TheServilePeasantryofManorialRecordsItwouldbeaswrongtorestrictthestudyofvillainagetolegaldocumentsastodisregardthem。Thejurisprudenceandpracticeoftheking’scourtspresentaone-sided，thoughaveryimportantviewofthesubject，butitmustbesupplementedandverifiedbyaninvestigationofmanorialrecords。Withoneclassofsuchdocumentswehavehadalreadytodeal，namelywiththerollsofmanorialcourts，whichformasitwerethestepping-stonebetweenlocalarrangementsandthegeneraltheoriesofCommonLaw。So-calledmanorial’extents’androyalinquisitionsbasedonthemleadusonestepfurther；theywereintendedtodescribethematter-of-factconditionsofactuallife，thedistributionofholdings，theamountandnatureofservices，thepersonaldivisionsofthepeasantry，theirevidenceisnotopentotheobjectionofhavingbeenartificiallytreatedforlegalpurposes。Treatisesonfarmingandinstructionstomanorialofficersreflecttheeconomicsideofthesystem，andanenormousnumberofaccountsofexpenditureandreceiptswouldenablethemodernsearcher，ifsominded，toenterevenintothedetailofagriculturalmanagement。(1*)Weneednotundertakethislastinquiry，butsomecomparisonbetweentheviewsoflawyersandtheactualfactsofmanorialadministrationmustbeattempted。WritersonCommonLawinviteonetothetaskbyrecognisingagreatvarietyoflocalcustoms；Bracton，forinstance，mentioningtwonotabledeviationsfromgeneralrulesinthedepartmentoflawunderdiscussion。InCornwallthechildrenofavillainandofafreewomanwerenotallunfree，butsomefollowedthefatherandothersthemother。(2*)InHerefordshirethemasterwasnotboundtoproducehisserfstoanswercriminalcharges。(3*)IfsuchcustomsweresufficientlystrongtocounteracttheinfluenceofgeneralrulesofCommonLaw，thevitalityoflocaldistinctionswasevenmorefeltinthosecaseswheretheyhadnorulestobreakthrough，Itmaybeevenaskedattheveryoutsetoftheinquirywhetherthereisnotadangerofourbeingdistractedbyendlessdetails。Ihopethatthefollowingpageswillshowhowthevarietiesnaturallyfallintocertainclassesandconvergetowardsafewdefinitepositions，whichappearthemoreimportantastheywerenotproducedbyartificialarrangementfromabove。Wemustbecarefulhowever，anddistinguishbetweenisolatedfactsandwidely-spreadconditions。Anotherpossibleobjectiontothemethodofourstudymaybealsonoticedhere，asitisconnectedwiththesamedifficulty。Supposewegetinonecasetheexplanationofacustomorinstitutionwhichrecursinmanyothercases；areweentitledtogeneraliseourexplanation？Thisseemsmethodicallysoundaslongasthecontrarycannotbeestablished，fortheplainreasonthatthevarietyoflocalfactsisavarietyofcombinationsandofeffects，notofconstitutiveelementsandofcauses。Theagentsofdevelopmentarenotmany，thoughtheirjointworkshadesoffintoagreatnumberofvariations。Wemaybeprettysurethataresultrepeatedseveraltimeshasbeeneffectedbythesamefactorsinthesameway；andifinsomeinstancesthesefactorsappearmanifestly，thereiseveryreasontosupposethemtohaveexistedinallthecases。Suchreflectionsareneverconvincingbythemselves，however，andthebestthingtotestthemwillbetoproceedfromthesebroadstatementstoaninquiryintotheparticularsofthecase。
Thestudyofmanorialevidencemuststartfromadiscussionastoterminology。Thenamesofthepeasantrywillshowthenaturalsubdivisionsoftheclass。Ifwelookonlytotheunfreevillagers，weshallnoticethatallthevarietiesofdenominationcaneasilybearrangedintofourclasses：oneoftheseclasseshasinviewsocialstanding，anothereconomiccondition，athirdstartsfromadifferenceofservices，andafourthfromadifferenceofholdings。Thelinemaynotbedrawnsharplybetweentheseveraldivisions，butthegeneralcontrastcannotbemistaken。
