In Shelford (f. 125 sqq. Cf. Rot. Hundr. ii. 544) there are only two main headings: "de militibus" and "de consuetudinariis et censuariis;"
but I think it is quite evident from the Survey that the first ought to run "de militibus et libere tenentibus," or something to the same effect, and that it includes the hundredors.
_De militibus._
Johannes de Moyne miles tenet unum mesuagium et unam rodam terre que fuit coteria operabilis in tempore Galfridi de Burgo Elyensis episcopi pro duobus solidis equ. Idem Johannes tenet unum mesuagium quod fuit Michaelis de la Greue pro 14 den. equ. Et inueniet unum hominem ad quamlibet trium precariarum ad cib.u.m domini. Et metet dimidiam acram de loue-bene sine cibo. Et inueniet unum hominem ad fenum leuandum et ta.s.sandum in curia domini episcopi. Et dabit tallagium c.u.m consuetudinariis pro tanta portione.
Johannes filius Nicholai Collogne tenet dimidiam hydam terre _per seruicium sequendi comitatum et hundredum_. Idem tenet quartam partem curie sue pro uno niso (_sic_) uel duobus solidis....
In Stratham the Molmen are reckoned with the freeholders and hundredors (f. 44).
_De libere tenentibus et censuariis._
Walterus de Ely miles tenet 50 acras de wara unde debet sectam _ad curiam de Ely. Et ad curiam de Stratham. Et in hundredum de Wycheford...._ Et faciet omnes consuetudines sicut Johannes filius Henrici subscriptus.
Johannes filius Henrici Folke tenet 10 acras de wara. Et debet _sectam hundredi per totum annum, scilicet ad quodlibet hundredum et sectam ad curiam de Ely et de Stratham_.... Et dabit gersumam pro filia sua maritanda.
_De consuetudinibus operariorum_, etc.
The entries quoted are sufficient, it seems, to establish the following facts:--
1. The hundredors of the Ely Minster are people holding tenements burdened with the obligation of representing the manor in the hundred and in the county.
2. The tenure may be quite distinct from the personal condition of the holder. A knight may possess the tenement of a hundredor in one place and a military fee in another (Philip de Insula in Wilburton and in Lyndon.)
3. A free tenant is not _eo ipso_ a hundredor. Some holdings are singled out for the duty. (Henry Torel, William "Nuncius," and Thomas filius Olive in Wyvelingham. Cf. Lyndon.)
4. In many cases the hundredors are mentioned without being expressly so called, and such cases present the transition between the Ely Surveys and other Cartularies which constantly speak of privileged tenants holding by suit to the hundred and to the county. (See the quotations on p. 189, n. 2, and p. 191, n. 1.)
But there is another side to the picture. In the cases of which we have been speaking till now the obligation to attend the hundred and the county is treated as a service connected with tenure, and has to meet the requirements of the State which enforces the representation of the villages at the Royal Courts. Such a system of representation follows from the conception of the County and of the Hundred as political parts of the kingdom on the one hand, and as composed of Manors and Villages or Vills, on the other. This may be called the _territorial_ system. But another conception is lingering behind it--that namely of the County, as a folk, and of the Hundred, as an a.s.sembly of the free and lawful population. The great Hundred is derived from it, but even in the ordinary meetings all the freeholders are ent.i.tled, if not obliged, to join. The Manor and the Vill have nothing to do with this right, which is not one of representation, but an individual one and extends to a whole cla.s.s. This may be called the _personal_ system of the Hundred. It is embodied in the so-called "Leges" of Henry I. And therefore we find constantly in the doc.u.ments, that the suit to the hundred, to the county, and also that to the sheriff"s tourn and to meet the justices, are mentioned in connection with two different cla.s.ses of people. On one hand stand the representatives of the township, on the other the free men, free tenants or socmen bound individually to attend the hundred and to perform other duties which are enforced on the same pattern. The Hundred Rolls give any number of examples.
I. 55: liberi homines de Witlisford et quatuor homines et prepositus solebant venire ad turnum vicecomitis set post bellum de Evesham per Baldewynum de Aveny subtracta fuit illa secta, set nesciunt quo warranto.
