CELTIC SYSTEM IN ENGLAND 221 



does he make note, as he so easily might have done, of the areas 

 of the parcels which fell within each group. Even at Hartley, 

 therefore, we are left with something of the uncertainty which 

 has thus far attended Northumberland maps, terriers, and 

 surveys. 



A better reason than this ambiguity, however, for thinking 

 that the Hartley and Seaton Delaval statements do not unques- 

 tionably imply the existence of a three-field system is the possi- 

 bility that the author, speaking as it were parenthetically, may 

 have been referring to a three-course rotation of crops. This 

 method of tillage, as is explained below, might appear where the 

 open-field furlongs were not grouped into three compact fields.^ 

 From occasional items there is reason to think that in Northum- 

 berland a three-course rotation was employed, at least upon de- 

 mesne lands. Nine large consolidated parcels at Hextold were 

 in 1232 so tilled that 51I acres were sown with wheat and rye, 

 78 with oats, and 50 were " de terra wareccanda." ^ Although 

 the division here into three parts was not precise, it was approxi- 

 mate. Regarding other demesne lands no uncertainty exists, 

 and it is furthermore obvious that they might He in common. 

 At Hepscott, for instance, an inquisition describes 88 acres of 

 demesne " de quibus tertia pars iacet in warecto et pastura 

 eiusdem warecti nihil valet per annum quia iacet in communi." ^ 

 Though we have no corresponding information regarding the 

 rotation of crops which was usual upon tenants' land, it may well 

 have been at times a three-course one. If so, the Hartley and 

 Seaton Delaval statements perhaps refer to such a situation, 

 and the term " field " is used carelessly in place of the more 

 exact " seisona." 



If this seem an over-refinement of explanation, and if it be 

 urged that a three-course rotation upon tenants' lands was not far 

 removed from a three-field system,^ the extent of the negative 

 evidence from Northumberland must once more be insisted upon. 

 Similar avoidance of three-field indications is not characteristic 



1 Cf. below, pp. 321-325. 2 Raine, Priory of Hexham, ii. 96. 



3 C. Inq. p. Mort., Edw. Ill, F. 2 (17). 



* The difference was, however, pronounced. Cf. below, pp. 321-325. 



