The Saxons in England, Volume 1 (of 2): A history of the English commonwealth till the period of the Norman conquestKemble, John Mitchell
History
The Saxons in England, Volume 1 (of 2): A history of the English commonwealth till the period of the Norman conquest
Kemble, John Mitchell
Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066
I shall now proceed to reverse the order of proceeding which has
hitherto been adopted, and to show that the hypothesis of the hide
having comprised from thirty to thirty-three acres is the only one which
will answer the conditions found in various grants: that in a number of
cases from very different parts of England, a larger number of acres
would either be impossible or most improbable: that it is entirely
impossible for the hide to have reached 120 or even 100 acres, and that
the amount left after deducting the arable, to form pastures and
meadows, is by no means extravagant. The examples are taken from
different charters printed in the Codex Diplomaticus Ævi Saxonici, and
for convenience of reference are arranged tabularly. The comparison is
made with the known acreage, taken from the Parliamentary return of
1841[174]. The table is constructed upon the following plan. The first
column contains the name of the place; the second, the number of hides;
the third, the actual acreage; the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and
eighth, the hides calculated at thirty, thirty-two, thirty-three, forty
and one hundred acres respectively; the ninth, tenth, eleventh and
twelfth, the excess of real over supposed acreage, at the first four
amounts; the thirteenth, the excess of hidage over real acreage on the
hypothesis of one hundred acres per hide; the fourteenth, fifteenth,
sixteenth and seventeenth, the ratios of hidage at thirty, thirty-two,
thirty-three and forty, to the excess, from which we deduce the
proportion between the arable, and the meadow, pasture and waste. In a
few instances, there is a double return, implying that it is uncertain
to which, of two synonymous districts, a grant must be referred.
-----
Footnote 174:
Enumeration Abstract, etc., 1841. I have also used the tables found in
Mr. Porter’s Progress of the Nation; in these however, the total
acreage, calculated apparently upon the square miles, differs slightly
from the results of the Government inquiry, Mr. Porter’s numbers
always exceeding those of the _Blue-book_.
-----
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