vill3-第6节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


r　part　of　the　land　and　is　called　the　heir；　while　his　fellow　appears　as　a　small　cotter　who　has　to　co…operate　in　the　work　performed　by　the　virgate。（55*）　Indications　are　not　wanting　that　sometimes　virgates　crumbled　up　into　cotlands；　bordlands；　and　crofts。　The　denomination　of　some　peasants　in　Northumberland　is　characteristic　enough　　they　are　'selfoders；'　obviously　dwelling　'self…other'　on　their　tenements。（56*）　On　the　other　hand；　it　is　to　be　noticed　that　the　gavelkind　rule　of　succession；　although　enacting　the　partibility　of　the　inheritance；　still　reserves　the　hearth　to　the　youngest　born；　a　trace　of　the　same　junior　right　which　led　to　Borough　English。　　　　　I　think　that　upon　the　whole　we　must　say　that　in　practice　the　very　marked　contrast　between　the　general　arrangement　of　the　holdings　and　the　Kentish　one　is　more　a　difference　in　the　way　of　reckoning　than　in　actual　occupation；　in　legal　forms　than　in　economical　substance。　The　general　arrangement　admitted　a　certain　subdivision　under　the　cover　of　an　artificial　unity　which　found　its　expression　in　the　settlement　of　the　services　and　of　the　relations　with　the　lord。（57*）　The　English　case　has　its　parallel　on　the　Continent　in　this　respect。　In　Alsace；　for　instance；　the　holding　was　united　under　one　'Trager'　or　bearer　of　the　manorial　duties；　but　by　the　side　of　him　other　people　are　found　who　participate　with　this　official　holder　in　the　ownership　and　in　the　cultivation。（58*）　The　second　system　also　kept　up　the　artificial　existence　of　the　higher　units；　and　obvious　interests　prevented　it　from　leading　to　a　'morcellement'　of　land　into　very　small　portions　in　practice。　The　economic　management　of　land　could　not　go　as　far　as　the　legal　partition。　In　practice　the　subdivision　was　certainly　checked；　as　in　the　virgate　system；　by　the　necessity　of　keeping　together　the　cattle　necessary　for　the　tillage。　Virgates　and　bovates　would　arise　of　themselves：　it　was　not　advantageous　to　split　the　yoke　of　two　oxen；　the　smallest　possible　plough；　and　co…heirs　had　to　think　even　more　when　they　inherited　one　ox　with　its　ox…gang　of　land。　The　animal　could　not　be　divided；　and　this　certainly　must　have　stopped　in　many　cases　the　division　of　land。　When　the　documents　speak　of　plots　containing　two　or　three　acres；　it　must　be　remembered　that　such　crofts　and　cotlands　occur　also　in　the　usual　system；　and　I　do　not　see　any　reason　to　suppose　that　the　existence　of　such　subdivided　rights　always　indicated　a　real　dispersion　of　the　economic　unit：　they　may　have　stood　as　a　landmark　of　the　relative　rights　of　joint　occupiers。　I　do　not　mean　to　say；　of　course；　that　there　was　no　real　basis　for　the　very　great　difference　which　is　assumed　by　the　two　ways　of　describing　the　tenements。　No　doubt　the　hand　of　the　lord　lay　heavier　on　the　Essex　people　than　on　the　Kentish　men；　their　occupation　and　usage　of　the　land　was　more　under　the　control　of　the　lord；　and　assumed　therefore　an　aspect　of　greater　regularity　and　order。　Again；　the　legal　privileges　of　the　Kentish　people　opened　the　way　towards　a　greater　development　of　individual　freedom　and　a　certain　looseness　of　social　relations。　Still　it　would　be　wrong　to　infer　too　much　from　this　formal　opposition。　In　both　cases　the　centripetal　and　the　centrifugal　tendency　are　working　against　each　other　in　the　same　way；　although　one　case　presents　the　stronger　influence　of　disruptive　forces；　and　the　other　gives　predominance　to　the　collective　power。　In　the　history　of　socage　and　military　tenure　the　system　of　unity　arose　gradually；　and　without　any　sudden　break；　out　of　the　system　of　division。　The　intimate　connexion　between　both　forms　is　even　more　natural　in　peasant　ownership；　which　had　to　operate　with　small　plots　and　small　agricultural　capital；　and　therefore　inclined　naturally　towards　the　artificial　combination　of　divided　interests。　In　any　case　there　is　no　room　in　practice　for　the　rigid　and　consequent　operation　of　either　rule　of　ownership；　and；　if　so；　there　is　no　actual　basis　for　the　inference　that　the　unification　of　the　holding　is　to　be　taken　as　a　direct　consequence　of　a　servile　origin　of　the　tenement　and　a　sure　proof　of　it。　Unification　appears　on　closer　inspection　as　a　result　of　economic　considerations　as　well　as　of　legal　disabilities；　and　for　this　reason　the　tendency　operated　in　the　sphere　of　free　property　as　well　as　among　the　villains；　among　these　last　it　could　not　preclude　the　working　of　the　disruptive　elements；　but　in　many　cases　only　hid　them　from　sight　by　its　artificial　screen　of　rigid　holdings。　　　　　We　have　seen　that　the　size　and　distribution　of　the　holdings　are　connected　with　the　number　of　oxen　necessary　for　the　tillage；　and　its　relation　to　the　full　plough。　