I. 154: Idem abbas (de Wauthan) subtraxit ad turnum vicecomitum sectam 4 hominum et prepositi de manerio suo de Esthorndone et de liberis hominibus suis in eadem villa et in villa de Stanford.
I. 180: Omnes liberi tenentes et quatuor homines et prepositus de Morton Valence subtraxerunt sectam ad turnum vicecomitis bis in anno ad idem hundredum.
In Shropshire we find the question put to the jurors of the inquest (II.
69): Si homines libere tenentes et 4 homines et prepositus de singulis villis venerint ad summonicionem sicut preceptum est.
II. 130: Dominus Ricardus Comes Gloverniae subtraxit 4 thethingas videlicet Stockgiffard, Estharpete Stuctone et Westone de hundredo de Wintestoke et ipsas sibi appropriavit. Item dic.u.n.t quod Thomas de Ban ... et ceteri libere tenentes predictarum 4 thethingarum solebant sequi dictum hundredum et se subtraxerunt a termino predicto.
II. 131: Dic.u.n.t quod una decena de Borewyk et alia decena Chyletone c.u.m liberis hominibus subtrahuntur de hundredo domini Regis de la Hane.
I. 17: Manerium de Collecote et 8 liberi Sokemanni tenentes in dicto manerio solebant facere sectam ad hundredum de Kenoteburie et subtracti sunt a tempore Alani de Fornham quondam vicecomitis usque nunc.
The last instances quoted do not speak directly of the four men and the reeve, but their meaning is quite clear and very significant. The suit of the t.i.thing and of the manor is contrasted with the personal suit of the free tenants. We find often entries as to the attendance of the manor, the township, or the t.i.thing.
I. 181: Dic.u.n.t quod abbas de Theokesberie pro terra sua in Codrinton ...
Episcopus Wygorniensis pro manerio suo de Clyve per quatuor homines et prepositum solebant facere sectam ad istum hundredum ad turnum vicecomitis bis in anno usque ad provisiones Oxonienses.
I. 105: Villata de Monston per 2 annos et villata de Stratton per 10 annos subtraxerunt sectam hundredi.
I. 78: Dic.u.n.t quod idem Walterus (de Bathonia) removit villanos de Sepwa.s.se in forinsec.u.m et feofavit liberos de eadem terra in quo terra quidam tuthinmannus (_corr._ quedam tethinga?) jungi solebat et sequi ad hundredum forinsec.u.m predictum et est secta ejusdem tethinge subtracta de tempore Regis Henrici patris Regis Edwardi anno ejus quarto.
It appears that the feoffment of free tenants was no equivalent for the destruction of the t.i.thing. The entry is remarkable but not very clear.
(Cf. I. 87, II. 133, and Maitland, Introduction to the Selden Soc. vol.
II, pp. x.x.xi, x.x.xiii.) In any case the main facts are not doubtful. The population of the kingdom was bound to attend the a.s.semblies of the hundred and of the county by representatives from the villages or t.i.things, which sometimes, though not always, coincided with the manors.
There were many exceptions of different kinds, but the Crown was striving to restrict their number and to enforce general attendance at least for the tourn and the eyre. The representation in these last cases, though much wider and more regular than at the ordinary meetings of the hundred and of the shire, was constructed on the same principles, and the difference lay only in the measure in which the royal right was put into practice against the disruptive tendencies of feudalism.
The inquest in the beginning of Edward I"s reign gives us a very good insight into the inroads from which the organisation had to suffer, especially in troubled times[869]. This attendance of the township is mentioned in marked contrast with the suit of the free tenants or socmen, which is also falling into disuse on many occasions, and also supposes a general theory, that the free people ought to attend in person.
An important point in the process which modified the representation of the vills in the hundred has to be noticed in the fact, that the suit from a single village was not considered as a unit which did not admit of any part.i.tion. When the village itself was divided among several landlords the suit was apportioned according to their parts in the ownership instead of remaining, as it were, outside the part.i.tion. We might well fancy that the township of Dudesford, though divided between the Abbots of b.u.t.tlesden and of Oseney, would send its deputies as a whole, and would designate them in a meeting of the whole. We find in reality, that the fee of one of the owners has to send three representatives, and the fee of the other two (Rot. Hundr. I. 33; cf. I.
