ThereareattheBritishMuseumtwomostcuriousSurveysofthepossessionsofElyMinster，onedrawnupin1222andtheotherin1277，(22*)Insomeofthemanorsdescribedwefindtenantscalled’hundredarii。’Theirdutiesvaryagooddeal，butthepeculiaritywhichgroupsthemintoaspecialdivisionandgivesthemtheirnameisthesuitofcourttheyowetothehundred。(23*)AndalthoughthenamedoesnotoccuroftenevenintheElySurveys，andisveryrareindeedelsewhere，(24*)thethingisquitecommon。Thevillagehastoberepresentedinthehundredcourteitherbythelordofthemanor，orbythesteward，orbythereeve，thepriest，andfourmen。(25*)ThesamepeoplehavetoattendtheCountyCourtandtomeettheKing’sjusticeswhentheyareholdinganeyre。(26*)Itisnotanecessaryconsequence，ofcourse，thatcertainparticularholdingsshouldbeburdenedwiththespecialdutyofsendingrepresentativestothesemeetings，butitisquiteinkeepingwiththegeneraltendencyofthetimethatitshouldbeso；andindeedonefindseverywherethatsomeofthetenants，evenifnotcalled’hundredarii，’aresingledoutfromtherestto’defend’thetownshipathundredandshiremoots。(27*)Theyareexemptedfromotherservicesinregardtothis’external，’this’forinsec’
duty，whichwasconsideredasbynomeansalightone。(28*)
Andnowastotheirstatus。TheobligationtosendthereeveandfourmenisenforcedallthroughEngland，andforthisreasonitisprimafacieimpossiblethatitshouldbeperformedeverywherebyfreeholdersintheusualsenseoftheword。Therecanbenodoubtthatinmany，ifnotinmost，placesthefeudalorganisationofsocietyaffordedlittleroomforaconsiderableclassoffree-holdingpeasantsoryeomen。(29*)Ifeverytownshipintherealmhadtoattendparticularjudicialmeetings，toperformservicefortheking，bymeansoffiverepresentatives，thesecouldnotbutbeselectedlargelyfromamongthevillainclass。ThepartplayedbytheserepresentativesintheCourtswasentirelyinkeepingwiththeirsubordinateposition。Theywerenotreckonedamongthe’freeandlawful’menactingasjudgesorassessorsanddecidingthequestionsatissue。Theyhadonlytomakepresentmentsandtogivetestimonyonoathwhenrequiredtodoso。Theoppositionisaverymarkedone，andspeaksofitselfagainsttheassumptionthatthefivemenfromthetownshipwereonanequalstandingwiththefreeholders。(30*)Again，fourofthesefivewereinmanycasesespeciallyboundbytheirtenuretoattendthemeetings，andthereevecamebyvirtueofhisoffice，butheisnamedfirst，anditdoesnotseemlikelythattheleadershouldbeconsideredasoflowerdegreethanthefollowers。Nowtheobligationtoserveasreevewastakenasamarkofvillainage。Allthesefactsleadoneforciblytotheconclusionthatthehundredorsofourdocumentsrepresentthevillagepeopleatlarge，andthevillainsfirstofall，becausethisclasswasmostnumerousinthevillage。Thisdoesnotmean，ofcourse，thattheywereallpersonallyunfree：weknowalready，thatthelawoftenurewasofmoreimportanceinsuchquestionsthanpersonalstatus。(31*)Itdoesnotevenmeanthatthehundredorswerenecessarilyholdinginvillainage：smallfreeholdersmayhaveappearedamongthem。Buttheinstitutioncouldnotrestonthebasisoflegalfreeholdifitwastorepresentthegreatbulkofthepeasantryinthetownships。
Thisseemsobviousanddefiniteenough，butourinquirywouldbeincompleteandmisleadingifitweretostophere。Wehaveinthisinstanceoneofthosecuriouscontradictionsbetweentwowell-establishedsetsoffactswhichareespeciallyprecioustotheinvestigatorbecausetheyleadhimwhileseekingtheirsolutiontoinferencesfarbeyondthematerialunderimmediateexamination。Inonesensethereeveandthefourmen，thehundredors，seemvillainsandnotfreeholders。Inanothertheyseemfreeholdersandnotvillains。Theirtenurebythe’sergeanty’ofattendinghundredsandshiresranksagainandagainwithfreeholdandinoppositiontobasetenure。(32*)
Originallythefourmenweremadetogonotonlywiththereevebutwiththepriest；andifthereevewasconsideredinfeudaltimesasunfree，thepriest，the’mass-thane，’wasalwaysconsideredasfree。(33*)Itistobenoticedthattheattendanceofthepriestfellintoabeyanceinprocessoftime，butthatitwasnotlessnecessaryfortherepresentationofthetownshipaccordingtotheancientconstitutionofthehundredthantheattendanceofthereeve。Thislastfactisofgreatimportancebecauseitexcludesanexplanationwhichwouldotherwiselookplausibleenough。Doesitnotseematfirstsightthatthecaseofthehundredorsissimplyacaseofexemptionandexactlyonaparallelwiththecommutationofservileobligationsformoney？
