Part 49
[1302] So again, if a _iugum_ is quartered, its quarter can be called a virgate. See Denman Ross, Hist. of Landholding, 140; Round, Feudal England, 108.
[1303] See above, p. 372.
[1304] K. 205 (i. 259): 'circiter 30 iugera.'--K. 217 (i. 274): '30 iugera.'--K. 225 (i. 290): 'hoc est 30 iugerum' ... 'hoc est 85 segetum.'--K. 234 (i. 308): '150 iugera.'--K. 241 (ii. 1): '24 iugeras.'--K. 259 (ii. 26): '19 iugera.'--K 264 (ii. 36): 'unum dimidium agrum ... healve aker.'--K. 276 (ii. 57): '10 iugera.'--K. 285 (ii. 70): '80 æcra.'--K. 339 (ii. 150): 'sextig æcera earðlondes ... oðer sextig.'--K. 586 (iii. 118): '30 æcra on ðæm twæm feldan.'--K. 612 (iii. 159): '2 hida buton 60 æcran.'--K. 633 (iii. 188): '3 mansas ac 30 iugerum dimensionem.'--K. 695 (iii. 295): '40 agros.'--K. 759 (iv. 59): '30 akera.'--K. 782 (iv. 106): 'fiftig æcera.'--K. 1154 (v. 303): '36 ækera yrðlandes.'--K. 1161 (v. 315): 'ter duodenas segetes' = '36 æcera yrðlandes.'--K. 1211 (v. 393): '25 segetes.'--K. 1218 (vi. 1): '14 hida and ... 40 æcera.'
[1305] Probably it occurs in Ine 67; certainly in Rectitudines 4, § 3, and in the late document about Tidenham (above, p. 330).--K. 369 (ii. 205): Boundary of a _gyrd_ at Ashurst which belongs to a hide at Topsham (A.D. 937).--K. 521 (ii. 418): Edgar grants 'tres virgas.'--K. 658 (iii. 229): Æthelred grants '3 mansas et 3 perticas.'--K. 1306 (vi. 163): Æthelred grants land 'trium sub aestimatione perticarum.'--K. 772 (iv. 84): Edward Conf. grants '5 perticas.'--K. 787 (iv. 115): He grants 'unam perticam et dimidiam.'--K. 814 (iv. 160): He grants 'dimidiam virgam et dimidiam quatrentem.'--Crawford Charters, 5, 9, mortgage in 1018 of a yard of land.--K. 949 (iv. 284); 979 (iv. 307): two other examples from the eve of the Conquest.--It is more likely that these 'yards' and 'perches' of land are quarter-hides than that they are quarter-acres; 'square' perches seem to be out of the question. There are of course many instances in the charters of a _pertica_, _virga_, _gyrd_ used as a measure of mere length. See above, p. 375, note 1266, where a few are cited.
[1306] Meitzen, op. cit. 74. In Germany the _Hufe_, _hoba_, _huoba_, _huba_, _etc._ is the unit. This word is said to be connected with the modern German _Behuf_, our _behoof_; it is the _sors_, the portion that behoves a man. In Sweden, the unit is the _Mantal_, a man's share. The last word about the _tenmannetale_ of Yorkshire has not been said.
[1307] K. 633 (iii. 188).
[1308] K. 612 (iii. 159): 'landes sumne dæl, ðæt synd 2 hida, buton 60 æcran ðæt hæft se arcebisceop genumen into Cymesige to his hame him to hwætelande.'
[1309] Rot. Hund. ii. 575. After going through the whole calculation, I have satisfied myself that the sum is worked in this way.
[1310] Hence in our law Latin the word _terra_ means arable land. To claim _unam acram terrae_ when you meant an acre of meadow (_prati_) would have been a fatal error.
[1311] K. 1222 (vi. 12); T. 508: 'And ic Æðelgar an an hide lond ðes ðe Æulf hauede be hundtuelti acren, ateo so he wille.' Kemble, Saxons, 117.
[1312] See above, p. 386, note 1304.