Thetermofmostcommonoccurrenceis，ofcourse，villanus。
Althoughitsetymologypointsprimarilytotheplaceofdwelling，andindirectlytospecificoccupations，itischieflyusedduringthefeudalperiodtodenoteservitude。Ittakesinboththemanwhoispersonallyunfreeandstandsincompletesubjectiontothelord，andthefreepersonsettledonservileland。BothclassesmentionedanddistinguishedbyBractonarecoveredbyit。Thecommonoppositionisbetweenvillanusandliberetenens，notbetweenvillanusandliberhomo。Itisnotdifficulttoexplainsuchaphraseologyinbookscompiledeitherintheimmediateinterestofthelordsorundertheirindirectinfluence，butitmusthavenecessarilyledtoencroachmentsanddisputes：ithasevenbecomeasnareforlaterinvestigators，whohavesometimesbeenledtoconsiderasonecompactmassapopulationconsistingoftwodifferentclasses，eachwithaseparatehistoryofitsown。TheLatin’rusticus’isappliedinthesamegeneralway。ltislesstechnicalhowever，andoccurschieflyinannalsanDotherliteraryproductions，forwhichitwasbettersuitedbyitsclassicalDerivation。Butwhenitisusedinoppositiontootherterms，itstandsexactlyasvillanus。thatistosay，itiscontrastedwithliberetenens。(4*)
Thefundamentaldistinctionofpersonalstatushasleftsometracesinterminology。TheHundredRolls，especiallytheWarwickshireone，(5*)mentionserviveryoften。Sometimesthewordisusedexactlyasvillanuswouldbe。(6*)Tenereinservituteandtenereinvillenagioareequivalent。(7*)Butotherinstancesshowthatservushasalsoaspecialmeaning。Caseswhereitoccursinan’extent’immediatelyaftervillanus，andpossiblyinoppositiontoit，arenotdecisive。(8*)Theymaybeexplainedbythefactthatthepersonsengagedindrawingupacustumal，jotteddowndenominationsofthepeasantrywithoutcomparingthemcarefullywithwhatpreceded。Amarginalnoteserviwouldnotbenecessarilyopposedtoavillanifollowingit；
itmayonlybeadifferentnameforthesamething。AnditmaybenotedthatintheHundredRollsthesenamesveryoftenstandinthemargin，andnotinthetext。Butsuchanexplanationwouldbeoutofplacewhenbothexpressionsareusedinthesamesentence。
ThedescriptionofIpsdeninOxfordshirehasthefollowingpassage：itemdietusR。deN。hanetdepropartesuaseptemservosvillanos。(Rot。Hundr。ii。781，b：cf。775，b，ServiCustumarii。)
Itisclearthatitwasintended，notonlytodescribethegeneralconditionofthepeasantry，buttodefinemoreparticularlytheirstatus。Thisobservationandthegeneralmeaningofthewordwillleadustobelievethatinmanycaseswhenitisusedbyitself，itimpliespersonalsubjection。
Thetermnativushasasimilarsense。Buttherelationbetweenitandvillanusisnotconstant；sometimesthislattermarksthegenus，whiletheformerappliestoaspecies；butsometimestheyareusedinterchangeably，(9*)andthefeminineforvillainisnieve(nativa)。Butwhilevillanusismadetoappearbothinawideandinarestrictedsense，andforthisreasoncannotbeusedasaspecialqualification，nativushasonlytherestrictedsensesuggestingstatus。(10*)Inconnectionwithotherdenominationsnativusisusedforthepersonallyunfree。(11*)
