins as
follows:--'The origin of bees is from Paradise, and on account of the
sin of man they came from thence, and they were blessed by God, and,
therefore, the mass cannot be without the wax.'[262]

The price of a swarm of bees in August was equal to the price of an
ox ready for the yoke, _i.e._ ten or fifteen times its present value,
in proportion to the ox.

Honey had, in fact, two uses, besides its being the [p208]
substitute for the modern sugar--one for the making of mead, which
was three times the price of beer; the other for the wax for candles
used in the chief's household, and on the altar of the mass.[263] The
lord of a taeog had the right of buying up all his honey;[264] and
in North Wales, according to the Venedotian Code, _all_ the honey of
the king's aillts or taeogs was reserved for the court.[265] The mead
brewer was also an important royal officer in all the three divisions
of Wales.

It is not surprising, then, that the tribute of honey, which formed
so important a part of the Welsh gwestva, should be retained as an
item in the tribute of the trevs of Gwent after their conquest by
Harold.

V. EARLIER EVIDENCE OF THE PAYMENT OF WELSH GWESTVA, OR FOOD-RENT.

From the combined evidence of the Domesday Survey and the 'Ancient
Laws of Wales,' the fact has now been learned that in the eleventh
century, as it had done previously probably for 400 years, the river
Wye separated by a sharp line the Saxon land, on which the manorial
land system prevailed, from the Welsh land, on which the Welsh tribal
land system prevailed. On the one side of the river, at the date
of the Survey, clusters of scattered homesteads of free Welshmen
contributed food-rents in the form of gwestva to the conqueror of
their chief, and taeogs their dawn-bwyds. On the other side the
_villata_ of geneats and geburs, besides paying gafol, performed
servile week-work upon the demesne lands of the lord of the [p209]
village or manor. It may be well, however, to seek for some earlier
evidence of the payment of gwestva on the Welsh side of the river.

Documentary evidence of the manorial system on the Saxon side was
forthcoming as early as the seventh century, in the laws of King Ine.
How far back can documentary evidence be traced of the Welsh system?

«The Book of St. Chad. Charters of the eighth century
mention food-rent.»

In the possession of the church of Llandaff there was long preserved
an ancient MS. of the Gospels in Latin, called the Book of St.
Chad.[266] This MS. appears to date back to the eighth century. And
it was for long the custom to enter on its margin a record of solemn
compacts sworn upon it, as in the similar case of the Book of Deer.
It thus happens to contain (_inter alia_) two short records of grants
to the church of St. Teilo (or Llandaff). One of these gifts is as
follows:[267]--

'This writing showeth that Ris and the family of Grethi gave to God
and St. Teilo, _Treb guidauc_. . . and this is its census: 40
loaves and a wether sheep in summer; and in winter, 40 loaves, a hog,
and 40 dishes of butter. . . .'

Another is in these words:--

'This writing showeth that Ris and Hirv . . . gave Bracma as far as
_Hirmain Guidauc_, from the desert of Gelli Irlath as far as Camdubr,
its "hichet" [food-rent?], 3 score loaves and a wether sheep, [p210]
and a vessel of butter. And then follow the witnesses.'[268]

«Evidently of Taeog-trevs.»

Rhys ap Ithael, the donor in these two cases, was king of the
district of Glewyssig in the middle of the ninth century, about
the time of Alfred the Great. Now, a king or chief would hardly
be likely to transfer to the church of Llandaff a free trev and
the gwestva paid therefrom. This would have involved the severance
of free members of the tribe from the tribe, to put them under an
ecclesiastical lordship. We should expect then to find that the Trev
'Guidauc' was a _taeog-trev_ on the chief's own land, and according
to the description given in the grants, the census corresponds not
with the gwestva of a free trev under the Welsh laws, but with the
'dawn-bwyd' of the taeog-trev.

The food tribute in these grants was divided into summer and winter
payments, and so, as we have seen, were the dawn-bwyds of the taeogs
in the Welsh laws; the scores of loaves, the sow, the wether sheep,
and the tubs of butter, correspond also with the food-gifts from
the taeog-trevs, as described in the laws, though with varying
quantities.[269]

These grants in the margin of the Book of St. Chad may, therefore
be taken as evidence that the system of food-rents was prevalent in
Wales in the middle of the ninth century.

«Survival of Welsh customs in Wessex.»

There is still earlier evidence of the prevalence of the system of
food-rents where we should little expect to find it, viz., in the
laws of King Ine. Ine being King of Wessex, and Wessex shading off as
it [p211] were into the old British districts both south and east
of the Severn, it was but natural that some old Welsh or British
customs should have survived in certain places; as _Walisc_ men here
and there survived amongst the conquering English. These Welshmen
were allowed under Ine's laws to hold half-hides and hides of land.
We have only to examine the Domesday Survey for Gloucestershire and
Herefordshire to find traces even at that date of survivals of Welsh
and Saxon customs in exceptional cases, even outside those districts
which had only just been conquered.

In some places where Saxon customs had long prevailed a little
community of Welshmen remained under Welsh customs. In other places
the customs were partly Welsh and partly English.[270] [p212]

«Food-rents mentioned in the laws of Ine in the seventh
century.»

In precisely the same way survivals such as these must have existed
in King Ine's time. There must have been then, as 400 years
afterwards, at the date of the Survey, places in Wessex where
Welshmen predominated and Welsh customs survived. There must have
been, in other words, manors which paid Welsh gwestva instead of
Saxon services. There is a remarkable passage in King Ine's laws
which can only be thus explained. On the same page, and in the
next paragraph but two to the law about the yard-land set _to
'gafol'_ and _to 'weorc,'_[271] there is a clause apparently out of
place, which begins abruptly with this heading: '_Æt x. hidum to
fostre_.'[272] In the Latin version this is rendered 'De x. hides ad
corredium.'[273] Now, there is a passage in a charter of Louis VII.
of France, anno 1157, given by Du Cange under the word '_Corredium_,'
in which certain 'villas' are freed from the exaction of 'quædam
convivia, quæ vulgo Coreede vel _Giste_ vocantur.' This definition
of corredium and of 'giste,' as a contribution of food exacted from
tenants, corresponds exactly to the Welsh 'gwestva.' And the Saxon
word _fostre_ also means food. So that this heading to the passage
in question may be translated--'from x. hides paying gwestva.'
And so interpreted the following list [p213] becomes perfectly
intelligible, for it describes what the gwestva consisted of.

_From 10 hides_--

x. dolia of honey.
ccc. loaves.
xii. amphora of Welsh ale.
xxx. of clear [do.]
ii. oxen or x. wethers,
x. geese.
xx. hens.
x. cheeses.
A full amphora of butter.
v. salmons of xx. pounds weight.
c. eels.

Now, if the system of gwestva payment or food-rent described in this
passage of the laws of King Ine be evidence of the survival of the
Welsh custom after the Saxon conquest, it is at the same time equally
clear documentary evidence of the seventh century that the system
of gwestva or food-rents was prevalent outside Wales in the west of
Britain before the Saxon conquest.[274]

FOOTNOTES:

[203] _Liber Landavensis_, p. 545. _Ordericus Vitalis_, ii. 190. It
may have been conquered in 1049, after Gruffydd and Irish pirates
had, according to Florence, crossed the Wye and burned 'Dymedham'
(see Freeman's _Norman Conquest_, ii. App. P); but most likely
shortly before A.D. 1065, under which date is the following entry in
the Saxon Chronicle:--

'A. 1065. In this year before Lammas, Harold the Eorl ordered a
building to be erected in Wales at Portskewith _after he had subdued
it_, and there he gathered much goods and thought to have King Edward
there for the purpose of hunting; but when it was all ready, then
went Cradock, Griffin's son, with the whole force which he could
procure, and slew almost all the people who there had been building.'

[204] _Domesday_, i. 162 _a_.

[205] _Ibid._ 162 _a_ _et seq._

[206] 185_b_. See also Freeman's _Norman Conquest_, ii. App. SS, p.
685.

[207] _Domesday_, i. 179 _a_.

[208] See _Leges Wallice_, p. 812. 'De qualibet villa rusticana debet
habere ovem fetam vel 4 denarios in cibos accipitrum.' The 54 villæ
at 4d. each would make xviii s. (? whether xxviii. by an extra x. in
error).

[209] _Domesday_, i. 162 _a_.

[210] _Domesday_, i. 162 _a_ (last entry).

[211] F. 179 _a_.

[212] F. 181 _a_.

[213] So f. 185_b_: 'In Castellaria de _Carlion_ . . . iii. Walenses
_lege Walensi viventes_ cum iii. car. et ii. bord. cum dim. car. et
reddunt iiii. sextar. mellis.'

[214] _Ancient Laws of Wales_, p. 373.

[215] _Description of Wales_, chap. cxvii.

[216] C. x.

[217] C. viii. The district of Snowdon afforded the best pasturage
and Anglesey the best corn-growing land.

[218] C. viii. and xvii. In the Isle of Man four oxen were yoked
abreast to the plough, Train's _Isle of Man_, ii. p. 241.

[219] C. viii.

[220] C. xvii.

[221] _Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales._ Record Commission,
1841. See preface by _Aneurin Owen_.

[222] _Venedotian Code. Ancient Laws of Wales_, pp. 81–2, and see
pp. 644–6 (_Welsh Laws_). Mr. Skene, in his chapter on _The Tribe in
Wales_ in his _Celtic Scotland_, iii. pp. 200, 201, does not seem
to have grasped fully the distinction between the _free tribesmen_
and their _family land_ on the one hand and the Aillts and Taeogs
with their _geldable_ or _register_ land on the other. Everything,
however, turns upon this. Compare _Welsh Laws_, xiv. s. 31 and s. 32
(pp. 739–741), where the distinction is again clearly stated.

[223] _Ancient Laws of Wales_, p. 638 (s. 45).

[224] _Id._ 651 (s. 83).

[225] P. 639 (s. 51).

[226] Pp. 81–2.

[227] See the surveys in the _Record of Carnarvon_ (14th century),
where the holdings are sometimes called '_Weles_,' thus:--'In eadem
villa sunt tria _Wele_ libera, viz. _Wele_ Yarthur ap Ruwon Wele Joz.
ap Ruwon and _Wele_ Keneth ap Ruwon. Et sunt heredes predicte Wele
de Yarthur ap Ruwon, Eign. ap Griffiri and Hoell. ap Griffri et alii
coheredes sui;' and so on of the other Weles (p. 11). This is the
common form of the survey _passim_.

[228] _Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, p. 741.

[229] _Id._ pp. 82 and 740.

[230] The fullest description of the rules of '_family land_' are
those in the _Venedotian Code_, c. xii., _The Law of Brothers for
Land_, pp. 81 _et seq._ See also _Welsh Laws_, Book IX. xxxi. p. 536;
also Book XIV. xxxi. pp. 739 _et seq._

[231] _Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, Glossary, p. 1001.

[232] The _Record of Carnarvon_, _passim_. Thus 'the _Wele_ of
So-and-so, the son of So-and-so, and the heirs of this Wele are
So-and-so.'

[233] This was not payable if an investiture fee had been paid by the
person dying.

[234] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 92 and 93.

[235] _Id._ p. 375.

[236] _Book of Carnarvon_, _passim_.

[237] Sometimes an '_uchelwr_' or tribesman had taeogs under him.
_Ancient Laws, &c._, pp. 88, 339, and 573. See also _Id._ p. 646.
_Welsh Laws._

[238] _Id._ pp. 82 and 536. _Welsh Laws_, s. xxxii.

[239] _Id._ p. 376.

[240] _Id._ p. 82.

[241] _Id._ p. 82.

[242] It was sometimes called 'tir kyllidin,' or geldable land, as
before stated.

[243] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 673.

[244] Pp. 36–7 and 212–13.

[245] _Id._ pp. 88 and 646.

[246] Pp. 93 and 376.

[247] P. 375–6. _Gwentian Code_, 11, xxxv.

[248] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 697.

[249] P. 294 (Dimetian Code). 'The _caeth_--there is no _galanas_
(death-fine) for him, only payment of his "werth" to his master _like
the "werth" of a beast_.'

[250] _Ancient Laws, &c._, pp. 90–1.

[251] _Id._ p. 91, s. 14.

[252] _Id._ p 91, s. 15. In _Leges Wallice_, p. 825, 'score pence'
or 'score of silver' is translated 'uncia argenti;' ∴ 3 _uncie agri_
should equal a '_trev_.' See _Liber Landavensis_, pp. 70 and 317.

[253]

4 erw = tyddyn.
16 erw = randir.
64 erw = gavael.
256 erw = trev.
1024 erw = maenol.

[254] The word _Gabail_ still in Scotch Gaelic retains its meaning of
_a farm_. The word is pronounced '_gāv´-ul_.'

[255] _Ancient Laws_, pp. 261. 'Four randirs are to be in the trev
from which the king's gwestva is to be paid' (s. 5).

[256] In upland districts there were 13 trevs in the maenol, p. 375.

[257] There were seven taeog-trevs in taeog-maenols, and each
contained three randirs, in two of which there were three
taeog-tyddyns to each, the third being pasture for the other two.
There were therefore six taeog holdings in each taeog-trev. _Ancient
Laws, &c._, pp. 375 and 829.

[258] Pp. 374–5.

[259] P. 829. 'In randir continentur ccc. et xii. acre: ut in ccc.
acris, araturam, et pascua et focalia possessor habeat; inde xii.
domicilia.' See also p. 790. 'Id est xii. domicilia.' The Dimetian
Code has it 'space for buildings on the 12 erws' (p. 263).

[260] 'There are to be thirteen trevs in every maenol, and the
thirteenth of these is the supernumerary trev.' _Gwentian Code_, p.
375.

[261] _Leges Wallice, Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 771 _et seq._

[262] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 360.

[263] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 325.

[264] _Id._ p. 213.

[265] _Id._ p. 92 (s. 5).

[266] _Liber Landavensis_, p. 271, App., and p. 615.

[267] For the translation see p. 616. For the original, p. 272, as
follows: 'Ostendit ista scriptio quod dederunt Ris et luith Grethi
_Treb guidauc_ i malitiduck Cimarguich, et hic est census ejus,
douceint torth hamaharuin in irham, haduceint torth in irgaem, ha
huch, ha douceint mannudenn deo et sancto elindo. . . .'

[268] For the translation see p. 617; for the original, p. 272.

[269] See _Leges Wallice_, ii. 14, '_De Daunbwyt_' [Dono Cibi].
_Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, p. 790.

[270] Fol. 162 _b_. 'In _Cirencester_ hundred King Edward had five
hides of land. In demesne v. ploughs and xxxi. villani with x.
ploughs, xiii. servi and x. bordarii, &c. The Queen has the wool of
the sheep. T. R. E.: this manor rendered iii.½ modii of corn, and of
barley iii. modii, and of honey vi.½ sextars, and ix.l. and v.s., and
3,000 loaves for dogs.'

This is very much like a survival of the Welsh food-rents at one of
the cities conquered by the Saxons in 577.

In some other places out of Archenfield there was a mixture of Welsh
and English customs.

The manor of _Westwode_ (f. 181) was held by St. Peter of Gloucester.
It contained vi. hides, 'one of which had Welsh custom, the others
English.' A Welshman in this manor had half a carucate, and rendered
i. sextar of honey.

And at _Clive_ (f. 179 _b_), 8 Welshmen had 8 teams, and rendered x.½
sextars of honey and vi.s. v.d., and in the forest of the king was
land of this manor, which T. R. E. had rendered vi. sextars of honey,
and vi. sheep with lambs.

These instances are sufficient to show that in Herefordshire, as in
Gloucestershire, in the newly conquered districts, the old Welsh dues
of honey, sheep, &c., remained undisturbed; while in the districts
which had long been under Saxon rule, in some few cases there was a
mixture of services, and in others the Saxon services of ploughing on
the lord's demesne had become general.

It may be assumed that when the services were thus described contrary
to the usual routine of the Domesday surveyors, it was because
there was something unusual about them; and that in the majority of
instances where Saxon customs prevailed, no description was deemed
needful. Compare the Domesday survey of Dorsetshire--a portion of the
'West Wales'--where the manors in the royal demesne are grouped so
that each group renders a 'firma unius noctis,' or a 'firma dimidiæ
noctis.'

[271] _Laws of Ine_, No. 67. Thorpe, p. 63.

[272] _Id._ No. 70. Thorpe, p. 63.

[273] _Id._ p. 504.

[274] For much curious information respecting the Welsh system of
tenures, see Taylor's _History of Gavel-kind_. London, 1663.

[p214]

CHAPTER VII.
_THE TRIBAL SYSTEM_ (_continued_).

I. THE TRIBAL SYSTEM IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND.

The Welsh evidence brings us back to a period parallel with the Saxon
era marking the date of King Ine's laws. The Welsh land system was
then clearly distinguished from the Saxon by the absence of the manor
with its village community in serfdom, and by the presence instead
of it of the scattered homesteads (_tyddyns_) of the tribesmen and
taeogs, grouped together for the purpose of the payment to the chief
of the food-rents, or their money equivalents.

Further light may possibly be obtained from observation of the tribal
system in a still earlier economic stage, though at a much later
date, in Ireland.

«Irish land divisions closely resemble the Welsh.»

Now, first--without going out of our depth as we might easily do in
the Irish evidence--it may readily be shown, sufficiently for the
present purpose, that the system of land divisions, or rather of the
grouping of homesteads into artificial clusters with arithmetical
precision, was prevalent in Ireland outside the Pale as late as the
times of Queen Elizabeth and [p215] James I., when an effort was
made to substitute English for Irish customs and laws.

There are extant several surveys of parts of Ireland of that date
in which are to be recognised arrangements of homesteads almost
precisely similar to those of the Welsh Codes. And further, the
names of the tenants being given, we can see that they were _blood
relations_ like the Welsh tribesmen, with a carefully preserved
genealogy guarding the fact of their relationship and consequent
position in the tribe.

The best way to realise this fact may be to turn to actual examples.

According to an inquisition[275] made of the county of _Fermanagh_
in 1 James I. (1603), the county was found to be divided into seven
equal baronies, the description of one of which may be taken as a
sample.

«Clusters of _taths_ or _tyddyns_.»

'The temporal land within this barony is all equally divided
into 7½ _ballybetaghes_ [literally _victuallers'_ towns,[276]
or units for purposes of the food-rents like the Welsh
_trevs_], each containing 4 quarters, each of those quarters
containing 4 tathes [corresponding with the Welsh _tyddyns_],
and each of those tathes aforesaid to be 30 acres country
measure.'

Of '_spiritual_ lands' there are two parish churches, one
having 4 quarters, the other 1 quarter.

Also there are 'other small freedoms containing small parcels
of land, some belonging to the spiritualty, and others being
part of the _mensal_ lands allotted to Macgwire (the chief).'

This exactly corresponds with the arrangement for the purposes of
the gwestva of the Welsh _tyddyns_ in groups of 4 and 16, as in the
Venedotian Code. [p216]

There is also a _Survey of County Monaghan_ in 33 Elizabeth[277]
(1591), in which the names of the holders of the _tates_ in each
_bailebiatagh_, or group of 16, are given. Thus, again, to take a
single example,--

«Example in Co. Monaghan.»

_Balleclonangre_, a ballibeatach containing xvi. _tates_.

To Breine McCabe Fitz Alexander 5 tates.
To Edmond McCabe Fitz Alexander 1 tate.
To Cormocke McCabe 2 tates.
To Breine Kiagh McCabe 2 tates.
To Edmond boy, McCabe 1 tate.
To Rosse McCabe McMelaghen 1 tate.
To Gilpatric McCowla McCabe 1 tate.
To Toole McAlexander McCabe 1 tate.
To James McTirlogh McCabe 1 tate.
To Arte McMelaghlin Dale McMahon 1 tate.
──
16

A fresh survey of the same district was made by Sir John Davies in
1607;[278] the record for this same bailebiatagh is as follows:--

Patrick M'Brian M'Cabe being found by a jury 1. Lissenarte.
the legitimate son of Brian M'Cabe 2. Cremoyle.
Fitz-Alexander, in demesne, 5 tates 3. Sharaghanadan.
4. Nealoste.
5. Tirehannely.

Patrick M'Edmond M'Cabe Fitz-Alexander, in 6. Curleighe.
demesne, 1 tate

Cormock M'Cabe, in demesne, 2 tates 7. Aghenelogh.
8. Derraghlin.

Rosse M'Arte Moyle, in demesne, 2 tates 9. Benage.
10. Cowlerasack.

James M'Edmond boy M'Cabe, in demesne, 1 tate 11. Tollagheisce.

Colloe M'Art Oge M'Mahowne, in demesne, 1 tate 12. Dromegeryne.

Patrick M'Art Oge M'Mahowne, in regard there 13. Corevanane.
is good hope of his honest deserts, and that
the first patentee disclaimeth, in demesne,
1 tate

Toole M'Toole M'Alexander M'Cabe, in demesne, 14. Turrgher.
1 tate

James M'Tirleogh M'Cabe, in demesne, 1 tate 15.

Brian M'Art Oge M'Mahowne, in demesne, 1 tate 16.

«The tribesmen blood relations.»

Now, by comparison it will be seen that at both dates there were
sixteen _tates_ in the bailebiatagh, and that the holders were
evidently blood relations. In some cases the name of a son takes the
place of his father (the genealogy being kept up), and in others new
tenants appear.

«The _tates_ family holdings.»

There is also reason to suppose that these _tates_ were family
homesteads (like the _tyddyns_ of the Welsh 'family land'), with
smaller internal divisions, and embracing a considerable number
of lesser households. The fact that one person only is named as
holding the tate, or the two tates, as the case may be, suggests
that he is so named as the common ancestor or head of the chief
household representing all the belongings to the tate. _Within_
the tate the subdivision of land seems to have been carried to an
indefinite extent. The following extract from Sir John Davies' report
will probably give the best account of the actual and, to his eye,
somewhat confused condition of things within the tates, as he found
them. It relates to the county of Fermanagh, and is in the form of a
letter to the Earl of Salisbury, dated 1607:[279]-- [p218]

«Sir John Davies' description of the septs.»

For the several possessions of all these lands we took this
course to find them out, and set them down for his lordship's
information. We called unto us the inhabitants of every barony
severally. . . We had present certain of the clerks or scholars
of the country, who know all the _septs_ and _families_, and
all their branches, and _the dignity[280] of one sept above
another_, and what families or persons _were chief of every
sept_, and who were _next_, and who were of _a third rank_,
and so forth, till they descended to the most inferior man in
all the baronies; moreover, they took upon them to tell what
quantity of land every man ought to have by the custom of their
country, which is of the nature of gavelkind. Whereby, as their
septs or families did multiply, their possessions have been
from time to time divided and subdivided and broken into so
many small parcels as almost every acre of land hath a several
owner, which termeth himself a lord, and his portion of land
his country: notwithstanding, as McGuyre himself had a chiefry
over all the country, and some demesnes that did ever pass to
him only who carried that title; so was there a chief of every
sept who had certain services, duties, or demesnes, that ever
passed to the tannist of that sept, and never was subject to
division. When this was understood, we first inquired whether
one or more septs did possess that barony which we had in hand.
That being set down, we took the names of the chief parties
of the sept or septs that did possess the baronies, and also
the names of such as were second in them, and so of others
that were inferior unto them again in rank and in possessions.
Then, whereas every barony containeth seven ballibetaghs and
a half, we caused the name of every ballibetagh to be written
down; and thereupon we made inquiry what portion of land or
services every man held in every ballibetagh, beginning with
such first as had land and services; and after naming such as
had the greatest quantity of land, and so descending unto such
as possess only two taths; then we stayed, for lower we could
not go,[281] because we knew the purpose of the State was only
to establish such freeholders as are fit to serve on juries;
at least, we had found by experience in the county of Monaghan
that such as had less than two taths allotted to them had not
40s. freehold per annum _ultra reprisalem_; and therefore were
not of competent ability for that service; and yet the number
of freeholders named in the county was above 200.

Sir John Davies, in the same report, also gives a graphic description
of the difficulty he had in [p219] obtaining from the aged Brehon of
the district the roll on which were inscribed the particulars of the
various holdings, including those on the demesne or mensal land of
the chief.[282]

It is difficult to form a clear conception of what the tribes, septs,
and families were, and what were their relations to one another. But
for the present purpose it is sufficient to understand that a sept
consisted of a number of actual or reputed _blood relations_, bearing
the same family names, and bound together by other and probably more
artificial ties, such as common liability for the payment of _eric_,
or blood fines.

A curious example of what is virtually an actual sept is found in the
State Papers of James I.

«Example of a Cumberland sept.»

In 1606 a sept of the 'Grames,' under their chief 'Walter, the gude
man of Netherby,' being troublesome on the Scottish border, were
transplanted from Cumberland to Roscommon; and in the schedule to
the articles arranging for this transfer, it appears that the sept
consisted of 124 persons, nearly all bearing the surname of _Grame_.
They were divided into families, seventeen of which were set down as
possessed of 20l. and upwards, four of 10l. and upwards, six of the
poorer sort, six of no abilities, while as dependants there were four
servants of the name of Grame, and about a dozen of irregular hangers
on to the sept.[283]

The sept was a human swarm. The chief was the Queen Bee round whom
they clustered. The territory occupied by a whole sept was divided
[p220] among the inferior septs which had swarmed off it. And a sort
of feudal relation prevailed between the parent and the inferior
septs.

There can probably, on the whole, be no more correct view of the
Irish tribal system in its essence and spirit than the simple
generalisation made by Sir John Davies himself, from the various and,
in some sense, inconsistent and entangled facts which bewildered him
in detail.[284]

«The chiefs and the tanists.»

First, as regards the chiefs, whether of tribes or septs, and their
demesne lands, he writes:[285]--

'1. By the Irish custom of tanistry the chieftains of every
country and the chief of every sept had no longer estate than
for life in their chieferies, the inheritance whereof did rest
in no man. And these chieferies, though they had some portions
of land allotted unto them, did consist chiefly in cuttings and
coscheries and other Irish exactions, whereby they did spoil
and impoverish the people at their pleasure. And when their
chieftains were dead their sons or next heirs did not succeed
them, but their _tanists_, who were elective, and purchased
their elections by show of hands.'

«Division of holdings among tribesmen.»

Next, as to tribesmen and their inferior tenancies:--

'2. And by the Irish custom of gavelkind the inferior tenancies
were partible amongst all the males of the sept; and after
partition made, if any one of the sept had died his portion was
not divided among his sons, but the chief of the sept made a
new partition of all the lands belonging to that sept, and gave
every one his part according to his antiquity.'

«The 'shuffling and changing' and frequent redistributions.»

These two Irish customs (Sir John Davies continues) made all their
possessions uncertain, being shuffled and changed and removed so
often from one to another, by new elections and partitions, 'which
uncertainty of estates hath been the true cause of desolation and
barbarism in this land.' [p221]

These were obviously the main features of an earlier stage of the
tribal system than we have seen in Wales. It was the system which
fitted easily into the artificial land divisions and clusters
of homesteads. And this method of clustering homesteads, in its
turn, not only facilitated, but even made possible those frequent
redistributions which mark this early stage of the tribal system.

The method of artificial clustering was apparently widely spread
through Ireland, as we found it in the various divisions of Wales.

«The system ancient»

It also was ancient; for according to an early poem, supposed by Dr.
Sullivan[286] to belong 'in substance though not in language to the
sixth or seventh century,' Ireland was anciently divided into 184
'Tricha Céds' (30 hundreds [of cows]), each of which contained 30
_bailes_ (or townlands); 5,520 _bailes_ in all.

The _baile_ or townland is thus described:--

'A baile sustains 300 cows,
Four full herds therein may roam.

«and pastoral.»

The poem describes the _bailes_ (or townlands) as divided into 4
quarters, _i.e._ a quarter for each of the 4 herds of 75 cows each.

«Ballys and quarters.»

The poem further explains that the _baile_ or townland was equal to
12 'seisrighs' (by some translated 'plough-lands'), and that the
latter land measure is 120 acres,[287] making the quarter equal
to three 'seisrighs' [p222] or 360 acres. But this latter mode
of measurement is probably a later innovation introduced with the
growth of arable farms. The old system was division into quarters,
and founded on the prevalent pastoral habits of the people. In the
earliest records Connaught is found to be divided into _ballys_, and
the ballys into _quarters_, which were generally distinguished by
certain mears and bounds.[288] The quarters were sometimes called
'_cartrons_,' but in other cases the cartron was the quarter of a
quarter, _i.e._ a 'tate.' O'Kelly's county in 1589 was found to
contain 665½ _quarters_ of 120 acres each.[289]

Lastly, it may be mentioned that in the re-allotment of the lands
in Roscommon to the sept of the _Grames_ on their removal from
Cumberland each family of the better class was to receive a _quarter_
of land containing 120 acres.[290]

«The system in Scotland»

The evidence as regards Scotland is scanty, but Mr. Skene, in his
interesting chapter on 'the tribe in Scotland,' has collected
together sufficient evidence to show that the tribal organisation in
the Gaelic districts was closely analogous to that in Ireland.[291]

«and in the Isle of Man.»

There are also indications that the Isle of Man was anciently divided
into ballys and quarters.[292] [p223]

The old tribal division of the ballys into 'quarters' and 'tates'
has left distinct and numerous traces in the names of the present
townlands in Ireland.

Annexed is an example of an ancient bally divided into quarters.
It is taken from the Ordnance Survey of county Galway. Two of the
quarters, now townlands, still bear the names of 'Cartron' and
'Carrow,' or 'Quarter,' as do more than 600 townlands in various
parts of Ireland.[293] This example will show that the quarters were
actual divisions.

Scattered over the bally were the sixteen 'tates' or homesteads, four
in each quarter; and in some counties--Monaghan especially--they are
still to be traced as the centres of modern townlands, which bear the
names borne by the 'tates' three hundred years ago, as registered
in Sir John Davies' survey. There is still often to be found in the
centre of the modern townland the circular and partly fortified
enclosure[294] where the old 'tate' stood, and the lines of the
present divisions of the fields often wind themselves round it in a
way which proves that it was once their natural centre.

Moreover, the names of the 'tates' still preserved in the present
townlands bear indirect witness to the [p224] reality of the old
tribal redistributions and shiftings of the households from one
'tate' to another. They seldom are compounded of personal names. They
generally are taken from some local natural feature. The homestead
was permanent. The occupants were shifting.

Again, an example taken from the Ordnance Survey--from county
Monaghan--will most clearly illustrate these points, and help the
reader to appreciate the reality of the tribal arrangements.

In the survey of the barony of 'Monoughan'[295] made in 1607, the
'_half ballibetogh called Correskallie_' is described as containing
eight 'tates,' the Irish names of which are recorded. They are given
below, and an English translation of the names is added[296] in
brackets to illustrate their peculiar and generally non-personal
character.

In the half ballibetogh called Correskallie (Round Hill of the
Story-tellers)--

4 tates Corneskelfee (? Correskallie).
Correvolen (Round Hill of the Mill).
Corredull (Round Hill of the Black Fort).
Aghelick (Field of the Badger).

4 tates Dromore (the Great Ridge).
Killagharnane (Wood of the Heap).
Fedowe (Black Wood).
Clonelolane (Lonan's Meadow).

A reduced map of this ancient 'half-ballibetogh,' as it appears now
on the large Ordnance Survey, is appended, in which the names of the
old 'tates' appear, with but little change, in the modern townlands.
The remains of the circular enclosures [p225] marking the sites
of the old 'tates' are still to be traced in one or two cases. The
acreage of each townland is given on the map in English measures. It
will be remembered that in Monaghan 60 Irish acres were allotted to
each tate instead of the usual 30.

[Illustration: _Example of an ancient_ 'Bally' _or_
'Townland' _still divided into_ 'Quarters' _which are now
called 'Townlands,' taken from sheet 103 of the Ordnance
Survey of Co. Galway_.]

[Illustration: MAP of the 'half-Bally' _OF_ CORRESKALLIE
Co. Monaghan.]

This evidence will be sufficient to prove that the arithmetical
clustering of the homesteads was real, and that, as in Wales, so in
Ireland, under the tribal system the homesteads were scattered over
the country, and not grouped together in villages and towns.[297]

Passing to the methods of agriculture, it is obvious, that, even in
a pastoral state, the growth of corn cannot be wholly neglected. We
have seen that in Wales there was agriculture, and that, so far as it
extended, the ploughing was conducted on an open-field system, and by
joint-ploughing.

It was precisely so also in Ireland, and it had been from time
immemorial.

«Open fields.»

It is stated in the 'Book of the Dun Cow' (_Lebor na Huidre_),
compiled in the _seventh_ century by the Abbot of Clanmacnois, known
to us in an Irish MS. of the year 1100, that 'there was not a ditch,
nor fence, nor stone wall round land till came the period of the sons
of Aed Slane [in the seventh century], but only smooth fields.' Add
to this the passage pointed out by Sir H. S. Maine[298] in the 'Liber
Hymnorum' (a MS. probably of the eleventh century), viz.-- [p226]

'Very numerous were the inhabitants of Ireland at this time
[the time of the sons of Aed Slane in the seventh century],
and their number was so great that they only received in the
partition 3 _lots of_ 9 _ridges_ [immaire] _of land_, namely 9
ridges of bog land, 9 of forest, and 9 of arable land.'

«The _run-rig_ or _Rundale_ system in Ireland and Scotland.»

Taking those two passages together, and noting that the word for
'ridges' (_immaire_) is the same word (_imire_, or _iomair_[299]) now
used in Gaelic for a ridge of land, and that the recently remaining
system of strips and balks in Ireland and Scotland is still known as
the 'run-rig' system, it becomes clear that whatever there was of
arable land in any particular year lay in open fields divided into
ridges or strips.

There are, further, some passages in the _Brehon Laws_ which
show that at least among the lower grades of tribesmen there was
joint-ploughing. And this arose not simply from 'joint-tenancy' of
undivided land by co-heirs,[300] but from the fact that the tribesmen
of lower rank only possessed _portions_ of the requisites of a
plough,[301] just as was the case with Welsh tribesmen and the Saxon
holders of yard-lands.

There can be little doubt, therefore, that we must picture the
households of tribesmen occupying the four 'tates' in each 'quarter'
as often combining to produce the plough team, and as engaged to some
extent in joint-ploughing. [p227]

At first, what little agriculture was needful would be, like the
Welsh 'coaration of the waste,' the joint-ploughing of grass land,
which after the year's crop, or perhaps three or four years' crop,
would go back into grass.[302] But it would seem from the passage
quoted above, that the whole quarter of normally 120 Irish acres was
at first divided into 'ridges'--possibly Irish acres--to facilitate
the allotment among the households not only of that portion which
was arable for the year, but also of the shares in the bog and the
forest. No doubt originally there was plenty of mountain pasture
besides the thirty, or sometimes sixty scattered acres or ridges
allotted in [p228] 'run-rig' to each 'tate' or household. In the
seventh century, as we have seen, the complaint was made that the
pressure of population had reduced the shares to twenty-seven ridges
instead of thirty.

Finally, when we examine in the Highlands of Scotland as well as
in Ireland the still remaining custom known as the '_Rundale_' or
'run-rig' system, whereby a whole townland or smaller area is held in
common by the people of the village, and shared among them in rough
equality by dividing it up into a large number of small pieces, of
which each holder takes one here and another there; we see before
us in Scotland as in Ireland a survival of that custom of scattered
ownership which belonged to the open-field system all the world over;
whilst we mark again the absence of the yard-land, which was so
constant a feature of the English system. The method is even applied
to potato ground, where the spade takes the place of the plough; and
thus instead of the strip, or acre laid out for ploughing, there is
the 'patch' which so often marks the untidy Celtic townland.

Existing maps of townlands, whilst showing very clearly the practice
still in vogue of subdividing a holding by giving to each sharer
a strip in each of the scattered parcels of which the old holding
consisted, hardly retain traces of the ancient division of the whole
'quarter' into equal ridges or acres. But they show very clearly the
scattered ownership which has been so tenaciously adhered to, along
with the old tribal practice of equal division among male heirs. An
example of a modern townland is annexed, which will illustrate these
interesting points. The confusion it presents will also illustrate
the inherent [p229] incompatibility in a settled district of equal
division among heirs with anything like the yard-land, or bundle of
equal strips handed down unchanged from generation to generation.

[Illustration: _Example of divisions and holdings in a
Townland on the_ Run-rig _system, Extracted from Report of
Devon Commission, see Lord Dufferin's 'Irish Emigration &
Tenure.'_

_This townland contains 205 acres now occupied in 422
lots, by 29 tenants 3 of whose scattered holdings are
shown in different colors_.]

Mr. Skene, in his interesting chapter on the 'Land Tenure in the
Highlands and Islands,'[303] has brought together many interesting
facts, and has drawn a vivid picture of local survivals of farming
communities pursuing their agriculture on the _run-rig_ system,
and holding their pasture land in common. And the traveller on the
west coast of Scotland cannot fail to find among the crofters many
examples of modified forms of joint occupation in which the methods
of the _run-rig_ system are more or less applied even to newly leased
land at the present time.

Thus whilst the tribal system seems to be the result mainly of the
long-continued habits of a pastoral people, it could and did adapt
itself to arable agriculture, and it did so on the lines of the open
field system in a very simple form, extemporised wherever occasion
required, becoming permanent when the tribe became settled on a
particular territory.

«The Irish tribal system in an earlier stage than the
Welsh.»

Returning now to the main object of the inquiry we seem, in the
perhaps to some extent superficial and too simple view taken
by Sir John Davies of the Irish tribal arrangements, to have
found what we sought--to have got a glimpse in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries of an earlier stage in the working of the
tribal system than we get in Wales nearly 1,000 years earlier. In
this stage the land in theory was still in tribal ownership, its
redistribution among the tribesmen [p230] was still frequent, and
arable agriculture was still subordinate to pasture. Lastly, the
arithmetical clustering of the homesteads was the natural method by
which the frequent redistributions of the land were made easy; while
the run-rig form of the open-field system was the natural mode of
conducting a co-operative and shifting agriculture.

But whilst gaining this step, and resting upon it for our present
purpose, we must not be blind to the fact that in another way the
Irish system had become more developed and more complex than the
Welsh.

Sir John Davies sometimes dwells upon the fact that the chief was in
no true sense the lord of the county, and the tribesmen in no true
sense the freeholders of the land. The land belonged to the tribe.
But, as we have seen, he found also that, as in Wales, the chiefs and
sub-chiefs had, as a matter of fact, rightly or wrongly, gradually
acquired a permanent occupation of a certain portion of land--so
many townlands--which, using the English manorial phrase, he speaks
of as '_in demesne_.' Upon these the chief's immediate followers,
and probably bondservants, lived, like the Welsh taeogs, paying him
food-rents or tribute very much resembling those of the taeogs.

«The complications described in the _Brehon Laws_.»

This land, as we have seen, he calls '_mensal land_,' probably
translating an Irish term; and we are reminded at once of the Welsh
_taeog-land_ in the _Register trevs_, which also, from the gifts of
food, was called in one of the Welsh laws '_mensal land_.'

Further, besides these innovations upon the ancient simplicity of the
tribal system, there had evidently, and perhaps from early times,
grown up artificial relationships, founded upon contract, or even
[p231] fiction, which, so to speak, ran across and complicated very
greatly the tribal arrangements resting upon blood relationship.
This probably is what makes the _Brehon laws_ so bewildering and
apparently inconsistent with the simplicity of the tribal system as
in its main features it presented itself to Sir John Davies.

The loan of cattle by those tribesmen (Boaires) who had more than
enough to stock their proper share of the tribe land to other
tribesmen who had not cattle enough to stock theirs, in itself
introduced a sort of semi-feudal, or perhaps semi-_commercial_
dependence of one tribesman upon another. Tribal equality, or rather
gradation of rank according to blood relationship, thus became no
doubt overlaid or crossed by an actual inequality, which earlier or
later developed in some sense into an irregular form of lordship
and service. Hence the complicated rules of '_Saer_' and '_Daer_'
tenancy. There were perhaps also artificial modes of introducing
new tribesmen into a sept without the blood relationship on which
the tribal system was originally built. These complications may
be studied in the Brehon laws, as they have been studied by Sir
Henry Maine and Mr. Skene, and the learned editors of the 'Laws'
themselves; but, however ancient may be the state of things which
they describe, they need not detain us here, or prevent our
recognising in the actual conditions described by Sir John Davies the
main features of an earlier stage of the system than is described in
the ancient Welsh laws.

II. THE TRIBAL SYSTEM IN ITS EARLIER STAGES.

The comparison of the Gaelic and Cymric tribal systems has shown
resemblances so close in leading [p232] principles, that we may
safely seek to obtain from some of the differences between them a
glimpse into earlier stages of the tribal system than the Welsh
evidence, taken alone, would have opened to our view.

«Outside influences: Rome, Christianity, and the
ecclesiastical system.»

Two powerful influences had evidently already partially arrested the
tribal system in Wales, and turned it as it were against its natural
bent into fixed and hardened grooves, before it assumed the shape in
which it appears in the Welsh laws. These two powerful influences
were (1) Roman rule and (2) Christianity. Their first action was to
some extent exercised singly and apart, though concurrently in point
of time. But their separate influences were afterwards surpassed and
consolidated by the remarkable combination of them both which was
presented in the ecclesiastical system.

The influences of Christianity, and of the later ecclesiastical
system, were powerfully exerted in Ireland also; but the Irish tribal
system differed from the Welsh in its never having passed directly
under Roman imperial rule.

The Brehon laws of Ireland perhaps owe their form and origin to
the necessity of moulding the old traditional customs to the new
Christian standard of the ecclesiastics, under whose eye the
codification was made. So, also, the Welsh laws of Howell the Good,
and the Saxon laws of Ine and his successors, all reflect and bear
witness to this influence, and had been no doubt moulded by it into
softer forms than had once prevailed. At least the harshest thorns
which grew, we may guess, even rankly upon the tribal system, must,
we may be sure, have been already removed before our first view of
it. [p233]

In fact, nearly all the early codes, whether those of Ireland,
Wales, or England, or those of German tribes on the Continent, bear
marks of a Christian influence, either directly impressed upon
them by ecclesiastical authorship and authority, or indirectly
through contact with the Roman law, which itself in the later edicts
contained in the Codes of Theodosius and Justinian had undergone
evident modification in a Christian sense.

So far as the Welsh tribal system is concerned, it is quite clear
that whatever had been the influence upon it of direct Roman imperial
rule and early Christianity, it submitted to a second and fresh
influence in the tenth century.

This appears when we consider the avowed motives and object of Howell
the Good in making his code. Its preface recites that he 'found
the Cymry perverting the laws and customs, and therefore summoned
from every _cymwd_ of his kingdom six men practised in authority
and jurisprudence; and also the archbishop, bishops, abbots, and
priors, imploring grace and discernment for the king to amend the
laws and customs of Cymru.' It goes on to say that, 'by the advice
of these wise men, the king retained some of the old laws, others
he amended, others he abolished entirely, establishing new laws
in their place;' special pains being taken to guard against doing
anything 'in opposition to _the law of the Church_ or _the law of the
Emperor_.'[304]

Finally, it is stated in the same preface that Howell the Good went
to Rome to confirm his laws by papal [p234] authority, A.D. 914, and
died A.D. 940. It may be added that the reference to the 'law of the
Emperor' was no fiction, for '_Blegewryd_, Archdeacon of Llandav, was
the clerk, and he was a doctor in the law of the Emperor and in the
law of the Church.'

«The tribal division among male heirs survives these
influences.»

In connexion with this ecclesiastical influence there is a curious
exception which proves the rule, in the refusal of Howell the Good to
give up the tribal rule of equal division among sons, which lay at
the root of the tribal system, and to introduce in its place the law
of primogeniture.

'The ecclesiastical law says that no son is to have the
patrimony but the eldest born to the father by the married
wife: the law of Howell, however, adjudges it to the youngest
son as well as to the oldest, [i.e. all the sons] and decides
that sin of the father or his illegal act is not to be brought
against a son as to his patrimony.'[305]

And so tenaciously was this tribal rule adhered to that even Edward
I., after his conquest of Wales, was obliged for the sake of peace to
concede its continuance to the Welsh, insisting only that none but
lawful sons should share in the inheritance.[306]

The fixing of the gwestva dues, and their commutation into the
_tunc pound_ from every free trev, may well have been one of the
emendations needful to bring the Welsh laws into correspondence with
the 'law of the Emperor,' if it was not indeed the result of direct
Roman rule, under which the chiefs paid a fixed _tributum_ to the
Roman State, possibly founded on the tribal food-rent.[307] [p235]

«Early exactions and license on the part of the chiefs.»

The special Welsh laws which relieve the free trevs of 'family land'
from being under the _maer_ (or villicus) and _canchellor_, and from
_kylch_ (or progress), and from _dovraeth_ (or having the king's
officers quartered upon them), and even limit the right of the _maer_
and _canchellor_ to quarter on the taeogs to three times a year with
three followers, and their share in the royal dues from the taeogs to
one-third of the _dawnbwyds_,[308] look very much like restrictions
of old and oppressive customs resembling those prevalent in Ireland
in later times, made with the intention of bringing the tribesmen and
even the taeogs within the protection of rules similar to those in
the Theodosian Code protecting the coloni on Roman estates.

The probability, therefore, is that the picture drawn by Sir John
Davies of the lawless exactions of the Irish chieftain from the
tribesmen of his sept would apply also to early Welsh and British
chieftains before the influence of Christianity and later Roman law,
through the Church, had restrained their harshness, and limited their
originally wild and lawless exactions from the tribesmen. The legends
of the _Liber Landavensis_ contain stories of as wild and unbridled
license and cruelty on the part of Welsh chieftains as are recorded
in the ancient stories of the Irish tribes. And Cæsar records that
the chiefs of Gallic tribes had so oppressively exacted their dues
(probably food-rents), that they had reduced the smaller people
almost into the condition of slaves. [p236]

The close resemblance of the Welsh system of clustering the
homesteads and trevs in groups of four and twelve or sixteen, to
that prevalent in Ireland, points to the common origin of both. It
confirms the inference that both in Wales and in Ireland this curious
practice found its _raison d'être_ in a stage of tribal life when
the families of free tribesmen did not as yet always occupy the same
tyddyn, but were shifted from one to another whenever the dying out
of a family rendered needful a redistribution to ensure the fair and
equal division of the tribal lands among the tribesmen, 'according to
their antiquity' and their rank under the tribal rules.

«Redivisions and shifting of holdings.»

This occasional shifting of tribal occupation within the tribe-land
was still going on in Ireland under the eyes of Sir John Davies, and
it seems to have survived the Roman rule in Wales, though it was
there probably confined within very narrow limits.

It seems, however, to have been itself a survival of the originally
more or less nomad habits of pastoral tribes.

«Semi-nomadic habits stopped by the Roman rule.»

So, also, the frailty of the slightly constructed homesteads of
the Welsh of the thirteenth century, which seemed to _Giraldus
Cambrensis_ as built only to last for a year, may be a survival of a
state of tribal life when the tribes were nomadic, and driven to move
from place to place by the pressure of warlike neighbours, or the
necessity of seeking new pastures for their flocks and herds. But the
nomadic stage of Welsh tribal life had probably come to an end during
the period of Roman rule.

* * * * *

«The grades in tribal society.»

Putting together the Irish and Welsh evidence in [p237] a variety
of smaller points, a clearer conception may perhaps be gained than
before of the character and relations to each other of the three
or four orders into which tribal life seems to have separated
people--the _chiefs_, the _tribesmen_, the _taeogs_, and under all
these, and classed among chattels, the _slaves_.

The _chief_ evidently corresponds less with the later lord of a manor
than with the modern king. He is the head and chosen chief of the
tribesmen. His office is not hereditary. His successor, his _tanist_
or _edling_, is chosen in his lifetime, and is not necessarily his
son.[309] The chieftains of Ireland are spoken of in mediæval records
and laws as _reguli_--little kings. When Wales (or such part of it
as had not been before conquered and made manorial) was conquered by
Edward I. the chieftainship did not fall into the hands of manorial
lords, but was vested directly in the Prince of Wales.[310]

«The tribesmen.»

The _tribesmen_ are men of the tribal blood, _i.e._ of equal blood
with the chief. They, therefore, do not at all resemble serfs. They
are more like manorial lords of lordships split up and divided by
inheritance, than serfs. They are not truly allodial holders, for
they hold tribal land; but they have no manorial lord over them.
Their chief is their elected chief, not their manorial lord. When
Irish chieftains claim to be owners of the tribal land in the
English sense, and set up manorial claims over the tribesmen, they
are disallowed by Sir John Davies. When Wales is [p238] conquered,
the _tunc pound_ is paid by the free tribesmen direct to the Prince
of Wales, the substituted chieftain of the tribe, and the tribesmen
remain freeholders, with no mesne lord between him and them.[311] So
it would have been also in Ireland if the plans of Sir John Davies
had been permanently carried out.[312]

«The taeogs.»

The _taeogs_ are not generally the serfs of the free tribesmen, but,
if serfs at all, of the chief. They are more like Roman _coloni_ than
mediæval serfs. But they are easily changed into serfs. In Ireland
the _mensal land_ on which they live is allowed by Sir John Davies to
be (by a rough analogy) called the chief's _demesne land_. In Wales
they are called in Latin documents _villani_; but they become after
the Conquest the villani, not of manorial lords, but of the Prince of
Wales, and they still live in separate trevs from the tribesmen.[313]

«The slaves.»

These, then, are the three orders in tribal life; while the slaves
in household or field service, and more or less numerous, are, like
the cattle, bought and sold, and reckoned as chattels alike under the
tribal and the manorial systems.

And we may go still further. These three tribal orders of men, with
their large households and cattle in the more or less nomadic stage
of the tribal system, move about from place to place, and wherever
they [p239] go, what may be called tribal houses must be erected for
them.

The tribal house is in itself typical of their tribal and nomadic
life. It is of the same type and pattern for all their orders, but
varying in size according to the gradation in rank of the occupier.

«The tribal house.»

«The _gwelys_, or _lecti_.»

«The household.»

«The chief.»

It is built, like the houses observed by Giraldus Cambrensis, of
trees newly cut from the forest.[314] A long straight pole is
selected for the roof-tree. Six well-grown trees, with suitable
branches apparently reaching over to meet one another, and of about
the same size as the roof-tree, are stuck upright in the ground
at even distances in two parallel rows--three in each row. Their
extremities bending over make a Gothic arch, and crossing one another
at the top each pair makes a fork, upon which the roof-tree is fixed.
These trees supporting the roof-tree are called _gavaels_, _forks_,
or _columns_,[315] and they form the nave of the tribal house. Then,
at some distance back from these rows of _columns_ or _forks_, low
walls of stakes and wattle shut in the _aisles_ of the house, and
over all is the roof of branches and rough thatch, while at the
ends are the wattle doors of entrance. All along the aisles, behind
the pillars, are placed beds of rushes, [p240] called _gwelys_
(_lecti_), on which the inmates sleep. The footboards of the beds,
between the columns, form their seats in the daytime. The fire is
lighted on an open hearth in the centre of the nave, between the
middle columns, and in the chieftain's hall a screen runs between
these central pillars and either wall, so partially dividing off the
upper portion where the chief, the edling, and his principal officers
have their own appointed places, from the lower end of the hall
where the humbler members of the household are ranged in order.[316]
The columns, like those in Homeric houses and Solomon's temple, are
sometimes cased in metal, and the silentiary, to call attention,
strikes one of them with his staff. The bed or seat of the chieftain
is also sometimes covered by a metal canopy.[317] In his hand he
holds a sceptre or wand of gold, equal in length to himself, and
as thick as his little finger. He eats from a golden plate as wide
as his face, and as thick as the thumb-nail of a ploughman who has
handled the plough for seven years.[318]

The kitchen and other outbuildings are ranged round the hall, and
beyond these again are the corn and the cattle-yard included in the
_tyddyn_.

«Likeness of the tribal house to the Gothic cathedral.»

The chieftain's hall is twice the size and value of the free
tribesman's, and the free tribesman's is twice [p241] that of the
taeog. But the plan is the same. They are all built with similar
green timber forks and roof-tree and wattle,[319] with the fireplace
in the nave and the rush beds in the aisles. One might almost
conjecture that as the tabernacle was the type which grew into
Solomon's temple, so the tribal house built of green timber and
wattle, with its high nave and lower aisles, when imitated in stone,
grew into the Gothic cathedral. Certainly the Gothic cathedral,
simplified and reduced in size and materials to a rough and rapidly
erected structure of green timber and wattle, would give no bad idea
of the tribal house of Wales or Ireland. It has been noticed in a
former chapter that the Bishop of Durham had his episcopal bothy,
or hunting hall, erected for him every year by his villeins, in
the forest, as late as the time of the Boldon Book. This also was
possibly a survival of the tribal house.[320]

«The tribal household.»

In this tribal house the undivided household of free tribesmen,
comprising several generations down to the great-grandchildren of a
common ancestor, lived together; and, as already mentioned, even the
structure of the house was typical of the tribal family arrangement.

In the aisles were the _gwelys_ of rushes, and the whole household
was bound as it were together in one _gwellygord_. The _gwelys_ were
divided by the [p242] central columns, or _gavaels_ (Welsh for
'fork'), into four separate divisions; so there were four _gavaels_
in a trev, and four randirs in a gavael. And so in after times, long
after the tribal life was broken up, the original holding of an
ancient tribesman became divided in the hands of his descendants into
_gavells_ and _gwelys_, or _weles_.[321]

Another point has been noticed. In the old times, when the tribesmen
shifted about from place to place, their personal names by necessity
could not be given to the places or tyddyns they lived in. The local
names in a country where the tribal system prevailed were taken from
natural characteristics--the streams, the woods, the hills, which
marked the site. This was the case, for instance, with the townlands
and _tates_ of Ireland. Most of them bear witness, as we have seen,
by their impersonal names, to the shifting and inconstant tenancy of
successive tribesmen.[322]

It was probably not till the tribes became stationary, and, after
many generations, the same families became permanent holders of
the same homesteads, that the Welsh _gwelys_ and _gavells_ became
permanent family possessions, known by the personal name of their
occupants, as we find them in the extents of the fourteenth
century.[323]

«The tribal blood-money.»

