That this open field system, the remains of which have now been examined, was identical with that which existed in the Middle Ages might easily be proved by a continuous chain of examples. But it will be enough for the present purpose to pick out a few typical instances, using them as stepping-stones.
It would be easy to quote Tusser's description of 'Champion Farming' in the sixteenth century. In his 'Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry' he describes the respective merits of 'several,' and 'champion' or open field farming. But as he describes the latter as a system already out of date in his time, and as rapidly giving way to the more economical system of 'several' or enclosed fields, we may pass on at once to evidence another couple of centuries earlier in date. [p018]
Of the fact that the open field system 500 years ago (in the fourteenth century), with its divisions into furlongs and subdivision into acre or half-acre strips, existed in England, the 'Vision of Piers the Plowman' may be appealed to as a witness.
What was 'the faire felde ful of folke,' in which the poet saw 'alle maner of men' 'worchyng and wandryng,' some 'putten hem to the plow,' whilst others 'in settyng and in sowyng swonken ful harde'?11 A modern English field shut in by hedges would not suit the vision in the least. It was clearly enough the open field into which all the villagers turned out on the bright spring morning, and over which they would be scattered, some working and some looking on. In no other 'faire felde' would he see such folk of all sorts, the '[hus]bondemen,' bakers and brewers, butchers, woolwebsters and weavers of linen, tailors, tinkers, and tollers in market, masons, dikers, and delvers; while the cooks cried 'Hote pies hote!' and tavern-keepers set in competition their wines and roast meat at the alehouse.12
Then as to the division of the fields into furlongs; remembering that the wide balks between them and along the headlands were often covered with 'brakes and brambles,' the point is at once settled by the naïve confession of the priest who scarce knew perfectly his Paternoster, and could 'ne solfe ne synge' 'ne seyntes lyues rede,' yet knew well enough the 'rymes of Robyn hood,' and how to 'fynde an hare in a fourlonge.' 13 [p019]
Further, a chance indication that the furlongs were divided into half-acre strips occurs most naturally in that part of the story where the folk in the fair field, sick of priests and parsons and other false guides, come at last to Piers the plowman, and beg him to show them the way to truth; and he replies that he must first plow and sow his 'half-acre:'
I have an half acre to erye · bi the heighe way:
Hadde I eried this half acre · and sowen it after,
I wolde wende with you · and the way teche.14
And if there should remain a shadow of doubt whether Piers' half-acre must necessarily have been one of the strips between the balks into which the furlongs were divided, even this is cleared up by the perfect little picture which follows of the folk in the field helping him to plow it. For in its unconscious truthfulness of graphic detail, after saying,—
Now is perkyn and his pilgrymes · to the plowe faren:
To erie his halue acre · holpyn hym manye,
the very first lines in the list of services rendered explain that—
Dikeres and delueres · digged up the balkes.15
This incidental evidence of 'Piers the Plowman' is fully borne out by a manuscript terrier of one of the open fields near Cambridge, belonging to the later years of the fourteenth or beginning of the fifteenth century.16 It gives the names of the owners and occupiers of all the seliones or strips. They are [p020] divided by balks of turf. They lie in furlongs or quarentenæ. They have frequently headlands or foreræ. Some of the strips are gored, and called gored acres. Many of them are described as butts. Indeed, were it not that the country round Cambridge being flat there are no lynches, almost every one of the features of the system is distinctly visible in this terrier.
But this terrier also contains evidence that the system was even then in a state of decay and disintegration. The balks were disappearing, and the strips, though still remembered as strips, were becoming merged in larger portions, so that they lie thrown together sine balca. The mention is frequent of iii. seliones which used to be v., ii. which used to be iv., iii. which used to be viii., and so on. Evidently the meaning and use of the half-acre strips are already gone.
It will be well, therefore, to take another leap, and at once to pass behind the Black Death—that great watershed in economic history—so as to examine the details of the system before rather than after it had sustained the tremendous shock which the death in one year of half the population may well have given to it.
A remarkably excellent opportunity for inquiry is presented by a complete set of manor rolls during the reign of Edward III. for the Manor of Winslow in Buckinghamshire, preserved in the Cambridge University Library.17 [p021]
No evidence could possibly be more to the purpose. Belonging to the Abbey of St. Albans, the rolls were kept with scrupulous accuracy and care. Every change of ownership during the long reign of Edward III. is recorded in regular form; and the year 1348–9—the year of the Black Death—occurring in the course of this reign, and occasioning more changes of ownership than usual, the MS. presents, if one may appropriate a geological expression, something like an economic section of the manor, revealing with unusual clearness the various economic strata in which its holdings were arranged.
