132 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters. 



tenth century (and probably in the eighth) as well as in the thirteenth 

 but that it was more complete and harsh at the earlier date than at the 

 latter. If these conclusions are correct, if the agricultural population of 

 England was in a condition of serfdom uninterruptedly from the eighth cen- 

 tury to the thirteenth, and if its early form was more severe that its later, 

 he must be admitted to have made out his case. 



As to the first point, it should be noted that he has proved the existence 

 of serfdom only as far back as the tenth century; its existence at an earlier 

 date is only an inference, j)artly from analogy, partly from evidence which, 

 as will be shown further on, proves the existence of the open-field system 

 of husbandry, but not of serfdom. The positive evidence goes no 

 further back than the time of Alfred. Now the interval between Alfred 

 and the origuial settlement of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain is just about as 

 long (400 years) as that between Alfred and Edward I. ; moreover, it is an 

 important consideration that the years directly following the conquest 

 would be likely to witness far more rapid and radical changes than the 

 ater period. 



The second point in his argument, that serfdom is found to be more 

 harsh in its type as we trace it further back in time, requires a careful ex- 

 amination, being opposed to the accepted view, and resting upon evidence 

 of a rather doubtful character. We have numerous documents belonging 

 to various j)oint of time from the tenth to the thirteenth century, which 

 contain a detailed enumeration of the duties and obligations of serfs, as 

 well as the amount of land they held. Now the obligations, sojfar as they 

 are specifically enumerated, are miich more numerous and burdensome at 

 the later period than at the earlier: but, at the earlier date, we find, in ad- 

 dition to the specific obligations, such general and indefinite ones as: "to 

 work as the Avork requires," and " every week do what work they are bid." 

 In such general and unhmited obligations as these, he says, consists the 

 essence of servitude. 



This argument requires that the obligations, beginning in the tenth 

 century with unlimited liability to labor, should go on regularly lessening 

 in amount and becoming easier through the feudal period. The contrary 

 is, however, the case. Leaving out of account for the present the indefi- 

 nite expressions just cited, to which we shaU return presently, we find the 

 precisely enumerated obligations to be less in the tenth century than in the 

 twelfth, and in the twelfth century again to be less than in the thirteenth. 

 That is, while there is an uninterrupted continuity through these four hun- 

 dred years in the organization of the peasantry and the general character of 

 their obUgations, these obligations, as specified in detail, appear to have 

 been steadily increasing during this period. Even the example given by 

 Mr. Seebohm (p. 157), of the manor of Tidenham at the two periods, sus- 

 stains this view, except for the phrase, " work as the work requires," at the 

 earlier period; and a comparison of the duties specified in the Reatitudines 

 singidarum personarum with the numerous descriptions in the Rotuli 



