SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY 



accustomed services, and he shall give to the lord 60 shillings (in three 

 instalments).' 1 The tenure was plainly a customary one in this case with an 

 implied right to transmit a claim to his son. At the next turn of the same 

 year (i 296) we find the first reference to ' life-tenure ' when Gregory Neubond 

 took the bondage which had belonged to his wife ' for the term of his life.' * 

 If we compare these entries with the post-mortem rolls of the prior's 

 tenants in 1349 the inference is that life-tenures were by no means common 

 except for small holdings in the thirteenth century. After the Black Death 

 the free peasants all appear to hold for life, but we are given to understand 

 that nominally serfs only held at the will of the lord, 8 as though the latter 

 were the less desirable tenure. Before 1349 a man might lease his land to 

 his neighbour for one or more crops,* but unless he paid a fine for the lord's 

 permission the land was forfeited.' This practice developed into a system of 

 sub-letting for a term of years (tabernatio)? and under the prior and the 

 bishop it marked the first definite step towards legal tenant-right. 



It is difficult to put into words what right the bond-tenant had in his 

 holding in the Palatinate before 1349, but it is certain that all transactions 

 must take place in the lord's court, subject to his consent, and for licence to 

 tabernate a fine must be paid. 7 Closely akin to the practice of tabernating 

 was that of collusive surrender which was in use in 1345.* John Wydows 

 held three acres in the Bondflatt and surrendered them to the use of (ad opus) 

 Alice wife of John the Miller. After the Black Death the two practices 

 were extended to whole bondages, 9 perhaps because the next heirs did not 

 care to take up the land. 10 But side by side with this movement towards 

 quasi-ownership by tenants of bondages, there was another custom arising 

 which finally prevailed. 



Before the Black Death bond-tenants had in most cases a customary 

 tenure 'at the will of the lord,' but after 1349 the life-tenure probably 

 became the more common if the tenant did not press the lord too hardly in 

 the matter of reduction of rent. At any rate, when the prior did make a 

 marked reduction in the firm, and perhaps also when he let at penyferme 

 without works, the new holder did not always obtain a life-interest. He 

 generally held ' at the will of the lord until another tenant shall come and 

 offer a larger or the ancient firm.' " Slowly, though almost imperceptibly, we 

 can trace in the prior's rolls, but in a very slight degree in the bishop's rolls, 

 how the lord found it impossible to obtain tenants for the vacant holdings 

 except at ridiculously low rents. The bishop was more successful than the 

 prior, perhaps because of the prevalence of penyferme lettings in his vills. 

 It may be also that some of his vills recovered more quickly than the prior's 

 from the effects of the pestilence. At any rate, by A.D. 1400, a curious 

 transformation had taken place in the tenure of bondage holdings under the 

 prior. In the last few decades of the fourteenth century the tenant had 

 become accustomed to take his land for a term of years only at a progressively 

 increasing rent. Life-tenures became fewer and fewer till they became very 



1 Dur. Ha/mote R. (Surtees Soc. Imii), 4. ' Ibid 7. 



Ibid. 35. ' Ibid. 10 (under Westoe). 



Cf. ibid. 8 (under West Merrington), with ibid. 4 (under Wearraouth). 



Dur. Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. bcxxii), 1 8 (under Wearmouth). 

 ' Cf. ibid. 38. ' Ibid. 17 (under Billingham). 



Ibid. 36, 38. "Ibid. 21. " Ibid. 25 (under Hesleden). 



2 225 29 