Another characteristic of the tribal system in its early stages
was the purely natural and tribal character of the system of
_blood-money_, answering to the [p243] _Wergelt_ of the Germans.
It was not an artificial bundling together of persons in tens or
tithings, like the later Saxon and Norman system of _frankpledge_,
but strictly ruled by actual family relationship. The murderer of a
man, or his relations of a certain degree, and in a certain order
and proportion, according to their nearness of blood, owed the
fixed amount of blood-money to the family of the murdered person,
who shared it in the same order and proportions on their side.[324]
The same principle held good for insults and injuries, between not
only individuals, but tribes. For an insult done by the tribesman of
another tribe to a chief, the latter could claim one hundred cows for
every cantrev in his dominion (_i.e._ a cow for every trev), and a
golden rod.[325]

«Tenacity of tribal habits.»

The tribesmen and the tribes were thus bound together by the closest
ties, all springing, in the first instance, from their common
blood-relationship. As this ruled the extent of their liability one
for another, so it fixed both the nearness of the neighbourhood of
their tyddyns, and the closeness of the relationships of their common
life. And these ties were so close, and the rules of the system so
firmly fixed by custom and by tribal instinct, that Roman or Saxon
conquest, and centuries of Christian influence, while they modified
and hardened it in some points, and stopped its actual nomadic
tendencies, left its main features and spirit, in Ireland and Wales
and Western Scotland, unbroken. It would seem that tribal life might
well go on repeating itself, generation after generation, for a
thousand years, with little variation, without [p244] really passing
out of its early stages, unless in the meantime some uncontrollable
force from outside of it should break its strength and force its life
into other grooves.

Nor was the tenacity of the tribal system more remarkable than its
universality. As an economic stage in a people's growth it seems to
be well-nigh universal. It is confined to no race, to no continent,
and to no quarter of the globe. Almost every people in historic or
prehistoric times has passed or is passing through its stages.

«Wide prevalence of the tribal system.»

Lastly, this wide prevalence and extreme tenacity of the tribal
system may perhaps make it the more easy to understand the almost
equally wide prevalence of that open-field system, by the simplest
forms of which nomadic and pastoral tribes, forced by circumstances
into a simple and common agriculture, have everywhere apparently
provided themselves with corn. It is not the system of a single
people or a single race, but, in its simplest form, a system
belonging to the tribal stage of economic progress. And as that
tribal stage may itself take a thousand years, as in Ireland, to
wear itself out, so the open field system also may linger as long,
adapting itself meanwhile to other economic conditions; in England
becoming for centuries, under the manorial system, in a more complex
form, the shell of serfdom, and leaving its _débris_ on the fields
centuries after the stage of serfdom has been passed; in Ireland
following the vicissitudes of a poor and wretched peasantry, whose
tribal system, running its course till suddenly arrested under other
and economically sadder phases than serfdom, leaves a people swarming
on the subdivided [p245] land, with scattered patches of potato
ground, held in 'run-rig' or 'rundale,' and clinging to the 'grazing'
on the mountain side for their single cow or pig, with a pastoral and
tribal instinct ingrained in their nature as the inheritance of a
thousand years.

Such in its main features seems to have been the tribal system as
revealed by the earliest Irish and Welsh evidence taken together.

There remains the question, What was the relation of this tribal
system to the manorial system in the south-east of England and on the
continent of Europe?

III. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TRIBAL AND AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY OF
THE WEST AND SOUTH-EAST OF BRITAIN WAS PRE-ROMAN, AND SO ALSO WAS THE
OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM.

«The south and east Britain not tribal but mainly
agricultural before Saxon conquest.»

The manorial system of the east and the tribal system of the west
of Britain have now been traced back, in turn, upon British ground,
as far as the direct evidence extends, _i.e._ to within a very few
generations of the time of the Saxon conquest; and in neither system
is any indication discernible of a recent origin.

So far as the evidence has hitherto gone, the two systems were, and
had long been, historically distinct. The tribal system probably once
extended as far into Wessex as the eastern limits of the district
long known as West Wales, _i.e._ as far east as Wiltshire; and within
this district of England the manorial system was evidently imposed
upon the conquered country, as it was later in portions of [p246]
Wales, leaving only here and there, as we have found, small and
mainly local survivals of the earlier tribal system.

But no evidence has yet been adduced leading to the inference that
before the Saxon invasion the Welsh tribal system extended all over
Britain.

Indeed, the evidence of Cæsar is clear upon the point that the
economic condition of the south-east of Britain was quite distinct
from that of the interior and west of Britain even in pre-Roman times.

«Evidence of Cæsar.»

Cæsar describes the south and east of Britain, which he calls the
maritime portion, as inhabited by those who had passed over from
the country of the Belgæ for the purpose of plunder and war, almost
all of whom, he says, retain the name of the states (_civitates_)
from which they came to Britain, where after the war they remained,
and began to cultivate the fields. Their buildings he describes as
exceedingly numerous, and very like those of the Gauls.[326] The most
civilised of all these nations, he says, are those who inhabit Kent,
which is entirely a maritime district; nor do they differ much from
Gallic customs.[327]

He speaks, on the other hand, of the inland inhabitants as aborigines
who mostly did not sow corn, but fed upon flesh and milk.[328]

Now, we have seen that the main distinctive mark of the tribal system
was the absence of towns and villages, and the preponderance of
cattle over corn.

When corn becomes the ruling item in economic arrangements, there
grows up the settled homestead and the _village_, with its open
fields around it. [p247]

Cæsar, therefore, in describing the agriculture and buildings of
the Belgic portion of England, and the non-agricultural but pastoral
habits of the interior, exactly hit upon the distinctive differences
between the already settled and agricultural character of the
south-east and the pastoral and tribal polity of the interior and
west of Britain.

«A corn-growing country before and during Roman rule.»

Nor was this statement one resting merely upon hearsay evidence.
Cæsar himself found corn crops ripening on the fields, and relied
upon them for the maintenance of his army. Nay, the reason which
led him to invade the island was in part the fact that the Britons
had given aid to the Gauls. Further, he obtained his information
about Britain from the _merchants_, and the news of his approach
was carried by the _merchants_ into Britain, thus making it evident
that there was a commerce going on between the two coasts, even in
pre-Roman times.[329]

We know that throughout the period of Roman occupation Britain was a
corn-growing country.

«Evidence of Zosimus.»

_Zosimus_ represents Julian as sending 800 vessels, larger than mere
boats, backwards and forwards to Britain for corn to supply the
granaries of the cities on the Rhine.[330]

«Eumenius.»

_Eumenius_, in his 'Panegyric of Constantine' (A.D. 310), also
describes Britain as remarkable for the richness of its corn crops
and the multitude of its cattle.[331]

«Pliny.»

_Pliny_ further describes the inhabitants of Britain as being so far
advanced in agriculture as to plough [p248] in _marl_ in order to
increase the fertility of the fields.[332]

«Tacitus.»

_Tacitus_,[333] in the same way (A.D. _circa_ 90), speaks of the soil
of Britain as fertile and bearing heavy crops (_patiens frugum_),
and describes the tricks of the tax gatherers in collecting the
_tributum_, which was exacted in corn.[334]

«Strabo.»

_Strabo_[335] (B.C. 30) mentions the export from Britain of '_corn_,
cattle, gold, silver, iron, skins, slaves, and dogs.'

«Diodorus Siculus.»

_Diodorus Siculus_[336] (B.C. 44) describes the manner of reaping and
storing corn in England thus:--

They have mean habitations constructed for the most part of
reeds or of wood, and they gather in the harvest by cutting
off the ears of corn and storing them in subterraneous
repositories; they cull therefrom daily such as are old, and
dressing them, have thence their sustenance. . . . The island
is thickly inhabited.

«Pytheas.»

Lastly, we have been recently reminded by Mr. Elton that _Pytheas_,
'the Humboldt of antiquity,' who visited Britain in the fourth
century B.C., saw in the southern districts abundance of wheat in
the fields, [p249] and observed the necessity of threshing it out
in covered barns, instead of using the unroofed threshing-floors
to which he was accustomed in Marseilles. 'The natives,' he says,
'collect the sheaves in great barns, and thresh out the corn there,
because they have so little sunshine that our open threshing-places
would be of little use in that land of clouds and rain.'[337]

It is clear, then, that in the south-east of Britain a considerable
quantity of corn was grown all through the period of Roman rule and
centuries before the Roman conquest of the island. And if so, that
difference between the pastoral tribal districts of the interior
and the more settled agricultural districts of the south and east,
noticed by Cæsar, was one of long standing.

The tribal system of Wales furnishes us, therefore, with no direct
key to the economic condition of South-eastern Britain.

But, on the other hand, the continuous and long-continued growth of
corn in Britain from century to century adds great interest to the
further question, Upon what system was it grown?

«The corn probably grown on the open-field system.»

Upon what other system can it have been grown than the _open-field
system_? The universal prevalence of this system makes it almost
certain that the fields found by Cæsar waving with ripening corn were
_open_ fields. The open-field system was hardly first introduced
by the Saxons, because we find it also in Wales and Scotland. It
was hardly introduced by the Romans, because its division lines
and measurements [p250] are evidently not those of the Roman
_agrimensores_. The methods of these latter are well known from their
own writings. Their rules were clear and definite, and wherever they
went they either _adopted the previous divisions of the land_, or
set to work on _their own system of straight lines and rectangular
divisions_. We may thus guess what an open field would have been if
laid out, _de novo_, by the Roman _agrimensores_; and conclude that
the irregular network or spider's web of furlongs and strips in the
actual open fields of England with which we have become familiar is
as great a contrast as could well be imagined to what the open field
would have been if laid out directly under Roman rules.

We happen to know also, from passages which we shall have occasion
to quote hereafter, that the Roman _agrimensores_ did find in other
provinces--we have no direct evidence for Britain--an open-field
system, with its irregular boundaries, its joint occupation, its
holdings of scattered pieces, and its common rights of way and of
pasture, existing in many districts--_in multis regionibus_--where
the red tape rules of their craft had not been consulted, and the
land was not occupied by regularly settled Roman colonies.[338]

The open-field system in some form or other we may understand, then,
to have preceded in Britain even the Roman occupation. And perhaps
we may go one step further. If the practice of ploughing marl into
the ground mentioned by Pliny was an early and local peculiarity of
Britain and of Gaul, as it seems to have been from his description,
then clearly [p251] it indicates a more advanced stage of the system
than the early Welsh co-aration of portions of the waste. The marling
of land implies a settled arable farming of the same land year
after year, and not a ploughing up of new ground each year. It does
not follow that there was yet a regular rotation of crops in three
courses, and so the fully organised three-field system; but evidently
there were permanent arable fields devoted to the growth of corn, and
separate from the grass land and waste, before Roman improvements
were made upon British agriculture.

«Was the system manorial?»

But the prevalence of an open-field husbandry in its simpler forms
was, as we have been taught by the investigation into the tribal
systems of Wales and Ireland, no evidence of the prevalence of that
particular form of the open-field husbandry which was connected with
the _manorial_ system, and of which the yard-land was an essential
feature. In order to ascertain the probability of the manorial system
having been introduced by the Saxons, or having preceded the Saxon
conquest in the south and east of Britain, it becomes necessary to
examine the manorial system in its Continental history, so as if
possible, working once more from the known to the unknown--this time
from the better known Roman and German side of the question--to find
some stepping-stones at least over the chasm in the English evidence.

FOOTNOTES:

[275] _Inquisitiones Cancellariæ Hiberniæ_, ii. xxx. iii.

[276] _Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy_, vii. p. xiv., p. 474.
Paper by the Rev. W. Reeves, D.D.

[277] _Inquisitiones Cancellariæ Hiberniæ_, ii. p. xxi.

[278] _Calendar of State Papers, Ireland_, 1606–8, p. 170.

[279] Appended to Sir John Davies' _Discovery of Ireland_, in some of
the early editions.

[280] Compare the words of Tacitus, 'Agri pro numero cultorum ab
universis vicis occupantur, quos mox inter se _secundum dignationem_
partiuntur. _Germania_, xxvi.

[281] In Monaghan Sir J. Davies had found tates with 60 acres each.
Here there were only 30 acres in a tate, so he kept to his old rule,
and took 2 tates as his lowest unit.

[282] This may be found also in _Ancient Laws of Ireland_, iii.
Preface, xxxv. 6.

[283] _Calendar of State Papers, Ireland_, 1603–6, p. 554; and
1606–8, p. 492.

[284] The evidence by which he was gradually informed may be traced
in detail in the above-mentioned _Calendars_.

[285] Sir John Davies' _Discovery of Ireland_, 1612, pp. 167 _et seq._

[286] _Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish_, E. O'Curry. Dr.
Sullivan's Introduction, p. xcvi. See also Skene's _Celtic Scotland_,
iii. 154.

[287] Skene, iii. 155. Sullivan, p. xcii.

[288] Skene, iii. 158, quoting a tract published in the appendix to
_Tribes and Customs_ of Hy Fiachraich, p. 453.

[289] _Id._ p. 160, quoting the _Tribes and Customs of Hy Many_.

[290] _Calendars of State Papers, Ireland_, 1606–8, pp. 491–2.

[291] Skene's _Celtic Scotland_, iii. c. vi.

[292] In a poem of the sixteenth century (1507–22), in Manks, given
in Train's _Isle of Man_, i. p. 50, occur the lines--

'Ayns dagh treen _Balley_ ren eh unnane
D'an sleih shen ayn dy heet dy ghuee,'

alluding to St. Germain; translated thus by Mr. Train:--

'For each four _quarterlands_ he made a chapel
For people of them to meet in prayer.'

For the 'quarterlands' see Statute of the Tinwald Court, 1645. Also
Feltham's Tour, _Manx Society_, p. 41, &c.

[293] That in many cases the quarters had become townlands as early
as the year 1683, see _Tribes and Customs of Hy Many_, Introd. p.
454. See also Dr. Reeve's paper 'On the Townland Distribution of
Ireland,' _Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy_, 1861, vol. vii.
p. 483.

[294] Many thousands of these circular enclosures are marked on the
Ordnance Map of Ireland.

[295] _Calendars of State Papers, Ireland_. 1607, p. 170.

[296] Taken from Shirley's _Hist. of Monaghan_, part iv. pp. 480–482.

[297] 'Neither did any of them in all this time plant any gardens or
orchards, enclose or improve their lands, live together in settled
villages or towns.'--_Discovery of Ireland_, p. 170. Compare this
with the description of the Germans by Tacitus. It was, as Sir
John Davies remarks, a condition of things 'to be imputed to those
[tribal] customs which made their estates so uncertain and transitory
in their possessions' (_id._).

[298] _Early History of Institutions_, p. 113.

[299] Skene's _Celtic Scotland_, iii. p. 381.

[300] As to joint-tenancy between co-heirs, see tract called
'Judgments of Co-tenancy.' _Brehon Laws_, iv. pp. 69 _et seq._

[301] See the tract 'Crith Gablach.' _Brehon Laws_, iv. pp. 300 _et
seq._ One grade has 'a fourth part of a ploughing apparatus, _i.e._
an ox, a plough-straw, a goad, and a bridle' (p. 307); another 'half
the means of ploughing' (p. 309); another 'a perfect plough' (p.
311); and so on. And the size of their respective houses and the
amount of their food-rent is graduated also according to their rank
in the tribal hierarchy. There is a reference to 'tillage in common'
in the 'Senchus Mor.' _Brehon Laws_, iii. p. 17.

[302] The following appeared in the _Athenæum_, March 3, 1883, under
the signature of Mr. G. L. Gomme:--'The 312 acres in possession of
the Corporation of Kells (co. Meath) are divided into six fields, and
thus used. The fields are broken up in rotation one at a time, and
tilled during four years. Before the field is broken the members of
the Corporation repair to it with a surveyor, and it is marked out
into equal lots, according to the existing number of resident members
of the body. Each resident freeman gets one lot, each portreeve and
burgess two lots, and the deputy sovereign five lots. A portion of
the field, generally five or six acres, is set apart for letting,
and the rent obtained for it is applied to pay the tithes and taxes
of the entire. The members hold their lots in severalty for four
years and cultivate them as they please, and at the expiration of
the fourth year the field is laid down with grass and a new one
is broken, when a similar process of partition takes place. The
other five fields are in the interim in pasture, and the right of
depasturing them is enjoyed by the members of the Corporation in
the same proportion as they hold the arable land; that is to say,
the deputy sovereign grasses five heads of cattle (called "bolls")
for every two grazed by the portreeves and burgesses, and for every
one grazed by the freemen; with this modification, however, that
the widow of a burgess enjoys a right of grazing to the same extent
as a freeman, and the widow of a freeman to half that extent. The
widows do not obtain any portions of the field in tillage. I should
note that the first charter of incorporation to Kells dates from
Richard I.'

[303] _Celtic Scotland_, iii. c. x. See also 'Account of Improvements
on the Estate of _Sutherland_.' By James Loch. London, 1826.

[304] _Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, p. 165.

[305] The _Venedotian Code_. _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 86.

[306] See the last clause in the '_Statuta de Rothelan_.' _Record of
Carnarvon_, pp. 128–9, and _Ancient Laws_, p. 872.

[307] The pound of 12 ounces of 20 pence used in codes of South
Wales seems to have been the pound used in Gaul in Roman times.
'Juxta Gallos vigesima pars unciæ denarius est et duodecim denarii
solidum reddunt . . . duodecim unciæ libram xx. solidos continentem
efficiunt. Sed veteres _solidum_ qui nunc _aureus_ dicitur
nuncupabunt.' _De mensuris excerpta. Gromatici Veteres._ Lachmann, i.
pp. 373–4.

[308] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 781.

[309] This presents a curious analogy to the method followed by
'adoptive' Roman emperors.

[310] See the surveys in the _Record of Carnarvon_, and compare the
Statute of Rothelan.

[311] See the surveys in the _Record of Carnarvon_. The _tunc pound_
in some districts of Wales is still collected for the Prince of
Wales. _Id._ Introduction, p. xvii.

[312] See Sir John Davies' _Discovery_, &c., the concluding
paragraphs. And for further information on this point, see my
articles in the _Fortnightly Review_, 1870, and the _Nineteenth
Century_, January 1881, 'On the Irish Land Question.'

[313] See the surveys in the _Record of Carnarvon_.

[314] To make a royal house more pretentious the bark is peeled off,
and it is called 'the _White House_.' See _Ancient Laws, &c._, pp.
164 and 303.

[315] See _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 142.--Hall of the _chief_. 40d. for
each _gavael_ supporting the roof, _i.e._ six _kolonon_, 80d. for
roof. Hall of _uchelwe_ or tribesman, 20d. each gavael supporting the
roof, _i.e._ six _colonen_, 40d. the roof. House of aillt or taeog,
10d. for each gavael supporting the roof, _i.e._ six _kolovyn_. P.
351.--Worth of winter house, 30d. the roof-tree, 30d. each _forck_
supporting the roof-tree. P. 676.--Three indispensables of the summer
bothy (_bwd havodwr_)--a roof-tree (nen bren), roof-supporting forks
(nen fyrch), and wattling (bangor). See also p. 288.

[316] Compare description of Irish houses in Dr. Sullivan's
_Introduction_, cccxlv. _et seq._, with the _Venedotian Code_.
_Ancient Laws, &c., of Wales_, p. 5, s. vi.--'Of Appropriate
Places.' Compare also the curious resemblances in the structure of
stone huts in the Scotch islands where trees could not be used, and
especially the position of the beds in the walls or in the rough
aisles.--Mitchell's _Past in the Present_, Lecture III. Compare Dr.
Guest's description of the Celtic houses. _Origines Celticæ_, ii.
70–83.

[317] _Id._

[318] _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 3.

[319] See _Ancient Laws, &c._, p. 142.

[320] Compare Strabo's description of the _Gallic_ houses, 'great
houses, arched, constructed of planks and wicker and covered with
a heavy thatched roof' (iv. c. iv. s. 3). Also for the early stake
and wattle _German_ houses, see Tacitus (_Germania_, xvi.), and the
interesting section (Bk. i. s. 4) on the subject in Dr. Karl von
Inama-Sternegg's _Deutsche Wirthschaftsgeschichte_. Leipzig, 1879.

[321] See the _Record of Carnarvon_, Introduction, p. vii. _Wele_,
_Gwele_, or _Gwely_ in Welsh signifies a bed, and accordingly in
these extents it is often called in Latin _Lectus_. See pp. 90,
95–99, 101.

[322] See _supra_, and the lists given of the names of townlands and
their meanings in Shirley's _Hist. of Co. Monaghan_, pp. 392–542.

[323] _Record of Carnarvon_, _passim_.

[324] See _Dimetian Code_, B. II., c. i. _Ancient Laws, &c._, pp. 197
_et seq._

[325] _Id._ p. 3.

[326] Lib. v. c. 12.

[327] C. 14.

[328] C. 14.

[329] Book iv. c. xx. and xxi.

[330] Book iii. c. v. _Mon. Brit._ p. lxxvi., A.D. 358.

[331] _Mon. Brit._ p. lxix.

[332] Pliny (_Monument. Hist. Brit._, pp. viii. ix.): 'Alia est
ratio, quam Britannia et Gallia invenere alendi eam (terram) ipsa:
quod genus vocant "_margam_." . . . Omnis autem marga aratro
injicienda est.'

Pugh's _Welsh Dict._, p. 328: '_Marl_, earth deposited by water, a
rich kind of clay (with many compounds).'

See _Chron. Monas. Abingdon._ II. xxx. P. 147, '_on tha lampyttes_;'
p. 402, '_on thone lampyt_' ('_lam_,' loam, mud, clay.--Bosworth, p.
41 _b_). Pp. 150 and 404, '_on tha cealc seathas_' (_chalk-pits_).

See _Liber de Hyda_, p. 88, 'caelcgrafan' (chalk-pits).

Compare Pliny (_ubi supra_) with _Abingdon_, ii. p. 294: 'Totam
terram quæ nimis pessima et infructifera erat tam citra aquam quam
ultra compositione terræ quæ vulgo "_Marla_" dicitur, ipse optimam et
fructiferam fecit.' (_Colne_ in Essex.)

[333] In his _Agricola_, xii.

[334] _Agricola_, xix.

[335] Strabo, Bk. IV. c. v. s. 2.

[336] _Mon. Brit._ Excerpta, ii.

[337] Elton's _Origins of English History_, p. 32.

[338] Siculus Flaccus, _De Conditionibus Agrorum_. _Gromatici
veteres._ Lachmann. P. 152. The passage will be given in full
hereafter.

[p252]

CHAPTER VIII.
_CONNEXION BETWEEN THE ROMAN LAND SYSTEM AND THE LATER
MANORIAL SYSTEM._

I. IMPORTANCE OF THE CONTINENTAL EVIDENCE.

«The question a complex one.»

In now returning to the question of the origin of the English
manorial system it is needful to widen the range of the inquiry, and
to seek for further light in Continental evidence.

The question itself has become a complex one. There may have been
manors in the south-eastern districts of Britain before the Saxon
conquest, while Britain was a Roman province, or the Saxons may have
introduced the manorial system when they conquered the country. These
remain the alternatives now that we have seen that the tribal system
in Britain was evidently not its parent. But even if the Saxons
introduced the manorial system, the further question arises whether
it was a natural growth from their own tribal system, or whether they
had themselves adopted it from the Romans? It is obvious, therefore,
that no adequate result can be obtained without a sufficiently
careful study (1) of the Roman provincial land system and (2) of the
[p253] German tribal system. Not till both those have been examined
can it be possible to judge which of the two factors contributed most
to the manorial system, and to what extent it was their joint product.

«The two factors, the Roman land system and the German
tribal system.»

The question must needs be complicated by the fact that during the
whole period of the later empire a large portion of Germany was
included within the lines of the Roman provinces; or, to state the
point more exactly, that a large proportion of the inhabitants of
these Roman provinces were Germans. It will be seen in the course of
the inquiry how much depends upon the full recognition of this fact.
Indeed, the very first step taken will bring it into prominence, and
put us, so to speak, on right geographical lines, by showing that
the nearest analogies to the English manor were to be found in those
districts precisely which were both Roman and German under the later
empire.

In studying, therefore, the land system in Roman provinces, we must
not forget that we are studying what, though Roman, may have been
subject to barbarian influences. In studying, on the other hand, the
German tribal system, it is no less important to remember that some
German customs may betray the results of centuries of contact with
Roman rule.

II. THE CONNEXION BETWEEN THE SAXON 'HAM,' THE GERMAN 'HEIM,' AND THE
FRANKISH 'VILLA.'

It would be unwise to build too much upon a mere resemblance in
terms, but we have seen that the Saxon words generally used for manor
were '_ham_' and '_tun_.' [p254]

We have seen how King Alfred, in the remarkable passage quoted in an
earlier chapter, put in contrast the temporary log hut on lænland
with the permanent hereditary possession--the '_ham_' or manor.
This latter was, as we have seen, the estate of a manorial lord,
with a community of dependants or serfs upon it, and not a village
of coequal freemen. Hence the word _ham_ did not properly describe
the clusters of scattered homesteads in the Welsh district. In King
Alfred's time Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, and even parts of Wiltshire
were still, as already mentioned, regarded as Welsh. They formed what
was known as West Wales. The manorial system had encroached far into
them, but it would seem that the phraseology of the earlier system
had not yet wholly disappeared. King Alfred in his will carefully
abstained from applying the word _ham_ to his numerous possessions in
these districts.

He disposed in his will of more than thirty separately named estates
in this West Welsh district, but he invariably used, in describing
them, the word 'land'--the _land_ or the _landes_ at such and such a
place;--and he concluded this part of his will with the statement,
'These are all that I have in _Wealcyne_, except in _Truconshirie_'
(in Cornwall). Then in the rest of his will King Alfred disposed of
nearly as many estates in the south-east or manorial districts of
England, and here he immediately changed his style. It was no more
the _land_, at this place and that, but the _ham_ at such and such
a place.[339] In the old English translation of the will given in
the _Liber de Hyda_ [p255] 'land' is rendered by 'lond' and 'ham'
invariably by '_twune_.'[340] Thus without saying that the words
_ham_ and _tun_ always were used in this sense, and could be used in
no other, they were generally at least synonymous with _manor_.

As late as the time of Bede, the suffix 'ham' or 'tun' was not yet so
fully embodied with the names of places as to form a part of them. In
the Cambridge MS. of his works 'ham' is still written as a separate
word.

«The German _heim_.»

It is a curious fact that the suffix 'ton' or 'tun' was practically
used nowhere on the Continent in the names of places; but the other
manorial suffix, 'ham,' in one or other of its forms--'hem,' 'heim,'
or 'haim'--was widely spread. And as in those districts where it was
found most abundantly, it translated itself, as in England, into
the Latin _villa_, its early geographical distribution may have an
important significance.

«Geographical distribution of _hams_ and _heims_.»

«In England.»

On the annexed map is marked for each county the per-centage of
the names of places mentioned in the Domesday Survey ending in
_ham_.[341] This will give a fair view of their distribution in
Saxon England. It will be seen that the 'hams' of England were most
numerous in the south-eastern counties, from Lincolnshire and Norfolk
to Sussex, finding their densest centre in Essex.[342]

«In Picardy.»

Passing on to the Continent, very similar evidence, but of earlier
date, is afforded for a small district surrounding St. Omer, in
Picardy, by a survey of the [p256] estates of the Abbey of St.
Bertin, taken about the year 850. The 'villas' there mentioned as
'_ad fratrum usus pertinentes_,' and which were distinctly manors,
are twenty-five in number, and the names of fifteen of them ended in
'hem.'[343]

Similar evidence is given for various districts in Germany in the
list of donations to the abbeys, the abbots of which possessed
estates in different parts of Germany--sometimes whole manors or
villages, sometimes only one or two holdings in this or that place.

«In the various abbey cartularies.»

«_Heims_ most numerous in the Roman province of Germania
Prima.»

On the accompanying map are marked the sites of places mentioned
in the cartularies of the Abbeys of Fulda,[344] Corvey,[345] St.
Gall,[346] Frising,[347] Wizenburg,[348] Lorsch,[349] and in other
early records, ending in _heim_ in the various districts of Germany.
The result is remarkable. It shows that these _heims_ were most
numerous in what was once the Roman province of _Germania Prima_,
on the left bank of the upper Rhine, the present Elsass, and on
both sides of the Rhine around Mayence--districts conquered by the
Frankish and Alamannic tribes in the fifth century, but inhabited
by Germans from the time of Tacitus, and perhaps of Cæsar, and
so districts in which German populations had come very early and
continued long under Roman rule. In this district the _heims_ rose
in [p257] number to 80 per cent. of the places mentioned in the
charters.

[Illustration: Percentage of Local Names ending in 'ham'
(Domesday Survey).

Percentage of Local Names ending without further suffix
(Domesday Survey).

Local names ending in 'heim'.

Local names ending in 'ingen'.

Local names ending in 'ingahem'.

German patronymic village names in France.]

There were many, but not so many, _heims_ in the valley of the
Neckar; but everywhere (with small local exceptions) they faded away
in districts outside the Roman boundary, except in Frisia, where the
proportion was large.

Now, the question is, what do these _heims_ represent?

«_Heim_ and _villa_ interchange.»

We have already said that they interchange like the English 'ham'
with the Latin 'villa.' The districts where they occur most thickly,
where they formed 80 per cent. of the names of places in the time
of the monastic grants, and which had formed for several centuries
the Roman province of Upper Germany, shade off into districts which
abounded with local names ending in _villa_.

«_Wilare_, _weiler_, and _wyl_.»

They did so a thousand years ago, and they do so now. It is only
needful to examine the Ordnance Survey of any part of these districts
to see how, even now, the places with names ending in 'heim' are
mixed with others ending in 'villa,' or 'wilare,' or the Germanised
form of the word, 'weiler,' or 'wyl;' and further, how the region
abounding with 'heims' shades off into a district abounding with
names ending in 'villa,' or 'wilare,' and we may add the equally
manorial Latin or Romance termination _curtis_, or 'court,' and its
German equivalent 'hof,' or 'hoven.' And such was the case also at
the date of the earliest monastic charters.

This fact in itself at least suggests very strongly that here, as
in England, 'ham' and 'villa' were synonyms for the same thing,
sometimes called by its [p258] Latin and sometimes by its German
name. Indeed, actual instances may be found in the charters of these
districts in which the name of the same place has sometimes the
suffix _villa_ or _wilare_ and sometimes _heim_.[350]

Moreover, these places which are thus called 'villas' or 'heims' in
the monastic charters were to all intents and purposes _manors_ as
far back as the records allow us to trace them.

The earliest surveys of the possessions of the abbeys leave no doubt
as to their manorial character.[351]

And the earliest charters prove that they were often at least
manorial estates before they were handed over to the monks.

Indeed, a careful examination of the Wizenburg and Lorsch charters
and donations leads to the result that these 'heims' and 'villas'
were often royal manors, '_villæ fiscales_' on the royal domains,
just as Tidenham and Hysseburne were in England. They seem to have
often been held as benefices by a _dux_ [p259] or a _comes_, or
other beneficiary of the king, just as Saxon royal manors were held
by the king's thanes as 'læn-land.'[352]

Thus the royal domains of Frankish kings were apparently under
manorial management, and practically divided up into manors. The
boundaries or 'marchæ' of one manor often divided it from the next
manor;[353] while one 'villa' or 'heim' often had sub-manors upon it,
as in the case of Tidenham.[354]

Thus the 'villa,' 'heim,' or 'manor,' seems to have been the usual
fiscal and judicial territorial unit under Frankish rule, as the
manor once was and the parish now is in England. And this alone seems
to afford a satisfactory explanation of the use of the word 'villa'
in the early Frankish capitularies, and in the Salic laws. It is
there used apparently for both private estates and the smallest usual
territorial unit for judicial or fiscal purposes.[355]

When a law speaks of a person attacking or taking possession of the
'villa' of another, the 'villa' is clearly a private estate. But when
it speaks of a [p260] crime committed 'between two villas,' the word
seems to be used for a judicial jurisdiction, just as if we should
say 'between two parishes.'

This double use of the word becomes intelligible if 'villa' may be
used as 'manor,' and if the whole country--the _terra regis_ with the
rest--were divided in the fifth century into 'villas' or 'manors,'
but hardly otherwise.

The remarkable passage in the Salic laws '_De Migrantibus_,' which
provides that no one can move into and settle in another 'villa'
without the license of those 'qui in villa consistunt,' but that
after a twelvemonth's stay unmolested he shall remain secure, 'sicut
et alii vicini,' seems at first sight to imply a _free village_.[356]
But another clause which permits the emigrant to settle if he has
the royal 'præceptum' to do so,[357] suggests that the 'villa' in
question was one of the royal 'villas'--a 'villa fiscalis' in the
demesne of the Crown.[358]

«_Ham_ and _villa_ in the Salic laws,»

The Salic law has come down to us in Latin versions, but the Malberg
glosses contain some indications that the word _villa_ was used as
a translation of variations of the word _ham_, then applied by the
Franks to both kinds of _villas_ in the manorial sense.

The old tradition recorded in the prologue to the [p261] later
versions of the Salic laws, whatever it be worth, attributes their
first compilation to four chosen men, whose names and residences are
as follows:--Uuisogastis, Bodogastis, Salegastis, Uuidogastis, _in
loca nominancium_, Bodochamæ, Salchamæ, Uuidochamæ.

In another version of the prologue instead of the words '_in loca
nominancium_,' the reading is '_in villis_,' and the termination of
the names is 'chem,' 'hem,' and 'em.'[359]

«and in the Malberg glosses.»

Dr. Kern, in editing the Malberg glosses, points out that the gloss
in Title xlii. shows that '_ham_' might be used by the Franks in
the sense of 'court'--'king's court,'--just as in some parts of the
Netherlands, especially in the Betuwe, '_ham_' is even now a common
name for ancient mansions, such as in mediæval Latin were termed
'_curtes_.' Thus he shows that the Frankish words '_chami theuto_'
(the bull of the ham) were translated in Latin as '_taurum regis_,'
_cham_ being taken to mean king's court.[360] Possibly the lord of
a _villa_ provided the 'village bull,' just as till recent times
in the Hitchin manor, as we have seen, the village bull was under
the manorial customs provided for the commoners by the rectorial
sub-manor.

So in another place the word '_chamestalia_' seems to be used in the
Malberg gloss for 'in truste _dominica_,'[361] the 'cham' again being
taken in a thoroughly _manorial_ sense.

That there were manorial lords with _lidi_ and
tributarii--semi-servile tenants--as well as _servi_, or slaves,
under them, is clear from other passages of the Salic laws.[362]
[p262]

But the 'ham' of the Malberg glosses seems to have had sometimes at
least the _king_ for its lord. And this brings us again to the double
use in the Salic laws of the word 'villa.' It seems, as we have
said, to have been used not only for a 'villa' in private hands, but
also in a wider sense for the usual fiscal or judicial territorial
unit, whether under the jurisdiction of a manorial lord, or of the
'villicus' or 'judex,' or beneficiary of the king.

Lastly, the early date of the Salic laws bringing the Frankish
and Roman provincial rule into such close proximity, irresistibly
raises the question[363] whether there may not have been an actual
continuity, first between the Roman and Frankish villa, and secondly,
between the Roman system of management of the imperial provincial
domains during the later empire, and the Frankish system of manorial
management of the 'terra regis' or 'villæ fiscales' after the
Frankish conquest. If this should turn out to have been the case,
then the further question will arise whether under the tribal
system of the Germans the beginnings of manorial tendencies can be
so far traced as to explain the ease with which Frankish and Saxon
conquerors of the old Roman provinces fell into manorial ways, and
adopted the manor as the normal type of estate.

This is the line of inquiry which it is now proposed to follow. [p263]

III. THE ROMAN 'VILLA,' ITS EASY TRANSITION INTO THE LATER MANOR, AND
ITS TENDENCY TO BECOME THE PREDOMINANT TYPE OF ESTATE.

«The Roman villa like a manor.»

The Roman _villa_ was, in fact, exceedingly like a manor, and,
moreover, becoming more and more so in the Gallic and German
provinces, at least under the later empire as time went on.

«An estate.»

The villa, as described by Varro and Columella, before and shortly
after the Christian era, was a farm--a _jundus_. It was not a mere
residence, but, like the villa of the present day in Italy, a
territory or estate in land.

«The _curtis_.»

The lord's homestead on the villa was surrounded by two enclosed
'cohortes,' or courts, from which was derived the word '_curtis_,' so
often applied to the later manor-house.[364]

«The _villicus_ and slaves.»

At the entrance of the outer court was the abode of the
'_villicus_'--a strictly manorial officer, as we have seen--generally
a slave chosen for his good qualities.[365] Near this was the common
kitchen, where not only the food was cooked, but also the slaves
performed their indoor work. Here also were cellars and granaries for
the storing of produce, the cells in which were the night quarters
of the slaves, and the underground '_ergastulum_,' with its narrow
windows, high and out of reach, where those slaves who were kept
in chains lived, worked, and were tormented; for [p264] in the
_ergastulum_ was revealed the cruel side of the system of slave
labour under Roman law. Columella says that the cleverest slaves
must oftenest be kept in chains.[366] Cato, according to Plutarch,
advised that slaves should be incited to quarrel amongst themselves,
lest they should conspire against their master, and considered it
to be cheaper to work them to death than to let them grow old and
useless.[367]

In the inner 'cohort' were the stalls and stables for the oxen,
horses, and other live stock; and all around was the land to be
tilled.

Thus the Roman villa, if not at first a complete manor, was already
an estate of a lord (dominus) _worked by slaves_ under a _villicus_.

Sometimes the whole work of the estate was done by slaves; and though
the estimates of historians have varied very much, there is no reason
to doubt that in the first and second centuries the proportion of
slaves to the whole population of the empire was enormous.

«The _decuriæ_, slaves.»

But even the management of slaves required organisation. The
anciently approved Roman method of managing the slaves on a villa was
to form them into groups of _tens_, called _decuriæ_, each under an
overseer or _decurio_.[368]

The _villicus_, or general steward of the manor, was sometimes a
_freedman_. And there was a strong reason why a freedman was often
put in a position of trust, viz. that if he should be dishonest, or
show [p265] ingratitude to his patron, he was liable to be degraded
again into slavery. There is an interesting fragment of Roman law
which suggests that the decurio of a gang of slaves was sometimes
a _freedman_, and that it was a common practice to assign to the
freedman a portion of land and a _decuria_ of slaves, and no doubt
oxen also to work it, thus putting him very much in the position of a
colonus with slaves under him. The result of his betrayal of trust,
in the case mentioned in the fragment, was his degradation, and the
resumption by his patron of the _decuria_ of slaves.[369] Thus we
learn that the lord of a villa might, in addition to his home farm
worked by the slaves in his own homestead, have portions of the land
of his estate let out, as it were, to farm to _freedmen_, each with
his _decuria_ of slaves, and paying rent in produce.

«Groups of tens.»

There was nothing very peculiarly Roman in this system of
classification in _tens_. The fact that men everywhere have ten
fingers makes such a classification all but universal. But the
Romans certainly did use it for a variety of purposes--for taxation
and military organisation as well as in the management of the
slaves of a villa. And _M. Guerard_, probably with reason, connects
these _decuriæ_ of the Roman villa with the _decaniæ_, or groups
of originally ten servile holdings, under a villicus or _decanus_,
which are described on the estates of the Abbey of St. Germain in
the Survey of the Abbot Irminon about A.D. 850.[370] So possibly a
survival of a similar system may be traced also in the much earlier
instances mentioned by Bede under date A.D. 655, in one of which
[p266] King Oswy grants to the monastery at Hartlepool twelve
_possessiunculæ_, each of '_ten families_;' and in the other of which
the abbess Hilda, having obtained a '_possession of ten families_,'
proceeds to build Whitby Abbey.[371] In all these cases of the Roman
freedman and his _decuria_, the Gallic decanus and his _decania_, and
the Saxon _possessiuncula_ of ten families, there is the bundle of
ten slaves or semi-servile tenants with their holdings, treated as
the smallest usual territorial division.[372]

But to return to the Roman villa. The organisation of _decuriæ_ of
slaves was not the only resource of the lord in the management of his
estate.

«The coloni, on a villa.»

Varro speaks of its being an open point, to be decided according
to the circumstances of each farm, whether it were better to till
the land by slaves or by freemen, or by _both_.[373] And Columella,
speaking of the families or 'hands' upon a farm, says 'they are
either slaves or _coloni_;'[374] and he goes on to say, 'It is
pleasanter to deal with coloni, and easier to get out of them _work_
than _payments_. . . . They will sooner ask to be let off the one
than the other. The best _coloni_,' he says, 'are those which are
_indigeni_, born on the estate and bound by hereditary ties to it.'
Especially distant corn farms, he considers, are cultivated with
less trouble by free coloni than by slaves under a villicus, because
slaves are dishonest and lazy, neglect the cattle, and waste the
produce; [p267] whilst _coloni_, sharing in the produce, have a
joint interest with their lord.

«_Adscripti glebæ._»

That the _coloni_ sometimes were _indigeni_ upon the estate, and
were sometimes called _originarii_, shows the beginning at least of
a tendency to treat them as _adscripti glebæ_, like the mediæval
'nativi.' Indeed, we find it laid down in the later laws of the
empire that _coloni_ leaving their lord's estate could be reclaimed
at any time within thirty years.[375] And nothing could more clearly
indicate the growth of the semi-servile condition of the colonus,
as time went on, than the declaration (A.D. 531) that the son of a
colonus who had done no service to the 'dominus terræ' during his
father's lifetime, and had been absent more than thirty or forty
years, could be recalled upon his father's death and obliged to
continue the services due from the holding.[376]

We know from Tacitus that the typical colonus had his own homestead
and land allotted to his use, and paid tribute to his lord in corn or
cattle, or other produce. And there is a clause in the Justinian Code
prohibiting the arbitrary increase of these tributes, another point
in which the _coloni_ resembled the later _villani_.[377]

«Likeness to a manor.»

«Village round a villa.»

A villa under a villicus, with servi under him living within the
'curtis' of the villa, and with a little group of coloni in their
_vicus_ also upon the estate, but outside the court, would thus be
very much like a later manor indeed. And Frontinus,[378] describing
[p268] the great extent of the _latifundia_, especially of
provincial landowners, expressly says that on some of these private
estates there was quite a population of rustics, and that often there
were _villages_ surrounding the _villa_ like fortifications. It would
seem then that the villas in the provinces were still more like
manors than those in Italy.

«The villa becoming the prevalent type of estate.»

It is now generally admitted that indirectly, at least, the Roman
conquest of German territory--the extension of the Roman province
beyond the Rhine and along the Danube--added greatly to the number
of semi-servile tenants upon the Roman provincial estates, and so
tended more and more to increase during the later empire the manorial
character of the 'villa;' whilst at the same time the pressure of
Roman taxation within the old province of Gaul, and beyond it, was so
great as steadily to force more and more of the free tenants on the
_Ager Publicus_ to surrender their freedom and swell the numbers of
the semi-servile class on the greater estates; so that not only was
the villa becoming more and more manorial itself, but also it was
becoming more and more the prevalent type of estate.

As regards the first point, during the later empire there was direct
encouragement given to landowners to introduce barbarians taken from
recently conquered districts, and to settle them on their estates
as _coloni_, and not as slaves. These foreign coloni became very
numerous under the name of _tributarii_ and perhaps 'læti;' so that
the proportion of coloni to [p269] slaves was probably, during the
later period of Roman rule, always increasing, and the Roman villa
under its _villicus_ was becoming more and more like a later manor,
with a semi-servile village community of _coloni_ or _tributarii_
upon it in addition to the slaves.[379]

As regards the second point, the evidence will be given at a later
stage of the inquiry.

* * * * *

Confining our attention at present to the Roman villa, and the slaves
and semi-servile tenants upon it, we have finally to add to the fact
of close resemblance to the later manor and manorial tenants proof
of actual historical connexion and continuity in districts where the
evidence is most complete.

A clear and continuous connexion can be traced in many cases, at all
events in Gaul, between the Roman villa and the later manor.

«German lords of villas.»

In the letters of Sidonius Apollinaris the Visigothic and Burgundian
invaders are described as adapting themselves roughly and coarsely to
Roman habits in many respects. He speaks of their being put into the
'villas' as 'hospites.' Indeed, it is well known that these Teutonic
invaders settled as invited guests, being called _hospites_ or
_gasti_;[380] that they shared the villas and lands of the Romans on
the same system as that which was adopted when Roman legions--often
of German soldiers--were quartered on a district, according to a
well-known [p270] passage of the 'Codex Theodosianus.'[381] They
took their _sortes_, or fixed proportions of houses and lands
and slaves, and, sharing the lordship of these with their Roman
'_consortes_,' they must have sanctioned and adapted themselves to
the manorial character of the villas whose occupation they shared,
ultimately becoming themselves lords of villas probably as manorial
as any Roman villas could be.[382]

Dr. P. Roth has shown that in Frankish districts many of the wealthy
provincials remained, under Frankish rule, in unbroken possession
of their former estates--their numerous 'villæ.' Amongst these
the bishops and abbots were conspicuous examples. He shows that
thousands of 'villæ' thus remained unchanged upon the widely extended
ecclesiastical estates.[383]

Gregory of Tours speaks of the restitution by King Hildebert of the
'villas' unjustly seized under the lawless regime of Hilperic.[384]
He also relates how bishops and monasteries were endowed by the
transfer to them of villas with the slaves and coloni upon them.

«Villas given to the Church.»

Under the year 582, he mentions the death of a certain _Chrodinus_,
also the subject of a poem by Fortunatus, a great benefactor of the
clergy, and describes him as 'founding villas, setting vineyards,
building houses [_domos_], making fields [_culturas_],' and then,
having invited bishops of slender means to [p271] his table, after
dinner 'kindly distributing these _houses, with the cultivators and
the fields, with the furniture, and male and female servants and
household slaves_ [_ministris et famulis_], saying, "These are given
to the Church, and whilst with these the poor will be fed, they will
secure to me favour with God."'[385]

Here, then, after the Frankish conquest, we have the word _villa_
still used for the typical estate; and the estate consists of the
_domus_, with the vineyards and the fields, and their cultivators.

Turning to the earliest monastic records we have seen that the
'villas' or 'heims' of the abbeys of Wizenburg and Lorsch were in
fact manors.

«Villas become villages,»

The donations to the Abbot of St. Germain-des-Prés,[386] in the
neighbourhood of Paris, commenced in the year 558, and in the survey
of the estates of the Abbey made in the year 820, there are described
_villas_ still cultivated by _coloni_, _leti_, &c.--villas which grew
into villages which now bear the names of the villas out of which
they sprang:--

_Levaci Villa_, now _Levaville_ (p. 90).
_Landulfi Villa_, now _Landonville_ (p. 94).
_Aneis Villa_, now _Anville_.
_Gaudeni Villa_, now _Grinville_ (p. 99).
_Sonani Villa_, now _Senainville_ (p. 100).
_Villa Alleni_, now _Allainville_ (p. 102).
_Ledi Villa_, now _Laideville_ (p. 102).
_Disboth Villa_, now _Bouville_ (p. 104).
_Mornane Villare_, now _Mainvilliers_ (p. 112).
And so on in numbers of instances.

«and '_hems_' which are manor.»

The chartulary of the Abbey of St. Bertin also [p272] contains
instructive examples. By the earliest charter of A.D. 648 the founder
of the abbey granted to the monks his villa called '_Sitdiu_,' and
it included within it twelve sub-estates, one of them, the _Tattinga
Villa_, which later is called in the cartulary _Tattingaheim_.[387]

The chief villa with these sub-estates was granted to the abbey
'_cum domibus, ædificiis, terris cultis et incultis, mansiones cum
silvis pratis pascuis, aquis aquarumve decursibus, seu farinariis,
mancipiis, accolabus, greges cum pastoribus_,' &c. &c., and
therefore was a manor with both slaves (_mancipia_) and _coloni_, or
other semi-servile tenants (_accolæ_) upon it, as indeed were the
generality of villas handed over to the monasteries.

There seems, therefore, to be conclusive evidence not only of a
remarkable resemblance, but also in many cases of a real historical
continuity between the Roman '_villa_' and the later Frankish manor.

IV. THE SMALLER TENANTS ON THE AGER PUBLICUS IN ROMAN PROVINCES--THE
VETERANS.

«Tenants on the _Ager Publicus_.»

Passing from that part of the land in Roman provinces included in the
villas, or _latifundia_, of the richer Romans, and so placed under
private lordship, we must now turn our attention to the wide tracts
of '_Ager Publicus_,' and try to discover the position and social
economy of the tenants, so to speak, on the great provincial manor of
the Roman Emperor.

Care must be taken to discriminate between the [p273] different
classes of these tenants, some of them being of a free and some of
them of a semi-servile kind.

«The veterans.»

First, there were the veterans of the legions, who, according to
Roman custom, were settled on the public lands at the close of a war,
by way of pay for their services.

«Regular centuriæ.»

For the settlement of these, sometimes regularly constituted military
_coloniæ_ were founded; and in this case, where everything had to be
started _de novo_, a large tract of land was divided for the purpose
by straight roads and lanes--pointing north, and south, and east,
and west--into _centuriæ_ of mostly 200 or 240 _jugera_, which were
then sub-divided into equal rectangular divisions, according to
the elaborate rules of the _Agrimensores_,[388] the odds and ends
of land, chiefly woods and marshes, being alone left to be used in
common by the 'vicini,' or body of settlers.

But in other cases the settlement was much more irregular and
haphazard in its character.

«Irregular holdings.»

Sometimes the veteran received his pay and his outfit, and was
left to settle wherever he could find unoccupied land--'_vacantes
terræ_'--to his mind. Under the later empire, owing to the constant
ravages of German tribes, there was no lack of land ready for
cultivators, without the appliance of the red-tape rules of the
_Agrimensores_. The veterans settled upon this and occupied it
pretty much as they liked, taking what they wanted according to
their present or prospective means of cultivating it. Lands thus
taken were called '_agri occupatorii_,' and were irregular [p274]
in their boundaries and divisions, instead of being divided into the
rectangular _centuriæ_.[389]

It is to these more irregular occupations of territory that the chief
interest attaches.

«Outfit of oxen and seed of two kinds.»

When, under the later empire, veterans were allowed to settle upon
'_vacantes terræ_,' they had assigned to them an outfit of oxen and
seed closely resembling the Saxon 'setene' and the Northumbrian
'stuht.'

«Single or double _fuga_.»

«The _jugum_.»

Those of the upper grade, whether so considered from military rank
or special service rendered by them to the State, were provided,
according to the edicts of A.D. 320 and 364, with an outfit of _two
pairs of oxen_ and 100 modii of each of two kinds of seed. Those of
lower rank received as outfit one pair of oxen and fifty modii of
each of the two kinds of seed.[390] And the land they cultivated
with these single or double yokes of oxen was perhaps called their
single or double _jugum_. Cicero, in his oration [p275] against
Verres, speaks of the Sicilian peasants as mostly cultivating '_in
singulis jugis_.'[391] During the later empire the typical holding
of land--the hypothetical unit for purposes of taxation--as we shall
see, came to be the _jugum_, but the assessment no longer always
corresponded with the actual holdings.

But to return to the holding of the Roman veteran. It is not
impossible to ascertain roughly its normal acreage from the amount of
seed allotted in the outfit, as well as from the number of oxen.

«Of about 30 jugera.»

A single pair of oxen was, as we have seen, allotted under Saxon
rules as outfit to the yard-land of thirty acres, of which, under the
three-field or three-course system, ten acres would be in wheat, ten
in oats or pulse, and ten in fallow. With the single pair of oxen was
allotted to the veteran fifty modii of wheat seed, and fifty of oats
or pulse. Five modii of wheat seed, according to the Roman writers on
agriculture, commonly went to the jugerum;[392] so that the veteran
with a single yoke of oxen had seed for ten jugera of wheat, and thus
was apparently assumed to be able to cultivate, if farming on the
three-course system, about thirty jugera in all, like the holder of
the Saxon yard-land. The veteran to whom was assigned the double yoke
of four oxen and 200 modii of seed--100 modii of each kind--would
have about 60 jugera in his double holding.

Of course, too much stress should not be placed upon any close
correspondence in the number of jugera; but it is, on the other hand,
perfectly natural [p276] that, in the theory of these outfits, seed
should be given for a definite area, and that this should be some
actual division of the centuria of the _Agrimensores_.

«Normal _centuria_, 200 and 240 jugera.»

Siculus Flaccus, who wrote about A.D. 100, and chiefly of Italy,
describes how, in the regular allotments by the _Agrimensores_, one
settler, according to his military rank, would receive a single
modus, another one and a half, and another two modii, whilst
sometimes a single allotment was given _to several people jointly_.
He mentions also that the _centuriæ_ varied in size, being sometimes
200 jugera and sometimes 240; the smaller lots also sometimes varying
in size, even in the same centuria, according to the fertility or
otherwise of the land.[393]

All we can say is that the centuria of 240 jugera would be divisible
into single and double holdings of thirty and sixty jugera
respectively, just as the English double hide of 240 acres, or single
hide of 120 acres, was divisible into yard-lands of thirty acres. The
centuria of 200 jugera would be divisible into holdings of fifty and
twenty-five jugera respectively.[394]

Passing from the outfit and the holdings, it may [p277] be asked,
what was the system of cultivation? was it an open field husbandry?

«Traces of an open-field husbandry in some cases.»

«_Supercilia_ or linches.»

It is obvious that formal centuriation in straight lines and
rectangular divisions, by the _Agrimensores_, produced something
entirely different from the open field system as we have found it in
England. But Siculus Flaccus records that in some cases, when vacant
districts were occupied by settlers without this formal centuriation,
as '_agri occupatorii_'--the settlers taking such tracts of land as
they had the means or expectation of cultivating--the boundaries were
irregular, and followed no rules but those of common sense and the
custom of the country.[395] And he gives as an instance of such a
common-sense rule the custom about '_supercilia_,' or _linches_, the
sloping surface of which, where they formed boundaries between the
land of two owners, should be kept the same number of feet in width,
the slope always belonging to the upper owner, because otherwise
it would be in the power of the lower owner, by ploughing into the
slope, to jeopardise the upper owner's land.[396] This, he says,
is the reason of the rule that the land of the owner of the upper
terrace generally descends to the bottom of the slope.[397]

«The holdings sometimes composed of scattered pieces.»

