This brings us face to face with a question that we have hitherto evaded. What is a manor? The word manerium appears on page after page of Domesday but to define its meaning will task our patience. Perhaps we may have to say that sometimes the term is loosely used, that it has now a wider, now a narrower compass, but we cannot say that it is not a technical term. Indeed the one statement that we can safely make about it is that, at all events in certain passages and certain contexts, it is a technical term.
We may be led to this opinion by observing that in the description of certain counties -- Middlesex, Buckingham, Bedford, Cambridge, Huntingdon, Derby, Nottingham, Lincoln, York -- the symbol M, which represents a manor, is often carried out into the margin, and is sometimes constrasted with the S which represents a soke and the B which represents a berewick. This no doubt has been done -- though it may not have been very consistently done -- for the purpose of guiding the eye of officials who will turn over the pages in search of manors. But much clearer evidence is forthcoming. Throughout the survey of Essex it is common to find entries which take such a form as this: 'Thurkil held it for two hides and for one manor'. 'Brithmaer held it for five hides and for one manor'; 'Two free men who were brothers held it for two hides and for two manors'; 'Three free men held it for three manors and for four hides and twenty-seven acres;(1*) in Sussex again the statement 'X tenuit pro uno manerio'(2*) frequently occurs. Such phrases as 'Four brothers held it for two manors, Hugh received it for one manor,(3*) -- 'These four manors are now for one manor'(4*) -- 'Then there were two halls, now it is in one manor,'(5*) -- 'A certain thegn held four hides and it was a manor,(6*) -- are by no means unusual.(7*) A clerk writes 'Elmer tenuit' and then is at pains to add by way of interlineation 'pro manerio.'(8*) 'Eight thegns held this manor, one of them, Alwin, held two hides for a manor; another, Ulf, two hides for a manor; another, Algar, one hide and a half for a manor; Elsi one hide, Turkill one hide, Lodi one hide, Osulf one hide, Elric a half-hide'(9*) -- when we read this we feel sure that the scribe is using his terms carefully and that he is telling us that the holdings of the five thegns last mentioned were not manors. And then Hugh de Port holds Wallop in Hampshire 'for half a manor.'(10*) But let us say at once that at least one rule of law, or of local custom, demands a definition of a manerium. In the shires of Nottingham and Derby a thegn who has more than six manors pays a relief of ? to the king, but if he has only six manors or less, then a relief of 3 marks to the sheriff.(11*) It seems clear therefore that not only did the Norman rulers treat the term manerium as an accurate term charged with legal meaning, but they thought that it, or rather some English equivalent for it, had been in the Confessor's day an accurate term charged with legal meaning.
The term manerium seems to have come in with the Conqueror,(12*) though other derivatives frow the Latin verb manere, in particular mansa, mansio, mansiuncula had been freely employed by the scribes of the land-. But these had as a rule been used as representatives of the English hide, and just for this reason they were incapable of expressing the notion that the Normans desired to express by the word manerium. In its origin that word is but one more name for a house. Throughout the Exeter Domesday the word mansio is used instead of the manerium of the Exchequer record, and even in the Exchequer record we way find these two terms used interchangeably: -- 'Three free men belonged to this manerium; one of them had half a hide and could withdraw himself without the licence of the lord of the mansio.'(13*) If we look for the vernacular term that was rendered by manerium, we are likely to find it in the English heal. Though this is not connected with the Latin aula, still these two words bearing a similar meaning meet and are fused in the aula, haula, halla of Domesday
Now this term stands in the first instance for a house and can be exchanged with curia. You may say that there is meadow enough for the horses of the curia,(14*) and that there are three horses in the aula;(15*) you may speak indifferently of a mill that serves the hall,(16*) or of the mill that grinds the corn of the court.(17*) But further, you may say that in Stonham there are 50 acres of the demesne land of the hall in Creeting, or that in Thorney there are 24 acres which belong to the hall in Stonham,(18*) or that Roger de Rames has lands which once were in the hall of St Edmund,(19*) or that in the hall of Grantham there are three carucates of land,(20*) or that Guthmund's sake and soke extended only over the demesne of his hall.