Author(s): E. A. Kosminsky
Source: The Economic History Review, Vol. 5, No. 2 (Apr., 1935), pp. 24-45
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Economic History Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2599197
Accessed: 23-06-2016 01:56 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley, Economic History Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Economic History Review
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS IN THE
THIRTEENTH CENTURY.'
By E. A. KOSMINSKY.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 25
of the Black Death and this to a considerable extent explains the form
at present assumed by the discussion. It is customary to start with
an enquiry as to how far commutation had proceeded prior to the
Black Death and then to consider the effects of the pestilence. The
period immediately preceding the Black Death has thus become
the starting-point of most of the discussion. In i866 Thorold Rogers
insisted that by the middle of the fourteenth century only faint
traces of labour services remained.' Since i900 the field has been
held by the theory put forward by T. W. Page, who concluded
from a statistical study that towards the middle of that century
labour dues still prevailed in the East, Midlands and South of
England (with the exception of Kent). " So far, then," he says,
" as concerns predial services it is clear that tenure in villeinage
was not different in the middle of the fourteenth century from what
it had been a hundred years before."2 Page's method has since
been subjected to a number of criticisms which may be sum-
marised as follows.3 First, his chief source, the Ministers' Accounts,
though very exact and detailed, does not lend itself readily to a
study of commutation, apart from the partial and varying annual
sales of labour dues (Vendicio operum), nor does he explain the
method which he adopted in interpreting it, so that his assertions
have had to be taken on faith and attempts at verification have
occasionally revealed errors.4 Secondly, Page's material is insuffi-
cient in quantity, covering only 8i manors in nineteen counties.
Thirdly, its geographical distribution is unequal; out of his
nineteen counties seven are represented by no more than one or
two manors each. Finally, the greater part of his evidence comes
from ecclesiastical estates, mostly from those of Ramsey Abbey.
For these reasons Page's material justifies only a very limited con-
clusion, viZ. that in a number of predominantly ecclesiastical manors
of the Midlands, South and East we find a developed system of labour
services in the middle of the fourteenth century. A somewhat dif-
ferent result emerges from a separate study of his lay manors, but
these are so few that it is perhaps unwise to draw any deductions from
them. In other words, Page's workis subject to the samelimitation as
that of the classical exponents ofmanorial theory, Seebohm and Vino-
gradoff. The conclusions of all three are based chiefly on material
drawn from large ecclesiastical estates in the South of England.5
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
26 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 27
and lay estates. In both, most of the services had been commuted
prior to the Black Death in the North-West, while in the South-
East they were to be found everywhere,'- and in some districts
were the rule rather than the exception. On the whole this meant a
return to Rogers' conclusions, though for the South-East Page
was partly, but only partly, right.
Gray's treatment of the problem has, however, raised many
doubts. Does a simple comparison between labour dues and money
payments (the latter relating to free as well as to villein tenants)
solve the problem of commutation ? Do money payments always
arise as a result of the commutation of labour dues ? He has
undoubtedly proved that by the middle of the fourteenth century
the traditional manorial economy based on labour services was
much more feebly represented in the North and West than in the
South and South-East. But does this necessarily imply that in the
North and West commutation had proceeded further, i.e. that here,
as well as in the South-East, labour dues had once prevailed and
were now giving way to money payments ? How, in that case, are
we to explain the greater speed of commutation in the most
economically backward part of England and the survival of a
natural economy, in the shape of labour services, in the areas of
most active money turnover ?
This brings us to a problem which is central to the whole history
of the manorial system. What is the origin of money payments and
in particular of the money payments of villains, especially of their
redditus assisae ? Gray's whole argument rests on the assumption
that the chief component of the redditus is to be found in commuted
labour dues. But Vinogradoff long ago pointed out the double
origin of money rents, some being gafol, the ancient payments of
the tenants, others the fual, /nol or mail paid in commutation of
labour services.' Of the other payments auxilium and tallagiuni
obviously could not be the result of commutation, though some of
the smaller customary rents did emerge from the substitution of
money for the smaller labour dues, chiefly extraordinary services
not connected with the cultivation of the demesne.2 But what
about the great bulk of villein payments ? Professor Levett, in her
remarkable work on the Black Death, analysed the whole item
redditus assisae in the Ministers' Accounts of the Bishopric of
Winchester and came to the conclusion that these payments were
not the result of commutation.' Instead she concluded, though very
' Growth of the Manor, p. 329; Villeinage in England, pp. 29I, 307.
2 N. Neilson in Oxford Studies, vol. ii.
c" The Black Death on the Estates of the See of Winchester," in Oxford
Studies, vol. v, pp. 14-20.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
28 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 29
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
30 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 3 1
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
32 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 33
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
34 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY RE VIE W
Stoneleigh itself, containing I7 carucates, P.R.O., K.R. Misc. Bks., i, If, f. xiii.
This manor has no villeins at all and the small freeholders are very little burdened
with labour services. Occasionally demesnes of this kind will be found in the
possession of monasteries not belonging to the Cistercian Order, e.g. Chicksand
Priory in Haregreave, R.H., vol. ii, pp. 6zo-6zi, and even on the possessions of
some lay lords, e.g. the demesne of Thomas Laungel in Laungel, ib. p. 739, etc.
1 This will be found in the Cambridgeshire hundreds of Chilford, Longstow
and Wetherley, in the Bedfordshire hundred of Willey, in the Buckinghamshire
hundred of Bunstow, in the Warwickshire hundred of Stoneleigh and in the
Oxfordshire hundreds of Pyrton, Ewelme and Langtree.