[1313] There can be little need of examples. Glastonbury Rentalia, 152: 'S. tenet unam virgatam terrae et dimidiam, quae computantur pro una virgata.' Ibid. p. 160: 'H. tenet unam virgatam et 5 acras, quae omnia computantur pro una virgata.' Worcester Register, 62: A virgate consists of 13 acres in one field and 12-1/2 in the other; the next virgate of 16 acres in one field and 12 in the other. In other cases the numbers are 16 and 14; 14-5/8 and 11; 13 and 12-1/2; 14 and 11; 14-3/4 and 11-1/4. Yet every virgate is a virgate.
[1314] At the date of Domesday we are a long way from the first danegeld and a very long way from any settlement of Cambridgeshire; still if we analyze a symmetrical hundred, such as Armingford, we shall find that the average ten-hide vill is just about twice as rich as the average five-hide vill in men, in teams and in annual _valet_, though there will be some wide aberrations from this norm.
[1315] See above, p. 336, note 1160.
[1316] See above, p. 237.
[1317] This is proved by 'The Burghal Hidage' of which we spoke above, p. 187, and shall speak again hereafter.
[1318] See the Gerefa published by Dr Liebermann in Anglia, ix. 251. Andrews, Old English Manor, 246.
[1319] The manner in which the old hides have really fallen to pieces but are preserving a notional existence is well illustrated by Domesday of St. Paul's, 41-47. In one case a hide forms nine tenements containing respectively 30, 30, 15, 15, 5, 5, 7-1/2, 5, 7-1/2 acres. See Vinogradoff, Villainage, 249.
[1320] Vinogradoff, Villainage, 242; Maitland, History of an English Manor, Eng. Hist. Rev. ix. 418.
[1321] See Pell, in Domesday Studies, i. 357. Almost at one and the same moment, but in two different 'extents,' the same tenements are being described as containing 15 and as containing 18 acres. Domesday of St. Paul's, 69: 'In this manor the hide contains 120 acres; the old inquest said that it used not to contain more than 80; but afterwards the lands were sought out and measured (_exquisitae sunt terrae et mensuratae_).'
[1322] Cart. Rams. iii. 208. See also the table given by Seebohm, op. cit. 37.
[1323] A 'double hide' of 240 acres plays a part in Mr Seebohm's speculations. His instances of it hardly bear examination. On p. 37 he produces from Rot. Hund. ii. 629 the equation 1 H.=6 V. of 40 A. apiece. This apparently refers to the Ramsey manor of Brington; but Cart. Rams. ii. 43 gives 1 H.=4 V. of 40 A., while Cart. Rams. iii. 209 gives 1 H.=4 V. of 34 A. Then Mr Seebohm, p. 51, cites from 'the documents of Battle Abbey given by Dugdale' the equation 1 H.=8 V.; but this seems to refer to the statement now printed in the Battle Cartulary (Camd. Soc.) p. xiii., where 1 H.=4 V. As to the supposed _solanda_ of two hides, see Round, Feudal England, 103.
[1324] The virgates on the Gloucestershire manors of Gloucester Abbey contain the following numbers of acres: 36, 40, 36, 38, 48, 48, 48, 48, 50, 48, 40, 64, 64, 64, 48, 50, 60, 48, 48, 64, 18 (?), 44, 80, 48, 48, 72. See Gloucester Cartulary, vol. iii. Of the taxation and wealth of the various counties we shall speak hereafter.
[1325] Napier and Stevenson, Crawford Charters, p. 47: The O. E. _sulh_ (plough) is 'cognate with Lat. _sulcus_.'
[1326] Both terms were in use in Normandy and some other parts of France: Delisle, Études, 538; also Ducange. In a would-be English charter of the days before the Conquest these words would be ground for suspicion. In K. 283 and 455 Kemble has printed (in documents which he stigmatizes) _caractorum_. But apparently (see B. ii. 104, iii. 94) what stands in the cartulary is _carattorum_, and this seems a mistake for the common _casatorum_. To mistake O. E. _s_ for _r_ is easy.
[1327] See Stevenson, E. H. R. v. 143.
