vill3-第3章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


nd　it　was　found　that　there　were　eight　hides　of　villain　land。　Of　these　eight　hides　one…fourth　was　taken；　and　it　was　reckoned　that　this　fourth　was　an　equivalent　to　the　one…third　of　the　park　and　of　the　demesne　farm；　which　ought　by　right　to　have　gone　to　the　lord　de　la　Lege。　On　the　basis　of　this　estimation　an　exchange　was　effected。　In　the　time　of　the　war　（perhaps　the　rebellion　of　1173）　the　eight　hides　and　other　hides　in　Segheho　were　encroached　upon　and　appropriated　unrighteously　by　many；　and　for　this　reason　a　general　revision　of　the　holdings　was　undertaken　before　Walter　de　Wahull　and　Hugh　de　la　Lege　in　full　court　by　six　old　men；　it　was　made　out　to　which　of　the　hides　the　several　acres　belonged。　At　that　time；　when　all　the　tenants　in　Segheho　（knights；　freeholders；　and　others）　did　not　know　exactly　about　the　land　of　the　village　and　the　tenements；　and　when　each　man　was　contending　that　his　neighbours　held　unrighteously　and　more　than　they　ought；　all　the　people　decided　by　common　agreement　and　in　the　presence　of　the　lords　de　Wahull　and　de　la　Lege；　that　everybody　should　surrender　his　land　to　be　measured　anew　with　the　rood　by　the　old　men　as　if　the　ground　had　been　occupied　afresh：　every　one　had　to　receive　his　due　part　on　consideration　of　his　rights。　At　that　time　R。F。　admitted　that　he　and　his　predecessors　had　held　the　area　near　the　castle　unrighteously。　The　men　in　charge　of　the　distribution　divided　that　area　into　sixteen　strips　（buttos）；　and　these　were　divided　as　follows：　there　are　eight　hides　of　villain　land　in　Segheho　and　to　each　two　strips　were　apportioned。　　　　　The　narrative　is　curious　in　many　respects。　it　illustrates　beautifully　the　extent　to　which　the　intermixture　of　plots　was　carried；　and　the　inconveniences　consequent　upon　it。　Although　the　land　had　been　measured　and　divided　at　the　time　when　the　lord　de　Wahull　took　the　land；　everything　got　into　confusion　at　the　time　of　the　civil　war；　and　the　disputes　originated　not　in　violence　from　abroad　but　in　encroachments　of　the　village　people　among　themselves：　the　owners　of　conterminous　strips　were　constantly　quarrelling。　A　new　division　became　necessary；　and　it　took　place　under　circumstances　of　great　solemnity；　as　a　result　of　an　agreement　effected　at　a　great　meeting　of　the　tenantry　before　both　lords。　The　new　distribution　may　stand　for　all　purposes　in　lieu　of　the　original　parcelling　of　the　land　on　fresh　occupation。　The　mode　of　treating　one　of　the　areas　shows　that　the　intermixture　of　the　strips　was　a　direct　consequence　of　the　attempt　to　equalise　the　portions。　instead　of　putting　the　whole　of　this　area　into　one　lot；　the　old　men　divide　it　into　strips　and　assign　to　every　great　holding；　to　every　hide；　two　strips　of　this　area。　Many　inconveniences　follow　for　some　of　the　owners；　e。g。　for　the　church　which；　it　is　complained；　cannot　put　its　plot　to　any　use　on　account　of　its　lying　far　away；　and　in　intermixture　with　other　people's　land。　But　the　guiding　principle　of　equal　apportionment　has　found　a　suitable　expression。　　　　　We　may　turn　now　from　the　analysis　of　this　case　to　general　considerations。　The　important　point　in　the　instance　quoted　was；　that　the　assignment　of　scattered　strips　to　every　holding　depended　on　the　wish　to　equalise　the　shares　of　the　tenants。　I　think　it　may　be　shown　that　the　treatment　adopted　in　Segheho　was　the　most　natural；　and　therefore　the　most　widely…spread　one。　To　begin　with；　what　other　form　of　allotment　appears　more　natural　in　a　crude　state　of　society？　To　employ　a　simile　which　I　have　used　already；　the　territory　of　the　township　is　not　like　a　homogeneous　sheet　of　paper　out　of　which　you　may　cut　lots　of　every　desirable　shape　and　size：　the　tilth　will　present　all　kinds　of　accidental　features；　according　to　the　elevation　of　the　ground；　the　direction　of　the　watercourses　and　ways；　the　quality　of　the　soil；　the　situation　of　dwellings；　the　disposition　of　wood　and　pasture…ground；　etc。　The　whole　must　needs　be　dismembered　into　component　parts；　into　smaller　areas　or　furlongs；　each　stretching　over　land　of　one　and　the　same　condition；　and　separated　from　land　of　different　quality　and　situation。　