Here, in this mention of _linches_ and irregular boundaries, traces
seem to turn up of an open-field husbandry; and a few pages further
on the same writer makes another observation which shows clearly that
frequently the holding, like the yard-land, was [p278] composed of
_scattered pieces_ in open fields, and that this scattered ownership,
as in England, was the result of an original joint occupation, and
probably of a system of co-operative ploughing.

He says[398] that in many districts were to be found _possessores_
whose lands were not contiguous, but made up of little pieces
scattered in different places, and intermixed with those of the
others, the several owners having common rights of way over one
another's land to their scattered pieces, and also to the common
woods, in which the _vicini_ only have common rights of cutting
timber and feeding stock.

This reference to the common woods and rights of way belonging only
to the 'vicini' seems to show that the scattering of the pieces in
the holdings had arisen as in the later open-field system, from an
original co-operation of ploughing or other cultivation.

«The result of joint occupation.»

Connecting these statements with the previous one, that sometimes
land was assigned to _a number of settlers jointly_, and that
sometimes settlers took possession, without centuriation, of so much
land as they could cultivate, and transferring these same methods
from Italy, where Flaccus observed them, to transalpine provinces,
where larger teams were [p279] needful for ploughing, it would seem
that we may rightly picture bodies of free settlers on the 'ager
publicus' as frequently joining their yokes of oxen together to
plough their allotments on the open-field system. And if this was
done by retired veterans on public land, they were probably only
following the common method adopted by the _coloni_ on the villas
of the richer Roman landowners in the provinces. If they did so,
they probably simply adopted the custom of the country in which they
settled, and followed a method common not only to Gaul and Germany,
but also to Europe and Asia.[399]

«The method of centuriation.»

Even in the case of the regular centuriation, there was an
_opportunity_, apparently, for joint occupation, and probably often a
necessity for joint ploughing.

Hyginus, describing the mode of centuriation, speaks first of the
two broad roads running north and south and east and west; and then
he says the '_sortes_' were divided, and the names recorded in tens
(_per decurias, i.e. per homines denos_), the subdivision among the
ten being left till afterwards.[400] It does not follow, perhaps,
that the subdivision was always made in regular squares. There may
sometimes have been a common occupation and joint ploughing; but of
this we know nothing.

«The veterans a privileged class.»

The retired veterans were a privileged class, and specially
exempted from many public burdens;[401] but in other respects there
is no reason to suppose that in their methods of settlement and
agriculture, and [p280] in the size of their holdings proportioned
to their single or double yokes, they differed from other free
settlers or ancient original tenants on the _ager publicus_. We may
add that, following the usual Roman custom, these settlers probably
as a rule lived in towns and villages, and not on their farms. We
may assume that, having single or double yokes of oxen and outfits
of two kinds of seed, they were arable and not pasture farmers, with
their homesteads in the village and their land in the fields around
it--in some places under the three-field system, in others with a
rectangular block of land on which they followed the three-course or
other rotation of crops for themselves.

Groups of settlers may therefore be regarded as sometimes forming
something very much like a free village community upon the public
land of the Empire, with no lord over it except the fiscal and
judicial officers of the Emperor.

V. THE SMALLER TENANTS ON THE 'AGER PUBLICUS'

(_continued_)--THE LÆTI.

«The _Læti_ a semi-servile class, like the Welsh _taeogs_.»

In the second place, there were settlers of quite another
grade--families of the conquered tribes of Germany, who were forcibly
settled within the _limes_ of the Roman provinces, in order that
they might repeople desolated districts or replace the otherwise
dwindling provincial population--in order that they might bear
the public burdens and minister to the public needs, _i.e._ till
the public land, pay the [p281] public tribute, and also provide
for the defence of the empire. They formed a semi-servile class,
partly agricultural and partly military; they furnished corn for
the granaries and soldiers for the cohorts of the empire, and
were generally known in later times by the name of '_Læti_,' or
'_Liti_'[402] They were somewhat in the same position as the Welsh
'_taeogs_' or '_aillts_.' They were foreigners, without Roman blood,
and hence a semi-servile class of occupiers distinct from, and
without the full rights of, Roman citizens[403]--a class, in short,
upon whom the full burden of taxation and military service could be
laid.

«Mostly deported Germans.»

Probably this system had been followed from the time of Augustus, as
a substitute for the earlier and more cruel course of sending tens of
thousands of vanquished foes to the Roman slave market for sale; but
it became a more and more important part of the imperial defensive
policy of Rome during the later empire, as the inroads of barbarians
became more and more frequent.

«System of forced emigration from conquered districts.»

There is clear evidence, from the third century, of the extension of
this kind of colonisation over a wide district. It is important to
realise both its extent and locality.

«A German population already in Rhætia, the _Agri
Decumates_, and in Elsass.»

In order fully to comprehend the meaning and consequences of this
German colonisation of Roman provinces, it must be borne in mind
that the rich lands on the left bank of the Rhine, between the
Vosges mountains and the river, had been settled [p282] by Germans
before the time of Tacitus. Strabo[404] distinctly says that the
Suevic tribes, who in his day dwelt on the east bank of the Rhine,
had driven out the former German inhabitants, and that the latter
had taken refuge on the west bank. Tacitus describes three German
tribes as settled in this district (now Elsass).[405] Further, the
large extent of country to the east of the Rhine, within the Roman
lines, reaching from Mayence to Regensburg, included in the _Agri
Decumates_ and the old province of Rhætia (_i.e._ what is now Baden,
Wirtemberg, and Bavaria), had by the third century become filled with
straggling offshoots from various German and mostly Suevic tribes who
had crossed the 'Limes'--a mixed population of Hermunduri, Thuringi,
Marcomanni, and Juthungi, with a sprinkling of Franks, Vandals,
Longobards, and Burgundians,--some of them friendly, some of them
hostile to the empire and gradually becoming absorbed in the greater
group of the 'Alamanni.'

«The Alamanni.»

«The _Limes_, or '_Pfahlgraben_.'»

Further, it should be remembered that in the third century offshoots
from the Alamanni and the Franks attempted to spread themselves over
the country on the Gallic side of the Rhine, assuming, during periods
of Roman weakness, a certain independence and even over-lordship, so
that Probus found sixty cities under their control. Probus completely
reduced them once more into obedience, and again made the Roman
authority supreme over the 'Agri Decumates,' and Rhætia as far as the
'Limes.'[406] [p283]

A few years before, Marcus Antoninus, after he had conquered
the Marcomanni in this district, had deported many of them into
Britain.[407]

«Forced colonisation in Britain and Belgic Gaul.»

Probus followed his example, and deported also into Britain such of
the Burgundians and Vandals from the 'Agri Decumates' as he could
secure alive as prisoners, 'in order that they might be useful as
security against revolts in Britain.'[408]

«Of _Læti_ in Belgic Gaul and the Moselle Valley.»

He also colonised large numbers of Germans in the Rhine valley (where
he introduced, it is said, the vine culture), and some of them in
Belgic Gaul. In his report to the Senate he described his victory as
the reconquest of all Germany. He boasted of the subjection of the
numerous petty kings, and declared that the Germans now ploughed, and
sowed, and fought for the Romans. And, as he himself had deported
Germans into Britain, his words cover the British as well as the
Gallic and German provinces.[409] This victory over the Alamannic
tribes and colonisation of them in Britain and Gaul, by Probus, was
in A.D. 277.

Very soon afterwards the same policy was again followed in dealing
with the Franks, who were plundering and depopulating the Belgic
provinces of Gaul further to the north, and ravaging the coasts
of Britain. [p284] In 286, Carausius, who was put in charge of
the Roman fleet, and whose business it was to guard the Gallic and
British shores infested by the Saxons and Franks, revolted and
proclaimed himself Emperor, defending himself successfully against
the Emperor Maximian, and leaguing himself with the Franks and
Saxons. In 291, Maximian, after directing his arms against the
Franks, deported a number of them and settled them as læti on the
vacant lands of the Nervii and Treviri, in Belgic Gaul and in the
valley of the Moselle.[410]

«Further deportations of Franks, Frisians, and Chamavi.»

The further steps taken by his co-Cæsar Constantius to put an end
to the revolt of Carausius are very instructive. He first recovered
the haven of Gesoriacum (Boulogne), and cut off the connexion of
the British fleet with Gaul. Then he turned northward again upon
the districts from whence the Frankish and Saxon pirates had been
accustomed to make their ravages upon Britain and Gaul. They were,
as has been said, in league with the British usurper, but succumbed
to the arms of Constantius. The first use he made of his victory
over them was to repeat the policy of his predecessors--to deport
a great multitude into those very Belgic districts which they had
depopulated by their ravages. This was the time when the districts
around Amiens and Beauvais, once inhabited by the Bellovaci, and
further south around Troyes and Langres, where the Tricassi and
Lingones had dwelt, were colonised by Franks, [p285] Chamavi, and
Frisians; and Eumenius,[411] in his Panegyric, represented them, as
Probus had described the Alamanni, as now tilling the fields they
had once plundered, and supplying recruits to the Roman legions. A
'_pagus Chamavorum_' existed in the ninth century in this district,
and so bore witness to the extent and permanence of this colony of
_Chamavi_.[412] Similar evidence for the other districts, as we shall
have occasion to see hereafter, is possibly to be found in the names
of places with a Teutonic termination remaining to this day, though
the language spoken is French.

A recent German writer, in a sketch of the reign of Diocletian, makes
the pregnant remark that when account is taken of all the masses of
Germans thus brought into the Roman provinces, partly as colonists
and partly as soldiers, it becomes clear that the northern districts
of Gaul were already half German before the Frankish invasion. These
German settlers were valuable at the time as tillers of the land,
payers of tribute, and as furnishing recruits to the legions; but in
history they were more than this, for they were, partly against their
will, the pioneers of the German '_Völkerwanderung_.'[413]

«Alamanni in Britain.»

We have seen that Probus had deported Alamanni into Britain in
pursuance of this continuous [p286] policy. It is curious to observe
that when Constantius soon after (in A.D. 306) died at York, and
Constantine was proclaimed Emperor in Britain, one of his supporters
was Crocus or Erocus,[414] a king of the Alamanni, proving that there
were Alamannic soldiers in Britain under their own king--probably,
more properly speaking, a sept or clan under its own chief--at that
date.

But it was not long before both the Alamanni and the Franks again
became troublesome in the Rhine valley. Under the year 357, in the
history of Ammianus Marcellinus, there is a vivid description of the
struggle of Julian to regain from the Alamanni the cities on the
Lower Rhine which the latter had occupied, as in the time of Probus,
within the Roman province of Lower Germany. After the decisive
battle of Strasburg, Julian crossed the Rhine at Mayence and laid
waste the country between the Maine and the Rhine, 'plundering the
wealthy farms of their crops and cattle, and burning to the ground
all the houses, _which latter in that district were built in the
Roman fashion_.'[415] He then restored the fortress of Trajan which
protected this part of the 'Limes.' The next year, the Salian Franks
having taken possession of Toxandria, on the Scheldt, Julian pounced
down upon them and recovered possession, and then set himself 'to
restore the fortifications of the cities of the Lower Rhine, and to
_establish afresh the granaries which had been burned, in which to
stow [p287] the corn usually imported from Britain_.'[416] This was
the occasion on which, according to Zosimus, 800 vessels, more than
mere boats, were employed in going backwards and forwards bringing
over the British corn, thus proving both the extent of British
agriculture and the close connexion between Britain and the province
of Lower Germany.

«Bucenobantes deported into Britain.»

The aggressions of the Alamanni, however, continued, and again we
find Ammianus Marcellinus describing how, at the close of a campaign,
Valentinian, in A.D. 371, deported into Britain the Bucenobantes, a
tribe of the Alamanni from the east banks of the Rhine, immediately
north of Mayence. He made them elect Fraomarius as their chief, and
then, giving him the rank of a tribune, sent him with his tribe of
Alamannic soldiers to settle in Britain, as probably Crocus or Erocus
had been sent before him.[417]

«The policy a settled one, and long continued.»

This policy of planting colonies of German colonists--even whole
clans under their petty chiefs--in the Belgic provinces and Britain,
with the double object of keeping up the supply of corn for the
empire and soldiers for the legions, was therefore steadily adhered
to for several generations. And a further proof of the extent to
which the system was carried turns up later in the numerous cohorts
of Læti mentioned by Ammianus,[418] and in the '_Notitia_,'[419] as
having been drawn from these colonies [p288] and placed as garrisons
all over Gaul and Germany, but especially on the banks of the Rhine.

It has been necessary to dwell upon this subject because it is
needful for the present purpose that it should be fully understood
that throughout the German provinces of _Rhætia_, the _Agri
Decumates_, _Upper and Lower Germany_, in _Belgic Gaul_, and in
_Britain_, there were large numbers of German semi-servile settlers
upon the _Ager Publicus_ interspersed among the free coloni and
veterans; and that most of the settlers, whether free coloni,
veterans, or læti, were engaged in agriculture. Some of them, no
doubt, especially since the encouragement said to have been given by
Probus to vine culture, may have occupied vineyards in Southern Gaul,
or in the valleys of the Rhine and its tributaries.

Lastly, it must also be remembered that there may have been
intermixed among the privileged veterans and the overburdened
'læti,' on the public lands, dwindling remains of original Gallic
inhabitants, and other free coloni or tenants, not privileged like
the veterans, but subject to the various public burdens. Some of
these were scarcely to be distinguished, perhaps, in point of law
and right from the owners of villas. They may have been holders of
slaves, and have had possibly sometimes even free coloni of their
own, though varying very much in the size of their holdings, and
falling far below the owners of latifundia in social importance.
Be this as it may, we shall presently find the free class of
landholders, whoever they might be, sinking steadily into a
semi-servile condition under the oppression of the Imperial fiscal
officers and the burden of the taxation and services [p289] imposed
upon them--the _tributum_ and _sordida munera_--the oppressive
exaction of which during the later empire was forcing them gradually
to surrender their freedom, and to seek the shelter of a semi-servile
position under the _patrocinium_, sometimes of the fiscal officer
himself, sometimes of the lord of a neighbouring 'villa.'

VI. THE 'TRIBUTUM' OF THE LATER EMPIRE.

Passing now to the system of taxation and forced services during the
later empire, it will be found to be of peculiar importance, not
only because of its connexion with the growing manorial tendencies,
but also because the taxation resembled so closely the system of
'_hidation_' prevalent afterwards in Saxon England, and some of the
forced services actually survived in the manorial system.

The system of taxation was modified by the Emperor Diocletian at the
very time when the policy of forced colonisation described in the
last chapter was being carried out.

«The _jugatio_ or assessment by the _jugum_ or _caput_.»

It was known as the taxation '_jugatione vel capitatione_'--the
tribute or stipendium of so much for every _jugum_ or _caput_.

'Jugum' and 'caput' were names for a hypothetically equal, if not
always the same, unit of taxation.[420]

The 'jugum' was probably originally taken from the area which
could be cultivated by the single or double yoke of oxen allotted
to the settler, and may [p290] have been a single or double one
accordingly. But a person holding a fraction of a _jugum_ or _caput_
was said to hold only a '_portio_,'[421] and paid, in consequence, a
proportion only of the burdens assessed upon the whole jugum.

Now, if the taxation had continued at actually so much per yoke of
oxen, the system would have been simple enough; and it would be
easy to understand how, whilst the _jugum_ represented the unit of
taxation for land, the _caput_ might be the unit corresponding in
value with the jugum, but applying to other kinds of property, such
as slaves and cattle, and including the capitation tax levied in
respect of wives and children. And this, probably, may be the meaning
of the double nomenclature--_jugum vel caput_. At any rate, we know
from the Theodosian Code, that the members of a veteran's family were
constituent parts of his 'caput.'[422]

The subject is obscure, but the reform of Diocletian seems to have
aimed at an equalisation of the taxation according to the value of
property.

«The _jugum_ became a unit of taxation,»

This seems to have involved an assessment of various kinds of land
in hypothetical _juga_, of the same value (said to be fixed at
2,000 solidi); and this involved a variation in the acreage of the
hypothetical _jugum_, according to the richness or otherwise of the
land, just as according to Flaccus was the case also as regards the
actual centuriæ and allotments.

«and varied in area.»

In one instance in which the figures have been [p291] preserved,
viz. for Syria, under the Eastern Empire, the assessment was as
follows under the system of Diocletian:[423]--

Of vine-land 5 jugera, or 10 plethra or half-acres.
Arable, first class 20 jugera, or 40 plethra or half-acres.
Arable, second class 40 jugera, or 80 plethra or half-acres.
Arable, third class 60 jugera, or 120 plethra or half-acres.

In the east, therefore, sixty jugera, or 120 Greek plethra or
half-acres, of ordinary arable land, were assessed as a _jugum_.

This instance makes it clear that while originally the actual
allotment to a single or double yoke of oxen may have been taken as
the basis of taxation, the 'jugum' had already become a hypothetical
_unit of assessment_, just as, by a similar process, was the case
with the English hide. Property had come to be assessed at so
many _juga_ under the _jugation_, without any attempt to make the
assessment accord with the actual number of yokes employed.

«The Indiction.»

The assessment was revised every fifteen years at what was called the
_Indiction_.[424]

We have seen that the nominal acreage of the typical holding assigned
to the single yoke of two oxen under Roman law on the Continent
resembled very closely that of the Saxon yard-land, which also had
two oxen allotted with it.[425] [p292]

«Analogy of the _jugum_ and _centuria_ to the yard-land
and hide.»

We have also seen that the twenty-five or thirty jugera of the single
yoke were probably fixed as an eighth of the Roman _centuria_, as the
yard-land was the eighth of a double hide.

The common acreage of the centuria was, as we have seen, 200 or 240
jugera. The latter number may be the simple result of the use of the
long hundred of 120; or it may have resulted, as suggested above,
from the necessity of making the centuria of the free citizen's
typical estate divisible into four double holdings of 60 acres, or
eight single holdings of 30 acres each.

Be this as it may, the centuria, or typical estate of a free citizen
in a regularly constructed Roman colony, seems to have stood to the
single or double holding of the common and often semi-servile settler
in the same arithmetical relation as the Saxon larger hide of 240
acres did to the yard-land.[426]

We have, then, two kinds of holdings:--

1. The one or more _centuriæ_ embraced in the [p293] latifundia or
villas of the large landowners, which, however, when tilled by their
coloni, and not by slaves, might well be subdivided into holdings of
sixty or thirty acres each.

2. The double and single holdings of the smaller settlers on the
'ager publicus' of fifty or sixty and twenty-five or thirty acres
each.

And we may conclude that the system of taxation called the
'_jugatio_' was founded upon these facts, though in order to equalise
its burden the assessment of an estate or a territory in juga became,
under Diocletian, a hypothetical assessment, corresponding no longer
with the _actual_ number of yokes, just as the Saxon hide _ad
geldam_, at the date of the Domesday Survey, no longer corresponded
with the actual carucate _ad arandum_.

Another resemblance between the Roman jugation and the Saxon hidage
was to be found in the method adopted when it became needful to
reduce the taxation of a district.

Thus, the land of the Ædui had been ravaged and depopulated. It had
paid the tributum on 32,000 juga; 7,000 juga were released from
taxation. In future it was assessed at 25,000 juga only; and so
relief was granted.[427]

«The _tributum_ paid by the lord, who claimed tribute from
his tenants, or '_tributarii_.'»

Further, as the English manorial lord paid the hidage for the whole
manor, so the lord of the villa, under Roman law, paid the tributum
not only for his own demesne land, but also for the land of his
coloni and tenants. Just as the servile tenants of a Saxon thane were
called his '_gafol gelders_,' so the [p294] semi-servile tenants
of a Roman lord were called his _tributarii_. In both cases they
paid their tribute to their lord, whilst the lord paid the imperial
tributum for himself and for them.[428]

«_Coloni_ and _tributarii_ in Britain.»

In a decree of the year 319, issued by Constantine to the 'Vicar of
Britain,' words are used which prove that there were _coloni_ and
_tributarii_[429] on British estates.[430]

Putting all these things together, the analogy between the Roman
'jugation' and the later English hidage can hardly be regarded as
accidental.

But to return, at present, to the tribute and the service due from
each _jugum_ or _caput_.

«The Roman 'tributum' and the Saxon 'gafol.'»

The tribute was generally paid part in money and part in produce,
and was, in fact, a tax. It was a separate thing from the _tithe_
of produce, rendered as rent to the State on the tithe-lands of the
_Agri decumates_ and of Sicily, though all these various annual
payments in produce may have been confused together under the term
_annonæ_. The _tribute_ proper survived probably, as we shall see, in
the later manorial '_gafol_.' The _tithe_, or other proportion taken
as rent--for the proportion was not always a tenth[431]--more nearly
resembled the manorial '_gafol-yrth_.' [p295] But we are not quite
ready yet to trace the actual connexion between these Roman and later
manorial payments.

VII. THE 'SORDIDA MUNERA' OF THE LATER EMPIRE.

«The _sordida munera_.»

In addition to the payments in kind or rents in produce, called
_annonæ_, there were other personal services demanded from settlers
in the provinces. They were called '_sordida munera_,' and strangely
resembled the base services of later manorial tenants.

There is a special title of the 'Codex Theodosianus' on the 'base
services' exacted under Roman law;[432] so that there is evidence of
the very best kind as to what they were.

«Of three grades of holdings.»

By an edict of A.D. 328 there was laid upon the _rectores_ of
provinces the duty of fixing the burden of the services according to
three grades of holdings--those of the greater, the middle, and the
lowest class--as well as the obligation of seeing that the services
were not exacted at unreasonable times, as during the collection of
crops. Further, the rectores were also ordered to record with their
own hand 'what is the service and how to be performed for every
"_caput_" [or jugum], whether so many _angariæ_ or so many _operæ_,
and in what way they are to be rendered for each of the three grades
of holdings.'[433] [p296]

Certain privileged classes were specially exempted from these 'base
services,' and it happens that edicts expressly mentioning Rhætia
specify from what services they shall be exempt, and so reveal in
detail what the services were.

The province of Rhætia lay to the south of the Roman _Limes_, and
east of the 'Agri decumates' of Tacitus, whilst also extending
into the Alpine valleys of the present Graubunden. The chief city
in North Rhætia, of which we speak (Vindelicia), was _Augusta
Vindelicorum_ (Augsburg), and Tacitus describes the German tribes of
the Hermunduri, north of the _Limes_, as engaged in friendly commerce
with the Romans, and as having perfectly free access not only to the
city, but also to the Roman villas around it.[434]

«What they were in Rhætia.»

We have seen that in this district south of the Danube, and in the
_Agri decumates_ between the Danube and the Rhine, there were large
numbers of German as well as Roman settlers, occupying land probably
as free 'coloni' and 'læti,' paying tribute to the State, in addition
to the usual tenth of the produce and personal services, according to
their grades of holding. Edicts of A.D. 382 and 390[435] represent
the tenants and settlers in this Roman province as liable with others
to render, in addition to the tithe of the produce in corn, &c.
(_annonæ_), _inter alia_, the following 'base services' (_sordida
munera_), viz.:-- [p297]

«Supply of bread.»

(1) The '_cura pollinis conficiendi_, _excoctio panis_, and
_obsequium pistrini_,' _i.e._ the preparation of flour, making of
bread, and service at the bakehouse.

The supply of so many loaves of bread is a very common item of the
later manorial services everywhere.

«Post-horse and carrying services.»

(2) The _præbitio paraveredorum et parangariarum_. These also were
services found surviving, in fact and in name, amongst the later
manorial services. The _angariæ_[436] and the _veredi_[437] were
carrying services, with waggons and oxen or with pack-horses, on
the main public Roman roads. The _parangariæ_ and _paraveredi_ were
_extra_ carrying services _off_ the main road. There is a special
title of the Codex Theodosianus '_De Cursu Publico, Angariis et
Parangariis_,'[438] in which, by various edicts, abuses are checked
and the services restrained within reasonable limits, both as to the
weight to be carried and the number of oxen or horses required.

Carrying services also are familiar in manorial records under the
name of '_averagium_.' In the Hundred Rolls and the Cartularies,
and in the Domesday Survey, they occur again and again; and in the
Anglo-Saxon version of the '_Rectitudines_,' in describing the
services of the 'geneat' or 'villanus,' the Latin words 'equitare
vel _averiare_ et summagium [p298] ducere,' are rendered 'ridan ⁊
auerian ⁊ lade lædan.' Also, in the record of the services of the
Tidenham 'geneats' the words run, '_ridan, and averian, and lāde
lædan, drāfe drīfan_,' &c.[439] At the same time, on the Continent
the word '_angariæ_' became so general a manorial phrase as to be
almost equivalent to 'villein services' of all kinds.[440]

The carrying and post-horse services, more strictly included in the
manorial _angariæ_ and _averagium_, extended over Britain, Gaul, and
the German provinces.

«Various _operæ_.»

(3) The '_obsequia operarum et artificum diversorum_'--the doing
all sorts of services and labour when required--like the Saxon
'boon-work,' which formed so constant a feature of manorial services
in addition to the gafol and regular week-work. How could the
words be better translated than in the Anglo-Saxon of the Tidenham
record--'and sela ōdra [p299] þinga dón,' '_and shall do other
things_,' qualified by the previous words, 'swá him man byt,' '_as he
is bid_.'?[441]

«Lime burning.»

(4) The '_obsequium coquendæ calcis_'--lime-burning. This was one
of the specially mentioned services of the servi of the Church in
Frankish times, under the Bavarian laws, in this very district of
Rhætia, as we shall see by-and-by.

«Building, &c., and support of inns, roads and bridges.»

(5) The '_præbitio materiæ, lignorum, et tabulorum; cura publicarum
vel sacrarum ædium construendarum atque reparandarum; cura
hospitalium domorum et viarum et pontium_'--the supply of material,
wood, and boarding for building, repairing, or constructing public
and sacred buildings, and the keeping up of inns, roads, and bridges.
Here we have two out of the 'three needs' marking in England the
higher service of the Saxon thane.

Such were the chief '_sordida munera_' of the settlers in Rhætia and
other Roman provinces. But servile as they were, and like as they
were to the later manorial services, we must not therefore conclude
that the settlers from whom they were due--whether German or Roman,
in Romano-German provinces--were under Roman law necessarily _serfs_.
They were, as we have said, 'free coloni' or 'læti,' and below them
were the 'servi.' The three grades in which they were classed,
'_ditiores_, _mediocres_, _atque infimi_,' marked gradations of
wealth,--probably according to the number of yokes of oxen held, or
the size of their holdings--not necessarily degrees of freedom.[442]
[p300]

VIII. THE TENDENCY TOWARDS A MANORIAL MANAGEMENT OF THE 'AGER
PUBLICUS,' OR IMPERIAL DOMAIN.

Having now examined into the character of the holdings, tribute,
and 'sordida munera' of the tenants on what may be called the great
provincial manor of the Roman emperor, it may perhaps be possible
to trace some steps in the process by which these tenants became in
some districts practically serfs on the royal villas or manors of the
Teutonic conquerors of the provinces.

The beginning of the process can be traced apparently at work during
the later empire.

«The Imperial military and fiscal officers.»

The German and Gallic provinces had for long been considered as in an
especial sense _Imperial_ provinces, and their 'ager publicus' and
tithe-lands had become regarded to a great extent as the personal
domain of the emperors. They were under the personal control of his
imperial _procuratores_, or agents.[443]

In fact there had grown up strictly imperial classes of military and
fiscal officers with local jurisdiction over larger or smaller areas.
There were the 'duces,' or 'magistri militum,' and 'comites,' and
'vicarii,'[444] whilst in the lowest rank of 'procuratores,' possibly
controlling smaller fiscal districts or [p301] subdistricts, were
the '_ducenarii_,' and '_centenarii_.'[445] They seem to have
combined military, and judicial, and fiscal duties with functions
belonging to a local police.

Whatever at first the exact position and authority of these military
and fiscal officers of the Emperor may have been, there is evidence
that they easily assumed a kind of manorial lordship over the portion
of the public domains under their charge in two distinct ways.

«Were apt to assume a sort of lordship in their district.»

In the first place, the 'villa' in which a military or fiscal officer
lived was the fiscal centre of his district. He was the 'villicus'
by whom the 'annonæ,' tribute, and 'sordida munera' were exacted. In
some instances the services seem to have been rendered in the form
of work on his 'villa,' or on the villas of 'conductores,' by whom
the special products of some districts were sometimes farmed.[446]
And there are passages in the Codes which complain of the tendency
in these Imperial officers of higher and lower rank to oppress those
under their jurisdiction, even sometimes using their services on
their own estates, and thus arrogating to themselves almost the
position of manorial lords, whilst reducing their fiscal dependants
to the position of semi-servile tenants.[447] [p302]

«Take persons and villages under their _patrocinium_.»

In the second place, the practice also was complained of by which the
fiscal officers, using their influence unduly, induced tenants on the
public lands of their district, and sometimes even _whole villages_,
to place themselves under their '_patrocinium_,' thereby practically
converting themselves into semi-servile tenants of a mesne lord who
stood between them and the emperor.[448]

The question would be well worth a more careful consideration than
can be given here how far these tendencies towards the gradual
establishment under [p303] the later empire of a manorial relation
between the 'coloni' and 'læti' on the crown lands, and the fiscal
officer of the district in which they lived, were the beginnings of
a process which ended in the division of the crown lands practically
into 'villæ,' or districts appendant to the villa of the fiscal
officer, which in their turn may have been the prototypes of
the villas or manors on the 'terra regis' of Frankish and Saxon
kings.[449]

«Frankish 'Terra Regis' divided into _Villæ_, or _Manors_.»

As we have said, the use of the word 'villa' in the Salic laws and
early capitularies, for the smallest general territorial unit as
well as for the 'villa' of a private lord, would thus perhaps be
most easily accounted for. And possibly the continuity which such a
result would indicate between Roman and Frankish institutions might,
after all, be confirmed by the seeming continuity, in name at least,
between the fiscal officers of the later empire and those of the
Salic and Ripuarian, and other early barbarian codes. The appearance
of the _dux_ and the _comes_ and the _centenarius_ in these codes,
and in the early capitularies, as the military, fiscal and judicial
officers of the Frankish kings, is at least suggestive of continuity
in fiscal and judicial arrangements, though of course it does not
follow that many German elements may not have been directly imported
into institutions which, even under the later Roman rule in the
Romano-German provinces, already indirectly and to some extent were
[p304] no doubt the compound product of both Roman and German
ingredients.[450]

The settlement of these difficult points perhaps belongs to
constitutional rather than to economic history.

«The process of commendation commenced under Roman rule.»

Having noticed the evident tendencies of the fiscal district of
the later empire to approach the manorial type, and to become a
crown villa or manor with dependent holdings upon it, we must pass
on to a further important effect of the oppression of the imperial
officers. We have noticed the edicts intended to prevent the tenants
on the imperial domain from putting themselves under their direct
'patrocinium.' These edicts did not prevent the over-burdened and
oppressed tenant from putting himself under the 'patrocinium' of
the lord of a neighbouring villa, thereby becoming his semi-servile
tenant, in order to escape from the cruel exactions of the
tax-gatherer.

This process was called 'commendation,' and it was carried out on
a remarkable scale. It consisted in the surrender by the smaller
tenants on the public lands of themselves and their property to some
richer landowner; so parting with their inheritance and their freedom
whilst receiving back a mere occupation of their holding by way of
usufruct only as a '_præcarium_,' or for life, as a servile tenement,
paying [p305] to their lord the fixed census or 'gafol' of the
servile tenant.

«And so hastened on manorial tendencies.»

By this process they rapidly swelled the number of servile tenants on
villas of the manorial type, and hastened the growing prevalence of
the manorial system.[451]

«Commendation very ancient.»

This process of commendation was nothing new. It was an old tribal
practice at work long before Roman times in Gaul, and destined not
only to outlast the Roman rule, but also to receive a fresh impulse
afterwards from the German invasions. And as its progress can be
traced step by step from Roman times, through the period of conquest
into the times of settled Frankish rule, and its history is closely
mixed up with the history of the growth of the Roman villa into
the mediæval manor, and with the change of the '_sordida munera_'
from public burdens into manorial services, it presents useful
stepping-stones over a gulf not otherwise to be easily crossed with
security.

«Cæsar. Subjection to an overlordship a means of escape
from oppression.»

Cæsar describes how in Gaul, even before the Roman conquest, the
free tribesmen, overburdened by the exactions of chieftains and
the tributes imposed upon them (probably by way of 'gwestva' or
food-rents), surrendered their freedom, and became little more than
'servi' of the chiefs. And so far had this practice proceeded that
he describes the people of Gaul as practically divided into two
classes--the chiefs, whom he likened to the Roman 'equites;' [p306]
and the common people, who were in a position little removed from
slavery.[452]

«Tacitus.»

Further, there is the evidence of Tacitus himself that oppressive
Roman exactions were forcing free tribesmen, even in _Frisia_,
to surrender their lands and their children into a condition of
servitude.[453]

«Gregory of Tours.»

Again, Gregory of Tours[454] describes how, in a year of famine, the
poor surrendered their freedom--_subdebant se servitio_--to escape
starvation. [p307]

«Salvian's complaint in the fifth century.»

Lastly, in the fifth century (A.D. 450–90) Salvian[455] describes
at great length the process by which Roman freemen were in the
practice of surrendering their possessions to great men and becoming
tributary to them, in order to escape the exactions of the officers
who collected the 'tributum.' He narrates how the rich Romans threw
upon the poor the weight of the public tribute, and made extra
exactions of their own; how multitudes in consequence deserted their
property and became _bagaudæ_--rebels and outlaws;--how, in districts
conquered by the Franks and Goths, there was no such oppression; how
Romans living in these districts had their rights respected; how
people even fled for safety and freedom from the districts still
under Roman rule into these Teutonic districts; and he expresses his
wonder why more did not do this.

«The effect of surrenders to an overlord.»

Many (he says) would fly from the Roman districts if they could carry
their properties and houses and families with them. As they cannot do
this (he goes on to say), they surrender themselves to the care and
protection of great men, becoming their _dediticii_ or semi-servile
tenants. And the rich (he complains) receive them under their
'patrocinium' or overlordship, not from motives of charity, but for
gain: for they require them to surrender almost all their substance,
_temporary possession only being allowed to the parent making
the surrender during his life_,[456] while the heirs lose their
inheritance. And this (he adds) is not all. [p308] The poor wretches
who have surrendered their property are compelled nevertheless to pay
tribute for it to these lords, as if it were still their own. Better
is the lot of those who, deserting their property altogether, hire
farms under great men, and so become the free _coloni_ of the rich.
For these others not only lose their property and their status, and
everything that they can call their own; they lose also themselves
and their liberty.[457]

This evidence of Salvian proves that the surrender by freemen of
themselves and their property to an overlord was rapidly going on in
Roman provinces during the fifth century, and this as the result of
Roman misrule, not of German conquest.

IX. THE SUCCESSION TO SEMI-SERVILE HOLDINGS; AND METHODS OF
CULTIVATION.

From the evidence of Salvian we can pass at once, crossing the gulf
of Teutonic conquest, to that of the Alamannic and Bavarian laws
and the monastic cartularies, in which we shall find the process
described by Salvian still going on under German rule, and thereby
holding after holding, which had once been free, falling under the
manorial lordship of the monasteries. [p309]

But before we do so it may be worth while to inquire further into
the position, under Roman rule, of the class of semi-servile tenants
into which a free possessor of land descended when he made the
surrender of his holding. We may ask, What was the rule of succession
to semi-servile holdings? and what were the customary methods of
cultivation followed by semi-servile tenants, whether upon the villa
of a lord or upon the imperial domains?

«The rule of single succession to a servile holding.»

Salvian distinctly states, as we have seen, that upon the death of
the person making the surrender to a lord, the right of inheritance
was lost to his children. The holding became, on the surrender, a
'præcarium'--a tenancy at the will of the lord by way of usufruct
only. This being so, any actual succession to the holding must
naturally have been, not by inheritance, but, in theory at all
events, by regrant from the lord to the successor--generally a
single successor--for, under the circumstances, the rule of single
succession would be likely to be adopted as most convenient to the
landlord.

«The later coloni 'usufructuarii.'»

The tenants produced by commendation were, however, hardly a class
by themselves. They most likely sank into the ordinary condition of
the large class of 'coloni,' &c., on the great provincial estates.
And there is a passage in the 'Institutes of Justinian' which
incidentally seems to imply that the ordinary 'colonus' of the later
empire was very nearly in the position of the 'usufructuarius,'
and held a holding which, in legal theory at least, ended with his
life.[458] [p310] And if this was the generally received theory
of the status of semi-servile tenants on the great estates, the
probability is that the practice of single succession by regrant may
have followed as a matter of convenience and as an all but universal
usage.

Further, if we may suppose this to have been the case on the private
estates of provincial landowners, the question remains whether the
semi-servile classes of tenants on the imperial domains may not have
been subject to the same customary rules.

«Tenants on public lands in theory 'usufructuarii.'»

«Probable prevalence of the rule of single succession.»

Now it must be remembered that the legal theory as regards that part
of the provincial land which was not centuriated and allotted to
the soldiers of the conquering Roman army as a 'colonia,' but left
in the possession of the old barbarian inhabitants, was that the
latter were merely usufructuary tenants, paying tribute for the use
of the land which belonged now to the conquerors.[459] And although
_quasi_-rights of inheritance, founded perhaps more upon barbarian
usage than direct Roman law, probably grew up generally in the more
settled districts of Gaul and the two Germanies, yet there may well
have been grades of tenants, some with rights of inheritance and
some without them. It may well be questioned whether, in the case of
the 'læti' and other semi-servile tenants, hereditary rights were
generally recognised. If we take into account the tendency we have
noticed in the management of the provincial domains towards manorial
methods and usages, it seems at least probable that the semi-servile
classes of tenants under [p311] the imperial military and fiscal
officers were placed much in the same position as the coloni on
private villas; that, in fact, their tenure was only a usufruct for
life or at will--a tenure to which, by custom, the single succession
would be a natural incident.

«The Romans adapted themselves to existing usages.»

Passing now specially to the tenants on the 'Agri Decumates' and
other tithe lands north of the Alps, and asking what were their rules
of succession and methods of husbandry, perhaps sufficient stress has
not always been laid upon the elasticity with which Roman provincial
management adopted local customs and adapted itself to the local
circumstances of a widely extended empire. We know little of the
methods and rules adopted in the management of the 'tithe lands,' but
if the foregoing considerations be sound, it may be that but little
change was needful to convert their tenants into serfs on a manorial
estate. They may have had but little to gain or to lose, or even to
alter in their habits, in exchanging the rule of the imperial fiscal
officers for the lordship of the later manorial lord.

«Management of tithe lands. Modern Eastern example.»

It is much to be hoped that more light may ere long be thrown upon
this obscure subject by students of provincial law and the barbarian
codes. In the meantime it may be possible, perhaps--so slowly do
things change in the East--that an actual modern example taken from
thence of the customary mode of managing public tithe lands at the
present moment in what was once a Roman province might be a better
guide to a correct conception of what went on 1,500 years ago on the
'Agri Decumates' than we could easily get in any other way.

«The Syrian code of fifth century.»

The Roman province of Syria is peculiarly [p312] interesting,
because the Roman code[460] applying to it in the fifth century
happens to remain, and to afford interesting evidence of adaptation
to local customs in a district unique in the advantage that its
usages, little altered by the lapse of time, can be studied as well
in the parables of the New Testament as on its actual fields to-day.

«The 'Pflicht-theil' in Syria and in Bavaria of Roman
origin.»

Sir Henry S. Maine[461] has recently referred to the parable of the
'Prodigal Son' as illustrating the custom still followed in Turkey
of sons taking their portions during the parent's lifetime, leaving
one home-staying son to become the single successor to the remainder,
including the family homestead and land.

The Syrian code,[462] following Roman Law,[463] insisted upon
three-twelfths of a man's property going to his children equally, and
left him at liberty to dispose of the remaining nine-twelfths among
them at his pleasure. But an _emancipated_ son had no claim to a
share in the _three_-twelfths.[464] These local or Roman usages have
an interesting connexion with the permission which, as we shall see
in the next section, was given by the Bavarian code of the seventh
century, to free possessors of land '_after they had made division
with their sons_' to surrender their '_own portion_,' by way of
commendation, to the Church.[465] [p313]

It is remarkable that, to the present day, in those districts of
Bavaria where the Code Napoléon has not superseded ancient custom
and law, the 'Pflicht-theil' of not less than one-half or one-third,
as fixed by the later Roman law, still remains inalienable from
the heirs, whilst a custom for the father to hand over the whole
or a part of the family holding to a son during his lifetime also
occurs.[466]

These coincidences between customs of Syria and Bavaria--both once
Roman provinces--refer to land of inheritance. But there were also
in Syria as elsewhere in the fifth century, between the freeholders
and the slaves, a class of semi-servile tenants--_adscriptitii_--who
were, in a sense, the property of a lord.[467] And besides these,
again, from the time of the New Testament[468] to the present, there
have been tenants paying a tithe or other portion of the produce in
return for a usufruct only of public or private lands.

There is no direct reference to public tithe lands in the Syrian
code, but the following description of present customs as regards
such lands may be valuable in the absence of earlier evidence. It
describes the tenants of the Crown tithe lands in Palestine as having
only a usufruct, expiring at their death, and as conducting their
husbandry upon an open-field system, which being so widely spread is
no doubt very ancient, and likely enough to resemble [p314] more or
less closely local methods followed on the 'Agri Decumates' under
Roman rule.[469]

«Land system in Palestine.»

Land tenure in Palestine is of three kinds:--

I. _Ard miri_,[470] or taxed Crown land.

In this class are included nearly all the large and fruitful
plains like those of Jaffa, Ramleh, and Esdraelon. These
lands are leased by the Government to various individuals, or
_sometimes to a whole village_. The lessee pays a _tenth_ of
the produce of the soil for his right of cultivation. _Miri_
land, therefore, cannot be sold by the lessee, nor has he
the power to transfer it; he merely possesses the right of
cultivation for a given time, and this only holds good during
the lifetime of the lessee. In the event of his death, the
contract he has made becomes null and void, even though its
term be not expired.

II. _Ard wakûf_, or glebe-land. . . .

III. _Ard mulk,_ or freehold, is chiefly composed of small
pieces of ground in the neighbourhood of the villages, such as
fig and olive plantations, gardens, and vineyards. . . .

«Tithe lands let to villages, and worked under the
open-field system.»

It has been already mentioned that by far the greater part of
the cultivated land is not private, but Government property,
either _miri_ or _wakûf_, and that the cultivator is merely
the holder. Each district has certain tracts of such lands,
and after the rains they are let to the different inhabitants
in separate plots. The division is decided by lottery. Herr
Schick has given an account of the manner in which this lottery
takes place. All those who are desirous of land assemble in
the _sāha_ (an open place generally in front of the inns).
The Imam, or _khatib_, who is writer, accountant, and general
archivist to the whole village, presides over this meeting.
The would-be cultivators notify how many ploughs they can
muster. If a man has only a half-share in one, he joins another
man with a like share. Then the whole number is divided into
classes. Supposing the total number of ploughs to be forty,
these would be divided into four classes of ten, and each class
would choose a Sheikh to represent them. The land of course
varies in quality, and this division into classes makes the
distribution simpler. Say there are four classes, the land is
divided into four equal portions, so that each class may have
good as well as bad. When the Sheikhs have agreed that the
division is fair, the lots are drawn. Each of the Sheikhs puts
some little thing into the _khatib's_ bag. Then the _khatib_
calls out the name of one of the divisions, and some passing
child is [p315] made to draw out one of the things from the
bag, and to whichever Sheikh it belongs, to this class belongs
the division named by the _khatib_. This decided, the Sheikhs
have to determine the individual distribution of the land. In
the case of ten ploughs to a class, _they do not each receive a
tenth piece of the whole, but, in order to make it as fair as
possible, the land is divided into strips, so that each portion
consists of a collection of strips in different parts of the
village lands_. The boundaries are marked by _furrows_ or
stones, and to move a neighbour's landmark is still accounted
an 'accursed deed,' as in the days of ancient Israel (Deut.
xix. 4). . . .

_The measure by which the Fellahin divide their land is the
feddân. It is decided by the amount which a man with a yoke
of oxen can plough per day, and is therefore a most uncertain
measure._

«Was it so on the Roman tithe lands?»

This description of the mode in which public land in Palestine is
often let to individual tenants or to whole villages at a rent of
a tenth of the produce, and further, the picture it gives of the
cultivation of the land let to a village by those villagers who
supply oxen for the ploughing on an open-field system so like that of
Western Europe, at least may suggest the possibility of a somewhat
similar system having been adopted in the management of the tithe
lands of the 'Agri Decumates.'

The allusion to the division of the fields into strips, and to the
unit of land measurement being the day's work of a pair of oxen,
and, we may add, the use of the same unit of measurement throughout
the Turkish Empire,[471] may at least prepare us to find [p316]
indications of a somewhat similar system of cultivation on the tithe
lands on the Danube and the Rhine when we come to examine their
conditions under the early Alamannic and Bavarian laws.

And, lastly, this Eastern illustration of the modern management of
'tithe lands' may help us to give due weight to the suggestion of Sir
H. S. Maine[472] that not only on the 'ager publicus,' but even on
the Roman provincial villa itself, in the organisation of the mostly
barbarian and servile tenants, and of the husbandry, many features
may well have been borrowed from ordinary and wide-spread customs
of barbarian communities, thus partially explaining what must again
and again strike us in this investigation, viz., the ease with which
Roman and barbarian elements combined during the later Roman rule
of the provinces and afterwards in producing a complex and joint
result--the typical manorial estate.

X. THE TRANSITION FROM THE ROMAN TO THE LATER MANORIAL SYSTEM.

«Laws of the Alamanni, A.D. 622.»

The Alamannic conquest of the province of _Germania Prima_, including
what is now Elsass and the western part of the 'Agri Decumates,'
may be described as almost a passive one. The population had long
been partly German, and Roman provincial usages can hardly have been
altogether supplanted in the fifth century. It was not till the
Alamanni were themselves [p317] conquered by the Franks (who had
in the meantime become nominally Christian) that their laws were
codified. When this took place in the year 622 it was with special
reference to the interests of the Church that the laws were framed,
just as in the case of the first codification of Anglo-Saxon laws on
King Ethelbert becoming a Christian.

«Permission to surrender to the Church.»

The very first provision of the Alamannic laws was a direct
permission to any freeman, without hindrance from 'Dux' or 'Comes,'
to surrender his property and himself to the Church by charter
executed before six or seven witnesses; and it provided further that
if he should surrender his land, to receive the usufruct of it back
again during life as a benefice charged with a certain tribute or
census, his heir should not dispute the surrender.[473]

In the Bavarian laws of slightly later date there is a similar
permission to any freeman, _from his own share, after he has made
division with his sons_, to surrender to the Church _villas_,
_lands_, _slaves_, or other property, to be received back as a
_beneficium_ in the same way,[474] and neither 'rex,' 'dux,' nor 'any
other person' is to prevent it. [p318]

Who are the people thus permitted to surrender their possessions to
the Church? Clearly they are the free possessores or tenants on the
public lands, now become '_terra regis_,' under the fiscal officers
who are still called _duces_ and _comites_.

Here, then, is still going on, but in the interest of the Church,
precisely the process described by Salvian, and with precisely the
same results.

Further, these results can be traced with remarkable exactness; for
in the charters of _St. Gall_ and _Lorsch_ and _Wizenburg_ there are
numerous instances of surrenders made under this law.

«Instances of surrender in the St. Gall charters.»

In the 'Urkundenbuch' of the Abbey of St. Gall, under date A.D.
754,[475] there is a charter by which a possessor of land in certain
'villas' in the neighbourhood of St. Gall hands over to the monastery
all that he possesses therein, with the cattle, slaves, houses,
fields, woods, waters, &c., thereon, together with two servi and all
their belongings; and (it proceeds) 'for these things I am willing
to render service every year as follows:--viz. xxx. seglas of beer
(cervesa), xl. loaves and a sound spring pig (frischenga), and xxx.
mannas, and to plough 2 jugera[476] (jochos) per [p319] annum, and
to gather and carry the produce to the yard, also to do post service
(_angaria_) when required.'

Here we have not only the public _tributum_ converted into a manorial
census or 'gafol,' but also the _sordida munera_ transformed into
manorial services.

In another charter, A.D. 759, is a surrender of all a man's
possessions in the place called _Heidolviswilare_, to the Abbey, 'in
this wise that I may receive it back from you _per precariam_, and
yearly I will pay thence _census_, _i.e._ xxx. siclas of beer, xl.
loaves, a sound spring frisginga, 3 day-works (operæ) of one man in
the course of the year; and my son Hacco, if he survive me, shall do
so during his life.'[477]

In another, A.D. 761,[478] the monks of St. Gall regrant a '_villa_'
called '_Zozinvilare_' to the original maker of the surrender at
the following _census_, viz. xxx. siclas of beer and xl. loaves,
a friscinga, and two hens, with this addition--'_In quisqua
sicione_[479] thou shalt plough _saigata una_ (one selion?) and reap
this and carry it into [the yard], and in one day (jurno)[480] thou
shalt cut it, and in another gather it and carry it, as aforesaid.'

In the surrender of a holding 'in villa qui dicitur _Wicohaim_,[481]
the census is . . . siclas of beer, xx. maldra of bread and a
frisginga, and work at the stated time at harvest and at hay-time,
two days in reaping the harvest and cutting the hay, and in early
spring one "_jurnalis_" at ploughing, and in the month of June to
break up [brachan] another, [p320] and in autumn to plough and sow
it--this is the census for that villa.'

«Like those described by Salvian.»

These grants were clearly surrenders by freemen like those described
by Salvian, which carried with them whatever coloni or servi there
were upon the land.

Thus, under date 771,[482] a priest gives to the monks all his
property _in villa Ailingas_ and another place, except two servi and
five yokes of land; and in another place he gives '_servum unum cum
hoba sua et filiis suis et cum uxore sua_.' The _hoba_ was clearly
the 'hub' or yard-land of the serf, and it, he and his wife and
children were all granted over by their lord to the abbey.

In the same year 771[483] a man named _Chunibertus_ and his wife
surrendered an estate called _Chuniberteswilari_, and it is
described as including just what a Roman villa would include,
_i.e._ the _villa_ itself (_casa_), surrounded by its court (_curte
circumclausa_), together with buildings, slaves, arable land,
meadows, fields, &c., &c. And yet in this case also he retains
possession '_sub usu fructuario_' during his life, paying the same
kind of census as in the other cases--xx. siclas of beer, a maldra of
bread, and a _frisking_.

«Likeness of the census and services to the Saxon 'gafol'
and 'gafolyrth.'»

Now, it will at once be seen how like is the census described in
these charters to the Saxon gafol of the 'Rectitudines,' and of the
manors of Tidenham or Hysseburne. There is distinctly the _gafol_,
and in many cases the _gafolyrth_ also, but no mention of the
_week-work_. Add this, and there would be an almost exact likeness to
Saxon serfdom.

But it will be remembered that even under the [p321] laws of Ine the
_week-work_ was not added to the _gafol_ unless the lord provided
not only the yard-land, but also the homestead. These surrenders
were surrenders by freemen of their own land and homesteads. It was
hardly likely that the more servile week-work should be added to
their census. How it would fare with their children when they sought
to succeed their parents in the now servile holding is quite another
thing.

«New serf created and 'week work' added.»

There is, indeed, apparently an instance, under date 787,[484] of the
settlement of a new serf--the grant of a fresh holding in villenage
from the Abbot of St. Gall to the new tenant. The holding, if we may
use the Saxon terms, is 'set' both 'to _gafol_ and to _week-work_;'
for the tenant binds himself (1) to pay to the abbey as _census_
(_i.e._ as _gafol_) yearly vii. maldra of grain and a sound spring
frisking, to be delivered at the granary of the monastery; and (2) to
plough _every week_ (_i.e._ as week-work)[485] at their nearest manor
(_curtem_) a '_jurnal_' (or acre strip) in every _zelga_[486] (_i.e._
in each of the three fields); and also six days in a year when work
out of doors is needed, whether in harvest or hay-mowing, to send two
'_mancipii_' for the work: also, when work is wanted in building or
repairing bridges, to send one man with food to the work, who is to
stop at it as long as required. And to these payments and services
the new tenant bound 'himself, his heirs, and all their descendants
lawfully begotten.' [p322]

This surely is a distinct case of the settlement of a new serf upon
the land, rendering in Saxon phrase both _gafol_ and _week-work_; and
the serfdom created is as nearly as possible identical with that of
an English manor of the same date.

«Surrender of whole villas or of holdings on villas.»

But to return to the surrenders. It is clear from the instances
quoted that some of these owners who surrendered their holdings were
holders of whole _villas or heims_, some of them of _portions of
villas or heims_. And yet they placed themselves by the surrender,
as Salvian described it, in a servile position, _lower_, as he says,
_than that of the coloni of the rich_, for they merely retained the
usufruct during their life. The inheritance was lost. And they still
had a tribute to pay to their lord, though free from tribute to
the public purse. The Frankish kings now stood in the place of the
Roman Emperor. The old Roman _tributum_ apparently remained, but was
payable to the Frankish king. When under the Alamannic laws these
surrenders were made to the Church, the tribute also was transferred
from the king to the Church.

We have seen that when such a surrender had been made under Roman
rule to a rich Roman landowner, the latter became responsible to the
public exchequer for the tributum, but he exacted tribute in his
turn from his tenant, who thus, as Salvian said, though parting with
his inheritance, still paid tribute to his lord. But this tribute
can hardly have been the full _tributum_ at which the holding was
assessed to the _jugatio_. It seems to have been rather a fixed and
typical _gafol_ or census, marking a servile condition. For in the
Alamannic laws there are clauses making the following remarkable
provisions:-- [p323]

«Tribute, services, and three days' 'week-work' under the
Alamannic law.»

_Leges Alamannorum Illotharii_[487] (A.D. 622).