Wehaveseenthatvillainsdischargedfromthemostonerousandopprobriousdutiesoftheirclassriseatonceinsocialstanding，andmixupwiththesmallerfreeholders。Hundredorsarerelievedfromthesesamebaseservicesinorderthattheymayperformtheirspecialwork，andthismaypossiblybetakenastheoriginoftheirfreedom。Shouldwelookatthefactsinthisway，theclassificationofthisclassoftenantsasfreewouldproceedfromalaxuseofthetermandtheirprivilegeswouldhavetoberegardedasaninnovation。Thepresenceofthepriestwarnsusthatwehavetoreckoninthecasewithasurvival，withanelementoftraditionandnotofmereinnovation。Anditisnotonlythepresenceofthepriestthatpointsthisway。
Atfirstsightthelineseemsdrawnverysharplybetweenthereeveandthefourmenontheonehand，andthefreeholdsuitorsofthehundredcourtontheother：whiletheselasthavetojudgeandtodecide，thefirstonlymakepresentments。Butthedistinction，thoughveryclearinlatertimes，isbynomeanstoberelieduponeveninthethirteenthcentury。InBritton’saccountofthesheriff’stournthetwobodies，thoughprovidedwithdifferentfunctions，aretakenasconstitutedfromthesameclass：’thefreelandownersofthehundredaresummonedandthefirststepistocausetwelveofthemtoswearthattheywillmakepresentmentaccordingtothearticles。Afterwardstherestshallbeswornbydozensandbytownships，thattheywillmakelawfulpresentmenttothefirsttwelvejurors。’(34*)Thewordingofthepassagecertainlyleadsonetosupposethatbothsetsofjurorsaretakenfromthefreeholderclass，andthedifferenceonlyliesinthefactthatsomeareselectedtoactasindividuals，andtheresttodosobyrepresentation。TheAssizeofClarendon，whichMrMaitlandhasshowntobeattheoriginofthesheriff’stourn，(35*)willonlystrengthentheinferencethatthetwobodieswereintendedtobelongtothesamefreeclass：
theinquiry，saystheAssize，shallbemadebytwelveofthemostlawfulmenofthecounty，andbyfourofthemostlawfulmenofeverytownship。Whatisthereinthesewordstoshowthatthetwosetsweretobetakenfromdifferentclasses？Anddoesnottheexpression’lawful，’extendingtobothsets，pointtopeoplewhoare’worthyoftheirlaw’thatistofreemen？TheAssizeofClarendonandtheconstitutionofthetournareespeciallyinterestingbecausetheygiveanewbearingtoanoldinstitution：bothdivisionsofthepopulationwhichtheyhaveinviewappearintheordinaryhundredandcountycourt，andinthe’lawday’ofthe’great’hundredinstitutedfortheviewoffrankpledge。Intheordinarycourtthelord，hissteward，andthereeve，priest，andfourmen，interchange，accordingtotheclearstatementofLeg。HenriciI。c。7，thatistosay，thevillistoberepresentedeitherbythelord，orbyhissteward，oragainbythesixmenjustmentioned。Theyarenotcalledoutasrepresentingdifferentclassesandinterests，butasrepresentingthesameterritorialunity。Ifthelandlorddoesnotattendpersonallyorbyhispersonalrepresentative，thesteward，thensixmenfromthetownshipattendinhisplace。Thequestionarisesnaturally，whereisonetolookforthesmallfreeholdersintheenactment？Howevermuchwemayrestricttheirprobablenumber，theirexistencecannotbesimplydeniedordisregarded。
Itdoesnotseemlikelythattheyweretreatedaslandlords(terrarumdomini)，andonecanhardlyescapetheinferencethattheyareincludedinthepopulationofthetownship，whichappearsthroughthemediumofthesixhundredors：anotherhintthattheclassdivisionunderlyingthewholestructuredidnotcoincidewiththefeudaloppositionbetweenfreeholderandvillain。Again，inthegreathundredfortheviewoffrankpledge，whichisdistinguishedfromtheordinaryhundredbyfullerattendance，andnotbyanyfundamentaldifferenceinconstitution，allmenaretoappearwhoare’freeandworthyoftheirwerandtheirwite：’(36*)thisexpressionseemsanequivalenttothe’freeandlawful’menofothercases，andatthesametimeitincludesdistinctlythegreatbulkofthevillainpopulationaspersonallyfree。