52, 102). This gives rise to a difficulty in the reading of our evidence. The Hundred Rolls speak not only of suit due from the village, the t.i.thing, or the manor, but also of the suit from the tenement. In one sense this may mean that the person holding a free tenement was bound to attend certain meetings of the commons of the realm. In another it was an equivalent to saying that a particular tenement was bound to join in the duty of sending representatives to such meetings. In a third acceptation of the words they might signify, that a particular tenement was charged to represent the village in regard to the suits, and for this reason privileged in other respects. A few extracts from the Hundred Rolls will ill.u.s.trate the difficulty.
I. 143: Dic.u.n.t quod Johannes de Boneya tenuit quoddam tenementum in Stocke quod solet facere sectam ad comitatum et hundredum, que secta postea subtracta fuit per Regem Alemanniae, etc.
Was John de Boneya a socman bound to attend personally, or a hundredor, a hereditary representative of the village of Stocke?
II. 208: Prior de Michulham subtraxit sectas et servicia 25 tenencium in manerio suo de Chyntynge qui solebant facere sectam et servicium hundredo de Faxeberewe et sunt subtracti per 6 annos ad dampnum dicti hundredi 5 sol. per annum.
The twenty-five tenants in question may be villains joining to send representatives in scot and in lot with the village (cf. I. 214, 216), or free socmen personally bound to attend.
II. 225: Prior de Kenilworth subtraxit, etc., de una virgata terre in Lillington 15 annis elapsis et de 4 virgatis in Herturburie 18 annis elapsis ... qui solent sequi ad hundredum de tribus septimanis in tres septimanas.
Here it would be difficult to decide whether the suit is apportioned between the tenements of the village on the principle of their contributing jointly to perform the services, or else bound up with these particular virgates as representing the village (cf. I. 34).
I notice this difficulty because it is my object in this Appendix to treat the evidence as it is given in the doc.u.ments, and to help those who may wish to study them at first hand. But as we are immediately concerned with the position of the "hundredor," I shall also point out that there are cases where a doubt is hardly possible. The tenant who is privileged on account of the duties that he performs in representing his village in the hundred court, may be easily recognised in the following examples.
II. 66: Dic.u.n.t quod Rogerus Hunger de Preston solebat sequi comitatum et hundredum _pro villa de Preston_ in tempore Henrici de Audithelege tunc vicecomitis Salop 20 annis elapsis, mortuo vero predicto Roberto Hunger, Abbas de Lilleshul qui intratus fuit in predictam villam per donum Roberti de Budlers de Mungomery extraxit (_corr._ subtraxit) predictam sectam 20^{ti} annis elapsis nesciunt quo warranto, unde dominus Rex dampnificatus est per illam subtraxionem, si idem Abbas warrantum inde non habet de 40 solidis.
I. 21: Johannes de Grey subtraxit se de secta curie pro villata de Chilton de uno anno et die (_corr._ et dimidio), unde dominus Rex dampnificatus est in 18 denariis.
Though the inst.i.tution of the hundredors has found expression in the Hundred Rolls, the name is all but absent from them. The rare instances when it occurs are especially worthy of consideration. I have three times seen a contraction which probably stands for it, but in one case it applies distinctly to the hundred-reeve or to a riding bailiff of the hundred.
I. 197 (Inquest of the hundred of Hirstingstan, Hunts): dic.u.n.t etiam quod homines ejusdem soke rescusserunt aueria que El. hundredarius ceperat pro debito domini Regis levando et impedierunt eum ad summoniciones faciendum de a.s.sisis et juratis et equum ipsius El.
duxerunt ad manerium de Someresham et eum ibi detinuerunt quousque deliberavit omnia averia per ipsum capta.
The case is different in regard to the description of Aston and Cote, Oxfordshire. It is printed on p. 689 of the second volume of the Hundred Rolls, but printed badly. The decisive headings are not given accurately, and I shall put it before the reader in the shape in which it stands in the MS. at the Record Office. The pa.s.sage is especially interesting because of the peculiar const.i.tution of the manor of Bampton, to which Aston and Cote belong. (See Gomme, Village Community.)
Hundred Rolls, Oxford.
Chancery Series, No. 1, m. 3.