(21*) We feel that to such phrases as these we should do no great violence were we to substitute 'manor' for 'hall.' Other phrases serve to bring these two words very closely together. One and the same page tells us, first, that Hugh de Port holds as one manor what four brothers held as two manors, and then, that on another estate there is one hall though of old there were two halls:(22*) -- these two stories seem to have the same point. 'Four brothers held this; there was only one hall there.'(23*) 'Two brothers held it and each had his hall; now it is as one manor.'(24*) 'In these two lands there is but one hall.'(25*) 'Then there were two halls; now it is in one manor.'(26*) 'Ten manors; ten thegns, each had his hall'(27*) 'Ingelric set these men to his hall... Ingelric added these men to his manor.'(28*)
We do not contend that manerium and halla are precisely equivalent. Now and again we shall be told of a manerium sine halla(29*) as of some exceptional phenomenon. The term manerium has contracted a shade of technical meaning; it refers, so we think, to a system of taxation, and thus it is being differentiated from the term hall. Suppose, for example, that a hall or manor has meant a house from which taxes are collected, and that some one removes that house, houses being very portable things:(30*) 'by construction of law,' as we now say, there still may be a hall or manor on the old site; or we may take advantage of the new wealth of words and say that, though the hall has gone, the manor remains: to do this is neater than to say that there is a 'constructive' hall where no hall can be seen. Then again, manerium is proving itself to be the more elastic of the two terms. We may indeed speak of a considerable stretch of land as belonging to or even as 'being in' a certain hall, and this stretch may include not only land that the owner of the hall occupies and cultivates by himself or his servants, but also land and houses that are occupied by his villeins:(31*) still we could hardly talk of the hall being a league long and a league wide or containing a square league. Of manerium, however, we may use even such phrases as those just mentioned.(32*) For all this, we can think of no English word for which manerium can stand, save hall; tun, it is clear enough, was translated by villa, not by manerium.
If now we turn from words to look at the things which those words signify, we shall soon be convinced that to describe a typical manerium is an impossible feat, for on the one hand there are enormous maneria and on the other hand there are many holdings called maneria which are so small that we, with our reminiscences of the law of later days, can hardly bring ourselves to speak of them as manors. If we look in the world of sense for the essence of the manerium we shall find nothing that is common to all maneria save a piece of ground -- very large it may be, or very small -- held (in some sense or another) by a single person or by a group of co-tenants, for even upon a house we shall not be able to insist very strictly. After weary arithmetical labours we might indeed obtain an average manor; we might come to the conclusion that the average manor contained so many hides or acres, possibly that it included land occupied by so many sokemen, villeins, bordiers, serfs; but an average is not a type, and the uselessness of such calculations will soon become apparent.
We may begin by looking at a somewhat large manor. Let it be that of Staines in Middlesex, which is held by St Peter of Westminster.(33*) It is rated at 19 hides but contains land for 24 plough-teams. To the demesne belong 11 hides and there are 13 teams there. The villeins have 11 teams. There are: --
3 villeins with a half-hide apiece. 4 villeins with a hide between them. 8 villeins with a half-virgate apiece. 36 bordiers with 3 hides between them. 1 villein with 1 virgate. 4 bordiers with 40 acres between them. 10 bordiers with 5 acres apiece. 5 cottiers with 4 acres. 8 bordiers with 1 virgate. 3 cottiers with 9 acres. 13 serfs. 46 burgesses paying 40 shillings a year.
There are 6 mills of 64 shillings and one fish-weir of 6s. 8d. and one weir which renders nothing. There is pasture sufficient for the cattle of the vill. There is meadow for the 24 teams, and in addition to this there is meadow worth 20s a year. There is wood for 30 pigs; there are 2 arpents of vine yard. To this manor belong four berewicks. Altogether it is worth ?5 and formerly it was worth ?0. -- This is a handsome manor. -- The next manor that is mentioned would be a fairer specimen. It is Sunbury held by St Peter of Westminster.(34*) It is rated at 7 hides and there is land for but 6 teams. To the demesne belong 4 hides and there is one team there. The villeins have 4 teams. There are: --
A priest with a half-virgate. 8 villeins with a virgate apiece. 2 villeins with a virgate. 5 bordiers with a virgate. 5 cottiers. 1 serf.
