第32章

Thepassageoccursinacaserelatingtoancientdemesne，butthestatementismadequitebroadly，andtheterm’socmen’isusedwithoutanyqualification。AsthereweremanysocmenoutsidetheKing’spossessionsonthelandoflayandspirituallords，suchusagemaybetakenasproofthatthepositionofallthesepeoplewasmoreorlessidentical。Andsoinourinquiryastothecharacteristictraitsofsocagegenerallywemaystartfromtheancientdemesne。Further，weseethatthesocman’stenureisdistinguishedfromfreetenure，socmenfromfreeholders。Inthelawbooksofthetimethefreebutnon-militarytenurehastobecharacterisednotmerelyassocage，butasfreesocage：thisfactwillgiveusasecondclueinanalysingthecondition。

Therearetwoleadingfeaturesinancientdemesnesocage：itiscertainintenureandservice，anditisheldbythecustomofthemanorandnotbyfeoffment。Thecertaintyofthetenureseverstheclassofsocmenfromthevillains，andistobefoundaswellinthecaseofsocmenoutsidethecrowndemesneasinthecaseofsocmenonthecrowndemesne。Whatistobesaidofthesecond。trait？Itseemsespeciallyworthyofnotice，becauseitcannotbesaidtobelongtofreeholdgenerally。AstoitsexistenceonancientdemesnelandIhavealreadyhadoccasiontospeak，anditcanhardlybedoubted。Iwilljustrecalltothereader’smindthefundamentalfacts：thatthe’littlewritofright’wastoinsurejusticeaccordingtothecustomofthemanor，andthatourdocumentsdistinguishinasmanywordsbetweenthecustomaryadmittanceofthesocmanandthefeoffmentofthefreeholder。Thismeans，thatincaseoflitigationtheonehadwarrantyandchartertoleanupon，whiletheotherhadtoappealtothecommunaltestimonyofhisfellow-suitorsinthecourtofthemanor，andinlaterdaystoanentryonthecourt-roll。Freeholdappearedascharteredland(book-land)，whilesocagewasintruthcopyholdsecuredbycommunalcustom。(42*)Thenecessarysurrenderandadmittancewasperformedinopencourt，andthepresenceoffellow-tenantswasasmucharequisiteofitastheactionofthelordorhissteward。

Ifwelooknowtothesocmenoutsidetheancientdemesne，weshallfindtheirconditionsocloselysimilar，thatthedocumentsconstantlyconfusethemwiththetenantsoftheancientdemesne。

ThefreemenundersokeintheeastofEnglandhavebestkeptthetradition，buteventheirrightisoftentreatedasamerevariationofancientdemesne。(43*)Forthisreasonweshouldbefairlyentitled，Ithink，toextendtothemthenotionofcustomaryfreehold。Thereisdirectevidenceinthisrespect。Inextentsofmanorssocmenareoftendistinguishedfromfreeholders。(44*)True，asalreadysaid，thatintheking’scourts’freesocage’cametoberegardedasoneofthefreeholdtenures，andassuch(whennotontheancientdemesne)wasprotectedbythesameactionswhichprotectedknight-serviceandfrankalmoign；butwehaveonlyhereanotherproofoftheimperfectharmonybetweenlegaltheoryandmanorialadministration。Whatservesinthemanorialdocumentstodistinguishthe’socman’fromthe’freeholder’isthefactthattheformerholdswithoutcharter。(45*)Wearenaturallyledtoconsiderhimasholding，atleastoriginally，byancientcustomandcommunaltestimonyinthesamesenseasthesocmenofancientdemesne。Inmostcasesonlythenegativeside，namelytheabsenceofacharter，ismentioned，butthereareentrieswhichdisclosethepositiveside，andspeakoftenantsorevenfreetenantsholdingwithoutcharterbyancienttenure。(46*)Itistobeadded，thatwefindsuchpeopleincentralandwesterncounties，thatisoutsideoftheDanelagh。InDomesdaytheirpredecessorswereenteredasvillains，buttheirtenureisneverthelessnotonlyafreebutanancientone。

Itmustalsobeaddedthatitisnotonlyfreesocmenthatonefindsoutsidetheancientdemesne；bondsocmenarementionedaswell。Nowthisseemsstrangeatfirstsight，becausetheusualandsettledterminologytreatsvillainsocageasapeculiarityofancientdemesne，Mynotionisthatitisnot’bond’thatqualitiesthe’socmen，’butviceversa。Toputitinadifferentway，thedocumentshadtonameaclasswhichheldbycertaincustom，althoughbybaseservice，andtheyaddedthe’socman’toqualifythe’bond’orthe’villain。’

TwocasesfromtheHundredRollsmayserveasanillustrationofthisnotunimportantpoint。ThevillofSohaminCambridgeshire(47*)wasownedin1279part