vill2-第37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！


　the　characteristic　of　the　status　on　which　I　have　been　insisting　till　now。　Commutation　was　undoubtedly　a　most　powerful　agency　in　the　process　of　emancipation；　our　authorities　are　very　ready　to　supply　us　with　material　in　regard　to　its　working；　and　I　do　not　think　that　anybody　will　dispute　the　intimate　connexion　between　the　social　divisions　under　discussion　and　the　transition　from　labour　services　to　rent。　Yet　a　money　rent　need　not　be　in　every　case　the　result　of　a　commutation　of　labour　services；　although　such　may　be　its　origin　in　most　cases。　We　have　at　least　to　admit　the　possibility　and　probability　of　another　pedigree　of　rent…paying　peasants。　They　may　come　from　an　old　stock　of　people　whose　immemorial　custom　has　been　to　pay　rent　in　money　or　in　kind；　and　who　have　always　remained　more　or　less　free　from　base　labour。　This　we　should　have　to　consider　as　at　all　events　a　theoretic　possibility；　even　if　we　restricted　our　study　to　the　terminology　connected　with　rent；　though　it　would　hardly　give　sufficient　footing　for　definite　conclusions。　But　there　are　groups　among　the　peasantry　whose　history　is　less　doubtful。　　　　　There　are　at　the　British　Museum　two　most　curious　Surveys　of　the　possessions　of　Ely　Minster；　one　drawn　up　in　1222　and　the　other　in　1277；（22*）　In　some　of　the　manors　described　we　find　tenants　called　'hundredarii。'　Their　duties　vary　a　good　deal；　but　the　peculiarity　which　groups　them　into　a　special　division　and　gives　them　their　name　is　the　suit　of　court　they　owe　to　the　hundred。（23*）　And　although　the　name　does　not　occur　often　even　in　the　Ely　Surveys；　and　is　very　rare　indeed　elsewhere；（24*）　the　thing　is　quite　common。　The　village　has　to　be　represented　in　the　hundred　court　either　by　the　lord　of　the　manor；　or　by　the　steward；　or　by　the　reeve；　the　priest；　and　four　men。（25*）　The　same　people　have　to　attend　the　County　Court　and　to　meet　the　King's　justices　when　they　are　holding　an　eyre。（26*）　It　is　not　a　necessary　consequence；　of　course；　that　certain　particular　holdings　should　be　burdened　with　the　special　duty　of　sending　representatives　to　these　meetings；　but　it　is　quite　in　keeping　with　the　general　tendency　of　the　time　that　it　should　be　so；　and　indeed　one　finds　everywhere　that　some　of　the　tenants；　even　if　not　called　'hundredarii；'　are　singled　out　from　the　rest　to　'defend'　the　township　at　hundred　and　shire　moots。（27*）　They　are　exempted　from　other　services　in　regard　to　this　'external；'　this　'forinsec'　duty；　which　was　considered　as　by　no　means　a　light　one。（28*）　　　　　And　now　as　to　their　status。　The　obligation　to　send　the　reeve　and　four　men　is　enforced　all　through　England；　and　for　this　reason　it　is　prima　facie　impossible　that　it　should　be　performed　everywhere　by　freeholders　in　the　usual　sense　of　the　word。　There　can　be　no　doubt　that　in　many；　if　not　in　most；　places　the　feudal　organisation　of　society　afforded　little　room　for　a　considerable　class　of　free…holding　peasants　or　yeomen。（29*）　If　every　township　in　the　realm　had　to　attend　particular　judicial　meetings；　to　perform　service　for　the　king；　by　means　of　five　representatives；　these　could　not　but　be　selected　largely　from　among　the　villain　class。　The　part　played　by　these　representatives　in　the　Courts　was　entirely　in　keeping　with　their　subordinate　position。　They　were　not　reckoned　among　the　'free　and　lawful'　men　acting　as　judges　or　assessors　and　deciding　the　questions　at　issue。　They　had　only　to　make　presentments　and　to　give　testimony　on　oath　when　required　to　do　so。　The　opposition　is　a　very　marked　one；　and　speaks　of　itself　against　the　assumption　that　the　five　men　from　the　township　were　on　an　equal　standing　with　the　freeholders。（30*）　Again；　four　of　these　five　were　in　many　cases　especially　bound　by　their　tenure　to　attend　the　meetings；　and　the　reeve　came　by　virtue　of　his　office；　but　he　is　named　first；　and　it　does　not　seem　likely　that　the　leader　should　be　considered　as　of　lower　degree　than　the　followers。　Now　the　obligation　to　serve　as　reeve　was　taken　as　a　mark　of　villainage。　All　these　facts　lead　one　forcibly　to　the　conclusion　that　the　hundredors　of　our　documents　represent　the　village　people　at　large；　and　the　villains　first　of　all；　because　this　class　was　most　numerous　in　the　village。　This　does　not　mean；　of　course；　that　they　were　all　personally　unfree：　we　know　already；　that　the　law　of　tenure　was　of　more　importance　in　such　questions　than　personal　status。（31*）　It　does　not　even　mean　that　the　hundredors　were　necessarily　holding　in　villainage：　small　freeholders　may　have　appeared　among　them。　But　the　institution　could　not　rest　on　the　basis　of　legal　freehold　if　it　was　to　represent　the　great　bulk　of　the　peasantry　in　the　townships。　　　　　