12 
LandmarliS in British Farming. 
First Period — 1230 to 1310. 
What distinguishes the open-field farm of the thirteenth 
centuiy from its twelfth-century predecessor, or its eighteenth- 
century descendant ? Agricultural improvements are few, and 
strictly local. From William the Conqueror to George III. farm- 
ing skill made little progress. The changes on open-field farms 
were social and economic ; they consisted in different relations 
between tillers and owners of the soil, in the growth of free- 
holders, tenant-farmers, copyholders, and labourers for hire. 
On the twelfth-century farm, the cultivators of the soil consisted 
of four classes. A few free tenants held their land by small 
money rents, by nominal gifts like a gillyflower or a rose, or 
by military ser^dce; and rendered, in person or by deputy, fixed, 
definite services at the two special seasons of the autumnal and 
Lenten ploughings, and the three harvests of hay and corn. The 
two next classes were serfs. The villein held his land by definite 
yearly, and uncertain weekly, labour services, as well as by 
small payments in kind ; the cottar’s tenure was the same, ex- 
cept that his obligations of weekly and yearly labour were more 
precarious, less definite, and less important. Their serfdom 
consisted in the uncertain labour-rent, and in such incidents of 
their tenure as the prohibition to sell oxen, the obligation to pay 
fines for the marriage of daughters, the necessity of obtaining 
licences to leave the manor. Finally, there were a few slaves 
who were employed upon the demesne land. Out of these four 
classes emerged, during the period 1230-1310 : the small free- 
holder, the copyholder, the customary tenant, the tenant-farmer, 
and the agricultural labourer. 
The processes by which this change was effected were 
various. In some cases, the week-day work of the villein was 
commuted for fixed money rents, and only the definite services 
remained. In others, portions of the demesne land were granted 
as freehold for ever, or let off, at will or permanently, to free 
tenants for annual quit-rents in corn or money. In others, 
stretches of the waste land were cleared, and granted or let out 
on similar terms. As less of the demesne land was kept in 
hand, labour became less valuable to the lord, and he allowed 
tbe villeins to commute their uncertain personal services for 
money. Land tenure thus began to assume a more modern 
aspect. The old system was breaking up. Commercial inte- 
rests, not humanitarian motives, accelerated similar changes in 
the condition of slaves. Mouths to feed, and hands without 
emjfioyment, were unprofitable to their owner. It was an 
advantage to the lord to ejnancipate his slave and to turn him 