There is meadow for 6 teams and pasture enough for the cattle of the vill. Altogether it is worth ? and has been worth ?. Within this one county of Middlesex we can see wide variations. There are manors which are worth ?0 and there are manors which are not worth as many shillings. The archbishop's grand manor at Harrow has land for 70 teams;(35*) the Westminster manor of Cowley has land for but one team and the only tenants upon it are two villeins.(36*)
But far larger variations than these are to be found. Let us look at a few gigantic manors. Leominster in Herefordshire had been held by Queen Edith together with sixteen members.(37*) The names of these members are given and we may find them scattered about over a wide tract of Herefordshire. In this manor with its members there were 80 hides. In the demesne there were 30 teams. There were 8 reeves and 16 beadles and 8 radknights and 238 villeins, 75 bordiers and 82 male and female serfs. These in all had 230 teams; so that with the demesne teams there were no less than 260. Further there were Norman barons paying rents to this manor. Ralph de Mortemer for example paid 15s and Hugh de Lacy 6s. 8d. It is let to farm at a rent of ?0 and besides this has to support a house of nuns; were it freed from this duty, it might, so thinks the county, be let at a rent of ?20. It is a most interesting manor, for we see strong traces of a neat symmetrical arrangement: -- witness the 16 members, 8 reeves, 8 radknights, 16 beadles; very probably it has a Welsh basis.(38*) But we have in this place to note that it is called a manor, and for certain purposes it is treated as a single whole. For what purposes? Well, for one thing, it is let to farm as a single whole. This, however, is of no very great importance, for landlords and farmers may make what bargains they please. But also it is taxed as a single whole. It is rated at the nice round figures of 80 hides.
No less handsome and yet more valuable is Berkeley in Gloucestershire.(39*) It brought in a rent of ?70 of refined money. It had eighteen members which were dispersed abrover so wide a field that a straight line of thirty miles would hardly join their uttermost points.(40*) 'All the aforesaid members belong to Berkeley.' There were 29 radknights, 162 villeins, 147 bordiers, 22 coliberts, 161 male and female serfs, besides some unenumerated men of the radknights; on the demesne land were 54 1/2 teams; and the tenants had 192. Tewkesbury also is a splendid manor. 'When it was all together in King Edward's time it was worth ?00,' though now but ?0 at the most can be had from it and in the turmoil of the Conquest its value fell to ?2.(41*) It was a scattered unit, but still it was a unit for fiscal purposes. It was reckoned to contain 95 hides, but the 45 which were in demesne were quit of geld, and matters had been so arranged that all the geld on the remaining 50 hides had, as between the lord and his various tenants, been Tewkesbury; the members were dispersed abr but 'they gelded in Tewkesbury.'(42*)
No list of great manors would be complete without a notice of Taunton.(43*) 'The bishop of Winchester holds Tantone or has a mansion called Tantone. Stigand held in in King Edward's day and it gelded for 54 hides and 2 1/2 virgates. There is land for 100 teams, and besides this the bishop in his demesne has land for 20 teams which never gelded.' 'With all its appendages and customs it is worth ?54 12d.' 'Tantone' then is valued as a whole and it has gelded as a whole. But 'Tantone' in this sense covers far more than the borough which bears that name; it covers many places which have names of their own and had names of their own when the survey was made.(44*) We might speak of the bishop of Exeter's manor of Crediton in Devon which is worth ?5 and in which are 264 villeins and 73 bordiers,(45*) or of the bishop of Winchester's manor of Chilcombe in Hampshire where there are nine churches,(46*) but we turn to another part of England.
