Twoimportantfactorsco-operatedtogivethecountryanexceptionallyprivilegedposition。EnglandwastheonlycountryinEuropewithafirmlyconstitutedgovernment。TheNormanConquesthadpowerfullyworkedinthesenseofsocialfeudalism，butithadarrestedthedisruptivetendenciesofpoliticalfeudalism。Theoppositionbetweenthetworaces，thenecessityforbothtokeeptogether，thecomplexityofpoliticalquestionswhicharosefromconquestandsettlementontheonehand，fromtheintercoursewithNormandyandFranceontheother，——alltheseagenciesworkingtogetheraccountforaremarkableintensityofactiononthepartofthecentripetalforcesofsociety，ifImayusetheexpression：therewasinEnglandaconstanttendencytowardstheconcentrationandorganisationofpoliticalpowerinsharpcontrastwiththerestofEuropewherethestatehadfallenapreytolocalandprivateinterests。OneoftheexternalresultsofsuchaconditionwasthegrowthofaroyalpowersupportedbythesympathyofthelowerEnglish-bornclasses，butarrangingsocietybythehelpofNormanprinciplesoffiscaladministration。Notlessmomentouswastheformationofanaristocracywhichwascompelledtoactasaclassinsteadofactingasamerecollectionofindividualseachstrivingforhisownparticularadvantage；asaclassithadtoreckonwith，andsometimesrepresent，theinterestsandrequirementsofotherclasses。InalltheserespectsEnglandwasmuchaheadofGermany，wheretribaldivisionsweremorepowerfulthannationalunity，andthestatehadtoformitselfonfeudalfoundationsinoppositiontoacosmopolitanImperialpower；itwasnotlessinadvanceofFrance，wheretheworkofunification，egotisticallyundertakenbytheking，hadhardlybeguntogettheupperhandinitsconflictwithlocaldynasties；notlessinadvanceofItaly，sowellsituatedforeconomicprogress，butpoliticallywreckedbyitsunhappyconnexionwithGermany，theanti-nationalinfluenceofthePapacy，andtheone-sideddevelopmentofmunicipalinstitutions。ByreasonofitspoliticaladvantagesEnglandhadthestartofotherEuropeancountriesbyawholecenturyandevenbytwocenturies。The’silverstreak’actedalreadyasaprotectionagainstforeigninroads，theexistenceofacentralpowerinsuredcivilorder，intercoursebetweenthedifferentpartsoftheislandopenedoutletstotrade，andreactedfavourablyontheexchangeofcommoditiesandthecirculationofmoney。
Anothersetofcausesoperatedinclosealliancewiththesepoliticalinfluences。ThepositionofEnglandinrelationtotheEuropeanmarketwasfromthefirstanadvantageousone。besidesthenaturaldevelopmentofseafaringpursuitswhichleadtointernationaltrade，andalwaystendtoquickentheeconomicprogress，thereweretwospecialreasonstoaccountforaspeedymovementinthenewdirection：thewoollentradewithFlandersbeginstoriseinthetwelfthcentury，andthisisthemostimportantcommercialfeatureinthelifeofNorth-WesternEurope；
thenagain，thepossessionofNormandyandtheoccupationofAquitaineandotherprovincesofFrancebytheEnglishopenedmarketsandroadsforaverybriskcommercialintercoursewiththeContinent。AsanoutcomeofallthesepoliticalandeconomicalconditionswefindtheEnglandofthethirteenthcenturyundoubtedlymovingfromnaturalhusbandrytothemoney-system。