2 The variation is still more marked in individual hundreds, where the per-
centage ranges from 2 to 66.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SER VICES AND MONEY RENTS 35
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
36 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
not be utilised here, because for these counties the sources give
the rents in a form which makes it impossible to separate
money rents from labour dues. As between the two groups for
which this separation is possible, we observe the highest develop-
ment of labour dues in the Eastern group, above all in the three
Northern hundreds of Huntingdonshire, situated in the area of
most typical manorial structure. In Cambridgeshire money rents
on the whole predominate, apparently to a very considerable extent,
but this predominance is due almost entirely to the prevalence of
large freehold rents; if we take the rent of the villeins alone, we
shall find an unmistakable predominance of labour dues (about
6o per cent.).' For Oxfordshire the computation is very difficult
and there is a great deal of variation from hundred to hundred,
but on the whole the dues of the villeins appear to be almost
equally composed of labour services and money rents, though even
here the freehold rents produce a total excess of money rents over
labour dues.2 In the hundreds of Warwickshire we find a consider-
able excess of money rents, forming about 70 per cent. of the total
rent paid, and here money rents predominate also in the payments
of the villeins.' Furthermore, if we use the rent to embrace the
1 According to the Hundred Rolls for Cambridgeshire the total of labour
services is (in round figures) about C72 5, of money payments C47 5, and of rents
in kind C3 2. Of these the estimate of the labour services is the least exact, since
the sources do not always give evaluations of individual services. It has been
very difficult to estimate the freehold rents; I was able to compute only a part
of these, viZ. the rents payable to the lords of those estates which also contained
villeins. These amounted to ?345. To arrive at an estimate of the total freehold
rent it is necessary to multiply this figure at least twofold. The labour services
of freeholders and their rents in kind are insignificant.
2 In the hundred of Bampton the labour dues of the villains are worth xi 6o,
money rents CI4o, money rents of freeholders ?99. In the hundred of Banbury
the corresponding figures are C38, k56 and kz6. In the hundred of Thame the
computation was not possible for the whole area, but for the manors for which
it could be made the figures are CI7, k4I and C67. A remarkable excess of
labour services over money payments in the dues of the villeins is found in the
hundred of Chadlington, where the respective figures are Czi8 and p86. For
other hundreds only approximate- and conjectural estimates are possible. In the
hundred of Billingdon there is a considerable excess of money rents in the
villein payments and in those of P]oughley and Wotton their money payments
and labour dues are approximately equal. In the hundred of Ewelme money
rents apparently predominate. In the hundred of Lewknor the two forms are
roughly equal. In the hundreds of Langtree and Dorchester the money rents
of the villeins are considerably in excess of their labour services.
3 In the Warwickshire hundred of Kineton the labour dues of the villeins
amount to C234, their money rents to 3 5 5 and the money rents of freeholders
to ?I 24. In the hundred of Stoneleigh the corresponding figures are ?8o, LI 32
and iz22. In the last case, however, labour dues have been very roughly
estimated, because the sources do not provide an estimate of individual
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 37
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
38 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SER VICES AND MONEY RENTS 39
1 Gray writes: " Where there is no mention of services, but only the money
rent, we may safely infer, such is the precision of the documents, that no services
were obligatory." E.H.R., 1914, p. 630. Gray seems to have believed implicitly
in his source and to have made no attempt to criticise it. I had no opportunity
of verifying his deductions from his material, but I fear that he overlooked
many of the pitfalls concealed in the Inquisitiones Post Mortem.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
40 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 41
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
42 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 43
1 The only type of payment which disappeared almost entirely was rent in
kind which was usually converted into money rent, rather than into labour dues.
There are also a number of cases of the transformation of labour services into
money dues, i.e. the classical commutation.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
44 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SERVICES AND MONEY RENTS 45
Close to this small nobility stood those landowners who were alto-
gether outside the feudal land system and who employed only
hired labour. We saw that in a number of counties, especially
in the East of England, there were very considerable freeholds,
whose connection with the manors was no more than superficial.
By means of small piece-meal additions to his holding, a peasant
freeholder might rise to the position of a knight, and was then
compelled to assume that title. The rapidity with which freehold
land changed hands in the market, and the resultant growth of
smallholders on the one hand and of knightly estates on the other,
are among the most important consequences of the spread of an
exchange economy in the English village.
In short, feudalism dissolved soonest and most easily in those
areas and on those estates where it had been least successful in
establishing itself. But on the possessions of the maiores baroness
and on ecclesiastical estates it held on firmly and even derived
additional strength from the growth of an exchange economy. In
England the great barons formed a privileged estate; they stub-
bornly defended the interests of their group and attempted to subject
the Crown to their will. In the period investigated in this article
the political power was theirs. Although attempts at an oligarchical
constitution failed and although the Crown tried, by the verifica-
tion of immunity rights (Quo Warranto), to establish its control over
the magnates, they were still for a long time to come to possess the
reality of power. They were the chief authors of the " feudal
reaction " which developed, not immediately after the Black Death,
but earlier and in connection with the change in agricultural
economy. It was primarily against them that the Peasant Revolt
of 13 8i was directed. The clearest and most prominent character-
istics of the " feudal reaction " appear in precisely those parts of
the country where agricultural production for exchange was most
developed. Thus already in the Inquisitiones Post Mortem of the
thirteenth century we can distinguish the area which, a century
and a half later, was to be the principal seat of the rising. The only
exception is perhaps Kent, where the Revolt was produced not,
as elsewhere, by the growth of labour services but by the land-
hunger of the smallholding peasantry and the encroachment of the
lords on the common waste.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:56:14 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms