THEIR CONDITION IN 1066 139 



had therefore liberty of commendation. Because they had 

 this liberty of commendation, they held freely of the King, 

 and we find that four of them provided one carrying service 

 and three sentinels for the King when he came into the shire. 

 But what is specially noticeable, here is a village of thirteen 

 or fourteen families, with no common superior but the King, 

 carrying on the complicated processes of the open-field 

 system. These processes implied rules for the division of 

 the meadow, for the fixing of the times of hay and corn 

 harvests, for the restriction of the number of cattle and sheep 

 to be turned by each into the pasture, and the fallow. There 

 was no external authority who could have imposed these rules 

 upon the villagers. They must, therefore, have adopted them 

 after consultation with one another. Doubtless after the rules 

 had once been adopted, they would work automatically ; but 

 it is hard to see how they could be evolved without definite 

 deliberation. And Orwell is not a solitary example. 

 Numbers of free villages can be found, not only in Cam- 

 bridgeshire, but in other counties. Mr. Round has selected 

 some similar cases in Hertfordshire. Wickham, a vill of 4 hides 

 i virgate 21 acres, was divided between thirteen sokemen. 

 The Pelhams, assessed at 12 hides, were divided as follows : 



H. v. 



Two brothers , men of An sgar the Staller ... i i 

 Alfred, man of Ansgar the Staller ... ... i M 1 



A thegn, man of Anschil of Ware ) i M 



A thegn, man of Godwin of Bendfield f 



a man A " She S " 



Two brothers J 



(a man of the Abbot of Ely] 



A thegn, man of Anschil of Ware ... ) ,, 



A thegn, man of Aethelmaer of Bennington f 



Five King's sokemen ... ... ... 2 



Aelfwine, a man of Godwine of Bendfield ... i 



Wulfwi, a man of Godwine of Bendfield ... 2 M 



12 i 



1 The marginal M shows that these properties were called "manors." 



