vill2-第35章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


e　man　free　by　blood　was　supposed　to　be　always　exempted　from　it；　however　debased　his　position　in　every　other　respect。　Our　authorities　often　allude　to　this　payment　by　the　energetic　expression　'buying　one's　blood'　（servus　de　sanguine　suo　emendo）。　It　seems　at　first　sight　that　one　may　safely　take　hold　of　this　distinction　in　order　to　trace　the　difference　between　the　two　component　parts　of　the　villain　class。　In　the　status　of　the　socman；　developed　from　the　law　of　Saxon　free…men；　there　was　usually　nothing　of　the　kind。　The　maritagium　of　military　tenure　of　course　has　nothing　in　common　with　it；　being　paid　only　by　the　heiress　of　a　fee；　and　resulting　from　the　control　of　the　military　lord　over　the　land　of　his　retainer。　The　merchetum　must　be　paid　for　every　one　of　the　daughters；　and　even　the　granddaughters　of　a　villain；　it　bad　nothing　to　do　with　succession；　and　sprang　from　personal　subjection。　　　　　When　the　bride　married　out　of　the　power　of　the　lord　a　new　element　was　brought　to　bear　on　the　case：　the　lord　was　entitled　to　a　special　compensation　for　the　loss　of　a　subject　and　of　her　progeny。（49*）　When　the　case　is　mentioned　in　manorial　documents；　the　fine　gets　heightened　accordingly；　and　sometimes　it　is　even　expressly　stated　that　an　arbitrary　payment　will　be　exacted。　The　fine　for　incontinence　naturally　connects　itself　with　the　merchet；　and　a　Glastonbury　manorial　instruction　enjoins　the　Courts　to　present　such　cases　to　the　bailiffs；　the　lord　loses　his　merchet　from　women　who　go　wrong　and　do　not　get　married。（50*）　　　　　Such　is　the　merchet　of　our　extents　and　Court　rolls。　As　I　said；　it　has　great　importance　from　the　point　of　view　of　social　history。　Still　it　would　be　wrong　to　consider　it　as　an　unfailing　test　of　status。　Although　it　is　often　treated　expressly　as　a　note　of　serfdom　（51*）；　some　facts　point　to　the　conclusion　that　its　history　is　a　complex　one。　In　the　first　place　this　merchet　fine　occurs　in　the　extents　sporadically　as　it　were。　The　Hundred　Rolls；　for　instance；　mention　it　almost　always　in　Buckinghamshire；　and　in　some　hundreds　of　Cambridgeshire。　In　other　hundreds　of　this　last　county　it　is　not　mentioned。　However　much　we　lay　to　the　account　of　casual　omissions　of　the　compilers；　they　are　not　sufficient　to　explain　the　general　contrast。　It　would　be　preposterous　to　infer　that　in　the　localities　first　mentioned　the　peasants　were　one　and　all　descended　from　slaves；　and　that　in　those　other　localities　they　were　one　and　all　personally　free。　And　so　we　are　driven　to　the　inference；　that　different　customs　prevailed　in　this　respect　in　places　immediately　adjoining　each　other；　and　that　not　all　the　feudal　serfs　descended　from　Saxon　slaves　paid　merchet。　　　　　If；　on　the　one　hand；　not　all　the　serfs　paid　merchet；　on　the　other　there　is　sufficient　evidence　to　show　that　it　was　paid　in　some　cases　by　free　people。　A　payment　of　this　kind　was　exacted　sometimes　from　free　men　in　villainage；　and　even　from　socage　tenants；　I　shall　have　to　speak　of　this　when　treating　of　the　free　peasantry；　I　advert　to　the　fact　now　in　order　to　show　that　the　most　characteristic　test　of　personal　servitude　does　not　cover　the　whole　ground　occupied　by　the　class；　and　at　the　same　time　spreads　outside　of　its　boundary。　　　　　This　observation　leads　us　to　several　others　which　are　not　devoid　of　importance。　As　soon　as　the　notion　arose　that　personal　servitude　was　implied　by　the　payment　of　merchet；　　as　soon　as　such　a　notion　got　sanctioned　by　legal　theory；　the　fine　was　extended　in　practice　to　cases　where　it　did　not　apply　originally。　