48 , THE ENCLOSURES IN ENGLAND [204 



in the least quantity. It is a matter of record that the medieval 

 farmer had not enough and could not have quite enough 

 manure, to maintain the productivity of the soil.^ 



The knowledge of the means of maintaining and increas- 

 ing the productivity of the soil is one thing, but the ability 

 to use this knowledge is another. The very origin and per- 

 sistence of the cumbersome common-field system in so many 

 parts of the world is sufficient testimony as to the impos- 

 sibility of improving the quality of the soil in the Middle 

 Ages. The only way in which these men could divide the 

 land into portions of equal value was to divide it first into 

 plots of dififerent qualities and then to give a share in each 

 of these plots to each member of the community. They 

 never dreamed of being able to bring the poor plots up to a 

 high level of productivity by the use of plentiful manuring, 

 etc., but had to accept the differences in quality as they found 

 them. The inconvenience and confusion of the common- 

 field system were endured because, under the circumstances, 

 it was the only possible system. 



Very few cattle were kept. No more were kept because 

 there was no way of keeping them. In the fields wheat, rye, 

 oats, barley and beans were raised, but no hay and no turnips. 

 Field grasses and clover which could be introduced in the 

 course of field crops were unknown. What hay they had 

 came entirely from the permanent meadows, the low-lying 

 land bordering the banks of streams. " Meadow grass," 

 writes Dr. Simkhovitch, *' could grow only in very definite 

 places on low and moist land that followed as a rule the 

 course of a stream. This gave the meadow a monopolistic 

 value, which it lost after the introduction of grass and clover 

 in the rotation of crops." ^ The number of cattle and sheep 



^Political Science Quarterly, vol. xxviii, p. 394. 

 2 Ibid., p. 393. 