Whenwefindnativusdomini，thepersonalrelationtothelordisespeciallynoticed。(12*)Thesensebeingsuch，nowonderthatthenatureofthetenureissometimesdescribedinaddition。(13*)Ofcourse，theprimarymeaningis，thatapersonhasbeenborninthepowerofthelord，andinthissenseitisopposedtothestranger——forinsecus，extraneus。(14*)InthissenseagaintheDomesdayofSt。Paul’sspeaksof’nativiaprincipio’inNavestock。(15*)Butthefactofbeingborntotheconditionsupposespersonalsubjection，andthisexplainswhynativiaresometimesmentionedincontrastwithfreemen，(16*)withoutanyregardbeingpaidtothequestionoftenure。Natives，orvillainsborn，hadtheirpedigreesaswellasthemostnobleamongthepeers。Suchpedigreesweredrawnuptopreventanyfraudulentassertionastofreedom，andtoguidethelordincasehewantedtousethenative’skininprosecutionofanactiondenativohabendo。OnesuchpedigreepreservedintheRecordOfficeisespeciallyinteresting，becauseitstartsfromsomestranger，extraneus，(17*)whocameintothemanorasafreeman，andwhoseprogenylapsesintopersonalvillainage；apparentlyitisacaseofvillainagebyprescription。
Theothersubdivisionoftheclass-freemenholdingunfreeland(18*)——hasnospecialdenomination。Thisdeprivesusofaveryimportantclueastothecompositionofthepeasantry，butwemaygatherfromthefacthowverynearbothdivisionsmusthavestoodtoeachotherinactuallife。Thefreemanholdinginvillainagehadtherighttogoaway，whilethenativewaslegallyboundtothelord；butitwasdifficultfortheonetoleavelandandhomestead，anditwasnotimpossiblefortheothertoflyfromthem，ifhewereill-treatedbyhislordorthesteward。
Eventhefundamentaldistinctioncouldnotbedrawnverysharplyinthepracticeofdailylife，andineveryotherrespect，astoservices，modeofholding，etc。，therewasnodistinction。Nowonderthatthecommontermvillanusisusedquitebroadly，andaimsatthetenuremorethanatpersonalstatus。
Termswhichhaveinviewthegeneraleconomicconditionofthepeasant，varyagooddealaccordingtolocalities。Eveninprivatedocumentstheyareonthewholelessfrequentthanthetermsofthefirstclass，andtheHundredRollsusethembutveryrarely。ItwOUldbeverywrongtoimplythattheywerenotwidelyspreadinpractice。Onthecontrary，theirvernacularformsvouchfortheirvitalityandtheiruseincommonspeech。Butbeingvernacularandpopularinorigin，thesetermscannotobtaintheuniformityandcurrencyofliterarynamesemployedandrecognisedbyofficialauthority。Thevernacularequivalentforvillanusseemstohavebeennietorneat。(19*)Itpointstotheregularcultivatorsofthearable，possessedofholdingsofnormalsizeandperformingthetypicalservicesofthemanor。(20*)Thepeasant’sconditionishereregardedfromtheeconomicalside，inthemutualrelationoftenureandwork，notinthestrictlylegalsense，andmenofthiscategoryformthemainstockofthemanorialpopulation。TheRochesterCustumalsays(21*)thatneatsaremorefreethancottagers，andthattheyholdvirgates。Thesuperiordegreeoffreedomthusascribedtothemiscertainlynottobetakeninthelegalsense，butismerelyasuperiorityinmaterialcondition。Thecontrastwithcottagersisastandingone，(22*)and，beingthemainpopulationofthevillage，neatsaretreatedsometimesasiftheyweretheonlypeoplethere。(23*)
ThenamemaybeexplainedetymologicallybytheAnglo-Saxongeneat，whichindocumentsofthetenthandeleventhcenturymeansamanusinganotherperson’sland。ThedifferencesinapplicationmaybediscussedwhenwecometoexaminetheSaxonevidence。
