Chapter VIII: Preface: v (7)

The term _manerium_ seems to have come in with the Conqueror[439], though other derivatives from the Latin verb _manere_, in particular _mansa_, _mansio_, _mansiuncula_ had been freely employed by the scribes of the land-books. 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 may 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_[440].' 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 Book.

[Manor and hall.]

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_[441], and that there are three horses in the _aula_[442]; you may speak indifferently of a mill that serves the hall[443], or of the mill that grinds the corn of the court[444]. 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[445], or that Roger de Rames has lands which once were in the hall of St Edmund[446], or that in the hall of Grantham there are three carucates of land[447], or that Guthmund's sake and soke extended only over the demesne of his hall[448]. 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[449]:--these two stories seem to have the same point. 'Four brothers held this; there was only one hall there[450].' 'Two brothers held it and each had his hall; now it is as one manor[451].' 'In these two lands there is but one hall[452].' 'Then there were two halls; now it is in one manor[453].' 'Ten manors; ten thegns, each had his hall[454].' 'Ingelric set these men to his hall.... Ingelric added these men to his manor[455].'

[Difference between manor and hall.]

We do not contend that _manerium_ and _halla_ are precisely equivalent. Now and again we shall be told of a _manerium sine halla_[456] 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[457]: '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[458]: 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[459]. For all this, we can think of no English word for which _manerium_ can stand, save _hall_; _tún_, it is clear enough, was translated by _villa_, not by _manerium_.

[Size of the _maneria_.]

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.

[A large manor.]

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[460]. 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 6_s._ 8_d._ 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 20_s._ a year. There is wood for 30 pigs; there are 2 arpents of vineyard. To this manor belong four berewicks. Altogether it is worth £35 and formerly it was worth £40.--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[461]. 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 £6 and has been worth £7. Within this one county of Middlesex we can see wide variations. There are manors which are worth £50 and there are manors which are not worth as many shillings. The archbishop's grand manor at Harrow has land for 70 teams[462]; the Westminster manor of Cowley has land for but one team and the only tenants upon it are two villeins[463].

[Enormous manors. Leominster.]

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[464]. 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 15_s._ and Hugh de Lacy 6_s._ 8_d._ It is let to farm at a rent of £60 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 £120. 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[465]. 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.

[Berkeley.]

[Tewkesbury.]

No less handsome and yet more valuable is Berkeley in Gloucestershire[466]. It brought in a rent of £170 of refined money. It had eighteen members which were dispersed abroad over so wide a field that a straight line of thirty miles would hardly join their uttermost points[467]. '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 £100,' though now but £50 at the most can be had from it and in the turmoil of the Conquest its value fell to £12[468]. 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 thrown on 35 of those hides. The 'head of the manor' was at Tewkesbury; the members were dispersed abroad; but 'they gelded in Tewkesbury[469].'

[Taunton.]

No list of great manors would be complete without a notice of Taunton[470]. 'The bishop of Winchester holds Tantone or has a mansion called Tantone. Stigand held it 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 £154. 12_d._' '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[471]. We might speak of the bishop of Exeter's manor of Crediton in Devon which is worth £75 and in which are 264 villeins and 73 bordiers[472], or of the bishop of Winchester's manor of Chilcombe in Hampshire where there are nine churches[473]; but we turn to another part of England.

[Large manors in the midlands.]

If we wish to see a midland manor with many members we may look at Rothley in Leicestershire[474]. The vill of Rothley itself is not very large and it is separately valued at but 62_s._ 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 £31. 8_s._ 1_d._ 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[475]. A Northamptonshire manor of 27 hides lay scattered about in six hundreds[476].

[Town-houses and berewicks attached to manors.]

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[477]. 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[478]. The berewick (_bereuita_)[479] 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[480].

[Manor and soke.]

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[481]. The soke in this context seems to be the territory in which the lord's rights are, or have been, of a justiciary rather than of a proprietary kind[482]. 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[483], or that the manor 'without the free men' is worth so much[484], that the manor is worth £10 and that the free men pay 40 shillings[485], 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[486].

[Minute manors.]

