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)Seebohm, Frederic
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 (Reprinted from the Fourth Edition)
Seebohm, Frederic
Village communities -- Great Britain
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.»
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account