XXII.

(1) Servi enim ecclesiæ tributa sua legitime reddant, quindecim
siclas de cervisa, porco valente [al. porcum valentem] tremisse
uno, pane [al. panem] modia dua, pullos quinque, ova viginti.

(2) Ancillæ autem opera inposita sine neglecto faciant.

(3) Servi dimidiam partem sibi et dimidiam [al. dimidium] in
dominico arativum reddant. Et si super hæc est, sicut servi
ecclesiastici ita faciant, tres dies sibi et tres in dominico.

XXIII.

De liberis autem ecclesiasticis, quod [al. quos] colonos
vocant, omnes sicut coloni regis ita reddant ad ecclesiam.

XXII.

(1) Let servi of the Church pay their tribute rightly, viz.,
15 siclæ of beer, with a sound spring pig, of bread two modia,
five fowls, twenty eggs.

(2) Let female servi do services required without neglect.

(3) Let servi do ploughing, half for themselves and half in the
demesne. And if there be other services, let them do as the
servi of the Church--three days for themselves and three days
in the demesne.

XXIII.

Concerning the freemen of the Church who are called 'coloni,'
let all pay to the Church just as the coloni of the king.

These clauses seem to establish clearly three facts:--

(1) That the slavery of the slaves or _servi_ on the ecclesiastical
estates had already, in A.D. 622, become modified and restricted as a
matter of general ecclesiastical custom to a _three days' week-work_.

(2) That the proper tribute (or _gafol_) of persons becoming servi
of the Church by surrender under this edict was to be as stated; the
resemblance of the details of this tribute with those mentioned in
the St. Gall surrenders showing the servile nature of the status into
which those making the surrender placed themselves thereby.

(3) Freemen of the Church called '_coloni_' were [p324] to pay to
the Church as the _coloni_ on the _terra regis_ did to the king.

In other words, a _whole villa_ or _manor_, with the village
community of 'free coloni' and the 'servi' upon it, might be handed
over _as a whole_ to the Church: in which case the free coloni were
to remain free and pay tribute to the Church as they would have done
to the king if they had been 'coloni' on the _terra regis_.

After thus becoming 'free coloni' of the Church they might, if they
chose, by a second act surrender their freedom and become _servi_ of
the Church, just as 'free coloni' on royal villas or on the _terra
regis_ might do under this edict.

This evidence relates, it will be remembered, to the district on
the left bank of the Rhine, which so abounded with '_heims_' and
'_villas_,' as well as to that portion of the 'Agri Decumates' which
was included in the province of Germania Prima.

There is still clearer evidence for the district to the east of the
'Agri Decumates,' comprehended in the Roman province of Rhætia.

Rhætia, it will be remembered, was the province, in edicts relating
to which the '_sordida munera_' were most clearly defined. We
have seen traces of some of these 'base services,' especially the
_boon-work_ and the '_angariæ_,' in the St. Gall charters. Still
clearer traces of them are found in the services described in the
early 'Bavarian laws' of the seventh century. These laws, as has been
seen, expressly allowed 'surrenders' by freemen of their property
to the Church, and the services of the _servi_ and _coloni_ of the
Church are described with remarkable clearness. [p325]

The section is headed--

«Tribute services and three days' 'week-work' under the
Bavarian laws.»

_Lex Baiuwariorum, textus legis primus._[488]

13.

_De colonis vel servis ecclesiæ, qualiter serviant vel quale_
[_al. qualia_] _tributa reddant._

Hoc est agrario secundum estimationem iudicis; provideat hoc
iudex secundum quod habet donet: de 30 modiis 3 modios donet,
et pascuario dissolvat secundum usum provinciæ.[489] Andecenas
legitimas, hoc est pertica [al. perticam] 10 pedes habentem, 4
perticas in transverso, 40 in longo arare, seminare, claudere,
colligere, trahere et recondere. A tremisse unusquisque
_accola_[490] ad duo modia sationis excolligere, seminare,
colligere et recondere debeat; et vineas plantare, fodere,
propaginare, præcidere, vindemiare. Reddant fasce [al. fascem]
de lino [al. ligno]; de apibus 10 vasa [al. decimum vas];
pullos 4, ova 15 reddant. _Parafretos_ [al. palafredos] donent,
aut ipsi vadant, ubi eis iniunctum fuerit. _Angarias_ cum carra
faciant usque 50 lewas [al. leugas]; amplius non minentur.

Ad casas dominicas stabilire [al. stabiliendas], fenile,
granica vel tunino recuperanda, pedituras rationabiles
accipiant, et quando necesse fuerit, omnino componant. Calce
furno [al. calcefurno], ubi prope fuerit, ligna aut petra [al.
petras] 50 homines faciant, ubi longe fuerat [al. fuerit], 100
homines debeant expetiri, et ad civitatem vel ad villam, ubi
necesse fuerit, ipsa calce trahantur [al. ipsam calcem trahant].

13.

_Concerning the coloni or servi of the Church, what services
and tributes they are to render._

This is the tribute _for arable_, according to the estimation
of the judge. The judge must look to it that according to what
a man has he must give; for 30 modia he must give 3 modia.
And for _pasturage_ he must pay according to the custom of
the province. Legal andecenæ (the perches being of 10 feet),
4 perches in breadth and 40 in length, [he is] to plough, to
sow, to fence, to gather, to carry, and to store. For spring
crops every cultivator to prepare for two modia of seed, and
sow, gather, and store it. And to plant vines, tend, graft, and
prune them, and gather the grapes. Let them render a bundle of
flax, of honey the tenth vessel, 4 fowls, and 15 eggs. Let them
give post-horses, or go themselves wherever they are told. Let
them do carrying service with waggons as far as 50 leugæ. They
cannot be compelled to go farther.

In keeping up the buildings in the demesne, in repairing the
hayloft, the granary, or the 'tun,' let them take reasonable
portions, and when needful let them compound together. To the
limekiln when near let 50 men, and when it is far let 100 men
be found to supply wood or [lime-]stone, and where needful let
the lime itself be carried to city or villa.

These are the services of the _coloni_ or _accolæ_ of the Church.
Next as to the _servi_:--

Servi autem ecclesiæ secundum possessionem suam reddant
tributa. Opera vero 3 dies in ebdomada in dominico operent
[al. operentur], 3 vero sibi faciant. Si vero dominus eius
[al. eorum] dederit eis boves aut alias res quod habet [al.
quas habent], tantum serviant, quantum eis per possibilitatem
impositum fuerit; tamen iniuste neminem obpremas [al. opprimas].

Let the servi of the Church pay tribute according to their
holdings. Let them work 3 days a week in the demesne, and 3
days for themselves. But if their lord give them oxen or other
things they have, let them do as much service as can be put
upon them, yet thou shalt oppress no one unjustly.

«Gafol-yrth or ploughing of _andecenæ_ or acre strips,
probably for the tenths on the 'tithe-lands.'»

In the face of this evidence it seems impossible to ignore either the
continuity of the tribute and services under Roman and German rule on
the one hand, or their identity with the _gafol_, the _gafol-yrth_,
and the _week-work_ of the English manor on the other hand. There
is first the tenth of the chief produce due as of old from these
occupants of the 'Agri Decumates' of Tacitus, closely connected with
the tribute of ploughing--the Saxon _gafol-yrth_ noticed above in the
St. Gall charters. This is to be rendered in _lawful andecenæ_, and
this measure of the plough-work is reckoned by the Roman rod of ten
feet, and takes the precise form, four rods by forty, which belongs
to the English acre of four roods;[491] and this is the [p327] strip
to be sown, gathered, and stored, just as in the case of the Saxon
'_gafol-yrth_.'

The tending of vines is peculiar to the country. The tenth bundle
of flax, the tenth vessel of honey, and the fowls and eggs are also
familiar items of the _census_ or _gafol_, both in the charters of
St. Gall and in the services of Saxon manors.

«'Sordida munera.'»

Then there are the pack-horse services (_parafreti_) and the carrying
services ('_angariæ cum carra_'), the keeping up of buildings, supply
of the limekiln, and the carriage of lime to the villa--all which
once public services ('_sordida munera_'), due to the Roman Emperor
on whose tithe lands the coloni were settled, were now the manorial
services of 'coloni' of the Church. They were called in the Codex
Theodosianus '_obsequia_,' and are almost identical with the Saxon
'_precariæ_' or boon-works.

Lastly, it has been observed that the coloni or _accolæ_ did not give
'_week-work_.' This was, as has been seen, the distinctive mark of
serfdom here in Rhætia, as for centuries afterwards throughout the
manors of mediæval Europe.

In other words, in the seventh century there are two classes of
tenants on ecclesiastical manors--(1) the _coloni_ or _accolæ_, to
use the Saxon terms of King Ine's laws, _set to gafol_; and (2) the
_servi_, _set to gafol and to week-work_.

Throw the two classes together, or let the remaining Roman coloni
sink, as the result of conquest or otherwise, down into the condition
up to which the slaves have risen in becoming serfs, and the serfdom
of the mediæval manorial estate is the natural result. At the same
time an explanation is given of the [p328] persistently double
character of the later services, which apparently was a survival of
their double origin in the union of the public tribute and _sordida
munera_ of the Roman _colonus_ with the servile work of the Roman
slave.

«Transition from slavery to serfdom.»

On the estates of the Church in the early years of the seventh
century the humanising power of Christian feeling had silently raised
the status of the slave. It had dignified labour, and given to him
a property in his labour, securing to him not only one day in seven
for rest to his weary and heavy-laden limbs, but also _three days in
the week_ wherein his labour was _his own_. From slavery he had risen
into serfdom. And this serfdom of the _quondam_ slave had become, in
the eyes of the still more weary and heavy-laden free labourers on
their own land, so light a burden compared with their own--such was
the lawless oppression of the age--that they went to the Church and
took upon them willingly the yoke of her serfdom, in order that they
might find rest under her temporal as well as spiritual protection.

Such an impulse did this rush for safety into serfdom on
ecclesiastical or monastic estates receive from the unsettlement and
lawlessness of the period of the Teutonic invasions, that by the time
of Charles the Great a large proportion of the land in these once
Roman provinces had become included in the manorial estates of the
monasteries.

«Scores of free-tenants on a single manor make surrenders
to the Abbey of Lorsch.»

In the thickly peopled Romano-German lands on both sides of the
Rhine, including the present Elsass on the one side, and the district
between the Rhine and the Maine (the present Baden and Wirtemberg)
on the other, so strong was the current in this direction that we
find in the _Traditiones_ of the monasteries [p329] of '_Lorsch_'
and '_Wizenburg_' scores of surrenders taking place sometimes in a
single village. And these cases are of peculiar interest because
_G. L. von Maurer_ relies almost solely upon them as the earliest
examples available in support of his theory of the original German
_mark_ and _free village community_. His _only_ early instances are
taken from the Lorsch Cartulary.[492] He cites 107 surrenders to the
Abbey of Lorsch in '_Hantscuhesheim_' alone,[493] and concludes that
there must have been at least as many free holders resident there in
earlier times. In _Loeheim_ there were eight surrenders; in other
heims thirty-five, five, twenty-three, ten, forty, five, and so on.
These must, he concludes, have formed part of originally free village
communities on the German mark system.[494]

Now these surrenders to the abbey go back to the reign of Pepin; and
the question is, What were these freemen who made these surrenders?
Were they indeed members of _German free village communities_?

In the first place, they lived in a district which for many
centuries had been a Roman province. The manners of the people
had long been Romanised. Even across the Maine for generations
the homesteads had been built in Roman fashion.[495] And it is
significant that the fragments surrendered in this district, which
since the time of Probus had become devoted to the vine culture,
were mostly little _vineyards_; e.g. '_rem meam, hoc est vineam, i.
in Hantscuhesheim_,'[496] and so [p330] on. These vineyards were
often composed of so many '_scamelli_,' or little _scamni_--ridges or
strips marked out by the Roman _Agrimensores_. All this is thoroughly
Roman. What looks at first sight so much like a German free village
community, was once a little Roman 'vicus' full of people, with their
vineyards on the hills around it. They look like German settlers or
'free coloni' on the public domains, who had become appendant to the
villa of the fiscal officer of the district, which had in fact by
this time become to all intents and purposes a manor.

A little further examination will confirm this view.

«The _villas_ were _manors_.»

Turning to the record of the earliest donation to the abbey, in A.D.
763,[497] we find a description of a whole villa or _heim_--'_Hoc
est, villam nostram quæ dicitur Hagenheim, cum omni integritate sua,
terris domibus ædificiis campis pratis vineis silvis aquis aquarumve
decursibus farinariis litis libertis conlibertis mancipiis mobilibus
et immobilibus, &c._'

Here there clearly is a villa or manor, and the tenants of this manor
are _liti_, _liberti_, _coliberti_,[498] and _mancipii_ or slaves.
There are charters of other estates which are just as clearly manors
with servile tenements and slaves upon them.

In the similar records of surrenders to the Abbey of St. Gall, as
we have seen, there are also donations of little free properties in
'_heims_' and '_villares_,' but by far the greater number of the
earliest donations are distinctly of whole manors or parts of manors,
with _coloni_ and _mancipii_ upon them. [p331]

The heims of this Romano-German district were therefore distinctly
manors. They were also '_marks_.'

«Another instance.»

In 773 Charles the Great gave to the Abbey of Lauresham the 'villa'
called 'Hephenheim,' '_in pago Rinense, cum omni merito et soliditate
sua cum terris domibus ædificiis accolis mancipiis vineis sylvis
campis pratis, &c._'--that is, the _whole manor_--'_cum omnibus
terminis et marchis suis_.' And then follow the _marchæ sive terminus
silvæ_, which pertained to the same villa of Hephenheim, 'as it had
always been held _sub ducibus et regibus ex tempore antiquo_.' It was
then a 'villa' or manor belonging to the Royal domain, and it was
then held as a benefice by a 'comes,' whose predecessor had also held
it, and his father before him, of the king.[499]

This is clearly a grant of a whole manor with the tenants and slaves
upon it, and a manor of long standing; and the word _mark_ is simply
the base Latin word for boundary, like the Saxon word 'gemære.'
Further, the boundaries are given exactly as in the Saxon charters,
in the form described in the writings of the Roman _Agrimensores_.

In 774,[500] Charles the Great made a similar grant to the abbey in
almost identical terms of the 'villa' called '_Obbenheim_,' in the
district of Worms, '_cum omni merito et soliditate sua, &c., accolis,
mancipiis, &c._,' just as before. This was another whole royal manor
granted with its tenants and slaves to the abbey. Yet in 788[501] the
holder of a vineyard ('_j petiam de vinea_') in this same Obbenheim
surrenders it to the abbey. In 782[502] [p332] there is another
grant. In 793[503] there is a similar grant of five vineyards, and
another[504] of three vineyards; and scores of other donations of
vineyards occur in the reigns of Charles and of his predecessor
Pepin.[505]

«The 'free coloni' were manorial tenants.»

«Surrenders by 'free coloni.'»

It is obvious, then, that these surrenders or donations, which
were exactly like those of _Hantscuhesheim_, were made by 'free
coloni' of the manor, who in the time of Pepin, while the lordship
remained in the king, as well as afterwards when the manor had been
transferred to the abbey, surrendered their holdings to the abbey,
thus converting them either into tenancies on the demesne land, or
into servile holdings under the lordship of the abbey. They were not
members of a German free village community, for they were tenants
of a manor when they made their surrenders. Nor were they slaves
(_mancipii_). The only other class mentioned in the charter was that
of the _accolæ_, the word used for 'free coloni' in the Bavarian
laws. These _accolæ_, it seems, then, were 'coloni' or free tenants
upon a royal manor, part of the old _ager publicus_, now '_terra
regis_.' And as such under the Frankish law it seems that they had
power to transfer themselves from the lordship of the king to that
of the Church. The Alamannic laws were enacted or at least confirmed
after the Frankish conquest, and probably were in force over this
particular district at the date of these surrenders. These laws, as
we have seen, expressly forbade the _comes_ under whom they lived
[p333] to prevent free tenants from making such surrenders for the
good of their souls.

Indeed, among the St. Gall charters there is one exactly in point.

«Example.»

It is dated A.D. 766,[506] and by it the sons of a person who had
surrendered his land to the Abbey under these laws by this charter
renewed the arrangement, 'in this wise, that so as we used to do
service to the king and the comes, so we shall do service for that
land to the monastery, receiving it as a benefice of the same monks
_per cartulam precariam_.'

This view of the case may be still further confirmed. In the Lorsch
records are contained in some cases descriptions of the services of
the two kinds of tenants on the manors surrendered to the Abbey.
There are free tenants and servile tenants, and it is a strong
confirmation of the continuity of the services from Roman to mediæval
times to find some of them so closely identical with the '_sordida
munera_' of the Theodosian Code and the services described in the
Bavarian laws.

To take an example: In _Nersten_ the services of each _mansus
ingenualis_ may be thus classified:[507]--

(1) _As census_, 5 modii of barley, 1 pound of flax, at Easter
4d., 1 fowl, 10 eggs, 2 loads of wood.

(2) _As work_, 4 weeks a year whenever required.

(3) _As_ '_gafolyrth_,' to plough 1 acre in each of the [three]
fields (_sationes_), and to gather and store it.

(4) _As_ '_precariæ_,' or _sordida munera_--

3 days' work at reaping

2 days' work at mowing. [p334]

2 days' work at binding and 2 loads of carrying.

The tenant gives a _parafredum_.

Attends in the host.

Carts 5 loads of lime to the kiln.

Carts 5 loads of wood.

Goes messages 'infra regnum' whenever required.

Each _mansus servilis_ rendered, on the other hand--

(1) _As census_, 1 uncia, 1 fowl, 10 eggs, a frisking worth 4d.

(2) _As boon work_, 'facit moaticum et bracem et picturas in
sepe et in grania.' In addition the tenant:--

Ploughs 4 days, and all demesne land.

Feeds for the winter 5 pigs and 1 cow.

(3) _As week-work_, 3 days a week whenever required.

For women's work, 1 uncia, 1 load of wood, 1 of grass, 10 eggs.

In total there were eighty-seven '_mansi et sortes_.'

«Their Roman connexion.»

It is evident that these _mansi_ and _sortes_ were not _allodial
lots_ in the common mark of a free village community, but the
holdings of two grades of _semi-servile_ and _servile_ tenants _on a
manor_; and it is evident that some of the services were survivals of
the _sordida munera_ exacted under Roman law. Surely the continuity
in the mode of surrender and in the services and tribute on these
South German manors, traced from the Theodosian Code to the Alamannic
and Bavarian laws, and found again in the surrenders (identical
with those described by Salvian) made under those laws, and also in
the later surveys of the monastic estates, excludes the probability
of their having been original settlements of German free village
communities on the German mark system, such as G. L. von Maurer
assumes that they were.

«Manorial tendency of the Roman land-system.»

These curious and numerous instances on which this writer relied
as evidence of the mark-system, and as remains of a once free
German village community, turn out in fact to be further instances
of [p335] the progress under Frankish rule, within a once Roman
province, of the practice described by Salvian--a practice which
continued from century to century, helping on the threefold tendency
(1) in the villa to become more and more manorial, _i.e._ more and
more an estate of a lord with a village community in serfdom upon
it; (2) for all land to fall under some manorial lordship or other,
whether royal, ecclesiastical, monastic or private, and so to become
part of a manorial estate; (3) for the originally distinct classes of
'free coloni' on the one hand, and _slaves_ or _servi_ on the other
hand, to become merged in the one common class of mediæval serfs.

We have yet, however, to examine the German side of this continental
economic history as carefully as we have examined the Roman side of
it, before we shall be in a position to use continental analogies as
the key to the solution of the English economic problem.

It may be that direct and important German elements also entered as
factors in the manorial system, both during the period of Roman rule
in the German provinces, and also after their final conquest by the
German tribes.

FOOTNOTES:

[339] _Liber de Hyda_, p. 63.

[340] _Liber de Hyda_, pp. 67 _et seq._

[341] The per-centage is under-estimated, owing to the repetition of
various forms of the same name having been excluded in counting those
ending in _ham_, but not in counting the _total_ number of places.

[342] In Essex the _h_ is often dropped, and the suffix becomes
'_am_.'

[343] _Chartularium Sithiense_, p. 97.

[344] _Traditiones et Antiquitates Fuldenses._ Dronke, Fulda, 1844.

[345] _Traditiones Corbeienses._ Wigand, 1843.

[346] _Urkundenbuch der Abtei St. Gallen_, A.D. 700–840. Wartmann,
Zurich, 1863.

[347] _Historia Frisingensis_, Meichelbeck, 1729.

[348] _Traditiones possessionesqne Wizenburgenses._ Spiræ, 1842.

[349] _Codex Laureshamensis Diplomaticus_, 1768.

[350] The following are examples of the interchange of villa and
heim in the names of places mentioned in the charters of the Abbey
of Wizenburg in the district of Spires. The numbers refer to the
charters in the _Traditiones Wizenburgenses_.

Batanandouilla (9).
Batanantesheim (28).

Hariolfesuilla (4).
Hariolueshaim (55).

Lorencenheim (141).
Lorenzenuillare (275).

Modenesheim (2).
Moduinouilare (52).

Moresuuilari (189).
Moresheim (181).

Munifridesheim (118).
Munifridouilla (52).

Radolfeshamomarca (90).
Ratolfesham, p. 241.
Radolfouuilari, Radulfo villa (71 and 73).

So also, among the manors of the Abbey of St. Bertin, 'Tattinga Villa'
granted to the abbey in A.D. 648 (_Chart. Sithiense_, p. 18), called
afterwards 'Tattingaheim' (p. 158). See also _Codex Dip._ ii. p. 227,
'Oswaldingvillare' interchangeable with 'Oswaldingtune,' in England.
See also _Codex Laureshamensis_, iii. preface.

[351] See _Traditiones Wizenburgenses_, pp. 269 _et seq._ _Codex
Laureshamensis_, iii. pp. 175 _et seq._

[352] See among the Lorsch charters that of _Hephenheim_ (A.D. 773).
'Hanc villam cum sylva habuerunt in beneficio Wegelenzo, pater
Warini, et post eum Warinus Comes filius ejus in ministerium habuit
ad opus regis et post eum Bougolfus Comes quousque eam Carolus rex
Sancto Nazario tradidit' (I. p. 16).

[353] See again the case of _Hephenheim_. 'Limites. Inprimis incipit
a loco ubi Gernesheim marcha adjungitur ad Hephenheim marcham,' &c.

[354] 'Villam aliquam nuncupatam Hephenheim sitam in Pago Renense,
cum omni merito et soliditate sua, et quicquid ad eandem villam
legitime aspicere vel pertinere videtur.' See also the case of the
Manor of 'Sitdiu,' with its twelve sub-estates upon it, granted to
the Abbot of St. Bertin A.D. 648. _Chartularium Sithiense_, p. 18.

[355] _Lex Salica_, xxxix. (cod. ii.), 4. 'Nomina hominum et
_villarum_ semper debeat nominare.'

xlv. (De Migrantibus). When any one wants to move from one '_villa_'
to another, he cannot do so without the licence of those 'qui in
villa consistunt;' but if he has removed and stayed in another
'villa' twelve months, 'securus sicut et _alii vicini_ maneat.'

xiv. 'Si quis _villa_ aliena adsalierit. . . .'

xlii. v. 'Si quis _villam_ alienam expugnaverit. . . .'

_Capitulare Ludovici Primi_, ix. 'De eo qui villam alterius
occupaverit' (Hessels and Kern's edition, p. 419).

_Chlodovechi Regis Capitula_ (id. p. 408), A.D. 500–1. 'De hominem
inter duas _villas_ occisum.'

[356] _Lex Salica_, xlv.

[357] _Id._ xiv.

[358] This inference is drawn by Dr. P. Roth, _Geschichte des
Beneficialwesens_, p. 74. See also _Waitz_, V. G. ii. 31.

[359] Hessels and Kern's edition, pp. 422–3.

[360] By the authors of the _Lex Emendata_. Note 39, p. 451.

[361] Note 216, p. 528.

[362] Tit. xxvi. (1) 'Si quis lidum alienum extra consilium domini
sui ante Regem per denarium ingenuum dimiserit IIIIM. den. qui
faciunt sol. c. culp. judicetur, et capitate domino ipsius restituat.
(2) Res vero ipsius lidi legitimo domino restituantur. (3) Si quis
servum alienum,' &c. &c. (H. and K. 136–144).

There were also Roman tributarii, Tit. xli. 'Si quis Romanum
tributarium occiderit,' &c. (s. 7).

[363] See on this point Roth, pp. 83 _et seq._

[364] Varro. i. 13.

[365] Cato, _R. R._ 2. Columella, _R. R._ i. 6–8. M. Guerard says
of the 'villicus,' 'Cet officier est le même que nous retrouvons au
moyen âge sous son ancien nom de _villicus_, ou sous le nom nouveau
de _major_.' _Polyptique d'Irminon_, i. 442.

[366] Columella, _De Re Rustica_, i. 8.

[367] Plutarch, _Cato_, c. 21. See _Cod. Theod._ IX. xii.

[368] 'Classes etiam non majores quam denum hominum faciundæ, quas
_decurias_ appellaverunt antiqui et maxime probaverunt.'--Columella,
i. 9.

[369] Fragment Jur. Rom. Vatic. 272. Huschke, p. 774.

[370] _Polyptique d'Irminon_, i. pp. 45 and 456.

[371] Bede, III. c. xxiv. 'Singulæ possessiones decem erant
familiarum.'

[372] See also the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, anno 777, where mention is
made of '10 bonde lands' given to the monks at Medeshampstede.

[373] Varro, i. xvii.

[374] Columella, i. vii.

[375] 'Si quis colonus _originalis vel inquilinus_ ante hos triginta
annos de possessione discessit,' &c.--_Cod. Theod._ v. tit. x. 1.

[376] _Cod. Just._ xi. tit. xlvii. 22.

[377] _Cod. Just._ xi. tit. xlix. 1.

[378] Frontini, Lib. ii. _De controversiis Agrorum._ Lachmann, p.
53. 'Frequenter in provinciis . . . . habent autem in saltibus
privati non exiguum populum plebeium et vicos circa villam in modum
munitionum.'

[379] _Cod. Theod._ v. tit. iv. 3, A.D. 409. By this edict liberty is
given for landowners to settle upon their property, as free _coloni_,
people of the recently conquered 'Scyras' (a tribe inhabiting the
present 'Moravia').

[380] Sid. Apol. _Epist._ ii. xii. He complains that a governor
partial to barbarians '_implet villas hospitibus_.'

[381] _Cod. Theod._ lib. vii. tit. viii. 5. Compare as regards the
_Burgundian_ settlement the passages in the _Burgundian Laws_,
carefully commented upon in Binding's '_Das Burgundisch-Romanische
Königreich, von 443 bis 532_ A.D.,' 1, c. i. s. ii. _et seq._

[382] Binding, p. 36. And they called them _villas_. _Leges Burg._ T.
38–9.

[383] Roth's _Geschichte des Beneficialwesens_, p. 81.

[384] _Hist. Francorum_, f. 344.

[385] _Hist. Francorum_, f. 295.

[386] _Polyptique d'Irminon._ Large donations were made to the abbey
as early as A.D. 558 by the Frankish King Hildebert. See M. Guerard's
Introduction, p. 35.

[387] _Chartularium Sithiense_, pp. 18 and 158.

[388] Mr. Coote has pointed out many remains of this centuriation in
Britain; and the inscriptions on many centurial stones are given in
_Hübner's_ collection.

[389] Siculus Flaccus, Lachmann and Rudorff, i. pp. 136–8.

[390] _Cod. Theod._ lib. vii. tit. xx. 3. A.D. 320. 'Constantinus ad
universos veteranos.' 'Let veterans according to our command receive
vacant lands, and hold them "immunes" for ever; and for the needful
improvement of the country let them have also 25 thousand _folles_, a
pair of oxen (_boum quoque par_), and 100 modii of different kinds of
grain, &c. (_frugum_).'

Ib. s. 8. 'Valentinianus et Valens ad universos provinciales,'
A.D. 364. 'To all deserving veterans we give what dwelling-place
(_patriam_) they wish, and promise perpetual "immunity."

'Let them have vacant or other lands where they chose, free from
stipendium and annual "præstatio." Further, we grant them for the
cultivation of these lands both animals and seed, so that those who
have been protectores (body-guards) should receive two pairs of oxen
(_duo boum paria_) and 100 modii, of each of the two kinds of corn
(_fruges_)--others after faithful service a single pair of oxen
(_singula paria boum_) and 50 modii of each of the two kinds of corn,
&c. If they bring male or female slaves on to the land, let them
possess them "immunes" for ever.'

[391] _In Verrem_, Actio 2, lib. iii. 27.

[392] Varro, _De Re Rustica_, i. 44. Columella, ii. 9. Guerard,
_Irminon_, i. 1.

[393] Siculus Flaccus, _De Condicionibus Agrorum_. Lachmann and
Rudorff, i. pp. 154–6.

[394] In the division of the land between the Romans and Visigoths
the amount allotted '_per singula aratra_' was to be 50 aripennes
(i.e. 25 jugera). _Lex Visigothorum_, x. 1, 14 (A.D. 650 or
thereabouts).

The _Liber Coloniarum I._ describes the 'ager _jugarius_' as 'in
quinquagenis jugeribus,' the 'ager _meridianus_ in xxv. jugeribus.'
Lachmann, i. 247. Here we have the normal divisions of the centuria
of 200 jugera into holdings of 25 and 50 jugera. On the other hand,
the _Lex Thoria_, B.C. 111, fixed 30 jugera as the largest holding to
be recognised on the public lands. Rudorff, p. 213 (_Corp. Jur. Lat._
200, 1. 14).

[395] P. 142. 'Quam maxime secundum consuetudinem regionum omnia
intuenda sunt.'

[396] P. 143. See also Frontinus, p. 43, and Hyginus, p. 115, and p.
128 on the same point.

[397] P. 152.

[398] Siculus Flaccus, Lachmann, p. 152. 'Præterea et in multis
regionibus comperimus quosdam possessores non continuas habere
terras, sed particulas quasdam in diversis locis, intervenientibus
complurium possessionibus: propter quod etiam complures vicinales
viæ sint, ut unusquisque possit ad particulas suas jure pervenire.
Sed et de viarum conditionibus locuti sumus. Quorundam agri
servitutem possessoribus ad particulas suas eundi redeundique
præstant. Quorundam etiam vicinorum aliquas silvas quasi publicas,
immo proprias quasi vicinorum, esse comperimus, nec quemquam in eis
cedendi pascendique jus habere nisi vicinos quorum sint: ad quas
itinera sæpe, ut supra diximus, per alienos agros dantur.'

[399] Teams of six and of eight oxen in the plough are mentioned in
the Vedas. '_Altindisches Leben_,' H. Zimmer. Berlin, 1879, p. 237.

[400] Hyginus, Lachmann and Rudorff, i. 113.

[401] See _Codex Theodosianus_, vii. tit. xx. s. 9, A.D. 366.

[402] In _Cod. Theod._ vii. xx. s. 10, A.D. 369, 'læti' are
mentioned; and in s. 12, A.D. 400, 'lætus Alamannus Sarmata, vagus,
vel filius veterani,' are mentioned together.

[403] Compare the Welsh _aillt_, or _alltud_ (Saxon _althud_,
foreigner), and the _Aldiones_ of the Lombardic laws, with the _Læti_.

[404] B. iv. c. iii. s. 4.

[405] _Germania_, 28.

[406] The importance of the _Limes_ or _Pfahlgraben_ as marking the
extent of Roman rule to the east of the Rhine, has recently been
fully realised. See Wilhelm Arnold's _Deutsche Urzeit_, c. iii. '_Der
Pfahlgraben und seine Bedeutung._' See also '_Allgemeine Geschichte
in Einzeldarstellungen_' (Berlin, 1882), Abth. 48, c. viii. And Mr.
Hodgkin's interesting paper on 'The _Pfahlgraben_' in _Archæologia
Æliana_, pt. 25, vol. ix. new series. Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1882.

[407] Gibbon, c. ix., quoting _Dion. Cas._, lxxi. and lxxii.

[408] Zosimus, i. p. 68. Excerpta, _Mon. Brit._ lxxv.

[409] Wietersheim's _Geschichte der Völkerwanderung_ (Dahn), i. 245.
Guerard's _Polypt. d'Irminon_, i. p. 252.

[410] 'Tuo, Maximiane Auguste, nutu, Nerviorum et Treverorum arva
jacentia Lætus postliminio restitutus et receptus in leges Francus
excoluit.' _Eumen. Panegyr. Constantio Cæs._, c. 21. Guerard, i. 250.

[411] _Eumen. Paneg. Constantio_, 9. Guerard, i. 252.

[412] Zeuss, _Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme_, pp. 582–4,
quoting the will of _St. Widrad_, Abbot of Flavigny in the eighth
century: 'In pago _Commavorum_,' 'in pago '_Ammaviorum_.' In the
_Notitia Occidentis_, cxl., there is mention of _Læti_ from this
district--_Præfectus Lætorum Lingonensium_. Boeking, p. 120.

[413] _Kaiser Diocletian und seine Zeit_, von Theodor Preuss,
Leipzig, 1869 (pp. 54–5).

[414] 'Quo [Constantio] mortuo, cunctis qui aderunt adnitentibus, sed
præcipue Eroco Alamannorum rege, auxilii gratia Constantium comitato,
imperium capit.' _Mon. Brit._ Excerpta. Ex Sexti Aurelii Victoris
_Epitome_ (p. lxxii.).

[415] Ammianus Marcellinus, bk. xvii. c. i. 7.

[416] Am. Marc. bk. xviii. c. ii. s. 3.

[417] _Id._ xxix. c. iv. 7.

[418] _Id._ bk. xx. c. viii. 13.

[419] Among the '_Præfecti Lætorum et Gentilium_' there is mention of
the Præfectus Lætorum _Teutonicianorum_, _Batavorum_, _Francorum_,
_Lingonensium_, _Nerviorum_, and _Lagensium_. _Notitia Occ._ cxl.
Böcking, p. 120. See also the valuable annotation '_De Lætis._'
Böcking, 1044 _et seq._

[420] _Cod. Theod._ vii. 6, 3. _Per viginti juga seu capita conferant
vestem. . ._

_Id._ xi. 16, 6. _Pro capitibus seu jugis suis. . ._

[421] _Cod. Theol._ xi. 17, 4. 'Universi pro portione suæ
possessionis jugationis que ad hæc munia coarctentur.'

[422] _Cod. Theod._ lib. vii. tit. xx. 4.

[423] See _Syrisch-Römisches Rechtsbuch aus dem Fünften Jahrhundert_
(Bruns und Sachan), Leipzig, 1880, p. 37; and Marquardt's
_Staatsverwaltung_, ii. 220. See also Hyginus, _De Limitibus
Constituendis_, Lachmann, &c., p. 205, where there is mention of
'_arvum primum, secundum_,' &c., in _Pannonia_.

[424] Marquardt, ii. 237.

[425] Not that the Roman jugerum was equal in area to the Saxon acre.
It was much smaller, and of quite a different shape, at least in
Italy. The acreage of the jugum no doubt varied very much, as did
also the acreage of the yard-land.

[426] It is even possible and probable that the Gallic coinage
in Roman times, mentioned in the _Pauca de Mensuris_ (Lachmann
and Rudorff, p. 373), 'Juxta Galios vigesima pars unciæ denarius
est . . . duodecies unciæ libram xx. solidos continentem efficiunt,
sed veteres _solidum_ qui nunc _aureus_ dicitur nuncupabant,'--the
division of the pound of silver into 12 ounces, and these into 20
pennyweights--with which we found the Welsh _tunc pound_ to be
connected, may also have had something to do with the contents of the
centuria and jugum. At all events, the division of the pound into
240 pence was very conveniently arranged for the division of a tax
imposed upon holdings of 240 acres, or 120 acres, or 60 acres, or 30
acres, or the 10 acres in each field. In other words, the coinage and
the land divisions were remarkably _parallel_ in their arrangement,
as we found was also the case with the _scutage_ of the Hundred
Rolls, and the _scatt penny_ of the villani in the Boldon Book.

[427] Eumenius, _Pan. Constantini_, Marquardt, S. V., ii. 222.

[428] _Cod. Theod._ lib. xi. tit. i. 14.

[429] See also Ammianus. xxvii. 8, 7. Coote, 131.

[430] _Cod. Theod._ lib. xi. tit. vii. 2. Idem A ad _Pacatianum
Vicarium Britanniarum_. Unusquisque decurio pro ea portione
conveniatur, in qua vel ipse vel colonus vel tributarius ejus
convenitur et colligit; neque omnino pro alio decurione vel
territorio conveniatur. Id enim prohibitum esse manifestum est et
observandum deinceps, quo[d] juxta hanc nostram provisionem nullus
pro alio patiatur injuriam. Dat. xii. Kal. Dec. Constantino A. et
Licinio C. Coss. (319).

[431] Hyginus. Lachmann, &c., i. 205.

[432] _Cod. Theod._ lib. xi. tit. xvi. _De Extraordinariis sive
Sordidis Muneribus_. See also Godefroy's notes.

[433] Lib. xi. t. xvi. 4. 'Ea forma servata, ut primo a potioribus,
deinde a mediocribus atque infimis, quæ sunt danda, præstentur.'
'Manu autem sua rectores scribere debebunt, quid opus sit, et in
qua necessitate, per singula capita, vel quantæ angariæ vel quantæ
operæ, vel quæ aut in quanto modo præbendæ sint, ut recognovisse se
scribant; exactionis, prædicto ordine inter ditiores, mediocres,
atque infimos observando.'

[434] _Germania_, xli.

[435] _Cod. Theod._ xi. 16, and 18.

[436] From _angarius_ = ἄγγαρος, a messenger or courier. The word is
probably of Persian origin.

'Nothing mortal travels so fast as these Persian messengers. The
entire plan is a Persian invention. . . . The Persians give the
riding post the name of "_angarum_."'--_Herodotus_, bk. viii. 98.

See also the _Cyropædia_, bk. viii. c. 17, where the origin of the
post-horse system is ascribed to Cyrus.

[437] From the Latin _veredus_, a post-horse.

[438] _Cod. Theod._ lib. viii. t. v.

[439] The '_veredus_' or post-horse, from which the _paraveredus_
or extra post-horse, sometimes _parhippus_ (all these words occur
in the _Codex Justin._ xii. l. [li.], 2 and 4, _De Cursu Publico_),
may have been equivalent to the later 'averius' or 'affrus' by which
the _averagium_ was performed. Cf. '_Parhippus_ vel Avertarius'
(_Cod. Theod._ VIII. v. xxii.) and see Id. xlvii., '_avertarius_'
= a horse carrying 'averta' or saddlebags. Hence, perhaps, the
base Latin _avera, averiæ, averii, affri_, beasts of burden, oxen,
or farm horses, and the verb '_averiare_' (Saxon of 10th century
'_averian_'), and lastly the noun 'averagium' for the service. See
also the Gallic _Ep-o-rediæ_ (men of the horse-course) mentioned by
Pliny iii. 21 (Dr. Guest's _Origines Celticæ_, i. 381), and compare
this word with _paraveredi_. In modern Welsh 'Rhed' = a running, a
course.

[440] Compare the careful paragraphs on these words in M. Guerard's
Introduction to the _Polyptique de l'Abbé Irminon_, pp. 793 _et seq._
The sense of the word as implying a compulsory service is shown in
the Vulgate of Matt. v. 4: 'Et quicunque te _angariaverit_ mille
passus: vade cum illo et alia duo.'

The same word is used in Matt. xxvii. 32, and Mark xv., where Simon
is _compelled_ to bear the cross.

[441] _Supra_, p. 154.

[442] There were probably _servi_ on the 'ager publicus' as there
were on the Frankish public lands, called '_servi fisci_.' See
_Decretio Chlotharii regis_, A.D. 511, 55S. _Mon. Germ. Hist. Legum
Sectio_, ii. p. 6

[443] Compare Dr. J. N. Madvig's _Die Verfassung und Verwaltung des
Römischen Staates_ (Leipzig, 1882), ii. p. 408.

[444] Madvig, ii. p. 573; and _Cod. Just._ xii. 8–14, and _Cod.
Theod._ xii. i. 38. See also the _Notitia Dignitatum_, passim.

[445] With regard to the _procuratores_, _ducenarii_, and
_centenarii_ see Madvig, ii. p. 411. See also _Cod. Just._, xii.
20 (De agentibus in rebus), where a certain 'magister officiorum'
is forbidden to have under him more than 48 _ducenarii_ and 200
_centenarii_. Also _Cod. Just._, xii. 23 (24). Mr. Coote (_Romans
in England_, p. 317 et seq.), identifies the 'centenarii' with the
'stationarii,' or police of the later provincial rule. Compare
this with the distinctly police duties of the 'centenarii'
of the '_Decretio Clotharii_' (A.D. 511–558), _Mon. Germ.
Hist._--Capitularia, p. 7.

[446] Madvig, ii. 432, and the authorities there quoted.

[447] _Cod. Theod._, xi. tit. 11. i. 'Si quis eorum qui provinciarum
Rectoribus exequuntur, quique in diversis agunt officiis principatus,
et qui sub quocumque prætextu muneris publici possunt esse
terribiles, rusticano cuipiam necessitatem obsequii, _quasi mancipio
sui juris_, imponat, aut servum ejus aut bovem in usus proprios
necessitatisque converterit. . . ultimo subjugatur exitio.' Quoting
the above Lehuërou observes:--'Les ducs, les comtes, les recteurs
des provinces, institués pour résister aux puissants et aux forts,
n'usèrent plus de l'autorité de leur charge que pour se rendre
redoutables aux petits et aux faibles, et se firent un honteux
revenue de la terreur qu'ils répandaient autour d'eux. Ils enlevaient
sans scrupule, tantôt le bœuf, tantôt l'esclave du pauvre, et
quelquefois le malheureux lui-même avec sa femme et ses enfants, pour
les employer tous ensemble à la culture de leurs _villæ_' (p. 140).
See also _Cod. Theod._ viii. t. v. 7 and 15.

[448] _Cod. Theod._, xi. tit. 24, _De Patrociniis vicorum_.
'Quicumque ex tuo officio, vel ex quocumque hominum ordine, _vicos_
in suum detecti fuerint patrocinium suscepisse, constitutas luent
pœnas. . . . Quoscumque autem vicos aut defensionis potentia, aut
multitudine sua fretos, publicis muneribus constiterit obviari,
ultioni quam ratio ipsa dictabit, conveniet subjugari.'

'Censemus ut qui rusticis patrocinia præbere temptaverit,
cujuslibet ille fuerit dignitatis, sive MAGISTRI UTRIUSQUE MILITIÆ,
sive COMITIS, sive ex _pro-consulibus_, vel _vicariis_, vel
_augustalibus_, vel _tribunis_ (_C. J._ xii. 17, 2), sive ex ordine
_curiali_, vel _cujuslibet alterius dignitatis_, quadraginta librarum
auri se sciat dispendium pro singulorum fundorum præbito patrocinio
subiturum, nisi ab hac postea temeritate discesserit. Omnes ergo
sciant, non modo eos memorata multa ferendos, qui clientelam
susceperint rusticorum, sed eos quoque qui fraudandorum tributorum
causa ad patrocinia solita fraude confugerint, duplum definitæ multæ
dispendium subituros.' (Dat. vi. Id. Mart. Constantinop., Theodoro v.
c. Coss. 399). See also _Lehuërou_, p. 136 139, and _Cod. Just._, xi.
54.

[449] Madvig, ii. 432. 'Wie lange die Ackersleute auf den
Kaiserlichen Grundstücken (_Coloni Cæsaris Dig._ vi. 6, s. 11,
i. 19, 3) eine grössere persönliche Freiheit bewahrten, und seit
welcher Zeit das spätere Kolonatsverhältniss galt, lässt sich nicht
bestimmen, da der Uebergang schrittweise vor sich ging.'

[450] In the _Ripuarium Laws_, tit. li. (53) 'Grafio' = '_comes_'
= '_judex fiscalis_,' and the _mallus_ was sometimes held 'ante
centenarium vel comitem, sen ante Ducem Patricium vel Regem,' tit.
1. (52). So in the _Salic Laws_, tit. lxxv. 'debet _judex_, hoc est,
_comes aut grafio_,' &c., but this occurs in one of the additions to
the '_Lex Antiqua_.' Compare the 'centenarius' in his relation to his
superior, the 'comes,' and in his position of 'judex' in the mallus
with the 'centenarius' under _Cod. Just._, vii. 20, 4.

[451] M. Lehuërou observes, 'Il y a déjà des _seigneurs_, cachés
encore sous l'ancienne et familière dénomination de _patrons_. Cela
est si vrai que, non seulement la chose, mais le mot se trouve dans
Libanius:--Περὶ τῶν προστασιῶν εἴσι κῶμαι μεγάλαι, πολλῶν ἑκαστη
δεσποτὢν.

[452] _De Bello Gallico_, vi. c. xiii.–xv. 'In omni Galliâ eorum
hominum qui aliquo sunt numero atque honore genera sunt duo. Nam
plebes pœne servorum habetur loco, quæ per se nihil audet et nulli
adhibetur consilio. Plerique, quum aut ære alieno aut magnitudine
tributorum aut injuriâ potentiorum premuntur, sese in servitutem
dicant nobilibus. In hos eadem omnia sunt jura quæ dominis in
servos. . . . Alterum genus est _Equitum_. Hi, quum est usus, atque
aliquod bellum incidit (quod ante Cæsaris adventum fere quotannis
accidere solebat, uti aut ipsi injurias inferrent aut illatas
propulsarent), omnes in bello versantur: atque eorum ut quisque
est genere copiisque amplissimus, ita plurimos circum se ambactos
clientesque habet. Hanc unam gratiam potentiamque noverunt.'

[453] Tacitus, _Annals_, iv. 72. 'In the course of the year the
Frisians, a people dwelling beyond the Rhine, broke out into open
acts of hostility. The cause of the insurrection was not the restless
spirit of a nation impatient of the yoke; they were driven to despair
by Roman avarice. A moderate tribute, such as suited the poverty
of the people, consisting of raw hides for the use of the legions,
had been formerly imposed by Drusus. To specify the exact size and
quality of the hide was an idea that never entered into the head
of any man till Olennius, the first centurion of a legion, being
appointed governor over the Frisians, collected a quantity of the
hides of forest bulls, and made them the standard both of weight
and dimensions. To any other nation this would have been a grievous
burden, but was altogether impracticable in Germany, where the cattle
running wild in large tracts of forest are of prodigious size, while
the breed for domestic uses is remarkably small. The Frisians groaned
under this oppressive demand. They gave up first their cattle, next
their lands; and finally were obliged to see their wives and children
carried into slavery by way of commutation. Discontent arose, and
they rebelled,' &c.

[454] _Hist._, f. 369.

[455] Salvian, _De Gubernatione Dei_, ib. v. s. vi.–viii.

[456] 'Hoc enim pacto aliquid parentibus temporarie attribuitur, ut
in futuro totum filiis auferatur'--Salvian, s. viii.

[457] The above is only an abridged summary of the lengthy
declamation of Salvian. See Gregory of Tours, '_De Miraculis S.
Martini_,' iv. xi. (1122), where a surrender is mentioned. 'Tradidit
ei omnem possessionem suam, dicens: "Sint hæc omnia penes S^{ti.}
Martini ditionem quæ habere videor, et hoc tantum exinde utar, ut de
his dum vixero alar."'

[458] Lib. ii. Tit. i. 36. 'Is ad quem ususfructus fundi pertinet,
non aliter fructuum dominus efficitur, quam si ipse eos perceperit;
et ideo, licet maturis fructibus nondum tamen perceptis decesserit,
ad heredem ejus non pertinent, sed domino proprietatis adquiruntur.
_Eadem fere et de colono_ dicuntur.

[459] Rudorff, ii. 317.

[460] _Syrisch-Römisches Rechtsbuch._ Aus dem fünften Jahrhundert.
Leipzig, 1880.

[461] _Early Law and Customs_, p. 260.

[462] S. 1, s. 9, and s. 27.

[463] _Inst. Just._ ii. xviii. 53, and
compare Sandars' note on this passage.

[464] _Syrian Code_, s. 3.

[465] See also _Lex Burgundiorum_, i. 2, 'Si cum filiis deviserit
et portionem suam tulerit, . . .' and id. xxiv. 5 and li. 1 and 2.
Also 'Urkunden' of St. Gall, No. 360. 'Quicquid contra filios meos
in portionem et in meam swascaram accepi.' See also Sir H. Maine's
_Ancient Law_, pp. 198, 224, 228.

[466] _Reports on Tenure of Land_, 1869–70, p. 226. Just. Nov. 18.

[467] See _Syrian Code_, s. 50.

[468] See the parable of 'The unjust steward,' and _supra_, p. 145.

[469] _Journal of the Palestine Exploration Society_, January 1883.
'Life, Habits, and Customs of the Fellahin of Palestine,' by the
Rev. F. A. Klein. From the _Zeitschrift_ of the German Palestine
Exploration Society.

[470] Shortened form of _ard emiri_--land of the Emir.

[471] The standard measure of land throughout the Turkish Empire
is called a _deunum_, and is the area which one pair of oxen can
plough in a single day; it is equal to a quarter of an acre, or a
square of forty _arshuns_ (nearly 100 feet). There seems to be but
one allusion to this fact in the Scriptures; it is found in 1 Sam.
xiv. 14, where the exploit of Jonathan and his armour-bearer is
described: twenty of the enemy are stated to have fallen within a
space of '_a half-acre of land_' of '_a yoke of oxen_,' an expression
better rendered 'within the space of half a _deunum_ of land.' This
measure is referred to in ancient profane writers, so that no change
has occurred in this respect. Van Lenner's _Bible Customs in Bible
Lands_, i. 75.

[472] _Early Law and Custom_, p. 332.

[473] _Lex Alamannorum_ Chlotharii. 1. 'Ut si quis liber res suas vel
semetipsum ad ecclesiam tradere voluerit, nullus habeat licentiam
contradicere ei, non dux, non comes, nec ulla persona, sed spontanea
voluntate liceat christiano homine Deo servire et de proprias res
suas semetipsum redemere. . . .

2. Si quis liber, qui res suas ad ecclesiam dederit et per cartam
firmitatem fecerit, sicut superius dictum est, et post hæc ad
pastorem ecclesiæ ad beneficium susceperit ad victualem necessitatem
conquirendam diebus vitæ suæ: et quod spondit persolvat ad ecclesiam
censum de illa terra, et hoc per epistulam firmitatis fiat, ut post
ejus discessum nullus de heredibus non contradicat.'--Pertz, _Legum_,
t. iii. pp. 45–6.

[474] _Lex Baiuwariorum._ Textus Legis primus.

1. 'Ut si quis liber persona voluerit et dederit res suas ad
ecclesiam pro redemptione animæ suæ, licentiam habeat de portione
sua, postquam cum filiis suis partivit. Nullus eum prohibeat, non
rex, non dux, nec ulla persona habeat potestatem prohibendi ei. Et
quicquid donaverit, villas, terras, mancipia, vel aliqua pecunia,
omnia quæcumque donaverit pro redemptione animæ suæ, hoc per
epistolam confirmet propria manu sua ipse. . . .

'Et post hæc nullam habeat potestatem nec ipse nec posteri ejus, nisi
defensor ecclesiæ ipsius _beneficium_ præstare voluerit ei.'--Pertz,
_Legum_, t. iii. pp. 269–70.

[475] _Urkundenbuch der Abtei St. Gallen_, i. p. 22.

[476] Compare with the Kentish 'yokes' and 'ioclets.' The yoke here
is, however, evidently the _juger_, not the _jugum_.

[477] _Urkundenbuch_, pp. 27–8.

[478] _Id._ p. 33.

[479] See also _id._ pp. 76 and 90.

[480] Hence '_jurnal_' for _acre_.

[481] _Id._ p. 41.

[482] _Urkundenbuch_, p. 59.

[483] _Id._ p. 60.

[484] _Urkundenbuch_, p. 106.

[485] "Et ad proximam curtem vestram in unaquaque zelga ebdomedarii
jurnalem arare debeamus" (p. 107).

[486] Waitz speaks of the three great fields under the
'_Dreifelderwirthschaft_' as 'Zelgen.'--_Verfassung der Deutschen
Völker_, i. 120. And see _infra_, chap. x. s. iii.

[487] Pertz, _Legum_, iii. pp. 51, 52.

[488] Pertz, _Legum_, t. iii. pp. 278–280.

[489] Compare _Chlotharii II. Præceptio_ (584–628) s. 11. 'Agraria,
pascuaria vel decimas porcorum ecclesiæ pro fidei nostræ devotione
concedimus, ita ut actor aut decimator in rebus ecclesiæ nullus
accedat.'--_Mon. Germ. Hist. Capitularia_, I. i. p. 19.

[490] This word '_accola_' is often used in charters for '_free
coloni_.'

[491] In the Glosses this andecena is called a '_sharwork_.'

[492] _Geschichte der Dorfverfassung in Deutschland_, i. pp. 6 _et
seq._

[493] _Traditiones in Pago Rhinensi. Codex Lauresham._ pp. 357 _et
seq._

[494] _Dorfverfassung_, pp. 15 _et seq._

[495] Ammianus Marcellinus, bk. xvii. c. i., A.D. 357.

[496] _Codex Lauresham._ pp. 326, 362, 369, 375 and _passim_.

[497] _Codex Lauresham._ p. 3.

[498] It is curious to notice that 'coliberti' appear also in the
_western_ counties of England in the Domesday Survey.

[499] _Codex Lauresham._ i. pp. 15–16.

[500] _Id._ i. pp. 18 and 19.

[501] _Id._ i. p. 297.

[502] _Id._ i. p. 303.

[503] _Codex Lauresham._ i. p. 347.

[504] _Id._ i. pp. 349–350.

[505] _Id._ ii. pp. 232 _et seq._

[506] _Urkundenbuch_ of St. Gall, i. p. 50.

[507] _Codex Laureshamensis_, iii. 212. See also the services at
_Winenheim_ (iii. 205), a manor near Heppenheim.

