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
In the first place, ancient Welsh ploughing was evidently not like
the classical ploughing of the sunny south, a mere scratching of the
ground with a light plough, which one or two horses or oxen could
draw. In the Welsh laws a team of eight oxen, as already said, is
assumed to be necessary. And hence the necessity of co-operative
ploughing. The plough was evidently heavy and the ploughing deep,
just as was the case in [p123] the twelfth century, and probably
from still earlier to quite modern times in Scotland, where, as we
have seen, the plough was of the same heavy kind, and the team of
eight or of twelve oxen. And it is curious to observe that the Welsh,
like the Scotch oxen in modern times, were driven four abreast,
_i.e._ yoked four to a yoke. So that, as already suggested, the
plough was aptly described by the monks in their mediæval Latin as a
'caruca,' and the ploughed land as a 'carucate.'
«and the strips go with the oxen.»
But the most interesting point about the ancient Welsh co-operative
ploughing was the fact that the key to a share in the produce was
the contribution of one or more oxen to the team. He who contributed
one ox was entitled to one erw in the twelve. He who contributed
two oxen was entitled to two erws. He who contributed a whole yoke
of four oxen would receive four erws, while only the _owner_ of the
full team of eight oxen could possibly do without the co-operation
of others in ploughing. Surely this Welsh evidence satisfactorily
verifies the hypothesis already suggested by the term _bovate_, and
by the allotment of two oxen as outfit to the yard-land or virgate,
and by the taking of tithes in the shape of every tenth strip as it
was traversed by the plough, and lastly by the order of rotation in
the strips disclosed by the Winslow example.
It explains how the possession of the oxen came to be in Saxon, as
probably in still earlier British or Roman times, the key to the
position of the holder, and his rank in the hierarchy of the village
community. And it points to the Saxon system of hides and yard-lands
having possibly sprung naturally out [p124] of pre-existing British
or Roman arrangements, rather than as having been a purely Saxon
importation.
«Hence the yard-land became a bundle of scattered strips.»
It also suggests a ready explanation of how when the common tillage
died out, and the strips included in a hide, yard-land, or virgate,
instead of varying with each year's arrangements of the plough teams,
became occupied by the villein tenant year after year in permanent
possession, there would naturally be left, as a survival of the
ancient system, that now meaningless and inconvenient scattering of
the strips forming a holding all over the open fields which in modern
times so incensed Arthur Young, and made the Enclosure Acts necessary.
«The strip the day's ploughing.»
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