Theconsequencesaretobeseenoneverysideinthearrangementsofstateandsociety。Themeansofgovernmentweremodifiedbytheeconomicchange。Hiredtroopstooktheplaceoffeudallevies；kingseasilyrenouncedthemilitaryserviceoftheirtenantsandtookscutageswhichgivethemthemeansofkeepingsubmissiveandwell-drilledsoldiers。Thesameprocesstookplaceallthroughthecountryonthelandofsecularandecclesiasticallords。Theyallpreferredtakingmoneywhichissoreadilyspentandsoeasytokeep，whichmaytransformitselfequallywellintogorgeouspageantsandintocapitalforcarryingonwork，insteadofexactingold-fashionedunwieldlyploughingsandreapingsorequallyclumsyrentsinkind。
Ontheotherhand，thepeasantswereequallyanxioustogetoutofthecustomarysystem：throughitsorganisationoflabouritinvolvednecessarilymanyannoyances，pettyexactionsandcoercion；itinvolvedagreatwasteoftimeandenergy。Thelandlordgainedbythechange，becausehereceivedaneconomicinstrumentofgreaterefficiency；thepeasantgainedbecausehegotridofpersonalsubjectiontocontrol；bothgained；forawholesystemofadministration，awholeclassofadministrators，stewards，bailiffs，reeves，awholemassofcumbrousaccountsandarchaicprocedurebecameunnecessary。
Inrealitythepeasantrygainedmuchmorethanthelord。Justbecausemoneyrentsdisplacedtheploughingsandreapingsverygradually，theyassumedthemostimportantcharacteristicoftheselatter——theircustomaryuniformity；traditionkeptthematacertainlevelwhichitwasverydifficulttodisturb，evenwhentheinterestsofthelordandtheconditionsofthetimehadalteredagreatdeal。Pricesfluctuateandrisegradually，thebuyingstrengthofmoneygetsloweredlittlebylittle，butcustomaryrentsremainmuchthesameastheywerebefore。Thusinprocessoftimethebalancegetsalteredforthebenefitoftherentpayer。Idonotmeantosaythatsuchviewsandsuchfactswereinfulloperationfromtheverybeginning：oneofthechiefreasonsforholdingtheGlastonburyinquestof1189wasthewishtoascertainwhethertherentsactuallycorrespondedtothevalueoftheplots，andtomakethenecessarymodifications。Butsuchfreshassessmentswereveryrare，itwasdifficulttocarrythemintopractice，andthegeneraltendencywasdistinctlytowardsastabilityofcustomaryrents。
Thewholeprocesshasasocialandnotmerelyaneconomicalmeaning。Commutation，evenwhenitwasrestrictedtoagriculturalservices，certainlytendedtoweakentheholdofthelordonhismen。Personalinterferencewasexcludedbyit，themanorialrelationresolveditselfintoapracticeofpayingcertainduesonceorseveraltimesayear；thepeasantceasedtobeatoolinthehusbandryarrangementsofhismaster。Thechangemadeitselfespeciallyfeltwhenthecommutationtookplaceinregardtoentirevillages：(3*)thenewarrangementdevelopedintothecustomofalocality，andgatheredstrengthbythenumberofindividualsconcernedinit，andthecohesionofthegroup。Inordernottoloseallpowerinsuchatownship，thelordsusuallyreservedsomecasesforspecialinterferenceandstipulatedthatsomeservicesshouldstillberenderedinkind。(4*)
Again，theconversionofservicesintorentsdidnotalwayspresentitselfmerelyintheformjustdescribed：itwasnotalwayseffectedbythemerewillofthelord，withoutanylegallybindingacts。Commutationgaverisetoactualagreementswhichcamemoreorlessunderthenoticeofthelaw。WeconstantlyfindintheHundredRollsandintheCartulariesthatvillainsareholdinglandbywrittencovenant。Inthiscasetheyalwayspayrent。Sometimesavillain，orawholetownship，getsemancipatedfromcertaindutiesbycharter，(5*)andtheinfringementofsuchaninstrumentwouldhavegiventhevillainsastandinggroundforpleadingagainstthelord。ithappenedfromtimetotimethatbondmentookadvantageofsuchdeedstoclaimtheirliberty，andtoprovethatthelordhadenteredintoagreementwiththemaswithfreepeople。(6*)Topreventsuchmisconstructionthelordveryoftenguardsexpresslyagainstit，andinsertsaprovisiontosaythattheagreementisnottobeconstruedagainsthisrightsandinfavourofpersonalfreedom。(7*)