Before examining these holdings it is needful only to state that here, as in the later examples, the fields of the manor are open fields, divided into furlongs, which in their turn are made up with apparently almost absolute regularity of half-acre strips. Whenever (with very rare exceptions) a change of ownership takes place, and the contents of the holding are described, they turn out to be made up of half-acre pieces, or seliones, scattered all over the fields.
The typical entry on these rolls in such cases is that A. B. surrenders to the lord, or has died holding, a messuage and so many acres of land, of which a half-acre lies in such and such a field, and often in such and such a furlong, between land of C. D. and E. F., another half-acre somewhere else between two other persons' land, another half-acre somewhere else, and so on. If the holding be of 112 acres it is found to be in 3 half-acre pieces, if of 4 acres, in 8 half-acre pieces, and so on, scattered over the fields. Sometimes amongst the half-acres are mentioned still smaller portions, roods and even half-roods or doles [p022] (chiefly of pasture or meadow land), belonging to the holdings, but the division into half-acre strips was clearly the rule.
There can be no doubt, therefore, of the identity of the system seen at work in these manor rolls with that of which some of the débris may still be examined in unenclosed parishes to-day.
Starting with the fact that the fields of the manor of Winslow and its hamlets18 were open fields divided into furlongs and half-acre strips, the chief object of inquiry will be the nature of the holdings of its various classes of tenants.
In the first place the land of the manor was divided, like that of almost all other manors, into two distinct parts—land in the lord's demesne, and land in villenage.
The land in demesne may be described as the home farm of the lord of the manor, including such portions of it as he may have chosen to let off to tenants for longer or shorter terms, and at money rents in free tenure.
The land in villenage is also in the occupation of tenants, but it is held in villenage, at the will of the lord, and at customary services. It lies in open fields. These are divided into three seasons, according to the [p023] three-field system. There is a west field, east field, and south field. The demesne land lies also in these three fields,19 probably more or less intermixed, as in many cases, with the strips in villenage, but sometimes in separate furlongs or shots from the latter.
Throughout the pages of the manor rolls, in recording transfers of holdings in villenage, the common form is always adhered to of a surrender by the old tenant to the lord, and a re-grant of the holding to the new tenant, to be held by him at the will of the lord in villenage at the usual services. Where the change of holding occurs on the death of a tenant, the common form recites that the holding has reverted to the lord, who re-grants it to the new tenant as before in villenage.
Further examination at once discloses a marked difference in kind between some classes of holdings in villenage and others.
In some cases the holding handed over is simply described by the one comprehensive word 'virgata' (the Latin equivalent for 'yard-land'), without any further description. The 'virgate' of A. B. is transferred to C. D. in one lump; i.e. the holding is an indivisible whole, evidently so well known as to need no description of its contents.
In other cases the holding is in the same way described as a 'half-virgate,' without any details being needful as to its contents.
But in the case of all other holdings the contents are described in detail half-acre by half-acre, each half-acre being identified by the names of the holders [p024] of the strips on either side of it. They vary in size from one half-acre to 8 or 10 or 12 half-acres, and in a few cases more. The greater number of them are, however, evidently the holdings of small cottier tenants. A few cases occur, but only a few, where a messuage is held without land.
But the question of interest is what may be the nature of the holdings called virgates and half-virgates—these well-known bundles of land, which, as already said, need no description of their contents. Fortunately in one single case a virgate or yard-land—that of John Moldeson—loses its indivisible unity and is let out again by the lord to several persons in portions. These being new holdings, and no longer making up a virgate, it became needful to describe their contents on the rolls.20 Thus the details of which a virgate was made up are accidentally exposed to view.
Putting the broken pieces of it together, this virgate of John Moldeson is found to have consisted of a messuage in the village of Shipton, in the manor of Winslow, and the following half-acre strips of land scattered all over the open fields of the manor.