[1328] In D. B. the _iugum_ appears as a portion of a _solin_; probably as a quarter of the solin. D. B. i. 13: 'pro uno solin se defendit. Tria iuga sunt infra divisionem Hugonis et quartum iugum est extra.' The _iugum_ has already appeared in a few Kentish land-books. In K. 199 (i. 249), B. i. 476, we find _an ioclet_ which seems to be half a manse (_mansiuncula_). In K. 407 (iii. 262), B. ii. 572, we find 'an iuclæte et insuper 10 segetes (_acres_).'
[1329] D. B. ii. 389: 'In Cratingas 24 liberi homines 1 carr. terrae et 1 virg.'
[1330] Yorkshire Inquisitions (Yorks. Archæeol. Soc.) passim. On p. 77 in an account of Catterick we read of 'a capital messuage worth 5_s._; 32 bovates of arable land in demesne (each bovate of 6 acres at 8_s._) £12. 16_s._; 31-1/2 bovates held by bondmen (each bovate of 10 acres at 13_s._ 4_d._) £21; ... 2 bovates which contain 24 acres and 32 acres called Inland worth 74_s._ 8_d._'
[1331] See above, p. 375.
[1332] A bovate of 13 acres seems to have prevailed in Scotland: Acts of Parliament of Scotland, i. 387.
[1332] The immediate source is the Seneschaucie. See Walter of Henley, ed. Lamond, p. 84. Fleta, p. 159.
[1334] Walter of Henley, pp. 6, 8, 44-5. With a three-course system the figures will be somewhat different. Plough 60 acres for winter seed, 60 for spring seed, 60 for fallow (total 180) at the rate of 7/8th of an acre per day:--Total, 205-6/7 days. In second fallowing plough 60 acres at an acre per day:--Grand total, 265-5/7 days. Whichever system is adopted, the plough 'goes' 240 acres.
[1335] Walter of Henley, p. 13.
[1336] Domesday of St. Paul's, 38.
[1337] Meitzen, op. cit. i. 277; Andrews, op. cit. 260.
[1338] Gerefa, 9 (Anglia, ix. 261): 'Me mæig in Maio and Junio and Julio on sumera fealgian.' Andrews, op. cit. 257.
[1339] Thus e.g. Domesday of St. Paul's, 59, Tillingham. Is it possible to fallow, when, as in this case, there is no pasture for the oxen except such as is afforded by the idle field? 'Non est ibi pastura nisi cum quiescit dominicum per wainagium.... (69) Non est ibi certa pastura nisi quando terrae dominici quiescunt alternatim incultae.'
§ 2. _Domesday Statistics._
[Domesday's three statements.]
As a general rule the account given by Domesday Book of any manor contains three different statements about it which seem to have some bearing upon the subject of our present inquiry. (_A_) It will tell us that the manor is rated to the geld at a certain number of units, which units will in Kent be solins or sulungs and yokes (_iuga_), in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Norfolk and Suffolk carucates and bovates (but bovates are, to say the least, rare in East Anglia), and in the rest of England hides and virgates; but acres also will from time to time appear in the statement. (_B_) It will tell us that the manor contains land for a certain number of teams, or for a certain number of oxen. (_C_) It will tell us that there are on the manor a certain number of teams, some whereof belong to the lord and some to the men.
