vill2-第28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！
quarters and get bound up together only through economic conditions。 The same observations hold good in regard to other customs which come to be considered as implying personal servitude。（53*） Merchet was the most striking consequence of unfreedom； but manorial documents are wont to connect it with several others。 It is a common thing to say that a villain by birth cannot marry his daughter without paying a fine； or permit his son to take holy orders； or sell his calf or horse； that he is bound to serve as a reeve； and that his youngest son succeeds to the holding after his death。（54*） This would be a more or less complete enumeration； and I need not say that in particular cases sometimes one and sometimes another item gets omitted。 The various pieces do not fit well together： the prohibition against selling animals is connected with disabilities as to property； and not derived directly from the personal tie；（55*） as for the rule of succession； it testifies merely to the fact that the so…called custom of Borough English was most widely spread among the unfree class。 The obligation of serving as a reeve or in any other capacity is certainly derived from the power of a lord over the person of his subject； he had it always at his discretion to take his man away from the field； and to employ him at pleasure in his service。 Lastly； the provision that the villain may not allow his son to receive holy orders stands on the same level as the provision that he may not give his daughter in marriage outside the manor： either of these prohibited transactions would have involved the loss of a subject。 We must place in the same category all measures intended to prevent directly or indirectly the passage of the peasantry from one place to the other。 The instructions issued for the management of the Abbot of Gloucester's estates absolutely forbid the practice of leaving the lord's land without leave。（56*） Still； emigration from the manor。 from time to time the could not be entirely stopped； inhabitants wandered away in order to look out for fieldwork elsewhere； or to take up some craft or trade。 In this case they had to pay a kind of poll…tax （chevagium）； which was； strictly speaking； not rent： very often it was very insignificant in amount； and was replaced by a trifling payment in kind； for instance； by the obligation to bring a capon once a year。（57*） The object was not so much to get money as to retain some hold over the villain after he had succeeded in escaping from the lord's immediate sway。 There are no traces of a systematic attempt to tax and ransom the work of dependents who have left the lord's territory nothing to match the thorough subjection in which they were held while in the manor。 And thus the lord was forced in his own interest to accept nominal payments； to concentrate his whole attention on the subjects under his direct control； and to prevent them as far as possible from moving and leaving the land。 In regulations for the management of estates we often find several paragraphs which have this object in view。 Sometimes the younger men get leave to work outside the lord's possessions； but only while their father remains at home and occupies a holding。 Sometimes； again； the licence is granted under the condition that the villain will remain in one of his lord's tithings（58*）； an obligation which could be fulfilled only if the peasant remained within easy reach of his birth…place； Special care is taken not to allow the villains to buy free land in order to claim their freedom on the strength of such free possession。（59*） Every kind of personal commendation to influential people is also forbidden。（60*） Notwithstanding all these rules and precepts； every page of the documents testifies to frequent migrations from the manors in opposition to the express will of the landowners。 The surveys tell of serfs who settle on strange land even in the vicinity of their former home。（61*） It is by no means exceptional to find mention of enterprising landlords drawing away the population from their neighbours' manors。（62*） The fugitive villain and the settler who comes from afar are a well…marked feature of this feudal society。（63*） The limitations of rights of property have left as distinct traces in the cartularies as the direct consequences of personal unfreedom。 These two matters are connected by the principle that everything acquired by the slave is acquired by his master； and this principle finds both expression and application in our documents。 On the strength of it the Abbot of Eynsham takes from his peasant land which had been bought by the latter's father。（64*） The case dates from the second half of the fourteenth century； from a time when the social conflict had become particularly acute in consequence of the Black Death； and of the consequent attempts on the part of landlords to stretch their rights to the utmost。 But we have a case from the thirteenth century： the Prior of Barnwell quotes the abovementioned rule in support of a confiscation of his villain's land。（65*） In both instances the principle is laid down expressly； but in other cases peasants were deprived of their property without any formal explanation。 Of course； one must look upon such treatment as exceptional。 But an important and constant result of the general conception is to be found in some of the regular feudal exactions。 The villain has no property of his own； and consequently he cannot transmit property。 Strictly speaking； there is no inheritance in villainage。 As a matter of fact the peasant's property did not get confiscated after his death； but the heirs had to surrender a part of it； sometimes a very considerable one。 A difference is made between chattels and land。 As to the first； which are supposed to be supplied by the lord； the duty of the heir is especially onerous； On the land of the Bishopric of Lichfield； for instance； he has to give up as heriot the best head of horned cattle； all horses； the cart； the caldron； all woollen cloth； all the bacon； all the swine except one； and all the swarms of bees。（66*） The villains of St。 Alban's have to give the best head of cattle； and all house furniture。（67*） But in most cases only the best beast is taken； and if there be no cattle on the tenement； then money has to be paid instead。（68*） The Cartulary of Battle is exceptionally lenient as to one of the Abbey's manors：（69*） it liberates from all duty of the kind those who do not own any oxen； It sometimes happens； on the other hand； that the payment is doubled； one beast is taken from the late occupier by way of heriot； and the other from his widow for the life interest which is conceded to her after the death of her husband。（70*） Such 'free bench' is regulated very differently by different customs。 The most common requirement is； that the widow may not marry again and must remain chaste。 In Kent the widow has a right to half the tenement for life； even in case of a second marriage； in Oxfordshire； if she marries without the lord's leave； she is left in possession only during a year and a day。（71*） In all these instances； when a second payment arises alongside of the heriot； such a payment receives also the name of heriot because of this resemblance； although the two dues are grounded on different claims； The true heriot is akin in name and in character to the Saxon 'here…geat' to the surrender of the military outfit supplied by the chief to his follower。 In feudal times and among peasants it is not the war…horse and the armour that are meant； ox and harness take their place； but the difference is not in the principle； and one may even catch sometimes a glimpse of the process by which one custom shades off into the other。 On the possessions of St。 Mary of Worcester； for instance； we find the following enactment：（72*） Each virgate has to give three heriots； that is a horse； harness； and two oxen； the half…virgate two heriots； that is a harnessed horse and one ox； other holdings give either a horse or an ox。 In such connexion the payment has nothing servile about it； and simply appears as a consequence of the fact or assumption that the landlord has provided his peasant with the necessary outfit for agricultural work。 And still the heriot is constantly mentioned along with the merchet as a particularly base payment； and though it might fall on the succession of a free man holding in villainage； it is not commonly found on free land。 the fact that this old Saxon incident of dependence becomes in the feudal period a mark of servile tenure； is a fact not without significance。 It is otherwise with the relief （relevium）； the duty levied for the resumption of the holding by the heir： it extends equally to military tenure and to villainage。 Although the heriot and relief get mixed up now and then； their fundamental difference is realised by the great majority of our documents and well grounded on principle。 In one case the chattels are concerned； in the other the tenement； one is primarily a payment in kind； the other a money…fine。 As to the amount of the relief the same fluctuations may be traced as in the case of the heriot。 the most common thing is to give a year's rent； but in some instances the heir must settle with the lord at the latter's will；
