248 OPEN-FIELD FARMS AND PASTURE COMMONS 



open-field system were overwhelming and ineradicable ; that as 

 an instrument of land cultivation it had probably deteriorated 

 since the thirteenth century ; that no increased production or 

 general adoption of improved practices could be expected under the 

 ancient system. But the Reporters note exceptions, from which 

 other conclusions may possibly be drawn. In some districts the 

 customary rotations had been abandoned for independent cultiva- 

 tion, or modified so as to admit some variation of crojDping. Thus, 

 by agreement, in Berkshire a portion of the fields was " hitched," 

 or, according to the Wiltshire equivalent, " hooked." In other 

 words, common rights of pasture on the arable land were suspended 

 so as to allow the cultivation of turnips, clover, or potatoes. Else- 

 where, again, portions of the arable land were withdrawn from 

 tillage to serve as cow-commons. Nor must it be supposed that 

 enclosed land was always better cultivated than open-field farms. 

 The Bedfordshire and Lincolnshire Reporters, for example, state 

 that in certain cases enclosure had produced no improvement, 

 and in Wiltshire the Reporter hints that open-field regulations at 

 least prevented some abuses to which land held in severalty was 

 hable. In some districts landlords imposed upon tenants of 

 separate holdings the same restrictions and course of cropping by 

 Mhich they had been fettered as occupiers of land in open-fields. 

 Without a large expenditure on equipment the agricultural con- 

 ditions of enclosed land were often worsened, rather than bettered. 

 Thus the Somersetshire Reporter quotes an example from the 

 Mendip Hills, where, when land had been enclosed, the landlord 

 refused to erect the necessary buildings. Similar cases might 

 have been collected from many other parts of the country. In 

 these respects, as well as in others, landlords had yet to be taught 

 the business of owning and lettmg land. There were " Goths and 

 Vandals," not only among tenants, but also among owners. 



Before any accurate estimate can be formed of the agricultural 

 advantages or defects of arable farming on intermixed strips of 

 land subject to common grazing rights, and of stock breeding and 

 rearing on pasture commons, it is necessary to allow for some 

 possibiHties of improvement by the cultivators of open-fields and 

 for some neglected opportunities by landlords and tenants of enclosed 

 land. But, when everj'^ reasonable allowance has been made, it is 

 clear that the balance was ov^erwhelmingly in favour of separate 

 occupation. As an instrument of production the ancient system 



