CHAPTER II 



The Earlier History of the Two- and Three-Field 



System 



Relying upon the characteristics of the two- and three-field 

 system deduced from the comprehensive evidence of the six- 

 teenth-century surveys, we may now turn to the more fragmen- 

 tary and, for the most part, earUer testimony touching the 

 system in question. It has been collected and arranged by 

 counties in Appendix II. Much of it is in the nature of terriers 

 of single holdings found in rentals or deeds of conveyance, but 

 only such evidence as satisfies the criteria indicated in the last 

 chapter has been admitted. In particular, reasonably equal dis- 

 tribution of arable acres between two or three fields has been 

 insisted upon. Descriptions of freeholds and leaseholds have been 

 utilized when they give unmistakable information about field 

 systems and when copyholds have not been available. Items 

 relative to small holdings have not been excluded if the acres in 

 question lay equally divided between fields which bore the usual 

 names. Lastly, the statements of the extents concerning fallow 

 and commonable demesne have been appended whenever they 

 appear pertinent. This collection of early evidence ought, it 

 would seem, to enable us to answer certain questions regarding 

 the two- and three-field system. At what time did it first 

 appear in England ? Throughout what territory did it prevail ? 

 Were two-field or three-field townships the earlier ? Were the 

 former sometimes transformed into the latter ? And what were 

 the respective areas appropriated by each group ? Answers to 

 these questions can be secured from Appendix II, although they 

 may not always be so precise as might be desired. 



Most unsatisfactory is the testimony regarding the first ques- 

 tion — that which asks about origins. The difficulty, as is usual 

 with such queries, arises from paucity of evidence. From the 

 end of the twelfth century, when the feet of fines begin and when 



so 