We　have　direct　testimony　to　the　effect　that　feudal　lords　introduced　it　on　their　lands　in　places　where　it　had　never　been　paid　（52*）；　and　one　cannot　help　thinking　that　such　administrative　acts　as　the　survey　of　1279…1280；　the　survey　represented　by　the　Hundred　Rolls；　materially　helped　such　encroachments。　The　juries　made　their　presentments　in　respect　of　large　masses　of　peasantry；　under　the　preponderating　influence　of　the　gentry　and　without　much　chance　for　the　verification　of　particular　instances。　The　description　was　not　false　as　a　whole；　but　it　was　apt　to　throw　different　things　into　the　same　mould；　and　to　do　it　in　the　interest　of　landed　proprietors。　Again；　the　variety　of　conditions　in　which　we　come　across　the　merchet；　leads　us　to　suppose　that　this　term　was　extended　through　the　medium　of　legal　theory　to　payments　which　differed　from　each　other　in　their　very　essence：　the　commutation　of　the　'jus　primae　noctis；'　the　compensation　paid　to　the　lord　for　the　loss　of　his　bondwoman　leaving　the　manor；　and　the　fine　for　marriage　to　be　levied　by　the　township　or　the　hundred；　were　all　thrown　together。　Last；　but　not　least；　the　vague　application　of　this　most　definite　of　social　tests　corroborates　what　has　been　already　inferred　from　terminology；　namely；　that　the　chief　stress　was　laid　in　all　these　relations；　not　on　legal；　but　on　economic　distinctions。　The　stratification　of　the　class　and　the　determination　of　the　lord's　rights　both　show　traits　of　legal　status；　but　these　traits　lose　in　importance　in　comparison　with　other　features　that　have　no　legal　meaning；　or　else　they　spread　over　groups　and　relations　which　come　from　different　quarters　and　get　bound　up　together　only　through　economic　conditions。　　　　　The　same　observations　hold　good　in　regard　to　other　customs　which　come　to　be　considered　as　implying　personal　servitude。（53*）　Merchet　was　the　most　striking　consequence　of　unfreedom；　but　manorial　documents　are　wont　to　connect　it　with　several　others。　It　is　a　common　thing　to　say　that　a　villain　by　birth　cannot　marry　his　daughter　without　paying　a　fine；　or　permit　his　son　to　take　holy　orders；　or　sell　his　calf　or　horse；　that　he　is　bound　to　serve　as　a　reeve；　and　that　his　youngest　son　succeeds　to　the　holding　after　his　death。（54*）　This　would　be　a　more　or　less　complete　enumeration；　and　I　need　not　say　that　in　particular　cases　sometimes　one　and　sometimes　another　item　gets　omitted。　The　various　pieces　do　not　fit　well　together：　the　prohibition　against　selling　animals　is　connected　with　disabilities　as　to　property；　and　not　derived　directly　from　the　personal　tie；（55*）　as　for　the　rule　of　succession；　it　testifies　merely　to　the　fact　that　the　so…called　custom　of　Borough　English　was　most　widely　spread　among　the　unfree　class。　The　obligation　of　serving　as　a　reeve　or　in　any　other　capacity　is　certainly　derived　from　the　power　of　a　lord　over　the　person　of　his　subject；　he　had　it　always　at　his　discretion　to　take　his　man　away　from　the　field；　and　to　employ　him　at　pleasure　in　his　service。　Lastly；　the　provision　that　the　villain　may　not　allow　his　son　to　receive　holy　orders　stands　on　the　same　level　as　the　provision　that　he　may　not　give　his　daughter　in　marriage　outside　the　manor：　either　of　these　prohibited　transactions　would　have　involved　the　loss　of　a　subject。　　　　　We　must　place　in　the　same　category　all　measures　intended　to　prevent　directly　or　indirectly　the　passage　of　the　peasantry　from　one　place　to　the　other。　The　instructions　issued　for　the　management　of　the　Abbot　of　Gloucester's　estates　absolutely　forbid　the　practice　of　leaving　the　lord's　land　without　leave。（56*）　Still；　emigration　from　the　manor。　from　time　to　time　the　could　not　be　entirely　stopped；　inhabitants　wandered　away　in　order　to　look　out　for　fieldwork　elsewhere；　or　to　take　up　some　craft　or　trade。　In　this　case　they　had　to