Theinfluenceofcommutationmakesitselffeltinthegrowthofanumberofsocialgroupswhicharrangethemselvesbetweenthefreeandtheserviletenantrywithoutfittingexactlyintoeitherclass。Ourmanorialauthoritiesoftenmentionmol-landandmol-men。(8*)Thedescriptionoftheirobligationsalwayspointsoneway：theyarerent-payingtenantswhomaybeboundtosomeextrawork，butwhoareverydefinitelydistinguishedfromthe’custumarii，’thegreatmassofpeasantswhorenderlabourservices。(9*)Kentishdocumentsuse’mala’or’mal’foraparticularspeciesofrent，andexplainthetermasapaymentincommutationofservilecustoms。(10*)Inthissenseitissometimesopposedtogafolorgable——theoldSaxonrentinmoneyorinkind，thislastbeingconsideredashavingbeenlaidontheholdingfromalltime，andnotastheresultofacommutation。(11*)EtymologicallythereisreasontobelievethatthetermmalisofDanishorigin，(12*)andthemeaninghasbeenkeptinpracticebytheScotchdialect。(13*)Whatimmediatelyconcernsourpresentpurposeis，thatthewordmal-menormol-meniscommonlyusedinthefeudalperiodforvillainswhohavebeenreleasedfrommostoftheirservicesbythelordonconditionofpayingcertainrents。Legallytheyoughttoremainintheirformercondition，becausenoformalemancipationhastakenplace；
buttheeconomicalchangereactsontheirstatus，andthemanorialdocumentsshowclearlyhowthewholeclassgraduallygathersimportanceandobtainsafirmerfootingthanwasstrictlyconsistentwithitsservileorigin。(14*)
IntheBurySt。Edmund’scasejustquotedinafootnotethefundamentalprincipleofservilityisstatedemphatically，butthestatementwasoccasionedbygradualencroachmentsonthepartofthemolmen，whowereevidentlybecominghardlydistinguishablefromfreeholders。(15*)AndinmanyCartularieswefindthesemolmenactuallyenumeratedwiththefreeholders，averystrikingfact，becausetheclearinterestofthelordwastokeepthetwoclassesasunder，andtheprocessofmakingamanorial’extent’
andclassifyingthetenantsmusthavebeenunderhiscontrol。Asamatteroffact，thevillagejurieswereindependentenoughtomaketheirpresentmentsmoreinaccordancewithcustomthaninaccordancewiththelord’sinterests。InatranscriptofaregisteroftheprioryofEyeinSuffolk，whichseemstohavebeencompiledatthetimeofEdwardI，themolmenaredistinguishedfromvillainsinaveryremarkablemannerasregardstheruleofinheritance，BoroughEnglishbeingconsideredastheservilemode，whileprimogenitureisrestrictedtothoseholdingmol-land。(16*)BoroughEnglishwasverywidelyheldinmedievalEnglandtoimplyservileoccupationofland，(17*)andtheprivilegeenjoyedbymolmeninthiscaseshowsthattheywereactuallyrisingabovethegeneralconditionofvillainage，theeconomicalpeculiaritiesoftheirpositionaffordingastepping-stone，asitwere，towardstheimprovementoftheirlegalstatus。Itisespeciallytobenoticed，thatinthisinstancewehavetoreckonwithamaterialdifferenceofcustom，andnotmerelywithavacillatingterminologyorageneralandindefiniteimprovementinposition。Aninterestingattemptatanaccurateclassificationofthisandotherkindsoftenantryisdisplayedbyaninquisitionof19EdwardIpreservedattheRecordOffice。Thefollowingsubdivisionsareenumeratedtherein：