[p336]

CHAPTER IX.
_THE GERMAN SIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL EVIDENCE._

I. THE GERMAN TRIBAL SYSTEM, AND ITS TENDENCY TOWARDS THE MANORIAL
SYSTEM.

«Cæsar's description of the German tribal system.»

The description given of the Germans by Cæsar is evidently that of a
people in the same tribal stage of economic development as the one
with which Irish and Welsh evidence has made us familiar.

'Their whole life is occupied in hunting and warlike
enterprise. . . . They do not apply much to agriculture, and
their food mostly consists of milk, cheese, and flesh. Nor has
anyone a fixed quantity of land or defined individual property,
but the magistrates and chiefs assign to tribes and families
who herd together, annually, and for one year's occupation, as
much land and in such place as they think fit, compelling them
the next year to move somewhere else.'[508]

He also alludes to the frailty of their houses,[509] another mark
of the tribal system in Wales, which [p337] indeed was a necessary
result of the yearly migration to fresh fields and pastures.

Now what were the tribes of Germans with whom Cæsar came most in
contact?

«The Suevi.»

His chief campaigns against the Germans were (1) against the _Suevi_,
who were crossing the Rhine north of the confluence with the Moselle,
and (2) against Ariovistus in the territory of the _Sequani_ at the
southern bend of the Rhine eastward. And it is remarkable that the
_Suevi_ were prominent again among the tribes enlisted in the army of
Ariovistus.[510] So that it is easy to see how the Suevi, coming into
close contact with Cæsar at both ends, came to be considered by him
as the most important of the German peoples.

He describes the _Suevi_ separately, and in terms which show over
again that they were still in the early tribal stage[511] in which an
annual shifting of holdings was practised. Indeed, their semi-nomadic
habits could not be shown better than by the inadvertently mentioned
facts that the Suevi who were crossing the Rhine to the north brought
their families with them; and that the Suevi and other tribes forming
the army of Ariovistus to the south had not had settled homes for
fourteen years,[512] but brought their families about with them in
waggons wherever they went, the waggons and women of each tribe being
placed behind the warriors when they were drawn up by tribes in
battle array.[513]

This statement of Cæsar that the Germans of his [p338] time were
still in the early tribal stage of economic development in which
there was an annual shifting of the households from place to place
needs no corroboration or explaining away after what has already been
seen going on under the Welsh and Irish tribal systems. The ease with
which tribal redistributions were made under the peculiar method of
clustering homesteads which prevailed in Wales and Ireland, makes the
statement of Cæsar perfectly probable.

* * * * *

But how was it 150 years later, when Tacitus wrote his celebrated
description of the Germans of his time?

«The 'Germania' of Tacitus.»

The 'Germania' was obviously written from a distinctly Roman point of
view.

The eye of the writer was struck with those points chiefly in which
German and Roman manners differed. The Romans of the well-to-do
classes lived in cities. City life was their usual life, and those
of them who had villas in the country, whilst sometimes having
residences for themselves upon them, as we have seen, cultivated them
most often by means of slave-labour under a _villicus_, but sometimes
by _coloni_.

«The scattered settlements of the free tribesmen.»

«The villages of their servile tenants.»

What struck Tacitus in the economy of the Germans (and by Germans
he obviously meant the _free tribesmen_, not their slaves) was that
they did _not_ live in cities like the Romans. 'They dwell' (he says)
'apart and scattered, as spring, or plain, or grove attracted their
fancy.'[514] Of whom is he speaking? Obviously of free tribesmen or
tribal households, _not of villagers or village communities_, for he
[p339] immediately afterwards, in the very next sentence, speaks of
the Germans as avoiding even in their villages (_vici_) what seemed
to him to be obviously the best mode of building, viz. in streets
with continuous roofs. 'Their villages' (he says) 'they build not in
our manner with connected and attached buildings. There is an open
space round every one's house.' And this he attributes not to their
fancy for one situation or another, as in the first case, but 'either
to fear of fire or ignorance of how to build.'[515]

It is obvious, therefore, that the Germans who chose to live
scattered about the country sides, as spring, plain or grove
attracted them, were not the villagers who had spaces round their
houses. We are left to conclude that the first class were the chiefs
and free tribesmen, who, now having become settled for a time,
were, in a very loose sense, the _landowners_, while the latter,
the villagers, must chiefly have been their servile dependants.
And this inference is confirmed when Tacitus comes to the second
point and tells us that the _servi_ of the Germans differed greatly
from those of the Romans. There were some slaves bought and sold in
the market, and free men sometimes sank into slavery as the result
of war or gambling ventures; but in a general way (he says) their
slaves were not included in the tribesmen's households or employed in
household service, but each family of slaves had a separate [p340]
homestead.[516] They had also separate crops and cattle; for 'the
lord (_dominus_) requires from the slave a certain quantity of corn,
cattle, or material for clothing, as in the case of _coloni_. To this
modified extent (Tacitus says) the German _servus_ is a slave. The
wife and children of the free tribesman do the household work of his
house, not slaves as in the Roman households.'

Clearly, then, the _vicus_--the _village_--on the land of the
tribesman who was their lord, was inhabited by these _servi_, who,
like Roman _coloni_, had their own homesteads and cattle and crops,
and rendered to their lord part of their produce by way of tribute or
food-rent.

The lords--the tribesmen--themselves (as Tacitus elsewhere remarks)
preferred fighting and hunting to agriculture, and left the
management of the latter to the women and weaker members of the
family.[517]

«A later tribal stage than Cæsar described.»

«Division among heirs.»

Now, if we could be sure that the tribal homestead was a permanent
possession, and that the village of serfs around it had a single
tribesman for its lord, the settlement would practically be to all
intents and purposes a _heim_ or _manor_ with a village in serfdom
upon it. It was evidently in a real sense the tribesman's separate
possession, for, after speaking of blood relationships which bind the
German tribesman's family and home most strongly together, Tacitus
adds, 'Everyone's children are his heirs and successors [p341]
without his making a will; and if there be no children, the grades of
succession are brothers, paternal uncles, maternal uncles.'[518]

But then this was also the case in Wales and Ireland. There was
division among male heirs of the family land. And yet this family
land was not a freehold permanent estate so long as a periodical
redistribution of the tribe land might shift it over to someone else.

«The embryo manor.»

The embryo manor of the German tribesman, with its village of serfs
upon it, might therefore, if the same practice prevailed, differ in
three ways from the later manor. It might become the possession of
a tribal household instead of a single lord; and also it possibly
might, on a sudden redistribution of the tribal land, fall into
the possession of another tribesman or tribal household, though
perhaps this is not very likely often to have happened. Finally,
it might become subdivided when the time came for the unity of the
tribal household to be broken up as it was in Wales after the final
redivision among second cousins.

It must be remembered that land in the tribal stages of economic
progress was the least stable and the least regarded of possessions.
A tribesman's property consisted of his cattle and his serfs. These
were his permanent family wealth, and he was rich or poor as he had
more or less of them. So long as the tribe land was plentiful, he as
the head of a tribal household took his proper share according to
tribal rank; and so long as periodical redistributions took place,
even when the tribal household finally was [p342] broken up, room
would be found for the new tribal households on the tribal land. But
when at last the limits of the land became too narrow for the tribe,
a portion of the tribesmen would swarm off to seek new homes in a new
country. Frequent migrations were, therefore, at once the proofs of
pressure of population and the safety-valve of the system.

«Fresh settlements.»

The emigrating tribesmen in their new home would form themselves into
a new sept or tribe, take possession of fresh tracts of unoccupied
land, and perhaps, if land were plentiful, wander about for a time
from place to place as pasture for their cattle might tempt them.
Then at last they would settle: each tribesman would select his site
by plain, wood or stream, as it pleased him. He would erect his stake
and wattle tribal house, and daub it over with clay[519] to keep out
the weather. He would put up his rough outbuildings and fence in his
corn and cattle yard. Round this tribal homestead the still rougher
homesteads of his serfs, each with its yard around it, would soon
form a straggling village, and the likeness to the embryo manor would
once more appear.

«The celebrated passage of Tacitus describing German
agriculture.»

Indeed, when we turn to the famous passage in which the German
settlements and their internal economy are described, the words
used by Tacitus seem in themselves to indicate that he had in his
eye precisely this process which the example of the Welsh and Irish
tribal systems has helped to make intelligible to us. Tracts of
country (_agri_), he says, are '_taken possession of_' (_occupantur_)
by a body of tribesmen (_ab universis_) who are apparently seeking
new [p343] homes; and then the _agri_ are presently divided among
them.

This passage, so often and so variously construed and interpreted, is
as follows:--

'Agri pro numero cultorum ab universis vicis [or _in_ or _per
vices_][520] occupantur, quos mox inter se secundum dignationem
partiuntur: facilitatem partiendi camporum spatia præstant.

'Arva per annos mutant, et superest ager: nec enim cum
ubertate et amplitudine soli labore contendunt, ut pomaria
conserant et prata separent et hortos rigent: sola terræ seges
imperatur.'[521]

It is unfortunate that the first few lines of this passage are
made ambiguous by an error in the texts. If the true reading be,
as many modern German critics now hold, '_ab universis vicis_'--by
all the _vici_ together, or by the whole community in _vici_--there
still must remain the doubt whether the word _vicus_ should not
be considered rather as the equivalent of the Welsh _trev_ than
of the modern _village_. The Welsh 'trev' was, as we have seen, a
subordinate cluster of scattered households. Tacitus himself probably
uses the word in this sense in the passage where he describes the
choice of the chiefs, or head men (_principes_) 'qui jura per pagos
_vicos_que reddunt.'[522] The _vicus_ is here evidently a smaller
tribal subdivision of the _pagus_, just as the Welsh _trev_ was
of the '_cymwd_,' and not necessarily a village in the modern
sense.[523] [p344]

«Fresh _agri_ taken possession of and divided under tribal
rules.»

If, on the other hand, the true reading be '_ab universis in_,' or
'_per, vices_' or '_invicem_,' the meaning probably is that fresh
tracts of land (_agri_) are one after another taken possession of by
the tribal community when it moves to a new district or requires more
room as its numbers increase.

The new _agri_, the passage goes on to say, are soon divided among
the tribesmen or the _trevs_, '_secundum dignationem_,' according to
the tribal rules, the great extent of the open country and absence of
limits making the division easy, just as it was in the instance of
Abraham and Lot.

«The agriculture is a co-aration of fresh portions of the
waste each year.»

In any case it is impossible to suppose that Tacitus meant by the
words _in vices_ or _invicem_, if he used them, that there was
any _annual_ shifting of the tribe from one locality to another,
for it is obvious that the very next words absolutely exclude the
possibility of an annual movement such as that described by Cæsar.
'_Arva per annos mutant et superest ager._' They change their _arva_
or ploughed land yearly, _i.e._, they plough up fresh portions of
the _ager_ or grass land every year, and there is always plenty left
over which has never been ploughed.[524] Nothing could describe more
clearly what is mentioned in the Welsh triads as '_co-aration of the
waste_.' The tribesmen have their scattered homesteads surrounded by
the lesser homesteads of their 'servi.' And the latter join in the
co-tillage of such part of the grass land as year by year is chosen
for the corn crops, while the cattle wander over the rest. [p345]

This seems to have been the simple form of the open field husbandry
of the Germans of Tacitus.

And this is sufficient for the present purpose; for whichever way
this passage be read, it does not modify the force of the previous
passages, which show how manorial were the lines upon which the
German tribal system was moving even in this early and still tribal
stage of its economic development, owing chiefly to the possession
of serfs by the tribesmen. It gives us further a clear landmark as
regards the use by the Germans of the open-field system of ploughing.
Tacitus describes a husbandry in the stage of 'co-aration of the
waste.' It has not yet developed into a fixed _three-course_ rotation
of crops, pursued over and over again permanently on the same arable
area, as in 'the three-field system' afterwards so prevalent in
Germany and England.

«The tendency of the German tribal system unlike the Welsh
towards the manor.»

These are important points to have gained, but the most important one
is that, notwithstanding the strong resemblances between the Welsh
and German tribal arrangements, there was this distinct difference
between them. The two tribal systems were not working themselves out,
so to speak, on the same lines. The Welsh system, in its economic
development, was not directly approaching the manorial arrangement
except perhaps on the mensal land of the chiefs. The Welsh tribesmen
had as a rule no servile tenants under them. The _taeogs_ were mostly
the _taeogs_ of the chiefs, not of the tribesmen. Thus, as we have
seen, when the conquest of Wales was completed, the tribesmen of the
till then unconquered districts became freeholders under the Prince
of Wales, and with no _mesne_ lord over them. The taeogs [p346]
became taeogs of the Prince of Wales and not of local landowners. So
that the manor did not arise. But even in the time of Tacitus the
German tribesmen seem to have already become practically manorial
lords over their own _servi_, who were already so nearly in the
position of serfs on their estates that Tacitus described them as
'_like coloni_.'

«The German and Roman elements easily combined to make the
manor.»

The manor--in embryo--was, in fact, already in course of development.
The German economic system was, to say the very least, working itself
out on lines so nearly parallel to those of the Roman manorial system
that we cannot wonder at the silent ease with which before and after
the conquest of Roman provinces, German chieftains became lords of
villas and manors. The two systems, Roman and German, may well have
easily combined in producing the later manorial system which grew up
in the Roman provinces of Gaul and the two Germanies.

II. THE TRIBAL HOUSEHOLDS OF GERMAN SETTLERS.

Now, if we were to rely upon this evidence of Tacitus alone, the
conclusion would be inevitable that the German and Roman land-systems
were so nearly alike in their tendencies that they naturally and
simply joined in producing the manorial system of later times. And
there can be little doubt that, speaking broadly, this would be a
substantially correct statement of the case.

«Were there other kinds of settlements not so manorial?»

But before we can fairly and finally accept it as such, it is
necessary to consider another branch of evidence which has sometimes
been understood to point to a kind of settlement _not manorial_.
[p347]

«The patronymic suffix _ing_ or _ingas_ to local names.»

The evidence alluded to is that of _local names_ ending in the
remarkable suffix _ing_ or _ingas_. It is needful to examine this
evidence, notwithstanding its difficult and doubtful nature. It
raises a question upon which the last word has by no means yet been
spoken, and out of which interesting and important results may
eventually spring. The impossibility of arriving, in the present
state of the evidence, at a positive conclusion, is no reason why its
apparent bearing should not be stated, provided that suggestion and
hypothesis be not confounded with verified fact. At all events, the
inquiry pursued in this essay would be open to the charge of being
one-sided if it were not alluded to.

«Do they represent clan settlements?»

The reader of recent literature bearing upon the history of the
English conquest of Britain will have been struck by the confidence
and skill with which, in the absence of historical, or even, in some
cases, traditional evidence, the story of the invasion and occupation
of England has been sometimes created out of little more than the
combination of physical geography with local names, on the hypothesis
that local names ending in '_ing_,' or its plural form '_ingas_,'
represent the original _clan settlements_ of the German conquerors.
Writers who rely upon G. L. Von Maurer's theory of the German
_mark-system_ have also naturally called attention to local names
with this suffix as evidence of settlements on the basis of the _free
village community_ as opposed to those of a manorial type.

Local names with this suffix, it is hardly needful to say, are found
on the Continent as well as in England. [p348]

How, it may well be asked, does the evidence they afford of _clan
settlements_ or _free village communities_ comport with the
thoroughly manorial character of the German settlements on the lines
described by Tacitus?

«What Germans did Tacitus describe?»

Now, in order to answer this question, it must first be considered
how far the description of Tacitus covers the whole field--whether it
refers to the Germans as a whole, or whether only to those tribes who
had come within Roman influences, and so had sooner, perhaps, than
the rest, relinquished their earlier tribal habits to follow manorial
lines.

So far as his description is geographical it is very methodical.

«Those within the _limes_.»

(1) There are the Germans _within_ the Roman _limes_.[525] These
included the tribes who, following up the conquests of Ariovistus,
had settled on the left bank of the Rhine in what was then called
the province of Upper Germany, including the present Elsass and the
country round the confluence of the Rhine with the Maine and Moselle.
These tribes were the Tribocci, Nemetes and Vangiones.[526] Further,
there were the tribes or emigrants, many of them German, gradually
settling within the limits of the 'Agri Decumates.' Lastly, there
were the _Batavi_ and other tribes settled in the province of Lower
Germany at the mouths of the Rhine, shading off into Belgic Gaul.

«Northern tribes outside it.»

(2) There were the Northern tribes _outside_ the Roman province,[527]
some of them tributary to the [p349] Romans and some of them
hostile, the _Frisii_, the _Chatti_ (or Hessians), and other tribes,
reaching from the German Ocean to the mountains, and occupying the
country embracing the upper valleys of the Weser and the Elbe, some
of which tribes afterwards joined the Franks and Saxons.

«The _Suevic_ tribes on the borders.»

(3) There were the _Suevic_ tribes[528] so familiar to Cæsar, and
amongst whom were the _Angli_ and _Varini_, the _Marcomanni_ and
_Hermunduri_, always hovering over the _limes_ of the provinces from
the Rhine and Maine to the Danube: some of them hostile and some
of them friendly; some of whom afterwards mingled with the Franks
and Saxons, but most of whom were absorbed in the Alamannic and the
Bavarian tribes who finally, following the course of the previous
emigration, passed over the _limes_ and settled within the 'Agri
Decumates' in Rhætia, and in the Roman province of Upper Germany.

«Distant tribes.»

(4) Behind all these tribes with whom the Romans came in contact were
others vaguely described as lying far away to the north and east.

The habits of _which_ of these widely different classes of German
tribes did Tacitus describe?

«The _Suevic_ tribes most in his mind probably.»

Probably it would not be safe to go further than to say that the
Germans whose manners he was most _likely_ to describe were those
chiefly _Suevic_ tribes hovering round the _limes_ of the provinces,
especially of the 'Agri Decumates,' with whom the Romans had most
to do. It is at least possible that he left out of his picture, on
the one hand, those distant northern or eastern tribes who may still
have retained their early nomadic habits, and on the other hand those
[p350] Germans who had silently and peaceably settled within the
_limes_ of the Roman provinces, and so had become half Roman.[529]

But to what class are we to refer the settlements represented by the
local names with the supposed patronymic suffix?

«The patronymic local names imply fixed _settlement_.»

The previous study of the Welsh and Irish tribal system ought to help
us to judge what they were.

In the first place we have clearly learned that in tracing the
connexion of the tribal system with local names, the fixing of a
particular personal name to a locality implies _settlement_. It
implies not only a departure from the old nomadic habits on the
part of the whole tribe, but also the absence within the territory
of the tribe of those redistributions of the tribesmen among
the homesteads--the shifting of families from one homestead to
another--which prevailed apparently in Wales and certainly in Ireland
to so late a date.

Following the parallel experience of the Irish and Welsh tribal
system we may certainly conclude that in the early semi-nomadic and
shifting tribal stage described by Cæsar the names of places, like
those of the Irish townlands, would follow local peculiarities of
wood or stream or plain, and that not until there was a permanent
settlement of particular families in fixed abodes could personal
names attach themselves to places, or suffixes be used which in
themselves involve the idea of a fixed abode.

«They are suggestive of the _tribal household_.»

Then with regard to the nature of the tribal settlements which these
local names with a patronymic [p351] suffix may represent, surely
the actual evidence of the Welsh laws and the 'Record of Carnarvon,'
as to what a _tribal household_ was, must be far more likely to
guide us to the truth than any theoretical view of the 'village
community' under the German mark-system, or even actual examples of
village communities existing under complex and totally different
circumstances at the present time, valuable as such examples may be
as evidence of how the descendants of tribesmen comport themselves
after perhaps centuries of settlement on the same ground.

«The joint holding of a family down to second cousins.»

Now we have seen that the tribal household in Wales was the
joint holding of the heirs of a common ancestor from the
_great-grandfather_ downwards, with redistributions within it to
make equality, first between brothers, then between cousins, and
finally between second cousins; the youngest son always retaining the
original homestead in these divisions. The _Weles_, _Gwelys_, and
_Gavells_ of the 'Record of Carnarvon' were late examples of such
holdings. They were named after the common ancestor and occupied
by his heirs. Such holdings, so soon as there was fixed settlement
in the homesteads, were obviously in the economic stage in which,
according to German usage, the name of the original holders with the
patronymic suffix might well become permanently attached to them.[530]

«The division, the youngest retaining the family homestead.»

We may then, following the Welsh example, fairly expect the
distinctive marks of the tribal household to be joint holding for
two or three _generations_, and then the _ultimate division of the
holding among male heirs_, the _youngest retaining the original
ancestral homestead_. [p352]

We know how persistently the division among male heirs was adhered to
in Wales and in Ireland under the custom of Gavelkind,[531] though
of the peculiar right of the youngest son to the original homestead
we have no clear trace in Ireland. Possibly St. Patrick was strong
enough to reverse in this instance a strong tribal custom. But in
Wales the succession of the youngest was, as we have seen, so deeply
ingrained in the habits of the people that it was observed even among
the _taeogs_. The elder sons received _tyddyns_ of their own in the
_taeog trev_ in their father's lifetime, whilst the youngest son
remained in his father's tyddyn, and on his death succeeded to it.

The persistence in division among heirs and the right of the youngest
were very likely therefore to linger as survivals of the tribal
household.

«Survival of this equal division and _the right of the
youngest_.»

Now it is well known that in the south-east of England, and
especially in Kent, the custom of Gavelkind has continued to the
present day, retaining the division among male heirs and historical
traces of the right of the youngest son to the original homestead.
In other districts of England and in many parts of Europe and Asia
the division among heirs has passed away, but the right of the
youngest--_Jüngsten-Recht_--has survived.

Mr. Elton, in his '_Origins of English History_,' has carefully
described the geographical distribution in Western Europe of the
practice, not so much of _division among heirs_, as of the _right of
the youngest_ to [p353] inherit the _original homestead_, the latter
having survived in many districts where the other has not.

«In Wales and S.E. England--the old 'Saxon shore.'»

In England he finds the right of the youngest most prevalent in the
south-east counties--in Kent, Sussex, and Surrey, in a ring of manors
round London, and to a less extent in Essex and the East Anglian
kingdom,--_i.e._ as Mr. Elton describes it, in a district about
co-extensive with what in Roman times was known as the _Saxon shore_.
A few examples occur in Hampshire, and there is a wide district where
the right of the youngest survives in Somersetshire, which formed for
so long a part of what the Saxons called '_Wealcyn_.'[532]

Further, as the custom is found to apply to copyhold or semi-servile
holdings, it would not be an impossible conjecture that previously
existing original tribal households were, at some period, upon
conquest, reduced into serfs, the division of the holdings among
heirs being at the same time stopped, so as to keep the holdings
in equal 'yokes,' or 'yard-lands,' thus leaving the right of the
youngest as the only point of the pre-existing tribal custom
permitted to survive.

«Survival of the 'right of the youngest' on the Continent.»

A similar process, perhaps in connexion with the Frankish conquest
of parts of Germany, possibly had been gone through in many
continental districts. Mr. Elton traces the right of the youngest
in the north-east corner of France and in Brabant, in Friesland, in
Westphalia, in Silesia, in Wirtemberg, in the Odenwald and district
north of Lake Constance, in Suabia, in Elsass, in the Grisons. It is
found also in [p354] the island of Borneholm, though it seems to be
absent in Denmark and on the Scandinavian mainland.[533]

Attention has been called to this curious survival of the right of
the youngest because it forms a possible link between the Welsh,
English, and continental systems of settlements in tribal households.

* * * * *

We now pass to the more direct consideration of the local names with
the supposed patronymic suffix.

«Wide extension and meaning of the patronymic suffix 'ing,' &c.»

These peculiar local names are scattered over a wide area; the suffix
varying from the English _ing_ with its plural '_ingas_,' the German
_ing_ or _ung_ with its plural _ingas_, _ingen_, _ungen_, _ungun_,
and the French '_ign_' or _igny_, to the Swiss[534] equivalent
_ikon_, the Bohemian _ici_,[535] and the wider Slavonic _itz_ or
_witz_.

It seems to be clear that the termination _ing_, in its older plural
form _ingas_, in Anglo-Saxon, not by any means always,[536] but still
in a large number of cases, had a _patronymic_ significance.

We have the evidence of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle itself that if
_Baldo_ were the name of the parent, his children or heirs would in
Anglo-Saxon be called _Baldings_[537] (Baldingas).

There is also evidence that the oldest historical form of settlement
in Bohemian and Slavic districts [p355] was in the tribal or joint
household--the undivided family sometimes for many generations
herding together in the same homestead (_dĕdiny_).[538]

And the number of local names ending in _ici_, or _owici_, changing
in later times into _itz_ and _witz_, taken together with the
late prevalence of the undivided household in these semi-Slavonic
regions, so far as it goes, confirms the connexion of the patronymic
termination with the holding of the co-heirs of an original
holder.[539]

The geographical distribution of local names with the patronymic
termination is shown on the same map as that on which were marked the
position of the 'hams' and 'heims.'

«In England.»

First, as regards England, the map will show that in the distribution
of places mentioned in the Domesday survey ending in _ing_, the
largest proportion occurs east of a line drawn from the Wash to the
Isle of Wight: just as in the case of the 'hams,' only that in Sussex
the greatest number of 'ings' occurs instead of in Essex.

It is worthy of notice that names ending in _ingham_ or _ington_ are
not confined so closely to this district, but are spread much more
evenly all over England.[540] Further, it will be observed that the
counties where the names ending in _ing_ occur without a suffix are
remarkably coincident with those where Mr. Elton has found survivals
of the _right of the youngest_, _i.e._ the old 'Saxon shore.' [p356]

«In Picardy.»

Next, as to the opposite coast of _Picardy_, the _ings_ and _hems_
are alike, for very nearly all the _hems_ in the Survey of the Abbey
of St. Bertin of A.D. 850 are preceded by _ing_, _i.e._ they are
_inghems_. The proportion was found to be sixty per cent.[541] In
this north-east corner of France the right of the youngest, as we
have seen, also survives.

«In the Moselle valley and round Troyes and Langres.»

There are also many patronymic names of places in the Moselle valley
and in Champagne around Troyes and Langres.[542]

«In Frisia.»

Next, as to _Frisia_, eight per cent. of the names mentioned in
the Fulda records end in '_inga_,' two and a half per cent. in
_ingaheim_, and three per cent. in _ing_ with some other suffix,
making thirteen and a half per cent. in all. In Friesland also there
are survivals of the _right of the youngest_.

«In Germany most densely in the old Roman provinces of the
'Agri Decumates.'»

Over North Germany, outside the Roman _limes_, the proportion is much
less, shading off in the Fulda records from six to three, two, and
one per cent.

But the greatest proportion occurs within the Roman _limes_ in the
valleys of the Neckar and the Upper Danube, where (according to the
Fulda records) it rises to from twenty to twenty-four per cent.,[543]
shading off to ten per cent. towards the Maine, and in the present
Elsass, and to nine per cent. southwards in the neighbourhood of St.
Gall.[544] [p357]

This chief home of the 'ings' was the western part of the district
of the 'Agri Decumates' of Tacitus and the northern province of
Rhætia, gradually occupied by the Alamannic and Bavarian tribes in
the later centuries of Roman rule.

Whether they entered these districts under cover of the Roman peace,
or as conquerors to disturb it, the founders of the 'ings' evidently
came from German mountains and forests beyond the _limes_.

«North of the _limes_ chiefly in Grapfeld and Thuringia.»

North of the Danube names with this suffix extend chiefly through
the region of the old Hermunduri into the district of Grapfeld and
Thuringia, where they were in the Fulda records six per cent.

This remarkable geographical distribution in Germany suggests
important inferences.

«They suggest settlements»

(1) The attachment of the personal patronymic to the name of a
particular locality implies in Germany no less than in Ireland
and Wales a permanent settlement in that locality, and so far
an abandonment of nomadic habits and even of the frequent
redistributions and shifting of residences within the tribal
territory.

«within Roman provinces,»

(2) The occurrence of these patronymic local names most thickly
_within the Roman limes_ and near to it, points to the fact that the
Roman rule was the outside influence which compelled the abandonment
of the semi-nomadic and the adoption of the settled form of life.

«possibly manorial.»

(3) The addition in some cases--most often in Flanders and in
England, which were both Roman [p358] provinces--of the suffix
_ham_ to the patronymic local name, although most probably a _later_
addition, and possibly the result of conquest, at least reminds us
of the possibility already noticed that even a _villa_ or _ham_ or
manor, with a servile population upon it, might be the possession of
a tribal household, who thus might be the lords of a manorial estate.

«Offshoots from Suevic tribes who became Alamanni.»

(4) Considering the geographical distribution of the patronymic
termination, beginning in Thuringia and Grapfeld, but becoming most
numerous in Rhætia and the 'Agri Decumates,' it is almost impossible
to avoid the inference that it is in most cases connected with
settlements in these Roman districts of offshoots from the old Suevic
tribe of the Hermunduri--viz. _Thuringi_, _Juthungi_, and others who,
settling in these districts during Roman rule, became afterwards lost
in the later and greater group of the _Alamanni_.

«Forced settlement of Alamanni in Belgic Gaul,»

«and possibly in England.»

This inference might possibly be confirmed by the fact that the
isolated clusters of names ending in 'ing' on the west of the Rhine,
correspond in many instances with the districts into which we happen
to know that forced colonies of families of these and other German
tribes had been located after the termination of the Alamannic wars
of Probus, Maximian, and Constantius Clorus. These colonies of
_læti_ were planted, as we have seen, in the valley of the Moselle,
and the names of places ending in 'ing' are numerous there to this
day. They were planted in the district of the Tricassi round Troyes
and Langres, and here again there are numerous patronymic names.
They were planted in the district of the Nervii round Amiens close
to the cluster of names ending in 'ingahem,' so many of which in
the ninth century are [p359] found to belong to the Abbey of St.
Bertin. Lastly--and this is a point of special interest for the
present inquiry--we know that similar deportations of tribesmen of
the Alamannic group were repeatedly made into Britain, and thus the
question arises whether the places ending in 'ing' in England may not
also mark the sites of peaceable or forced settlements of Germans
under Roman rule.

They lie, as we have seen, chiefly within the district of the Saxon
shore, _i.e._ east of a line between the Wash and the Isle of Wight,
just as was the case also with the survivals of the _right of the
youngest_.

If evidence had happened to have come to hand of a similar
deportation of Alamannic Germans into Frisia instead of Frisians into
Gaul, the coincidence would be still more complete.

«Such settlements naturally in tribal households without
slaves.»

The suggestion is very precarious. Still, it might be asked, where
should clusters of tribal households of Germans resembling the Welsh
_Weles_ and _Gavells_ be more likely to perpetuate their character
and resist for a time manorial tendencies than in these cases of
peaceable or forced emigration into Roman provinces? Who would
be more likely to do so than troublesome septs (like that of the
Cumberland '_Grames_' in the days of James I.) deported bodily to a
strange country, and settled, probably not on private estates, but on
previously depopulated public land, without slaves, and without the
possibility of acquiring them by making raids upon other tribes?

«Not necessarily Alamannic.»

Now, according to Professor Wilhelm Arnold, the German writer who
has recently given the closest attention to these local names, the
patronymic suffix [p360] 'ingen' is one of the distinctive marks
of settlements of Alamannic and Bavarian tribes, and denotes that
the districts wherein it is found have at some time or another been
conquered or occupied by them. The _heims_, on the other hand, in
this writer's view, are in the same way indicative of Frankish
settlements.[545]

The view of so accurate and laborious a student must be regarded as
of great authority. But the foregoing inquiry has led in both cases
to a somewhat different suggestion as to their meaning. The suffix
_heim_ is Anglo-Saxon as well as Frankish, and translating itself
into villa and manor seems to represent a settlement or estate most
often of the manorial type. So that it seems likely, that whatever
German tribes at whatever time came over into the Roman province and
usurped the lordship of existing villas, or adopted the Roman villa
as the type of their settlements, would probably have called them
either _weilers_ or _heims_ according to whether they used the Roman
or the German word for the same thing.

And in the same way it also seems likely, that _whatever tribes_,
at _whatever time_, by their own choice or by forced colonisation,
settled in _house communities of tribesmen with or without a servile
population under them_, would be passing through the stage in which
they might naturally call their settlements or [p361] homesteads
after their own names, using the patronymic suffix _ing_.

It is undoubtedly difficult to obtain any clear indication of the
_time_[546] when these settlements may have been made. Nor, perhaps,
need they be referred generally to the same period, were it not for
the remarkable fact that the _personal names_ prefixed to the suffix
in England, Flanders, the Moselle valley, round Troyes and Langres,
in the old _Agri Decumates_ (now Wirtemburg), and in the old Rhætia
(now Bavaria), and even those in Frisia, were to a very large extent
_identical_.

«The names are not _clan_ names, but personal names.»

«But the identity of the names throughout is very
remarkable.»

This identity is so striking, that if the names were, as some have
supposed, necessarily _clan-names_, it might be impossible to deny
that the English and continental districts were peopled actually by
branches of the same _clans_. But it must be admitted that, as the
names to [p362] which the peculiar suffix was added were _personal_
names and not family or clan names--_John_ and _Thomas_, and not
_Smith_ and _Jones_--it would not be safe to press the inference from
the similarity too far. _Baldo_ was the name of a person. There may
have been persons of that name in every tribe in Germany. The Baldo
of one tribe need not be closely related to the Baldo of another
tribe, any more than _John Smith_ need be related to _John Jones_.
The households of each Baldo would be called _Baldings_, or in the
old form _Baldingas_; but obviously the Baldings of England need have
no clan-relationship whatever to the Baldings of Upper Germany.[547]
Nevertheless, the striking similarity of mere personal names goes for
something, and it is impossible to pass it by unnoticed. The extent
of it may be shown by a few examples.

In the following list are placed _all_ the local names mentioned in
the Domesday Survey of _Sussex_, beginning with the first two letters
of the alphabet in which the peculiar suffix occurs, whether as final
or not,[548] and opposite to them similar personal or local [p363]
names taken from the early records of _Wirtemberg_, _i.e._ the
district of the Rhine, Maine, and Neckar, formerly part of the 'Agri
Decumates.'

«In Sussex.»

_Sussex._ _Wirtemberg._

Achingeworde Acco, Echo, Eccho, Achelm

Aldingeborne Aldingas

Babintone Babinberch, Babenhausen, Bebingon

Basingeham Besigheim

Bechingetone Bechingen

Beddingesjham Bedzingeswilaeri

Belingeham Bellingon, Böllingerhof

Berchinges Bercheim

Bevringetone

Bollintun Bollo, Bollinga

Botingelle Böttinger

Brislinga Brisgau

«In Picardy.»

As regards the supposed patronymic names in the district between
Calais and St. Omer, Mr. Taylor states that 80 per cent. are found
also in England.[549]

«In the Moselle valley.»

We may take as a further example the resemblance between names of
places occurring in Sprüner's maps of '_Deutschlands Gaue_' in the
Moselle valley and those of places and persons mentioned in early
Wirtemberg charters.

_Moselle Valley._ _Wirtemberg._

Beringa Beringerus
Eslingis Esslingen
Frisingen Frieso, Frisingen
Gundredingen Gundrud
Heminingsthal Hemminbah
Holdingen Holda
Hasmaringa Hasmaresheim
Lukesinga Lucas, Lucilunburch [p364]
Munderchinga Mundricheshuntun, Munderkingen
Ottringas Oteric, Otrik
Putilinga Pettili, Pertilo
Uffeninga Ufeninga
Uttingon Uto, Uttinuuilare

«In Champagne.»

The following coincidences[550] occur in the modern Champagne, which
embraces another district into which forced emigrants were deported.

_Champagne._ _England._ _Wirtemberg._

Autigny Edington Eutingen
Effincourt Effingham Oeffingen
Euffigneux Uffington Offingen
Alincourt Allington --
Arrigne Arrington Erringhausen
Orbigny Orpington Erpfingen
Attigny Attington Atting
Etigny Ettinghall Oettinger
Bocquegney Buckingham Böchingen
Bettigny Beddington Böttingen

And so on in about forty cases.

A comparison of the fifteen similar names in _Frisia_ occurring in
the Fulda records, with other similar names of places or persons in
_England_ and _Wirtemberg_, gives an equally clear result.

«In Frisia.»

_Frisia._[551] _Wirtemberg._[552] _England._

Auinge Au, Auenhofen Avington (Berks and Hants)
Baltratingen Baldhart, Baldingen Beltings (Kent)
Belinge Bellingon Bellingdon, Bellings (Several
counties)
Bottinge Böttingen Boddington (Gloucester,
Northampton)
Creslinge Creglingen, Cressing (Essex),
Chrezzingen Cressingham (Norfolk)
Gandingen ──── ────
Gutinge ──── Guyting (Gloucester),
Getingas (Surrey)
Hustinga ──── ────
Huchingen Huchiheim, Hucking (Kent)
Huc = Hugo
Husdingun ──── ────
Rochinge Roingus, Rohinc Rockingham (Notts)
Suettenge Suittes, Suitger ────
Wacheringe Uuachar Wakering (Essex)
Wasginge Uuassingun Washington (Sussex)
Weingi Wehingen ────

«The inferences to be drawn from the similarity.»

It is impossible to follow out in greater detail these remarkable
resemblances between the personal names which appear with a
patronymic suffix in the local names in England and Frisia, and
certain well-defined districts west of the Rhine, and the local and
personal names mentioned in the Wirtemberg charters. The foregoing
instances must not be regarded as more than examples. And for the
reasons already given it would also be unwise to build too much
upon this evident similarity in the personal names, but still it
should be remembered that the facts to be accounted for are--(1) The
concentration of these places with names having a supposed patronymic
termination in certain defined districts mostly within the old Roman
provinces. (2) The practical identity throughout all these districts
of so many of the personal names to which this suffix is attached.

The first fact points to these settlements in tribal households
having taken place by peaceable or forcible emigration during Roman
rule, or very soon after, at all events _at about the same period_.
The second fact points to the practical homogeneity of the German
tribes, whose emigrants founded the settlements which [p366] in
England, Flanders, around Troyes and Langres, on the Moselle, in
Wirtemberg, in Bavaria, and also in Frisia, bear the common suffix to
their names.

The facts already mentioned of the survival _to a great extent in
the same districts_, strikingly so in England, of the _right of the
youngest_, and in Kent of the original form of the local custom of
Gavelkind, point in the same direction.

Taking all these things together, we may at least regard the economic
problem involved in them as one deserving closer attention than has
yet been given to it.

«The settlements in tribal households may have been manors.»

In conclusion, turning back to the direct relation of these facts to
the process of transition of the German tribal system into the later
manorial system, it must be remembered that the holdings of tribal
households might quite possibly be, from the first, embryo manors
with serfs upon them. They might be settlements precisely like those
described by Tacitus, the lordship of which had become the joint
inheritance of the heirs of the founder. As a matter of fact, the
actual settlements in question had at all events become manors before
the dates of the earliest documents. We have seen, _e.g._, that
the villas belonging to the monks of St. Bertin, with their almost
invariable suffix 'ingahem,' were manors from the time of the first
records in the seventh century, and they may never have been anything
else. We have seen that in the year 645 the founder of the abbey gave
to the monks his villa called _Sitdiu_, and its twelve dependent
villas (_Tatinga villa_, afterwards _Tatingahem_, among them)[553]
with the slaves and coloni upon them. They seem to [p367] have been,
in fact, so many manorial farms just like those which, as we learned
from Gregory of Tours, _Chrodinus_ in the previous century founded
and handed over to the Church.

«They at least ultimately became manorial.»

We have not found, therefore, in this inquiry into the character of
the settlements with local names ending in the supposed patronymic
suffix, doubtful as its result has proved, anything which conflicts
with the general conclusion to which we were brought by the manorial
character of the Roman villa and the manorial tendency of the German
tribal system as described by Tacitus, viz. that as a general rule
the German settlements made upon the conquest of what had once been
Roman provinces were of a strictly manorial type. If the settlements
with names ending in _ing_ were settlements of _læti_ or of other
emigrants during Roman rule, taking at first the form of tribal
households, they at least became manors like the rest during or very
soon after the German conquests. If, on the other hand, they were
later settlements of the conquerors of the Roman provinces, or of
emigrants following in the wake of the conquests, they none the less
on that account soon became just as manorial as those Roman villas
which by a change of lordship and translation of words may have
become German _heims_ or Anglo-Saxon _hams_.

It is certainly possible that during a short period, especially if
they held no serfs or slaves, tribal households may have expanded
into free village communities. But to infer from the existence of
patronymic local names that German emigration at all generally took
the form of free village communities would surely not be consistent
with the evidence.

FOOTNOTES:

[508] _De Bello Gallico_, lib. vi. c. 21 and 22. 'Neque quisquam agri
modum certum aut fines habet proprios, sed magistratus ac principes
in annos singulos gentibus cognationibusque hominum, qui una
coierunt, quantum eis et quo loco visum est agri attribuunt, atque
anno post alio transire cogunt.'

[509] _Id._ lib. vi. c. 22.

[510] _De Bello Gallico_, lib. i. c. 51.

[511] _Id._ lib. iv. c. 1. 'Sed privati ac separati agri apud eos
nihil est, neque longius anno remanere uno in loco incolendi causa
licet.'

[512] _Id._ lib. i. c. 36.

[513] _Id._ lib. i. c. 51.

[514] 'Colunt discreti ac diversi, ut fons, ut campus, ut nemus
placuit.'--_Germania_, xvi.

[515] 'Vicos locant non in nostrum morem, connexis et cohærentibus
ædificiis: suam quisque domum spatio circumdat, sive adversus casus
ignis remedium, sive inscitia ædificandi.'--_Germania_, xvi.

[516] 'Ceteris servis non in nostrum morem descriptis per familiam
ministeriis utuntur. Suam quisque sedem, suos penates regit.
Frumenti modum dominus aut pecoris aut vestis ut colono injungit,
et servus hactenus paret: cetera domus officia uxor ac liberi
exsequuntur.'--_Germania_, xxv.

[517] _Id._ xiv. and xv.

[518] _Germania_, xx.

[519] _Germania_, xvi.

[520] The Bamberg Codex has '_ab universis vicis_,' and this is
followed by Waitz (_Verfassungsgeschichte_, Kiel, 1880, i. 145).
The Leyden Codex has 'in vicem.' Others 'per vices,' which earlier
critics considered to be an error for 'per vicos.' See Wietersheim's
_Geschichte der Völkerwanderung_, with Dahn's notes, i. p. 43.
Leipzig, 1880.

[521] _Germania_, xxvi.

[522] _Id._ xii.

[523] The Welsh 'trev' and German 'dorf' probably are from the same
root.

[524] '"_Ager_" dictus qui a divisoribus agrorum relictus est ad
pascendum communiter vicinis.' Isodorus, _De Agris_. Lachmann and
Rudorff, i. p. 369.

[525] _Germania_, xxviii. and xxix.

[526] These tribes are mentioned by Cæsar as forming part of the army
of Ariovistus. _De Bello Gallico_, lib. i. c. 51.

[527] _Germania_, xxx.–xxxvii.

[528] _Germania_, xxxviii.–xlv.

[529] He regarded the 'Agri Decumates' as 'hardly in Germany.'

[530] This result did not follow in Wales, because in Welsh local
names suffixes are not usual.

[531] _Gavelkind_ may be derived from _gabel_, a fork or branch,
and the word is used in Ireland as well as in Kent. Irish _gabal_,
_gabal-cined_ (Gavelkind). _Manners, &c. of the Ancient Irish._
O'Curry, iii. p. 581.

[532] _Origins of English History_, pp. 188–9.

[533] _Origins of English History_, pp. 197–98.

[534] Arnold's _Ansiedelungen_, p. 89.

[535] Palacky's _Geschichte von Böhmen_, Buch ii. c. 6, p. 169.

[536] 'Ing' also meant a low meadow by a river bank, as '_Clifton
Ings_,' near York, &c. Also it was sometimes used like 'ers,',
as '_Ochringen_,' dwellers on the river 'Ohra.' In Denmark the
individual strip in a meadow was an 'ing,' and so the whole meadow
would be '_the ings_.'

[537] See Anglo-Saxon Chronicle _sub anno_ 522. 'Cordic was Elesing,
Elesa was Esling, Esla was Gewising,' and so on. See also Bede's
statement that the Kentish kings were called _Oiscings_, after their
ancestor _Oisc_. Bede, bk. ii. c. 5.

[538] Palacky, pp. 168–9. Compare the word with the Welsh _tyddyn_,
and the Irish _tate_ or _tath_.

[539] See Meitzen's _Ausbreitung der Deutschen_, p. 17. Jena, 1879.

[540] See Taylor's _Words and Places_, p. 131.

[541] It is curious to observe that, taking all the names in the
Cartulary (including many of _later date_), only 2 per cent. end in
_ing_ or _inga_, 6 per cent. in _inghem_ or _ingahem_: making 8 per
cent. in all.

[542] Taylor's _Words and Places_, pp. 496 _et seq._

[543] Out of 119 places named in the charters of the Abbey of
_Frisinga_ earlier in date than A.D. 800, 24 per cent. ended in
_inge_, and only 1 per cent. in _heim_.--Meichelbeck, _passim_.

[544] In the St. Gall charters, out of 1,920 names, 9 per cent.
end in _inga_, 3½ per cent. in _inchova_. The most common other
terminations are either _wilare_ or _wanga_; only 2 per cent. end in
_heim_.

[545] Arnold's _Ansiedelungen und Wanderungen deutscher Stämme_.
Marburg, 1881. See pp. 153 _et seq._ He considers that the Alamanni
were a group of German peoples who had settled in the Rhine valley
and the _Agri Decumates_, including among them the _Juthungi_, who
had crossed over from the north of the _limes_ late in the third
century.

[546] In the _Erklärung der Peutinger Tafel_, by E. Paulus,
Stuttgart, 1866, there is a careful attempt to identify the stations
on the Roman roads from _Brigantia_ to _Vindonissa_, and from
_Vindonissa_ to _Regino_. The stations on the latter, which passed
through the district abounding in 'ings,' are thus identified;
the distances between them, except in one case (where there is a
difference of 2 leugen), answering to those marked in the _Table_
(see p. 35):--

_Vindonissa_ (Windisch), _Tenedone_ (Heidenschlöschen), _Juliomago_
(Hüfingen), _Brigobanne_ (Rottweil), _Aris flavis_ (Unter-Iflingen),
_Samulocennis_ (Rottenberg), _Grinario_ (Sindelfingen), _Clarenna_
(Carlsstatt), _Ad lunam_ (Pfahlbronn), _Aquileia_ (Aalen) [up to
which point there is a remarkable change of names throughout, but
from which point the similarity of names becomes striking], _Opie_
(Bopfingen), _Septemiaci_ (Maihingen), _Losodica_ (Oettingen),
_Medianis_ (Markhof), _Iciniaco_ (Itzing), _Biricianis_
(Burkmarshofen), _Vetonianis_ (Nassenfels), _Germanico_ (Kösching),
_Celeuso_ (Ettling), _Abusena_ (Abensberg), _Regino_ (Regensburg).
But these names in _ing_ and _ingen_, and Latin _iaci_, do not seem
to be patronymic. So also in the case of the Roman '_Vicus Aurelii_'
on the _Ohra_ river, now 'Oehringen.' Is it not possible that
many other supposed patronymics may simply mean such and such or
So-and-so's 'ings' or meadows?

[547] The occasional instances in which the patronymic termination
is added to the name of a tree or an animal, has led to the hasty
conclusion that the Saxons were '_totemists_,' and believed
themselves descended from trees and animals; _e.g._ that the
_Buckings_ of _Bucks_ thought themselves descendants of the beech
tree. The fact that _personal names_ were taken from trees and
animals--that one person called himself '_the Beech_,' another '_the
Wolf_'--quite disposes of this argument, for their households would
call themselves '_Beechings_' and '_Wolfings_' in quite a natural
course, without any dream of descent from the tree or the animal
whose name their father or great-grandfather had borne.

[548] The resemblance is equally apparent whether the comparison
be made between names without further suffix or whether those with
it are included. See the long list of patronymic names in England,
Germany, and France in Taylor's _Words and Places_, App. B, pp.
496–513.

[549] Taylor's _Words and Places_, pp. 131–4, and App. B, p. 491.

[550] See the lists given in Taylor's _Words and Places_, Appendix B,
pp. 496 _et seq._ Taylor says that there are 1,100 of the patronymic
names in France, of which 250 are similar to those in England. See
pp. 144 _et seq._

[551] Taken from _Traditiones Fuldensis_, Dronke, pp. 240–243. The
above list includes all the names in Frisia with a patronymic and no
other suffix.

[552] Taken from the _Wirtembergische Urkundenbuch_.

[553] _Chartularium Sithiense_, p. 18.

[p368]

CHAPTER X.
_THE CONNEXION BETWEEN THE OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM AND SERFDOM
OF ENGLAND AND OF THE ROMAN PROVINCES OF GERMANY AND GAUL._

I. THE OPEN-FIELD SYSTEM IN ENGLAND AND IN GERMANY COMPARED.

We now return to the English manorial and open-field system, in
order, taking it up where we left it, to trace its connexion with
the similar Continental system, and to inquire in what districts
the closest resemblances to it are to be found--whether in the
un-Romanised north or in the southern districts so long included
within the _limes_ of the Roman provinces.

«Under the manorial system, the open-field system the shell
of serfdom.»

The earliest documentary evidence available on English ground left us
in full possession of the Saxon manor with its village community of
serfs upon it, inhabiting as its shell the open-field system in its
most organised form, _i.e._ with its (generally) three fields, its
furlongs, its acre or half-acre strips, its headlands, its yard-lands
or bundles of normally thirty acres, scattered all over the fields,
the yard-land representing the year's ploughing of a pair of oxen in
the team of [p369] eight, and the acre strip the measure of a day's
plough-work of the team.

This was the system described in the '_Rectitudines_' of the tenth
century, and the allusions to the 'gebur,' the 'yard-land,' the
'setene,' the 'gafol,' and the 'week-work' in the laws of Ine carried
back the evidence presumably to the seventh century.

«Simpler form of open-field husbandry under the tribal
system.»

But it must not be forgotten that side by side with this manorial
open-field system we found an earlier and simpler form of open-field
husbandry carried on by the free tribesmen and taeogs of Wales. This
simpler system described in the Welsh laws and the 'triads' seemed
to be in its main features practically identical with that described
also in the _Germania_ of Tacitus. It was an annual ploughing up of
fresh grass-land, leaving it to go back again into grass after the
year's ploughing. It was, in fact, the agriculture of a pastoral
people, with a large range of pasture land for their cattle, a small
portion of which annually selected for tillage sufficed for their
corn crops. This is clearly the meaning of Tacitus, '_Arva per annos
mutant et superest ager._' It is clearly the meaning of the Welsh
'triads,' according to which the tribesman's right extended to his
'tyddyn,' with its corn and cattle yard, and to _co-aration of the
waste_.

«Three-field system produced by a three-course rotation of
crops.»

Nor can there be much mystery in the relation of these two forms
of open-field husbandry to each other. In both, the arable land
is divided in the ploughing into furlongs and strips. There is
co-operation of ploughing in both, the contribution of oxen to the
common team of eight in both, the allotment of the strips to the
owners of the oxen in rotation, [p370] producing the same scattering
of the strips in both. The methods are the same. The difference lies
in the application of the methods to two different stages of economic
growth. The simple form is adapted to the early nomadic stage of
tribal life, and survives even after partial settlement, so long as
grassland is sufficiently abundant to allow of fresh ground being
broken by the plough each year. The more complex and organised form
implies fixed settlement on the same territory, the necessity for
a settled agriculture within a definite limit, and the consequent
ploughing of the same land over and over again for generations. The
_three-field_ system seems to be simply the adaptation of the early
open-field husbandry to a permanent three-course rotation of crops.

«The yard-land the mark of serfdom.»

But there is a further distinguishing feature of the English
three-field system which implies the introduction of yet another
factor in the complex result, viz. the _yard-land_. And this
indivisible bundle of strips, to which there was always a single
succession, was evidently the holding not of a free tribesman whose
heirs would inherit and divide the inheritance, but of a serf, to
whom an outfit of oxen had been allotted. In fact, the complex and
more organised system would naturally grow out of the simpler form
under the two conditions of _settlement_ and _serfdom_.

Now, turning from England to the Continent, we have in the same way
various forms of the open-field system to deal with, and in comparing
them with the English system their geographical distribution becomes
very important.

«German authorities on the German system.»

Happily, very close attention has recently been given to this subject
by German students, and we are [p371] able to rely with confidence
on the facts collected by Dr. Landau,[554] by Dr. Hanssen,[555]
and lastly by Dr. August Meitzen in his _Ausbreitung der Deutschen
in Deutschland_,[556] and in his still more recent and interesting
review of the collected works of Dr. Hanssen.[557]

Whilst we learn from these writers that much remains to be done
before the last word can be said upon so intricate a subject, some
general points seem at least to be clearly made out.

In the first place there are some German systems of husbandry which
may well be weeded out at once from the rest as not analogous to the
Anglo-Saxon three-field system in England.

«The Feldgraswirthschaft.»

There is the old '_Feldgraswirthschaft_,' analogous perhaps to the
Welsh co-ploughing of the waste and the shifting '_Arva_' of the
Germans of Tacitus, which still lingers in the mountain districts of
Germany and Switzerland, where corn is a secondary crop to grass.[558]

«The Einzelhöfe.»

There are the '_Einzelhöfe_' of Westphalia and other districts,
_i.e._ single farms, each consisting mainly of land all in one block,
like a modern English farm, but as different as possible from the
old English open-field system, with its yard-lands and scattered
strips.[559]

«Forest and marsh system.»

Further, there is a peculiar form of the open-field system,
chiefly found in forest and marsh districts, in which each holding
consists generally of _one single [p372] long strip of land_,
reaching from the homestead right across the village territory to
its boundary.[560] This system, so different from the prevalent
Anglo-Saxon system, is supposed to represent comparatively modern
colonisation and reclamation of forest and marsh land; and though
possibly bearing some analogy to the English _fen_ system, is not
that for which we are seeking.

