Itistobenotedespecially，thatalthoughinafewcasesadifferenceismadebetweenthedivisionforroyalassessmentandforthemanorialimpositions，inthegreatmajorityofcasesnosuchdifferenceexists，andthedutiesinregardtothekingandtothelordarereckonedaccordingtothesamesystemofholdings。OnthemanorsofEly，forinstance，the12acreware47*formthebasisofallthereckoningofrentsandwork。Andsoiftheroyalassessmentappearwiththefeaturesofanartificialfiscalarrangement，thesameobservationhastobeextendedtothemanorialassessment；andthuswereachbyanotherwaythesameconclusionwhichwedrewfromananalysisofthesingleholdingandofitscomponentparts。Nodoubtthewholestandsincloserelationtotherealityofcultivationandland-holding，buttherigidity，regularity，andcorrectnessofthesystempresentanecessarycontrasttothefactsofactuallife。Asthesoilcouldnotbemadetofitintogeometricalsquares，evensothepopulationcouldnotremainwithoutchangefromoneagetotheotherwithinthesameboundaries。Thusincourseoftimetheplough-landof160and180acres，whichistheplough-landofpracticalfarming，appearsbythesideofthestatutoryhideof120acres；andsoagaininsideeverysingleholdingtherecomesupthecontrastbetweenitsrealconformationanddistribution，andtheoutwardformitassumedinregardtotheking，thelord，andthesteward。
　　Theinquiryastotherelationbetweentheholdingandthepopulationonitis，ofcourse，oftheutmostimportanceforageneralestimateofthearrangement。Fromaformalpointofviewthequestionissoonsolved：ontheonehand，theholdingofthevillainremainsundividedandentire；itdoesnotadmitofpartitionbysaleordescent；ontheother，thewillofthelordmayalter，ifnecessary，thenaturalcourseofinheritanceandpossession；thesocagetenureisoftenfreefromthefirstoftheselimitations，andalwaysfreefromthesecond。Theindivisibilityofvillaintenementsischieflyconspicuousinthelawofinheritance：allthelandwenttooneofthesonsiftherewereseveral；veryoftentheyoungestinherited；andthiscustom，towhichmerechancehasgiventhenameofBoroughEnglish，wasconsideredasoneoftheproofsofvillainage。48*Itiscertainlyacustomofgreatimportance，andprobablyitdependedonthefactthattheelderbrothersleftthelandattheearliestopportunity，andduringtheirfather’slife。Wheredidtheygo？
　　Itiseasytoguessthattheysoughtworkoutofthemanor，ascraftsmenorlabourers；thattheyservedthelordasservants，ploughmen，andthelike；thattheywereprovidedwithholdings，whichforsomereasondidnotdescendtomaleheirs；thattheywereendowedwithsomedemesneland，orfittedouttoreclaimlandfromthewaste。Wemayfindforallthesesuppositionssomesupportingquotationintherecords。Andstillitwouldbehardtobelievethattheentireincreaseofpopulationfoundanexitbytheseby-paths。Ifnoexitwasfound，thebrothershadtoremainontheirfather’splot，andthefactthattheydidsocanbeproved，ifitneedsproof，fromdocuments。49*Theunityoftheholdingwasnotdisturbedinthecase；therewasnodivision，andonlytherightheir，theestiopamonastheysaidinSparta，hadtoanswerfortheservices；thelordlookedtohimandnofurther；butinpointoffacttheholdingcontainedmorethanonefamily，andperhapsmorethanonehousehold。Howeverthismaybe，inregardtothelordtheholdingremainedoneandundivided。
　　ThiscircumstancedrawsasharplinebetweenthefeudalarrangementofmostcountiesandthatwhichprevailedinKent。
　　Thegavelkindortributarytenuretherewassubjectedtoequalpartitionamongtheheirs。
　　LetustakeaKentishsurvey，theBlackBookofSt。
　　Augustine’s，Canterbury，forinstance：itdescribesthepeasantholdingsinawaywhichdiffersentirelyfromothersurveys。Itbeginsbystatingwhatdutieslieoneachsulung，thatis，ontheKentishploughlandcorrespondingtothehideoffeudalEngland。
　　Noregularsub-divisionscorrespondingtothevirgatesandbovatesarementioned，andthereckoningstartsnotfromseparatetenements，butfromtheircombinationintosulungs。50*Thenfollowdescriptionsofthesinglesulungs，anditturnsoutthateveryoneofthemconsistsofaverygreatnumberofcomponentparts，becausetheprogenyoftheoriginalholdershasclusteredonthem，andparcelledthemupinverycomplicatedcombinations。51*Theportionsaresometimessosmall，thatanindependentcultivationofthemwouldhavebeenquiteimpossible。