The　hide　appears　as　the　ploughland　with　eight　oxen；　the　virgate　corresponds　to　one　yoke　of　oxen；　and　the　bovate　to　the　single　head。　it　need　not　be　added　that　such　figures　are　not　absolutely　settled；　and　are　to　be　accepted　as　approximate　terms；　The　great　heavy　plough　drawn　by　eight　or　ten　oxen　is　certainly　often　mentioned　in　the　records；　especially　on　demesne　land。（59*）　The　dependent　people；　when　they　have　to　help　in　the　cultivation　of　the　demesne；　club　together　in　order　to　make　up　full　plough　teams。（60*）　It　is　also　obvious　that　the　peasantry　had　to　associate　for　the　tilling　of　their　own　land；　as　it　was　very　rare　for　the　single　shareholder　to　possess　a　sufficient　number　of　beasts　to　work　by　himself。　But　it　must　be　noticed　that　alongside　of　the　unwieldy　eight…oxen　plough　we　find　much　lighter　ones。　Even　on　the　demesne　we　may　find　them　drawn　by　six　oxen。　And　as　for　the　peasantry；　they　seem　to　have　very　often　contented　themselves　with　forming　a　plough　team　of　four　heads。（61*）　It　is　commonly　supposed　by　the　surveys　that　the　holder　of　a　yardland　joins　with　one　of　his　fellows　to　make　up　the　team。　This　would　mean　on　the　scale　of　the　hide　of　120　acres　that　the　team　consists　of　four　beasts。（62*）　It　happens　even　that　a　full　plough　is　supposed　to　belong　to　two　or　three　peasants；　of　which　every　one　is　possessed　only　of　five　acres；　in　such　cases　there　can　be　no　talk　of　a　big　plough；　it　is　difficult　to　admit　even　a　four…oxen　team；　and　probably　those　people　only　worked　with　one　yoke　or　pair　of　beasts。（63*）　Altogether　it　would　be　very　wrong　to　assume　in　practice　a　strict　correspondence　between　the　size　of　the　holding　and　the　parts　of　an　eight…oxen　plough。　The　observation　that　the　usual　reckoning　of　the　hide　and　of　its　subdivisions；　according　to　the　pattern　of　the　big　team；　cannot　be　made　to　fit　exactly　with　the　real　arrangement　of　the　teams　owned　by　the　peasantry　　this　firmly　established　observation　leads　us　once　more　to　the　conclusion　that　the　system　of　equal　holdings　had　become　very　artificial　in　process　of　time　and　was　determined　rather　by　the　relation　between　the　peasants　and　the　manorial　administration　than　by　the　actual　conditions　of　peasant　life。　Unhappily　the　artificial　features　of　the　system　have　been　made　by　modern　inquirers　the　starting　point　of　very　far…reaching　theories　and　suppositions。　Seebohm　has　proposed　an　explanation　of　the　intermixture　of　strips　as　originating　in　the　practice　of　coaration。　He　argues　that　it　was　natural　to　divide　the　land　tilled　by　a　mixed　plough…team　among　the　owners　of　the　several　beasts　and　implements。　Every　man　got　a　strip　according　to　a　certain　settled　and　ever…recurring　succession。　I　do　not　pretend　to　judge　of　the　value　of　the　interesting　instances　adduced　by　Seebohm　from　Celtic　practices；　but　whatever　the　arrangement　in　Wales　or　Ireland　may　have　been；　the　explanation　does　not　suit　the　English　case。　A　doubt　is　cast　on　it　already　by　the　fact　that　such　a　universal　feature　as　the　intermixture　of　strips　appears　connected　with　the　occurrence　of　such　a　special　instrument　as　the　eight…oxen　plough；　The　intermixture　is　quite　the　same　in　Central　Russia；　where　they　till　with　one　horse；　and　in　England　where　more　or　less　big　ploughs　were　used。　the　doubt　increases　when　we　reflect　that　if　the　strips　followed　each　other　as　parts　of　the　plough…team；　the　great　owners　would　have　been　possessed　of　compact　plots。　Every　holder　of　an　entire　hide　would　have　been　out　of　the　intermixture；　and　every　virgater　would　have　stood　in　conjunction　with　a　sequence　of　three　other　tenants。　Neither　the　one　nor　the　other　inference　is　supported　by　the　facts。　The　observation　that　the　peasantry　are　commonly　provided　with　small　ploughs　drawn　by　four　beasts　ruins　Seebohm's　hypothesis　entirely。　One　would　have　to　suppose　that　most　fields　were　divided　into　two　parts；　as　the　majority　of　the　tenements　are　yardlands　with　half　a　team。　The　only　adequate　explanation　of　the　open…field　intermixture　has　been　given　above；　it　has　its　roots　in　the　wish　to　equalise　the　holdings　as　to　the　quantity　and　quality　of　the　land　assigned　to　them　in　spite　of　all　differences　in　the　shape；　the　position；　and　the　value　of　the　soil。　　　　　Before　I　leave　the　question　as　to　the　holdings　of　the　feudal　peasantry；　I　must　mention　some　terms　which　occur　in　different　parts　of　England；　although　more　rarely　than　the　usual　hides　and　virgates。（64*）　Of　the　sulung　I　have　spoken　already。　It　is　a　full　ploughland；　and　200　acres　are　commonly　reckoned　to　belong　to　it。　The　name　is　sometimes　found　out　of　Kent；　in　Essex　for　instance。　In　Tillingham；　a　manor　of　St。　Paul's　of　London；　we　come　across　six　hides　'trium　solandarum'。（65*）　The　most　probable　explanation　seems　to　be　tha