TABLE I. STATISTICS
Recorded Danegeld Hides, Modern Population circ. ann. Carucates, Acreage (Ellis) 1150 Sulungs
I II III IV £ _s._ _d._
Kent 975,820 12,205 105 16 10 1,224 Sussex 932,733 10,410 217 0 6 3,474 Surrey 461,230 4,383 179 16 0 1,830 Hampshire 1,037,764 10,373 184 15 4 2,588 Berkshire 461,742 6,324 205 11 4 2,473 Wiltshire 880,248 10,150 389 13 0 4,050 Dorset 632,272 7,807 248 5 0 2,277 [7,512 E] [2,321 E] Somerset 1,042,488 13,764 277 10 4 2,936 [13,307 E] [2,951 E] Devon 1,667,097 17,434 103 19 8 1,119 Cornwall 868,208 5,438 22 15 0 155 Middlesex 180,480(?) 2,302 85 12 0 868 Hertford 406,932 4,927 110 1 4 1,050 Buckingham 475,094 5,420 204 14 7 2,074 Oxford 485,322 6,775 249 16 5 2,412 Gloucester 796,731 8,366 194 1 6 2,388 Worcester 480,342 4,625 101 6 0 1,189 Hereford 537,363 5,368 93 15 6 1,324 Cambridge 549,565 5,204 114 15 0 1,233 Huntingdon 233,928 2,914 71 5 0 747 Bedford 298,494 3,875 110 12 0 1,193 Northampton 639,541 8,441 119 10 9 1,356 Leicester 528,986 6,772 100 0 0 2,500(?) Warwick 578,595 6,574 128 12 6 1,338 Stafford 749,713 3,178 45 1 0 505 [499 E] Shropshire 859,516 5,080 117 18 6 1,245 Chester [655,036] 2,349 0 0 0 512 Derby 657,550 3,041 } 112 1 11 { 679 Nottingham 539,752 5,686 } { 567 Rutland [97,273] 862 11 12 0 37 York [3,888,351] 8,055 165 9 5 10,095 Lincoln 1,694,907 25,305 266 0 0 4,188 Essex 985,545 16,060 236 8 0 2,650 Norfolk 1,315,092 27,087 330 2 2 [2,422] Suffolk 947,742 20,491 235 0 8
Hides Gelding Valet T. R. W. Teamlands Teams (Pearson)
V VI VII VIII
£ _s._ _d._
3,102 5,140 9 10 Kent 2,241 3,091 3,255 7 4 Sussex 706 1,172 1,142 1,524 4 9 Surrey 1,572 2,847 2,614 Hampshire 1,338 2,087 1,796 2,383 16 1 Berkshire 3,457 2,997 Wiltshire 2,303 1,762 2,656 9 8 Dorset [2,332 E] [3,359 12 9E] 4,858 3,804 Somerset [4,812 E] [4,161 4 7E] 7,972 5,542 3,220 14 3 Devon 399 2,377 1,187 662 1 4 Cornwall 664 545 754 7 8 Middlesex 1,716 1,406 1,541 13 11 Hertford 2,244 1,952 1,813 7 9 Buckingham 2,639 2,467 3,242 2 11 Oxford 3,768 2,827 6 8 Gloucester 1,889 991 0 6 Worcester 2,479 Hereford 1,676 1,443 Cambridge 1,120 967 864 15 4 Huntingdon 1,557 1,367 1,096 12 2 Bedford 2,931 2,422 1,843 0 7 Northampton 1,817 736 3 0 Leicester 2,276 2,003 1,359 13 8 Warwick 1,398 951 [516 16 3E] Stafford
1,755 Shropshire Chester 762 862 461 4 0 Derby 1,255 1,991 Nottingham Rutland York 5,043 4,712 Lincoln 3,920 4,784 10 8 Essex 4,853 4,154 11 7 Norfolk Suffolk
TABLE II. AVERAGES.
Acreage Acreage Acreage Population div. by div. by div. by div. by population teamlands teams teamlands
IX X XI XII
Kent 79 314 Sussex 89 301 Surrey 105 393 403 3·7 Hampshire 100 364 397 3·6 Berkshire 73 221 257 3·0 Wiltshire 86 254 293 2·9 Dorset 80 274 358 3·3 Somerset 75 214 274 2·8 Devon 95 209 300 2·1 Cornwall 159 365 731 2·2 Middlesex 78 271 331 3·4 Hertford 82 237 289 2·8 Buckingham 87 211 243 2·4 Oxford 71 183 196 2·5 Gloucester 95 211 Worcester 103 254 Hereford 100 216 Cambridge 105 327 380 3·1 Huntingdon 80 208 241 2·6 Bedford 77 191 218 2·4 Northampton 75 218 264 2·8 Leicester 78 291 Warwick 88 254 288 2·8 Stafford 235 536 788 2·2 Shropshire 169 489 Chester [278] Derby 216 862 762 3·9 Nottingham 94 430 271 4·4 Rutland [112] York [482] Lincoln 66 336 359 5·0 Essex 61 251 Norfolk 48 270 Suffolk 46
Experimental valet Total valet of teamland Population Teamlands div. by [or of land div. by div. by teamlands tilled by teams teams [or by teams] team]
XIII XIV XV XVI