Passing all these by, we come to a peculiar method of husbandry which
covers a large tract of country, and which is adopted under both the
single farm system and also the open-field system with scattered
ownership, but which nevertheless is opposed to the three-field
system. It is especially important for our purpose because of its
geographical position.

«The one-field system»

All over the sand and bog district of the north of Germany, crops,
mostly of rye and buckwheat, have for centuries been grown _year
after year on the same land_, kept productive by marling and peat
manure, on what Hanssen describes as the 'one-field system.'[561]
This system is found in Westphalia, East Friesland, Oldenburg, North
Hanover, Holland, Belgium. Denmark, Brunswick, Saxony, and East
Prussia. Over parts of the district under this one-field system the
single-farm system prevails, in others the fields are divided into
'Gewanne' and strips, and there is scattered ownership.

«in North Germany.»

Now, possibly this one-field system, with its marling and peat
manure, may have been the system described by Pliny as prevalent
in Belgic Britain and Gaul before the Roman conquest, [p373] but
certainly it is not the system prevalent in England under Saxon rule.
And yet this district where the one-field system is prevalent in
Germany is precisely the district from which, according to the common
theory, the Anglo-Saxon invaders of Britain came. It is precisely the
district of Germany where the three-field system is conspicuously
absent. So that although Nasse and Waitz somewhat hastily suggested
that the Saxons had introduced the three-field system into England,
Hanssen, assuming that the invaders of England came from the north,
confidently denies that this was possible. 'The Anglo-Saxons and the
Frisians and Low Germans and Jutes who came with them to England
cannot [he writes] have brought the three-field system with them
into England, because they did not themselves use it at home in
North-west Germany and Jutland.' He adds that even in later times the
three-field system has never been able to obtain a firm footing in
these coast districts.[562]

«The three-field system»

There remains the question, where on the Continent was prevalent
that two-or three-field system analogous to the one most generally
prevalent on the manors of England?

«in the old Suevic and Roman districts.»

The result of the careful inquiries of Hanssen, Landau, and Meitzen
seems to be, broadly speaking, this, viz., that setting aside the
complication which arises in those districts where there has been
a Slavic occupation of German ground and a German re-occupation of
Slavic ground,[563] the ancient three-field system, with its _huben_
of scattered strips, was most [p374] generally prevalent south of
the Lippe and the Teutoberger Wald, _i.e._ in those districts once
occupied by the Suevic tribes located round the Roman _limes_, and
still more in those districts within the Roman _limes_ which were
once Roman province--the 'Agri Decumates,' Rhætia, and Germania
Prima--the present Baden, Wirtemberg, Swabia, and Bavaria, on the
German side of the Rhine, and Elsass and the Moselle valley on its
Gallic side.[564]

These once Roman or partly Romanised districts were undoubtedly its
chief home. Sporadically and later, it existed further north but not
generally.

This general geographical conclusion is very important. But before
we can fairly assume either a Roman or South German origin, the
similarity of the English and South German systems must be examined
in their details and earliest historical traces. Further, the
examination must not be confined to the shell. It must be extended
also to the serfdom which in Germany as in England, so to speak,
lived within it.

In previous chapters some of the resemblances between the English and
German systems have incidentally been noticed, but the reader will
pardon some repetition for the sake of clearness in the statement of
this important comparison. [p375]

II. THE BOUNDARIES, OR 'MARCHÆ.'

«The boundaries, or marchæ.»

_First_ as to the whole territory or ager occupied by the village
community or township. This, by the presentment of the homage of the
Hitchin Manor, was described in the record by its _boundaries_--from
such a place to such a place, and so on fill the starting-point was
reached again.

In the '_gemæru_' of the Saxon charters the same form was used.

In the '_marchæ_' of the manors surrendered to the abbey of Lorsch in
the seventh and eighth centuries, the same form was used in the Rhine
valley.

It is, in fact, as we have seen, a form in use before the Christian
era, and described by the Roman 'Agrimensores' as often adopted in
recording the '_limites_' of irregular territories, to which their
rectangular centuriation did not extend.

Now, when we consider this method, it implies permanent settlements
close to one another, where even the marshes or forests lying between
them have been permanently divided by a fixed line, or it implies
that a necessity has arisen to mark off the occupied territory from
the _ager publicus_. It may have been derived from the rough and
ready methods of marking divisions of tribe-land during the early and
unsettled stages of tribal life. But the German settlements described
by Tacitus seem to have been without defined boundaries. 'Agri' were
taken possession of according to the number of the settlers, _pro
numero cultorum_. Not till some outside influence compelled final
_settlement_ would the necessity for [p376] well-marked boundaries
of territories arise. And we have seen that the evidence of local
names strongly points to the Roman rule as this settling influence.

In the Lorsch charters the districts included within the 'marchæ' are
often, as we have seen, called 'marks.'

III. THE THREE FIELDS, OR 'ZELGEN.'

«The three fields.»

Next as to the division of the arable land into fields--generally
_three_ fields[565]--representing the annual rotation of crops.

The homage of the Hitchin Manor presented that the common fields
within the township had immemoriably been and ought to be kept and
cultivated in three successive _seasons_ of--

(1) Tilth-grain,
(2) Etch-grain, and
(3) Fallow.

The three fields are elsewhere commonly known as the--

(1) Winter corn,
(2) Spring corn, and
(3) Fallow.

Universally, the fallow ends at the autumn sowing of the wheat crop
of the next season, which is hence called 'winter corn.'

The word _etch_, or _eddish_, or _edish_, occurs in Tusser, and means
the stubble of the previous crop [p377] of whatever kind. Thus, in
the 'Directions for February,' he says,--

«Etch-grain sown on the stubble of a previous crop.»

'Eat _etch_, ere ye plow,
With hog, sheep, and cow.'[566]

This is evidently to prepare the stubble of the last year's corn crop
for the spring sown bean or other crop; for under the same month he
says,--

Go plow in the stubble, for now is the season
For sowing of vetches, of beans, and of peason.[567]

In the directions for the October sowing are the following lines:--

Seed first go fetch
For _edish_, or _etch_.
White wheat if ye please,
Sow now upon pease.[568]

And again,--

When wheat upon _eddish_ ye mind to bestow
Let that be the first of the wheat ye do sow.
* * * * *
White wheat upon pease-_etch_ doth grow as he would,
But fallow is best if we did as we should.
* * * * *
When peason ye had and a fallow thereon,
Sow wheat ye may well without dung thereupon.[569]

«Tilth-grain sown on the fallow.»

'Etch-grain' is therefore the crop, generally oats or beans, sown in
spring after ploughing the stubble of the wheat crop, which itself
was best sown if possible upon the fallow, and so was called the
'tilth-grain.'

«Breach-corn.»

The oats or beans grown on the wheat stubble were sometimes called
'_Breach_-corn,' and _Breach_-land was land prepared for a second
crop.[570] [p378]

Where shall we find these words and things on the Continent?

Looking to the Latin words used for the three fields, it is obvious
that these were sometimes regarded as three separate ploughings--
_araturæ_, or _culturæ_,--or as so many sowings--_sationes_,[571]--just
as in the north of England they are called 'falls,' or 'fallows,' which
have to be ploughed.

«Names for the three fields, 'Felder,' 'Sationes,'
'Zelgen.'»

In North Germany, where they occur, they are generally simply called
'_felder_;'[572] in France around Paris they were called in the ninth
century '_sationes_;'[573] but in South Germany and Switzerland
the usual word for each field is _Zelg_, which Dr. Landau connects
with the Anglo-Saxon '_tilgende_' (tilling), and the later English
'_tilth_,' one of the Hitchin words. And he says that _Zelg_ strictly
means only the ploughed field[574] (_aratura_), though used for all
the three. The three fields were thus spoken of as three _tilths_.
The word '_Zelg_' we have already found in the St. Gall charters in
the eighth century, and Dr. Landau points out other instances of the
same date of its use in the districts of Swabia, the middle Rhine,
and later in the Inn Valley.

«'Esch,' and the Gothic 'Attisk.'»

On the other hand, in Westphalia, in Baden, and especially in Upper
Swabia and Upper Bavaria, as far as the river Isar, and also in
Switzerland, the word _Esch_ is the one in use,[575] the word being
used in [p379] Westphalia, also for the whole arable area.[576]
_Esch_ also was in use at the date of the earliest form of the
Bavarian laws (in the seventh century). The hedge put up in defence
of the sown field is there called an '_ezzisczun_.'[577] Still
earlier, in the fourth century, further East the open fields seem to
have been called '_attisk_;' for Ulphilas, in his translation of Mark
ii. 23, speaks of the disciples walking over the '_attisk_'--_i.e._
over the 'etch,' or 'eddish'--instead of as in the Anglo-Saxon
translation over the '_æcera_.' Here, therefore, we have another of
the Hitchin words.

«'Brachfrichte.'»

«These words point to connexion with South Germany.»

In Hesse, according to Dr. Landau, the three fields are spoken of as--

(1) In der _Lentzen_.
(2) In der _Brache_.
(3) In der _Rure_.

On the Main, in the fifteenth century, they were spoken of as--

(1) _Lenz_ frichte.
(2) _Brach_ frichte.
(3) _Rur_ frichte.

In Elsass, in the fourteenth century, and on the Danube--

(1) Brochager (Brach field)
(2) Rurager (Fallow field)

were used, and Dr. Landau says that _Esch_ is sometimes put in
contrast with '_Brach_.'[578] Whatever may be [p380] the exact
meaning of the word _Brach_--whether referring to the breaking of the
rotation or the breaking of the stubble--there can be no doubt of the
identity of the word with the English _Breach_ and _Breach-corn_.

It appears, therefore, that in South Germany, and especially in the
districts once Roman province, the three fields representing the
rotation of crops for many centuries have been known by names closely
resembling those used in England.

IV. THE DIVISION OF THE FIELDS INTO FURLONGS AND ACRES.

Passing next to the divisions of the open fields, we take first the
Furlongs or Shots (the Latin _Quarentenæ_).

«'Shot.'»

The word 'Shot' probably is simply the Anglo-Saxon '_sceot_,' or
_division_; but it is curious to find in a document of 1318 mention
of 'unam peciam, quod vulgariter dicitur _Schoet_' at _Passau_, near
the junction of the Inn with the Danube.[579]

«'Gewann.'»

The usual word in Middle and South Germany is '_Gewende_,' in Lower
Germany '_Wande_' or '_Wanne_,' or '_Gewann_'--words which no less
than the Furlong[580] refer to the length of the furrow and the
turning of the plough at the end of it.

«Headland.»

The _headland_, on which the plough was turned, [p381] is also found
in the German three-field system as in England.

«'Voracker.'»

In a Frankish document quoted by Dr. Landau, it is called the
'_Voracker_,' elsewhere it is known as the '_Anwänder_' (_versura_),
or '_Vorwart_.'[581]

«The Lince called 'Rain.'»

In the English system the furlongs were divided into strips or
acres by turf balks left in the ploughing, and, as we have seen, on
hill-sides, the strips became terraces, and the balks steep banks
called 'linces.' It will be remembered that these were produced by
the practice of always turning the sod downhill in the ploughing.
There are many _linces_ as far north as in the district of the
'Teutoberger Wald,'[582] and they occur in great numbers as far south
as the Inn Valley, all the way up to St. Mauritz and Pontresina.
Although in many places the terraces in the Engadine are now
grass-land, it is well known to the peasantry that they were made by
ancient ploughing.

The German word for the turf slope of these terraces is '_Rain_,'
and, like the word balk, it means a strip of unploughed turf.[583] It
is sometimes used for the terrace itself. Precisely the same word is
used for the similar terraces in the Dales of Yorkshire, which are
still called by the Dalesmen '_reeans_' or '_reins_.'[584] Terraces
of the same kind are found in [p382] Scotland; and when Pennant
in 1772 asked what they were called, he was told that they were
'_baulks_.'[585]

«The Celtic _Rhan_.»

Both words suggest a wider than merely German origin. 'Balk' is as
thoroughly a Welsh word[586] as it is English and German. 'Rain' can
hardly be other than the Welsh '_Rhan_' (a division), or '_Rhyn_' and
'_grwn_' (a ridge), with which the name of the open-field system in
Ireland and Scotland--'_run-rig_'--is no doubt connected. The English
word _lince_ or _linch_, with the Anglo-Saxon 'hlinc' and 'hlince,'
is perhaps allied to the Anglo-Saxon 'Hlynian,' or 'Hlinian,' to
lean, making its participle '_hlynigende_;' and this, and the old
High German '_hlinen_,' are surely connected with the Latin and
Italian '_inclinare_' and the French '_enclin_.' As we have seen, the
Roman 'Agrimensores' called these slopes or terraces '_supercilia_.'

* * * * *

Next let us ask, whence came the English _acre strip_ itself?

«The acre strip a day's work.»

It represented, as we have seen, a day's work at ploughing. Hence the
German _Morgen_ and _Tagwerk_, in the Alps _Tagwan_ and _Tagwen_; and
hence also, as early as the eighth century, the Latin '_jurnalis_'
and [p383] '_diurnalis_.'[587] In early Roman times Varro describes
the _jugerum_ [or _jugum_]--the Roman acre--as '_quod juncti boves
uno die exarare possint_.'[588]

The division of arable open fields into day-works was therefore
ancient. It was also widely spread, and by no means confined to the
three-field system. It was common to the co-aration of both free
tribesmen and 'taeogs' in Wales; and the Fellahin of Palestine to
this moment divide their open fields into day-works for the purpose
of easy division among them, according to their ploughs or shares in
a plough.[589]

In the Irish open-field system, as we have seen, the land was very
early divided into equal 'ridges,' for in the passage quoted,
referring to the pressure of population in the seventh century, the
complaint was, not that the people received _smaller_ ridges than in
former times, but _fewer of them_. These ridges, however, may or may
not have been 'day-works.'

But perhaps, outside of the three-field system, a still more widely
spread practice was that of dividing the furlongs or larger divisions
into _as many strips as there were sharers_, without reference to the
size of the strips. This practice seems to be the one adopted in many
parts of Germany, in Russia, and in the East, and it is in common use
in the western districts of Scotland to this day whenever a piece of
land is held by a number of crofters as joint holders.[590] [p384]

It is doubtful whether the division into acre strips representing
day-works, and divided from their neighbours by 'raine' or balks,
was one of the features of the original German system of ploughing.
It is chiefly, if not entirely, in the districts within or near to
the Roman 'limes,' or colonised after the conquest of the Roman
provinces, that it appears to have been prevalent.[591]

With regard to the word 'acre,' it is probably of very ancient origin.

The German 'acker' has the wider sense of ploughed land in general,
but sometimes in East Friesland,[592] and also in South Germany and
German Switzerland it has still the restricted meaning of the acre
strip laid out for ploughing.[593]

* * * * *

We now pass to the form of the acre strip or day's work in ploughing.

«Roman jugerum.»

The Roman _actus_ or furrow length was 120 feet, or twelve 10-feet
rods. The _actus quadratus_ was 120 feet square. The jugerum was
composed of two of these _actus quadrati_. It was therefore in length
still an actus or furrow of 120 feet, and it was twice as broad as
it was long; whilst the length of the English acre is ten times its
breadth.

«Strips of the same form as the English acre in France and
in Bavaria in the seventh century.»

Thus the English acre varied much in its shape [p385] from the Roman
jugerum. Its exact measurements are found in the _mappa_, or measure
of the day-work of the tenants of the abbot of St. Remy at Rheims,
which is described in the Polyptique of the ninth century as forty
perches in length and four in width.[594] It occurs again in the
'_napatica_' of the Polyptique of the abbey of St. Maur, near Nantes,
which was of precisely the same dimensions.[595] And we have seen
that the 'andecena,' or measure of the day's work of ploughing for
the coloni and servi of the Church, was described by the Bavarian
laws in the seventh century as of precisely the same form as the
English acre, forty rods in length and four rods in width, only that
the rods were Roman rods of 10 feet.

We have to go, therefore, to Bavaria in the seventh century for
the earliest instance of the form of the English acre. And in this
earliest instance it had a distinctly _servile_ connexion, as it had
also in the French cases quoted. In all it fixed the day's task-work
of semi-servile tenants.

Further, the Bavarian 'andecena,' if the spelling of the word may be
trusted, may have another curious and interesting connexion with the
Saxon acre, to which attention must be once more turned.

«The form in which the 'agrarium' or tithe-rent was taken.»

We have seen that the tithes were to be paid in Saxon times in the
produce of 'every tenth acre as it [p386] is traversed by the
plough.' The Roman land-tribute in Rhætia and the 'Agri Decumates'
also consisted of tithes. If these latter tithes were paid as the
Saxon ecclesiastical tithes were, by every tenth strip being set
aside for them in the ploughing, the words of the Bavarian law have
an important significance. The _judex_ or _villicus_ is required by
the laws to see that the _colonus_ or _servus_ shall render by way
of _agrarium_ or land tribute according to what he has, from every
thirty modii three modii (_i.e._ the tenth)--'lawful _andecenæ_
(_andecenas legitimas_), that is (the rod having ten feet) four rods
in width and forty in length, to plough, to sow, to hedge, to gather,
to lead, and to store.'[596]

Now why is the peculiar phraseology used 'from 30 modii 3 modii'?
Surely either because three modii, according to the 'Agrimensores,'
went to the juger, or because the actual acre of the locality was
sown with three modii of seed,[597] so that in either case it was
a way of saying 'from every ten acres one acre.' Further, the form
and measure of the acre is described, and it is called the '_lawful
andecena_.' The word itself in its peculiar etymology possibly
contains a reference to the _one strip set apart in ten for the
tithe_. Be this as it may, here again, in another point connected
with the 'acre,' we find the nearest and earliest analogies in South
Germany within the old Roman province. [p387]

Lastly, we have still to explain the reason of the difference
between the form of the Roman 'actus' and 'jugerum' and that of the
early Bavarian and English acre.

The Egyptian arura was 100 cubits square.[598]

The Greek πλέθρον was 10 rods or 100 feet square.[599]

The Roman actus was 12 rods or 120 feet square.

The Roman 'jugerum' was made up of two 'actus' placed side by side,
and was the area to be ploughed in a day.

«Form of the acre or day's-work connected with the number
of oxen in the team.»

In all these cases the yoke of two oxen is assumed, and the length of
the acre, or 'day-work,' is the length of the furrow which _two_ oxen
could properly plough at a stretch.[600]

The reason of the increased length of the Bavarian and the English
acre was, no doubt, connected with the fact of the larger team.[601]

If the Bavarian team was of eight oxen, like that of the English
and Welsh and Scotch common plough, it would seem perfectly natural
that with four times the strength of team the furrow might also be
assumed to be four times the usual length. In this way the Greek
and Roman furrow of 10 or 12 rods may naturally have been extended
north of the Alps into the 'furlong' of forty rods. [p388] . Now,
there is a remarkable proof that long furrows, and therefore probably
large teams, were used in Bavaria, then within the Roman province of
Rhætia, as early as the second century. The remains of the Bavarian
'Hochäcker' are described as running uninterruptedly for sometimes
a kilomètre and more, _i.e._ five times the length of the English
furlong. And a Roman road with milestones, dating as early as A.D.
201, in one place runs across these long furrows in a way which seems
to prove that they were older than the road.[602]

«The Bavarian 'Hochäcker' and their long furrows.»

Professor Meitzen argues from this fact that these 'Hochäcker' with
long furrows are pre-German in these districts, and in the absence of
evidence of their Celtic origin he inclines to attribute them to the
husbandry of officials or contractors on the imperial waste lands,
who had at their command hundreds of slaves and heavy plough teams.

This may be the solution of the puzzling question of the origin of
the Bavarian 'Hochäcker,' but the presence of the team of eight oxen
in Wales and Scotland as well as in England, and the mention of teams
of six and eight oxen in the Vedas[603] as used by Aryan husbandmen
in the East, centuries earlier, makes it possible, if not probable,
that the Romans, in this instance as in so many others, adopted and
adapted to their purpose a practice which they found already at work,
connected perhaps with a heavier soil and a clumsier plough than they
were used to south of the Alps.[604] [p389]

V. THE HOLDINGS--THE YARD-LAND OR HUB.

We now pass from the strips to the holdings.

The typical English holding of a serf in the open fields was the
yard-land of normally thirty acres (ten [p390] scattered acres
in each of the three fields), to which an outfit of two oxen was
assigned as '_setene_' or '_stuht_,' and which descended from one
generation to another as a complete indivisible whole.

«The hub or yard-land.»

The German word for the yard-land is _hof_ or _hub_; in its oldest
form _huoba, huba, hova_.[605] And Aventinus, writing early in the
sixteenth century of the holdings in Bavaria in the thirteenth
century, distinguishes the _hof_ as the holding belonging to a
_quadriga_, or yoke of four oxen, taxed at sixty 'asses,' from the
_hub_ or holding of the _biga_ or yoke of two oxen, and taxed [p391]
at thirty 'asses.'[606] If the tax in this case were one '_as_' per
acre, then the _hof_ contained sixty acres, and the _hub_ thirty
acres. So that, as in the yard-land, ten acres in each field would go
under the three-field system to the pair of oxen.

«Wide prevalence of the hub of thirty morgen in Middle and
South Germany.»

The _hub_ of thirty _morgen_ seems to have been the typical holding
of the serf over a very wide area, according to the earliest records.
Whilst as a rule absent from North Germany, Dr. Landau traces it in
Lower Saxony, in Engern, in Thuringia, in Grapfeld, in Hesse, on the
Middle Rhine and the Moselle, in the old Niederlahngau, Rheingau,
Wormsgau, Lobdengau and Spiergau, in Elsass, in Swabia, and in
Bavaria.[607]

The double _huf_ of sixty _morgen_ also occurs on the Weser and the
Rhine in Lower Saxony and in Bavaria.[608] The word 'huf' first
occurs in a document of A.D. 474.[609]

The passage in the Bavarian laws of the seventh century, already
referred to, declaring the tithe to be 'three modii from every
thirty' modii--or one 'lawful andecena' from each ten that, in the
typical case taken, 'a man has'--would seem to suggest that ten
_andecenæ_ or acre strips in each field (or thirty in all) was a
typical holding, whilst the use of the Roman rod of ten feet points
to a Roman influence.

«The double 'hub' of sixty morgen. The outfit of oxen.»

Further, the fact of the prevalence of the double and single _huf_
or _hub_ of sixty and thirty acres over so large an area once Roman
province, irresistibly suggests a connexion with the double and
single yoke [p392] of oxen given as outfit to the Roman veteran,
with such an allowance of seed as to make it probable, as we have
seen, that the double yoke received normally fifty or sixty jugera,
and the single yoke twenty-five or thirty jugera.

It is worth remembering, further, that in the Bavarian law before
quoted, limiting the week-work of the _servi_ on the ecclesiastical
estates to three days a week, an exception is made allowing unlimited
week-work to be demanded from _servi_ who had been supplied with
their outfit of oxen _de novo_ by their lord. So that there is a
chain of evidence as to the system of supplying the holders of
'yard-lands,' 'huben,' and 'yokes,' with an outfit of oxen, of
which the Kelso '_stuht_,' the Saxon '_setene_,' the outfit of the
_servus_ under this Bavarian law, and that of the Roman veteran, are
links.[610]

It is hardly needful to repeat that it does not follow from this that
the system of allotting about thirty acres (varying in size with the
locality) to the pair of oxen was a Roman invention. The clear fact
is that it was a system followed in Roman provinces under the later
empire, as well as in Germany and England afterwards; and, as the
holding of thirty acres was found to be the allotment to each 'tate'
or household under the Irish tribal system, it may possibly have had
an earlier origin and a wider prevalence than the period or extent of
Roman rule.

«Scattering of the strips composing them.»

The scattering of the strips composing a _yard-land_ or _hub_, over
the open fields should also be once more mentioned in comparing
the two. It was not [p393] confined to the 'yard-land' or 'hub.'
It arose, as we have seen, in Wales, from the practice of joint
ploughing, and was the result of the method of dividing the joint
produce, probably elsewhere also, under the tribal system. It is the
method of securing a fair division of common land in Scotland and
Ireland and Palestine to this day, no less than under the English
and German three-field system. And the remarkable passage from
Siculus Flaccus has been quoted, which so clearly describes a similar
scattered ownership, resulting probably from joint agriculture
carried on by '_vicini_,' as often to be met with in his time on
Roman ground. This passage proves that the Roman holding (like the
Saxon _yard-land_ and the German _hub_) might be composed of a bundle
of scattered pieces; but this scattering was too widely spread from
India to Ireland for it to be, in any sense, distinctively Roman. It
perhaps resulted, as we have seen, from the heaviness of the soil
or the clumsiness of the plough, and the necessity of co-operation
between free or semi-servile tenants, in order to produce a
plough team of the requisite strength according to the custom of
the country; and this necessity probably arose most often in the
provinces north of the Alps.

«The single succession to the 'hub' and 'yard-land.'»

Another point distinctive of the 'yard-land' and the 'hub' was
the absence of division among heirs, the single succession, the
indivisibility of the bundle of scattered strips in the holding.
And this finds its nearest likeness perhaps, as we have seen, in
the probably single succession of the semi-servile holder, or
mere 'usufructuarius' under Roman law, and especially under the
semi-military rule of the border provinces. [p394]

«The Saxon 'Gebur' and the High German 'Gipur.'»

Lastly, before leaving the comparison between the _yard-land_ and
_hub_ it may be asked why the serf who held it in England was called
a _Gebur_.

The word _villanus_ of the Domesday Survey is associated with other
words, such as _villicus_, _villata_, _villenage_, all connected with
serfdom, and all traceable through Romance dialects to the Roman
'_villa_.'

But the Anglo-Saxon word was '_Gebur_.' It was the _Geburs_ who were
holders of yard-lands.

We trace this word _Gebur_ in High German dialects. We find it in
use in the High German translation of the laws of the Alamanni,
called the '_Speculi Suevici_,' where free men are divided into three
classes:--

(1) The '_semperfrien_' = lords with vassals under them.

(2) The '_mittlerfrien_' = the men or vassals of the lords.

(3) The '_geburen_' = _liberi incolæ_, or 'fri-lant-sæzzen' [_i.e._
not slaves].[611]

The word 'gebur' or 'gipur' occurs also in the High German of
Otfried's 'Paraphrase of the Gospels,'[612] of the ninth century, and
in the Alamannic dialect of Notger's Psalms for _vicinus_.[613]

Here, again, the South German connexion seems to be the nearest to
the Anglo-Saxon. [p395]

VI. THE HIDE, THE HOF, AND THE CENTURIA.

«The 'hide,' 'familla,' 'casatum,' and 'hiwisc.'»

From the yard-land, or _hub_, the holding of a serf, we may pass to
the typical holding of the full free landholder, connected in England
with the full team of eight oxen.

The Saxon _hide_, or the _familia_ of Bede, was Latinised in Saxon
charters into '_casatum_.' We have found in the St. Gall charters
the word '_casa_' used for the homestead. The present Romanish word
for house is '_casa_,' and for the verb 'to dwell,' '_casar_.' And
there is the Italian word '_casata_,' still meaning a family. Thus
the connexion between the '_familia_' of Bede and the '_casatum_' of
the charters is natural. Bede wrote more classical Latin than the
ecclesiastical scribes in the charters. The hide was the holding of
a family.[614] Hence it was sometimes, like the yard-land or holding
of a servile family, called a '_hiwisc_,' which was Anglo-Saxon,
and also High German for family.[615] But the Saxon hide, also, was
translated into _ploughland_ or _carucate_, corresponding with the
full team of eight oxen.

«The 'carucate,' 'sulung,' or plough-land.»

Generally in Kent, and sometimes in Sussex, Berks, and Essex, we
found in addition to or instead of the hide or carucate, or 'terra
unius aratri,' _solins_, _sullungs_, or _swullungs_--the land
pertaining to a '_suhl_,' the Anglo-Saxon word for plough. This
word is [p396] surely of Roman rather than of German origin. The
Piedmontese '_sloira_,' and the Lombardic '_sciloira_,' and the Old
French '_silleoire_,' are surely allied to the Romanish '_suilg_,'
and the Latin '_sulcus_.'

«The 'gioc,' or 'jugum.'»

Again, in Kent the quarter of a 'sulung' (answering to the yard-land
or virgate of other parts) is called in the early charters a 'gioc,'
'ioclet,' or 'iochlet,'[616] _i.e._ a yoke or small-yoke of land.
We have seen in the St. Gall charters, also, mention of 'juchs' or
'jochs,' which, however, were apparently jugera. This word _gioc_ is
surely allied to the Italian '_giogo_,' and the Latin _jugum_.

«The 'hide' and 'centuria' the typical free holding.»

Here, then, we have the _hide_ the typical holding of a _free_
family, as the _centuria_ was under Roman law. A free Saxon thane
might hold many hides, and so might and did the lord of a Roman villa
hold more than one 'centuria' within its bounds. Still Columella
took as his type of a Roman farm the 'centuria' of 200 acres,[617]
and calculated how much seed, how many oxen, how many _opera_, or
day-works of slaves, or 'coloni' were required to till it. The hide,
double or single, was also a land measure, and contained eight or
four yard-lands, and so also was the 'centuria' a land measure
divisible into eight normal holdings allotted with single yokes. Both
also became, as we have seen, units of assessment. But in England the
hide was the unit. Under the Roman system of taxation the _jugum_ was
the unit. [p397]

This variation, however, confirms the connexion. The Roman _jugum_,
or yoke of two oxen, made a complete plough. Nothing less than the
hide was the complete holding in England, because a team of eight
oxen was required for English ploughing. The yard-land was only a
fractional holding, incomplete for purposes of ploughing without
co-operation. Hence it would seem that the complete _plough_ was
really the unit in both cases.

«The Saxon 'hidation' and the Roman 'jugatio.'»

How closely the English hidation followed the lines of the Roman
'_jugatio_' has already been seen. When to the many resemblances
of the hide to the 'centuria,' and of the 'jugum' to the virgate,
regarded as units of assessment, are now added the other connecting
links found in this chapter, in things, in figures, and in words,
between the Saxon open-field system, and that of the districts of
Upper Germany, so long under Roman rule, the English hidation may
well be suspected to go back to Roman times, and to be possibly
a survival of the Roman _jugation_. When Henry of Huntingdon, in
describing the Domesday Survey, instead of saying that inquiry was
made how many hides and how many virgates there were, uses the words
'quot _jugata_ et quot virgata terræ,'[618] he at any rate used the
exact words which describe what in the Codex Theodosianus is spoken
of as taxation 'per _jugationem_.'[619]

Not, as already said, that the Romans introduced into Britain the
division of land according to plough teams, and the number of
oxen contributed [p398] to the plough team. It would grow, as
we have seen, naturally out of tribal arrangements whenever the
tribes settled and became agricultural, instead of wandering about
with their herds of cattle. It was found in Wales and Ireland and
Scotland, in Bohemia, apparently in Slavonic districts also and
further east.[620] It is much more likely that the Romans, according
to their usual custom, adopted a barbarian usage and seized upon an
existing and obvious unit as the basis of provincial taxation.

«Roman _tributum_ in Frisia paid in hides.»

The Frisian tribute of hides was perhaps an example of this. The
Frisians were a pastoral people, and a hide for every so many oxen
was as ready a mode of assessing the tribute as counting the plough
teams would be in an agricultural district. The word 'hide,' which
still baffles all attempts to explain its origin, may possibly have
had reference to a similar tribute. Even in England it does not
follow that it was in its origin connected with the plough team.
Its real equivalent was the _familia_, or _casatum_--the land of a
family--and in pastoral districts of England and Wales the Roman
tribute may possibly have been, if not a hide from each plough team,
a hide from every family holding cattle; just as in A.D. 1175 Henry
II. bound his Irish vassal, Roderic O'Connor, to pay annually '_de
singulis animalibus decimum corium placabile mercatoribus_'--perhaps
a tenth of the hides he himself received as tribute from his own
tribesmen.[621] The supposition of such an origin of the connexion of
the word 'hide' with the 'land of a family' [p399] or of a plough
team is mere conjecture; but the _fact_ of the connexion is clear.
All these three things, the _hide_, the _hiwisce_, and the _sullung_,
and their subdivision the _yard-land_, were the units of British
'hidation,' just as the _centuria_ and the _jugum_ were the units of
the Roman 'jugatio.'

VII. THE GAFOL AND GAFOL-YRTH.

Passing now to the serfdom and the services under which the
'yard-lands' and the 'huben' were held, it may at least be said that
their practical identity suggests a common origin.

We learned from the _Rectitudines_ and from the _Laws of Ine_, to
make a distinction between the two component parts of the obligations
of the 'gebur' in respect of his yard-land.

There was (1) the _gafol_, and (2) the _week-work_.

The _gafol_ was found to be a semi-servile incident to the yard-land.
The week-work was the most servile one.

A man otherwise free and possessing a homestead already, could, under
the laws of Ine, hire a yard-land of demesne land and pay _gafol_ for
it, without incurring liability to _week-work_. But if the lord found
for him both the yard-land and the homestead, then he was a complete
'gebur' or 'villanus,' and must do _week-work_ also.

«The Saxon 'gafol' and 'gafol-yrth.'»

Taking the _gafol_ first, and descending to details, it was found to
be complex--_i.e._ it included _gafol_ and _gafol-yrth_. [p400]

The _gafol_ of the 'gebur,' as stated in the _Rectitudines_, was
this:--

For _gafol proper_:--

10d. at Michaelmas.

23 sesters of beer, and
2 fowls, at Martinmas.

1 lamb at Easter, or 2d.

For _gafolyrth_:--the ploughing of 3 acres, and sowing of it
from the 'gebur's' own barn.

Comparing the _gafol_ proper with the _census_ of the St. Gall
charters, and the _tribute_ of the 'servi' of the Church under
the Alamannic laws of A.D. 622, the resemblance was found to be
remarkably close.

The tribute of the 'servi' of the Church was thus stated in the
latter:--

15 siclæ of beer.
A sound spring pig.
2 modia of bread.
5 fowls.
20 eggs.

As regards this tribute _in kind_ the likeness is obvious, and
it further so closely resembles the food-rent of the Welsh free
tribesmen as to suggest that it may have been a survival of ancient
tribal dues--a suggestion which the word 'gafol' itself confirms. It
seems to be connected with the _Abgabe_, or food gifts of the German
tribesmen.[622]

«Possible connexion with Roman _tributum_.»

We saw that the word _gafol_ was the equivalent of _tributum_ in the
Saxon translation of the Gospels. 'Does your master pay tribute?'
'_Gylt he gafol?_'

Further, the French evidence seems to show [p401] that the later
manorial payments in kind and services upon Frankish manors were,
to some extent, a survival of the old Roman exactions in Gaul.[623]
And the tribute of the Alamannic and Bavarian laws, and of the St.
Gall and other charters, was found to be equally clearly a survival
of the Roman tributum in the German province of Rhætia and the 'Agri
Decumates.'

«The Saxon 'gafol-yrth' and the Roman 'agrarium' or
tithe-rent.»

But in addition to the 'gafol' in kind, there was the _gafol-yrth_;
and of this also we found in the St. Gall charters numerous examples.
In the many cases where the owner of homesteads and land surrendered
them to the Abbey, and henceforth paid tribute to the Abbey, there
was not only the tribute in kind, but also the _ploughing of so
many acres_, sometimes of one, sometimes of two, and sometimes
of one in each _zelga_ or field--to be ploughed, and reaped, and
carried by the tenant. The combination of the dues in _kind_
and in _ploughing_, with sometimes other services, made up the
_tributum in servitium_--_i.e._ the gafol of the _tributarius_, or
'_gafol-gelder_,' which he paid under the Alamannic laws to his lord,
the latter thenceforth paying the public tributum for the land to the
State.

Perhaps we may go one step further.

«Not always a tenth.»

From the remarkable resemblance of the English _gafol-yrth_ and its
South German equivalent the inference was drawn that this peculiar
_rent taken in the form of the ploughing of a definite number of
acres_, was probably a survival of the Roman tenths, [p402] or other
proportion of produce claimed as rent from settlers on the _ager
publicus_ of the 'Agri Decumates,' and of Rhætia. Indications were
found that the _agrarium_, or tenth of the arable produce, may have
been taken _in actual acres_ like the Saxon tithes--_i.e._ in the
produce of so many '_andecenæ_,' the ploughing, sowing, reaping, and
garnering of which were done by the tenant.

But under Roman usage the proportion taken was not always a
_tenth_. The State rent was nominally a tithe. But it was in fact
so extortionately gathered as sometimes in Sicily to _treble_ the
tithe.[624] Hyginus also says that the 'vectigal,' or tax, was taken
in some provinces in a certain part of the crop, in some a fifth, in
others a seventh.[625] In Italy the dues from the _Agri Medietates_
perhaps surviving in the later _métayer_ system, amounted sometimes
to _one-half_. At any rate, the proportion varied.

Now the Saxon 'gafol-yrth' of the yard-land of thirty acres seems,
according to the 'Rectitudines,' as we have seen, to have been the
produce of three acres in the wheat-field, ploughed by the 'gebur'
and sown with seed from his own barn. For it will be remembered that
the first season after the yard-land was given there was to be no
gafol, and in the gebur's outfit only seven out of the ten acres in
the wheat-field [p403] were to be handed over to him already sown,
leaving three unsown, _i.e._ probably _the three_ which otherwise he
must have sown for the _gafol-yrth_ due to his lord. As ten acres of
the yard-land were probably always in fallow, three acres of wheat
was a heavier _gafol-yrth_ than a fairly gathered tithe would have
been.

It would therefore seem probable that as the 'gafol' in kind may be
traced back to the Roman _tributum_, itself perhaps a survival of the
tribal food-rents of the conquered provinces, so the 'gafol-yrth' may
be traced back to the Roman _decumæ_, or other proportion of the crop
due by way of land-tax or rent to the State. And this survival of
the complex tribute or gafol, made up of its two separate elements,
from Roman to Saxon times, becomes all the more striking when it is
considered also that it was due from a normal holding with an outfit
of a pair of oxen, both in the case of the Saxon _yard-land_ and of
the Roman veteran's allotment.

VIII. THE BOON-WORK AND WEEK-WORK OF THE SERF.

«The Saxon 'boon-work' and the Roman 'sordida munera.'»

Proceeding still further, besides the _gafol_ and _gafol-yrth_,
and yet distinct from the _week-work_, was the liability of the
serfs on the Saxon manor to certain _boon-work_ or services _ad
preces_; sometimes in ploughing or reaping a certain number of
acres of the lord's demesne land in return for grass land or other
advantages, or without any special equivalent; sometimes in going
errands or carrying goods to market or otherwise, generally known
as _averagium_. 'He shall land-gafol pay, and shall _ridan_ and
_averian_ [p404] and _lade lædan_' for his lord. So this boon-work
in addition to 'gafol' is described in the 'Rectitudines.'

The various kinds of manorial 'averagium' were, as we have seen,
often called in mediæval Latin _angariæ_, a going on errands or
postal service; _paraveredi_, or packhorse services; and _carroperæ_,
or waggon services.

We have seen how these services resembled the _angariæ_ and the
_parangariæ_ and _paraveredi_, which were included among the
'_sordida munera_' or '_obsequiæ_' of the Theodosian Code in force
in Rhætia in the fourth century, found still surviving, though
transformed into manorial services, in the same districts in the
seventh century and afterwards, under the Bavarian laws and in the
monastic charters. The carrying services and other boon-work on Saxon
manors closely resembled those of the Frankish charters and the
Bavarian laws, and probably therefore shared their Roman origin.

«The week-work of the serf.»

There remains to complete the serfdom its most servile incident, the
_week-work_--that survival of the originally unrestricted claim of
the lord of the Roman villa to his slave's labour which, limited,
as we have seen, according to the evidence of the Alamannic laws,
under the influence of Christian humanity by the monks or clergy, in
respect of the servi on their estates, to three days a week, became
the mediæval _triduanum servitium_. The words of the Alamannic law
are worth re-quoting.

'_Servi dimidiam partem sibi et dimidiam in dominico arativum
reddant. Et si super hæc est_, SICUT SERVI ECCLESIASTICI _ita
faciunt, tres dies sibi et tres in dominico._'

Let _servi_ do plough service, half for themselves and half in
demesne. And if there be any further [service] let them work
_as the servi of the Church_, three days for themselves, and
three in demesne. [p405]

This remarkable passage in the Alamannic code of A.D. 622 seems to be
the earliest version extant of the Magna Charta of the agricultural
servus, who thus early upon ecclesiastical estates was transformed
from a slave into a serf.

IX. THE CREATION OF SERFS AND THE GROWTH OF SERFDOM.

«Serfdom recruited from above and from below.»

There is yet another point in which the correspondence between
British and Continental usages is worth remarking.

The community in serfdom on a lord's estate was both by Saxon and
Continental usage recruited from above and from below.

«Free-men become serfs.»

Free men from above, by voluntary arrangement with a lord, could
and did descend into serfdom. The Saxon free tenant could, by free
contract, arrange to take a yard-land, and if he were already
provided with a homestead and oxen, he became a 'gafol-gelder,'
or _tributarius_ of his lord, without incurring the liability to
the more servile 'week-work,' just as was the case when, under the
Alamannic laws, free men made surrender of their holdings to the
Abbey of St. Gall. In both cases, as we saw, week-work was added if
the lord found the homestead and the outfit.

«Slaves become serfs.»

On the other hand, whenever a lord provided his slave with an outfit
of oxen, and gave him a part in the ploughing, he rose out of slavery
into serfdom. To speak more correctly, he rose into that middle
class of tenants who, by whatever name they were [p406] known at
first, afterwards became confounded together in the ranks of mediæval
serfdom.

«Grades in serfdom during the period of transition.»

«'Tributarii,' 'coloni,' and 'liti.'»

There were, in fact, grades in the community in serfdom not only
like those of the Saxon geburs and cottiers, but also corresponding
to the historical origin of the serfs. Thus, as we have seen in the
'Polyptique d'Irminon' and in many other cartularies and surveys of
monastic estates, there are _coloni_ and _liti_ among the serfs,
names bearing witness to the historical origin of the serfs, though
the difference between them had all but vanished.

«Slaves made into these.»

«The læts of the laws of Ethelbert.»

There is a passage in the Ripuarian laws, 'If any one shall make
his slave into a "tributarius," or a "litus," &c.'[626] The 'lidus'
of the 'Lex Salica' was under a lordship, and classed with 'servi,'
and by a legal process he could be set free.[627] We have noticed
the passage in the Theodosian Code which speaks of 'coloni' and
'tributarii' on British estates, and also the mention by Ammianus
Marcellinus of 'tributarii' in Britain. We have noticed also the
three grades of 'læts,' the only class of tenants mentioned in the
laws of Ethelbert.

«Survivals of the period of transition in Britain.»

Now, whatever doubt there might be as to what were the 'læts' on
Kentish 'hams' and 'tuns' in the sixth century, if they stood alone
as isolated phenomena; taken together with the 'tributarii' and
'coloni' and 'liti' on Continental manors, there can be hardly
any doubt that they belonged to the same middle [p407] class of
semi-servile tenants to which allusion has been made. Their presence
on the manorial 'hams' and 'tuns' of England revealed in the earliest
historical record after the Saxon Conquest, taken in connexion
with the many other points brought together in this chapter, makes
the inference very strong indeed that they, like the 'coloni,'
'tributarii,' and 'liti' on Continental manors, were a survival from
that period of transition from Roman to German rule, during which
the names of the various classes of semi-servile tenants, afterwards
merged in the common status of mediæval serfdom, still preserved
traces of their origin.

X. THE CONFUSION IN THE STATUS OF THE TENANTS ON ENGLISH AND GERMAN
MANORS.

«Serfs free in status unfree in tenure.»

In one sense both in England and Germany the holders of the
'yard-lands' and 'huben,' though serfs, were _free_. As regards their
lords they were serfs. As regards the slaves they were free. In this
respect they resembled very closely the Roman 'coloni' on a private
villa.

«Grades of manorial tenants.»

On the Frankish manors there were two classes of these semi-servile
tenants--'mansi ingenuiles,' who were free from the 'week-work;' and
'mansi serviles,' from whom 'week-work' was due. Probably owing to
the nature of the Saxon conquest the first of these classes seems
to have practically become absorbed in the other. The laws of Ine,
indeed, mention the gafol-gelder who, providing his own homestead,
did not become liable to 'week-work' like the 'gebur.' But [p408]
in the statements of the services on the manors of Hisseburne and
Tidenham no such class appears. In the 'Rectitudines' there is no
class mentioned between the _thane_, who is lord of the manor, and
the 'geneats'--_i.e._ the 'gebur' and the 'cotsetl.' In the Domesday
Survey there are no tenants above the villani, as a general rule,
except in the Danish districts, where the 'Sochmanni' and the 'liberi
homines' appear.

Comparing the status of English and German holders of 'yard-lands'
and 'huben,' the resemblances are remarkable, and they confirm the
suggestion of a common origin. Both are 'adscripti glebæ.' In both
cases there is the absence of division among heirs. In both the
succession is single, and in theory at the will of the lord. In both
there are the gafol and customary services.

In both cases there is the distinction in grade of serfdom between
the man who freely becomes the holder of a yard-land or hub by his
own surrender, or by voluntary submission to the semi-servile tenure,
and the man who is a _nativus_ or born serf.

In both cases there is a regular contribution towards military
service or the equipment of a soldier, and apparently no bar in
status from actual service, though doubtless in a semi-menial
position.

«The confusion perhaps partly a survival from Roman
provincial conditions.»

In all these points we have noticed strong analogies between the
semi-free and semi-servile conditions of the various classes of
tenants on Roman villas, and on the Roman public lands, which we have
spoken of as the great provincial manor of the Roman Empire. And the
natural inference seems to be, that even the curious confusion of the
free and servile status may [p409] be, in part, a survival of the
like confusion in the Roman provinces. It naturally grew up under the
semi-military rule of the German provinces, and possibly in Britain
also; whilst the Saxon conquest of the latter, no doubt, as we have
said, tended to reduce the confusion into something like simplicity
by fusing together classes of semi-servile tenants of various
historical origins, in the one common class of the later 'geneats' or
'villani,' in whose status the old confusion, however, survived.

XI. RESULT OF THE COMPARISON.

«Strong evidence of connexion between Britain and the
South German provinces during Roman rule, in the serfdom and in the
open-field system which was its shell.»

To sum up the result of the comparison made in this chapter between
the English and the Continental open-field system and serfdom. The
English and South-German systems at the time of the earliest records
in the seventh century were to all intents and purposes apparently
identical.

The mediæval serf, judging from the evidence of his gafol and
services, seems to have been the compound product of survivals from
three separate ancient conditions, gradually, during Roman provincial
rule and under the influence of barbarian conquest, confused and
blended into one, viz. those of the _slave_ on the Roman villa, of
the _colonus_ or other semi-servile and mostly barbarian tenants on
the Roman villa or public lands, and of the _slave_ of the German
tribesman, who to the eyes of Tacitus was so very much like a Roman
_colonus_.

That peculiar form of the open-field system, which was the shell of
serfdom both in England and on the Continent, also connects itself
in Germany [p410] distinctly with the Romano-German provinces,
whilst at the same time conspicuously absent from the less Romanised
districts of Northern Germany.

It seems therefore inconceivable that the three-field system and the
serfdom of early Anglo-Saxon records can have been an altogether new
importation from North Germany, where it did not exist, into Britain,
where it probably had long existed under Roman rule.

«The Saxon invaders from North Germany hardly brought the
three-field system into England.»

We have already quoted the strong conclusion of Hanssen that the
Anglo-Saxon invaders and their Frisian Low-German and Jutish
companions could not introduce into England a system to which they
were not accustomed at home. It must be admitted that the conspicuous
absence of the three-field system from the North of Germany does
not, however, absolutely dispose of the possibility that the system
was imported into England from those districts of Middle Germany
reaching from Westphalia to Thuringia, where the system undoubtedly
existed. It is at least possible that the invaders of England may
have proceeded from thence rather than as commonly supposed, from the
regions on the northern coast. But if it be possible that a system of
agriculture implying long-continued settlement, and containing within
it numerous survivals of Roman elements, could be imported by pirates
and the emigrants following in their wake, the possibility itself
implies that the immigrants had themselves previously submitted to
long-continued Roman influences.

On the whole we may adopt as a more likely theory the further
suggestion of Hanssen, that if the three-field system was imported at
all into England, [p411] the most likely time for its importation
was that same period of Roman occupation during which he considers
that it came into use in the Roman provinces of Germany.[628]

«The Romans probably introduced the three-course rotation
of crops.»

Nor is there anything inconsistent with this suggestion in the
irregular lines of the English open fields and their divisions, so
different from those produced by the rectangular centuriation of
Roman 'Agrimensores.' We must not forget that the open field system
in its simpler forms was almost certainly pre-Roman in Britain as
elsewhere; so that what the Romans added to transform it into the
manorial three-field system probably was rather the three-course
rotation of crops, the strengthening of the manorial element on
British estates, and the methods of taxation by 'jugation,' than
any radical alteration in the land-divisions or in the system of
co-operative ploughing.[629]

FOOTNOTES:

[554] '_Die Territorien in Bezug auf ihre Bildung und ihre
Entwicklung_,' Hamburg and Gotha, 1854.

[555] Dr. Hanssen's various papers on the subject are collected in
his _Agrarhistorische Abhandlungen_, Leipzig, 1880.

[556] Jena, 1879.

[557] '_Georg Hanssen_, als _Agrar-Historiker_.' Von August Meitzen,
1881. Tübingen.

[558] See Hanssen's chapter, '_Die Feldgraswirthschaft deutscher
Gebirgsgegenden_,' in his _Agrarhist. Abhandl._, pp. 132 _et seq._

[559] Landau, pp. 16–20.

[560] See the interesting examples given in Meitzen's _Ausbreitung_,
with maps.

[561] See Hanssen's chapter on the '_Einfeldwirthschaft_,'
_Agrarhist. Abhandl._ pp. 190 _et seq._

[562] Hanssen, p. 496.

[563] As to this part of the question, see especially Meitzen's
_Ausbreitung_.

[564] Landau, '_Die Territorien_,' pp. 32 _et seq._

[565] Sometimes in Germany, as in England, there were _two_
or more. See Hanssen's chapters on the '_Zwei-, Vier-und
Fünffelderwirthschaft_.'

[566] Tusser, 'February Abstract.'

[567] _Id._ 'February Husbandry.'

[568] _Id._ 'October Abstract.'

[569] _Id._ 'October Husbandry.'

[570] Halliwell, _sub voce_.

[571] '_Campis Sationalibus_' Charter, A.D. 704. B. M. Ancient
Charter, Cotton MS. Augustus, ii. 82. '_Tuican hom_' (Twickenham, in
Middlesex).

[572] Landau, 53.

[573] Guerard's _Polyp. d'Irminon_. '_Arat inter tres sationes
perticatres_,' pp. 134, &c.; and see Glossary, p. 456.

[574] Landau, p. 54.

[575] Landau, p. 54. 'Die alte Form dieses Wortes ist _ezzisc_,
_ezzisca_, _ezzisch_ (gothisch _atisk_), und wird in den Glossen
durch _segetes_ erklärt.'

[576] Hanssen's chapter, _'Zur Geschichte der Feldsysteme in
Deutschland_,' in his _Agrarhistorische Abhandlungen_, p. 194.

[577] 'Si illum sepem eruperit vel dissipaverit quem _Ezzisczun_
vocant,' &c. _Textus Legis Primus_, x. 16. Pertz, p. 309. In _id._ x.
21 the words '_Semitæ convicinales_' are used of open fields. In the
_Burgundian Laws_ 'Additamentum Primum,' tit. 1, 'Agri communes.'

[578] Landau, pp. 54–5.

[579] _Passau_ received its name from a Roman legion of _Batavi_
having been stationed there.--_Mon. Boica_, xxx. p. 83. Landau, p. 49.

[580] In East Friesland, under the one-field system, the word
'_flaggen_' is used for 'furlongs.' Hanssen, p. 198.

[581] Landau, p. 32.

[582] There are great numbers to be seen from the railway from Ems as
far as Nordhausen on the route to Berlin.

[583] Thus _Rainbalken_ is the turf balk left unploughed as a
boundary.

[584] Halliwell. '_Räin_,' a ridge (north). See also _Studies_,
by Joseph Lucas, F.G.S., c. viii., where there is an interesting
description of the 'Reins' in Nidderdale. These terraces occur in the
neighbouring dales of Billsdale, Bransdale, and Furndale; and also in
Wharfdale and the valley of the Ribble, &c.

[585] Pennant's _Tour in Scotland_, p. 281. 'Observed on the right
several very regular terraces cut on the face of a hill. They are
most exactly formed, a little raised in the middle like a firm walk,
and about 20 feet broad, and of very considerable length. In some
places were three, in others five flights, placed one above the
other, terminating exactly in a line at each end, and most precisely
finished. I am told that such tiers of terraces are not uncommon in
these parts, where they are called baulks.'

[586] See Pugh's _Welsh Dictionary_:

_Balc_, a break in furrow land.
_Balcia_, a breaking of furrows.
_Balcio_, to break furrows.
_Balciog_, having irregular furrows.
_Balciwr_, a breaker of furrows.
And see _supra_, p. 4.

[587] So in the St. Gall charters, quoted above. Thus also Dronke,
_Traditiones et Antiq. Fuldenses_, p. 107, 'xx. diurnales hoc est
quod tot diebus arari poterit.'--Landau, 45.

[588] Varro, _De Re Rustica_, i. 10; and see _Plin. Hist. Nat._ 18.
3. 15.

[589] See _supra_, chapter viii.

[590] I have found it in use on the coast opposite the Isle of Skye.
Several crofters will take a tract of land, divide it first into
larger divisions, or 'parks,' and then divide the parks into lots, of
which each takes one.

[591] I am indebted for this information to Professor Meitzen, who
informs me that he doubts whether it was a feature of the old purely
German open fields. In undisturbed old German districts the 'Gewanne'
and strips are of irregular and arbitrary size, and are not separated
by permanent turf 'raine' or balks.

[592] Hanssen, p. 198.

[593] In the Engadine, in reply to the question what the flat strips
between the linches were called, the driver answered, '_acker_.' When
it was pointed out that they were _grass_, the reply was, 'Ah! but a
hundred years ago they were ploughed.'

