Thedisruptionofpoliticalunityatthetimeofthegreatcivilwar，andthesystematicresumptionofroyalrightsbyHenryII，musthaveledtoasettlementwhichimpairedthesocialstandingofthevillaininthesenseoffeudallaw。TheimmediateconnexionbetweenthelowerclassandtheroyalpowercouldnotbekeptupduringthetroubledreignofStephen，whenEnglandallbutlapsedintothepoliticaldismembermentoftheneighbouringcontinentalstates。GovernmentandlawwererestoredbyHenryII，buthehadtosetalimittohissphereofactioninorderthatwithinthatspherehemightactefficiently。Theverygrowthofthegreatsystemofroyalwritsnecessitatedthedrawingasharplinebetweenthepeopleadmittedtousethemandthoseexcludedfromthisbenefit。Onepartoftherevolutioneffectedbythedevelopmentofroyaljurisdictionisverynoticeableinourdocuments：thestrugglebetweenkingandmagnatesastotherightofjudgingfreeholdershasleftmanytraces，ofwhichthehistoryofthe’brevequodvocaturpraecipe’isperhapsthemostremarkable。Butthevictoriousprogressofroyaljurisdictioninregardtofreeholderswascounter-balancedbyanallbutcompletesurrenderofitinregardtovillains。Thecelebratedtit。29ofWilliamtheConqueror’slawsprovidingthatthecultivatorsofthelandarenottobesubjectedtonewexactions，hadlostitssenseinthereignofHenryII，andsosoonasitwassettledthatoneclassoftenantswastobeprotected，whileanotherwastobeunprotectedintheking’scourt，thelawyerssetthemselvesthinkingovertheproblemofadefiniteandplaindivisionofclasses。Theirworkinthisdirectionbearsallthemarksofafreshdeparture。Theyarewaveringbetweentheformalandthematerialtest：insteadofsettingupatoncetheconvenientdoctrinethatvillainageisprovedbystock，andthatinregardtoserviceandtenurethequestionisdecidedbytheircertaintyoruncertainty，theytryforalongtimetoshapeconclusiverulesastothekindofservicesandincidentswhichimplyvillainage，andforatimedistinctionbetweenrurallabourandrentbecomesespeciallyimportant。
Onthewhole，Ithinkthatananalysisofthelegalandmanorialevidencebelongingtothefeudalageleadsforciblytotheconclusionthatthegeneralclassificationofsocietyunderthetwoheadsoffreeholdersandvillainsisanartificialandalateone。Anumberofimportantgroupsappearbetweenthetwo)
andifwetrytoreducethemtosomeunity，wemaysaythatathirdclassisformedbycustomaryfreeholders。Anotherwayofstatingthesamethingwouldbetosay，thatthefeudalnotionofafreeholdfromwhichthemodernnotionhasdevelopedmustbesupplementedfromthepointofviewofthehistorianbyamoreancientformwhichishidden，asitwere，insidetheclassdistinctionofvillainage。Bythesideofthefreeholderrecognisedbylaterlawtherestandsthevillainasacustomaryfreeholderwhohaslostlegalprotection。Idonotthinkthattheproblemsresultingfromtheambiguouspositionofthefeudalvillaincanbesolvedbetterthanonthesuppositionofthis’thirdestate。’
Chandler，CourtRollsofGreatCressingham，p。14：’20solididetotoHomagioquiarecusaveruntprepararefenumdomini。DebitumponaturinrespectumusqueproximamcuriametintereascrutaturleDomesday。’Amanorialextentisevidentlymeant。Comp。
DomesdayofSt。Paul’s。
ElyInq。，CottonMSS。，Claudius，C。xi。60，a：’Anelipemen，Anelipewymanetcoterellusmanenssuperterramepiscopivelterramalicuiuscustumariorumsuorummetetunamsellioneminautumpnoexconsuetudinequevocaturluuebene。’Cp。42，a，’quilibetanlepimanetanlepiwymanetquiibetundersetlemetetdimidiamacrambladi，’etc。，andRamsey，Cart。i50——Ihavenotbeenabletofindasatisfactoryetymologicalexplanationof，anelipeman，；butheseemsasmalltenant，andsometimessettledonthelandofavillain。