| Where situated. | Between the Land of |
|---|---|
12 acre in Clayforlong. |
John Boveton and William Jonynges. |
12 acre in Brereforlong. |
Richard Lif and John Mayn. |
|
12 acre at Anamanlond by the king's highway (juxta regiam viam). | |
12 acre at Lofthorn. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at le Wawes. |
John Hikkes and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Michelpeysforlong. |
Henry Warde and John Watekyns. |
12 acre above le Snoute. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre in le Snouthale. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Livershulle. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Narowe-aldemed. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre in Shiptondene. |
John Hikkes and John Howeprest. |
12 acre in Waterforough. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
2 roods below Chircheheigh. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Fyveacres. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Sherdeforlong. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Thorlong. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre (of pasture) in Farnhamesden. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre (of pasture) in three parcels. | |
1 acre (of pasture) below Estattemore. | |
12 acre (of pasture) at Brodemore. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre (of meadow) at Risshemede. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
2 doles (of meadow) in Shrovedoles. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre below le Knolle. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Brodealdemade. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre above Brodelangelonde. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Merslade. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Langebenehullesdene. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Hoggestonforde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Clayforde. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Narwelanglonde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Wodewey. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre Benethenhystrete. |
William Jonynges and Henry Boviton. |
12 acre Benethenhystrete. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Langeslo. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Lowe. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at le Knolle. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Brodealdemede. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Shortslo. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Eldeleyen. |
John Watekyns and John Janekyns. |
12 acre above Langeblakgrove. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Blakeputtis. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre above Medeforlong. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at le Thorn. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Overlitellonde. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre above le Brodelitellonde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Overlitellonde. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre above Medeforlong. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at le Thorn. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Hoggestonforde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Eldeleyes. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Cokwell. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Brodefarnham. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Langefarnham. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above Farnhamshide. |
Henry Boveton and Richard Atte Halle. |
12 acre at Howeshamme. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Stonysticch. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Coppedemore. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Brerebuttes. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Wodeforlonge. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Porteweye. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Litebenhulle. |
Henry Boveton and Matthew atte Lane. |
12 acre at Michilblakegrove. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Litelblakegrove. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Brodereten. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Brodeliteldon. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Stoteford. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre at Brodelangelonde. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre above Litelbelesden. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
12 acre in Anamaneslonde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Litelpeisaere. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
1 rood in le Trendel. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Merslade. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Merslade. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre at Brodelitellonde. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre below le Knolle. |
John Watekyns and Henry Warde. |
12 acre above le Brodealdemede. |
John Watekyns and John Mayn. |
Thus the virgate or yard-land of John Moldeson was composed of a messuage and
scattered all over the open fields in their various furlongs.
But it may be asked, how can it be proved that the other virgates were like the one virgate of John [p027] Moldeson thus by chance described and exposed to view on the manor rolls? Is it right to assume that this virgate may be taken as a pattern of the rest? The answer is, that in the description of its 72 half-acre strips the 144 neighbouring strips are incidentally involved. And as 66 of its strips had on one side of them 66 other strips of another tenant, viz. John Watekyns, and on the other side 43 of the next strips belonged to Henry Warde, and 23 to John Mayn, and 8 of the strips only had other neighbours, it is evident that the virgate of John Moldeson was one of a system of similar virgates formed of scattered half-acre strips, arranged in a certain regular order of rotation, in which John Moldeson came 66 times next to John Watekyns, and two other neighbours followed him, one 43 and the other 23 times, in similar succession.
Thus the Winslow virgates were intermixed, and each was a holding of a messuage in the village, and between 30 and 40 modern acres of land, not contiguous, but scattered in half-acre pieces all over the common fields. The half-virgate consisted in the same way of a messuage in the village with half as many strips scattered over the same fields. The intermixed ownership complained of in the Inclosure Acts, and surviving in the Hitchin maps, need no longer surprise us.
We know now what a virgate or yard-land was. We shall find that its normal area was 30 scattered acres—10 acres in each of the three fields. Using again the map of the Hitchin fields, we may mark upon it the contents of a normal virgate by way of impressing upon the eye the nature of this peculiar holding. It must always be remembered that when [p028] the fields were divided into half-acres instead of acres the number of its scattered strips would be doubled.