[594] M. Guérard's Introduction to the _Polyptique d'Irminon_, p. 641.

[595] _Id._ p. 641; and Appendix, i. p. 285. The Irish acre is of the
same form as the English--4 rods by 40--but the rod is 21 feet. See
the _Cartulaire de Redon_ in Brittany, No. cccxxvi. (p. 277), where
a church is given to the abbey 'cum sedecim porcionibus terræ quæ
lingua eorum "acres" nominantur' (A.D. 1061–1075). In Normandy, in
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, there were acres of four roods,
'vergées.' _Id._ p. cccxi. Compare also the form of the Welsh erw.

[596] Pertz, 278. _Lex Baiuwariorum textus legis primus_, 13.

[597] The Agrimensores reckoned 3 modii of land to the jugerum.
_Gromatici Veteres_, i. p. 359 (13). In general 5 modii of wheat seed
was sown on the jugerum, but the '_lawful andecena_,' being only
about three-fifths of a jugerum, would require only 3 modii of wheat
seed to sow it.

[598] Herod, ii. 168

[599] According to Suidas it was equal to four ἄρουραι, and Homer
mentions τετράγυον as a usual field representing a day's work. (Od.
xviii. 374.) Hence τετράγυον = 'as much as a man can plough in a day.'

[600] 'Sulcum autem ducere longiorem quam pedum centumviginti
contrarium pecori est.'--Col. ii. 11, 27.

[601] The Rev. W. Denton, in his _Servia and the Servians_, p.
135, mentions Servian ploughs with six, ten, or twelve oxen in the
team. See also mention of similar teams of oxen or buffaloes in
Turkey--_Reports on Tenures of Land_, 1869–70, p. 306.

[602] '_Der älteste Anbau der Deutschen._' Von A. Meitzen, Jena, 1881.

[603] Zimmer's _Altindisches Leben_, p. 237.

[604] There are two other points which bear upon the Roman connexion
with the _acre_.

(1) If the length of the furrow was to be increased, it would
be natural to jump from one well-known measure to another. The
_stadium_, or length of the foot race, was one-eighth of a mile,
and was composed of ten of the Greek ἅμμα. The 'furlong' is also
the one-eighth of a mile, and contains ten chains. But the stadium
contained 625 Roman feet or 600 Greek feet--about 607 English
statute feet. How does this comport with its containing 40 rods?
The fact is, the rod varied in different provinces, and the Romans
adopted probably the rod of the country in measuring the acre.
'Perticas autem juxta loca vel crassitudinem terrarum, prout
provincialibus placuit videmus esse dispositas, quasdam decimpedas,
quibusdam duos additos pedes, aliquas vero xv. vel x. et vii. pedum
diffinitas.'--_Pauca de Mensuris, Grom. Vet._, Lachmann, &c., p.
371. Forty rods of 10 cubits, or 15 feet each, would equal the 600
feet of the Greek stadium. In fact, the English statute furlong is
based upon a rod of 16½ feet. There is also the further fact that the
later Agrimensores expressly mention a 'stadialis ager of 625 feet'
(Lachmann, Isodorus, p. 368; _De Mensuris excerpta_, p. 372). So that
it seems to be clear that the stadium, like the furlong, was used not
only in measuring distances, but also in the division of fields.

(2) We have seen that the acre strips in England were often called
'balks,' because of the ridge of unbroken turf by which they were
divided the one from the other. We have further seen that the word
'balk' in Welsh and in English was applied to the pieces of turf left
unploughed between the furrows by careless ploughing. There is a
Vedic word which has the same meaning.

The Latin word 'scamnum' had precisely this meaning, and also it
was applied by the Agrimensores to a piece of land broader than
its length. The 'scamnum' of the Roman 'castrum' was the strip 600
feet long and 50 to 80 feet broad--nearly the shape of the English
and Bavarian 'acre'--set apart for the 'legati' and 'tribunes.' The
fields in a conquered district, instead of being allotted in squares
by 'centuriation,' were divided into 'scamna' and 'striga;' and the
fields thus divided into pieces broader than their length were called
'agri scamnati,' while those divided into pieces longer than their
breadth were called 'agri strigati.' Length was throughout reckoned
from north to south; breadth from east to west. Frontinus states that
the 'arva publica' in the provinces were cultivated 'more antiquo'
on this method of the 'ager per strigas et per scamna divisus et
assignatus,' whilst the fields of the 'coloniæ' of Roman citizens
or soldiers planted in the conquered districts were 'centuriated.'
See Frontinus, lib. i. p. 2, and fig. 3 in the plates, and also fig.
199; and see Rudorff's observations, ii. 290–298. The whole matter
is, however, very obscure, and it is difficult to identify the 'ager
scamnatus' with the Romano-German open fields. Frontinus was probably
not specially acquainted with the latter.

[605] The meaning of 'hub' is perhaps simply 'a holding,' from
'haben.'

The term 'yard-land,' or 'gyrd-landes,' seems to be simply the
holding measured out by the 'gyrd,' or rod; just as gyrd also means a
'rood.' Compare the 'vergée' of Normandy.

The Roman 'pertica' was the typical rod or pole used by the
Agrimensores, and on account of its use in assigning lands to the
members of a colony, it is sometimes represented on medals by the
side of the augurial plough. By transference, the whole area of land
measured out and assigned to a colony was known to the Agrimensores
as its 'pertica' (Lachmann, Frontinus, pp. 20 and 26; Hyginus, p.
117; Siculus Flaccus, p. 159; Isodorus, p. 369).

The Latin 'virga,' used in later times instead of '_pertica_' for
the measuring rod, followed the same law of transference with still
closer likeness to the Saxon 'gyrd.' Both 'virga' and 'gyrd' = a
rod and a measure. Both 'virga terræ' and 'gyrd landes' = (1) the
rood, and (2) the normal holding--the virgate or yard-land. The
word 'virgate,' or 'virgada,' was used in Brittany as well as in
England. In the _Cartulaire de Redon_ it is, however, evidently the
equivalent of the Welsh 'Randir.' See the twelve references to the
word 'virgada' in the index of the _Cartulary_.

[606] Du Cange, under 'Huba.'

[607] Landau, p. 36.

[608] _Id._ 37–8.

[609] In the will of Perpetuus. Meitzen, _Ausbreitung_, &c., p. 14.

[610] The practice was long continued in what was called the 'steel
bow tenancy' of later times.

[611] _Juris Prov. Alemann._ c. 2. Schilteri editio.

[612] Otfried, v. 4, 80; ii. 14, 215.

[613] Notger, Psalm xliii. 14; lxxviii. 4; lxix. 7.

[614] Compare _Cod. Theod._ IX. tit. xlii. 7: 'Quot mancipia in
prædiis occupatis . . . quot sint _casarii vel coloni_,' &c.

[615] See _Ancient Laws of England_, Thorpe, p. 79, under
_wer-gilds_, s. vii., where 'hiwisc' = 'hide.' See also '_hiwiski_,'
'_hiwischi_,' for '_familia_,' in '_St. Paules Glossen_,' sixth or
seventh century. Braune's _Althochdeutsches Lesebuch_, p. 4.

[616] _B. M. Ancient Charters_, ii. Cotton MS. Aug. ii. 42, A.D. 837.
The Welsh _short yoke_ was that of two oxen, _i.e._ a fourth part of
the full plough team.

[617] Columella, ii. 12. The calculation in this passage, how many
_opera_ or day-works a farm requires shows striking resemblance to
the later manorial system.

[618] Du Cange, 'Jugatum.'

[619] See Marquardt, ii. 225 _n._

[620] Meitzen, _Ausbreitung_, pp. 21 and 33.

[621] _Fœd._ vol. i. p. 31. Robertson's _Historical Essays_, p. 133.

[622] Diez, p. 150. '_Gabella_,' Portuguese, Spanish, and Provençal =
tax. French _gabelle_ = salt-tax. Italian '_gabellan_,' to tax, from
v. b. _gifan_, Goth. _giban_.

[623] See Guérard's _Polyptique d'Irminon_, i. chap. viii. Also
Lehuérou's _Institut. Meroving._ liv. ii. c. 1; and M. Vuitry's
_Etudes sur le Régime Financier de la France_, Première Etude.

[624] So Cicero asserted against Verres. The seed, he argued, was
fairly to be taken at about a _medimnus_ to each jugerum. Eight
medimni of corn per acre would be a good crop; ten would be the
outside that under all possible favour of the gods the jugerum
could yield. Therefore the tithe ought not to exceed at the highest
estimate one medimnus per jugerum. But the tax-gather had taken
_three_ medimni per jugerum, and so by extortion had _trebled the
tithes_.--_In Verrem_, act. ii. lib. iii. c. 47, 48, 49.

[625] _Hygini de Limitibus Constituendis_, p. 204.

[626] Tit. lxii.

[627] _Lex Salica_, tit. xxxviii. 'De homicidiis _servorum_ et
ancillarum. v. Si quis homo ingenuus _lidum alienum_ expoliaverit,'
&c. See also tit. xvi. See also tit. xxvi. 'De libertis extra
consilium Domini sui dimissis' (xxxv. 'De libertis dimissis
ingenuis'). 'Si quis _alienum lætum_ ante rege per dinarium _ingenuum
demiserit_,' &c.

[628] 'Soll die Dreifelderwirthschaft nach England importirt sein,
so bliebe wohl nur übrig an die Periode der römischen Okkupation
zu denken, wie ich eine ähnliche Vermuthung, die sich freilich
auch nicht weiter begründen lässt, für Deutschland ausgesprochen
habe (p. 153). Einfacher ist es den selbstständigen Ursprung der
Dreifelderwirthschaft in ganz verschiedenenen Ländern als einen
auf einer gewissen wirthschaftlichen Kulturstufe wie von selber
eintretenden Fortschritt sich zu denken' (_Agrarhist. Abhand._ p.
497).

[629] Mr. Coote has adduced apparently clear evidence of centuriation
in many parts of England; but we have already seen that only the land
actually assigned to the soldiers of a _colonia_ was centuriated.
There would seem to be no reason to suppose that they disturbed the
generally existing open fields still cultivated by the conquered
population.

[p412]

CHAPTER XI.
_RESULT OF THE EVIDENCE._

I. THE METHOD OF THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS.

It may perhaps now be possible to sum up the evidence, without
pretending to more certainty in the conclusion than the condition of
the question warrants.

«The tribal system in Wales and Germany.»

At the two extreme limits of our subject we have found, on one side,
the tribal system of Wales and Ireland, and, on the other side, the
German tribal system.

In the earliest stage of these systems they were seemingly alike,
both in the nomadic habits of the tribes, and the shifting about of
the households in a tribe from one homestead to another. Sir John
Davis describes this shifting as going on in Ireland in his day, and
Cæsar describes it as going on in Germany 1,700 years earlier.

«Co-aration of the waste on the early open-field system.»

In both cases, such agriculture as was a necessity even to pastoral
tribes was carried on under the open-field system in its simplest
form--the ploughing up of new ground each season, which then
went back into grass. The Welsh triads speak of it as a [p413]
_co-aration_ of portions of _the waste_. Tacitus describes it in the
words, 'Arva per annos mutant, et superest ager.' In neither case,
therefore, is there _the three-field system_, which implies fixed
arable fields ploughed again and again in rotation.

«The three-field system implies fixed settlements and
rotation of crops, which came probably with Roman rule. The yard-land
or hub implies servile tenants.»

The three-field system evidently implies the surrender of the
tribal shifting and the submission to fixed settlement. Further,
as wherever we can examine the three-field system we find the mass
of the holdings to have been fixed bundles, called _yard-lands_
or _huben_--bundles retaining the same contents from generation
to generation--it seems to follow either that the tribal division
of holdings among heirs, which was the mark of free holdings, had
ceased, _or_ that the three-field system was from the first the shell
of a community in serfdom.

The geographical distribution of the three-field system--mainly
within the old Roman provinces and in the Suevic districts along
their borders--makes it almost certain that, in Germany, _Roman rule_
was the influence which enforced the settlement, and introduced, with
other improvements in agriculture, such as the vine culture, a fixed
rotation of crops.

In Wales the necessity for settlement did _not_ generally produce
the three-field system _with holdings in yard-lands_,[630] because,
as the Welsh tribesmen, though they may have had household slaves,
as a rule held no taeogs or prædial slaves, it produced no serfdom.
But under the German tribal system, even in the time of Tacitus, the
tribesmen in the [p414] semi-Romanised districts, at all events,
already had prædial slaves.

«The Roman villa another factor and grew into the manor.»

The manorial system, however, was not simply a development from the
tribal system of the Germans; it had evidently a complex origin. A
Roman element also seems to have entered into its composition.

The Roman _villa_, to begin with, a slave-worked estate, during the
later empire, whether from German influence or not, became still more
like a manor by the addition of _coloni_ and other mostly barbarian
semi-servile tenants to the slaves.

There may have been once free village communities on the 'ager
publicus,' but, as we have seen, the management of the public lands
under the fiscal officers of the Emperor also tended during the later
Empire to become more and more manorial in its character, so much so
that the word 'villa' could apparently sometimes be applied to the
fiscal district.

«Roman and German elements combined.»

Whichever of the two factors--Roman or German--contributed most
to the mediæval manor, the manorial estate became the predominant
form of land ownership in what had once been Roman provinces. And
the German successors of Roman lords of villas became in their
turn manorial lords of manors; whilst the 'coloni,' 'liti,' and
'tributarii' upon them, wherever they remained upon the same ground,
apparently became, with scarcely a visible change, a community of
serfs.

«Both 'ager publicus' and 'terra regis' manorial.»

On the other hand, the fact that the _terra regis_ also was divided
under Saxon and Frankish kings into _manors_ probably was the natural
result of the growing manorial management of the public lands under
the fiscal officers of the Emperor during the later Empire, [p415]
quickened or completed after the barbarian conquests. The fiscal
districts seem to have become in fact royal manors, and the free
'coloni,' 'liti,' and 'servi' upon them appear as manorial tenants of
different grades in the earliest grants to the monasteries.

The fact that as early as the time of Tacitus, the German chieftains
and tribesmen were in their own country lords of serfs, in itself
explains the ease with which they assumed the position of lords of
manors on the conquest of the provinces.

The result of conquest seems thus to have been chiefly a change of
lordship, both as regards the private villas and the public lands.
The conquered districts seem to have become in a wholesale way
practically _terra regis_. There is no evidence that the modes of
agriculture on the one hand or the modes of management on the other
hand were materially changed. The conquering king would probably at
once put followers of his own into the place of the Roman fiscal
officers. These would become _quasi_-lords of the royal manors on
the _terra regis_. Then by degrees would naturally arise the process
whereby under lavish royal grants manors were handed one after
another into the private ownership of churches and monasteries and
favourites of the king, thus honey-combing the _terra regis_ with
private manors.

This seems to have been what happened in the Frankish provinces, and
in the Alamannic and Bavarian districts, where the process can be
most clearly traced. And the result seems to have been the almost
universal prevalence of the manorial system in these districts. Even
the towns came to be regarded as in the demesne of the king. And
[p416] gradually manorial lordship extended itself over the free
tenants as well as over the various semi-servile classes who were
afterwards confused together in the general class of serfs.

The community of serfs was fed from above and from below. Free
'coloni,' by their own voluntary surrender, and free tribesmen,
perhaps upon conquest or gradually by the force of long usage, sank
into serfs. Slaves, on the other hand, by their lord's favour, or to
meet the needs of agriculture, were supplied with an outfit of oxen
and rose out of slavery into serfdom.

But what was this serfdom? It was not simply the old prædial slavery
of the Germans of Tacitus. Nor was it merely a continuance of the
slavery on the Roman villa.

«Slavery mitigated by Christian humanity.»

For finally, in the period of transition from Roman to German
lordship, a new moral force entered as a fresh factor in the economic
evolution. The silent humanising influence of Christianity seems to
have been the power which mitigated the rigour of slavery, and raised
the slave on the estates of the Church into the middle status of
serfdom, by insisting upon the limitation of his labour to the three
days' week-work of the mediæval serf.

Thus, from the point of view alike of the German and the Roman
'servi,' mediæval serfdom, except to the freemen who by their own
surrender or by conquest were degraded into it, was a distinct step
upward in the economic progress of the masses of the people towards
freedom.

* * * * *

«The pre-Roman _one-field_ system in England.»

Applying these results especially to England, we [p417] have once
more to remember that there was settled agriculture in Belgic Britain
before the Roman invasion: that the fact vouched for by Pliny, that
_marl_ and _manure_ were ploughed into the fields, is proof that
the simplest form of the open-field system--the Welsh co-aration of
the waste, and the German shifting every year of the '_arva_'--had
already given place to a more settled and organised system, in
which the same land remained under tillage year after year. Pliny's
description of the marling of the land, however, points rather to
the _one-field system_ of Northern Germany than to the three-field
system, as that under which the corn was grown which Cæsar found
ripening on British fields when he first landed on the southern
coast.[631]

«Roman introduction of the three-course rotation of crops.»

In the meantime Roman improvements in agriculture may well have
included the introduction into the province of Britain of the
three-course rotation of crops. The open fields round the villa of
the Roman lord, cultivated by his slaves, 'coloni,' 'tributarii,'
and 'liti,' may have been first arranged on the three-field system;
and, once established, that system would spread and become general
during those centuries of Roman occupation in which so much corn was
produced and exported from the island.

The Roman _annonæ_--founded, perhaps, on the earlier tribal
food-rents--were, in Britain, as we know from the 'Agricola'
of Tacitus, taken mostly in corn; [p418] and the _tributum_
was probably assessed during the later empire on that system of
_jugation_ which was found to be so like to the _hidation_ which
prevailed after the Saxon conquest.

«Conquest the rule. The invaders become lords of _hams_
manors.»

Putting aside as exceptional the probably peaceful but at best
obscure settlements in tribal households, and regarding conquest
as the rule, the economic evidence seems to supply no solid reason
for supposing that the German conquerors acted in Britain in a way
widely different from that which they followed on the conquest
of Continental Roman provinces. The conquered territory here as
elsewhere probably became at first _terra regis_ of the English,
Saxon, or Jutish kings. And though there may have been more cases in
England than elsewhere of extermination of the old inhabitants, the
evidence of the English open-field system seems to show that, taking
England as a whole, the continuity between the Roman and English
system of land management was not really broken. The Roman provincial
_villa_ still seems to have remained the typical form of estate; and
the management of the public lands, now _terra regis_, seems to have
preserved its manorial character. For whenever estates are granted to
the Church or monasteries, or to thanes of the king, they seem to be
handed over as already existing manors, with their own customs and
services fixed by immemorial usage.

It is most probable that whenever German conquerors descended upon an
already peopled country where agriculture was carried on as it was in
Britain, their comparatively small numbers, and still further their
own dislike to agricultural pursuits and liking for lordship, and
familiarity with servile tenants in [p419] the old country, would
induce them to place the conquered people in the position of serfs,
as the Germans of Tacitus seem to have done, making them do the
agriculture by customary methods. If in any special cases the numbers
in the invading hosts were larger than usual, they would probably
include the semi-servile dependants of the chieftains and tribesmen.
These, placed on the land allotted to their lords, would be serfs in
England as they had been at home.

«The yard-land shows this,»

At this point, as we have seen, the internal evidence of the
open-field system, at the earliest date at which it arises, comes
to our aid, showing that as a general rule it was the shell, not of
household communities of tribesmen doing their own ploughing like the
Welsh tribesmen by co-aration, but of serfs doing the ploughing under
an over-lordship.

Here the English evidence points in precisely the same direction
as the Continental. For, as so often repeated, the prevalence, as
far back as the earliest records, of yard-lands and _huben_, handed
down so generally, and evidently by long immemorial custom, as
_indivisible bundles_ from one generation to another, implies the
_absence_ of _division among heirs_, and is accordingly a mark of the
servile nature of the holding.

«and also local names.»

«The earlier 'hams' and 'tuns' manors.»

Further, whenever a place was called, as so many places were, by the
name of a single person, it seems obvious that at the moment when its
name was acquired it was under a _land ownership_, which, as regards
the dependent population upon it, was a _lordship_. We have seen that
in the laws of King Ethelbert the '_hams_' and '_tuns_' of England
are spoken of as in a single ownership, whilst the [p420] mention of
the three grades of 'læts' shows that there were semi-servile tenants
upon them. And in the vast number of instances in which local names
consist of a personal name with a suffix, the evidence of the local
name itself is strong for the manorial character of the estate. When
that suffix is _tun_, or _ham_, or _villa_, with the personal name
prefixed, the evidence is doubly strong. Even when connected with an
impersonal prefix, these suffixes in themselves distinctly point, as
we have seen, to the manorial character of the estate, with at least
direct, if not absolutely conclusive, force.

Whatever doubt remains is not as to the generally manorial character
of the _hams_ and _tuns_ of the earliest Saxon records, or as to
the serfdom of their tenants; as to this, it is submitted that the
evidence is clear and conclusive. Whatever doubt remains is as to
which of two possible courses leading to this result was taken by the
Saxon conquerors of Britain.

As regards the methods of their conquest, there happens to exist no
satisfactory contemporary evidence. They may either have conquered
and adopted the Roman villas, whether in private or imperial hands,
with the slaves and 'coloni' or 'tributarii' upon them, calling
them 'hams,' or they may have destroyed the Roman villas and their
tenants, and have established in their place fresh 'hams' of their
own, which in mediæval Latin records, whether in private or royal
possession, were also afterwards called 'villas.' In some districts
they may have followed the one course, in other districts the other
course. Either of the two might as well as the other have produced
manors and manorial serfdom. [p421]

«Survivals from the Romano-German province prove
continuity, and are inconsistent with extermination»

But when the internal evidence of the Anglo-Saxon land system
is examined, even this doubt as to which of the two methods was
generally followed is in part removed. For it may at least be said
with truth that the hundred years of historical darkness during which
there is a simple absence of direct testimony, is at least bridged
over by such planks of _in_direct economic evidence as the apparent
connexion between the Roman 'jugation' and the Saxon 'hidage,' the
resemblance between the Roman and Saxon allotment of a certain number
of acres along with single or double yokes of oxen to the holdings,
the prevalence of the rule of single succession, the apparent
continuance of the Roman _tributum_ and _annonæ_, and even some of
the _sordida munera_ in the Saxon _gafol_, _gafol-yrth_, _averagium_,
and other manorial services; and, lastly, the fact that in Gaul and
Upper Germany the actual continuity between the Roman _villa_ and the
German _heim_ can be more or less clearly traced.

«unless the invaders were themselves Romanised.»

The force of this economic evidence, it is submitted, is at least
enough to prove either that there was a sufficient amount of
continuity between the Roman villa and the Saxon manor to preserve
the general type, or that the German invaders who destroyed and
re-introduced the manorial type of estate came from a district in
which there had been such continuity, and where they themselves had
lived long enough to permit the peculiar manorial instincts of the
Romano-German province to become a kind of second nature to them.

It is as impossible to conceive that this complex manorial land
system, which we have found to bristle with historical survivals
of usages of the [p422] Romano-German province, should have been
suddenly introduced into England by _un-Romanised_ Northern piratical
tribes of Germans, as it is to conceive of the sudden creation of a
fossil.

The most reasonable hypothesis, in the absence of direct evidence,
appears therefore to be that the manorial system grew up in Britain
as it grew up in Gaul and Germany, as the compound product of
barbarian and Roman institutions mixing together during the periods
first of Roman provincial rule, and secondly of German conquest.

«The large extent of folk-land evidence against extensive
allodial allotments.»

This hypothesis seems at least most fully to account for the facts.
Perhaps, it is not too much to say that whilst the large tracts of
England remaining folk-land or _terra regis_, in spite of the lavish
grants to monasteries complained of by Bede, are in themselves
suggestive of the comparatively limited extent of allodial allotments
among the conquering tribesmen, the existence and multiplication
upon the _terra regis_, not of free village communities, but of
royal manors of the same type as that of the Frankish villas, with a
serfdom upon them also of the same type, and connected with the same
three-field system of husbandry in both cases, almost amounts to a
positive verification when the historical survivals clinging to the
system in both cases are taken into account.

«The invaders either adopted the natives as serfs or
brought serfs with them.»

Even on the supposition that the Saxons really exterminated the old
population and destroyed every vestige of the Roman system, it has
already become obvious that it would not at all follow that they
generally introduced free village communities; for in that case the
evidence would go far to show that they most likely brought slaves
with them and settled [p423] them in servile village communities
round their own dwellings, as Tacitus saw the Germans of his time
doing in Germany. But, again, it must be remembered that however
naturally this might produce the manor and serfdom, still the
survivals of minute provincial usages hanging about the Saxon land
system would remain unaccounted for, unless the invaders of the fifth
century had already been thoroughly Romanised before their conquest
of Britain.

«English history begins not with free communities but with
serfdom.»

We cannot, indeed, pretend to have discovered in the economic
evidence a firm bridge for all purposes across the historic gulf
of the fifth century, and to have settled the difficult questions
who were the German invaders of England, whence they came, and what
was the exact form of their settlements in one district or another.
But the facts we have examined seem to have settled the practical
economic question with which we started, viz. whether the _hams_ and
_tuns_ of England, with their open fields and yard-lands, in the
earliest historical times were inhabited and tilled in the main by
free village communities, or by communities in villenage. However
many exceptional instances there may have been of settlements in
tribal households, or even free village communities, it seems to be
almost certain that these 'hams' and 'tuns' were, generally speaking,
and for the most part from the first, practically _manors_ with
communities in _serfdom_ upon them.

«The yard-land not the allodial allotment of a free
tribesman.»

It has become at least clear, speaking broadly, that the equal
'yard-lands' of the 'geburs' were not the 'alods' or free lots of
'alodial' freeholders in a common 'mark,' but the tenements of serfs
paying 'gafol' and doing 'week-work' for their lords. And this is
[p424] equally true whether the manors on which they lived were
bocland of Saxon thanes, or folk-land under the 'villicus' of a Saxon
king.

II. LOCAL EVIDENCE OF CONTINUITY BETWEEN ROMAN AND ENGLISH VILLAGES.

There yet remains one test to which the hypothesis of continuity
between the British, Roman, and English village community and
open-field system may be put.

«Doubts as to the extermination of the British population
by the English invaders.»

It has sometimes been inferred, perhaps too readily, that the English
invaders of Roman Britain nearly exterminated the old inhabitants,
destroying the towns and villages, and making fresh settlements of
their own, upon freshly chosen sites. If this were so, it would, of
course, involve the destruction of the open fields round the old
villages, and the formation of fresh open fields round the new ones.

The passage in Ammianus Marcellinus has sometimes been quoted,
in which he describes the Alamanni, who had taken possession of
Strasburg, Spires, Worms, Mayence, &c., as encamped outside these
cities, shunning their inside 'as though they had been graves
surrounded by nets.'[632] But this was in time of war, and no proof
of what they might do when in peaceable possession of the country.

Mr. Freeman also has drawn a graphic picture of Anderida, with the
two Saxon villages of Pevensey and West Ham outside of its old Roman
walls, and no dwellings within them. But it would so obviously be
[p425] much easier to build new houses outside the gates of a ruined
city, or, perhaps, we should say rather fortified camp, than to clear
away the rubbish and build upon the old site, that such an instance
is far from conclusive. Nor does the fact that in so many cases the
streets of once Roman cities deviate from the old Roman lines prove
that the new builders avoided the ancient sites. It proves only
that, instead of removing the heaps of rubbish, they chose the open
spaces behind them as more convenient for their new buildings, in
the process of erecting which the heaps of rubbish were doubtless
gradually removed.

«Is there evidence of continuity in the rural villages?»

But, in truth, cases of fortified cities are not to the point. What
we want to find out is whether, in the _rural_ districts, the British
villages, with their open fields around them, were generally adopted
by the Romans, and whether, having survived the Roman occupation, the
Saxons adopted them in their turn.

«_e.g._ in the Hitchin district.»

It may be worth while to recur to the district from which was taken
the typical example of the open fields, testing the point by such
local evidence as may there be found.

«The Icknild way and other ancient roads.»

Among the ancient boundaries of the township of Hitchin, or rather
of that part which included the now enclosed hamlet of Walsworth,
was mentioned the Icknild way--that old British road which, passing
from Wiltshire to Norfolk, here traverses the edge of the Chiltern
hills. It sometimes winds lazily about uphill and down, following
the line of the chalk downs. In many places it is merely a broad
turf drift way. Here and there a long straight stretch of a mile or
two suggests a Roman improvement upon [p426] its perhaps once more
devious course. Here and there, too, are fragments of similar broad
turf lanes leading nowhere, having lost the continuity which no doubt
they once possessed. Sometimes crossing it, sometimes branching
off from it, sometimes running parallel to it, are also frequently
found similar winding broad turf drift ways, or straight roads of
apparently British or Roman origin. It crosses Akeman Street at
Tring, Watling Street at Dunstable, and Irmine Street at Royston.
Neither Dunstable nor Royston, however, are examples of continuity,
being comparatively modern towns, neither of them mentioned in the
Domesday Survey. Hitchin lies about half-way between the cross-roads.

«The district under its Belgic kings.»

The district included in the annexed map, of which Hitchin is the
centre, was a part of Belgic Britain. According to Cæsar this had
been under the rule of the same king as Belgic Gaul, and upon the
evidence of coins and certain passages in Roman writers, it is pretty
well understood to have been, soon after the invasion of Cæsar, under
the rule of Tasciovanus,[633] whose capital was Verulamium, and after
him of his son Cunobeline, whose capital was Camulodunum. The sons of
the latter (one of them Caractacus) were prevented from succeeding
him by the advance of the Roman arms.[634] The intimate relations of
the two capitals at Verulam and at Colchester explain the existence
of the roads between them.

[Illustration: MAP of the neighbourhood of HITCHIN.

THE HILLS AT MEPPERSHALL.

LITLINGTON.

TOOT HILL AT PIRTON.]

The dykes which cross the Icknild way at [p427] intervals, East
of Royston--the Brent dyke, the Balsham dyke (parallel to the _Via
Devana_), and the Devil's dyke, near Newmarket--seem to indicate that
here was the border land between this district and that of the Iceni
(Norfolk and Suffolk).

«Coins of Tasciovanus and Cunobeline.»

Sandy (the Roman _Salinæ_), at the north of the district in the
map, is known, from the evidence of coins of Cunobeline, to have
been an important British centre. A gold coin of Tasciovanus, and
other British coins, have been picked up on the Icknild way, between
Hitchin and Dunstable. A gold coin of Cunobeline, and many fragments
of Roman pottery, have been found about half a mile to the east of
Abington, a village a little to the north of the Icknild way, near
Royston.[635] Coins of Cunobeline have also been found at Great
Chesterford. A copper coin of Cunobeline was picked up in a garden in
Walsworth, a hamlet of Hitchin, and British urns of a rude type have
been recently found on the top of Benslow Hill, the high ground on
the east of the town.

«Pre-Roman roads, &c.»

The map will show in how many directions the district is cut up by
Roman roads, which, as they evidently connect the various parts of
the domain of the before-mentioned British kings, were probably, with
the Icknild way itself, British tracks before they were adopted by
the Romans.

Almost every commanding bluff of the chalk downs retains traces of
its having been used as a hill fort, probably in pre-Roman times, as
well as later, while the numerous tumuli all along the route of the
Icknild way testify, probably, to the numerous battles fought in its
neighbourhood. [p428]

«Its Roman conquest under Claudius and Aulus Plautius,
about A.D. 43.»

Probably this district fell under direct Roman rule after the
campaigns of Aulus Plautius and Claudius, about A.D. 43.[636]
The direction of the advance was probably across the Thames at
Wallingford, and along the Icknild way, from which the descent upon
Verulam could well be made from Tring or Dunstable down what were
afterwards called Akeman Street and Watling Street. Under the tumulus
near Litlington, called Limloe, or Limbury Hill, skeletons were
found, and coins of the reign of Claudius, and of later date. It
is possible that the battle was fought here in a later reign which
brought the further parts of the district under Roman rule.

«The Saxon conquest about A.D. 571.»

The date of the Saxon conquest of this district may be as definitely
determined. It preceded the conquest of Bath, Cirencester, and
Gloucester by a very few years. It may be pretty clearly placed at
about A.D. 571, when, according to the Saxon Chronicle, 'Cuthwulf
fought with the Brit-weals at Bedcan-ford (Bedford), and took four
towns. He took Lygean-birg (Lenborough) and Aegeles-birg (Aylesbury),
and Bænesingtun (Bensington) and Egonesham (Eynsham).' This was the
time when Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, and Oxfordshire fell into
the hands of the West Saxons.

The old boundary of the ecclesiastical division of the country before
the time of the Norman conquest included this district, with Bedford,
in the diocese of Dorchester. The boundary probably followed the
lines of the old West Saxon kingdom, and shut it off [p429] from
Essex and the rest of Hertfordshire, which were included in the
diocese of London.

The district, therefore, seems to have remained nearly 400 years
under Roman rule, and under the British post-Roman rule another 100
years, till within twenty-five or thirty years of the arrival of St.
Augustine in England, and the date of the laws of King Ethelbert,
and within little more than 100 years of the date of the laws of
King Ine, which laws presumably were founded upon customs of this
district, once a part of the West Saxon kingdom.

«Do the Roman remains suggest continuity?»

The question is whether the position of the Roman remains which have
been discovered in this neighbourhood points to a continuity in the
sites of the present villages between British, Roman, and Saxon
times. This question may certainly, in many instances, and, perhaps,
generally, be answered distinctly in the affirmative.

«The town of Hitchin, or 'Hiz,' _i.e._ 'of the streams.'»

Take first the town of Hitchin itself. Its name in the Domesday
Survey was 'Hiz,' and there can be little doubt that it is a Celtic
word, meaning 'streams.'[637] The position of the township accords
with this name. The river 'Hiz' rises out of the chalk at Wellhead,
almost immediately turns a mill, and, flowing through the town,
joins the Ivel a few miles lower down in its course, and so flows
ultimately into the Ouse. The Orton[638] rises at the west extremity
of the township, in [p430] a few hundred yards turns West Mill, and
forms the boundary of the parish till it meets the Hiz at Ickleford,
where the two are forded by the Icknild way. The Purwell, rising
from the south east, forms the boundary between the parishes of
Hitchin and Much Wymondley, and then, after turning Purwell Mill, and
dividing Hitchin from Walsworth Hamlet, also joins the Hiz before it
reaches Ickleford. Thus two of these three pure chalk streams embrace
the township, and one passes through it giving its Celtic name Hiz to
the town.[639]

«Its Celtic name.»

It is not likely that either the Romans or the Saxon invaders gave it
this Celtic name.

«British and Roman remains.»

As already mentioned, on the top of the hill, to the east of the
town, British sepulchral urns have been recently found.

A Roman cemetery, with a large number of sepulchral urns, dishes,
and bottles, and coins of Severus, Carausius, Constantine, and
Alectus, was turned up a few years ago on the top of the hill on
the opposite side of the town, in a part of the open fields called
'The Fox-holes'[640]--a plot of useless ground being often used for
burials by the Romans.

Another Roman cemetery, with very similar pottery and coins, has been
found on Bury Mead, near the line where the arable part ceases and
the [p431] Lammas meadow lands begin. Bury field itself (_i.e._ the
arable) has been deeply drained, but yielded no coins or urns.

Occasional coins and urns have been found in the town itself.

This, so far as it goes, is good evidence that Hitchin was a British
and a Roman before it was a Saxon town.

In the sub-hamlet of Charlton, near Wellhead, the source of the
Hiz, small coins of the lower Empire have been found. As already
mentioned, a coin of Cunobeline was found in the village of
Walsworth. In even the hamlets, therefore, there is some evidence
of continuity. At Ickleford, where the Icknild way crosses the Hiz,
Roman coins have been found.

«Much Wymondley.»

The next parish to the east, divided from Hitchin by the Purwell
stream, is Much Wymondley.

The evidence of continuity, as regards this parish, is remarkably
clear. The accompanying map[641] supplies an interesting example of
open fields, with their strips and balks and scattered ownership
still remaining in 1803. These open arable fields were originally
divided off from the village by a stretch of Lammas land.

«Roman holding perhaps of a retired veteran.»

Between this Lammas land and the church in the village lie the
remains of the little Roman holding, of which an enlarged plan is
given. It consists now of several fields, forming a rough square,
with its sides to the four points of the compass, and contains,
filling in the corners of the square, about 25 Roman [p432]
jugera--or the eighth of a centuria of 200 jugera--the extent of
land often allotted, as we have seen, to a retired veteran with a
single pair of oxen. The proof that it was a Roman holding is as
follows:--In the corner next to the church are two square fields
still distinctly surrounded by a moat, nearly parallel to which, on
the east side, was found a line of black earth full of broken Roman
pottery and tiles. Near the church, at the south-west corner of the
property, is a double tumulus, which, being close to the church
field, may have been an ancient 'toot hill,' or a terminal mound.
In the extreme opposite corner of the holding was found a Roman
cemetery, containing the urns, dishes, and bottles of a score or
two of burials. Drawings of those of the vessels not broken in the
digging, engraved from a photograph, are appended to the map, by the
kind permission of the owner.[642] Over the hedge, at this corner,
begins the Lammas land.[643]

How many other holdings were included in the Roman village we do not
know, but that the village was in the same position in relation to
the open fields that it was in 1803 is obvious.

«Ashwell.»

Ashwell also evidently stands on its old site round the head of a
remarkably strong chalk spring, the clear stream from which flows
through the village as the river _Rhee_, a branch of the _Cam_. Early
Roman coins and sepulchral urns have been found in the hamlet called
'Ashwell End,' and a Roman road, called 'Ashwell Street,' passes
by the town parallel [p433] to the Icknild way. Near to the town
is a camp, with a clearly defined vallum, called Harborough Banks,
where coins of the later Empire have been found. A map of the parish,
made before the enclosure, and preserved in the place, shows that it
presented a remarkably good example of the open-field system.

[Illustration: PLAN of the Parish of MUCH WYMONDLEY.

Enlarged Plan of the Roman Holding.]

«Roman villa and cemetery.»

An instance of continuity as remarkable as that of Much Wymondley
occurs at Litlington,[644] the next village to Ashwell, on the
Ashwell Street. The church and manor house in this case lie near
together on the west side of the village, and in the adjoining field
and gardens the walls and pavements of a Roman villa were found
many years ago. At a little distance from it, nearer to the Ashwell
Street, a Roman _ustrinum_ and cemetery were found, surrounded
by four walls, and yielding coins of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius,
Quintillus, Carausius, Constantine the Great, Magnentius, &c. A map
of this village is appended.

When the Roman villa was discovered, the open fields around the
village were still unenclosed, and the position of Ashwell Street was
pushed farther from the village at the time of the enclosure.

The tumulus called 'Limloe,' or 'Limbury Hill,' lies at the side
of the road leading from the Icknild way across the Ashwell Street
to the village, and immediately under it skeletons with coins of
Claudius, Vespasian, and Faustina were found, as already mentioned.

«Ickleton and Chesterford.»

A few miles further east than Royston are two villages, Ickleton on
the Icknild way, and Great [p434] Chesterford a little to the south
of it. That both these places are on Roman sites the foundations and
coins which have been found attest.[645] There are remains of a camp
at Chesterford, and coins of Cunobeline as well as numerous Roman
coins have been dug up there.[646]

«Hadstock.»

At Hadstock, a village near, in a field called 'Sunken Church Field,'
Roman foundations and coins have been found.[647]

«Other instances of continuity in the sites of villages.»

Proceeding further east the list of similar cases might be greatly
increased. But keeping within the small district, in the following
other cases the finding of Roman coins in the villages seems to be
fair proof of continuity in their sites, viz.:--Sandy, Campton,
Baldock, Willian, Cumberlow Green, Weston, Stevenage, Hexton, and
Higham Gobion.

«Ancient mounds and earth works.»

Two remarkable instances of ancient mounds or fortifications close
to churches occur at Meppershall and Pirton, of both of which plans
are given. The Pirton mound is called in the village the 'toot hill.'
These mounds in the neighbourhood of churches may be much older than
the Saxon conquest. Open air courts were by no means confined to one
race.[648] Roman remains have been found in the neighbourhood of both
these places, but how near to the actual village sites I am unable to
say.[649]

Leaving out these two and many more doubtful cases, and without
pretending to be exhaustive, there have been mentioned nearly a score
in which Roman [p435] remains or coins have already been found on
the present sites of villages in this small district.

[Illustration: ROMAN POTTERY FOUND AT GREAT WYMONDLEY,
HERTS. MARCH 1882.]

«Strong evidence of continuity in this district.»

So far the local evidence supports the view that the West Saxons, who
probably conquered it about A.D. 570, succeeded to a long-settled
agriculture; and further it seems likely that, assuming the lordship
vacated by the owners of the villas, and adopting the village sites,
they continued the cultivation of the open fields around them by
means of the old rural population on that same three-field system,
which had probably been matured and improved during Roman rule, and
by which the population of the district had been supported during the
three generations between the departure of the Roman governors and
the West Saxon conquest.

But it may perhaps be urged that these districts, conquered so late
as A.D. 570, may have been exceptionally treated. If this were so,
it must be borne in mind that the whole of central England--i.e. the
counties described in the second volume of the Hundred Rolls as to
which the evidence for the existence of the open-field system was so
strong--was included in the exception. Indeed, if the line of the
Icknild way be extended along Akeman Street to Cirencester, Bath, and
Gloucester, the line of the Saxon conquests which were later than
A.D. 560 would be pretty clearly marked. The laws of Ine, pointing
backwards as they do from their actual date, reach back within two or
three generations of the date of the Saxon conquest of this part of
Old Wessex.

«The Hitchin district hardly exceptional.»

It would be impossible here to pursue the question in detail in other
parts of England. Perhaps it will be sufficient to call attention to
the many cases [p436] mentioned in Mr. C. Roach Smith's valuable
'Collectanea,'[650] in which Roman remains have been found in close
proximity to the churches of modern villages, and to his remark that
a long list of such instances might easily be made.[651]

The number of such cases which occur in Kent is very remarkable, and
Kent was certainly not a late conquest.

I will only add a passing allusion to the remarkable case at
Woodchester, in Gloucestershire, where the church, present mansion,
and Roman villa are close together,[652] and mention that in two
of the hamlets on the manor of Tidenham--Stroat and Sedbury (or
Cingestun)--Roman remains bear testimony to a Roman occupation before
the West Saxon conquest.[653]

The fact seems to be that the archæological evidence, gradually
accumulating as time goes on, points more and more clearly to the
fact that our modern villages are very often on their old Roman and
sometimes probably pre-Roman sites--that however much the English
invaders avoided the walled towns of Roman Britain, they certainly
had no such antipathy to the occupation of its villas and rural
villages. [p437]

III. CONCLUSION.

«Economic result.»

The economic result of the inquiry pursued in this essay may now be
summed up in few words.

Its object was not to inquire into the origin of village and tribal
communities as the possible beginning of all things, but simply
to put English Economic History on true lines at its historical
beginning, viz.: the English Conquest.

«Two rural systems throughout--the village community in the
east, and the tribal community in the west.»

Throughout the whole period from pre-Roman to modern times we have
found in Britain two parallel systems of rural economy side by side,
but keeping separate and working themselves out on quite different
lines, in spite of Roman, English, and Norman invasions--that of the
_village_ community in the eastern, that of the _tribal_ community in
the western districts of the island.

«Community and equality in both.»

«Each had its own open-field system.»

Both systems as far back as the evidence extends were marked by the
two notes of community and equality, and each was connected with a
form of the open or common field system of husbandry peculiar to
itself. These two different forms of the common field system also
kept themselves distinct throughout, and are still distinct in their
modern remains or survivals.

«Both pre-Roman.»

Neither the village nor the tribal community seems to have been
introduced into Britain during a historical period reaching back for
2,000 years at least.

«The English village community in serfdom, and its»

«three-field system.»

«A step out of slavery towards the freedom of the new order
of things.»

On the one hand, the village community of the eastern districts of
Britain was connected with a settled agriculture which, apparently
dating earlier [p438] than the Roman invasion and improved during
the Roman occupation, was carried on, at length, under that
three-field form of the open-field system which became the shell of
the English village community. The equality in its yard-lands and
the single succession which preserved this equality we have found to
be apparently marks not of an original freedom, not of an original
allodial allotment on the German 'mark system,' but of a settled
serfdom under a lordship--a semi-servile tenancy implying a mere
usufruct, theoretically only for life, or at will, and carrying with
it no inherent rights of inheritance. But this serfdom, as we have
seen reason to believe, was, to the masses of the people, not a
degradation, but a step upward out of a once more general slavery.
Certainly during the 1,200 years over which the direct English
evidence extends the tendency has been towards more and more of
freedom. In other words, as time went on during these 1,200 years,
the serfdom of the old order of things has been gradually breaking
up under those influences, whatever they may have been, which have
produced the new order of things.

«The tribal community and its 'run-rig' system.»

«opposed to the new order of things.»

On the other hand, the tribal community of the western districts
of Great Britain and of Ireland, though parallel in time with the
village community of the eastern districts, was connected with an
earlier stage of economic development, in which the rural economy was
pastoral rather than agricultural. This tribal community was bound
together, perhaps, in a unique degree, by the strong ties of blood
relationship between free tribesmen. The equality which followed
the possession of the tribal blood involved an equal division among
the sons of tribesmen, and was [p439] maintained in spite of the
inequality of families by frequent redistributions of the tribal
lands, and shiftings of the tribesmen from one homestead to another
according to tribal rules. We have traced the curious method of
clustering the homesteads in arithmetical groups mentioned in the
ancient Welsh laws, and still practised in Ireland in the seventeenth
century, and we have found many survivals of it in the present names
and divisions of Irish townlands. We have found the simple form of
open-field husbandry used under the tribal system, and suited to its
precarious and shifting agriculture, still surviving in the 'rundale'
or 'run-rig' system, by which, to this day, is effected in Ireland
and western Scotland that infinite subdivision of holdings which
marks the tenacious adherence to tribal instincts on the part of a
people still fighting an unequal battle against the new order of
things.

«The new order opposed to community and equality.»

The new order has, no doubt, arisen in one sense out of both branches
of the old, but neither the manorial village community of the
eastern district, nor the tribal community of the west, can be said
to be its parent. Its fundamental principle seems to be opposed to
the community and equality of the old order in both its forms. The
freedom of the individual and growth of individual enterprise and
property which mark the new order imply a rebellion against the bonds
of the communism and forced equality, alike of the manorial and of
the tribal system. It has triumphed by breaking up both the communism
of serfdom and the communism of the free tribe.

«Belongs to a wider range of economic development.»

Nor, it would seem, can the new order be regarded with any greater
truth as a development from the [p440] germs of any German tribal
or 'mark' system imported in the keels of the English invaders.
It would seem to belong to an altogether wider range of economic
development than that of one or two races. Its complex roots went
deeply back into that older world into which the Teutonic invaders
introduced new elements and new life, no doubt, but, it would seem,
without destroying the continuity of the main stream of its economic
development, or even of the outward forms of its rural economy.

This, from an economic point of view, is the important conclusion
to which the facts examined in this essay seem to point. These
facts will be examined afresh by other and abler students, and the
last word will not soon have been said upon some of them. They are
drawn from so wide a field, and from lines reaching back so far,
that their interest and bearing upon the matter in hand will not
soon be exhausted or settled. But if the conclusion here suggested
should in the main be confirmed, what English Economic History
loses in simplicity it will gain in breadth. It will cease to be
provincial. It will become more closely identified with the general
economic evolution of the human race in the past. And this in its
turn will give a wider interest to the vast responsibilities of the
English-speaking nations in connexion with the progress of the new
order of things and the solution of the great economic problems of
the future.

«The communism of the old order a thing of the past,»

What are the forces which have produced, and are producing, the
evolution of the new order, and to what ultimate goal the 'weary
Titan' is bearing the 'too full orb of her fate,' are questions of
the [p441] highest rank of economic and political importance, but
questions upon which not much direct light has been thrown, perhaps,
in this essay. Still the knowledge what the community and equality
of the English village and of the Keltic tribe really were under
the old order may at least dispel any lingering wish or hope that
they may ever return. Communistic systems such as these we have
examined, which have lasted for 2,000 years, and for the last 1,000
years at least have been gradually wearing themselves out, are hardly
likely--either of them--to be the economic goal of the future.

«like the open-field system.»

The reader of this essay may perhaps contemplate the few remaining
balks and linces of our English common fields, and the surviving
examples of the 'run-rig' system in Ireland and Scotland, with
greater interest than before, but it will be as historical survivals,
not of types likely to be reproduced in the future, but of economic
stages for ever past.

FOOTNOTES:

[630] There are undoubtedly manors and yard-lands in some districts,
but of later and English introduction.

[631] The '_one-field system_ 'of _permanent arable_ must not
be confused with the improvement of the early Welsh and Irish
'co-aration of the waste,' by which the land was cropped perhaps two
or three or four years before it was _left to go back into grass_.
This resembles the German _Feldgraswirthschaft_ and not the German
one-field system.

[632] Amm. Marc. xvi. c. ii.

[633] Evans' _Ancient British Coins_, p. 220 _et seq._

[634] _Ibid._ p. 284 _et seq._

[635] I am indebted to the Rev. W. G. F. Pigott for this information.

[636] See the paper on 'The Campaign of Aulus Plautius,' in Dr.
Guest's _Origines Celticæ_, vol. ii.

[637] Compare supra, p. 161: the change of 'Hisse-burn' or
'Icenan-burn' into 'Itchin River,' and of 'æt Icceburn' into
'Ticceburn,' and 'Titchbourne.' May not Icknild Way, or
'Icenan-hild-wæg,' mean highway 'by the streams,' and Ricknild Way
mean highway 'by the ridge'? See map, _supra_, ch. v., s. v. They are
sometimes parallel as an upper and lower road.

[638] Formerly 'Alton.' See Survey of the Manor of Hitchin. 1650,
Public Record Office.

[639] In Hampshire the old Celtic or Belgic names of rivers in many
cases gave their names to places upon them. The '_Itchin_' to Itchin
Stoke, Itchin Abbas, Itchbourne, &c. The '_Meona_' (_Cod. Dip._
clviii.) to Meon Stoke, East and West Meon, &c. The '_Candefer_'
(_Cod. Dip._ mcccix.) to three 'Candovers.' So also the _Tarrant_
gives its names to several places.

[640] Now part of the garden of Mr. W. T. Lucas, in whose possession
many of them now remain. Three skeletons, one of them of great size,
were found near the urns.

[641] For permission to reproduce this map I am indebted to the
present lord of the manor, C. W. Wilshere, Esq., of the Fryth, Welwyn.

[642] Mr. William Ransom, of Fairfield, near Hitchin.

[643] As regards Roman cemeteries, as placed in the extreme corner of
a holding, _see_ Lachmann, pp. 271–2; _De Sepulchris Dolabell_. p.
303.

[644] _Archæologia_, vol. xxvi. p. 376.

[645] _Journal of British Archæological Association_, iv. 356, and v.
54.

[646] _Archæologia_, xxxii. p. 350.

[647] _Id._, p. 352.

[648] _See_ Mr. Gomme's interesting work on _Primitive Folkmotes_, c.
ii.

[649] A remarkably fine _glass_ funeral urn was found about half
a mile below the Meppershall Hills in 1882 by the tenant of the
neighbouring farm.

[650] Vol. i. pp. 17, 66, 190; vol. iii. p. 33; vol. iv. p. 155; vol.
v. p. 187; vol. vi. p. 222.

[651] _Collectanea_, v. p. 187. The recently discovered Roman villa
on the property of Earl Cowper, at Wingham, near Canterbury, is
a striking instance. See Mr. Dowker's pamphlet thereon. See also
_Archæologia_, xxix. p. 217, &c., where Mr. C. Roach Smith mentions
several other instances.

[652] _Account of the Roman Antiquities at Woodchester_, by S.
Lysons. Lond.: MDCCXCVII.

[653] See Mr. Ormerod's _Archæological Memoirs_.

[p443]

APPENDIX.

THE MANOR OF HITCHIN (PORTMAN AND FOREIGN) IN THE COUNTY OF HERTFORD.

«1891. Oct. 21»

'At the Court [Leet and] of the View of Frank pledge of our
Sovereign Lord the King with the General Court Baron of William
Wilshere, Esquire, Lord Firmar of the said manor of his
Majesty, holden in and for the manor aforesaid, on Thursday,
the twenty-first day of October, One thousand eight hundred and
nineteen, Before Joseph Eade, Gentleman, Steward of the said
manor, and by adjournment on Monday, the first day of November
next following, before the said Joseph Eade, the Steward aforesaid.

'The jurors for our Lord the King and the Homage of this Court
having diligently enquired into the boundaries, extent, rights,
jurisdictions, and customs of the said manor, and the rights,
powers, and duties of the lord and tenants thereof, and having
also enquired what lands in the township of Hitchin and in the
hamlet of Walsworth respectively within this manor are subject to
common of pasture for the commonable cattle of the occupiers of
messuages, cottages, and land within the said township and hamlet
respectively, and for what descriptions and number of cattle, and
at what times of the year and in what manner such rights of common
are by the custom of this manor to be exercised, and what payments
are by such custom due in respect thereof, they do upon their
oaths find and present as follows:--

'That the manor comprises the township of Hitchin and the hamlet
of Walsworth, in the parish of Hitchin, the [p444] lesser manors
of the Rectory of Hitchin, of Moremead, otherwise Charlton, and of
the Priory of the Biggin, being comprehended within the boundaries
of the said manor of Hitchin, which also extends into the hamlets
of Langley and Preston in the said parish of Hitchin, and into
the parishes of Ickleford, Ippollitts, Kimpton, Kingswalden, and
Offley.

«Boundaries.»