Thedifferencebetweenmolmenandworkmenlies，ofcourse，inthefactthatthefirstpayrentandthesecondperformweek-work。Butwhatismore，themolmenarerangedamongthesokemen，andthissupposesacertaintyoftenureandservicenotenjoyedbythevillains。Inthiswaytheintermediateclass，thoughofservileorigin，connectsitselfwiththefreetenantry。
Thesamegroupappearsinmanorialdocumentsunderthenameofcensuarii。(19*)Bothtermsinterchange，andwefindthesamefluctuationbetweenfreeandservileconditioninregardtothecensuariiasinregardtomolmen。Thethirteenth-centuryextentofthemanorofBroughton，belongingtotheAbbeyofRamseyinHuntingdonshire，whencomparedwithDomesday，showsclearlytheoriginofthegroupandtheprogresswhichthepeasantryhadmadeintwohundredyears。TheDomesdaydescriptionmentionstensokemenandtwentyvillains；thethirteenth-centuryCartularyspeaksinoneplaceofliberiandvillani，setsouttheservicesduefromthelatter，butsaysthattheAbbotcan’ponereomniaoperaadcensum；’whileinanotherplaceitspeaksasthoughthewholewereheldbyliberietcensuarii。(20*)
Asimilarconditionisindicatedbythetermgavelmanni，whichoccurssometimes，althoughnotsooftenaseitherofthedesignationsjustmentioned。(21*)Itcomesevidentlyfromgafolorgafel，andappliestorent-payingpeople。Itoughttobenoticed，however，thatifwefollowthedistinctionsuggestedbytheKentishdocuments，therewouldbeanimportantdifferenceinthemeaning。Rentneednotalwaysappearasaresultofcommutation；itmaybeanoriginalincidentofthetenure，andtherearefactsenoughtoshowthatlandswereheldbyrentinoppositiontoserviceeveninearlySaxontime。Shouldmalbetakenasacommutationrent，andgafolstrictlyinthesenseoforiginalrent，thegavelmenwouldpresentaninterestingvariationofsocialgroupingastheprogenyofancientrent-holdingpeasantry。Idonotthink，however，thatweareentitledtopressterminologicaldistinctionssocloselyinthefeudalperiod，andIshouldneverenteraprotestagainsttheassumptionthatmostgavelmenweredistinguishedfrommolmenonlybyname，andinfactoriginatedinthesameprocessofcommutation。But，grantingthis，wehavetograntsomethingelse。
Viceversa，itisveryprobableindeedthatthegroupsofcensuariiandmolmenarenottobetakenexclusivelyastheoutcomeofcommutation。Ifgafolgetstoberatherindistinctinitsmeaning，sodoesmal，andastocensus，thereisnothingtoshowwhetheritarisesinconsequenceofcommutationoroforiginalagreement。AndsotheKentishdistinction，evenifnotcarriedoutsystematically，opensaprospectwhichmaymodifyconsiderablythecharacteristicofthestatusonwhichIhavebeeninsistingtillnow。Commutationwasundoubtedlyamostpowerfulagencyintheprocessofemancipation；ourauthoritiesareveryreadytosupplyuswithmaterialinregardtoitsworking，andIdonotthinkthatanybodywilldisputetheintimateconnexionbetweenthesocialdivisionsunderdiscussionandthetransitionfromlabourservicestorent。Yetamoneyrentneednotbeineverycasetheresultofacommutationoflabourservices，althoughsuchmaybeitsorigininmostcases。Wehaveatleasttoadmitthepossibilityandprobabilityofanotherpedigreeofrent-payingpeasants。Theymaycomefromanoldstockofpeoplewhoseimmemorialcustomhasbeentopayrentinmoneyorinkind，andwhohavealwaysremainedmoreorlessfreefrombaselabour。Thisweshouldhavetoconsiderasatalleventsatheoreticpossibility，evenifwerestrictedourstudytotheterminologyconnectedwithrent；thoughitwouldhardlygivesufficientfootingfordefiniteconclusions。Buttherearegroupsamongthepeasantrywhosehistoryislessdoubtful。