It is not possible to ascertain from a mere record of the changes in the holdings precisely how many of these virgates and half-virgates there were in the manor of Winslow. But in the year of the Black Death it may be assumed that the mortality fell with something like equality upon all classes of tenants, 153 changes of holding from the death of previous holders being recorded in 1348–9. Out of these, 28 were holders of virgates and 14 of half-virgates. The virgates and half-virgates of these holders who died of the Black Death must have included more than 2,400 half-acre strips in the open fields; and adding up the contents of the other holdings of tenants who died that year, it would seem that about two-thirds of the whole area which changed hands in that memorable year were included in the virgates and half-virgates. It may be inferred, therefore, that about the same proportion of the whole area of the open fields must have been included in the virgates and half-virgates whose holders died or survived. Clearly, then, the mass of the land in the open fields was held in these two grades of holdings.21
Thus much, then, may be learned from the Winslow manor rolls with respect to the virgates and half-virgates. Not only were they holdings each composed of a messuage and the scattered strips belonging to it in the open fields, not only did they form the [p029] two chief grades of holdings with equality in each grade, but also they were all alike held in villenage. They were not holdings of the lord's demesne land, but of the land in villenage. The holders, besides their virgates and half-virgates, often, it is true, held other land, part of the lord's demesne, as free tenants at an annual rent. But such free holdings were no part of their virgates. The virgates and half-virgates were held in villenage. Of these they were not free tenants, but villein tenants. So also the lesser cottage holdings were held in villenage. But the holders of virgates and half-virgates were the highest grades in the hierarchy of tenants in villenage. They not only held the greater part of the open fields in their bundles of scattered strips; the rolls also show that they almost exclusively served as jurors in the 'Halimot,' or Court of the Manor; though occasionally one or two other villein tenants with smaller holdings were associated with them.22
It is possible that just as villein tenants could hold in free tenure land in the lord's demesne, so free men might hold virgates in villenage and retain their personal freedom; but those at all events of the holders of virgates who were nativi, i.e. villeins by descent were adscripti glebæ. They held their holdings at the will of the lord, and were bound to perform the customary services. If they allowed their houses to [p030] get out of repair they were guilty of waste, and the jury were fined if they did not report the neglect.23
Yet the entries in the rolls prove that their holdings were hereditary, passing by the lord's re-grant from father to son by the rule of primogeniture, on payment of the customary heriot or relief.24
Widows had dower, and widowers were tenants by the curtesy, as in the case of freeholds. The holders in villenage, even 'nativi,' could make wills which were proved before the cellerarius of the abbey, and had done so time out of mind, while the wills of free tenants were proved at St. Albans.25
These things all look like a certain recognition of freedom within the restraints of the villenage. But if the 'nativi' married without the lord's consent they were fined. If they sold an ox without licence, again they were fined. If they left the manor without licence they were searched for, and if found arrested as fugitives and brought back.26 If their daughters lost their chastity27 the lord again had his fine. And [p031] in all these cases the whole jury were fined if they neglected to report the delinquent.
Their services were no doubt limited and defined by custom, and so late as the reign of Edward III. mostly discharged by a money payment in lieu of the actual service, but they rested nominally on the will of the lord; and sometimes to test their obedience the relaxed rein was tightened, and trivial orders were issued, such as that they should go off to the woods and pick nuts for the lord.28 In case of dispute a court was held under the great ash tree at St. Albans, and the decision of this superior manorial court at head-quarters settled the question.29 This villenage of the Winslow tenants was, no doubt, in the fourteenth century mild in its character; the silent working of economic laws was breaking it up; but it was villenage still. It was serfdom, but it was serfdom in the last stages of its relaxation and decay.
Already, any harking back by the landlord upon older and stricter rules—any return, for instance, to the actual services instead of the money payments in lieu of them—produced resentment and insubordination amongst the villein tenants. Murmurs were already heard in the courts, and symptoms appear on the rolls in the year following the Black Death which clearly indicate the presence of smouldering embers very likely soon to burst into flame.30 The rebellion under Wat Tyler was, in fact, not far ahead. But in this inquiry we are looking backwards into earlier times, in order to learn what English serfdom was when fully in force, rather than in the days when [p032] it was breaking up. In the meantime the practical knowledge gained from the Winslow manor rolls, how a community in serfdom fitted as it were into the open field system as into an outer shell, and still more the knowledge of what the virgate and half-virgate in villenage really were, drawn from actual examples, may prove a useful key in unlocking still further the riddle of earlier serfdom.
The facts thus learned from the Winslow Manor Rolls throw just that flash of light upon the otherwise dry details of the Hundred Rolls of Edward I. which is needful to make the picture they give in detail of the manors in parts of five midland counties vivid and clear.
English economic history is rich in its materials; and of all the records of the economic condition of England, next to the Domesday Survey, the Hundred Rolls are the most important and remarkable. The second volume, in its 1,000 folio pages, contains inter alia a true and clear description of every manor in a large district, embracing portions of Oxfordshire, Berkshire, Bedfordshire, Huntingdonshire, and Cambridgeshire, in about the year 1279; and as in most cases the name of every tenant is recorded, with the character of his holding and a description of his payments and services, the picture of each manor has almost the detail and accuracy of a photograph. Turning over its pages, the mass of detail may at first appear confused and bewildering, and in one sense it is so, because [p033] it relates to a system which, however simple when fully at work, becomes broken up and entangled whilst in process of disintegration. But the key to it once mastered, the original features of the system may still be recognised. Even the broken pieces fall into their proper places, and the general economic outlines of the several manors stand out sharply and clearly marked.