£ _s._ _d._ £ _s._ _d._
3·9 [1 13 1] 1 14 11 Kent 3·3 [1 1 0] 0 18 3 Sussex 3·8 1·02 1 6 0 1 0 8 Surrey 3·9 1·08 1 2 6 Hampshire 3·5 1·16 1 2 4 1 2 10 Berkshire 3·3 1·15 1 4 4 Wiltshire 4·4 1·30 1 3 0 1 6 8 Dorset 3·6 1·27 0 15 9 Somerset 3·1 1·43 0 8 0 0 5 3 Devon 4·5 2·00 0 5 6 0 3 8 Cornwall 4·2 1·21 1 2 8 1 1 1 Middlesex 3·5 1·22 0 17 11 0 13 11 Hertford 2·7 1·14 0 16 1 0 13 6 Buckingham 2·7 1·06 1 4 6 1 0 8 Oxford 2·2 [0 15 0] [0 16 1] Gloucester 2·4 [0 10 5] [0 10 7] Worcester 2·1 [0 9 11] Hereford 3·6 1·16 1 2 9 Cambridge 3·0 1·15 0 15 5 0 12 2 Huntingdon 2·8 1·13 0 14 1 0 15 4 Bedford 3·4 1·21 0 9 9 Northampton 3·7 0 9 8 Leicester 3·2 1·13 0 11 11 0 10 10 Warwick 3·3 1·47 0 7 4 0 8 8 Stafford 2·8 [0 7 2] Shropshire Chester 3·5 0·88 0 12 1 0 11 7 Derby 2·8 0·63 0 3 6 Nottingham Rutland York 5·3 1·07 0 17 6 Lincoln 4?0 [1 4 4] Essex 5?5 [0 17 1] Norfolk Suffolk
[Northern formulas.]
We may begin our investigation with a formula common in Derbyshire.
In M [place name] habuit K [man's name] _a_ car[ucatas] terrae ad geldum. Terra _b_ car[ucarum _or_ carucis]. Ibi nunc in dominio _d_ car[ucae] et ... villani et ... bordarii habent _e_ car[ucas].
The Lincolnshire formula is perhaps yet plainer. Instead of saying 'Terra _b_ car[ucarum],' it says, 'Terra ad _b_ car[ucas].' Still more instructive is a formula used in Yorkshire.
In M habuit K _a_ car[ucatas] terrae ad geldum ubi possunt esse _b_ car[ucae]. Nunc habet ibi K _d_ car[ucas] et ... villanos et ... bordarios cum _e_ car[ucis].
As a variant on the phrase 'ubi possunt esse _b_ car[ucae],' we have, 'quas potest arare 1 car[uca],' or 'has possunt arare _b_ car[ucae][1340].'
The teams on the demesne (_d_) and the teams of the tenants (_e_) are enumerated separately. The total number of the teams (_d_ + _e_) we will call _c_.
Now occasionally we may find an entry concerning which the following equation will hold good: _a_ = _b_ = _c_: in other words, the same number will stand for the carucates at which the manor is taxed, the 'teamlands' that there are in it (or to put it another way the number of teams that 'can be there,' or the number of teams that 'can plough it'[1341]) and also for the teams that are actually to be found there. Thus:--
Terra Roberti de Todeni.... In Ulestanestorp habuit Leuricus 4 car[ucatas] terrae ad geldum. Terra totidem car[ucis]. Ibi habet Robertus in dominio 1 car[ucam] et 6 villanos et 3 bordarios et 8 sochemannos habentes 3 car[ucas][1342].
Here _a_ = _b_ = _c_. But entries so neat as this are not very common. In the first place, the number (_c_) of teams often exceeds or falls short of the number (_b_) of 'teamlands,' or, which is the same thing, the number of teams that there 'can be.' An excess of 'teamlands' over teams is common. In some parts of Yorkshire and elsewhere instead of reading that there are so many teams, we read 'modo vasta est':--there are no oxen there at all. But the reverse of this case is not very uncommon. Thus we may be told that there are 3 carucates for geld, that 'there can be there 2 teams' and that there are 4 teams[1343]; we may find a manor that contains land for but 3 teams equipped with as many as 7[1344]. As to the relation between _a_ and _b_, this is not fixed. On one and the same page we may find that _a_ is equal to, greater and less than _b_. Thus in Lincolnshire[1345]:
In Colebi habuit Siuuard 7 car. terrae ad geldum. Terra ad totidem car.
