The Agrarian Problem in the Sixteenth Century Part 36

2. Wilts.h.i.+re and Dorsets.h.i.+re.

South Newton, Estoverton and Phipheld, Winterbourne Ba.s.set, Washerne, Donyngton, Byshopeston, Knyghton, Ewerne (the last in Dorsets.h.i.+re, _Topographer and Genealogist_, vol. i. There are only three customary tenants on this manor, and only one is represented in the table, as the use made by the others of their land is not ascertainable).

3. Bedfords.h.i.+re, Northamptons.h.i.+re, Staffords.h.i.+re, Leicesters.h.i.+re.

Salford, Weedon Weston, Wotton in Elishall, Kibworth Harcourt.

In connection with this table the following points should be noticed:--

(i) I am not certain that all the tenants represented in it are customary tenants. But with one or two exceptions the holdings of all are not larger than those of the customary tenants on other manors, so that there is no reason to suppose that their agricultural economy differed from that usually followed by the latter.

(ii) More serious, the figures are not completely accurate. I have entered under each denomination, "arable," "meadow," or "pasture," land so entered by the surveyor. In some cases, however, the character of the land is not specified. _E.g._ it is described simply as a "close," or a tenant is said to hold so many acres of arable "with appurtenances."

Further, tenants frequently possess rights of pasture which are not expressed in terms of acres, but are either measured by the number of beasts which they may graze, or are not measured at all (_e.g._ "catalla sine extento"). In the latter case, which does not affect any except the Wilts.h.i.+re manors, I have not attempted to form any estimate, but have simply taken their holdings as stated by the surveyor. When there is no clue to the character of the land, I have omitted it. When it is plain that the land falls under a special denomination, though this is not specified in the survey, I have placed it under that denomination in my table. _E.g._ at Donyngton nearly every tenant holds "unum clausum noviter extractum de communia," and together they hold in such "closes"

132 acres. I have entered these as "pasture."

TABLE VI. (pp. 115-117)

1. Ingoldmells, Lincolns.h.i.+re: Ma.s.singberd, Ingoldmells Court Rolls, Preface, p. vii. I quote the words of the editor, "In 1086 the annual value of the manor of Ingoldmells was 10.... In 1295 the rents of the free and bondage tenants were 51, 17s. 1d.... In 1347 the same rents were 61, 9s. 4d., and in 1421 they were 71, 10s. 3d.... But in 1485 3, 7s. 4d. had to be deducted for lost rents ... from a total of 72, 6s. 8d.... When the manor was sold in 1628 by Charles I., the reserved rent ... was only 73, 17s. 2d.... It is therefore clear that at Ingoldmells the tenants appropriated virtually the whole of the increase in the value of the land."

2. Crondall, Hamps.h.i.+re: Baigent, _Crondal Records_, Part I., pp. 135 and 383.

3. Sutton Warblington, Hamps.h.i.+re: _ibid._, pp. 141 and 383. At the later date Sutton Warblington appears to have been treated as part of the manor of Crondal, though still itself called a manor.

4. Birling, Northumberland: _Northumberland County History_, vol. v.

5. Acklington, Northumberland: _ibid._, vol. v.

6. High Buston, Northumberland: _ibid._, vol. v. (Tenants at will and copyholders only).

7. Amble, Northumberland: _ibid._, vol. v.

8. Aspley Guise, Bedfords.h.i.+re. These figures were kindly supplied me by Dr. G.H. Fowler of Aspley Guise as the result of his researches in the Record Office into the history of the manor.

9. South Newton, Wilts.h.i.+re: Roxburghe Club, _Surveys of Lands of William, first Earl of Pembroke_, edited by Straton. Note (a) The manor of South Newton included the parishes of Childhampton, Stoford, Little Wishford, and North Ugford. I have dealt here only with the Parish of South Newton, (b) The figures relate only to the customary tenants, and do not include the payments of freeholders and _convencionarii_. I have obtained the figure of 8, 3s. 11-1/2d. by adding together the tenants'

money payments and the value of their works, which are set down in terms of money. But I am not sure that it is correct. I have omitted the payments of fowls (made at both dates) and the small payments for church shot and maltsilver.