From one extreme we may pass to the other extreme. If there 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[487]. 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 12_s._, formerly it
was worth 10_s._

(ii) A Somersetshire manor[488]. 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 12_s._ 6_d._ and has been
worth 20_s._

(iii) A Somersetshire manor[489]. 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, 6_s._

(iv) A Somersetshire manor[490]. 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, 6_s._

(v) A Devonshire manor[491]. 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, 3_s._

(vi) A Devonshire manor[492]. Value, 3_s._ All seems to be in
demesne; we see no tenants and no stock.

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

(vii) A Somersetshire manor[493] occupied by one villein. We read
nothing of any stock. Value, 15_d._

(viii) A Somersetshire manor[494] with 3 bordiers on it. Value,
4_s._

(ix) A Somersetshire manor[495] with one bordier on it. Value,
30_d._

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[496]. Yet each of these holdings is a _mansio_, and the Bishop of Winchester's holding at Taunton is a _mansio_.

[Small manors in the east.]

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'[497]. 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[498]. 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 10_s._[499]

(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
10_s._[500]

(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
8_s_.[501]

(iv) Three free men and their mother held 30 acres for a manor.
There was half a team. Value, 5_s._[502]

(v) In Rincham a free man held 30 acres for a manor. There were
half a team and one acre of meadow. Value, 5_s._[503]

(vi) In Wenham Ælfgar a free man held 24 acres for a manor. Value,
4_s._[504]

(vii) In Torp a free man held 20 acres for a manor. One team; wood
for 5 pigs. Value, 40_d._[505]

(viii) In Tudenham Ælfric 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, 3_s._[506]

We are not speaking of curiosities; the sixty acre manor was very common in Essex, the thirty acre manor was no rarity in Suffolk.

[The manor as a peasant's holding.]

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[507]. 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, of 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[508]?

[Definition of a manor.]

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 can not 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 can not accept. Not only may we find a manor the only tenants upon which are _liberi homines_[509], 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 can not believe. In one case we read that the whole manor is being farmed by the villeins so that there is nothing in demesne[510], while in other cases we are told that there is nothing in demesne and see no trace of any recent change[511]. 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.

[The manor and the geld.]

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 Brihtmær held in King Edward's time for forty acres and for a manor[512].'--'Two free men who were brothers, Bondi and Ælfric held it for two hides and for two manors[513].' 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 south-western 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[514]. 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[515]. 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 can not easily tax the rich; for another he can not 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.

[Classification of men for the geld.]

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.

[Proofs of connexion between the manor and the geld.]

Any thing that could be called a strict proof of this theory we can not offer; but it has been suggested by many facts and phrases which we can not otherwise explain. In the first place, our record seems to assume that every holding either is a manor or forms part of a manor[516]. 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[517].' 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[518]. '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[519].' 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[520]. 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[521]. 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[522].' 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[523]. 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[524].' 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[525].

[Land gelds in a manor.]

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[526]. 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.

[Geld and hall.]

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[527]. 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[528]?

[The petty manors.]

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.

[The lord and his man's taxes.]

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 _bót_ of 12 ores[529].' 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[530].

[Distinction between villeins and sokemen.]

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[531], 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[532]. In Suffolk even the names of these humble tenants are sometimes recorded[533]. And then, we have seen[534] 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.

[The lord's subsidiary liability.]

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 Book[535]. Then in 1198 a new assessment was made. We are told that the king ordained that every baron should with the sheriffs 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[536]. 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[537].

[Manors distributed to the Frenchmen.]

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[538], 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[539]. 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[540].'--'in Berningham a free man held 20 acres of land and this was delivered to Walter Giffard to make up Letheringsett[541].'-- 'Peter claims the land which belonged to seventeen free men as having been delivered to him to make up this manor[542].'--'This land was delivered to Peter to make up some, but his men do not know what, manor[543].' 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[544]. Here too we may perhaps find the explanation of the entry which says that Hugh de Port held Wallop 'for half a manor[545].' 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.

[Summary.]

Such then is the best explanation that we can offer of the _manerium_ of Domesday Book. 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[546].

FOOTNOTES:

[428] D. B. ii. 21, 26, 37 b, 59 b.

