include rents assized, and certain miscellaneous items such as "Hewesilver," "Heringsilver," Brensilver"; at the later date "Rents assized 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 Cambridgeshire 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 assize," 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 nonexistent, (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. 1. Norfolk. TABLE VIII (p. 212) Massingham 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. 9–10); Langley (Hen. VIII., R. O. Augm. Off., Misc. Bks. 399, f. 228-9); Walsingham (Hen. VIII., R. O. Augm. Off., Misc. Bks. 399, f. 201); Brisingham (31 Eliz., R. O. Misc. Bks. 220, f. 236); Farfield (31 Eliz., ibid.); Wighton (17 Eliz., R. 0. Rentals and Surveys, Duchy of Lanc., Bdle. 7, No. 34); Peakhall (1575, Holkham MSS., Tittleshall Bks., No. 12); West Lexham (1575, Holkham MSS., West Lexham MSS., No. 87); Foxley (1568, Holkham MSS., Billingford and Bintry MSS., Bdle. No. 9); Sparham (1590, Holkham MSS., Sparham MSS., Bdle. No. 5); Billingford (between 1564 and 1606, Holkham MSS., Billingford and Bintry MSS., Bdle. No. 9); Fulmordeston (1614, Holkham MSS., Map No. 59). 2. Wiltshire. South Newton, Estoverton, Wynterbourne Basset, Byshopeston, Donnington, Knyghton, Domerham, Burdonsball, Foughlestone, Brudecomb, Westoverton, Sutton Maundeville, Stockton, Albedeston, Chalke, Bulbridge, Dichampton, Patney, Wyley, Berwick St. John, Remesbury, Staunton, Chilmerke (all 1565-73, Roxburgh Club, Surveys of Lands of William, First Earl of Pembroke). 3. Manors in other counties. Ashton (Lancs., Hen. VIII., R. O. Rentals and Surveys, Gen. Ser., Portf. 19, No. 7, ff. 69-72); Prestwood (Staffs., R. O. Misc. Bks. Land Rev., vol. 185, ff. 155b-7); Gamlingay Merton (Cambridgeshire, 1601, Merton Estate Maps); Gamlingay Avenells (ibid.); Salford (Bedfordshire, 1595, All Souls Estate Maps); Weedon Weston (Northants, c. 1595, ibid.); Edgeware (Middlesex, 1597, All Souls Estate Maps); Kingsbury (Middlesex, 1597, ibid.); Greenham (Bucks, 1595, ibid.); Crendon (Bucks, c. 1595, ibid.); Harlesden Farm (Middlesex, 1599, ibid.); Land in the Parish of Hendon (Middlesex, c. 1599, ibid.); Whadborough (Leicestershire, 1620, ibid.). The fact that this table is compiled from documents of different dates makes it impossible to use it as an index of the size of the large leasehold farms at any one period in the sixteenth century. Nor can I hope to have escaped errors of calculation. I hope, however, it may be of some use in illustrating the considerable scale on which some farms were conducted. TABLES IX, X, and XI (pp. 218, 225-226 and 227) The farms from which these tables are compiled are included in the list given in explanation of Table VIII. (with one excep tion, Ewerne in Dorsetshire, Topographer and Genealogist, vol. i.), and it is therefore unnecessary to set them out in detail here. The figures as to arable, pasture, and meadow on the demesne of 41 monasteries are taken from Savine, "English Monasteries on the Eve of the Dissolution," Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History, vol. i. p. 172. TABLE XIII (p. 300) This table is compiled from documents relating to the undermentioned manors. When the reference has already been given I do not repeat it here:-23 manors in Wilts, Somerset, and Devon, Roxburghe Club, Surveys of Lands of William, First Earl of Pembroke. West Lexham (Norfolk), Sparham (Norfolk), East Dereham (Norfolk), Wighton (Norfolk), Stockton Socon (Norfolk, 1649, R. O. Parly. Surveys, Norf. No. 14); Aldeburgh (Suffolk, Hen. VIII., R. O. Misc. Bks., Treas. of Receipt, vol. 163); St. Edmund (Suffolk, 1650, R. O. Parly. Surveys, Suff. No. 14); Dodnash (Suffolk, Hen. VIII., R. O. Misc. Bks., Treas. of Receipt, vol. 163, f. 79); Chatesham, Suffolk (Hen. VIII., R. O. Misc. Bks., Treas. of Receipt, vol. 163, f. 91); Falkenham (Suffolk, Hen. VIII., R. O. Treas. of Receipt, vol. 163, f. 181); Stratford juxta Higham (Suffolk), Mettingham (Suffolk, Victoria County History, chapter on Social and Economic History); Mark Soham (Suffolk, ibid.); Bushey (Herts, 7 Eliz., from Court Rolls lent me by the late Miss Toulmin Smith); Ewerne (Dorset, 1567, Topographer and Genealogist, vol. i.); Corton (Somerset, ibid.); Rolleston (Staffs., ibid.); Hewlington (Denbighshire, 4 Eliz., Wrexham Library, Ancient Local Records, vol. ii.); Holt (Denbighshire, ibid.); Wotton in Elishall (Staffs.); Burton Bondend (Staffs.); Agarsley (Staffs.); High Furness (Lancs., 28 Eliz., R.O. Duchy of Lancs., Special Commissions, No. 398); Crondal (Hants); Edgeware (Middlesex); Kingsbury (Middlesex); Malden (Surrey, Merton MSS., book labelled Malden, Thorncroft, and Farleigh); Thorncroft (Surrey, ibid.); Farleigh (Surrey, ibid.); 14 manors in Northumberland (Northumberland County History, vol. viii., p. 238); Bradford (Somerset, Selden Society, vol. xii., Leadam, Select Cases in the Court of Requests); Shepton Mallet, Somerset (Calendar of Proceedings in Chancery, temp. Eliz. H.h. i. 27); Newton Tracye (Devon, ibid., H.h. 23, 17); Chudlye (Devon, ibid., L.l. 8, 31); Powlton (Wilts, ibid., M.m. 13); Kibworth Harcourt (Leicestershire, Merton MSS., book containing extracts from Merton Court Rolls); Barkby (Leicestershire, ibid.). NOTE.-(i) The names of the manors from which Dr. Savine takes his figures are not given. Consequently his information and mine may sometimes overlap. (ii) The MSS. book from which the customs of Farleigh, Thorncroft, and Malden are taken is dated 1841, but it purports to give customs based on ancient court rolls. The same applies to the information as to Kibworth Harcourt and Barkby. GENERAL INDEX ABBEYS, see Monasteries Act of Parliament, Enclosure by in 18th century, 183-184 Statute of Merton, 1235, 87, 180, 248, 371-372 15 Hen. VI. c. 2, sanctioning export of corn, 113, 197 6 Hen. VIII. c. 5, against depopulation, 353 7 Hen. VIII. c. 1, against depopulation, 353 25 Hen. VIII. c. 13, against depopulation, 354 27 Hen. VIII. c. 25, for relieving impotent beggars, 269 1 Ed. VI. c. 2, legalising enslavement of vagabonds, 44, 269 2 and 3 Ed. VI. c. 12, giving good titles to Duke of Somerset's tenants, 3 and 4 Ed. VI. c. 3, re-enacting Statute of Merton with amendments, 5 and 6 Ed. VI. c. 5, against depopulation, 354 2 and 3 Phil. and M. c. 2, against depopulation, 354 5 Eliz. c. 2, Statute of Artificers, 23, 45, 100, 353 14 Eliz. c. 5, directing compulsory assessment for relief of poor, 269 18 Eliz. c. 3, directing provision of materials for setting unemployed to 31 Eliz. c. 7, requiring cottages to be let with 4 acres of land attached, 35 Eliz. c. 7, against depopulation, but repeating clauses in previous Acts 39 Eliz. c. 1, against depopulation, 354-355 39 Eliz. c. 2, against depopulation, 354-355 4 Jac. I. c. 11, for enclosure of certain parishes in Herefordshire, 395 Action of trespass- copyholders' remedy by, 289 freeholders' remedy by, 248 Administration- of land by peasants, 102, 159-161, 244-246. See also Agriculture, Commons, of Acts against Depopulation- difficulty of, 377-386 irregularity of, 391-393 occasional effectiveness of, 386-387, 390-392 opposition of landlords to, 367–368, 370, 397-398 petition of rebels for, 335, 337 Administrative Courts, see Council, Courts Administrative interference- with economic matters, 355-357 with enclosures--- under Henry VII., 359–360 ,, Henry VIII., 360–362 |