Ihavenotbeenable，inthepresentinstance，tokeepclearoftheevidencebelongingtotheintermediateperiodbetweentheSaxonandthefeudalarrangementsofsociety；thisdeviationfromthegeneralrule，accordingtowhichsuchevidenceistobediscussedseparatelyandinconnexionwiththeConquest，wasunavoidableinourcase，becauseitisonlyinthelightofthelawsofHenryIthatsomeimportantfeudalfactscanbeunderstood。inatrialastosuitofcourtbetweentheAbbotofGlastonburyandtwolaylords，thedefendantspleadthattheyareboundtoappearattheAbbot’shundredcourtpersonallyorbyattorneyonlyonthetwolaw-days，whereasforthejudgmentofthievestheirfreemen，theirreevesandministershavetoattendinordertotakepartinthejudgment。(37*)Itisclearlyacaseofsubstitution，liketheonementionedinLeg。Henrici，c。7，andthepointis，thattherepresentativesofthefeearedesignatedasreevesandfreemen。Altogetherthetwocontradictoryaspectsinwhichthehundredorsaremadetoappearcanhardlybeexplainedotherwisethanontheassumptionofafluctuationbetweentheconceptionofthehundredasofanassemblyoffreemen，anditstreatmentundertheinfluenceoffeudalnotionsastosocialdivisions。Inonesensethehundredorsarevillains：theycomefromthevill，representthebulkofitspopulation，whichconsistsofvillains，andaregraduallyputonadifferentfootingfromthegreaterpeoplepresent。Inanothersensetheyarefreemen，andeventreatedasfreeholders，becausetheyformpartofacommunalinstitutionintendedtoincludethefreeclassandtoexcludetheservileclass。(38*)Ifsocietyhadbeenarrangedconsistentlyonthefeudalbasis，therewouldhavebeennoroomfortherepresentationofthevillinsteadofthemanor，fortherepresentationofthevillnowbythelordandnowbyadeputationofpeasants，foraterminologywhichappearstoconfuseorelsetoneglectthedistinctionbetweenfreeandservileholding。Asitis，theintricateconstitutionofthehundred，althoughlargelymodifiedanddifferentiatedbylaterlaw，althoughcutupasitwerebythefeudalprincipleofterritorialservice，looksstillinthemainasanorganisationbasedonthefreedomofthemassofthepeople。(39*)Thefreepeoplehadtoattendvirtually，ifnotactually，andaseriesofcontradictionssprangupfromtheattempttoapplythisprincipletoalegalstatewhichhadalmosteliminatedthenotionoffreedominitstreatmentofpeasantryonvillainland。Asinthesefeudalrelationsallstresslayontenureandnotonstatus，themanorialdocumentsseemtoraisethehundredorsalmostorquitetotherankoffreeholders，althoughinstrictlawtheymayhavebeenvillains。Thenetresultsseemtobe：(1)
thattheadministrativeconstitutionofhundredandcountyisderivedfromasocialsystemwhichdidnotrecognisethefeudaloppositionbetweenfreeholderandvillain；(2)thatwemustlookuponfeudalvillainageasrepresentingtoalargeextentapopulationoriginallyfree；(3)thatthisoriginalfreedomwasnotsimplyoneofpersonalstatus，butactuallyinfluencedtheconceptionoftenureeveninlaterdays。(40*)
Ifinmanorialdocumentsthese’hundredors’occupyasitwereanambiguousposition，thesamemaybesaidofanotherandaveryimportantclass——thesocmen。Thesocagetenurehashadaverycuriousterminologicalhistory。EverybodyknowsthatitappearsinDomesdayasalocalpeculiarityofDanishdistricts；inmodernlawitcametobeageneralnameforanyfreeholdthatwasneitherknightservice，frankalmoign，norgrandsergeanty。Itbecameinfactthenormalandtypicalfreetenure，andassuchitwastreatedbytheActofCharlesIIabolishingmilitarytenure。
Longbeforethis——eveninthethirteenthcentury——’freesocage’wasthenameofafreeholdtenurefullyprotectedbytheKing’sCourts。Verygreatmenoccasionallyheldlandinfreesocage(perliberumsocagium)；theyevenheldoftheKinginchiefbyfreesocage，andthetenurehadmanyadvantages，sinceitwasfreefromtheburdensomeincidentsofwardshipandmarriage。Butnoonewouldhavecalledthesemensocmen(sokemanni，socomanni)。Ontheotherhand，thesocmen，freesocmen，weretohefoundalloverEnglandandnotintheDanishcountryonly。Itisofthetenureofthesesocmenthatwehavetospeaknow。InatrialofEdwardtheFirst’stimethecounseldistinguishthreemannersofpersons——freemen，villains，andsocmen。Theselastaresaidtooccupyanintermediateposition，becausetheyareasstatuliberiinregardtotheirlords。(41*)