Ofcourseinlatertimesthetestappliedindrawingthelinebetweenfreeholdandbasertenurewasmuchratherthemodeofconveyancethananythingelse。Thecommutationintomoneyrentoflabourservicesduefromatenement，heldbycopyofcourtroll，(acommutationwhichinsomecaseswasnoteffectedbeforethefifteenthcentury)，didnotconvertthetenementintofreehold；
haditdoneso，therewouldhavebeennocopyholdtenureatthepresentday。ButIamherespeakingofthethirteenthcenturywhenthis，conveyancingtest，couldnotbereadilyapplied，whentheself-sameceremonymightberegardedeitherasthefeoffmentbysubinfeudationofafreeholdtenantortheadmittanceofacustomarytenant，therebeingneithercharterontheonehandnorentryonacourtrollontheotherhand。Thusthenatureoftheservicesduefromthetenementhadtobeconsidered，and，atleastingeneral，atenementwhichmerelypaidamoneyrentwasdeemedfreehold。
VillainageinEngland byPaulVinogradoffSecondEssay：TheManorandtheVillageCommunityChapter1
TheOpenFieldSystemandtheHoldingsMyfirstessayhasbeendevotedtothepeasantryoffeudalEnglandinitssocialcharacter。Wehavehadtoexamineitsclassesordivisionsintheirrelationtofreedom，personalslavery，andpraedialserfage。Thelandsystemwastouchedupononlysofarasitinfluencedsuchclassification，orwasinfluencedbyit。
Butnocorrectestimateofthesocialstandingofthepeasantrycanstophere，orcontentitselfwithlegaloradministrativedefinitions。Innodegreeofsocietydomenstandisolated，andadescriptionofindividualstatusalonewouldbethoroughlyincomplete。Menstandarrangedingroupsforeconomicalandpoliticalcooperation，andthesegroupsarecomposedaccordingtothelawsofthedivisionandhierarchicalorganisationoflabour，composed，thatis，ofheterogeneouselements，ofmemberswhohavetofulfildifferentfunctions，andtooccupyhigherandlowerpositions。ThenormalgroupwhichformsasitweretheconstitutivecellofEnglishmediaevalsocietyisthemanor，andwemusttrytomakeoutinwhatwayitwasorganised，andhowitdiditsworkinthethirteenthcentury，atthetimeoffullydevelopedfeudalism。
Thestructureoftheordinarymanorisalwaysthesame。Undertheheadshipofthelordwefindtwolayersofpopulationthevillainsandthefreeholders；andtheterritoryoccupieddividesitselfaccordinglyintodemesneland(1*)and’tributaryland’
(ifImayusethatphrase)oftwodifferentclasses。Thecultivationofthedemesnedependstoacertainextentontheworksuppliedbythetenantsofthetributaryland。Rentsarecollected，laboursupervised，andallkindsofadministrativebusinesstransacted，byasetofmanorialofficersorservants。
Theentirepopulationisgroupedintoavillagecommunitywhichcentresroundthemanorialcourtorhalimote，whichisbothcouncilandtribunal。Myinvestigationwillnecessarilyconformtothistypicalarrangement。Theholdingofthepeasantisthenaturalstarting-point：itwillgiveusthecluetothewholeagrariansystem。Nextmaycomethatpartoftheterritorywhichisnotoccupiedinseveralty，butusedincommon。Theagrarianobligationswithregardtothelordandthecultivationofthedemesnelandmaybetakenupafterwards。Thepositionofprivilegedpeople，eitherservantsorfreeholders，mustbediscussedbyitself，asanexceptionalcase。And，lastly，thequestionwillhavetobeputtowhatextentwerealltheseelementsweldedtogetherinthevillagecommunity，andundertheswayofthemanorialcourt？