　　Inordertounderstandthedescriptionitmustbeborneinmindthatthefactofthetenementbeingownedbyseveraldifferentpersonsindefinitebutundividedsharesdidnotprecludefarmingincommon；whileontheotherhand，injudgingoftheusualfeudalarrangementofholdingswemustrememberthattheartificialunityandindivisibilityofthetenementmaybeamerescreenbehindwhichthereexistsacomplexmassofrightssanctionedbymoralityandcustomthoughnotbylaw。ThesurveysoftheKentishpossessionsofBattleAbbeyaredrawnuponthesameprincipleasthoseofSt。Augustine’s；theonlydifferenceis，thattheindividualportionsarecollectednotinsulungs，butinyokesjuga。52*
　　AndsowehaveinEnglandtwosystemsofdividingthelandofthepeasant，ofregulatingitsdescentanditsduties。Inonecasethetenant-rightisconnectedwithrigidholdingsdescendingtoasingleheir；inanotherthetenementsgetbrokenup，andtheheirsclubtogetherinordertomeetthedemandsofthemanorialadministration。Thecontrastissharpandcuriousenough。Howisonetoexplain，thatinconditionswhichweremoreorlessidentical，thelandwassometimespartitionedandsometimeskepttogether，thepeopleweredispersedinsomeinstancesandkepttogetherinothers？
　　Closerinspectionwillshowthathoweversharptheoppositioninlawmayhavebeen，inpointofhusbandryandactualmanagementthecontrastwasnotsouncompromising。Connectinglinksmaybefoundbetweenthetwo。TheDomesdayofSt。Paul’s，forinstance，iscompiledinthemainintheusualway，butonesectionofit——thedescriptionoftheEssexmanorsofKirby，Horlock，andThorpe——doesnotdifferfromtheKentishsurveysinanythingbuttheterminology。53*Theservicesarelaidonhides，andnotontheactualtenements。Eachhideincludesagreatnumberofplotswhichdonotfallinwithanyconstantsubdivisionsofthesamekindasthevirgatesandbovates。Someoftheseplotsareverysmall，allareirregularintheirformation。Ithappensthatoneandthesamepersonholdsinseveralhides。Inoneword，theKentishsystemhasfoundawayforsomeunexplainedreasonintothepossessionsofSt。Paul’s，andwefindsubjectedtoitsomeEssexmanorswhichdonotdiffermuchintheirhusbandryarrangementsfromotherpropertiesinEssex，andhavenoclaimtothespecialprivilegesofKentishsoil。
　　Onceapprisedofthepossibleexistenceofsuchintermediateforms，weshallfindinmostsurveysfactstendingtoconnectthetwoarrangements。TheGloucesterCartulary，forinstance，mentionsvirgatesheldbyfourpersons。54*Theplotsofthesefourownersareevidentlybroughttogetherintoavirgateforthepurposeofassessingtheservices。Twopeasantsonthesamevirgatearefoundconstantly。Ithappensthatonegetsthegreaterpartofthelandandiscalledtheheir，whilehisfellowappearsasasmallcotterwhohastoco-operateintheworkperformedbythevirgate。55*Indicationsarenotwantingthatsometimesvirgatescrumbledupintocotlands，bordlands，andcrofts。ThedenominationofsomepeasantsinNorthumberlandischaracteristicenough——theyare’selfoders，’obviouslydwelling’self-other’ontheirtenements。56*Ontheotherhand，itistobenoticedthatthegavelkindruleofsuccession，althoughenactingthepartibilityoftheinheritance，stillreservesthehearthtotheyoungestborn，atraceofthesamejuniorrightwhichledtoBoroughEnglish。
　　IthinkthatuponthewholewemustsaythatinpracticetheverymarkedcontrastbetweenthegeneralarrangementoftheholdingsandtheKentishoneismoreadifferenceinthewayofreckoningthaninactualoccupation，inlegalformsthanineconomicalsubstance。Thegeneralarrangementadmittedacertainsubdivisionunderthecoverofanartificialunitywhichfounditsexpressioninthesettlementoftheservicesandoftherelationswiththelord。57*TheEnglishcasehasitsparallelontheContinentinthisrespect。InAlsace，forinstance，theholdingwasunitedunderone’Trager’orbearerofthemanorialduties；butbythesideofhimotherpeoplearefoundwhoparticipatewiththisofficialholderintheownershipandinthecultivation。58*Thesecondsystemalsokeptuptheartificialexistenceofthehigherunits，andobviousinterestspreventeditfromleadingtoa’morcellement’oflandintoverysmallportionsinpractice。Theeconomicmanagementoflandcouldnotgoasfarasthelegalpartition。Inpracticethesubdivisionwascertainlychecked，asinthevirgatesystem，bythenecessityofkeepingtogetherthecattlenecessaryforthetillage。Virgatesandbovateswouldariseofthemselves：itwasnotadvantageoustosplittheyokeoftwooxen，thesmallestpossibleplough；andco-heirshadtothinkevenmorewhentheyinheritedoneoxwithitsox-gangofland。Theanimalcouldnotbedivided，andthiscertainlymusthavestoppedinmanycasesthedivisionofland。