If we wish to see a midland manor with many members we may look at Rothley in Leicestershire.(47*) The vill at Rothley itself is not very large and it is separately valued at but 62s. But 'to this manor belong the following members,' and then we read of no less than twenty-one members scattered over a large area and containing 204 sokemen who with 157 villeins and 94 bordiers have 82 teams and who pay in all ?1 8s. 1d. Their rents are thus reckoned as forming a single whole. In Lincolnshire Earl Edwin's manor of Kirton had 25 satellites, Earl Morcar's manor of Caistor 16, the Queen's manor of Horncastle 15.(48*) A Northamptonshire manor of 27 hides lay scattered about in six hundreds.(49*)
It is common enough to see a town-house annexed to a rural manor. Sometimes a considerable group of houses or 'haws' in the borough is deemed to 'lie in' or form part of a manor remote from its walls. Thus, to give but two examples, twelve houses in London belong to the Bishop of Durham's manor of Waltham in Essex; twenty-eight houses in London to the manor of Barking.(50*) Not only these houses but their occupants are deemed to belong to the manor; thus 80 burgesses in Dunwich pertain to one of the Ely manors.(51*) The berewick (bereuita)(52*) also frequently meets our eye. Its name seems to signify primarily a wick, or village, in which barley is grown; but, like the barton (bertona) and the grange (grangia) of later days, it seems often to be a detached portion of a manor which is in part dependent on, and yet in part independent of, the main body. Probably at the berewick the lord has some demesne land and some farm buildings, a barn or the like, and the villeins of the berewick are but seldom called upon to leave its limits; but the lord has no hall there, he does not consume its produce upon the spot, and yet for some important purposes the berewick is a part of the manor. The berewick might well be some way off from the hall; a manor in Hampshire had three berewicks on the mainland and two in the Isle of Wight.(53*)
Then again in the north and east the manor is often the centre of an extensive but very discrete territory known as its soke. One says that certain lands are 'soke' or are 'the soke,' or are 'in the soke' of such a manor, or that 'their soke belongs' to such a manor. One contrasts the soke of the manor with the 'inland' and with the berewicks.(54*) The soke in this contest seems to be the territory in which the lord's rights are, or have been, of a justiciary rather than of a proprietary kind.(55*) The manor of the eastern counties is a discrete, a dissipated thing. Far from lying within a ring fence, it often consists of a small nucleus of demesne land and villein tenements in one village, together with many detached parcels in many other villages, which are held by 'free men' and sokemen. In such a case we may use the term manerium now in a wider, now in a narrower sense. In valuing the manor, we hardly know whether to include or exclude these free men. We say that the manor 'with the free men' is worth so much,(56*) or that the manor 'without the free men' is worth so much,(57*) that the manor is worth ?0 and that the free men pay 40 shillings,(58*) that Thurmot had soke over the manor and over three of the free men while the Abbot of Ely had soke over the other three.(59*)
From one extreme we may pass to the other extreme. If here were huge manors, there were also tiny manors. Let us begin in the south-west of England. Quite common is the manor which is said to have land for but one team; common also is the manor which is said to have land for but half a team. This means, as we believe, that the first of these manors has but some 120 acres of arable, while the second has but 60 acres or thereabouts. 'Domesday measures' are, it is well known, the matter of many disputes; therefore we will not wholly rely upon them, but will look at some of these 'half-team' manors and observe how much they are worth, how many tenants and how much stock they have upon them.
(i) A Somersetshire manor.(60*) Half the land is in demesne; half is held by 7 bordiers. The only plough beasts are 4 oxen on the demesne; there are 3 beasts that do not plough, 20 sheep, 7 acres of underwood, 20 acres of pasture. It is worth 12s, formerly it was worth 10s.
(ii) A Somersetshire manor.(61*) A quarter of the land is in demesne; the rest is held by 2 villeins and 3 bordiers. The men have one team; apparently the demesne has no plough-oxen. No other animals are mentioned. There are 140 acres of wood, 41 acres of moor, 40 acres of pasture. It is worth 12s. 6d. and has been worth 20s.
(iii) A Somersetshire manor.(62*) All the land, save 10 acres, is in demesne; 2 bordiers hold the 10 acres. There is a team on the demesne; there are 2 beasts that do not plough, 7 pigs, 16 sheep, 4 acres of meadow, 7 of pasture. Value, 6s.
(iv) A Somersetshire manor.(63*) The whole of the arable is in demesne; the only tenant is a bordier. There are 4 plough-oxen and 11 goats and 7 acres of underwood. Value, 6s.
(v) A Devonshire manor.(64*) To all seeming all is in demesne and there are no tenants. There are 4 plough-beasts, 15 sheep, 5 goats, 4 acres of meadow. Value, 3s.
We have been at no great pains to select examples, and yet smaller manors may be found, manors which provide arable land for but two oxen. Thus.
(vi) A Devonshire manor.(65*) Value, 3s. All seems to be in demesne; we see no tenants and no stock.
(vii) A Somersetshire manor(66*) occupied by one villein. We read nothing of any stock. Value, 15d.
(viii) A Somersetshire manor(67*) with 3 bordiers on it. Value, 4s.
(ix) A Somersetshire manor(68*) with one bordier on it. Value, 30d.
The lowest value of a manor in this part of the world is, so far as we have observed, one shilling; that manor to all appearance was nothing but a piece of pasture land.(69*) Yet each of those holdings is a mansio, and the Bishop of Winchester's holding at Taunton is a mansio.