Thechieffeaturesofthefield-systemwhichwasinoperationinEnglandduringthemiddleageshavebeensufficientlyclearedupbymodernscholars，especiallybyNasse，ThoroldRogers，andSeebohm，andthereisnoneedfordwellingatlengthonthesubject。EverybodyknowsthatthearableofanEnglishvillagewascommonlycultivatedunderathreeyears’rotationofcrops；(2*)atwofieldsystemisalsofoundveryoften；(3*)therearesomeinstancesofmorecomplexarrangements，(4*)buttheyareveryrare，andappearlate-notearlierthanthefourteenthcentury。WalterofHenley’streatiseonfarming，whichappearstobelongtothefirsthalfofthethirteenth，mentionsonlythefirsttwosystems，anditsestimateoftheplough-landisbasedonthem。Inthecaseofathreefieldrotationahundredandeightyacresarereckonedtotheplough；ahundredandsixtyinasystemoftwocourses。(5*)Wefindthesameestimateinthechaptersonhusbandryandmanagementofanestatewhichareinsertedinthelaw-bookknownasFleta。(6*)Thestripsinthefieldsbelongingtotheseveraltenantsweredividedbynarrowbalksofturf，andwhenthefieldlayfallow，oraftertheharvesthadbeenremoved，theentirefieldwasturnedintoacommonpasturefortheuseofthevillagecattle。Thewholeareawasprotectedbyaninclosurewhileitwasundercrop。
Acuriousdeviationisapparentinthefollowinginstance，takenfromthecartularyofMalmesbury。TheAbbeymakesanexchangewithaneighbourwhohasrightsofcommononsomeoftheconvent’sland，andthereforedoesnotallowofitsbeingcultivatedandinclosed(inhocfacere)。InreturnforcertainconcessionsonthepartoftheAbbey，thisneighbouringowneragreesthatfallowpastureshouldbeturnedintoarableontheconditionthataftertheharvestitshouldreturntocommonuse，aswellasthelandnotactuallyunderseed。LastlycomesaprovisionaboutthevillainsofthepersonenteringintoagreementwiththeAbbey：iftheydonotwanttoconformtothenewarrangementofcultivation，theywillbeadmittedtotheirstripsforthepurposeofploughinguporusingthefallow。(7*)
Thecaseisinterestingintworespects：itshowstheintimateconnexionbetweentheconstructionoftheinclosure(inhoc)andtheraisingofthecrop；thespecialparagraphaboutthevillainsgivesustounderstandthatsomethingmorethantheusualrotationofcropswasmeant：the’inhokare’appearsinoppositioneithertotheordinaryploughingupofthefallow，orinageneralsensetoitsuseforpasture；itseemstoindicateextra-cultivationofsuchlandasoughttohaveremaineduncultivated。Theseconsiderationsareborneoutbyotherdocuments。InatrialofEdwardI’stimethe’inheche’isexplainedinasmanywordsastheploughingupoffallowforacropofwheat，oats，orbarley。(8*)TheGloucesterSurvey，indescribingoneofthemanorsbelongingtotheAbbey，arrangesitslandintofourfields(campi)，eachconsistingofseveralparts：
thefirstfieldissaidtocontain174acres，thesecond63，thethird109，thefourth69acres。Two-thirdsofthewholearesubjectedtotheusualmodesofcultivationunderathree-coursesystem，andone-thirdremainsforpasture。Butoutofthislastthird，40acresofthefirstfield(of174acres)getinclosedandusedforcropinoneyear，and20acresofthesecondinanother。(9*)Inthiswaytheordinarythree-coursealternationbecomessomewhatmorecomplicated，anditwillbehardlytooboldaguesstosupposethatsuchextra-cultivationimpliedsomemanuringofsuchpatchesasweredeprivedoftheirusualrestonceinthreeyears。Incontradictiontothecustomaryarrangementwhichdidnotrequireanyspecialmanuringexceptthatwhichwasincidenttotheuseofarableaspastureforthecattleaftertheharvest，wefindplotssetapartformoreintensecultivation，(10*)anditistobenoticedthatthereckoninginconnexionwiththemdoesnotstartfromthedivisionaccordingtothreeparts，butsupposesaseparateclassificationintwosections。