[429] D. B. i. 21.

[430] D. B. i. 45.

[431] D. B. i. 6 b.

[432] D. B. i. 27.

[433] D. B. i. 163.

[434] So in the Exeter record, D. B. iv. 390: 'Tenuerunt 3 tegni pro
4 mansionibus, et Robertus habet illas pro 1 mansione.'

[435] D. B. i. 169 b. Similar interlineations in i. 98.

[436] D. B. i. 148; on f. 149 is a similar case.

[437] D. B. i. 45 b.

[438] D. B. i. 280 b.

[439] In several passages in D. B. the word seems to be _manerius_.

[440] D. B. ii. 96 b: 'Huic manerio iacebant 3 liberi homines, unus
tenuit dim. hidam et potuit abire sine licentia domini ipsius
mansionis.'

[441] D. B. i. 149, Wicombe.

[442] D. B. ii. 38 b, Hersam.

[443] D. B. i. 174 b, Poiwic.

[444] D. B. i. 268, Gretford.

[445] D. B. ii. 350 b.

[446] D. B. ii. 263: 'sed fuerunt in aula S. Edmundi.'

[447] D. B. i. 337 b.

[448] D. B. ii. 408 b: 'cum soca et saca super dominium hallae
tantum.'

[449] D. B. i. 45, Wicheham, Werste.

[450] D. B. i. 20, Waliland.

[451] D. B. i. 11 b, Acres.

[452] D. B. i. 26 b, Eldretune.

[453] D. B. i. 27, Percinges.

[454] D. B. i. 284 b, Ættune.

[455] D. B. ii. 29 b, 30 b.

[456] D. B. i. 307 b, Burghedurum; 308, Ternusc.

[457] D. B. i. 63: 'Ipse quoque transportavit hallam et alias domos
et pecuniam in alio manerio.'

[458] D. B. i. 338 b: 'Ad huius manerii aulam pertinent Catenai et
Usun 4 car. terrae ad geldum. Terra ad 8 carucas. Ibi in
dominio 2 carucae et 20 villani et 15 sochemanni et 10
bordarii habentes 9 carucas. Ibi 360 acre prati. Ad eundem
manerium iacet hec soca:--In Linberge 4 car. terrae etc.'

[459] Throughout Yorkshire the phrase is common, 'Totum manerium
_x._ leu. long. et _y._ leu. lat.'

[460] D. B. i. 128.

[461] D. B. i. 128 b.

[462] D. B. i. 127.

[463] D. B. i. 128 b.

[464] D. B. i. 180.

[465] Compare the cases in Seebohm, Village Community, 267.

[466] D. B. i. 163.

[467] If we mistake not, the Osleuuorde of the record is Ashleworth,
which, though some miles to the north of Gloucester, either
still is, or but lately was, a detached piece of the Berkeley
hundred.

[468] D. B. i. 163.

[469] D. B. i. 163 b: 'Hanc terram dedit regina Rogerio de Buslei et
geldabat pro 4 hidis in Tedechesberie.'

[470] D. B. i. 87 b; iv. 161.

[471] Eyton, Somerset, ii. 34.

[472] D. B. i. 101 b; iv. 107.

[473] D. B. i. 41.

[474] D. B. i. 230.

[475] D. B. i. 338-9.

[476] D. B. i. 220, Tingdene.

[477] D. B. ii. 15 b, 17 b.

[478] D. B. ii. 385 b.

[479] The form _bereuita_ is exceedingly common, but must, we think,
be due to a mistake; _c_ has been read as _t_.

[480] D. B. i. 38 b, Edlinges. Some of the 'wicks' seem to have been
dairy farms. D. B. i. 58 b: 'et wika de 10 pensis caseorum.'
On the Glastonbury estates we find persons called _wikarii_,
each of whom has a _wika_. Glastonbury Rentalia, 39: 'Thomas
de Wika tenet 5 acras et 50 oves matrices et 12 vaccas ...
Philippus de Wika tenet unum ferlingum et 50 oves matrices et
12 vaccas.' Ibid. 44: 'A. B. tenet unum ferlingum et 50 oves
matrices et 12 vaccas pro 1 sol. pro wika.' Ibid. 48:
'Ricardus de Wika tenet 5 acras et 50 oves matrices et 12
vaccas. Alanus de Wika eodem modo.' Ibid. p. 51

[481] D. B. i. 350: 'In Osgotebi et Tauelebi 2 bo[vatae] inland et 1
bo[vata] soca huius manerii.' D. B. i. 338 b: 'Hiboldeston est
bereuuita non soca et in Grangeham sunt 2 car[ucatae] inland
et in Springetorp dim. car[ucata] est inland. Reliqua omnis
est soca.'