'That the following are the boundaries of the township of Hitchin
with the hamlet of Walsworth (that is to say), beginning at Orton
Head, proceeding from thence to Burford Ray, and from thence to a
water mill called Hide Mill, and from thence to Wilberry Hills;
from thence to a place called Bossendell, from thence to a water
mill called Purwell Mill, and from thence to a brook or river
called Ippollitts' Brook, and from thence to Maydencroft Lane,
and from thence to a place called Wellhead, and from thence to
a place called Stubborn Bush, and from thence to a place called
Offley Cross, and from thence to Five Borough Hills, and from
thence back to Orton Head, where the boundaries commenced. And
that all the land in the parish of Hitchin lying on the north
side of the river which runneth from Purwell Mill to Hide Mill is
within the hamlet of Walsworth, and that the following lands on
the south side of the same river are also within the same hamlet
of Walsworth (vizt.), Walsworth Common, containing about fourteen
acres; the land of Sir Francis Sykes called the Leys, on the south
side of Walsworth Common, containing about four acres; the land of
William Lucas and Joseph Lucas, called the Hills, containing about
two acres; and nine acres or thereabouts, part of the land of
Sir Francis Sykes, called the Shadwells, the residue of the land
called the Shadwells on the north side of the river.

«Jurisdiction.»

'That the lord of the manor of Hitchin hath Court Leet View of
Frank pledge and Court Baron, and that the jurisdiction of the
Court Leet and View of Frank pledge extendeth over the whole of
the township of Hitchin and the hamlet of Walsworth. That a Court
Leet and Court of the View of Frank pledge and Great Court Baron
are accustomed to be holden for the said manor within one month
[p445] after the Feast of Saint Michael the Archangel in every
year, and may also be holden within one month after the Feast of
Easter. And that general or special Courts Baron and customary
Courts are holden at the pleasure of the lord or of his steward.

'That in the Court Leet yearly holden after the Feast of St.
Michael the Archangel the jurors for our Lord the King are
accustomed to elect and present to the lord two constables and
six headboroughs (vizt.), two headboroughs for Bancroft Ward, two
for Bridge Ward, and two for Tilehouse Street Ward (each such
constable and headborough having right and being bound to execute
the office through the whole leet), and likewise two ale conners,
two leather searchers and sealers, and a bellman who is also the
watchman and cryer of the town. And they present that Bancroft
Ward contains Bancroft Street, including the Swan Inn, Silver
Street, Portmill Lane, and the churchyard, church and vicarage
house, and the alley leading out of Bancroft now called Quaker's
Alley. That Bridge Ward contains the east and north sides of the
market place, and part of the south side thereof to the house of
John Whitney, formerly called the Maidenhead Inn, Mary's Street,
otherwise Angel Street, now called Sun Street, Bull Street, now
called Bridge Street, to the river; Bull Corner, Back Street,
otherwise Dead Street, from the south to the north extremities
thereof; Biggin Lane with the Biggin and Hollow Lane. And that
Tilehouse Street Ward contains Tilehouse Street, Bucklersbury to
the Swan Inn, and the west side and the remainder of the south
side of the market place.

PRESENTMENTS OF THE HOMAGE.

«Reliefs.»

'And the Homage of this Court do also further present that
freeholders holding of the said manor do pay to the lord by way
of relief upon the death of the preceding tenant one year's
quitrent, but that nothing is due to the lord upon the alienation
of freehold.

«Fines on admissions.»

'That the fines upon admissions of copyholders, whether by descent
or purchase, are, and beyond the memory of [p446] man have been,
certain (to wit), half a year's quitrent; and that where any
number of tenants are admitted jointly in one copy, no greater
fine than one half year's quitrent is due for the admission of all
the joint tenants.

«Power of leasing.»

'The Homage also present that by the custom of the manor the
customary tenants may without licence let their copyholds for
three years and no longer, but that they may by licence of the
lord let the same for any term not exceeding twenty-one years; and
that the lord is upon every such licence entitled to a fine of one
year's quitrent of the premises to be demised.

«Forfeiture.»

'The Homage present that the freehold tenants of the said manor
forfeit their estates to the lord thereof for treason and for
murders and other felonies; and that the copyholders forfeit their
estates for the like crimes, and for committing or suffering their
copyholds to be wasted, for wilfully refusing to perform their
services, and for leasing their copyholds for more than three
years without licence.

'The Homage also present that by the custom of this manor
copyholds are granted by copy or court roll for the term of forty
years, and that a tenant outliving the said term is entitled to be
re-admitted for the like term upon payment of the customary fine
of half a year's quitrent.

«Heriots.»

'The Homage present that there are no heriots due or payable to
the lord of this manor for any of the tenements holden thereof.

«Woods and trees.»

'The Homage also present that, all woods, underwoods, and trees
growing upon the copyhold lands holden of the said manor were by
King James the First, by his Letters Patent, under the Great Seal
of England, bearing date the fourteenth day of March, in the 6th
year of his reign (in consideration of two hundred and sixty-six
pounds sixteen shillings paid to his Majesty's use), granted
to Thomas Goddesden and Thomas Chapman, two copyholders of the
said manor, and their heirs and assigns, in trust to the use of
themselves and the rest of the copyholders of the said manor; and
that the copyhold tenants of the said manor are by virtue of such
grant entitled to cut all timber and [p447] other trees growing
on their copyholds, and to dispose thereof at their will.

«Grain sold in the market toll free.»

'The Homage also present that no toll has ever been paid or ought
to be paid for any kind of corn or grain sold in the market of
Hitchin.

«Common pound and stocks.»

'They also present that from the time whereof the memory of man is
not to the contrary, the lord of this manor has been used to find
and provide a common pound and stocks for the use of the tenants
of this manor.

'And the Homage do further present that by the custom of this
manor the lord may, with the consent of the Homage, grant by copy
of court roll any part of the waste thereof, to be holden in fee
according to the custom of the manor, at a reasonable rent and by
the customary services, or may with such consent grant or demise
the same for any lesser estate or interest.

COMMONS WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP OF HITCHIN.

'And the Homage of this Court do further present that the
commonable land within the manor and township of Hitchin consists
of--

«1st. Green Commons in the township of Hitchin.»

'Divers parcels of ground called the Green Commons, the soil
whereof remains in the lord of the said manor (that is to say):

'Butts Close, containing eight acres or thereabouts; Orton Mead,
containing forty acres or thereabouts, exclusively of the Haydons,
and extending from the Old Road from Hitchin to Pirton by Orton
Head Spring west unto the way which passes through Orton Mill
Yard east; and that the Haydons on the east of the last mentioned
way, containing four acres or thereabouts, are parts of the same
common, and include a parcel of ground containing one rood and
thirteen perches or thereabouts adjoining the river, which have
been fenced from the rest of the common by Samuel Allen; and the
ground called the Plats lying between Bury Mead and Cock Mead,
containing two acres or thereabouts, including the slip of ground
between the river and the way leading to the mill of the said John
[p448] Ransom, lately called Burnt Mill, and now called Grove
Mill, which hath been fenced off and planted by John Ransom.

«2nd. Lammas Meadows.»

'And of the lands of divers persons called the Lammas Meadows
in Cock Mead, which contain eighteen acres or thereabouts, and
in Bury Mead, which contains forty-five acres or thereabouts,
including a parcel of land of the Rev. Woollaston Pym, clerk,
called Old Hale.

«3rd. Common fields.»

'And of the open and unenclosed land within the several common
fields, called Purwell Field, Welshman's Croft, Burford Field,
Spital Field, Moremead Field, and Bury Field.

«Right of common.»

'That the occupier of every ancient messuage or cottage within the
township of Hitchin hath a right of common for such cattle and at
such times as are hereinafter specified upon the Green Commons and
the Lammas Meadows, but no person hath any right of common within
this township as appurtenant to or in respect of any messuage or
cottage built since the expiration of the 13th year of the reign
of Queen Elizabeth, unless the same shall have been erected on the
site of an ancient messuage then standing.

'That any person having right of common in respect of the messuage
or cottage in his actual occupation may turn on the Green Commons
and the Lammas Meadows two cows and one bullock, or cow calf under
the age of two years.

«Common bull.»

'That the rectors impropriate of the rectory of the parish of
Hitchin or their lessees of the said rectory are bound to find a
bull for the cows of the said township, and to go with the herd
thereof, and that no other bull or bull calf may be turned on the
commons.

'That Butts Close is the sole cow common from the 6th day of
April, being Old Lady-day inclusive, to the 12th day of May also
inclusive, and after that time is used for collecting in the
morning the herd going out to the other commons.

'That Orton Mead, including the Haydons, is an open common upon
and from the thirteenth day of May, called Old May-day, till the
fourteenth day of February, called Old Candlemas Day. [p449]

'That the Plats are an open common upon and from Whitsunday till
the 6th day of April.

'That Cock Mead and Bury Mead became commonable on the thirteenth
day of August, called Old Lammas Day, and continue open till the
6th day of April.

'That the common fields called Bury Field and Welshman's Croft are
commonable for cows only from the time when the corn is cut and
carried therefrom until the twelfth day of November, called All
Saints', and that the close of Thomas Wilshire, gentleman, called
Bury Field Close, is part of the common field called Bury Field,
and the closes of John Crouch Priest, called Ickleford Closes, are
part of Welshman's Croft, and are respectively commonable at the
same times with the other parts of such respective common fields.

'That every occupier of an ancient messuage or cottage hath right
of common upon the Green Commons, except Butts Close, for one
gelding from and after the thirteenth day of August until the
fourteenth day of February.

'That no person entitled to common for his cattle may turn or
suffer the same to remain on any of the commons between the hours
of six in the evening and six in the morning.

'That it is the duty of the Homage at every Great Court Baron
holden next after the Feast of St. Michael to appoint a herdsman
for this township, and that every commoner turning his cows upon
the commons is bound to pay a reasonable sum, to be from time
to time assessed by the Homage, for the expenses of scouring
the ditches, repairing the fences and hedges, and doing other
necessary works for the preservation of the commons and for the
wages of the herdsman. And the Homage of this Court assess and
present such payments at one shilling for every head of cattle
turned on the commons, payable by each commoner on the first day
in every year on which he shall turn his cattle upon the commons,
to be paid to the foreman of the Homage of the preceding Court
Baron, and applied in and towards such expenses. And that the
further sum of threepence be paid on Monday weekly for every head
of cattle which any [p450] commoner shall turn or keep on the
commons for the wages of the herdsman.

'That the cattle to be depastured on the commons ought to be
delivered or sent by the owners to Butts Close between the hours
of six and eight of the morning from the sixth day of April to the
eleventh day of October, both inclusive; and after the eleventh of
October between the hours of seven and nine of the morning. And
that it is the duty of the herdsman to attend there during such
hours, and to receive into his care the cattle brought to him, and
to conduct them to the proper commons, and to attend and watch
them there during the day, and to return them to the respective
owners at six o'clock in the evening or as near thereto as may be;
but no cow which is not brought to the herdsman within the hours
before appointed for collecting the herd is considered as part of
the herd or to be under the herdsman's care; and that no horned
cattle ought to be received into the herd without sufficient knobs
on their horns.

SHEEP COMMONS.

«The common fields.»

'That every occupier of unenclosed land in any of the common
fields of the said township hath common of pasture for his sheep
levant and couchant thereon over the residue of the unenclosed
land in the same common field, in every year from the time when
the corn is cut and carried until the same be again sown with
corn, and during the whole of the fallow season, save that no
sheep may be depastured on the land in Bury Field and Welshman's
Croft between the harvest and the twelfth day of November, the
herbage thereof from the harvest to the twelfth day of November
being reserved for the cows.

«The three seasons.»

'That the common fields within the township of Hitchin have
immemorially been and ought to be kept and cultivated in three
successive seasons of tilthgrain, etchgrain, and fallow.

'That the last fallow season of Purwell Field and Welshman's
Croft was from the harvest of 1816 until the wheat sowing in
the autumn of 1817; and that the fallow season [p451] of those
fields commenced again at the close of the last harvest. That the
last fallow season of Burford Field and Spital Field was from the
harvest of the year 1817 until the wheat sowing in the autumn of
the year 1818. And the last fallow season of Moremead Field and
Bury Field was from the harvest of 1818 until the wheat sowing of
1819.

'That no person hath any right of common for sheep on any of the
Green Commons or Lammas ground within this township except on Old
Hale and on the closes of John Crouch Priest, called Ickleford
Closes, which are commonable for sheep at the same time with the
field called Welshman's Croft.

«Right of enclosure giving up right of common.»

'The Homage find and present that every owner and every occupier
of land in any of the common fields of this township may at his
will and pleasure enclose and fence any of his land lying in the
common fields of this township (other than and except land in Bury
Field and Welshman's Croft), and may, so long as the same shall
remain so enclosed and fenced, hold such land, whether the same
belong to one or to more than one proprietor, exempt from any
right or power of any other owner or occupier of land in the said
township to common or depasture his sheep on the land so enclosed
and fenced (no right of common on other land being claimed in
respect of the land so enclosed and fenced).

'The Homage also find and present that the commonable lands in the
hamlet of Walsworth within this manor consist of--

«Walsworth Common.»

'A parcel of meadow ground called Walsworth Common, containing
fourteen acres or thereabouts, the soil whereof remains in the
lord of the manor.

'And of certain parcels of meadow called Lammas Meadow (that is to
say), the Leys, part of the estate of Sir Francis Sykes adjoining
to Walsworth Common, and containing four acres or thereabouts;
Ickleford Mead, containing two acres or thereabouts; Ralph's
Pightle, adjoining to Highover Moor, containing one acre or
thereabouts, Woolgroves, containing three acres or thereabouts,
lying near to the mill of John Ransom, heretofore called Burnt
Mill, and now called Grove Mill. [p452]

'A close called the Hills, containing two acres or thereabouts, on
the west side of the road from Hitchin to Baldock, and a parcel of
land called the Shadwells on the east side of the same road, and
divided by the river, containing twelve acres or thereabouts.

'And they find and present that four several parcels of land
hereinafter described have been by John Ransom enclosed and fenced
out from the said Lammas ground called Woolgroves, and are now by
him held in severalty.

'And that the same are and always have been parts of the
commonable land of the said hamlet (to wit): A piece of land
containing twenty-one perches or thereabouts on the south-west
side of the present course of the river, and between the same
and the old course; a piece of land containing twelve perches or
thereabouts, now by the alteration of the course of the river
surrounded by water; a piece of land on the north-east side
of Woolgroves, containing one rood and twenty-two perches or
thereabouts; and a piece of land at the south-east corner of
Woolgroves, containing one rood or thereabouts.

'And the Homage find and present that the occupier of every
ancient messuage or cottage within the hamlet of Walsworth hath
a right to turn and depasture on the commonable land thereof,
in respect of and as appurtenant to his messuage or cottage,
two cows and a bullock or yearling cow calf upon and from the
thirteenth day of May, called Old May-day, until the sixth day of
April, called Old Lady-day, and one horse upon and from the said
thirteenth day of May until the thirteenth day of August, called
Old Lammas-day, and hath a right to turn the like number of cattle
upon the Lammas ground in Walsworth upon and from Old Lammas-day
until Old Lady-day. That no person hath a right to common or turn
any sheep upon the said common called Walsworth Commons, and that
no sheep may be turned on the Lammas ground of Walsworth between
Old Lammas-day and the last day of November.

'The Homage also present that it is the duty of the Homage of this
Court at every Great Court Baron yearly holden next after the
Feast of St. Michael, upon the [p453] application and request of
any of the persons entitled to common the cattle upon the commons
within the hamlet of Walsworth, to appoint a herdsman for the
said hamlet, and to fix and assess a reasonable sum to be paid to
him for his wages, and also a reasonable sum to be paid by the
commoners for draining and fencing the commons.

'This Court was then adjourned to Monday, the first day of
November next.

'Signed THOS. JEEVES (Foreman).
SAMUEL SMITH.
JOHN MARSHALL.
WILLM. DUNNAGE.
WM. BLOOM.
ROBT. NEWTON.
WILLM. HALL.
WM. MARTIN.
THOS. WALLER.
GEO. BEAVER.
W. SWORDER.
JOHN MOORE.'

INDEX AND GLOSSARY.

_Acre_, the 'selio,' or strip in the open field (40 x 4 rods),
3, 106, 385. A day's work in ploughing, 124. Reason of its
shape, 124. Welsh acre, _see_ 'Erw'

_Ager_, _agellus_, _agellulus_, territory of a manor, 167

_Ager publicus_, tenants on, 272–288. Tendencies towards
manorial methods of management, 300, 308

_Agri decumates_, occupied by Alamannic tribes, 282–288.
Position of tenants on, 311

_Agri occupatorii_, with irregular boundaries, 277, and
sometimes scattered ownership, 278

_Agrimensores_ (Roman), methods of centuriation, 250, 276, 279

_Aillt_, or _altud._ _See_ 'Taeog.' Compare Aldiones of
Lombardic Laws and Saxon 'althud' = foreigner, 281

_Alamanni_, German tribes, offshoots of, Hermundori, Thuringi,
&c., 282. Some deported into Britain, 285. Conquered by
Julian, 286

_Alfred the Great_, his founding the New Minster at Winchester,
160. Services of serfs on his manor of Hysseburne, 162.
His sketch of growth of a new _ham_, 169. His Boethius
quoted, 168

_Amobr_, fee on marriage of females under Welsh laws, 195

_Andecena_, day work of serf under Bavarian laws same shape as
English acre, 325, 386, 391

_Angariæ and parangariæ_, carrying or post-horse services
(_see_ Roman 'sordida munera'), 297, and so any forced
service, 298. Manorial services, 324–327

_Anwänder_, German 'headland,' 381

_Archenfeld_, in Wales, survey of, in Domesday Book, 182, 206–7

_Averagium_ manorial carrying service from _avera_ or _affri_,
beasts of burden, 298, _n._; at Bleadon, 57

_Balk_, the unploughed turf between two acre strips in the
open fields. 4; in 'Piers the Plowman,' 19; in Cambridge
terrier, 20; in Welsh laws, 119; a Welsh word, 382

_Ballibetogh_, cluster of 16 taths or homesteads, 215–224

_Bally_, Irish townland, 221, 223

_Battle Abbey Records_ (A.D. 1284–7), 49

_Bede_, complaint of lavish grants of manors to monasteries, 168

_Bees_, Welsh Law of, 207

_Bene-work_ or _Boon-work_. _See_ Precariæ

_Black Death_, 20; influence on villenage, 31

_Boc-land_, land of inheritance permanently made over by
charter or deed, 168, 171

_Boldon Book_ (A.D. 1183), evidence of, 68–72

_Book of St. Chad_, Welsh charters in margins of, 209

_Booths_, making of, by villani, for fairs of St. Cuthbert, 71

_Bordarii_, or cottagers (from 'bord,' a cottage), 76; in
Domesday Survey, 95; normal holding about 5 acres, 97;
mentioned in Liber Niger of Peterborough, 97

_Boundaries_, method of describing, in Hitchin Manor, 9; in
Saxon charters, 107, 111. Manor of King Edwy (Tidenham),
149; in Lorsch charters, 331. Roman method, 9. _See also_,
375

_Bovate_ (_Bovata terræ_), the half yard-land contributing
_one_ ox to the team of eight, 61. 2 bovates in Boldon
Book = virgate, 68

_Brehon Laws_, 226, 231, 232

_Breyr_, free Welsh tribesman, 192

_Britain_, Belgic districts of, pre-Roman settled agriculture
in, 245. Exports of corn during Roman rule, 247, 286. The
marling of the land described by Pliny, 250. Analogous to
'one-field system' of North Germany, 372

_Bucenobantes_, deported into Britain, 287

_Butts_, strips in open fields abutting others, 6

_Cæsar_, description of British and Belgic agriculture, 246.
Ditto of chiefs and tribesmen in Gaul, 305. Description of
German tribal system, 336–338

_Cambridge_, terrier of open fields of, in fourteenth or
fifteenth century, 19, 20

_Carpenter_, village official having his holding free, 70

_Caruca_ (_see_ Carucate), plough team of eight oxen, yoked
four to a yoke, 62, 74, 123; _carucæ adjutrices_, or
smaller teams of villeins, 48, 74, 85; variations in team,
64, 74; of Domesday Survey, 85

_Carucate_, unit of assessment = land of a _caruca_ (_see_
Caruca), connexion with hide, 40. Used in Domesday Survey,
85

_Centenarii_, Roman and Frankish officials, 300–303

_Centuria_, division of land by Roman _Agrimensores_ of 200 or
240 jugera, 276. Divided into eight normal single holdings
of 25 or 30, or double holdings of 50 or 60 jugera, 276

_Centuriation._ _See_ Agrimensores

_Ceorl_= husbandman; a wide term embracing, like 'geneat,' the
lower class of freemen and serfs above the slaves, 110, 144

_Chamavi_, pagus chamaviorum, 285

_Co-aration_, or co-operative ploughing by contributors to team
of eight oxen, 117. Described in Welsh Laws as 'Cyvar,'
118–124; in Ireland, 226; in Palestine, 314; in Roman
provinces, 278

_Coloni_, position of, on the later Roman villa, 266.
Right of lord to compel son to continue his parent's
holding and services, 267. Often barbarians, 269.
Like _usufructuarii_, 309, _n._ Possibly with single
succession, 308–310

_Commendation_, surrender, putting a freeman under the
_patrocinium_ or lordship of another, instances of,
305. Salvian's description of, 307. Effect of, 307–310.
Practice continues under Alamannic and Bavarian laws,
allowing surrenders to the Church, 316–335

_Continuity_ of English village sites, 424–436

_Cornage, cornagium_, tribute on horned cattle, 71

_Co-tillage._ _See_ Co-aration

_Cotsetla_, or cottier, in 'Rectitudines', = bordarius in
Domesday Survey, 130; his services, &c., 130–131

_Cottier tenants_, holders in villenage of a few scattered
strips in open fields, 24, 29, 34, 69

_Cyvar._ _See_ Co-aration

'_Daer_' and '_Saer_' tenancy in Ireland, 231

_Davies, Sir John_, his surveys in Ireland and description of
the Irish tribal system, 214–231

_Dawnbwyd_, food rent of Welsh taeogs, 198

_Decuriæ_, of slaves on Roman villa, 264

_Dimetian_ Code of South Wales. _See_ 'Wales, Ancient Laws of'

_Domesday Survey_ (A.D. 1086). Manors everywhere, 82. Lord's
demesne and land in villenage, 84. Assessment by hides and
carucates, 84; in Kent by solins, 85; _liberi homines_
and _sochmanni_ in Danish district, 86–89. Tenants in
villenage, villani, bordarii or cottarii, and servi,
89. The villani holders of virgates or yard-lands, 91;
examples from surveys of Middlesex, Herts, and Liber
Eliensis, 92–94. Bordarii hold about five acres each, more
or less, 95–97. Survey of Villa of Westminster, 97–101;
area of arable land in England, and how much of it held in
the yard-lands of villani, 101–104. Survey of portions of
Wales, 182–184, 211

_Doles_, or Dǽls, i.e. pieces or strips, hence 'gedal-land,'
110; and run-dale (or run-rig) system of taking strips
in rotation or scattered about, 228 (_see also_ Doles of
Meadow-land, 25)

_Drengage_, hunting service (Boldon Book), 71

_Ebediw_, Welsh death payment or heriot, 195

Edward the Confessor, his dying vision of the open fields round
Westminster, 100

_Einzelhöfe_, German single farms in Westphalia, 371

_Enclosure Acts_, 4,000 between 1760–1844, 13

_English settlements_, methods of, 412–423

_Ergastulum_, prison for slaves on Roman villa, 264

_Erw_, Welsh acre, the actual strips in open fields described
in Welsh Laws, 119

_Etch_, crop sown on stubble, 377

_Ethelbert_, Laws of, _hams_ and _tuns_ in private ownership
and mention of læts, 173–174

_Faber_, or village blacksmith, holds his virgate free of
services, 70

_Fleta_ (temp. Ed. I.), description of manor in, 45

_Forera_ (Saxon foryrthe), or headland, 20, 108

_Frankpledge_, View of, 10

_Franks_, their inroads, 283; deported into Belgic Gaul, 284

_Frisians_, 285. Tribute in hides, 306, _n._

_Furlong_ (shot, or quarentena), division of open fields 'a
furrow long,' divided into strips or acres, 4; in Saxon
open fields, 108; German, Gewann, 380

_Gafol_ (from German _Gaben_, _Abgaben_, food gifts under
German tribal system), tribute, 144, 145; in money and
in kind, of villein tenants. Perhaps survival of Roman
tributum based upon tribal food rents (_see_ 'Roman
tributum,' and 'jugatio,' 'gwestva'); of villani, on
English manors, 78; of _gebur_, on Saxon manors, 132,
140–142, 155, 162. Marked a semi-servile condition, 146,
326

_Gafol-land_, 137. _See_ Geneat-land

_Gafol-gilder_, payer of gafol or tribute, 145

_Gafol-yrth_, the ploughing of generally three acre strips
and sowing by the gebur, from his own barn, and reaping
and carrying of crop to lord's barn by way of rent; in
'Rectitudines,' 132–140; on Hysseburne Manor of King
Alfred, 162; in South Germany in seventh century, 326 _et
seq._ Possibly survival of the _agrarium_ or tenth of
produce on Roman provincial tithe lands, 399–403

_Gavael_, the tribal homestead and holding in N. Wales, 200–202

_Gavelkind_, Irish _gabal-cined_, distinguished by equal
division among heirs, 220, 352

_Gebur_, villanus proper, or owner of a yard-land normally
of thirty acres with outfit of two oxen and seed, in
'Rectitudines,' 131–133. His services described, 131–133,
and 137–143; his gafol and week-work in respect of
yard-land, 142; his outfit or 'setene,' 133, 143; in laws
of Ine, 147. Services and gafol on Tidenham Manor of King
Edwy, 154. In High German 'Gebur and Gipur' = vicinus,
394, and compare 278

_Gedal-land_, land divided into strips (Laws of Ine), 110.
_See_ Doles

_Geneat_, a wide term covering all tenants in villenage, 129,
137, 154. Servile condition of, liable to have life taken
by lord, 146

_Geneat-land_, land in villenage as opposed to 'thane's
inland,' or land in demesne, 116. Sometimes called
'gesettes-land' and 'gafol-land, 128, 150; 'gyrds of
gafol-land,' 150

_Geset-land_, land set or let out to husbandmen, 128. _See_
'Geneat-land'

_Gored Acres_, strips in open fields pointed at one end, 6, 20;
in Saxon open fields, 108

_Gwely_, the Welsh family couch (lectus), also a name for a
family holding, 195; in Record of Carnarvon, 194

_Gwentian Code_, of South Wales. _See_ 'Wales, Ancient Laws of'

_Gwestva_, food rent of Welsh tribesmen, and _tunc pound_ in
lieu of it, 195; early evidence of, in Ine's laws, 209–213

_Gyrd_ (a rod-virga)

_Gyrdland._ _See_ Yardland. _See_ 169–172

_Ham_ (hem, heim, haim), in Saxon, like 'tun,' generally
= villa or manor, 126, 254. A private estate with a
village community in serfdom upon it, 127. Geographical
distribution of suffix, 255. _See_ Villa

_Headland_, strip at head of strips in a furlong on which the
plough was turned, 4. Latin '_forera_,' Welsh '_pentir_,'
Scotch '_headrig_,' German '_anwänder_,' 5, 380. In Saxon
open fields, 108

_Hide_, normal holding of a free family (hence Latin _casatum_
and the _familia_ of Bede), but in later records
corresponding with the full plough team of eight oxen,
and so = four yard-lands. Used as the unit of assessment
for early times, 38. Perhaps from Roman times. Compare
Roman _tributum_, 290–294. Connexion with carucate and
yard-land, 36. Normal hide, 120 a., 37. Double hide of
240 a., 37, 39, 51, 54. Possible origin of word, 398. The
_hide_, the _hof_, and the _centuria_ compared, 395

_Hitchin_ (Herts), its 'open fields,' 1–7. Map of township
and of an estate therein, _opposite title-page_. Map of
Purwell field, 6. Its village community described in Manor
Rolls of 1819, 8, and appendix. Boundaries, 9. Officers,
10. Common fields, 11. Its Celtic name _Hiz_, 429. Roman
remains, 430. Continuity of villages in Hitchin district
from Celtic and Roman and Saxon times, 424–436

_Hiwisc_, Saxon for family holding, 162, 395

_Honey_, Welsh rents in. _See_ Gwestva, 207, 211–213

_Hordwell_, boundaries of, in Saxon Charter, 107

_Hundred Rolls_ of Edward I., A.D. 1279, evidence of, as to the
prevalence of the Manor, the open-field system and serfdom
in five Midland Counties, 32, _et seq._

_Husband-lands_ in Kelso and Newminster Records = virgate or
yard-land, 61

_Hydarii_, holders of hides, 52

_Hysseburne_, Manor of Stoke by, on the river Itchin near
Winchester, held by King Alfred, 160. Serfdom and services
of ceorls on, 162

_Ine, Laws of_ (A.D. 688), evidence of open-field system, 109.
Acre strips, 110. Yardlands, 142. Hides and half hides,
147. Geneats, geburs, gafol, week-work, 147. Welsh food
rents, 212–213

_Ing_, suffix to local names; whether denotes clan settlements
and where found, 354–367

_Inquisitio Eliensis_ mentions liberi homines and sochmanni,
87. Mentions villani as holding virgates, &c., 94.
Mentions both bordarii and cottarii, 96

_Isle of Man_, early division of land into ballys and quarters,
222

_Jugatio._ _See_ Roman tributum

_Jugerum_, size and form of, 387

_Jugum._ (_See_ Roman tributum.) Roman unit of assessment,
289–295. Description of, in Syrian Code, 291. Analogy to
virgate and hide, and sulung, 292

_Jüngsten-Recht_, right of youngest to succeed to holding,
352–354. See also under Welsh laws, 193, 197

_Kelso, Abbey of_, '_Rotulus redituum_,' _stuht_ or outfit to
tenants of, 61

_Lammas land_, meadows owned in strips, but commonable after
Lammas Day, in Hitchin Manor, 11; in laws of Ine, 110

_Læn-land_, lands granted as a benefice for life to a thane, 168

_Læti_, conquered barbarians deported and settled on public
lands during later Roman rule, chiefly in Belgic Gaul and
Britain, 280–289

_Leges Alamannorum_ (A.D. 622), surrenders to Church allowed
under, 317; services of _servi_ and _coloni_ of the Church
under, 323

_Leges Baiuwariorum_ (7th century) surrenders under, 317.
Services of _coloni_ and _servi_ of the Church under, 325

_Leges Ripuariorum_, 304

_Lex Salica_, use of 'villa' in a manorial sense, 259–262, 303

_Lex Visigothorum_ (A.D. 650 about) in division of land between
Romans and Visigoths, fifty aripennes allotted _per
singula aratra_, 276 _n._

_Liber Niger_ of Peterborough Abbey (A.D. 1125), nearest
evidence to the Domesday Survey, 72 _et seq._

_Libere tenentes_, holders of portions of demesne-land, i.e.
land _not_ in villenage, 33. Villeins holding yard-lands
in villenage may be _libere tenentes_ of other land
besides, 34. Increasing in later times, 54. Absent from
Domesday survey generally, 86; Archdeacon Hale's theory of
their presence disproved, 86–87 _n._

_Liberi homines_, of Domesday Survey in Danish districts, 86,
102

_Lince, or lynch_, acre strip in open fields formed into a
terrace by always turning the sod downwards in ploughing a
hill side, 5; sketch of, 5; in Saxon open fields, 108; in
Yorkshire 'reean' and Germany 'rain' = _lince_ or _balk_,
381

_Lingones_, 284

_Lorsch_ (Lauresham), instances of surrenders to the Abbey of,
329–333

_Maenol_, cluster of tribal homesteads in Welsh laws, in North
Wales of sixteen homesteads paying between them the _tunc
pound_, 202. In South Wales the _maenol_ is a group of
twelve _trevs_, each paying _tunc pound_, 203–4

_Manor_, or _villa_, in Saxon, _ham_ or _tun_. An estate
of a lord or thane with a village community generally
in serfdom upon it. Hitchin Manor and its connexion
with open-field system, 1–13. Manors before Domesday
Survey--Winslow, 22; Hundred Rolls, 32; described in
Fleta, 45; Battle Abbey and St. Paul's, 49; Gloucester
and Worcester, 55; Bleadon, 57; Newminster and Kelso,
60. In Boldon Book, 68; in Liber Niger of Peterborough,
72; summary, 76. In Domesday Survey manors everywhere,
82 _et seq._ Westminster, 97. Saxon 'hams' and 'tuns'
were manors, 126 _et seq._ Manor of Tidenham, of King
Edwy, 148. Hysseburne, of King Alfred, 160. Creation of
new manors, 166. Terra Regis composed of manors, 167.
'Hams' and 'tuns' in King Ethelbert's laws, manors, i.e.,
in private ownership with semi-servile tenants (_læts_)
upon them, 173. There were manors in England before St.
Augustine's arrival, 175. English and Frankish identical,
253. Villa of Salic Laws probably a manor on Terra Regis,
259–263. Likeness of Roman villa to, 263–272 (_see_
Roman 'Villa'). Villas, or fiscal districts of Imperial
officials, tend to become manors, 300–305. Transition
from villas to manors under Alamannic and Bavarian laws
in South Germany, 316–335. Frankish manors, their tenants
and services, 333. Manorial tendencies of German tribal
system, 346

_Monetary System_, Gallic and Welsh pound of 240 pence of
silver divided into twelve unciæ each of a score pence,
204. The Gallic system in Roman times, 234, 292

_Nervii_, 284

_Newminster Abbey_, cartulary of, 60

_No Man's Land_, or 'Jack's Land,' odds and ends of lands in
open fields, 6. In Saxon boundaries, 108

_Open-Field System in England_; remains of open fields
described, 1, _et seq._ Divided into acre or half-acre
strips, 2, and furlongs or shots, 4. Holdings in bundles
of scattered strips, 7; _i.e._, hides, half-hides,
yard-lands, &c. (to which refer). Wide prevalence of
system in England, 13. The shell of a village community,
8–13--which was in serfdom, 76–80. The English system,
the _three-field system_, _i.e._, in three fields,
representing three-course rotation of crops, 11. Traced
back in Winslow manor rolls (Ed. III.), 20 _et seq._; in
Gloucester and Worcester surveys, 55; Battle Abbey and
St. Paul's records, 49; Newminster and Kelso records,
60; Boldon Book, 68; Liber Niger of Peterborough, 72.
Summary of post-Domesday evidence, 76. Prevalence in
Saxon times, shown by use of the word _æcera_, 106, and
by occurrence of _gored acres_, _head-lands_, _furlongs_,
_linces_, &c., in the boundaries appended to charters,
108. Evidence of division of fields into acre strips in
seventh century in _Laws of Ine_, 109–110. Holdings in
hides, half-hides and yard-lands, 110–117. Scattering of
strips in a holding the result of co-operative ploughing,
117–125. The three-field system would grow out of the
simple form of tribal system, by addition of rotation of
crops in three courses, settlement, and serfdom, 368–370.
_Welsh open-field system_, 181, 213, with division into
'_erws_,' or acres, 119. Scattering of strips in a holding
arising from co-aration, 121. The system 'co-aration of
the waste,' _i.e._ of grass land which went back into
grass, 192, 227, 244, 251. Like that of the Germania of
Tacitus, 369, 412. No fixed 'yard-lands' or rotation of
crops, 251, 413. _Irish and Scotch open-field system_ like
the Welsh; modern remains of, in _Rundale_ or _Run-rig_
system, 214–231. _German_ open-field systems, 369–411;
different kinds of, _Feldgraswirthschaft_ resembling that
described by Tacitus and Welsh 'co-aration of waste,'
371. One-field system of N. Germany, 372–373. Forest and
marsh system, 372. Three-field system in S. Germany,
373. Comparison of, with English, and connexion with
Roman province, 375–409. Absent from N. Germany, and so
could not have been introduced into England by the Saxon
invaders, 373, 409, 411. Rotation of crops, perhaps of
Roman introduction, 410, 411. Wide prevalence of forms of
open-field system, 249. Description of, in Palestine, 314.
Mention of, by Siculus Flaccus, 278. Possibly in use on
Roman tithe lands, 315. Remains of the simple tribal form
of, in modern rundale or run-rig of Ireland and Scotland,
quite distinct from the remains of the three-field form in
England, 437–439. Described by Tusser as uneconomical, 17,
and by Arthur Young, 16

_Parangariæ_, extra carrying services, _see_ 'angariæ'

_Paraveredi_, extra post-horses (_see_ Roman 'sordida
munera'), 297, from _veredus_ a post-horse, 298. Manorial
_Parafretus_, 325–334

_Patrocinium._ _See_ 'Commendation'

_Pfahl-graben_, the Roman _limes_ on the side of Germany, 282

_Pflicht-theil_, survival of late Roman law, obliging a fixed
proportion of a man's property to go equally to his sons.
In Bavaria, 313. Compare Bavarian laws of the seventh
century, 317, and Syrian code of fifth century, 312

_Piers the Plowman_, his 'faire felde,' an open field divided
into half-acre strips and furlongs, by balks, 18–19

_Plough-bote_, or _Plough-erw_, the strips set apart in the
co-ploughing, for the carpenter, or repair of plough, 121.
(_See_ Carpenter)

_Plough team_, normal English manorial common plough team of 8
oxen (_see_ 'Caruca'). Welsh do., also of 8 oxen, 121–2.
Scotch also, 62–66. 6, 10, or 12 oxen in Servia, 387
_n._ In India, 388. Single yoke of 2 oxen in Egypt and
Palestine, 314, 387; and in Sicily, 275, and Spain, 276

_Polyptique d'Irminon_, Abbot of St. Germain des Prés, and M.
Guérard's Introduction quoted, 265, 298, 641

_Præpositus_ of a manor elected by tenants, 48. Holds one wista
without services at Alciston, 50. Holds his two bovates
free (Boldon Book), 70. Word used for Welsh 'maer,' 184

_Precaria_, a benefice or holding at will of lord or for life
only, 319, 333

_Precariæ_ or Boon-works, work at will of lord, 78. On Saxon
Manors, 140, 157. In South Germany, 327. Sometimes
survivals of the Roman 'sordida munera,' 327, 403

_Priest_, his place in village community often with his
yard-land, 90–111, 115

_Probus_ introduces vine culture on the Rhine, 288. Deports
Burgundians and Vandals into Britain, 283. Colonised with
Læti Rhine Valley and Belgic Gaul, 283

_Punder_, keeper of the village pound, 69, 70

_Quarentena._ _See_ Furlong. Length of furrow 40 poles long

_Rain_, German for 'balk' as in Yorkshire 'reean' = linch, 381

_Randir_, from _rhan_, a division, and _tir_, land; a share of
land under Welsh laws, 200. A cluster of three homesteads
in South Wales, 204; and four randirs in the _trev_, 204;
but in North Wales a subdivision of the homestead, 200

'_Rectitudines Singularum Personarum_' (10th century?),
evidence of, 129 _et seq._ Dr. Leo's work upon, 164

_Redon, Cartulaire de_, quoted, 385

_Rhætia_, semi-servile barbarian settlers in, 288. _Sordida
munera_ in, 296–299. Roman custom, in present Bavaria as
to land tenure, 313. Transition from Roman to Mediæval
manor in, 316–335

_Rig_, strip in Irish and Scotch open fields, 3. Hence Run-rig
system

_Roman jugatio sive capitatio_, 289, 295. _See_ Roman tributum

_Roman_ '_sordida munera_,' 295–299. Some of them survive in
manorial services, 324, 325, 327, 334, 404

_Roman tributum_ of later Empire, 289–295. Roman _jugatio_ and
Saxon hidage compared, _id._, and 397

_Roman Veterans_ settled on _ager publicus_ with single or
double yokes of oxen and seed for about 30 or 60 jugera,
272–276

_Roman Villa._ _See_ Villa

_Run-rig_ or _Rundale_, the Irish and Scotch modern open-field
system, 3. Survival of methods of tribal system now used
in subdivision of holdings among heirs, 226, 230, 438–440

_St. Bertin_, Abbey of Sitdiu at, Grimbald brought by King
Alfred from thence, 160; Chartularium Sithiensis, and
surveys of estates of, 255–6; villa or manor of Sitdiu,
272, 366; suffix 'inghem' to names of manors, 356

_St. Gall_, records of Abbey, surrenders to, 316–324

_St. Paul's_ (Domesday of), A.D. 1222, 51

_Salian Franks_ in Toxandria, 286

_Scattered Ownership_, in open fields, 7. Characteristic
of 'yard-land' in Winslow manor rolls, 23. In Saxon
open fields, 111. In Welsh laws, 118. Resulted from
co-ploughing, 121. Under runrig system, 226–229

_Scutage_, 1d. per acre or 1l. per double hide of 240 a.,
or 40s. per _scutum_, to which four ordinary hides
contributed, 38

_Seliones_, the acre or half-acre strips into which the open
fields were divided, separated by turf _balks_, 2, 3, 19,
119

_Servi_ (_slaves_), in Domesday Survey, 89, 93–95. Saxon
_Theow_ 164–166, 175. Welsh _caeth_, 199, 238. On Roman
Villa, 263. Arranged in _decuriæ_, 264. Under Alamannic
and Bavarian laws, 317, 323–326

_Services_ of _villani_, chiefly of three kinds: (1) Gafol,
(2) precariæ or boon-work, (3) week-work (refer to these
heads), 41. In Hundred Rolls, 41. Domesday of St. Paul's,
53. Gloucester and Worcester records, 58. In Kelso
records, 67. Boldon Book, 68. Liber Niger of Peterborough,
73. Summary of post-Domesday evidence, 78. On Saxon
manors, in 'Rectitudines,' 130, 137–147. On Tidenham manor
of King Edwy, 154. On Hysseburne manor of King Alfred,
162. In Saxon '_weork-ræden_,' 158. Of cottiers (or
bordarii) in Hundred Rolls, 44. Gloucester and Worcester,
58, 69. Of Saxon 'cotsetle,' 130, 141. On German and
English manors compared, 399–405

_Setene_, outfit of holder of Saxon yard-land, 133, 139. _See_
Stuht

_Shot_, 4 (_see_ furlong), Saxon 'sceot,' a division, occurs at
Passau, 380

_Siculus Flaccus_ mentions open fields, irregular boundaries,
and scattered ownership, on _agri occupatorii_, 274–278

_Sochmanni_, a class of tenants on manors chiefly in the
Danish districts, 34. Mentioned in Hundred Rolls in
Cambridgeshire, 34; in Domesday Survey, 87, 102

_Solanda_, in Domesday of St. Paul's = double hide of 240 a., 54

_Solin_, _sullung_, of Kent, plough land from 'Suhl,' a plough,
54; divided into 'yokes' (= yard-lands), 54; sullung = 4
gyrdlands and to ½ sullung, outfit of four oxen, A.D. 835,
139. _See also_, 395

_Stuht_, Kelso records, outfit of two oxen, &c., with
husband-land (yard-land), 61. Compare '_setene_' of the
Saxon gebur with yard-land, 133 and 139, and outfit of
Roman veteran, 274; and see under Bavarian Laws, 326

_Succession to holdings_, under the tribal system to all sons
of tribesmen equally, 193, 234, 340; to yard-lands and
other holdings in serfdom _single_ by regrant, 23–24, 133,
176; so probably in the case of semi-servile holdings of
_usufructuarii_ under Roman law, 308

_Supercilia_, or linches, mentioned by _Agrimensores_, 277

_Syrian Code_ of fifth century, 291–294

_Tacitus_, description of German tribal system in the
_Germania_, 338–343

_Tacogs_ (or aillts), Welsh tenants without Welsh blood or
rights of inheritance, not tribesmen--their 'register
land' (tir cyfrif), 191; arranged in separate clusters
or trevs with equality within each, 197; their 'register
land,' 197; their dues to their lord and other incidents,
198–199

_Tate, or Tath_, the Irish homestead, analogous to Welsh
'tyddyn,' 214, 231. _See_ Tribal system, Irish

_Thane_, Lord of a ham. Thane's inland = Lord's demesne land,
128. Thane's law or duties in 'Rectitudines,' 129; his
services, 134; a soldier and servant of king, 135; his
'fyrd,' 136; _trinoda necessitas_, 134

_Theows_, slaves on Saxon estates, 144; their position, 164.
Example from 'Ælfric's Dialogue,' 165

_Three-Field System._ (_See_ Open-field system.) Form of the
open-field system with three-course rotation of crops

_Tidenham_, Manor of King Edwy. Description of, and of services
of geneats and geburs upon, A.D. 956, 148–159. _Cytweras_
and _hæcweras_, for salmon fishing, 152

_Tir-bwrdd_ = terra mensalia, 198

_Tir-gwelyawg_, family land of Welsh free tribesmen, 191

_Tir-cyfrif_, register land of taeogs, 101

_Tir-kyllydus_, Welsh geldable land, 191

_Tithes_ of Church under Saxon laws taken in actual strips or
acres 'as they were traversed by the plough,' 114; acres
of tithes in Domesday Survey, 117; Ethelwulf's grant, 114

_Tithe lands_ of Sicily, 275; of modern Palestine, 314. (_See_
'_Agri decumates_.')

_Trev_, cluster of Welsh free tribesmen's homesteads, four in
North Wales, 200–202; twelve in South Wales, 204. _Taeog_
trevs, 203

_Treviri_, 284

_Tricassi_, 284

_Tribal System in Wales_, 181–213. Welsh districts and traces
of, in Domesday Survey, 182, 206–7. Food rents in D.S.,
185. Welsh land system described by Giraldus Cambrensis,
186–189. In Ancient Laws of Wales, 189 _et seq._ The
free tribesmen of Welsh blood, 190. Homesteads scattered
about, but grouped into clusters for payment of food
rents, 190. Their family land (tir-gwelyawg), 190–191.
Their right to a tyddyn (homestead), five free 'erws'
and co-tillage of waste, 192. The tribal household with
equality within it among brothers, first cousins, and
second cousins, 193. The gwely or family couch, 194. The
_gwestva_, or food rent, and tunc pound in lieu of it,
195. Other obligations of tribesmen, 195. The _taeogs or
aillts_ (see these words) not tribesmen, their tenure and
rules of equality, 197. Land divisions under Welsh Codes
connected with the _gwestva_ and food rents, 199–208.
Early evidence of payment of gwestva and of food rents of
taeogs, 208–213. Shifting of holdings under tribal system,
205. Cluster of twelve tyddyns in Gwent and sixteen in
N. Wales pay _tunc pound_, 202, 203. _In Ireland and
Scotland_, 214–231. Clusters of sixteen tates or taths
(Welsh tyddyn), 215–217. Sir John Davies's surveys and
description of tribal system, Tanistry, and Gavelkind,
215–220. Example of a Sept deported from Cumberland, 219.
Ancient division of Bally or townland into _quarters_
and _tates_, 221, 224. Quarters and names of tates still
traceable on Ordnance Survey, 223–224. Names of tates not
personal, owing to tribal distributions and shiftings of
tribal households from tate to tate, 224.

Irish open-field system--rundale or run-rig--226–228. Similar
system in Scotland, 228–229. Tribal system in its earlier
stages, 231–245. Tenacity with which tribal division among
sons maintained, 234. The tribal house, 239. Blood money,
242. Wide prevalence of tribal system, 244. Absent from
S.E. or Belgic districts of England at Roman conquest,
245. _In Germany_, description of tribal system by Cæsar,
336–337. Description of, by Tacitus, 338–342. Husbandry
like Welsh co-tillage of the waste for one year only,
343–345. Manorial tendencies of German system: tribesmen
have their _servi_ who are 'like _coloni_,' 345–346.
The manor in embryo, 346. Tribal households of German
settlers--local names ending in 'ing'--whether clan
settlements or perhaps as manorial as others, 346–367

_Tun_, generally in Saxon = ham or manor, (to which refer), 255

_Tunc pound_, payment in lieu of Welsh _gwestva_ (to which
refer) paid to the Prince of Wales, 196

_Tusser_, his description of 'Champion' or open-field
husbandry, 17

_Tyddyn_, the Welsh homestead, 192–193. Compare Irish 'tate' or
'tath' and Bohemian 'dĕdiny,' 355

_Uchelwyr_, free Welsh tribesman, 192

_Venedotian_ Code of North Wales. _See_ Wales, Ancient Laws of

_Veredus_, post horse, derivation of word, 298

_Villa_, word interchangeable with _manor_, _ham_, _tun_, 126,
254. Frankish _heim_ or _villa_ on _Terra Regis_ was a
manor and unit of jurisdiction, 257, 262. _The Roman
villa_, an estate under a villicus, worked by slaves, 263.
Its _cohortes_ and _ergastulum_, 263–264. Slaves arranged
in _decuriæ_, 264. _Coloni_, often barbarians on a villa,
266. Likeness to a manor increasing, 267–268. Burgundians
shared villas with Romans, 269. Villas transferred to
Church, 270. And continued under German rule to be villas,
270. And became gradually mediæval manors with villages
upon them, 271. Villas surrendered under Alamannic and
Bavarian laws to the Church, 317 _et seq._

_Village Community or Villata_, under a manor, 8. Hitchin
example. _See_ Hitchin. Its common or open fields: arable,
11; meadow and pasture, 11. Its officials, 10, 70

_Villani_, holders of land in villenage, 29. Sometimes _nativi_
and _adscripti glebæ_, 29. Pay heriot or relief; widows
have dower; make wills proved in Manor Court, 30. The
yard-land the normal holding of full villanus with two
oxen, 27 (_see_ Yard-land). Sometimes they hold the
demesne land at farm, 69. Sometimes farm whole manor, 70.
_Pleni-villani_ and _semi-villani_, 74

_Villenage._ _See_ Villani. Breaking up in 14th century, 31.
Its death-blow the Black Death and Wat Tyler's rebellion,
31–32. Incidents of, in Worcestershire, 56. General
incidents, 80. _See_ Servius

_Virgarii_, holders of Virgates, 50

_Virgate._ See Yardland.

_Wales, Ancient Laws of_, ascribed to Howel Dda (10th century),
189. Contemporary with Saxon Laws, 190. _See_ 'Tribal
System' of, 181–213. Parts of, mentioned in Domesday
Survey, 182, 185

_Wat Tyler's_ rebellion, 31

_Week-work._ The distinctive service of the serf in villenage,
78 (and see for details 'Services'), in _Rectitudines_,
week-work of gebur three days a week, 131, 141. In
services of Tidenham unlimited, 155. So in those of
Hysseburne, 163. In laws of Alamanni (A.D. 622) three
days on estates of Church, 323. So in Bavarian laws (7th
century), 326. Unless lord has found everything, 326. On
Lorsch manors three days, 334. _See also_, 404

_Wele_, Welsh holding in _Record of Carnarvon_. _See_ 'Gwely,'
193–195

_Westminster_, description of its manor and open fields in
Domesday Survey, 97–101

_Winslow_, Court Rolls of, 20–32

_Wista_, in Battle Abbey records = ½ hide--the _Great Wista_ =
½ double hide, 50

_Wizenburg_, surrenders to Abbey of, 329. Interchange between
_villas_ and _heims_ in records of, 258

_Yard-land_ (_gyrd-landes_, _virgata terræ_), normal holding
of villanus with two oxen in the common plough of eight
oxen--a bundle of mostly thirty scattered strips in
the open fields = German 'hub.' Example of yard-land
in Winslow Manor rolls, 24. Rotation in the strips,
27. Large area in yard-lands, 28. Held in villenage by
villani, 29. Evidence of Hundred Rolls, 33. Variation in
acreage and connexion with 'hide,' 36, 55 = husband-land
of two bovates in the North, 61, 67. Normal holding of
villanus in _Liber Niger_ of Peterborough, 73. Normal
holding of villanus of Domesday Survey, 91–95. Large
proportion of arable land of England held in yard-lands
at date of survey, 101. Saxon 'gyrd-lands,' 111, 117. In
'Rectitudines,' 133. In 'Laws of Ine,' 142. A bundle of
scattered strips resulting from co-operative ploughing,
117–125. With single succession (_see_ 'Succession') which
is the mark of serfdom of the holders, 176, 370

_Yoke of Land_ (mentioned in Domesday Survey of Kent) =
yard-land. Division of the _sullung_ or double hide in
Kent, 54. Compared with Roman _jugum_. _See_ Jugum

_Yoke_, _short_ for two oxen, _long_ for four oxen abreast in
Welsh laws, 120

_Youngest_ son, custom for, to succeed to holding. _See_
Jüngsten-Recht

PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO. LTD., COLCHESTER
LONDON AND ETON, ENGLAND

* * * * * *

Transcriber's note:

Original punctuation and spelling were generally retained.

Illustrations are moved from inside paragraphs to between paragraphs.

Footnotes are renumbered and moved from the ends of pages to the
ends of chapters.

The List of Maps and Plates was reformatted slightly to eliminate
the original ditto marks ahead of each page number. Ditto marks have
also been removed elsewhere, adding repetitive text as necessary.
Large curley brackets, "{" or "}", meant to indicate combination or
grouping of information on two or more lines, have been eliminated
from this ebook. Such information has been recast appropriately to
retain the original meaning.

Page 142: No anchor was found for the footnote; a new anchor was
therefore inserted thus: "an otherwise almost unintelligible passage
in the laws of King Ine[170]".

Page 144, first footnote: The text looks like "twihinde mek"; this
has been changed to "twihinde men".

Page 207: changed "rendered as gwesta" to "rendered as gwestva".

Page 216–217: "ballibeatach" is also spelled "bailebiatagh" on these
pages.

Page 261: changed "in the sense of 'court'--king's court,'--just as
in" to "in the sense of 'court'--'king's court,'--just as in", by
adding the single quote.

Page 340: The first footnote on this page lacks the volume number for
the reference _Germania_. The second edition of the book contains the
same footnote, but shows the volume number as "xxv", which has been
inserted herein.

Page 391: The third footnote is rendered "_Id._ 37–8" herein, based
on the second edition of the book. The current (reprint of the
fourth) edition was illegible.

Index, under "Hide": "Double hide of, 240 a" changed to "Double hide
of 240 a".

Index, under "Polyptique d'Irminon": It says "Introduction quoted, 265,
298, 641", but there is no page 641 in the book. However, footnote
number 594 refers to page 641 of M. Guérard's Introduction.

*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The English Village Community - Examined in its Relations to the Manorial and Tribal Systems and to the Common or Open Field System of Husbandry; An Essay in Economic History (Reprinted from the Fourth Edition)" ***

Home