From one side of England we will journey to the other side; from Devon and Somerset to Essex and Suffolk. We soon observe that in describing the holdings of the 'free men' and sokemen of this eastern district as they were in King Edward's day, our record constantly introduces the term manerium. A series of entries telling us how 'a free man held x hides or carucates or acres' will ever and anon be broken by an entry that tells us how 'a free man held x hides or carucates or acres for a manor'.(70*) We soon give up counting the cases in which the manor is rated at 60 acres. We begin counting the cases in which it is rated at 30 acres and find them numerous; we see manors rated at 24 acres, at 20, at 15, at 12 acres. But this, it may be said, tells us little, for these manors may be extravagantly underrated.(71*) Let us then look at a few of them.
(i) In Espalle Siric held 30 acres for a manor; there were always 3 bordiers and one team and 4 acres of meadow; wood for 60 pigs and 13 beasts. It was then worth 10s.(72*)
(ii) In Torentuna Turchetel a free man held 30 acres for a manor; there were always 2 bordiers and one team and a half. It is worth 10s.(73*)
(iii) In Bonghea Godric a free man held 30 acres for a manor; there were 1 bordier and 1 team and 2 acres of meadow. It was then worth 8s.(74*)
(iv) Three free men and their mother held 30 acres for a manor. There was half a team. Value, 5s.(75*)
(v) In Rincham a free man held 30 acres for a manor. There were half a team and one acre of meadow. Value, 5s.(76*)
(vi) In Wenham AElfgar a free man held 24 acres for a manor. Value, 4s.(77*)
(vii) In Torp a free man held 20 acres for a manor. One team; wood for 5 pigs. Value, 40d.(78*)
(viii) In Tudenham AElfric the deacon, a free man, held 12 acres for a manor. One team, 3 bordiers, 2 acres of meadow, 1 rouncey, 2 beasts that do not plough, 11 pigs, 40 sheep. Value, 3s.(79*)
We are not speaking of curiosities; the sixty-acre manor was very common in Essex, the thirty-acre manor was no rarity in Suffolk.
Now it is plain enough that the 'lord' of such a manor -- or rather the holder of such a manor, for there was little lordship in the case -- was often enough a peasant, a tiller of the soil. He was under soke and under commendation; commended it may be to one lord rendering soke to another. Sometimes he is called a sokeman.(80*) But he has a manor. Sometimes he has a full team, sometimes but half a team. Sometimes he has a couple of bordiers seated on his land, who help him in his husbandry. Sometimes there is no trace of tenants, and his holding is by no means too large to permit of his cultivating it by his own labour and that of his sons. No doubt in the west country even before the Conquest these petty mansiones or maneria were being accumulated in the hands of the wealthy. The thegn who was the antecessor of the Norman baron sometimes held a group, a geographically discontinuous group, or petty manors as well as some more substantial and better consolidated estates. But still each little holding is reckoned a manor, while in the east of England there is nothing to show that the nameless free men who held the manors which are said to consist of 60, 40, 30 acres had usually more than one manor apiece. When therefore we are told that already before the Conquest England was full of manors, we must reply: Yes, but of what manors?(81*)
Now were the differences between various manors a mere difference in size and in value, a student of law might pass them by. Our notion of ownership is the same whether it be applied to the largest and most precious, or to the smallest and most worthless of things. But in this case we have not to deal with mere differences in size or value. The examples that we have given will have proved that few, if any, propositions of legal import will hold good of all maneria. We must expressly reject some suggestions that the later history of our law may make to us. 'A manor has a court of its own': -- this is plainly untrue. To say nothing of extreme cases, of the smallest of the manors that we have noticed, we cannot easily believe that a manor with less than ten tenants has a court of its own, yet the number of such manors is exceedingly large. 'A manor has freehold tenants': -- this of course we must deny, unless we hold that the villani are freeholders. 'A manor has villein or customary tenants': -- even this proposition, though true of many cases, we cannot accept. Not only may we find a manor the only tenants upon which are liberi homines,(82*) but we are compelled to protest that a manor need not have any tenants at all. 'A manor must contain demesne land': -- this again we cannot believe. In one case we read that the whole manor is being farmed by the villeins so that there is nothing in demesne,(83*) while in other cases we are told that there is nothing in demesne and see no trace of any recent change.(84*) Thus, one after another, all the familiar propositions seem to fail us, and yet we have seen good reason to believe that manerium has some exact meaning. It remains that we should hazard an explanation.