[482] When therefore, as is often the case, we find that the
occupants of 'the soke' are not sokemen but villeins, this
seems to point to a recent depression of the peasantry.

[483] D. B. ii. 330 b: 'In illo manerio ... sunt 35 liberi
homines.... Tunc valuerunt liberi homines 4 libras. Manerium
cum liberis hominibus valet modo 24 libras.'

[484] D. B. ii. 358 b: 'Hoc manerium exceptis liberis tunc valuit 30
solidos.'

[485] D. B. ii. 289 b.

[486] D. B. ii. 285 b.

[487] D. B. iv. 397; i. 93 b, Ichetoca.

[488] D. B. iv. 411; i. 94 b, Tocheswilla.

[489] D. B. iv. 398; i. 93 b, Pilloc.

[490] D. B. iv. 341; i. 96, Sordemanneford.

[491] D. B. iv. 355; i. 116 b, Labera.

[492] D. B. iv. 367; i. 112 b, Oplomia.

[493] D. B. iv. 338; i. 95 b, Aisseforda.

[494] D. B. iv. 395; i. 93, Terra Colgrini.

[495] D. B. iv. 394; i. 93, Rima.

[496] D. B. iv. 338; i. 95 b, Aisseforda.

[497] As the term _manerium_ is often represented by the mere letter
_M_ or _m_, we will refer to some cases in which it is written
in full. D. B. ii. 295 b: '40 acras pro uno manerio'; Ibid.
311 b: 'In eadem villa est 1 liber homo de 40 acris et tenet
pro manerio.'

[498] The question whether the acreage stated in the Suffolk survey
is real or rateable can not be briefly debated. We hope to
return to it.

[499] D. B. ii. 322 b, 323.

[500] D. B. ii. 323.

[501] D. B. ii. 288.

[502] D. B. ii. 309.

[503] D. B. ii. 297 b.

[504] D. B. ii. 377.

[505] D. B. ii. 333.

[506] D. B. ii. 423.

[507] D. B. ii. 316: 'In Aldeburc tenuit Uluricus sochemannus Edrici
T. R. E. 80 acras pro manerio.' Ibid. 353: 'Nordberiam tenuit
Eduinus presbyter sochemannus Abbatis 30 acras pro manerio.'

[508] We have taken our examples of small manors from the east and
the south-west because Little Domesday and the Exeter Domesday
give details which are not to be had elsewhere. But instances
may be found in many other parts of England. Thus in Sussex,
i. 24, two free men held as two manors land rated at a hide
and sufficient for one team; it is now tilled by four
villeins. In the Isle of Wight, D. B. i. 39 b, five free men
held as five manors land sufficient for two teams; it is now
tilled by four villeins. In Gloucestershire, D. B. i. 170, is
a manor worth ten shillings with two serfs upon it; also a
manor rated at one virgate. In Derbyshire, D. B. i. 274 b,
land sufficient for four teams and rated as four carucates had
formed eight manors. In Nottinghamshire, D. B. i. 285 b, land
sufficient for a team and a half and valued at ten shillings
had formed five manors for five thegns, each of whom had his
hall.

[509] D. B. ii. 380: 'In Thistledona tenet 1 liber homo Ulmarus
commendatus S. Eldrede 60 acras pro manerio et 5 liberi
homines sub se.'

[510] D. B. i. 127 b: 'Wellesdone tenent canonici S. Pauli.... Hoc
manerium tenent villani ad firmam canonicorum. In dominio nil
habetur.'