AnotherSaxonterm-gebur-hasleftitstraceintheburusandburimanofNormanrecords。Theworddoesnotoccurveryoften，andseemstohavebeenappliedintwodifferentways-tothechiefvillainsofthetownshipinsomeplaces，andtothesmallertenantry，apparentlyinconfusionwiththeNormanbordarius，insomeother。(24*)Theverypossibilityofsuchaconfusionshowsthatitwasgoingoutofcommonuse。Ontheotherhand，theDanishequivalentbondusiswidelyspread。ItistobefoundconstantlyintheDanishcounties。(25*)Theoriginalmeaningisthatofcultivatoror’husband’——thesameinfactasthatofgeburandboor。Feudalrecordsgivecurioustestimonyofthewayinwhichthewordsliddownintothe’bondage’ofthepresentday。Weseeitwavering，asitwere，sometimesexchangingwithservusandvillanus，andsometimesopposedtothem。(26*)
Anotherwordofkindredmeaning，chieflyfoundineasterndistricts，islandsettus，withthecorrespondingtermforthetenure；(27*)thisofcourseaccordingtoitsetymologysimplymeansanoccupier，amansittingonland。
Severaltermsarefoundwhichhaveregardtothenatureofservices。Agriculturalworkwasthemostcommonandburdensomeexpressionofeconomicalsubjection。Peasantswhohavetoperformsuchservicesinkindinsteadofpayingrentsforthemarecalledoperarii。(28*)Anotherdesignationwhichmaybefoundeverywhereisconsuetudinariiorcustumarii。(29*)Itpointstocustomaryservices，whichthepeoplewereboundtoperform。Whensuchtenantsareopposedtothevillains，theyareprobablyfreemenholdinginvillainagebycustomarywork。(30*)Asthenamedoesnotgiveanyindicationastotheimportanceoftheholdingaqualificationissometimesaddedtoit，whichdeterminesthesizeofthetenement。(31*)
Inmanymanorswefindagroupoftenants，possessedofsmallplotsoflandfortheserviceoffollowingthedemesneploughs。
Thesearecalledakermanniorcarucarii(32*)，aremostlyselectedamongthecustomaryholders，andenjoyanimmunityfromordinaryworkaslongastheyhavetoperformtheirspecialduty。(33*)Onsomeoccasionstherecordsmentiongersumarii，thatispeasantswhopayagersuma，afineformarryingtheirdaughters。(34*)Thispaymentbeingconsideredasthebadgeofpersonalserfdom，theclassmusthaveconsistedofmenpersonallyunfree。
Thosenamesremaintobenoticedwhichreflectthesizeoftheholding。InoneofthemanorsbelongingtoSt。Paul’sCathedralinLondonwefindhidarii。(35*)Thisdoesnotmeanthateverytenantheldawholehide。Onthecontrary，theyhaveeachonlyapartofthehide，buttheirplotsarereckonedupintohides，andtheservicesduefromthewholehidearestated。
Virgatarius(36*)isofverycommonoccurrence，becausethevirgatewasconsideredasthenormalholdingofapeasant。Itiscuriousthatinconsequencethevirgateissometimescalledsimplyterra，andholdersofvirgates——yerdlings。(37*)Peasantspossessedofhalfvirgatesarehalfyerdlingsaccordingly。Theexpressions’afullvillain’(38*)and’halfavillain’mustbeunderstoodinthesamesense。Theyhavenothingtodowithrank，butaimmerelyatthesizeofthefarmandthequantityofservicesandrents。Ferlingsetiaretobemetwithnowandtheninconnexionwiththeferlingorferdel，thefourthpartofavirgate。(39*)
Theconstantdenominationforthosewhohavenopartinthecommonarablefields，butholdonlycroftsorsmallplotswiththeirhomesteads，is’cotters’(cotsetle，cottagiarii，cottarii(40*)，etc。)。Theygetopposedtovillainsastoownersofnormalholdings。(41*)Exceptionallythetermisusedforthosewhohaveverysmallholdingsintheopenfields。Inthiscasetheauthoritiesdistinguishbetweengreaterandlessercotters(42*)，betweentheownersofa’fullcote’andof’halfacote。’(43*)
Thebordarii，soconspicuousinDomesday，andevidentlyrepresentingsmalltenantsofthesamekindasthecottagers，disappearalmostentirelyinlatertimes。(44*)