A manor is a house against which geld is charged. To the opinion that in some way or another the definition of a manor is intimately connected with the great tax we shall be brought by phrases such as the following: 'Richard holds Fivehide of the Earl which Brihtmaer held in King Edward's time for forty acres and for a manor.'(85*) -- 'Two free men who were brothers, Bondi and AElfric, held it for two hides and for two manors.'(86*) When we say that a man holds land 'as' or 'for' (pro) forty acres, we mean that his holding, be its real size what it may, is rated to the geld at forty acres. If we add the words 'and as (or for) one manor,' surely we are still speaking of the geld. For one moment the thought may cross our minds that, besides a tax on land, there has been an additional tax on 'halls,' on houses of a certain size or value; but this we soon dismiss as most unlikely. To raise but one out of many objections: had there been such a house-tax, it would have left plain traces of itself in those 'Geld inquests' of the southwestern counties that have come down to us. Rather we regard the matter thus: -- The geld is a land-tax, a tax of so much per hide or carucate. In all likelihood it has been assessed according to a method which we might call the method of subpartitioned provincial quotas. The assumption has been made that a shire or other large district contains a certain number of hides; this number has then been apportioned among the hundreds of that shire, and the number allotted to each hundred has been. apportioned among the vills of that hundred. The common result is that some neat number of hides, five, ten or the like is attributed to the vill.(87*) This again has been divided between the holdings in that vill. Ultimately it is settled that for fiscal purposes a given holding contains, or must be deemed to contain, this or that number of hides, virgates, or acres. Thus far the system makes no use of the manerium. But it now has to discover some house against which a demand may be made for every particular penny of geld. Despite the 'realism' of the system, it has to face the fact that, after all, taxes must be paid by men and not by land. Men live in houses. It seeks the tax-payer in his house. Now, were all the occupiers of land absolute owners of the land that they occupied, even were it true that every acre had some one person as its absolute owner, the task would be simple. A schedule of five columns, such we are familiar with, would set forth 'Owner's Name,' 'Place of Residence,' 'Description of Geldable Property,' 'Hidage,' 'Amount due.' But the occupier is not always the owner; what is more, there is no absolute ownership. Two, three, four persons will be interested in the land; the occupier will have a lord and that lord a lord; the occupier may be a serf, a villein, a sokeman; there is commendation to be considered and soke and all the infinite varieties of the power to 'withdraw' the land from the lord. Rude and hard and arbitrary lines must be drawn. Of course the state will endeavour to collect the geld in big sums. It will endeavour to make the great folk answer for the geld which lies on any land that is in any way subject to their power; thus the cost of collecting petty sums will be saved and the tax will be charged on men who are solvent. The central power may even hold out certain advantages to the lord who will become responsible for the geld of his tenants or justiciables or commended men. The hints that we get in divers counties that the lord's 'inland' has borne no geld seem to point in this direction, though the arrangements about this matter seem to have varied from shire to shire.(88*) On the pipe rolls of a later day we see that the geld charged against the magnates is often 'pardoned.' For one reason the king cannot easily tax the rich; for another he cannot easily tax the poor; so he gets at the poor through the rich. The small folk will gladly accept any scheme that will keep the tax-collector from their doors, even though they purchase their relief by onerous promises of rents and services. The great men, again, may find advantage in such bargains; they want periodical rents and services, and in order to obtain them will accept a certain responsibility for occasional taxes. This process had gone very far on the eve of the Conquest. Moreover the great men had enjoyed a large liberty of paying their geld where they pleased, of making special compositions with the king, of turning some wide and discrete territory into a single geld-paying unit, of forming such 'manors' as Taunton or Berkeley or Leominster.
In King Edward's day the occupiers of the soil might, so it seems to us, be divided by the financier into three main classes. In the first class we place the man who has a manor. He has, that is, a house at which he is charged with geld. He may be a great man or a small, an earl or a peasant; he may be charged at that house with the geld of a hundred hides or with the geld of fifteen acres. In the second class we place the villeins, bordiers, cottiers. The geld apportioned to the land that they occupy is demanded from their lord at his manor, or one of his manors. How he recoups himself for having to make this payment, that is his concern; but he is responsible for it to the king, not as guarantor, but as principal debtor. But then, at least in the east and north, there are many men who fall into neither of these classes. They are not villeins, they are sokemen or 'free men'; but their own tenements are not manors; they belong to or 'lie in' some manor of their lord. These men, we think, can be personally charged with the geld; but they pay their geld at their lord's hall and he is in some measure bound to exact the payment.