[511] D. B. i. 235 b: Billesdone, 'In dominio nil fuit nec est.'
Ibid. 166 b, Glouc.: 'Isdem Willelmus [de Ow] tenet
Alvredestone. Bondi tenuit T. R. E. Ibi 3 hidae geldantes. Nil
ibi est in dominio, sed 5 villani et 3 bordarii habent 3
carucas.'... 'Isdem Willelmus tenet Odelavestone. Brictri
filius Algari tenuit. Ibi nil in dominio nisi 5 villani cum 5
carucis.' D. B. iv. 396: 'Rogerius habet 1 mansionem quae
vocatur P...et reddit gildum pro dimidia virgata; hanc potest
arare 1 carruca. Hanc tenet Anschetillus de Rogerio. Ibi habet
Anschetillus 4 bordarios qui tenent totam illam terram et
habent ibi 1 carrucam et 1 agrum prati, et reddit 10 solidos.'

[512] D. B. ii. 31.

[513] D. B. ii. 59 b.

[514] I leave this sentence as it stood before Mr Round had
published in his Feudal England the results of his brilliant
researches. Of the 'five hide unit' I already knew a good
deal; of the 'six carucate unit' I knew nothing.

[515] Round, Domesday Studies, i. 109.

[516] D. B. i. 35: 'In Driteham tenet Ricardus [filius Gisleberti] 1
hidam et dimidiam. Ælmar tenuit de Rege E. pro uno manerio....
In eadem Driteham est 1 hida et dimidia quam tenuit Aluric de
Rege E. pro uno manerio, et postea dedit illam terram uxori
suae et filiae ad aecclesiam de Certesy, sicuti homines de
hundredo testantur. Ricardus [filius Gisleberti] calumniatur.
Non iacet ulli manerio, nec pro manerio tenet, set liberata
fuit ei et modo 3 hidae geldant pro una hida et dimidia.' To
say of the second of these two plots that it neither is a
manor nor yet belongs to a manor, is to say that it is
shirking the geld. D. B. i. 48: 'Walerannus tenet Dene....
Ista tera non adiacet ulli suo manerio.' Here _suo_ =
_Waleranni_. Waleran seems to be holding land without good
title.

[517] D. B. i. 163 b, Clifort. D. B. i. 58 b: 'In Winteham tenet
Hubertus de Abbate 5 hidas, de terra villanorum fuerunt 4, et
geldaverunt cum hidis manerii.'

[518] The word _wara_ means defence; it comes from a root which has
given us, _wary_, _warrant_, _warn_, _guarantee_, _weir_, etc.
See Vinogradoff, Villainage, 243.

[519] D. B. i. 212.

[520] D. B. i. 340, 366, 368. Is not the last part of the word A.-S.
_notu_, (business, office)?

[521] D. B. i. 132 b: 'Hoc manerium tenuit Heraldus Comes et iacuit
et iacet in Hiz [Hitchin, Herts] sed wara hujus manerii iacuit
in Bedefordscire T. R. E. in hundredo de Maneheue.' D. B. i.
190, 'Haec terra est bereuuicha in Neuport [Essex] set wara
ejus iacet in Grantebrige.' When in the survey of Oxfordshire,
i. 160, it is said, 'Ibi 1 hida de _warland_ in dominio,' the
taxed land is contrasted with the inland, which in this county
has gone untaxed.

[522] D. B. i. 28.

[523] See the cases of the monks of Bury and the canons of S.
Petroc, above, p. 55.

[524] D. B. i. 4 b: 'De terra huius manerii ten[uit] unus homo
archiepiscopi dimid. solin et cum his 6 solins geldabat T. R.
E. quamvis non pertineret manerio nisi de scoto quia libera
terra erat.' The _scotum_ in this context seems to be or to
include the geld. Compare D. B. i. 61 b: 'Haec terra iacet et
appreciata est in Gratentun quod est in Oxenefordscire et
tamen dat scotum in Berchescire.' D. B. ii. 11: 'In Colecestra
habet episcopus 14 domos et 4 acras non reddentes
consuetudinem praeter scotum nisi episcopo.'

[525] See above, p. 85.

[526] Hamilton, Inquisitio, 60.

[527] Above, p. 110.