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
It is possible that just as villein tenants could hold in free
tenure land in the lord's demesne, so free men might hold virgates
in villenage and retain their personal freedom; but those at all
events of the holders of virgates who were _nativi_, _i.e._ villeins
by descent were _adscripti glebæ_. They held their holdings at the
will of the lord, and were bound to perform the customary services.
If they allowed their houses to [p030] get out of repair they were
guilty of _waste_, and the jury were fined if they did not report the
neglect.[23]
Yet the entries in the rolls prove that their holdings were
hereditary, passing by the lord's re-grant from father to son by
the rule of primogeniture, on payment of the customary heriot or
relief.[24]
Widows had dower, and widowers were _tenants by the curtesy_, as in
the case of freeholds. The holders in villenage, even 'nativi,' could
make wills which were proved before the _cellerarius_ of the abbey,
and had done so time out of mind, while the wills of free tenants
were proved at St. Albans.[25]
These things all look like a certain recognition of freedom within
the restraints of the villenage. But if the 'nativi' married without
the lord's consent they were fined. If they sold an ox without
licence, again they were fined. If they left the manor without
licence they were searched for, and if found arrested as fugitives
and brought back.[26] If their daughters lost their chastity[27] the
lord again had his fine. And [p031] in all these cases the whole
jury were fined if they neglected to report the delinquent.
«But their serfdom is breaking up.»
Their services were no doubt limited and defined by custom, and so
late as the reign of Edward III. mostly discharged by a money payment
in lieu of the actual service, but they rested nominally on the will
of the lord; and sometimes to test their obedience the relaxed rein
was tightened, and trivial orders were issued, such as that they
should go off to the woods and pick nuts for the lord.[28] In case
of dispute a court was held under the great ash tree at St. Albans,
and the decision of this superior manorial court at head-quarters
settled the question.[29] This villenage of the Winslow tenants was,
no doubt, in the fourteenth century mild in its character; the silent
working of economic laws was breaking it up; but it was villenage
still. It was serfdom, but it was serfdom in the last stages of its
relaxation and decay.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account