"The name manor is of Norman origin, but the estate to which
it was given existed, in its essential character, long before
the Conquest; it received a new name as the shire also did,
but neither the one nor the other was created by this change.
The local jurisdictions of the thegns who had grants of sac
and soc, or who exercised judicial functions amongst their
free neighbours, were identical with the manorial
jurisdictions of the new owners. … The manor itself was, as
Ordericus tells us, nothing more nor less than the ancient
township, now held by a lord who possessed certain judicial
rights varying according to the terms of the grant by which he
was infeoffed. Every manor had a court baron, the ancient
gemot of the township, in which by-laws were made and other
local business transacted, and a court customary in which the
business of the villenage was despatched. Those manors whose
lords had under the Anglo-Saxon laws possessed sac and soc, or
who since the Conquest had had grants in which those terms
were used, had also a court-leet, or criminal jurisdiction,
cut out as it were from the criminal jurisdiction of the
hundred, and excusing the suitors who attended it from going
to the court-leet of the hundred."
_W. Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 9, section 98,
and chapter 11, section 129 (volume 1)._
"From the Conquest to the 14th century we find the same
agricultural conditions prevailing over the greater part of
England. Small gatherings of houses and cots appear as oases
in the moorland and forest, more or less frequent according to
the early or late settlement of the district, and its freedom
from, or exposure to, the ravages of war and the punishment of
rebellion. These oases, townships or vills if of some extent,
hamlets if of but a few houses, gather round one or more
mansions of superior size and importance, the Manor houses, or
abodes of the Lords of the respective Manors. Round each
township stretch the great ploughed fields, usually three in
number, open and uninclosed. Each field is divided into a
series of parallel strips a furlong in length, a rod wide,
four of which would make an acre, the strips being separated
by ridges of turf called balks, while along the head of each
series of strips runs a broad band of turf known as a
headland, on which the plough is turned, when it does not by
custom turn on some fellow-tenant's land, and which serves as
a road to the various strips in the fields. These strips are
allotted in rotation to a certain number of the dwellers in
the township, a very common holding being that known as a
virgate or yardland, consisting of about 30 acres. … Mr.
Seebohm's exhaustive researches have conclusively connected
this system of open fields and rotation of strips with the
system of common ploughing, each holder of land providing so
many oxen for the common plough, two being the contribution of
the holder of a virgate, and eight the normal number drawing
the plough, though this would vary with the character of the
soil. … At the date of Domesday (1086), the holders of land
in the common fields comprise the Lord; the free tenants,
socmanni or liberi homines, when there are any; the villani or
Saxon geburs, the holders of virgates or half virgates; and
the bordarii or cotarii, holders of small plots of 5 acres or
so, who have fewer rights and fewer duties. Besides ploughing
the common-fields, the villani as part of their tenure have to
supply the labour necessary to cultivate the arable land that
the Lord of the Manor keeps in his own hands as his domain,
dominicum, or demesne."
_T. E. Scrutton,
Commons and Common Fields,
chapter 1._
{2085}
Relative to the origin of the manor and the development of the
community from which it rose there are divergent views much
discussed at the present day. "The interpretation, current
fifteen years ago, was the natural outcome of the Mark theory
and was somewhat as follows: The community was a voluntary
association, a simple unit within which there were households
or families of various degrees of wealth, rank and authority,
but in point of status each was the equal of the other. Each
was subject only to the customs and usages of the community
and to the court of the Mark. The Mark was therefore a
judicial and political as well as an agricultural unit, though
cultivation of the soil was the primary bond of union. All
offices were filled by election, but the incumbent in due time
sank back into the general body of 'markgenossen.' He who was
afterwards to be the lord of the manor was originally only the
first Marksman,' who attained to this preeminence in part by
the prestige of election to a position of headship, in part by
usurpation, and in part by the prerogatives which protection
and assistance to weaker Marksmen brought. Thus the first
Marksman became the lord and held the others in a kind of
subjection to himself, and received from them, though free,
dues and services which grew increasingly more severe. The
main difficulty here seems to be in the premise, and it is the
evident artificiality of the voluntary association of freemen
which has led to such adverse criticism upon the whole theory.
… While the free village community was under fire at home as
well as abroad, Mr. Seebohm presented a new view of an exactly
opposite character, with the formula of the community in
villeinage under a lord. Although this view has for the moment
divided thinkers on the subject, it has proved no more
satisfactory than the other; for while it does explain the
origin of the lord of the manor, it leaves wholly untouched
the body of free Saxons whom Earle calls the rank and file of
the invading army. Other theories have sought to supply the
omissions in this vague non-documentary field, all erected
with learning and skill, but unfortunately not in harmony with
one another. Coote and Finlason have given to the manor an
unqualified Roman origin. Lewis holds to a solid British
foundation, the Teutonists would make it wholly Saxon, while
Gomme is inclined to see an Aryo-British community under Saxon
overlordship. Thus there is a wide range from which to select;
all cannot be true; no one is an explanation of all
conditions, yet most of them have considerable sound evidence
to support them. It is this lack of harmony which drives the
student to discover some theory which shall be in touch with
known tribal conditions and a natural consequence of their
development, and which at the same time shall be sufficiently
elastic to conform to the facts which confront us in the early
historical period. An attempt has been made [in the work here
quoted from] to lay down two premises, the first of which is
the composite character of the tribal and village community,
and the second the diverse ethnological conditions of Britain
after the Conquest, conditions which would allow for different
results. … Kemble in his chapter on Personal Rank has a
remark which is ill in keeping with his peaceful Mark theory.
He says: 'There can be no doubt that some kind of military
organization preceded the peaceful settlement, and in many
respects determined its mode and character.' To this statement
Earle has added another equally pregnant: 'Of all principles
of military regiment there is none so necessary or so
elementary as this, that all men must be under a captain, and
such a captain as is able to command prompt and willing
obedience. Upon this military principle I conceive the English
settlements were originally founded, that each several
settlement was under a military leader, and that this military
leader was the ancestor of the lord of the manor.' Professor
Earle then continues in the endeavor to apply the suggestion
contained in the above quotation. He shows that the 'hundreds'
represent the first permanent encampment of the invading host,
and that the military occupation preceded the civil
organization, the latter falling into the mould which the
former had prepared. According to this the manorial
organization was based upon a composite military foundation,
the rank and file composing the one element, the village
community; the captain or military leader composing the other,
settled with suitable provision by the side of his company;
the lord by the side of free owners. In this attempt to give
the manor a composite origin, as the only rational means
whereby the chief difficulty can be removed, and in the
attempt to carry the seignorial element to the very beginning
we believe him to be wholly right. But an objection must be
raised to the way in which Professor Earle makes up his
composite element. It is too artificial, too exclusively
military; the occupiers of the village are the members of the
'company,' the occupier of the adjacent seat is the
'captain,' afterwards to become the lord. … We feel certain
that the local community, the village, was simply the kindred,
the sub-clan group, which had become a local habitation, yet
when we attempt to test its presence in Anglo-Saxon Britain we
meet with many difficulties."
_C. McL. Andrews,
The Old English Manor,
pages 7-51._
ALSO IN:
_F. Seebohm,
English Village Communities,
chapter 2, section 12._
_Sir H. Maine,
Village Communities,
lecture 5._
MANSFIELD, OR
SABINE CROSS ROADS, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MARCH-MAY: LOUISIANA).
MANSOURAH, Battle of (1250).
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.
MANSUR, Al, Caliph, A. D. 754-775.
----------MANTINEA: Start--------