Anything that could be called a strict proof of this theory we cannot offer; but it has been suggested by many facts and phrases which we cannot otherwise explain. In the first place, our record seems to assume that every holding either is a manor or forms part of a manor.(89*) Then we are told how lands 'geld' at or in some manor or at the caput manerii. Thus lands which lie many miles away from Tewkesbury, but which belong to the manor of Tewkesbury, 'geld in Tewkesbury.'(90*) Sometimes the same information is conveyed to us by a phrase that deserves notice. A piece of land is said to 'defend itself' in or at some manor, or, which is the same thing, to have its wara or render its wara, that is to say, its defence, its answer to the demand for geld, there.(91*) 'In Middleton two sokemen had 16 acres of land and they rendered their wara in the said Middleton, but they could give and sell their land to whom they pleased.'(92*) When we are told that certain lands are in warnode Drogonis or in warnode Archiepiscopi, it is meant that the lands belong to Drogo or the Archbishop for the purpose of 'defence' against the geld.(93*) It is not sufficient that land should be taxed, it must be taxed 'in' some place, which may be remote from that in which, as a matter of physical fact, it lies.(94*) One clear case of a free tenant paying his geld to his lord is put before us: -- 'Leofwin had half a hide and could withdraw with his land and he paid geld to his lord and his lord paid nothing.'(95*) Besides this we have cases in which the lord enjoys the special privilege of collecting the geld from his tenants and keeping it for his own use.(96*) A remarkable Kentish entry tells us that at Peckham the archbishop had an estate which had been rated at six sullungs, and then that 'of the land of this manor a certain man of the archbishop held a half-sullung which in King Edward's day gelded with these six sullungs, although being free land it did not belong to the manor save for the purpose of the scot.'(97*) Here we have land so free that the one connexion between it and the manor to which it is attributed consists in the payment of geld -- it gelds along with the other lands of the manor. In the great lawsuit between the churches of Worcester and Evesham about the lands at Hamton, the former contended that these lands should pay their geld along with the other estates of the bishop.(98*)
Let us observe the first question that the commissioners are to ask of the jurors. What is the name of the mansio? Every piece of geldable land is connected with some mansio, at which it gelds. Let us observe how the commissioners and the jurors proceed in a district where the villae and the mansiones or maneria are but rarely coincident. The jurors of the Armingford hundred of Cambridgeshire are speaking of their country vill by vill. They come to the vill of Abington.(99*) Abington, they say, was rated at five hides. Of these five hides the king has a half-hide; this lies in Litlington. Earl Roger has one virgate; this lies in his manor of Shingay. Picot the sheriff has a half-virgate; this lies and has always lain in Morden. In what sense important to the commissioners or their master can a bundle of strips scattered about in the fields of Abington be said to lie in Litlington, in Shingay, or in Morden? We answer that it gelds there.
Hence the importance of the hall. It is the place where geld is demanded and paid. A manor without a hall is a thing to be carefully noted, otherwise some geld may be lost.(100*) A man's land has descended to his three sons: if 'there is only one hall,' but one demand for geld need be made; if 'each has his hall,' there must be three separate demands. When we are told that two brothers held land and that each had his house (domus) though they dwelt in one court (curia), a nice problem is being put before us: -- Two halls, or one hall -- Two manors or one manor?(101*)
The petty maneria of Suffolk, what can they be but holdings which geld by themselves? The holders of them are not great men, they have no tenants or just two or three bordiers; sometimes they can not 'withdraw' their lands from their lords. But still they pay their own taxes at their own houses.
