第62章

Onemorepointremainstobenoticed。Inordertomakeitclearwemustbywayofexceptionstartfromthearrangementsofalaterepochthanthatwhichwehavebeendiscussing。ThemanorofAstonandCote，whichmayhavebeencarvedoutwithseveralothersfromthemanorofBampton，presentsaverygoodinstanceofavillagemeetingwhichdoesnotcoincidewiththemanorialdivisions，andappearsconstructedonthelinesofavillagecommunitywhichhaspreserveditsunity，althoughseveralmanorshavegrownoutofit。ItwasstatedbythelordofthemanorofAstonandCotein1657，that’therehathbeenacustomtimeoutofmindthatacertainnumberofpersonscalledtheSixteen，orthegreaterpartofthem，haveusedtomakeorders，setpenalties，chooseofficers，andlotmeadows，anddoallsuchthingsasareusuallyperformedordoneinthecourtsbaronofothermanors。’Allthedetailsofthiscaseareinteresting，butweneednotgointothem，becausetheyhavebeensetoutwithsufficientcareintheexistingliterature，andsummedupbyMrGommeinhisbookontheVillageCommunity。(84*)Itisthemainpointwhichwemustconsider。Hereisanassemblymeetingtotransactlegalandeconomicbusiness，whichactsonthepatternofmanorialcourts。Andifnotamanorialcourt，whatisit？I

thinkitisdifficulttoescapetheconclusionthatitisameetingofthevillagecommunityoutsidethelinesofmanorialdivision。ThesuppositionthatitrepresentstheoldmanorofBampton，towhichAston，Cote，BamptonPogeys，BamptonPrioryaresubordinated，isentirelyinsufficienttoexplainthecase，becausethenweshouldnothavehadtorecognisenewmanorsinthefractionswhichweredetachedfromBampton，andtherewouldhavebeennocalltospeakofapeculiarassemblyassumingthecompetenceofacourtbaron——weshouldhavehadthemanorialcourtandthelordofBampton，andnottheSixteentospeakof。

Thefactispatentandsignificant。Itshowsbyitselfthattheremayhavebeencaseswherethevillagecommunityandthemanordidnotcoincide，andthevillagecommunityhadthebestofit。

Thefirstpropositiondoesnotadmitofdoubt。Itwasofquitecommonoccurrencethatthelandofonevillageshouldbebrokenupbetweenseveralmanors，althoughitsopenfieldsystemandallitshusbandryarrangementsremainedundivided。Thequestionarises，howwasthatsystemtowork？Therecouldbeexpressagreementbetweentheowners；(85*)ancientcustomandtheinterferenceofmanorialofficerschosenfromthedifferentpartscouldhelponmanyoccasions。Butitisimpossibletosuppose，inthelightoftheBamptoninstance，thatmeetingsmightnotsometimesexistinsuchdividedvillageswhichtookintotheirhandsthemanagementofthemanyeconomicquestionsarisingoutofcommonhusbandry：questionsabouthedges，rotationofcrops，commonableanimals，usageastowood，moor，pasture，andsoforth。Adiligentsearchinthecustomsofmanorsatalaterperiod，sayinthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies，mustcertainlydiscloseanumberofsimilarinstances。Ourownmaterialdoesnothelpus，becauseitpassesoverquestionsofhusbandry，andtouchesmerelyjurisdiction，ownership，andtenant-right。Andsowemustrestrictourselftonoticetheopeningforaninquiryinthatdirection。

Suchaninquirymustalsodealwiththeconversepossibility，namely，thecasesinwhichthemanorissolargethatseveralvillageunitsfitintoit。Wemayfindveryfrequentlyinsomepartsofthecountrylargemanorswhicharecomposedofseveralindependentvillagesandhamlets。(86*)Onlargetractsoflandthesevillageswouldformseparateopenfieldgroups。Althoughtheeconomicevidenceisnotwithinourreachinearlytimes，wehaveindicationsofseparatevillagemeetingsunderthemanorialcourtevenfromthelegalpointofviewtakenbythecourt-rolls。

InseveralinstancestheentriesprintedinthesecondvolumeoftheSeldenSocietypublicationspointtotheactionoftownshipsasdistinctfromthemanorialcourt，andplacedunderit。InBroughtonamandistrainedfordefaultputshimselfontheverdictofthewholecourtandofthetownshipofHurst，bothvillainsandfreemen，thatheowesnosuittothecourtofBroughton，savetwiceayearandtoafforcethecourt。BeitnotedthatthecourtofHurstisdistinguishedfromthetownship，whi