This　seems　obvious　and　definite　enough；　but　our　inquiry　would　be　incomplete　and　misleading　if　it　were　to　stop　here。　We　have　in　this　instance　one　of　those　curious　contradictions　between　two　well…established　sets　of　facts　which　are　especially　precious　to　the　investigator　because　they　lead　him　while　seeking　their　solution　to　inferences　far　beyond　the　material　under　immediate　examination。　In　one　sense　the　reeve　and　the　four　men；　the　hundredors；　seem　villains　and　not　freeholders。　In　another　they　seem　freeholders　and　not　villains。　Their　tenure　by　the　'sergeanty'　of　attending　hundreds　and　shires　ranks　again　and　again　with　freehold　and　in　opposition　to　base　tenure。（32*）　Originally　the　four　men　were　made　to　go　not　only　with　the　reeve　but　with　the　priest；　and　if　the　reeve　was　considered　in　feudal　times　as　unfree；　the　priest；　the　'mass…thane；'　was　always　considered　as　free。（33*）　It　is　to　be　noticed　that　the　attendance　of　the　priest　fell　into　abeyance　in　process　of　time；　but　that　it　was　not　less　necessary　for　the　representation　of　the　township　according　to　the　ancient　constitution　of　the　hundred　than　the　attendance　of　the　reeve。　This　last　fact　is　of　great　importance　because　it　excludes　an　explanation　which　would　otherwise　look　plausible　enough。　Does　it　not　seem　at　first　sight　that　the　case　of　the　hundredors　is　simply　a　case　of　exemption　and　exactly　on　a　parallel　with　the　commutation　of　servile　obligations　for　money？　We　have　seen　that　villains　discharged　from　the　most　onerous　and　opprobrious　duties　of　their　class　rise　at　once　in　social　standing；　and　mix　up　with　the　smaller　freeholders。　Hundredors　are　relieved　from　these　same　base　services　in　order　that　they　may　perform　their　special　work；　and　this　may　possibly　be　taken　as　the　origin　of　their　freedom。　Should　we　look　at　the　facts　in　this　way；　the　classification　of　this　class　of　tenants　as　free　would　proceed　from　a　lax　use　of　the　term　and　their　privileges　would　have　to　be　regarded　as　an　innovation。　The　presence　of　the　priest　warns　us　that　we　have　to　reckon　in　the　case　with　a　survival；　with　an　element　of　tradition　and　not　of　mere　innovation。　And　it　is　not　only　the　presence　of　the　priest　that　points　this　way。　　　　　At　first　sight　the　line　seems　drawn　very　sharply　between　the　reeve　and　the　four　men　on　the　one　hand；　and　the　freehold　suitors　of　the　hundred　court　on　the　other：　while　these　last　have　to　judge　and　to　decide；　the　first　only　make　presentments。　But　the　distinction；　though　very　clear　in　later　times；　is　by　no　means　to　be　relied　upon　even　in　the　thirteenth　century。　In　Britton's　account　of　the　sheriff's　tourn　the　two　bodies；　though　provided　with　different　functions；　are　taken　as　constituted　from　the　same　class：　'the　free　landowners　of　the　hundred　are　summoned　and　the　first　step　is　to　cause　twelve　of　them　to　swear　that　they　will　make　presentment　according　to　the　articles。　Afterwards　the　rest　shall　be　sworn　by　dozens　and　by　townships；　that　they　will　make　lawful　presentment　to　the　first　twelve　jurors。'（34*）　The　wording　of　the　passage　certainly　leads　one　to　suppose　that　both　sets　of　jurors　are　taken　from　the　freeholder　class；　and　the　difference　only　lies　in　the　fact　that　some　are　selected　to　act　as　individuals；　and　the　rest　to　do　so　by　representation。　The　Assize　of　Clarendon；　which　Mr　Maitland　has　shown　to　be　at　the　origin　of　the　sheriff's　tourn；（35*）　will　only　strengthen　the　inference　that　the　two　bodies　were　intended　to　belong　to　the　same　free　class：　the　inquiry；　says　the　Assize；　shall　be　made　by　twelve　of　the　most　lawful　men　of　the　county；　and　by　four　of　the　most　lawful　men　of　every　township。　What　is　there　in　these　words　to　show　that　the　two　sets　were　to　be　taken　from　different　classes？　And　does　not　the　expression　'lawful；'　extending　to　both　sets；　point　to　people　who　are　'worthy　of　their　law'　that　is　to　free　men？　The　Assize　of　Clarendon　and　the　constitution　of　the　tourn　are　especially　interesting　because　they　give　a　new　bearing　to　an　old　institution：　both　divisions　of　the　population　which　they　have　in　view　appear　in　the　ordinary　hundred　and　county　court；　and　in　the　'law　day'　of　the　'great'　hundred　instituted　for　the　view　of　frankpledge。　In　the　ordinary　court　the　lord；　his　steward；　and　the　reeve；　priest；　and　four　men；　interchange；　according　to　the　clear　statement　of　Leg。　Henrici　I。　c。　7；　that　is　to　say；　the　vill　is　to　be　represented　either　by　the　lord；　or　by　his　steward；　or　again　by　the　six　men　just　mentioned。　They　are　not　called　out　as　representing　different　classes　and　interests；　but　as　representing　the　same　territorial　unity。　If　the　landlord　does　not　attend　personally　or　by　his　personal　representative；　the　steward；　then　six　men　from　the　township　attend　in　his　place。　The　questi