In supposing that forces have been at work which tend to make the lord responsible for the taxes of his men, we are not without a warrant in the ancient dooms. 'If a king's thegn or a lord of land (landrica) neglects to pay the Rome penny, let him forfeit ten half-marks, half to Christ, half to the king. If a "townsman" withholds the penny, let the lord of the land pay the penny and take an ox from the man, and if the lord neglects to do this, then let Christ and the king receive the full bot of 12 ores.'(102*) The right of doing justice is also the duty of doing justice. It is natural that the lord with soke should become a tax-gatherer, and he will gladly guarantee the taxes if thereby he can prevent the king's officers from entering his precinct and meddling with his justiciables. At no time has the state found it easy to collect taxes from the poor; over and over again it has been glad to avail itself of the landlord's intermediation.(103*)
Our theory that while the lord is directly and primarily responsible for the geld of his villeins, he is but subsidiarily responsible for the geld of those of his sokemen or 'free men' who are deemed to belong to his manor, is founded in part on what we take to have been the wording of King William's writ,(104*) in part on the form taken by the returns made thereto. The writ draws a marked line between the villein and the sokeman. The king wishes to know how much land each sokeman, each liber homo, holds; he does not care that any distinction should be drawn between the lord's demesne lands and the lands of the villeins. And, on the whole, his commands are obeyed. A typical entry in the survey of East Anglia will first describe in one mass the land held by the lord and his villeins, will tell us how many carucates this land is rated at, how many teams there are on the demesne, and how many the men have, then it will enumerate sheep and pigs and goats, and then, as it were in an appendix, it will add that so many sokemen belong to this manor and that between them they hold so many carucates or acres.(105*) In Suffolk even the names of these humble tenants are sometimes recorded.(106*) And then, we have seen(107*) that there is some doubt as to whether or no these men are or are not to be reckoned as part of the manor for all purposes. We have to say that the manor 'with the free men,' or 'without the free men', is worth so much.
After all, we are only supposing that the fashion in which the danegeld was put in charge resembled in some of its main outlines the fashion in which a very similar tax was put in charge under Richard I. In 1194, the land-tax that was levied for the payment of the king's ransom seems to have been assessed according to the hidage stated in Domesday (108*) Then in 1198 a new assessment was made. We are told that the king ordained that every baron should with the sheriff's aid distrain his men to pay the tax cast upon them, and that if, owing to the baron's default, distresses were not made, then the amount due from the baron's men should be seized from the baron's own demesne and he should be left to recoup himself as best he could.(109*) Now it is a liability of this sort that we are venturing to carry back into the Confessor's day. The lord is responsible to the state as principal, and indeed as sole, debtor for so much of the geld as is due from his demesne land and from the land of his villani, while as regards any lands of 'free men' or sokemen which are attached to his manor, his liability is not primary nor absolute; he is bound to take measures to make these men pay their taxes; if he fails in this duty, then their taxes will become due from his demesne.(110*)
When we read that in Nottinghamshire the relief of the thegn who had six manors or less was three marks, while his who had more than six manors was eight pounds,(111*) this may seem to hint that some inferior limit was set to the size of the manor. If so, it was drawn at a very low point in the scale of tenements. Possibly some general rule had compelled all men who held less than a bovate or half-virgate to 'add' themselves to the manor of some lord. But the Nottinghamshire rule is rude and arbitrary. He who has seven houses against which geld is charged is a big man. On the other hand, it is probable that the Norman lords brought with them some notion, and not a very modest notion, of what a reasonably sufficient manerium should be. The king has in some cases rewarded them by a promise of ten or twenty manors without specifying very carefully what those manors are to be like. He has promised Count Eustace a hundred manors.(112*) Thus we would explain a not uncommon class of entries: -- 'fourteen free men commended to Wulfsige were delivered to Rainald to make up (ad perficiendum) this manor of Carlington.'(113*) -- in Berningham a free man held 20 acres of land and this was delivered to Walter Giffard to make up Letheringsett.'(114*) -- 'Peter claims the land which belonged to seventeen free men as having been delivered to him to make up this manor.'(115*) -- 'This land was delivered to Peter to make up some, but his men do not know what, manor.'(116*) The small 'free men' of the east have been 'added to' manors to which they did not belong in King Edward's day. A few of the free men of Suffolk still 'remain in the king's hand' ready to be delivered out to complete the manors of their conquerors.(117*) Here too we may perhaps find the explanation of the entry which says that Hugh de Port held Wallop 'for half a manor.'(118*) The king has promised him a dozen or score of manors; and this estate at Wallop worth but fifteen shillings a year, really no gentleman would take it for a manor.
Such then is the best explanation that we can offer of the manerium of Domesday About details we may be wrong, but that this term has a technical meaning which is connected with the levy of the danegeld we can not doubt. It loses that meaning in course of time because the danegeld gives way before newer forms of taxation. It never again acquires a technical meaning until the late days when retrospective lawyers find the essence of a manor in its court.(119*)
This book is provided by FunNovel Novel Book | Fan Fiction Novel [Beautiful Free Novel Book]