Speaking generally, in its chief economic features every manor is alike, as in the record itself one common form of survey serves for them all. Hence the Winslow example gives the requisite key to the whole. Bringing to the record the knowledge of how the open fields were everywhere divided into furlongs, and acre or half-acre strips, and that virgates and half-virgates were equal bundles of strips scattered all over the fields, the description of the manors in the Hundred Rolls becomes perfectly intelligible.
In the first place the manor consists, as in the Winslow example, of two parts—the land in demesne and the land in villenage.
The land in demesne consists of the home farm, and portions, irregular in area, let out from it to what are called free tenants (libere tenentes), some of them being nevertheless villeins holding their portions of the demesne lands in free tenure at certain rents in addition to their regular holdings.
The land in villenage, as in the Winslow manor, is held mostly in virgates and half-virgates, and below these cottiers hold smaller holdings, also in villenage.
In describing the tenants in villenage there is first a statement that A. B. holds a virgate in villenage at such and such payments and services, which are often [p034] very minutely described. The money value of each service and the total value of them all is in many cases also carefully given. This description of the holding and services of A. B. is then followed by a list of persons who also each hold a virgate at the same services as A. B.
Secondly, there is a similar statement in detail that C. D. holds a half-virgate in villenage, and that such and such are his payments and services, followed by a similar list of persons who also each hold a half-virgate at the same services as C. D.
Then follows a list of the little cottier tenants, and their holdings and services. Amongst some of these cottage holdings there is equality, some are irregular, and some consist of a cottage and nothing else.
These holdings are all in villenage, but, as before mentioned, the names of the villein tenants often occur again in the list of free tenants (libere tenentes) of portions of the lord's demesne or of recently reclaimed land (terra assarta).
This may be taken as a fair description of the common type of manor throughout the Hundred Rolls, with local variations.
The chief of these is that in many places in Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire the holdings of the villani, instead of being described as virgates and half-virgates, are described by their acreage. There are so many holders of 30, 20, 15, 10, or other number of acres each. They are not the less in grades, with equality in each grade, but the holdings bear no distinctive name.
There is also in these counties a class of tenants, partly above the villani, called sochemanni, which we [p035] shall find again when we reach the Domesday Survey. But upon exceptional local circumstances it is not needful to dwell here.
The fact is, then, that in the Hundred Rolls of Edward I. there is disclosed over the much wider area of five midland counties almost precisely the same state of things as that which existed in the manor of Winslow late in the reign of Edward III. That manor was under the ecclesiastical lordship of an abbey, but here in the Hundred Rolls the same state of things exists under all kinds of ownership. Manors of the king or the nobility, of abbeys, and of private and lesser landowners, are all substantially alike. In all there is the division of the manor into demesne land and land in villenage. In all the mass of the land in villenage is held in the grades of holdings mostly called virgates and half-virgates, with equality in each grade both as to the holding and the services. In all alike are found the smaller cottage holdings, also in villenage; and lastly, in all alike there are the free tenants of larger or smaller portions of the demesne land.
If the picture of a manor and its open fields and virgates or yard-lands in villenage—i.e. both of the shell and of the community in serfdom inhabiting the shell—drawn in detail from the single Winslow example, has thrown light upon the Hundred Rolls, these latter, embracing hundreds of manors in the midland counties of England, give the picture a typical value, proving that it is true, not for one manor only, but, speaking generally, for all the manors of central England.
They also give additional information on the relation [p036] of the holdings to the hide, and reveal more clearly than the Winslow manor rolls the nature of the serfdom under which the villein tenants held their virgates. Before passing from the Hundred Rolls it will be worth while to examine the new facts they give us, and to devote a section to an examination of the services.
Before passing to the villein services described in the Hundred Rolls, evidence may be cited from them showing the relation of the virgate or yard-land—which is now known to be the normal holding of the normal tenant in villenage—to the hide and carucate. If to the knowledge of what a virgate was, can be added an equally clear understanding of what a hide was, another valuable step will be gained.
In the rolls for Huntingdonshire a series of entries occurs, describing, contrary to the usual practice of the compilers, the number of acres in a virgate, and the number of virgates in a hide, in several manors.
These entries are given below,31 and they show clearly—
(1) That the bundle of scattered strips called a virgate did not always contain the same number of acres.
(2) That the hide did not always contain the same number of virgates.
But at the same time it is evident that the hide in [p037] Huntingdonshire most often contained 120 acres or thereabouts. It did so in twelve cases out of nineteen. In one case it contained the double of 120, i.e. 240 acres. In six cases only the contents varied irregularly from the normal amount.