10. Cuxham, Oxfords.h.i.+re: Merton MSS., Nos. 5902 and 5905.

11. Ibstone, Buckinghams.h.i.+re: _ibid._, Nos. 5902 and 5209. (In the earlier rental freeholders as well as customary tenants, and in the later possibly leaseholders as well, are included.)

12. Malden, Surrey: Merton MSS. MSS. both headed "Maldon, Thorncroft, and Farleigh 1841," and giving extracts from early court rolls and rentals.

13. Kibworth, Leicesters.h.i.+re: Merton MSS., Nos. 6375 (Rental), 6362, and 6356 (ministers' accounts). The earliest entry is the payments of the copyholders only: the two later entries are "rents of a.s.size."

14. Standen, Hertfords.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 868, No.

17; Bdle. 869, No. 8; Bdle. 869, No. 15; Bdle. 870, No. 4. The earliest entry is "Rents a.s.sized 18, 17s. 3d. Lands let at will of lord 60s."

The second, third, and fourth give the total income.

15. Feering, Ess.e.x: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 841, No. 5; Bdle. 841, No. 23; Mins. Accts., Hen. VIII., No. 951. The first two entries are totals of quarterly rents paid at Christmas, Easter, Birth of St. John the Baptist, and Michaelmas. The last is "a.s.sized rent." It is possible, therefore, that the apparent diminution is due to the earlier rentals having included payments not given in the last.

16. Appledrum, Suss.e.x: R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Rolls 643, 644, and Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 1019, No. 15.

17. Minchinhampton: R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Gen. Ser., Rolls 237 and 241. In the earlier doc.u.ments the "total rent yearly" is given as 41, 14s. 4d., and the "sum total of works" as 4, 15s.

18. Langley Marish, Berks.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 761, No. 4, and Bdle. 762, No. 5; Land Rev. Misc. Bks., vol. 188, f. 196ff.

The first entry is the sum total of rents paid quarterly, together with 7s. 4d. of a custom called "vaccage," and 13s. 4d. of common fine at view of frank pledge. (Exactly the same items are entered in the following year.) The second entry is "profits and issues of the manor,"

and is headed "account of the manor for 83 days," but the similarity of the figure with that of the earlier date makes it hard to believe that the "profits" relate to less than one quarter of the year. The third entry is made up of rents of free and customary tenants, demesne lands held by copy, and customary rents called "Hedage" and "Duply," producing 23s. 3-1/2d.

19. Lewisham, Kent: R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Gen. Ser., Roll 361; Misc.

Bks., Treas. of Receipt, vol. 174, f. 1-34; Misc. Bks., Aug. Off., vol.

414, f. 33-4. The first entry is "Rent of the tenants of the manor of Lewisham," the second "Rental of the lords.h.i.+p of Lewisham." The third "Rent of free tenants 17, 12s. 10-1/2d., Rent of tenants _per dimissionem_ 72, 9s. 8-1/2d., Rents of tenants at will 9d."

20. Cuddington, Surrey: R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Rolls 669 and 624, Aug. Off., Misc. Bks., vol. 414, f. 3-16. The first entry is "Rents belonging to the manor at the terms of Easter and Michaelmas," i.e. it is for half a year only, and therefore I have ventured to double it. The second and third entries consist of the annual rent of all cla.s.ses of tenants.

21. Isleworth, Middles.e.x: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 916, Nos.

11, 21, and 25. The figures at each date refer to the a.s.sized rent. At the two earlier dates the a.s.sized rent is given for all four quarters of the year. At the last date it is given only for the Michaelmas quarter.

In order to make comparison possible, I have given the rents for the Michaelmas quarter throughout. The full entries for the two earlier dates are: 1314-15, 15, 5s. 6d. at Christmas, 17, 1s. 9-3/4d. at Easter, 15, 5s. 6d. at June 24, 21, 16s. 10d. at Michaelmas, works sold 22s. 1-1/2d; 1386-7, 14, 13s. at Christmas, 16, 19s. 7d. at Easter, 13, 13s. at June 24, 23, 3s. 10-1/2d. at Michaelmas, works sold 106s. 10d.

