Xll INTRODUCTION 



estates during the disturbance caused by the Norman Con- 

 quest, and still more after the Black Death, only become 

 intelligible when we remember how closely the value of the 

 estate depended on the maintenance of a sufficient head of 

 labour. 



This, then, was a fundamental principle which underlay 

 the whole scheme of rural management, that the persons 

 of the labourers should be retained on the estate, and that 

 their progeny should not be permitted to avoid becoming 

 liable to the same obligations in turn. The whole of the 

 social restrictions on villans putting their children to school, 

 or allowing them to be ordained, or to be apprenticed in a 

 town, had this as their economic justification — that there 

 must be available labour for the home farm. These restric- 

 tions were so universally known that Walter of Henley did 

 not think it necessary to allude to them ; he is rather con- 

 cerned with the other question as to the means of getting 

 their full quotas of work out of the servile tenants. And 

 he points out important aid which may be secured in this 

 matter by laying stress on the communal obligations of the 

 villans. The villans as a whole were responsible, and if 

 anyone failed to perform his service, the others might be 

 required to make good his deficiency. It is obvious that 

 this principle of communal responsibility might be urged 

 so as to be very oppressive, and with the view of exacting 

 far more than the denned obligations of the tenants. It 

 offers, like so many of the matters touched upon, an 

 interesting subject for investigation, as it would be curious 

 to know how far it was successfully insisted upon, and 

 whether this claim formed an element in fomenting the 

 discontent which followed the Black Death. 



To carry out this system of management it was of 

 course necessary to have a considerable staff of officials. 

 The bailiff was appointed by the lord to look after the 

 whole estate in detail ; his duties closely resembled the occu- 

 pations of a modern farmer, as he was responsible for all 

 the stock on the home farm, as well as for seeing that the 

 labourers paid their proper services ; he was directly 