AnotherfactworthnoticingintheGloucesterinstanceistheirregulardistributionofacresinthe’fields，’andthedivisionoftheentirearableintofourunequalparts。Thehusbandryisconductedonthethree-coursesystem，andstillfourfieldsarementioned，andthereisnosimplerelationbetweenthenumberofacreswhichtheyrespectivelycontain(174，63，109，69)。Itseemsobviousthattheexpression’field’(campus)isusedherenotintheordinarysensesuggestedbysuchrecordsasspring-field，winter-field，andthelike，butinreferencetothetopographyofthedistrict。Thewholeterritoryundercultivationwasdividedintoanumberofsquaresorfurlongswhichlayroundthevillageinfourlargegroups。ThealternationofcropsdistributedthesameareaintothreeaccordingtoamodenotdescribedbytheSurvey，anditlooksproVableatfirstglancethateachofthe’fields’(campi)containedelementsofallthreecourses。Thesuppositionbecomesacertainty，ifwereflectthatitgivestheonlypossibleexplanationofthewayinwhichthetwofoldalternationofthe’inhoc’ismadetofitwiththethreefoldrotationofcrops：everyyearsomeofthelandineachcampushadtoremaininfallow，andcouldbeinclosedortakenunder’inhoc。’Hadthecampusasawholebeenreservedforoneofthethreecourses，therewouldhavebeenroomforthe’inhoc’
onlyeverythreeyears。
Ihavegoneintosomedetailsinconnexionwiththisinstancebecauseitpresentsadeviationfromordinaryrules，andevenadeviationfromtheusualphraseology，anditisprobablethattheexceptionaluseofwordsdependedontheexceptionalprocessoffarming。Anewspeciesofarable——themanuredplotunder’inhoc’——cameintouse，andnaturallydisturbedtheplainarrangementoftheold-fashionedthreecourses；thelandshadtobegroupedanewintofoursectionswhichwentundertheaccustomeddesignationof’fields，’althoughtheydidnotfitinwiththe’threefields’oftheoldsystem。Inmostcases，however，ourrecordsusetheword’field’(campus)inthatverysenseoflandunderoneofthe’courses，’whichisoutofthequestioninthecasetakenfromtheGloucesterCartulary。Thecommonuseisespeciallyclearwhenthedocumentswanttodescribetheholdingofaperson，andmentionthenumberofacresineach’field。’TheAbbotofMalmesbury，e。g。，enfeoffsoneRobertwithavirgateformerlyheld’inthefields’byA。，twenty-oneacresinonefieldandtwenty-oneinanother。(11*)Thecharterdoesnotcontainanydescriptionofcampiintheterritorialsense，anditisevidentthattheexpression’inthefields’ismeanttoindicateacustomaryandwell-knownhusbandryarrangement。Thesamemeaningmustbeputonsentenceslikethefollowing：——R。A。holdsavirgateconsistingofforty-twoacresinbothfields。(12*)Thequestionmayberaisedwhetherwehavetolookfor’bothfields’inthewinterandspringfieldofthethreecoursesrotation，orinthearableandfallowofthetwocourses。Inthefirstoftheseeventualities，thethirdreservedforpastureandrestwouldbeleftoutofthereckoning；itwouldbetreatedasanappurtenanceofthelandthatwasincultivation。Casesinwhichtheportionsintheseveralfieldsareunequalseemtopointtothesecondsense。(13*)Itwasimpossibletodividethewholeterritoryundercultivationlikeapieceofpaper：conformationofthesoilhad，ofcourse，muchtodowiththeshapeofthefurlongsandtheirdistribution，andthecoursesofthehusbandrycouldnotimpressthemselvesonitwithoutsomeinequalitiesandstrayremnants。Itmayhappenforthisreasonthatamanholdssixteenacresinonefieldandfourteenintheother。Thereisalmostalways，however，acertaincorrespondencebetweenthenumberofacresineachfield；