In Cherchebi habuit Comes Morcar 5 car. terrae ad geldum. Terra ad 4 car.
In Bodebi habuit Comes Morcar 8 car. terrae ad geldum. Terra ad 9 car.
[Southern formulas.]
Leaving now for a while the carucated part of England and postponing our visit to Kent, we find similar formulas. They tell us (_A_) that the manor contains a certain number of units of assessment, (_B_) that there is land for a certain number of teams, (_C_) that there are so many teams upon it. But we have a new set of units of assessment; instead of carucates and bovates, we have hides and virgates. The Huntingdonshire formula is particularly clear. It runs thus:
In M habet K _a_ hidas ad geldum. Terra _b_ car[ucarum _or_ carucis]. Ibi nunc in dominio _d_ car[ucae] et ... villani et ... bordarii habentes _e_ car[ucas].
The number of hides that is put before us is the number of hides 'for geld.' So in Cheshire and Shropshire the number of hides that is put before us is the number of 'hidae geld[antes].' From this we easily pass to the formula that prevails in Wiltshire, Dorset, Somerset and Devon:
K tenet M. T[empore] R[egis] E[dwardi] geldabat pro _a_ hidis. Terra est _b_ car[ucarum]. In dominio sunt _d_ car[ucae] et ... villani et ... bordarii cum _e_ car[ucis].
A formula common in Sussex, Surrey and several other counties instead of telling us that this manor has _a_ hides for geld, or has _a_ gelding hides, or gelds for _a_ hides, tells us--what seems exactly the same thing--that it 'defends itself' for _a_ hides. Then we pass to counties such as Middlesex, Hertford, Buckingham and Oxford where the entry does not commonly use any words which explicitly refer to geld:--we are told that K holds M for so many hides (pro _a_ hidis). Lastly, we may pass to counties, such as Warwickshire and Staffordshire where, at first sight, the entries may seem to us ambiguous. They run thus--'K holds M. There are there _a_ hides. There is land for _b_ teams.' Here for a moment it may seem to us that we have two different statements about the actual extent or capacity of the manor:--there are _a_ hides there, but land for _b_ teams. But comparing the formulas in use here with those in use in other counties, we can hardly doubt that they all come to one and the same thing:--a statement about _b_, the capacity of the manor, is preceded by a statement about its taxation, which statement may take the short form, 'There are _a_ hides there,' instead of one of the longer forms, 'It gelds, or defends itself, for _a_ hides,' or 'He holds _a_ gelding hides, or _a_ hides for geld.'
[Kentish formulas.]
In Kent again, we have the three statements, though here the units of assessment are sulungs and yokes:--the land 'defends itself' for _a_ sulungs; there is land there for _b_ teams; there are _d_ teams in demesne and the men have _e_ teams.
[Relation between the three statements.]
In the hidated south, as in the carucated north, the relation between the three amounts is not invariable. We may find that _a_ = _b_ = _c_. It is common to find that _c_ is less than _b_, but occasionally it is greater; on one and the same page we may find that _c_ is equal to, is greater, is less than _b_. Then _a_ is often equal to _b_, often it is less than _b_, but sometimes it is greater. We have therefore three statements about the manor, between which there is no necessary connexion of any very simple kind.
It may look pedantic, but will be convenient if, by means of the letters _A_, _B_ and _C_, we try to keep distinctly before our minds 'the _A_ statement' about the units of assessment, 'the _B_ statement' about the 'teamlands,' or teams for which 'there is land,' and 'the _C_ statement' about the existing teams. We shall find hereafter that there are certain counties in which we do not get all three statements, at least in any of their accustomed forms. In Gloucestershire, Worcestershire and Herefordshire we rarely get the _B_ statement. As to Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk, we seem at first sight to obtain _A_ and not _B_, or _B_ and not _A_, while Leicestershire will require separate treatment.
[Introduction of statistics.]