22. Wootton, Oxfords.h.i.+re: R.O. Misc. Accts., Bdle. 962, No. 20; Bdle.

963, No. 14; Aug. Off., Misc. Bks., vol. 414, f. 38b. At the two earlier dates the figures given are the a.s.sized rents of free and bond tenants and _cotarii_, at the last date they are the rents of free and customary tenants. At that time there was also a rent of 30s. 8-1/2d. from a.s.sarts, and a rent of 13, 0s. 11d. from tenants by demission. I have omitted the last two items as there is nothing comparable to them in the earlier entries.

23. Speen, Berks.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 750, No. 22; Misc. Bks. Land Revenue, vol. 187, f. 97-101. At the earlier date the figures refer to the a.s.sized rents, at the later date to the rents of free tenants, customary tenants, and "firms."

24. Schitlington, Bedfords.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 741, Nos. 16, 19, and 27. At the first date the figures refer to the a.s.sized rent, and include "Tallage of the vill 10." At the second date they cover the same entries as at the first. At the last date they refer to the rent as it appears in the Rental. At this time there are certain additional entries, viz., "Firm of land 8, 5s. 0-1/4d., Firm of the manor 4, 15s. 4d., Increase of Rent [of a mill(?)] 13s. 4d., Increase of Rent of 1 messuage, 1 virgate with croft and meadow 13s. 7-1/2d."

These I have omitted.

25. Cranfield, Bedfords.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 740, Nos. 18, and 25; Mins. Accts., Hen. VIII., No. 4. At the first two dates the figures include rents of free and native tenants and ferm of lands.

At the last date the entry is "Rent of the vill, as by the rental, 72, 2s. 1-3/4d."

26. Holywell, Huntingdons.h.i.+re: R.O. Mins. Accts., Gen. Ser., Bdle. 877, No. 17, Bdle. 878, No. 1. At the first date the entries include rents a.s.sized, and certain miscellaneous items such as "Hewesilver,"

"Heringsilver," "Brensilver"; at the later date "Rents a.s.sized of free and villein tenants 4, 19s. 8d., customary rent lately in works and in new rent 15, 6s. for 17 virgates paying 18s. each, 6, 15s., for 25 cotmen paying 9s. each, 6s. 8d. increment of rent."

The suggestion that it might be of interest to try to discover how far rents were stationary over long periods came to me from reading the article by Maitland on "The History of a Cambridges.h.i.+re Manor" in _E. H.

R._, vol. ix., where he points out that copyholders must have enjoyed a considerable unearned increment. The table of rents explained above is unsatisfactory, because of the difficulty of finding a basis for the comparison of payments at different periods. Thus at the earlier dates there are the tenants' works, and (occasionally) tallages to be considered; at the later the rent obtained from leasing the demense. The variety of the sources of manorial revenue makes it impossible to discover a common form to which the payments on all manors can be reduced. The ideal would be to take the villeins' payments and works in (say) the fourteenth century, and to compare them with the payments of the copyhold tenants in the sixteenth century. But since the commonest entry is simply "rents of a.s.size," which included the rents of freeholders as well as of customary tenants, this simple procedure is often impossible.

While the table given on pages 115-117 is certainly not what could be desired, I am inclined to think its inaccuracies do not lie in the direction of exaggerating the fixity of rents, but rather, if anything, in underestimating it, because (i) when a total rent is given for the fifteenth or sixteenth century, without further particulars, it probably often included the rent paid by the farmer of the demesne, which at the earlier period was non-existent, (ii) at the later period the total rent often included payments made for new encroachments in the waste. When this is evidently the case, as at Wootton, and the amount of the new payments is stated, I have omitted them, my object being to compare, when possible, the rents paid by customary tenants at different periods.

But often it is not possible to make such an allowance, and therefore I am disposed to think that the figures for the later dates are more likely to be weighted with irrelevant items than are the figures for the earlier dates. This makes the comparatively slow increase in the rents of some manors all the more worthy of notice.

TABLE VIII (p. 212)

1. Norfolk.

Ma.s.singham Priory (two farms, Hen. VIII., R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Gen.

Ser., Portf. 24, No. 4, f. 46); Wymondham (Hen. VIII., R.O. Augm. Off., Misc. Bks. 408, f. 25); Marshams (Marham(?), Hen. VIII., Augm. Off., Misc. Bks. 408, f. 19); Thetford (Hen. VIII., Augm. Off., Misc. Bks.

408, f. 22); Bockenham (Hen. VIII., R.O. Augm. Off., Misc. Bks. 408, f.