Over　the　irregular　squares　of　this　rough　chess…board　a　more　or　less　entangled　network　of　rights　and　interests　must　be　extended。　There　seem　to　be　only　two　ways　of　doing　it：　if　you　want　the　holding　to　lie　in　one　compact　patch　you　will　have　to　make　a　very　complicated　reckoning　of　all　the　many　circumstances　which　influence　husbandry；　will　have　to　find　some　numerical　expression　for　fertility；　accessibility；　and　the　like；　or　else　you　may　simply　give　every　householder　a　share　in　every　one　of　the　component　areas；　and　subject　him　in　this　way　to　all　the　advantages　and　drawbacks　which　bear　upon　his　neighbours。　If　the　ground　cannot　be　made　to　fit　the　system　of　allotment；　the　system　must　conform　itself　to　the　ground。　There　can　be　no　question　that　the　second　way　of　escaping　from　the　difficulty　is　much　the　easier　one；　and　very　suitable　to　the　practice　of　communities　in　an　early　stage　of　development。　This　second　way　leads　necessarily　to　a　scattering　and　an　intermixture　of　strips。　The　explanation　is　wide　enough　to　meet　the　requirements　of　cases　placed　in　entirely　different　local　surroundings　and　historical　connexions；　the　tendency　towards　an　equalising　of　the　shares　of　the　tenantry　is　equally　noticeable　in　England　and　in　Russia；　in　the　far　west　and　in　the　far　east　of　Europe。　In　Russia　we　need　not　even　go　into　history　to　find　it　operating　in　the　way　described；　the　practice　is　alive　even　now。　　　　　This　intermixture　of　strips　in　the　open　fields　is　also　characteristic　in　another　way：　it　manifests　the　working　of　a　principle　which　became　obliterated　in　the　course　of　history；　but　had　to　play　a　very　important　part　originally。　It　was　a　system　primarily　intended　for　the　purpose　of　equalising　shares；　and　it　considered　every　man's　rights　and　property　as　interwoven　with　other　people's　rights　and　property：　it　was　therefore　a　system　particularly　adapted　to　bring　home　the　superior　right　of　the　community　as　a　whole；　and　the　inferior；　derivative　character　of　individual　rights。　The　most　complete　inference　from　such　a　general　conception　would　be　to　treat　individual　occupation　of　the　land　as　a　shifting　ownership；　to　redistribute　the　land　among　the　members　of　the　community　from　time　to　time；　according　to　some　system　of　lot　or　rotation。　The　western　village　community　does　not　go　so　far；　as　a　rule；　in　regard　to　the　arable；　at　least　in　the　time　to　which　our　records　belong。　But　even　in　the　west；　and　particularly　in　England；　traces　of　shifting　ownership；　'shifting　severalty；'　may　be　found　as　scattered　survivals　of　a　condition　which；　if　not　general；　was　certainly　much　more　widely　spread　in　earlier　times。（22*）　The　arable　is　sometimes　treated　as　meadows　constantly　are：　every　householder's　lot　is　only　an　'ideal'　one；　and　may　be　assigned　one　year　in　one　place；　and　next　year　in　another。　The　stubborn　existence　of　intermixed　ownership；　even　as　described　by　feudal　and　later　records；　is　in　itself　a　strong　testimony　to　the　communal　character　of　early　property。　The　strips　of　the　several　holders　were　not　divided　by　hedges　or　inclosures；　and　a　good　part　of　the　time；　after　harvest　and　before　seed；　individual　rights　retreated　before　common　use；　every　individualising　treatment　of　the　soil　was　excluded　by　the　compulsory　rotation　of　crops　and　the　fact　that　every　share　consisted　of　a　number　of　narrow　strips　wedged　in　among　other　people's　shares。　The　husbandry　could　not　be　very　energetic　and　lucrative　under　such　pressure；　and　a　powerful　consideration　which　kept　the　system　working；　against　convenience　and　interest；　was　its　equalising　and　as　it　were　communal　tendency。　I　lay　stress　on　the　fact：　if　the　open…field　system　with　its　intermixture　had　been　merely　a　reflection　of　the　original　allotment；　it　would　have　certainly　lost　its　regularity　very　soon。　People　could　not　be　blind　to　its　drawbacks　from　the　point　of　view　of　individual　farming；　and　if　the　single　strips　had　become　private　property　as　soon　as　they　ceased　to　be　shifting；　exchanges；　if　not　sales；　would　have　greatly　destroyed　the　inconvenient　network。　The　lord　had　no　interest　to　prevent　such　exchanges；　which　could　manifestly　lead　to　an　improvement　of　husbandry；。　and　in　regard　to　his　own　strips；　he　must　have　perceived　soon　enough　that　it　would　be　bette