　　Whenthedocumentsspeakofplotscontainingtwoorthreeacres，itmustberememberedthatsuchcroftsandcotlandsoccuralsointheusualsystem，andIdonotseeanyreasontosupposethattheexistenceofsuchsubdividedrightsalwaysindicatedarealdispersionoftheeconomicunit：theymayhavestoodasalandmarkoftherelativerightsofjointoccupiers。Idonotmeantosay，ofcourse，thattherewasnorealbasisfortheverygreatdifferencewhichisassumedbythetwowaysofdescribingthetenements。NodoubtthehandofthelordlayheavierontheEssexpeoplethanontheKentishmen，theiroccupationandusageofthelandwasmoreunderthecontrolofthelord，andassumedthereforeanaspectofgreaterregularityandorder。Again，thelegalprivilegesoftheKentishpeopleopenedthewaytowardsagreaterdevelopmentofindividualfreedomandacertainloosenessofsocialrelations。Stillitwouldbewrongtoinfertoomuchfromthisformalopposition。Inbothcasesthecentripetalandthecentrifugaltendencyareworkingagainsteachotherinthesameway，althoughonecasepresentsthestrongerinfluenceofdisruptiveforces，andtheothergivespredominancetothecollectivepower。Inthehistoryofsocageandmilitarytenurethesystemofunityarosegradually，andwithoutanysuddenbreak，outofthesystemofdivision。Theintimateconnexionbetweenbothformsisevenmorenaturalinpeasantownership，whichhadtooperatewithsmallplotsandsmallagriculturalcapital，andthereforeinclinednaturallytowardstheartificialcombinationofdividedinterests。Inanycasethereisnoroominpracticefortherigidandconsequentoperationofeitherruleofownership，and，ifso，thereisnoactualbasisfortheinferencethattheunificationoftheholdingistobetakenasadirectconsequenceofaservileoriginofthetenementandasureproofofit。Unificationappearsoncloserinspectionasaresultofeconomicconsiderationsaswellasoflegaldisabilities，andforthisreasonthetendencyoperatedinthesphereoffreepropertyaswellasamongthevillains；amongtheselastitcouldnotprecludetheworkingofthedisruptiveelements，butinmanycasesonlyhidthemfromsightbyitsartificialscreenofrigidholdings。
　　Wehaveseenthatthesizeanddistributionoftheholdingsareconnectedwiththenumberofoxennecessaryforthetillage，anditsrelationtothefullplough。Thehideappearsastheploughlandwitheightoxen，thevirgatecorrespondstooneyokeofoxen，andthebovatetothesinglehead。itneednotbeaddedthatsuchfiguresarenotabsolutelysettled，andaretobeacceptedasapproximateterms，Thegreatheavyploughdrawnbyeightortenoxeniscertainlyoftenmentionedintherecords，especiallyondemesneland。59*Thedependentpeople，whentheyhavetohelpinthecultivationofthedemesne，clubtogetherinordertomakeupfullploughteams。60*Itisalsoobviousthatthepeasantryhadtoassociateforthetillingoftheirownland，asitwasveryrareforthesingleshareholdertopossessasufficientnumberofbeaststoworkbyhimself。Butitmustbenoticedthatalongsideoftheunwieldyeight-oxenploughwefindmuchlighterones。Evenonthedemesnewemayfindthemdrawnbysixoxen。Andasforthepeasantry，theyseemtohaveveryoftencontentedthemselveswithformingaploughteamoffourheads。61*Itiscommonlysupposedbythesurveysthattheholderofayardlandjoinswithoneofhisfellowstomakeuptheteam。Thiswouldmeanonthescaleofthehideof120acresthattheteamconsistsoffourbeasts。62*Ithappenseventhatafullploughissupposedtobelongtotwoorthreepeasants，ofwhicheveryoneispossessedonlyoffiveacres；insuchcasestherecanbenotalkofabigplough；itisdifficulttoadmitevenafour-oxenteam，andprobablythosepeopleonlyworkedwithoneyokeorpairofbeasts。63*Altogetheritwouldbeverywrongtoassumeinpracticeastrictcorrespondencebetweenthesizeoftheholdingandthepartsofaneight-oxenplough。Theobservationthattheusualreckoningofthehideandofitssubdivisions，accordingtothepatternofthebigteam，cannotbemadetofitexactlywiththerealarrangementoftheteamsownedbythepeasantry——thisfirmlyestablishedobservationleadsusoncemoretotheconclusionthatthesystemofequalholdingshadbecomeveryartificialinprocessoftimeandwasdeterminedratherbytherelationbetweenthepeasantsandthemanorialadministrationthanbytheactualconditionsofpeasantlife。