94 THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH 



phrase " as fine as an ant-hill," and advise that it should be rolled. 

 Tusser recommends that wheat should also be rolled, if the land 

 is sufficiently dry. For seeding, Fitzherbert adopts the mediaeval 

 rule of two bushels of wheat and rye to the acre. All seeds were 

 scattered broadcast by the hand from the hopper. Neither writer 

 mentions the dibbing of beans, though that useful practice had been 

 introduced by thirteenth century farmers. For barley, oats, and 

 " cod ware," Fitzherbert recommends a thicker seeding than was 

 practised in mediaeval farming. The best yield per acre is obtained 

 from moderate or thin sowing. But it has been suggested that 

 Elizabethan farmers more often allowed their land to become foul, 

 and that crops were more thickly sown in the hope of saving them 

 from being smothered. The suggestion is perhaps confirmed by 

 the space which Fitzherbert devotes to weeds, and by his careful 

 description of the most noxious plants. At harvest, wheat and rye 

 were generally cut with the sickle, and barley and oats were mown 

 with the scythe. Fitzherbert advises that corn ricks should be 

 built on scaffolds and not on the ground. In the eighteenth century 

 the advice was still given and still unheeded. 



In their treatment of drainage and manure, neither author makes 

 any advance on mediaeval practice. To prevent excessive wetness, 

 both advise a water-furrow to be drawn across the ridges on the 

 lowest part of the land ; but neither describes the shallow drains, 

 filled with stones, and covered in with turf, which were familiar to 

 farmers in the Middle Ages. Mole-heaps, if carefully spread, are 

 not an unmixed evil. But when Tusser champions the mole as a 

 useful drainer of wet pastures, it is evident that the science of 

 draining was yet unborn. In choice of manure, neither writer 

 appears to command the resources of his ancestors. The want of 

 fertilising agencies was then, and may even now prove to be, one 

 of the obstacles to small holdings. At the present day the small 

 cultivator can, if he has money enough, buy chemical manures, and, 

 unlike his Elizabethan ancestor, he no longer uses his straw or the 

 dung of his cattle as fuel. But when chemical manures were 

 unknown, it was imperatively necessary to employ all natural 

 fertilisers. Fitzherbert does indeed deplore the disappearance of 

 the practice of marling. 1 But Tusser does not mention the value 



1 Arthur Standish, writing in 1611, says that straw and dung were used 

 as fuel (The Commons Complaint, p. 2), and Markham (Enrichment of the 

 Weald of Kent) shows the antiquity of the practice of marling by saying that 

 trees of 200 or 300 years old may be seen in " innumerable " spent marl-pits. 



