Land Tenure and Agriculture. 79 



would naturally be come to between the lord and the people, 

 whereby the former supplied capital and the latter labour, both 

 amicably dividing the proceeds of produce in some propor- 

 tion equal to the sacrifices made on either side. On the death 

 of an agriculturist his heirs or executors would make some 

 arrangement with their lord for the perpetuation of his loan 

 in farm stock ; but to recoup himself for the wear and tear 

 of implements and the losses in his live stock by disease or 

 old age, as well as to uphold his proprietary rights over the 

 loan, the lord would demand and receive some valuable beast. 

 This we believe to have been the origin of the heriot, which, 

 like many of the old customs, had its peaceful as well as its 

 warlike adaptations, and which, though a Danish usage, was 

 not necessarily a Danish innovation. It was also the origin of 

 the lands held in villeinage, which were in this way rendered 

 partly under seignorial and partly under popular control. 



It seems therefore probable that, up to a certain period, 

 possibly that particular one at which the system of Bocland 

 was inaugurated, kings might appropriate as much Polcland as 

 they liked for their demesne, and lords might slice off large 

 corners of it for their semi-private uses, without acting in the 

 least tyrannically ; rather, on the contrary, conferring a last- 

 ing benefit on the community at large. A very different 

 state of this question occurred afterwards, when the Norman 

 conqueror, for purposes economically useless, afforested half 

 Hampshire, and devastated in the process, not only common 

 wastes, but private lands under arable cultivation. 



It is, however, likely that, as in the case of the Roman 

 Ager Publicus, there came a time when the appropriation of 

 the people's waste could only be carried out under certain con- 

 ditions, such as reserving the popular rights of turbary, estovers, 

 and the like, but vesting all other proprietary rights in indi- 

 vidual hands. It furthermore seems sufficiently clear that the 

 people must have been able to prove a very strong proprietary 

 title, in order to have succeeded in retaining such valuable 

 powers over the lord's waste and common field, as the rights of 

 pasturage undoubtedly are. And, on the other hand, the lord 

 was able to show the same strongly vested interest in the 



